The problem is citi is the guarantor of the revlon loan .
It is more like your dad paying your credit bill in full instead of the minimum and now saying he wants the money back
Re:Citibank's $900M Blunder
by andreareina on Thursday August 20, 2020 @12:26PM
(#24224913)
I'm not finding anything that says Citibank is a guarantor, only administrator, whatever that means. If Citibank did guarantee the loan, then Brigade has no need to fear Revlon's bankruptcy right, since they'd be able to collect from Citi. Unless they're worried that Citi is going to go under, which is another kettle of fish.
It is cash flow . Everyone is in a crunch , if revlon default on this loan, and then go under , getting money of anyone will take a long while .
Brigade gave the loan pre pandemic , under very different conditions , today they are probably happy with the money back.
It could also be that They may other liabilities of their own, where this liquidity could be useful.
Under normal market you want as little of money with you, money in the bank does not earn much , it is doubly important if you are in the business of making investments .
However in poor confidence conditions you want as much liquidity as you can have which is why everyone starts buying treasuries when markets go south .
It's different for a very important reason.
Revlon didn't authorize the money to be sent. This is like you telling your bank to send a check to AMEX for $150 and they put down $1500 on the check, it comes out of their funds, not yours, and then when AMEX cashes the check that's when the mistake is discovered.
The important point is that Citi made the mistake not Revlon.
My guess is that if Citi loses the suit they'll end up being the lender for the part that Brigade loaned.