Writing Samples
Try it on 1:
1. I want my reader to (action/next steps)…
2. What do they currently know/feel about this topic?
3. Why should they care or how
will this help them on their job?4.What possible questions or
objections will there be?5.Is all of your evidence necessary for them to know (nice vs need to know)?
Try it on 2:
Better subjects
Visual Design
Try it on 3:
Bottom line up front + context for data
Cut it down
Check the tone
1.
Subject: Answer to the LoUs consultation
Here below is our answer to your questions.
First to explain the meaning of the case you mentioned. In this case judgment, the LoU given by the government of XX should not be regarded as a guarantee. Reasons are that according to the name and the content of the document there was no agreement between both parties on XX to pay the debts or assume the responsibility when the debtor fails to pay the debts. And the past lawyer’s letters did not request the government to repay the money on behalf of the debtor either. As a result, this LoU did not comply with the definition of guarantee in article 6 of the Guarantee Law of XX. (Article 6, Guarantee referred to in this law means the acts of a guarantor to pay the debts or assume the responsibility under an agreement between the guarantor and the creditor, in case the debtor fails to pay the debts.)
Second as for the validity of government LoUs in general. At present there are no special articles regulating the validity of LoUs. The practices of courts show that whether a document can be regarded as a guarantee on XX law needs to be checked case by case. The past judgments of different courts are quite different. Generally speaking, the judgments of the Supreme Court in XX do not have effects as laws. These judgments, showing the opinions of the Supreme Court on a specific matter, however indeed in a way influence future judgments of lower courts. According to the practice of the Supreme Court on government LoUs (There was also a similar case in 2006 with the same judgment as the case here. xxxxx), it is of great possibility that the LoUs will not be regarded as guarantees. Besides that, even if a LoU can be recognized as a guarantee, it would also be announced invalid according to the article 8 of the Guarantee Law of the XX, (Article 8, State organs cannot act as guarantors, except for sub-lending of loans from foreign governments or international economic organizations.) which means your bank will still not be able to request the government to pay the debt.
Conclusion: Based on the analysis above, we remind you of the risk of accepting LoUs or any other documents of government as loan guarantees. As for the past LoUs, we believe it is better to check them for their real worth as credit support, and you may communicate with the government on using other ways of guarantee or remedy measures in advance.
2.
Subject: Hello Bob san: Seek your information on XYZ and SOR for regulatory requirement
Hello Bob san,
Thank you for your support as always. I, as well as my colleagues, really appreciate your support.
Please let me ask some additional questions, regarding the description as below in the SOR policy as attached, since I am not sure how the relevant functions of SOR engine described as below actually works in Japan. I would highly appreciate it if you could advise the answer by 23th Wednesday this week.
(BTW, I am thinking the attached policy is the latest version. Is my understanding correct? I would highly appreciate your confirmation)
[SCREENSHOT_ Redacted here]
Q1. In Japan, the TSE and the PTSes that ABC Japan uses – provide the information of order book (bid / ask information) – i.e. liquidity – on a real time basis to the public while those markets open. Even though the information on the liquidity is disclosed, does the SOR engine send IOC orders to seeks liquidity to TSE and these PTSes?
In addition, as you know, the PTSes that ABC Japan uses only accept limit orders, not accepting market orders. I wonder how SOR functions to seek liquidity in such PTSes?
Q2. When or in which cases does the SOR engine seek liquidity from alternate venues by sending IOC orders as written in the SOR policy?
Q3. To which market does SOR engine send IOC orders to seek liquidity? In other words, how does SOR engine decide the market to send the IOC orders?
Thank you very much for your support as always,
Jon
3.
Subject: urgent update
Melanie,
There was an IT incident this morning before market open, which was fixed barely before the market open. And though a few clients traded away voluntarily, there was no major impact to our clients overall fortunately.
However, ABC Sales and Trading takes it very seriously because XYZ and other key clients were among those traded away.
What happened was, there was a new PTS launched in June named QQQ, and one of the codes (QED) used by A coincided with B. Though we don’t trade at B, since last night Bloomberg has started to push QQQ orders to B too, in addition to A, which is a normal course of business as a vendor. Because of the lack of preparation to this change on our side, we saw client low-touch orders coded by SEDOL rejected as duplicates in both exchanges.
The business finds this as serious error in understanding change requirements by IT, as well as in communication between relevant parties in IT and between IT and the business.
I was told by XX that this will be excalated to Global IT management and ORM, so I am sharing this with you in advance.
Regards,
Tim
4.
Subject: W8?
Hi XXXX team,
We received the following questions from the client regarding W8.
W8 has three-year expiration date and YYYY thinks it is close to expiry. Does YYYY need to resubmit?
If resubmission is necessary, when is submission required?
I checked the W8 submitted by the customer and it was signed on December 10, 2018 and expired.(Due date: December 31, 2021)
Therefore, I think it is necessary to resubmit the report immediately. Is this correct?
Please let me clarify the management method of W8 for the future.
Until now, W8 had been resubmitted from the client at the timing of the Periodic Review.
However, XYZ customers mostly have low risk and periodic review is 4-year cycles, which does not match the W8 expiration date and must be managed separately.
We intend to minimize the impact on our customers.
Is W8 strictly required to be resubmitted every three years?
If so, it would be helpful if the FATCA team could tell us how to manage the deadline.
Thank you for your great help in advance.
5.
Subject: PropOsal
The Company was invited to give feedback on the attached proposals initiated by mother company.
Currently , ABC is the custodian of those shares in New Zealand on behalf of New Zealand clients. Those New Zealand clients will place their sell shares orders to their New Zealand designated brokers and those orders will centralize in ABC and ABC will transfer those orders to XXXX for execution. Meanwhile, they also provide the existing client holding information for checking. The Company will compare the placed orders against the respective holding to serve short selling order controls. This arrangement is considered to be an effective internal controls to avoid short selling.
Owing to new client information control measures in New Zealand, ABC proposes not to share any client holding in the new arrangement. They will advise the respective brokers to take relevant short selling controls.
Base on this, without having client holding information, the Company may reply on the counterparty broker representation that they has sufficient stocks to place for their long sell orders. If any individual brokers committed short sell orders, we will wait for the counterparty broker notification from ABC to follow up. We understand that ABC has arranged the handling process of short sell orders.
In addition, they also may not able to provide any client particulars in case of any regulatory enquries arise. Accordingly, the Company is anticipated that we not be able to fulfill the licensed broker obligation to implement effective short sell controls under this arrangement and answer the regulators enquries if needed.
6.
Subject: You are cordially invited to join our Growing All Days briefing sessions
Dear All,
As you may know, we begin to roll out Everyday Growing (EG), a global initiative to move us towards a more flexible way of managing performance at ABC. Instead of having formal annual performance discussions which tend to be more task-oriented, we can now benefit from the new approach where the frequency of feedback and development conversations will be tailor-made for each employee and manager. Not only can this foster the career development of employees, it can also improve business performance by aligning employees’ personal goals with the team strategy.
As people managers, your support is essential to make this happen. Please join us on one of the following briefing sessions to know more about EG. Sign up NOW at XXXX. Please note that your participation is mandatory. If we have not received response from you by 15 September 2022, you will be assigned into any of the sessions.
Broadcast email to all employees will be sent after all the people manager sessions have been completed. The employee sessions will be in late Oct to Dec. Everyone can get well prepare to have a robust conversation officially next year after goal setting.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Thank you!
Regards
Human Resources Department
7.
SUBJECT: Meeting
Hi Sarah,
By way of introduction, this is George from Really Good Capital. I work in our regional banks team, together with Tom and Sue. We are planning a visit to Seoul on 11 November 2022. Is it possible to schedule a meeting at 9-10 AM with ABC's management? The other timeslot is 12:15PM-1:15PM when we can have a lunch meeting. Please let me know if management members will be available for meeting at either timeslot.
FYI, We are going to be taking around 10 investors to the meeting. We will be interested to know about ABC's business strategy and Korean banking industry through this meeting.
Thank you for your help.