MIRA
INFORM REPORT
|
Report Date : |
17.11.2012 |
IDENTIFICATION DETAILS
|
Name : |
TRICON INTERNATIONAL, LTD. |
|
|
Registered Office : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Incorporation : |
11.04.1997 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal Form : |
Limited Partnership |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line of Business : |
Subject engaged in facilitates global commerce and the physical movement of industrial chemicals, petrochemicals, feedstocks, motor gasoline components, and polymers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. of Employees : |
175 |
|
RATING & COMMENTS
|
MIRA’s Rating : |
Ba |
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
Status : |
Satisfactory |
|
Payment Behaviour : |
No Complaints |
|
Litigation : |
Clear |
NOTES :
Any query related to this report can be made
on e-mail: infodept@mirainform.com
while quoting report number, name and date.
ECGC Country Risk Classification List – June 30th, 2012
|
Country Name |
Previous Rating (31.03.2011) |
Current Rating (30.06.2012) |
|
|
A1 |
A1 |
|
Risk Category |
ECGC
Classification |
|
Insignificant |
A1 |
|
Low |
A2 |
|
Moderate |
B1 |
|
High |
B2 |
|
Very High |
C1 |
|
Restricted |
C2 |
|
Off-credit |
D |
UNITED STATES - ECONOMIC OVERVIEW
The
Source : CIA
Company name and address
There is no business incorporated with that name in
We found TRICON ENERGY, LTD. as a business name owned by:
Company name: TRICON INTERNATIONAL, LTD.
Address:
Telephone: +1
713-963-0066
Fax: +1 713-985-6190
Website: www.triconenergy.com
Corporate ID#: 9744810
State:
Judicial form: Limited Partnership
Date incorporated: April
11, 1997
Stock Value: A
LP has no stock
Name of manager: Ignacio
TORRAS
ACTIVITIES
& OPERATIONS
Business:
Tricon Energy Ltd. facilitates global commerce and the physical movement
of industrial chemicals, petrochemicals, feedstocks, motor gasoline components,
and polymers in the
It offers various chemicals, including aromatics, anhydrides,
chlorinated solvents, methanol, solvents, plasticizers, and fiber
intermediates; chloralkali; and various polymers, which include polyethylene,
polypropylene, polyvinyl chloride, polystyrene, and polyethylene terephthalate
polymers. The company connects buyers and suppliers of aromatics, plasticizers,
polymers, solvents, chloralkali, anhydrides, and chemical process
intermediates, as well as pharmaceutical buyers and sellers.
It has trading partnerships in Latin America, Europe, the Middle East;
Asia, Africa, North America, Central America, and
The company was founded in 1996 and is based in
The group has locations in Chapultepec, Mexico; Istanbul, Turkey; Sao
Paola, Brazil; Bogota, Colombia; Santiago de, Chile; Paris, France; Suffolk,
United Kingdom; Mumbai, India; Shanghai, China; and Seoul, Korea.
EIN: 76-0502110
Staff: 175
Operations & branches:
At the headquarters, we
find the corporate office, on lease.
SHAREHOLDERS & MANAGERS
Shareholders:
TRICON ENERGY, INC.
Incorporated in
ID# 0139761200
Management:
Ignacio TORRAS is the President and Director of the group.
Jeff McNEAR is the COO.
Jeff McNear serves as Chief Operating Officer of Tricon Energy Ltd. At
Tricon,
Mr. McNear is responsible for managing all aspects of the organization,
including credit, risk management, and banking relations.
Mr. McNear has an extensive experience in chemical marketing,
distribution and transportation. While at TMHI and Panachem, Mr. McNear was
responsible for sourcing and trading of organic and inorganic chemicals
worldwide for eight distribution companies throughout
At TMHI, Mr. McNear was also responsible for coordinating
transportation, break-bulk, and storage arrangements, and the preparation of
transaction and export/import documentation.
He has a B.A. in international affairs and Spanish from the
As far as we know, they are involved in the parent Company.
Subsidiaries
And partnership: None
FINANCIALS
In
On a direct call, a
financial assistant controlled the present report.
Sales declared for year
2011 is in the range of USD 53,800,000=
The business is profitable.
Banks: Mercantil CommerceBank
Ph: 713-571-8010
LEGAL FILINGS
Legal filings & complaints:
As of today date, there is no legal filing pending with the Courts.
Secured debts summary (UCC):
File number: 03-0017456854
Date filed: 02-14-2003
Lapse date: 02-14-2013
Secured Party: BNP Paribas
File number: 03-0018070776
Date filed: 02-21-2003
Lapse date: 02-21-2013
Secured Party: Fortis Bank
SA
File number: 03-0021498128
Date filed: 03-21-2003
Lapse date: 03-21-2013
Secured Party: RB
International Finance (
1133
Avenue of the
File number: 04-0045214999
Date filed: 10-17-2003
Lapse date: 10-17-2013
Secured Party: ING
Rue Petitot 6,
File number: 09-0004379608
Date filed: 02-13-2009
Lapse date: 02-13-2014
Secured Party: Cooperatieve
Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank
File number: 09-0019797749
Date filed: 07-13-2009
Lapse date: 07-13-2014
Secured Party: BNP Paribas
(Suisse)
2 Place de Hollande,
File number: 10-0006197599
Date filed: 03-04-2010
Lapse date: 03-04-2015
Secured Party: Fortis Bank
3012 AE
File number: 11-0018455095
Date filed: 06-22-2011
Lapse date: 06-22-2016
Secured Party: Standard
Chartered Bank
1095
Avenue of the
File number: 11-0023841585
Date filed: 08-12-2011
Lapse date: 08-12-2016
Secured Party: ABN Amro
Capital
File number: 12-0000617502
Date filed: 01-06-2012
Lapse date: 01-06-2017
Secured Party: Garantibank
International NV
Keizersgracht 569-575,
File number: 12-0002351771
Date filed: 01-23-2012
Lapse date: 01-23-2017
Secured Party: Mercantil
CommerceBank
Standard & Poor’s
|
|
|
Publication
date: 05-Aug-2011 20:13:14 EST |
·
We have lowered our long-term
sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and
affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
·
We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings
from CreditWatch negative.
·
The downgrade reflects our
opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration
recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to
stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
·
More broadly, the downgrade
reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of
American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of
ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when
we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
·
Since then, we have changed our
view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties
over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress
and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a
broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt
dynamics any time soon.
·
The outlook on the long-term
rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next
two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher
interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher
general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
The transfer and
convertibility (T&C) assessment of the
debt service--remains
'AAA'.
We lowered our long-term
rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over
raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate
indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public
spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising
revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a
contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation
plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of
the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government
debt burden by the middle of the decade.
Our lowering of the
rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our
perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria
(see "Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and
Assumptions ," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41).
Nevertheless, we view the
We have taken the ratings
off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment
of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by
delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that
the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course
of
The political
brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as
the containment of which
we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal
sustainability.
Our opinion is that
elected officials remain wary of tackling the structural issues required to
effectively address the rising U.S. public debt burden in a manner consistent
with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated sovereign peers (see Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and
Assumptions," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). In our
view, the difficulty in framing a consensus on fiscal policy weakens the
government's ability to manage public finances and diverts attention from the
debate over how to achieve more balanced and dynamic economic growth in an era
of fiscal stringency and private-sector deleveraging (ibid). A new political
consensus might (or might not) emerge after the 2012 elections, but we believe
that by then, the government debt burden will likely be higher, the needed
medium-term fiscal adjustment potentially greater, and the inflection point on
the U.S. population's demographics and other age-related spending drivers
closer at hand (see "Global Aging 2011: In The U.S., Going Gray Will Likely
Cost Even More Green, Now," June 21, 2011).
Standard & Poor's
takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and
the Administration might conclude is appropriate for putting the
The act calls for as much as $2.4 trillion of reductions in
expenditure growth over the 10 years through 2021. These cuts will be
implemented in two steps: the $917 billion agreed to initially, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion
that the newly formed Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction
is supposed to recommend by November 2011. The act contains no measures to
raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend
them.
The act further provides
that if Congress does not enact the committee's recommendations, cuts of $1.2
trillion will be implemented over the same time period. The reductions would
mainly affect outlays for civilian discretionary spending, defense, and Medicare.
We understand that this fall-back mechanism is designed to encourage Congress
to embrace a more balanced mix of expenditure savings, as the committee might
recommend.
We note that in a letter to
Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated total
budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the next 10
years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal
projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the CBO's
latest "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" of June 2011,
updated to include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to
Congress. In general, the CBO's "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" assumes a
continuation of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.
We view the act's
measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation. However, this is within the
framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves open the details of what is
finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and Congress and the Administration
could modify any agreement in the future. Even assuming that at least $2.1
trillion of the spending reductions the act envisages are implemented, we
maintain our view that the
Compared with previous
projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003
tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed
our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue
to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress
reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case
scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near
2% annually over the decade.
Our revised upside
scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the
outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these
same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of
new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners
lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario,
we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated
74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.
Our revised downside
scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as being consistent with a
possible further downgrade to a 'AA' long-term rating--features less-favorable
macroeconomic assumptions, as outlined below and also assumes that the second
round of spending cuts (at least $1.2 trillion) that the act calls for does not
occur. This scenario also assumes somewhat higher nominal interest rates for
U.S. Treasuries. We still believe that the role of the U.S. dollar as the key
reserve currency confers a government funding advantage, one that could change
only slowly over time, and that Fed policy might lean toward continued loose
monetary policy at a time of fiscal tightening. Nonetheless, it is possible
that interest rates could rise if investors re-price relative risks. As a
result, our alternate scenario factors in a 50 basis point (bp)-75 bp rise in
10-year bond yields relative to the base and upside cases from 2013 onwards. In
this scenario, we project the net public debt burden would rise from 74% of GDP
in 2011 to 90% in 2015 and to 101% by 2021.
Our revised scenarios
also take into account the significant negative revisions to historical GDP
data that the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced on July 29. From our
perspective, the effect of these revisions underscores two related points when
evaluating the likely debt trajectory of the
When comparing the U.S.
to sovereigns with 'AAA' long-term ratings that we view as relevant
peers--Canada, France, Germany, and the U.K.--we also observe, based on our
base case scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the U.S.'s net public debt
is diverging from the others. Including the
Standard & Poor's
transfer T&C assessment of the
The outlook on the
long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario
illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently assume could
lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside
scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select
Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other
initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high
earners--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and
we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt
dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.
FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATES
|
Currency |
Unit
|
Indian Rupees |
|
US Dollar |
1 |
Rs.54.99 |
|
|
1 |
Rs.87.21 |
|
Euro |
1 |
Rs.70.22 |
INFORMATION DETAILS
|
Report
Prepared by : |
NIT |
RATING EXPLANATIONS
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
>86 |
Aaa |
Possesses an extremely sound financial base with the strongest capability
for timely payment of interest and principal sums |
Unlimited |
|
71-85 |
Aa |
Possesses adequate working capital. No caution needed for credit
transaction. It has above average (strong) capability for payment of interest
and principal sums |
Large |
|
56-70 |
A |
Financial & operational base are regarded healthy. General
unfavourable factors will not cause fatal effect. Satisfactory capability for
payment of interest and principal sums |
Fairly Large |
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
26-40 |
B |
Capability to overcome financial difficulties seems comparatively
below average. |
Small |
|
11-25 |
Ca |
Adverse factors are apparent. Repayment of interest and principal sums
in default or expected to be in default upon maturity |
Limited with
full security |
|
<10 |
C |
Absolute credit risk exists. Caution needed to be exercised |
Credit not
recommended |
|
-- |
NB |
New Business |
-- |
This score serves as a reference to assess SC’s credit risk
and to set the amount of credit to be extended. It is calculated from a
composite of weighted scores obtained from each of the major sections of this report.
The assessed factors and their relative weights (as indicated through %) are as
follows:
Financial
condition (40%) Ownership
background (20%) Payment
record (10%)
Credit history
(10%) Market trend
(10%) Operational
size (10%)
This report is issued at your request without any risk
and responsibility on the part of MIRA INFORM PRIVATE LIMITED (MIPL) or its
officials.