20fd

Wyoming City School District, OH -- Moody's assigns Aa2 rating to Wyoming C.S.D., OH's $11.1M GOULT Ref. Bonds, Ser. 2015

Aa2 maintained on $40.3M of post-sale GO debt

New York, August 03, 2015 –

Moody’s Rating

Issue: School Improvement Unlimited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds Series 2015 (Non-Bank Qualified); Rating: Aa2; Sale Amount: $11,110,000; Expected Sale Date: 08/17/2015; Rating Description: General Obligation

Opinion

Moody’s Investors Service has assigned a Aa2 rating to Wyoming City School District, OH’s $11.1 million School Improvement Unlimited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2015. Concurrently, Moody’s maintains the Aa2 rating on the district’s outstanding general obligation bonds. Post-sale, the district will have $40.3 million of general obligation debt outstanding.

SUMMARY RATING RATIONALE

The Aa2 rating reflects the district’s very strong financial position with solid voter support and reserve levels, modestly sized suburban tax base outside Cincinnati (Aa2 stable) with a strong socio-economic profile, a high debt burden, and exposure to two underfunded pension plans.

OUTLOOK

Outlooks are generally not assigned to local government credits with limited amounts of debt outstanding.

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO UP

- Material increases to the district’s full valuation

- Multi-year trend of positive operations which lead to stronger reserves

- Moderation of the district’s exposure to unfunded pension liabilities

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO DOWN

- Pronounced declines to the district’s tax base and/or weakened socioeconomic characteristics

- Narrowing of Operating Fund reserves and liquidity to levels no longer commensurate with the current rating category

OBLIGOR PROFILE

The district is located in Hamilton County in southwestern Ohio. The District encompasses approximately 2.5 square miles and serves the students residing in the City of Wyoming and had a population of 8,261 as of the 2010 US Census.

LEGAL SECURITY

The Series 2015 General Obligation Refunding Bonds are secured by the district’s general obligation unlimited tax pledge, which benefits from a dedicated property tax levy that is unlimited as to rate or amount.

USE OF PROCEEDS

Proceeds of the current offering will be used to refund select maturities of the district’s outstanding Series 2005 bonds for interest savings.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in this rating was US Local Government General Obligation Debt published in January 2014. Please see the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

REGULATORY DISCLOSURES

For ratings issued on a program, series or category/class of debt, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series or category/class of debt or pursuant to a program for which the ratings are derived exclusively from existing ratings in accordance with Moody’s rating practices. For ratings issued on a support provider, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the rating action on the support provider and in relation to each particular rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the support provider’s credit rating. For provisional ratings, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the provisional rating assigned, and in relation to a definitive rating that may be assigned subsequent to the final issuance of the debt, in each case where the transaction structure and terms have not changed prior to the assignment of the definitive rating in a manner that would have affected the rating. For further information please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page for the respective issuer on www.moodys.com.

The following information supplements Disclosure 10 (“Information Relating to Conflicts of Interest as required by Paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(J) of SEC Rule 17g-7”) in the regulatory disclosures made at the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for each credit rating:

Moody’s was not paid for services other than determining a credit rating in the most recently ended fiscal year by the person that paid Moody’s to determine this credit rating.

Regulatory disclosures contained in this press release apply to the credit rating and, if applicable, the related rating outlook or rating review.

Please see www.moodys.com for any updates on changes to the lead rating analyst and to the Moody’s legal entity that has issued the rating.

Please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for additional regulatory disclosures for each credit rating.


Mark G. Lazarus
Asst Vice President - Analyst
Public Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
100 N Riverside Plaza
Suite 2220
Chicago, IL 60606
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Orlie Prince
Senior Vice President
Public Finance Group
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Releasing Office:
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

© 2015 Moody’s Corporation, Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., Moody’s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, “MOODY’S”). All rights reserved.

CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES (“MIS”) ARE MOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S (“MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS”) MAY INCLUDE MOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY’S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL, FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT RATINGS NOR MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY’S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE.

MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO CONSIDER MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS IN MAKING ANY INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER.

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY’S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.

All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY’S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind. MOODY’S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY’S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, MOODY’S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody’s Publications.

To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY’S.

To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information.

NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY’S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER.

Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody’s Corporation (“MCO”), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,500 to approximately $2,500,000. MCO and MIS also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS’s ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at www.moodys.com under the heading “Investor Relations – Corporate Governance – Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy.”

For Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY’S affiliate, Moody’s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN 61 003 399 657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody’s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 136 972 AFSL 383569 (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to “wholesale clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY’S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a “wholesale client” and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to “retail clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY’S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail clients. It would be dangerous for “retail clients” to make any investment decision based on MOODY’S credit rating. If in doubt you should contact your financial or other professional adviser.

For Japan only: Moody’s Japan K.K. (“MJKK”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody’s Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody’s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody’s SF Japan K.K. (“MSFJ”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (“NRSRO”). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively.

MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY200,000 to approximately JPY350,000,000.

MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements.

Allergan bid may be healthier for Teva than battle with Mylan

By Tova Cohen and Ari Rabinovitch

TEL AVIV, July 26 (Reuters) - After months of sparring in a hostile takeover bid for rival Mylan NV, Teva Pharmaceutical’s move to buy Allergan Plc’s generic drug business instead could be a smoother ride that will bring bigger returns, faster.

Israel-based Teva, the world’s largest generic drugmaker, is in advanced talks to buy Allergan’s generic drugs unit for between $40-45 billion dollars, according to a person familiar with the matter.

News of the deal broke on Saturday after Teva’s $40 billion bid for Mylan hit a snag when a Dutch foundation linked to Mylan bought temporary control of half the company in an attempt to block the takeover.

A Teva spokesman declined to comment on possible talks with Allergan.

Though the Teva-Mylan feud has hogged the industry spotlight since April, Allergan’ generics business may actually have been Teva’s first choice. Teva CEO Erez Vigodman is believed to have approached Allergan last year, which was called Actavis prior to a March merger.

In June 2014, just a few months after joining the company himself, Vigodman hired the former head of Actavis’ generic drug business, Sigurdur Olafsson, to fill a similar role at Teva.

“There was previously a preference for Actavis over Mylan but for some reason it didn’t materialise,” said Bank of Jerusalem analyst Jonathan Kreizman.

Should the deal with Dublin-based Allergan now go through, there will be two big upsides for Teva, he said.

First, there is less overlap than with Mylan. Teva has been planning a generic version of Mylan’s EpiPen, a billion-dollar product, while Mylan has been working on a generic version of Teva’s best-selling multiple sclerosis drug Copaxone.

In the short term, Teva would benefit from removing the uncertainty over the outcome of the Mylan deal that has weighed on its stock.

Since hitting a year high of $68.74 in New York on April 9, just before speculation on a possible Mylan bid had surfaced, Teva shares are down more than 10 percent, closing on Friday at $61.85.

Kreizman said he assumes the size of the deal would be similar in scope to Mylan, noting Allergan has about 8 percent of the U.S. drugs market, compared with 9 percent for Mylan and 14 percent for Teva.

“Assuming the entity is more or less the same size, valuation is less of an issue,” he said.

The Mylan deal is hard for the market to digest, he said, while “any friendly transaction … would have better impact.”

Allergan’s generics operations has about $7 billion in sales, said Umer Raffat, an analyst with investment research firm ISI Group.

“Theoretically, a Teva/Allergan generics business combo offers Teva the opportunity to get what it was looking for without having to go through Dutch courts,” he said.

This includes boosting its scale and getting access to complex generics like injectables as well as biosimilar drugs through Allergan’s partnership with Amgen on oncology biologic drugs, he said.

(Editing by William Hardy)

南中法興五甲購B (21395) 現報 0.088港元,下跌 14.56 %

[智珠] 香港7月24日 - 南方A50 (02822) 的窩輪 南中法興五甲購B (21395) 呈異動, 現報0.088港元, 較上日收市下跌 14.56 %,成交160,000.00份,投資者宜留意下列相關的技術分析指標,以及其正股的股價變動和公司的市場動向,提高警惕 : (貨幣 : 港元) 溢價42.562 %,槓桿比率(倍) 149.709,引伸波幅0 %,對沖值0 %,認購比率1.00,行使價21.88,到期日2015-11-04,10天平均價0.2057,50天平均價0.43754,52周最高1.1,52周最低0.081。

註: 我們的窩輪監察站在每個交易日的交易時段內,全面性監察窩輪的股價異動,由於窩輪波幅往往較正股來得突然和較大,我們認為由其股價觸及百分之五的波幅,即有需要作即時報導,隨而每百分之三再作追擊報導,務使讀者能追貼其走勢。

網頁http://www.dbpower.com.hk


網頁http://www.dbpower.com.hk

Cartoon capers: Japan PM uses offbeat PR blitz to rescue ratings

By Linda Sieg
TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is using ‘anime’ cartoons, Internet chats and even an unusual show-and-tell TV appearance, complete with a mockup of burning buildings, in an effort to persuade wary voters that his bolder defense policy makes sense.
So far, it isn’t working.
Abe’s popularity rating, once as high as 60 percent, has slumped as he makes changes to Japan’s post-war security stance, such as legislation enabling its armed forces to defend a friendly nation under attack. His disapproval rating topped 50 percent after the bills passed the lower house last week.
Abe had a far easier sales job when he won power in December 2012, vowing to reboot the economy. Now he faces protests and a majority of voters who do not understand his security policy or feel it is dangerous and violates Japan’s pacifist constitution.
Some think Abe is losing his cool. “The ratings are tough,” said a source from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). “I think they (Abe’s inner circle) are getting flustered.”
This month, the LDP released an 'anime’ entitled “Tell me, moustachioed commander!”, in which a character modeled after LDP lawmaker and former army commander Masahisa Sato chats to a high-school girl, Akari, while commuting on a train, assuring her the changes are needed but won’t increase the risk of war.
“Do you know there are countries pointing missiles at Japan?” the Sato character asks. “What will we do if they are fired?”
Akari replies: “Eh? They’ll fire them? No, No! Someone protect us!”
The cartoon also includes an image, echoing one Abe introduced at a news conference last year, of a Japanese mum and child being rescued by a U.S. ship that comes under attack.
The 'anime’ inspired a parody, in which Akari fires back that the legislation is unconstitutional and that the government is acting dictatorially, and asks why it is pussy-footing around by not specifically naming arch-rival China as the threat.
Abe has also taken to the Internet. In one episode on a LDP Web channel, he likens collective self-defense to an incident in which “buddy Aso” (Finance Minister Taro Aso) volunteers to protect Abe from bullies - and gets punched himself.
The new laws, Abe said, would allow him to defend Aso.
Opposition lawmakers accused Abe of talking down to voters.
On Monday, Abe appeared on national TV with a model of an American house spewing fake smoke and fire. The mock flames spread to a smaller U.S. building and threaten to engulf a Japanese house. At that point, Abe said, demonstrating with cut-outs, Japanese “firefighters” help to douse the fire.
The show-and-tell reaped online ridicule.
Abe, who says the changes are vital to cope with growing threats in the region, has vowed to press on. “We are not doing politics to win support but rather, while obtaining support, we want to do what needs to be done,” he said on Monday’s TV show.
Debate in the upper house will likely start next week. If no vote takes place within 60 days, the ruling bloc can then enact them with its two-thirds majority in the lower house, a step it would prefer to avoid for fear of looking high-handed.
For now, nearly all of Abe’s critics in the LDP are staying mum, reassured by the opposition’s even soggier support rates.
“There is dissatisfaction, but people are silent,” the LDP source said. That could change, experts say, if Abe’s ratings fall further, possibly encouraging a rival in a September LDP leadership race as the party eyes an upper house poll next year.

(Editing by Mark Bendeich)

GUS: spada liczba mieszkańców Polski

W porĂłwnaniu z 2014 rokiem liczba mieszkaĹ„cĂłw Polski zmniejszyĹ‚a siÄ™ o 17 tys. 57 osĂłb - wynika z opracowania GĹ‚Ăłwnego UrzÄ™du Statystycznego pt. “Powierzchnia i ludność w przekroju terytorialnym w 2015 r.” …