---

       T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

                          E U R O P E

          Friday, February 25, 2022, Vol. 23, No. 35

                           Headlines



F R A N C E

PARTS HOLDING: S&P Ups ICR to 'B' on Deleveraging, On Watch Neg.


I R E L A N D

AVOCA CLO XXIII: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class F Notes
BAIN CAPITAL 2019-1: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class F Notes
BARINGS EURO 2018-3: Fitch Raises Rating on Class F Notes to 'B'
BILBAO CLO II: Fitch Raises Rating on Class E-R Notes to 'B'
BILBAO CLO III: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class E-R Notes

BLACKROCK EUROPEAN VIII: Moody's Gives B3 Rating to Cl. F-R Notes
HARVEST CLO XX: Fitch Raises Rating on Class F Notes to 'B'
PEMBROKE PROPERTY 2: S&P Assigns B Rating on Class F Notes
SHAMROCK RESIDENTIAL 2022-1: S&P Gives (P)B- Rating on Cl. G Notes
VENDOME FUNDING 2020-1: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Cl. F-R Notes

VOYA EURO II: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class F-R Notes


I T A L Y

DECO 2019-VIVALDI: Fitch Lowers Class D Notes Rating to 'CCC'


R U S S I A

NATIONAL FACTORING: Fitch Withdraws Ratings After Reorganisation


S P A I N

HAYA REAL ESTATE: Moody's Lowers CFR to Caa2, Outlook Remains Neg.


S W I T Z E R L A N D

CLARIANT AG: Moody's Puts 'Ba1' CFR Under Review for Downgrade
DDM HOLDING: Fitch Puts 'B' LT IDRs on Watch Negative


U N I T E D   K I N G D O M

CLARITY PRODUCTS: Goes Into Liquidation
DERBY COUNTY FOOTBALL: Administrators Review Formal Offers
EUROSAIL-UK 2007-5: Fitch Cuts Rating on Class D1c Notes to 'CC'
OASIS CARE: Coronavirus Pandemic Prompts Liquidation
STUDIO RETAIL: Formally Appoints Administrators

TRITON UK: Fitch Alters Outlook on 'B-' LongTerm IDRs to Negative


X X X X X X X X

[*] BOOK REVIEW: Hospitals, Health and People

                           - - - - -


===========
F R A N C E
===========

PARTS HOLDING: S&P Ups ICR to 'B' on Deleveraging, On Watch Neg.
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its long-term issuer credit rating on
France-based auto parts distributor Parts Holding Europe SAS'
(PHE's) and its issue rating on its senior secured notes to 'B'
from 'B-', and its rating on the super senior revolving credit
facility (RCF) to 'BB-' from 'B+'.

At the same time, family investment firm D'Ieteren Group (not
rated) plans to acquire the company from financial sponsor Bain
Capital for an enterprise value of EUR1.7 billion. D'Ieteren
intends to fund its EUR540 million equity purchase with its own
liquidity, whereas PHE's existing gross debt of about EUR1.2
billion is likely to remain outstanding at closing.

The proposed transaction could provide further uplift to PHE's
stand-alone credit profile (SACP) if S&P assesses D'Ieteren's
creditworthiness as higher than PHE's and that PHE could receive
some support from the group in times of stress.

S&P said, "We consequently placed our issuer and issue ratings on
PHE on CreditWatch with positive implications; we plan to resolve
the CreditWatch placement when the transaction closes, which we
expect in the second half of 2022.

"PHE's robust and steady operating performance supports our
upgrade.We anticipate the company's revenue to reach the EUR2
billion mark in 2022 on continued international expansion and solid
organic growth (6% for the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2021,
compared with the same period in 2019). We forecast revenue growth
of 7%-9% in 2022 (from 13%-15% in 2021) as the company maintains
its leading position in France's auto independent aftermarket and
further increases its revenue base in other countries such as
Spain, Italy, and Belgium. We also anticipate PHE will sustain S&P
Global Ratings-adjusted EBITDA margins of about 11% this year,
similar to our estimate of 10.5%-11.0% in 2021 and 10.5% in 2020,
and up from 9.5% in 2019 due to higher fixed-cost absorption, some
procurement and logistics efficiencies, and continued cost control.
We estimate this earnings momentum will allow the company to keep
adjusted debt to EBITDA below 6.5x in 2022 and thereafter, with
FOCF providing further flexibility to reduce leverage through debt
repayment or earnings accretive acquisitions.

"PHE's growth roadmap is supported by its good FOCF. We anticipate
the company's earnings trajectory to translate into sizable
adjusted FOCF of about EUR100 million in 2022, after some working
capital requirements of up to EUR10 million and predictable capital
expenditure (capex) spending of about EUR50 million. In our view,
this will allow PHE to further pursue its inorganic growth strategy
outside of its existing core markets without materially impairing
its credit metrics, with estimated annual tuck-in acquisition
spending of about EUR30 million. We estimate that previous
acquisitions have enabled PHE to increase its international revenue
above EUR500 million in 2021 from about EUR250 million in 2017.
Moreover, we do not anticipate additional payouts to Bain Capital
before the acquisition by D'Ieteren closes after the EUR71 million
paid in October 2021, further supporting PHE's financial headroom
in executing its growth strategy or reducing debt. Pending further
assessment, we believe that D'Ieteren would support PHE's inorganic
growth strategy. Upon the acquisition, and depending on our view of
the group's financial policy for the company, we may assess PHE's
leverage on a net rather than gross debt basis, which could
incrementally improve the company's credit metrics (up to 0.7x debt
to EBITDA in 2022 in our forecast).

"PHE's integration to D'Ieteren Group could provide rating upside.
Based on preliminary information, we see a possibility that
D'Ieteren's credit quality could be higher than PHE's 'b' SACP.
This could be supported primarily by the group's lower leverage
compared with that of PHE. D'Ieteren's financial metrics benefit
from a sizable dividend stream over the past four years from its
50.01% ownership of international glass repair services provider
Belron Group S.A. (BB+/Stable/--; operating under the Carglass
brand), with EUR617 million in dividend receipts for D'Ieteren in
2021 alone. Our assessment of D'Ieteren's credit quality would also
take into account the company's auto retail and distribution
business in Belgium (revenue above EUR3 billion and operating
margin of 3%-4% in 2019-2020) and its 40% stake in industrial spare
parts distributor TVH Parts (about EUR1.2 billion of revenue and
reported EBITDA around EUR250 million). We understand that the
group plans to fund the proposed purchase of PHE with from its own
cash flow (about EUR1.8 billion of cash on hand as of June 30,
2021) rather than by raising new debt, similar to its EUR1.2
billion purchase of 40% of TVH Parts' equity in 2021.

"We expect that PHE would be D'Ieteren's second-biggest earnings
and cash flow contributor behind the share in Belron's net income
and dividend upon closing. As such, we think PHE could receive
extraordinary financial support from the group in some foreseeable
circumstances. However, in our view, this depends upon D'Ieteren's
investment and portfolio strategy, the importance of PHE within
this strategy, and integration between the group and PHE with
respect to financing activities and key business decisions, which
we will assess by the time of closing. In addition, potential
rating uplift for PHE will remain contingent on D'Ieteren
maintaining lower leverage compared with PHE's, leading us to
believe it would be able to support its new asset.

"The CreditWatch positive placement indicates that we could raise
our ratings on PHE by one notch if the transaction closes as
expected and the company maintains stand-alone credit metrics in
line with our expectations. The upgrade would be contingent on our
assessment of D'Ieteren's creditworthiness being at least two
notches above that of PHE and our expectation that the new owner
would provide the company with extraordinary financial support in
some foreseeable circumstances. Any doubt that both of these two
conditions are met would lead us to affirm the rating at the level
of the SACP. In assessing the potential for PHE to receive
extraordinary support, we will focus on D'Ieteren's investment
strategy, the importance of PHE within this strategy, and the
extent of integration between the group and PHE with respect to
financing activities and key business decisions.

"We plan to resolve our CreditWatch placement when the transaction
closes, which we expect in the second half of 2022."

ESG credit indicators: E-2, S-2, G-3

S&P said, "Governance currently has a moderately negative influence
on our credit rating analysis for PHE. Our assessment of the
company's financial risk profile as highly leveraged reflects
corporate decision-making that prioritizes the interests of the
controlling financial sponsor owners (Bain Capital), in line with
our view of the majority of rated entities owned by private-equity
sponsors. Our assessment also reflects their generally finite
holding periods and a focus on maximizing shareholder returns.
Environmental and social factors have no material influence on our
rating analysis. We view the independent automotive aftermarket as
not materially exposed to the powertrain transition, which will
have a material impact on the product portfolio of spare parts only
in the very long-term.

"We could change our G-3 assessment to G-2 upon transaction close
if we do not identify any negative factors in PHE's future
ownership and governance structure."




=============
I R E L A N D
=============

AVOCA CLO XXIII: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Avoca CLO XXIII DAC's notes. The class
B-1 through F notes have been removed from Under Criteria
Observation (UCO), and the Rating Outlooks for all classes remain
Stable.

    DEBT                     RATING           PRIOR
    ----                     ------           -----
Avoca CLO XXIII DAC

A Loan                 LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf
A Notes XS2336488411   LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf
B-1 XS2336488684       LT AAsf    Affirmed    AAsf
B-2 XS2336488767       LT AAsf    Affirmed    AAsf
C XS2336488841         LT Asf     Affirmed    Asf
D XS2336489229         LT BBB-sf  Affirmed    BBB-sf
E XS2336489492         LT BB-sf   Affirmed    BB-sf
F XS2336489575         LT B-sf    Affirmed    B-sf
X XS2336488171         LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Avoca CLO XXIII DAC is a cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) comprised of mostly senior secured obligations. The
transaction is actively managed by KKR Credit Advisors (Ireland)
and will exit its reinvestment period in October 2025.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of the recently updated Fitch CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the current portfolio and stressed
portfolio is based on the Dec. 31, 2021 trustee report.

Fitch's updated analysis applied the agency's collateral quality
matrix specified in the transaction documentation. There are four
matrices in this transaction, based on 0% and 10% fixed rate assets
and 16% and 20% top 10 largest obligors concentration limits.
Fitch's updated analysis applied the agency's collateral quality
matrix specifying the 16% top 10 obligor limit and 0% and 10% fixed
rate limits as the agency viewed this as the most rating relevant.

The Stable Outlooks on the class X through F notes reflect Fitch's
expectation that the classes have sufficient levels of credit
protection to withstand potential deterioration in the credit
quality of the portfolio in stress scenarios commensurate with such
class's rating.

Deviation from Model-Implied Ratings: The rating actions for the
class C, D and E notes are one notch below their respective model
implied ratings (MIR) produced from Fitch's cash flow analysis. The
deviations reflect the remaining reinvestment period until October
2025, during which the portfolio can change due to reinvestment or
negative portfolio migration. The rating actions for the class X, A
debt, B-1, B-2 and F notes are in line with their respective MIR.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction metrics indicate stable
asset performance. The transaction is passing all coverage tests,
collateral quality tests, and portfolio profile tests. Exposure to
assets with a Fitch-derived rating (FDR) of 'CCC+' and below is
1.6% excluding non-rated assets, as calculated by Fitch.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the transaction's underlying obligors in the 'B'/'B-' category. The
weighted average rating factor (WARF) as calculated by the trustee
was 33.5, which is below the maximum covenant of 34.5. The WARF, as
calculated by Fitch under the updated criteria, was 25.1.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise
99.4% of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views
the recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch WARR
reported by the trustee was 63.3%, against the covenant at 60.0%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. The top 10 obligor
concentration is 12.8%, and no obligor represents more than 1.6% of
the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to three
    notches, depending on the notes;

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in an upgrade of up to
    five notches, depending on the notes;

-- Except for the tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur in the case of better than expected
    portfolio credit quality and deal performance that leads to
    higher CE and excess spread available to cover losses in the
    remaining portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by,
Fitch in relation to this rating action.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.


BAIN CAPITAL 2019-1: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class F Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Bain Capital Euro CLO 2019-1 DAC's class
D and E notes and affirmed the class A, B, C and F notes. The class
B through F notes have been removed from Under Criteria
Observation, and the Rating Outlooks for all classes remain
Stable.

    DEBT              RATING           PRIOR
    ----              ------           -----
Bain Capital Euro CLO 2019-1 DAC

A XS2075846811   LT AAAsf  Affirmed    AAAsf
B XS2075847462   LT AAsf   Affirmed    AAsf
C XS2075848940   LT Asf    Affirmed    Asf
D XS2075849674   LT BBBsf  Upgrade     BBB-sf
E XS2075850094   LT BBsf   Upgrade     BB-sf
F XS2075850250   LT B-sf   Affirmed    B-sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Bain Capital Euro CLO 2019-1 DAC is a cash flow collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) comprised of mostly senior secured obligations.
The transaction is actively managed by Bain Capital Credit U.S. CLO
Manager, LLC and will exit its reinvestment period in April 2024.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of the recently updated Fitch CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the current portfolio and stressed
portfolio is based on the Jan. 5, 2022 trustee report.

Fitch's updated analysis applied the agency's collateral quality
matrix specified in the transaction documentation. The transaction
has two matrices, based on 18% and 26.5% top 10 obligor limits and
Fitch analyzed the matrix specifying the 18% limit, as the agency
viewed this matrix as the most ratings relevant. Fitch also applied
a haircut of 1.5% to the weighted-average recovery rate (WARR) as
the calculation of the WARR in the transaction documentation
reflects and earlier version of Fitch's CLO criteria.

The Stable Outlooks on the class A through F notes reflect Fitch's
expectation that the classes have sufficient levels of credit
protection to withstand potential deterioration in the credit
quality of the portfolio in stress scenarios commensurate with such
class's rating.

Deviation from Model-Implied Ratings: The rating actions for the
class B through F notes are one notch below their respective model
implied ratings (MIR) produced from Fitch's cash flow analysis. The
deviations reflect the remaining reinvestment period until April
2024, during which the portfolio can change due to reinvestment or
negative portfolio migration. The rating actions for the class A
notes are in line with their MIR.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction metrics indicate stable
asset performance. The transaction is passing all coverage tests,
collateral quality tests, and portfolio profile tests. Exposure to
assets with a Fitch-derived rating (FDR) of 'CCC+' and below is
3.4% excluding non-rated assets, as calculated by Fitch.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the transaction's underlying obligors in the 'B'/'B-' category. The
weighted-average rating factor (WARF) as calculated by the trustee
was 32.9, which is below the maximum covenant of 34.4. The WARF, as
calculated by Fitch under the updated criteria, was 24.9.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise
99.6% of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views
the recovery prospects for these assets as more favorable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch WARR
reported by the trustee was 66.4%, against the covenant at 65.97%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. The top 10 obligor
concentration is 11.0%, and no obligor represents more than 1.2% of
the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to four
    notches, depending on the notes;

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in an upgrade of up to
    five notches, depending on the notes;

-- Except for the tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur in the case of better than expected
    portfolio credit quality and deal performance that leads to
    higher CE and excess spread available to cover losses in the
    remaining portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by,
Fitch in relation to this rating action

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.


BARINGS EURO 2018-3: Fitch Raises Rating on Class F Notes to 'B'
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Barings Euro CLO 2018-3 DAC's class D,
E, and F notes, and has affirmed the class A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, and
C notes. The class B-1 through F notes have been removed from Under
Criteria Observation (UCO), and all Rating Outlooks are Stable.

     DEBT              RATING            PRIOR
     ----              ------            -----
Barings Euro CLO 2018-3 DAC

A-1 XS1914503377   LT AAAsf  Affirmed    AAAsf
A-2 XS1914504003   LT AAAsf  Affirmed    AAAsf
B-1 XS1914504425   LT AAsf   Affirmed    AAsf
B-2 XS1914505158   LT AAsf   Affirmed    AAsf
C XS1914505745     LT Asf    Affirmed    Asf
D XS1914507014     LT BBBsf  Upgrade     BBB-sf
E XS1914506800     LT BBsf   Upgrade     BB-sf
F XS1914507105     LT Bsf    Upgrade     B-sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Barings Euro CLO 2018-3 DAC is a cash flow CLO comprised of mostly
senior secured obligations. The transaction is actively managed by
Barings (U.K.) Limited and will exit its reinvestment period in
July 2023.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of Fitch's recently updated CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria, and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the stressed portfolio based on the Jan.
17, 2022 trustee report.

The transaction has four matrices, based on 17% and 26.5% top 10
obligor limits and 0% and 20% fixed-rate assets. Fitch analyzed the
matrices specifying the 17% top-10 obligor limit and 0% and 20%
fixed-rate assets, as the agency viewed these as the most rating
relevant. Fitch also applied a haircut of 1.5% to the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), as the calculation of the WARR in
transaction documentation reflects an earlier version of Fitch's
CLO criteria.

The Stable Outlooks on all classes reflect Fitch's expectation that
the classes have sufficient levels of credit protection to
withstand potential deterioration in the credit quality of the
portfolio in stress scenarios commensurate with such class's
rating.

Deviation from Model-Implied Ratings: The ratings assigned to all
notes, except the class A-1 and A-2 notes, are one notch below
their respective model implied ratings. The deviations reflect the
remaining reinvestment period until July 2023, during which the
portfolio can change due to reinvestment or negative portfolio
migration.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction metrics indicate stable
asset performance. The transaction is failing the Moody's Maximum
Weighted Average Rating Factor Test and Fitch 'CCC' and Moody's Caa
portfolio profile tests. Exposure to assets with a Fitch-derived
rating (FDR) of 'CCC+' and below is 9.3% excluding non-rated
assets, as calculated by Fitch.

'B' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of the
transaction's underlying obligors in the 'B' category. The Fitch
weighted average rating factor (WARF), as calculated by the
trustee, was 34.7, which is below the maximum covenant of 35.0. The
WARF, as calculated by Fitch under the updated criteria, was 26.0.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise
96.1% of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views
the recovery prospects for these assets as more favorable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch WARR
reported by the trustee was 66.2%, against the covenant at 62.3%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. The top 10 obligor
concentration is 14.8%, and no obligor represents more than 1.9% of
the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to three
    notches, depending on the notes;

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in an upgrade of up to
    four notches, depending on the notes;

-- Except for the tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur in the case of better than expected
    portfolio credit quality and deal performance that leads to
    higher CE and excess spread available to cover losses in the
    remaining portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.


BILBAO CLO II: Fitch Raises Rating on Class E-R Notes to 'B'
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Bilbao CLO II DAC's class D-R and E-R
notes and affirmed the class X-R, A-1-R, A-2A-R, A-2B-R, B-R and
C-R notes. The class A-2A-R through E-R notes have been removed
from Under Criteria Observation. The Rating Outlooks for all
classes remain Stable.

      DEBT                 RATING            PRIOR
      ----                 ------            -----
Bilbao CLO II DAC

A-1-R XS2364001581    LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf
A-2A-R XS2364001821   LT AAsf    Affirmed    AAsf
A-2B-R XS2364002399   LT AAsf    Affirmed    AAsf
B-R XS2364002555      LT Asf     Affirmed    Asf
C-R XS2364002803      LT BBB-sf  Affirmed    BBB-sf
D-R XS2364003280      LT BBsf    Upgrade     BB-sf
E-R XS2364003520      LT Bsf     Upgrade     B-sf
X-R XS2364001409      LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Bilbao CLO II DAC is a cash flow CLO comprised of mostly senior
secured obligations. The transaction is actively managed by
Guggenheim Partners Europe Limited and will exit its reinvestment
period in February 2026.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of the recently updated "Fitch CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria" and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the stressed portfolio based on the Jan.
6, 2022 trustee report.

The rating actions for all notes, except for the class X-R and
A-1-R notes, are one notch lower than the model-implied ratings
produced from Fitch's updated stressed portfolio analysis for all
classes of notes. The deviation reflects the remaining long
reinvestment period until February 2026, during which the portfolio
can change significantly due to reinvestment or negative portfolio
migration.

Fitch's updated analysis applied the agency's collateral quality
matrix specified in the transaction documentation. The transaction
has six matrices, based on 15% and 23% top 10 obligor concentration
limits and 0%, 5% and 10% fixed rate assets. Fitch analyzed the
matrix specifying the 15% top 10 obligor limit and 0% fixed rate
assets as the agency viewed this as the most relevant.

The Stable Outlooks on each class of notes reflect Fitch's
expectation that the classes have sufficient levels of credit
protection to withstand potential deterioration in the credit
quality of the portfolio in stress scenarios commensurate with such
class's rating.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction metrics indicate stable
asset performance. The transaction is passing all coverage tests,
collateral quality tests, and portfolio profile tests. Exposure to
assets with a Fitch-derived rating (FDR) of 'CCC+' and below is
1.7% excluding non-rated assets, as calculated by Fitch.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the transaction's underlying obligors in the 'B'/'B-' category. The
WARF, as calculated by the trustee, was 33.6, which is below the
maximum covenant of 35.0. The WARF, as calculated by Fitch under
the updated criteria, was 25.2.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise 99%
of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views the
recovery prospects for these assets as more favorable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch WARR
reported by the trustee was 63.5%, against the covenant at 62.1%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. No obligor represents more than
1.7% of the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee. The top
10 obligor concentration is 14.9% as calculated by Fitch.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to two
    notches, depending on the notes;

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in an upgrade of up to
    five notches, depending on the notes;

-- Except for the tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur in the case of better than expected
    portfolio credit quality and deal performance that leads to
    higher CE and excess spread available to cover losses in the
    remaining portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Bilbao CLO II DAC

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.


BILBAO CLO III: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Bilbao CLO III DAC's class D-R notes and
affirmed the class A-1-R, A-2A-R, A-2B-R, B-R, C-R and E-R notes.
The class A-2A-R through E-R notes have been removed from Under
Criteria Observation. The Rating Outlooks for all classes remain
Stable.

      DEBT                 RATING            PRIOR
      ----                 ------            -----
Bilbao CLO III DAC

A-1-R XS2332235733    LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf
A-2A-R XS2332236384   LT AAsf    Affirmed    AAsf
A-2B-R XS2332236970   LT AAsf    Affirmed    AAsf
B-R XS2332237788      LT Asf     Affirmed    Asf
C-R XS2332238323      LT BBB-sf  Affirmed    BBB-sf
D-R XS2332239131      LT BBsf    Upgrade     BB-sf
E-R XS2332238919      LT B-sf    Affirmed    B-sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Bilbao CLO III DAC is a cash flow CLO comprised of mostly senior
secured obligations. The transaction is actively managed by
Guggenheim Partners Europe Limited and will exit its reinvestment
period in February 2026.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of the recently updated "Fitch CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria" and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the stressed portfolio based on the
January 6, 2022 trustee report.

The rating actions for all notes are at their respective
model-implied ratings produced from Fitch's updated stressed
portfolio analysis for all classes of notes, except for the class
B-R and D-R notes. The deviation reflects the remaining long
reinvestment period until February 2026, during which the portfolio
can change significantly due to reinvestment or negative portfolio
migration.

Fitch's updated analysis applied the agency's collateral quality
matrix specified in the transaction documentation. The transaction
has four matrices, based on 15% and 23% top 10 obligor
concentration limits and 0% and 10% fixed rate assets. Fitch
analyzed the matrix specifying the 15% top 10 obligor limit and 0%
fixed rate assets as the agency viewed this as the most relevant.

The Stable Outlooks on each class of notes reflect Fitch's
expectation that the classes have sufficient levels of credit
protection to withstand potential deterioration in the credit
quality of the portfolio in stress scenarios commensurate with such
class's rating.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction metrics indicate stable
asset performance. The transaction is passing all coverage tests,
collateral quality tests, and portfolio profile tests. Exposure to
assets with a Fitch-derived rating (FDR) of 'CCC+' and below is
1.7% excluding non-rated assets, as calculated by Fitch.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the transaction's underlying obligors in the 'B'/'B-' category. The
WARF, as calculated by the trustee, was 33.5, which is below the
maximum covenant of 37.0. The WARF, as calculated by Fitch under
the updated criteria, was 25.2.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise 99%
of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views the
recovery prospects for these assets as more favorable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch WARR
reported by the trustee was 62.1%, against the covenant at 62.7%.
The transaction is currently failing its Fitch Minimum Weighted
Average Recovery Rate Test.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. No obligor represents more than
1.8% of the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee. The top
10 obligor concentration is 15.0% as calculated by Fitch.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to four
    notches, depending on the notes;

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in an upgrade of up to
    five notches, depending on the notes;

-- Except for the tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur in the case of better than expected
    portfolio credit quality and deal performance that leads to
    higher CE and excess spread available to cover losses in the
    remaining portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Bilbao CLO III DAC

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.


BLACKROCK EUROPEAN VIII: Moody's Gives B3 Rating to Cl. F-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following definitive ratings to the refinancing notes issued by
BlackRock European CLO VIII Designated Activity Company (the
"Issuer"):

EUR248,000,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2036, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

EUR30,000,000 Class B-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2036, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

EUR10,000,000 Class B-2-R Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due
2036, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

EUR25,000,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2036, Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

EUR28,000,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2036, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

EUR20,000,000 Class E-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2036, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

EUR12,000,000 Class F-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2036, Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rationale for the ratings is based on a consideration of the
risks associated with the CLO's portfolio and structure as
described in Moody's methodology.

The Issuer has issued the notes in connection with the refinancing
of the following classes of notes (the "Original Notes"): Class A-1
Notes, Class A-2 Notes, Class B-1 Notes, Class B-2 Notes, Class C-1
Notes, Class C-2 Notes, Class C-3 Notes, Class D-1 Notes, Class D-2
Notes, Class E Notes, and Class F Notes due July 20, 2032
previously issued on June 5, 2019.

As part of this refinancing, the Issuer has amended the base matrix
and modifiers that Moody's has taken into account for the
assignment of the definitive ratings.

The Issuer is a managed cash flow CLO. At least 90% of the
portfolio must consist of senior secured obligations and up to 10%
of the portfolio may consist of senior unsecured obligations,
second-lien loans, mezzanine obligations and high yield bonds. The
portfolio is expected to be fully ramped up as of the closing date
and to comprise of predominantly corporate loans to obligors
domiciled in Western Europe.

BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Limited ("BlackRock") will
manage the CLO. It will direct the selection, acquisition and
disposition of collateral on behalf of the Issuer and may engage in
trading activity, including discretionary trading, during the
transaction's four-and-half-year reinvestment period. Thereafter,
subject to certain restrictions, purchases are permitted using
principal proceeds from unscheduled principal payments and proceeds
from sales of credit impaired obligations or credit improved
obligations.

In addition to the seven classes of notes rated by Moody's, the
Issuer has originally issued EUR36,500,000 of Subordinated Notes
which remain outstanding and are not rated.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

Methodology underlying the rating action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

The rated notes' performance is subject to uncertainty. The notes'
performance is sensitive to the performance of the underlying
portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and credit conditions
that may change. The collateral manager's investment decisions and
management of the transaction will also affect the notes'
performance.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in December 2021.

Moody's used the following base-case modeling assumptions:

Par Amount: EUR400,000,000

Diversity Score (*): 54

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3029

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.6%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 3.5%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 7.67 years


HARVEST CLO XX: Fitch Raises Rating on Class F Notes to 'B'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Harvest CLO XX DAC's class F notes and
affirmed the others. The class B through F notes have been removed
from Under Criteria Observation (UCO). The Outlooks are Stable.

     DEBT                RATING            PRIOR
     ----                ------            -----
Harvest CLO XX DAC

A-R XS2310757989     LT AAAsf  Affirmed    AAAsf
B-1-R XS2310759092   LT AAsf   Affirmed    AAsf
B-2-R XS2310760009   LT AAsf   Affirmed    AAsf
C-R XS2310761239     LT Asf    Affirmed    Asf
D-R XS2310762047     LT BBBsf  Affirmed    BBBsf
E XS1843451532       LT BBsf   Affirmed    BBsf
F XS1843451375       LT Bsf    Upgrade     B-sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Harvest CLO XX DAC is a cash flow CLO comprising mostly senior
secured obligations. The transaction is actively managed by
Investcorp Credit Management EU Limited and will exit its
reinvestment period in April 2023.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of the recently updated Fitch CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the current and stressed portfolios
based on the 7 January 2022 trustee report.

Fitch's updated analysis applied the agency's collateral-quality
matrix specified in the transaction documentation. The matrix is
based on a 10% fixed-rate concentration limit and a 20% top-10
obligor concentration limit.

The weighted average life (WAL) used for the transaction's stressed
portfolio and matrix analysis is floored at six years after a
12-month reduction from the WAL covenant. This is to account for
structural and reinvestment conditions after the reinvestment
period, including the satisfaction of the coverage and Fitch 'CCC'
limit tests, together with a progressively decreasing WAL covenant.
These conditions would, in the agency's opinion, reduce the
effective risk horizon of the portfolio during stress periods.

The Stable Outlooks on all notes reflect Fitch's expectation of
sufficient credit protection to withstand potential deterioration
in the credit quality of the portfolio in stress scenarios that are
commensurate with the ratings. Further, it reflects no expected
deleveraging as the transaction is still in its reinvestment
period.

Model-Implied Rating Deviation: The ratings of the class B to F
notes are one notch below their model- implied ratings (MIR). The
deviation reflects the remaining reinvestment period till April
2023 during which the portfolio can change significantly due to
reinvestment or negative portfolio migration.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction's metrics indicate stable
asset performance. According to the trustee report, the transaction
is approximately 0.97% below par and is passing all coverage,
collateral-quality and portfolio-profile tests.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the transaction's underlying obligors at 'B'/'B-'. The weighted
average rating factor (WARF) as calculated by the trustee was
34.19, which is below a maximum covenant of 35. The WARF, as
calculated by Fitch under the updated criteria, was 26.05.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise
99.2% of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views
the recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch weighted
average recovery rate reported by the trustee was 63.4%, against a
minimum covenant at 62.5%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. The top- 10 obligor
concentration is 14.15%, and no obligor represents more than 1.88%
of the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to three
    notches, depending on the notes.

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed, due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in upgrades of up to four
    notches, depending on the notes.

-- Except for the tranche already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur on better- than expected portfolio credit
    quality and deal performance that leads to higher CE and
    excess spread available to cover losses in the remaining
    portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk-presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other nationally
recognised statistical rating organisations and/or European
securities and markets authority-registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk-presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.


PEMBROKE PROPERTY 2: S&P Assigns B Rating on Class F Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings has assigned preliminary credit ratings to
Pembroke Property Finance 2 DAC's class A, B, C, D, E, and F notes.
At closing, Pembroke Property Finance 2 also issued unrated class Z
notes.

In this true sale transaction, the issuer used the issuance amount
to purchase a portfolio of 147 commercial mortgage loans and to
fund a committed reserve account.

The portfolio comprises 147 small commercial real estate loans
originated by Finance Ireland Credit Solutions DAC and Finance
Ireland Property Finance DAC (FICS and FIPF; the sellers) and
secured on commercial properties located throughout Ireland.

This is the second Pembroke transaction following Pembroke Property
Finance DAC in 2019.

S&P said, "When we assigned preliminary ratings to the class B to E
notes our expected recoveries from the underlying properties could
support higher rating levels for these classes. We made a one-notch
downward adjustment in our analysis, recognizing that this
transaction structure differs from that typically seen in European
CMBS, where a static asset base secures a known amount of debt. In
contrast, this transaction incorporates an increased level of
operational flexibility (subject to certain asset conditions). In
the final pool, five risk groups have repaid and the overall pool
size has reduced. In assigning our final ratings we have not
notched down for any note classes, as we have already considered
potential changes in the pool throughout the transaction's life.
The assigned ratings also have sufficient headroom for future
changes in the collateral pool. Also, further loan repayments
post-closing will be applied sequentially, creating additional
credit enhancement for the rated notes.

"Our ratings address Pembroke Property Finance 2's ability to meet
timely interest payments and principal repayment no later than the
legal final maturity on the class A notes -- in June 2040 -- and
the ultimate payment of interest and principal no later than the
legal final maturity on the other rated notes, in June 2040. The
issuer will pay interest according to the priority of payments.
Under the transaction documents, interest payments on all classes
of notes (excluding the class A notes) can be deferred even when a
class of notes becomes the most senior outstanding without
constituting an event of default. Any deferred interest will also
accrue interest at the applicable rate due under that class of
notes.

"Our ratings on the notes reflect the credit support provided by
the subordinate classes of notes, the issuer reserve, the
underlying loans' credit, cash flow, legal characteristics, and an
analysis of the transaction's counterparty and operational risks,
namely the ability of the servicer, FICS, to perform its roles in
this transaction."

  Ratings

  CLASS    RATING    CLASS SIZE (MIL. EUR)

   A       AAA (sf)    160.92
   B       AA (sf)      35.25
   C       A (sf)       36.02
   D       BBB (sf)     20.69
   E       BB+ (sf)     16.09
   F       B (sf)       19.92
   Z       NR           26.48

   NR--Not rated.


SHAMROCK RESIDENTIAL 2022-1: S&P Gives (P)B- Rating on Cl. G Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its credit ratings to Shamrock
Residential 2022-1 DAC's class A to G-Dfrd Irish RMBS notes. At
closing, the issuer will also issue unrated class RFN, Z and X
notes.

Shamrock Residential 2022-1 is a static RMBS transaction that
securitizes a portfolio of EUR598.6 million loans (excluding
EUR3.35 million of loans subject to potential write-off). These
consist of owner-occupied and buy-to-let primarily reperforming
mortgage loans secured over residential properties in Ireland.

The securitization comprises two purchased portfolios, Bay and
Barrow, which aggregate assets from six Irish originators. The
loans in the Bay subpool were originated by AIB DAC, EBS DAC, and
Haven Mortgages Ltd., while the loans in the Barrow subpool were
originated by Ulster Bank Ireland DAC, Danske Bank A/S, and
Stepstone Mortgages Funding DAC.

S&P's rating on the class A notes addresses the timely payment of
interest and the ultimate payment of principal. Its ratings on the
class B to G-Dfrd notes address the ultimate payment of interest
and principal. The timely payment of interest on the class A notes
is supported by the liquidity reserve fund, which was fully funded
at closing to its required level of 2.0% of the class A notes'
balance. Furthermore, the transaction benefits from regular
transfers of principal funds to the revenue item (through 2.50%
yield supplement overcollateralization) and the ability to use
principal to cover certain senior items.

Cabot Financial (Ireland) Ltd. and Mars Capital Finance (Ireland)
DAC, the administrators, are responsible for the day-to-day
servicing.

At closing, the issuer will use the issuance proceeds to purchase
the beneficial interest in the mortgage loans from the seller. The
issuer grants security over all its assets in favor of the security
trustee. S&P considers the issuer to be bankruptcy remote under its
legal criteria.

  Preliminary Ratings

  CLASS   PRELIM. RATING   CLASS SIZE (%)

   A         AAA (sf)         76.00

   B-Dfrd    AA+ (sf)          5.50

   C-Dfrd    A+ (sf)           5.00

   D-Dfrd    BBB+ (sf)         3.75

   E-Dfrd    BB (sf)           3.75

   F-Dfrd    B (sf)            1.50

   G-Dfrd    B- (sf)           2.00

   RFN       NR                2.00

   Z         NR                2.50

   X         NR                NR

  Dfrd--Deferrable.
  NR--Not rated.


VENDOME FUNDING 2020-1: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Cl. F-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Vendome Funding CLO 2020-1 DAC's class
E-R notes and affirmed the class A-1-R, A-2-R, B-R, C-R, D-R and
F-R notes. The class B-R through F-R notes have been removed from
Under Criteria Observation (UCO), and all Rating Outlooks are
Stable.

       DEBT               RATING            PRIOR
       ----               ------            -----
Vendome Funding CLO 2020-1 DAC

A-1-R XS2348057469   LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf
A-2-R XS2353069219   LT AAAsf   Affirmed    AAAsf
B-R XS2348058277     LT AAsf    Affirmed    AAsf
C-R XS2348059598     LT Asf     Affirmed    Asf
D-R XS2348060174     LT BBB-sf  Affirmed    BBB-sf
E-R XS2348060760     LT BBsf    Upgrade     BB-sf
F-R XS2348060927     LT B-sf    Affirmed    B-sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Vendome Funding CLO 2020-1 DAC is a cash flow CLO comprised of
mostly senior secured obligations. The transaction is actively
managed by CBAM CLO Management Europe, LLC and will exit its
reinvestment period in January 2026.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of Fitch's recently updated CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria, and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the stressed portfolio based on the Jan.
7, 2022 trustee report.

The transaction has four matrices, based on 15% and 23% top 10
obligor limits and 0% and 12.5% fixed-rate assets. Fitch analyzed
the matrices specifying the 15% top-10 obligor limit and 0% and
12.5% fixed-rate assets as the agency viewed these as the most
rating relevant. Fitch also applied a haircut of 1.5% to the
weighted average recovery rate (WARR) as the calculation of the
WARR in transaction documentation reflects an earlier version of
Fitch's CLO criteria.

The Stable Outlooks on all classes reflect Fitch's expectation that
the classes have sufficient levels of credit protection to
withstand potential deterioration in the credit quality of the
portfolio in stress scenarios commensurate with such class's
rating.

Deviation from Model-Implied Ratings: The ratings assigned to all
notes, except the class A-1-R, A-2-R and F-R notes, are one notch
below their respective model implied ratings. The deviations
reflect the remaining reinvestment period until January 2026,
during which the portfolio can change due to reinvestment or
negative portfolio migration.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction metrics indicate stable
asset performance. The transaction is passing all coverage tests,
collateral quality tests, and portfolio profile tests. Exposure to
assets with a Fitch-derived rating (FDR) of 'CCC+' and below is
2.5% excluding non-rated assets, as calculated by Fitch.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the transaction's underlying obligors in the 'B'/'B-' category. The
Fitch weighted average rating factor (WARF), as calculated by the
trustee, was 32.9, which is below the maximum covenant of 34.0. The
WARF, as calculated by Fitch under the updated criteria, was 24.8.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise
99.1% of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views
the recovery prospects for these assets as more favorable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch WARR
reported by the trustee was 66.2%, against the covenant at 63.3%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. The top 10 obligor
concentration is 13.8%, and no obligor represents more than 1.5% of
the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to two
    notches, depending on the notes;

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in an upgrade of up to
    four notches, depending on the notes;

-- Except for the tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur in the case of better than expected
    portfolio credit quality and deal performance that leads to
    higher CE and excess spread available to cover losses in the
    remaining portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Vendome Funding CLO 2020-1 DAC

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by,
Fitch in relation to this rating action.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.


VOYA EURO II: Fitch Affirms 'B-' Rating on Class F-R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Voya Euro CLO II DAC's class D-R and E-R
notes and affirmed the class A-R, B-1-R, B-2-R, C-R and F-R notes.
The class B-1-R through F notes have been removed from Under
Criteria Observation (UCO), and all Rating Outlooks are Stable.

     DEBT                 RATING           PRIOR
     ----                 ------           -----
Voya Euro CLO II DAC

A-R XS2357476691     LT AAAsf  Affirmed    AAAsf
B-1-R XS2357476931   LT AAsf   Affirmed    AAsf
B-2-R XS2357477152   LT AAsf   Affirmed    AAsf
C-R XS2357477079     LT Asf    Affirmed    Asf
D-R XS2357477236     LT BBBsf  Upgrade     BBB-sf
E-R XS2357478556     LT BBsf   Upgrade     BB-sf
F-R XS2357478473     LT B-sf   Affirmed    B-sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Voya Euro CLO II DAC is a cash flow CLO comprised of mostly senior
secured obligations. The transaction is actively managed by Voya
Alternative Asset Management LLC and will exit its reinvestment
period in January 2026.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

CLO Criteria Update: The rating actions mainly reflect the impact
of Fitch's recently updated CLOs and Corporate CDOs Rating
Criteria, and the shorter risk horizon incorporated in Fitch's
updated stressed portfolio analysis. The analysis considered cash
flow modelling results for the stressed portfolio based on the Jan.
5, 2022 trustee report.

The transaction has four matrices, based on 15% and 20% top 10
obligor limits and 0% and 5% fixed-rate assets. Fitch analyzed the
matrices specifying the 15% top-10 obligor limit and 0% and 5%
fixed-rate assets as the agency viewed these as the most rating
relevant.

The Stable Outlooks on all classes reflect Fitch's expectation that
the classes have sufficient levels of credit protection to
withstand potential deterioration in the credit quality of the
portfolio in stress scenarios commensurate with such class's
rating.

Deviation from Model-Implied Ratings: The ratings assigned to all
notes, except the class A-R and F-R notes, are one notch below
their respective model implied ratings. The deviations reflect the
remaining reinvestment period until January 2026, during which the
portfolio can change due to reinvestment or negative portfolio
migration.

Stable Asset Performance: The transaction metrics indicate stable
asset performance. The transaction is passing all coverage tests,
collateral quality tests, and portfolio profile tests. Exposure to
assets with a Fitch-derived rating (FDR) of 'CCC+' and below is
2.4% excluding non-rated assets, as calculated by Fitch.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the transaction's underlying obligors in the 'B'/'B-' category. The
Fitch weighted average rating factor (WARF), as calculated by the
trustee, was 33.6, which is below the maximum covenant of 36.0. The
WARF, as calculated by Fitch under the updated criteria, was 25.0.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise
99.8% of the portfolio as calculated by the trustee. Fitch views
the recovery prospects for these assets as more favorable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch WARR
reported by the trustee was 66.3%, against the covenant at 65.7%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. The top 10 obligor
concentration is 12.1%, and no obligor represents more than 1.5% of
the portfolio balance, as reported by the trustee.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- An increase of the rating default rate (RDR) at all rating
    levels by 25% of the mean RDR and a decrease of the rating
    recovery rate (RRR) by 25% at all rating levels in the
    stressed portfolio will result in downgrades of up to four
    notches, depending on the notes;

-- Downgrades may occur if the build-up of the notes' credit
    enhancement (CE) does not compensate for a larger loss
    expectation than initially assumed due to unexpectedly high
    levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A reduction of the RDR at all rating levels by 25% of the mean
    RDR and an increase in the RRR by 25% at all rating levels in
    the stressed portfolio would result in an upgrade of up to
    five notches, depending on the notes;

-- Except for the tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
    upgrades may occur in the case of better than expected
    portfolio credit quality and deal performance that leads to
    higher CE and excess spread available to cover losses in the
    remaining portfolio.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Voya Euro CLO II DAC

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by,
Fitch in relation to this rating action.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.




=========
I T A L Y
=========

DECO 2019-VIVALDI: Fitch Lowers Class D Notes Rating to 'CCC'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded Deco 2019 - Vivaldi S.r.l.'s notes.

     DEBT             RATING            PRIOR
     ----             ------            -----
Deco 2019 - Vivaldi S.r.l.

A IT0005372435   LT Asf    Downgrade    A+sf
B IT0005372450   LT BB+sf  Downgrade    BBB+sf
C IT0005372468   LT Bsf    Downgrade    BBsf
D IT0005372476   LT CCCsf  Downgrade    Bsf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The transaction is a 95% securitisation of two commercial mortgage
loans totalling EUR233.935 million to two Italian borrowers, both
sponsored by Blackstone funds. The loans are both variable-rate
(with variable margins) and each is secured on an Italian fashion
retail outlet village. The transaction benefits from a liquidity
facility of EUR10.5 million, which is available to cover interest
on the class A and B notes and amortises in line with their
aggregate balance.

The two loans are both secured on established fashion outlets in
northern Italy. Franciacorta Outlet Village is 7km from the city of
Brescia in Lombardy, with 11.6 million people living within a
90-minute drive. The centre comprises 186 retail units spanning
across 36,803sq. m. Palmanova Outlet Village is an open-air outlet
located in the municipality of Aiello di Friuli, in the province of
Udine, part of the Friuli Venezia Giulia Region in the north of
Italy. It has an estimated catchment area of about three million
people within a 90-minute drive. It comprises of 92 retail units
across 22,204sq. m.

There were no material changes to property values from the
valuation in December 2021. Performance has been largely stable
since the last rating action in March 2021, with minor occupancy
gains in Palmanova being offset by proportionate losses in
Franciacorta. Contracted income appears to be lower as a result of
more tenants moving to turnover-only leases, which report no rent
figure in the latest rent roll provided. This may simply reflect
the short-term weakness in turnover related to pandemic measures or
tenant fit-out.

Both loans have been in breach of their cash trap debt yield
triggers since rent discounts were agreed in August 2020, although
only small amounts have been reserved so far. However, the metrics
have been improving quarter on quarter and Fitch expects they will
soon get out of cash trap mode as business rebounds and tenants
resume their operations.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Turnover Performance Reduces Income: Fitch understands that
property values were largely unchanged in the December 2021
valuation thanks to more aggressive income growth projections over
the valuation horizon counteracting the lower year-one estimated
rental level (consisting of base and turnover rental amounts).
Estimated day-one rent is 10.6% and 5.2% lower than in the October
2020 valuation for Palmanova and Franciacorta, respectively, a
meaningful correction for the pandemic-induced reduction in
footfall. Fitch finds no convincing evidence to support as strong a
consumption-led rebound as is assumed in the valuation, and have
reset Fitch's estimated rental values (ERV) at or close to the
valuation-implied year one level to reflect this. This has driven
the downgrades.

Stabilising Rental Prospects: Despite adverse footfall conditions,
the underlying properties have maintained occupancy and contracted
income relatively well, without any major deviations in
performance. Collection rates have improved, with the latest
evidence suggesting 70% of full invoiced amounts. The updated
estimated rental levels account for a significant correction,
rendering any additional declines somewhat unlikely in Fitch's
opinion, subject to the risk of re-emergence of the pandemic in
Italy. This is reflected in the Stable Outlooks on the notes.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- Increase in vacancy and rent decline within the portfolio.

The change in model output that would apply with 0.8x cap rates is
as follows:

-- 'A+sf' / 'BBB+sf' / 'BB+sf' / 'BB-sf'

The change in model output that would apply with 1.25x rental value
declines is as follows:

-- 'A-sf' / 'BBsf' / 'Bsf' / 'CCCsf'

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- Stabilisation of investor sentiment coupled with improved
portfolio performance.

KEY PROPERTY ASSUMPTIONS (all by market value):

-- ERV assumed for the analysis EUR20.7 million

-- Depreciation: 10%

-- 'Bsf' weighted average (WA) cap rate: 5.9%

-- 'Bsf' WA structural vacancy: 14.7%

-- 'Bsf' WA rental value decline: 5.0%

-- 'BBsf' weighted average (WA) cap rate: 6.5%

-- 'BBsf' WA structural vacancy: 16.1%

-- 'BBsf' WA rental value decline: 7.0%

-- 'BBBsf' WA cap rate: 7.2%

-- 'BBBsf' WA structural vacancy: 18.2%

-- 'BBBsf' WA rental value decline: 9.0%

-- 'Asf' WA cap rate: 7.8%

-- 'Asf' WA structural vacancy: 20.3%

-- 'Asf' WA rental value decline: 14.3%

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. There were no findings that affected the
rating analysis. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

Prior to the transaction closing, Fitch reviewed the results of a
third-party assessment conducted on the asset portfolio information
and concluded that there were no findings that affected the rating
analysis.

Overall, Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the
agency's rating analysis according to its applicable rating
methodologies indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Deco 2019 - Vivaldi S.r.l. has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for
Rule of Law, Institutional and Regulatory Quality due to
uncertainty of the enforcement process in Italy which has a
negative impact on the credit profile, and is relevant to the
ratings in conjunction with other factors.

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.




===========
R U S S I A
===========

NATIONAL FACTORING: Fitch Withdraws Ratings After Reorganisation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has withdrawn National Factoring Company (Joint-Stock
Company)'s (NFC) ratings, including Long-Term Issuer Default
Ratings (IDRs) of 'BB' Rating Watch Positive (RWP), following the
company's reorganisation in the form of a merger.

The rating withdrawal is driven by NFC's reorganisation, after the
company was merged into a subsidiary of PJSC Sovcombank (SCB,
BB+/Stable/bb+). Fitch will no longer provide ratings or analytical
coverage of NFC, which no longer exists.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

NFC has ceased all banking and factoring activities as its business
has been transferred into NFC-Premium, an unregulated factoring
entity within NFC Group, and which has subsequently been merged
into Sovcombank Factoring, SCB's consolidated factoring entity. SCB
acquired 100% of NFC and the wider NFC Group in July 2021.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity. Following the rating withdrawal, Fitch will
no longer ESG Relevance Scores for NFC.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

NA

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Financial Institutions and
Covered Bond issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario
(defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in
a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating
horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative
direction) of four notches over three years. The complete span of
best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating
categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario
credit ratings are based on historical performance.




=========
S P A I N
=========

HAYA REAL ESTATE: Moody's Lowers CFR to Caa2, Outlook Remains Neg.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded Haya Real Estate S.A.U.'s
("Haya" or "the company") corporate family rating to Caa2, from
Caa1, and downgraded the company's probability of default rating to
Caa3-PD, from Caa1-PD. Concurrently, Moody's has downgraded to
Caa2, from Caa1, the instrument rating of the senior secured fixed-
and floating-rate notes maturing in November 2022 issued by Haya
Finance 2017 S.A., Haya's subsidiary. The outlook on all ratings
remains negative.

"The rating action considers the terms of the proposed refinancing
of the company's existing senior secured notes and the high
likelihood that the proposed exchange offer will constitute a
distressed exchange under Moody's methodology", said Fabrizio
Marchesi, Vice President and Moody's lead analyst for the company.
"The action also reflects Moody's concerns regarding the long-term
sustainability of Haya's capital structure even in the event of a
successful refinancing" added Mr. Marchesi.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's understands that Haya is in the process of extending the
maturity of its capital structure via an exchange offer, which
would involve bondholders exchanging their existing notes for new
senior secured notes due 2025. The exchange offer does not propose
any debt write-off, as a portion of the existing senior secured
notes will be refinanced at par using excess cash on the company's
balance sheet. While recognizing that the company has signed a
lock-up agreement with an ad hoc group of lenders in favor of the
refinancing, representing over 60% of the existing senior secured
notes, the rating agency considers that uncertainty remains
regarding the ultimate outcome of the proposed debt extension,
which will require the support of at least 75% of bondholders. The
downgrade of the PDR to Caa3-PD, which is one-notch lower than the
CFR, reflects the fact that, if completed as proposed, the debt
refinancing will likely constitute a distressed exchange, under
Moody's methodology, which is a form of default under Moody's
definition.

The downgrade of the CFR to Caa2 also reflects Moody's concerns
regarding the sustainability of Haya's capital structure over the
longer-term. Although a successful refinancing of the existing
senior secured notes would eliminate immediate refinancing risk,
the rating agency has concerns regarding the sustainability of
Haya's business model given the ongoing deterioration in its assets
under management (AuM) and the risk of erosion in profitability
over time, also due to potential changes in product mix. This could
hinder the company's capacity to fulfill its debt obligations even
following an extension in maturities to 2025.

Haya's Caa2 CFR also reflects (1) concerns about the company's
ability to secure enough new business to offset the natural decline
in AuM; (2) limited earnings visibility, as a large portion of its
revenue is derived from one-off sales commissions where the sales
decision lies with the company's clients; (3) a highly concentrated
customer base, which exposes Haya to a high degree of contract
renewal risk, including the need to renew contracts with Sareb in
2022 and Cajamar in 2024; and (4) geographical concentration.

The aforementioned weaknesses are partly mitigated by (1) Haya's
scale, know-how and status as a leading debt servicer in Spain; (2)
the company's track record of new contract wins and renewals, most
recently without the payment of upfront fees; and (3) Haya's free
cash flow (FCF) generation potential, with relatively high EBITDA
margin and relatively low capital spending needs.

Haya's financial performance has improved over the past four
quarters, but remains weak when compared to pre-coronavirus levels
and leverage remains high. Revenue and company-adjusted EBITDA rose
to EUR192 million and EUR60 million, respectively, as of September
30, 2021, from EUR177 million and EUR52 million in 2020, but
Moody's forecasts for company-adjusted EBITDA of EUR65 million in
both 2022 and 2023 are well below pre-pandemic levels (EUR146
million in 2017, EUR133 million in 2018, EUR106 million in 2019).
This is due to less favorable contractual terms, as recent contract
wins have not involved upfront payments, and a shift in product mix
towards lower-margin real estate-owned (REO) assets. As a result,
Moody's adjusted (gross) leverage, of 6.6x as at September 30,
2021, is expected to remain broadly flat at 2021 forecast levels of
around 6.5x in the absence of any debt repayments from the
company's significant cash on balance or expected free cash flow
(FCF) generation of around 3-4% of total debt per year (based on
current financing costs).

Under its ESG framework, Moody's regards the COVID outbreak and the
effects that this has had on Haya's operating performance as a
social risk, and the company's high tolerance for leverage as a
governance risk.

Haya is a private company indirectly owned by funds managed by
Cerberus Capital Management L.P. As is often the case in highly
levered, private-equity-sponsored deals, owners have a high
tolerance for leverage/risk and governance is comparatively less
transparent when compared to publicly-traded companies, often with
relatively limited board diversification. Moody's takes a negative
view on the absence of any financial support from Haya's
shareholders as part of the proposed debt refinancing.

LIQUIDITY

The company's liquidity is weak. Although the company held EUR109
million of cash on balance sheet as of September 30, 2021, benefits
from EUR14 million of availability under a EUR15 million revolving
credit facility (RCF), and is expected to generate FCF of around
EUR15-20 million per year going forward (based on its current cost
of financing), crucially, EUR424 million of Haya's senior secured
notes will mature in November 2022. The RCF agreement terms include
a single springing covenant, applicable if 40% or more of the RCF
is drawn. The RCF matures in May 2022.

STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS

The senior secured fixed- and floating-rate notes due in November
2022 benefit from guarantees from entities representing 100% of the
group's EBITDA and assets. The senior secured notes also benefit
from a security package comprising a pledge over shares, bank
accounts, credit rights under servicing contracts, receivables
under insurance policies, and receivables under intercompany loans.
The RCF benefits from the same guarantee and security package, but
will rank senior to the notes in an event of enforcement of the
collateral.

The Caa2 rating on the senior secured notes is in line with the
CFR, reflecting a 50% family recovery rate typical for transaction
with a mix of bank debt and bonds.

RATING OUTLOOK

The negative outlook reflects Haya's ongoing weak financial
performance compared to historical levels and the uncertainty
associated with the ultimate outcome of the proposed exchange offer
and eventual capital structure of the company.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

The rating could be stabilized if Haya successfully refinances its
debt falling due in November 2022; demonstrates an ability to
stabilize its AuM base and operating performance; and maintains
liquidity at an adequate level on a sustained basis.

Over time, positive rating pressure could develop if Haya
demonstrates an ability to win new business and renew its customer
contracts on favorable terms, so as to grow its AuM; improves its
operating performance on a sustainable basis, to levels that would
remove concerns regarding the ability to meet debt obligations as
they fall due; ensures a more sustainable capital structure going
forward; and maintains adequate liquidity.

Negative rating pressure would likely arise if it becomes
increasingly unlikely that Haya will successfully refinance its
capital structure; in the event that the company pursues a debt
restructuring process which leads to higher losses for creditors
than currently expected; or on the back of heightened concerns
regarding the company's liquidity.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Business and
Consumer Services published in November 2021.

COMPANY PROFILE

Headquartered in Madrid, Spain, Haya Real Estate, S.A.U. is a
leading, independent servicer of nonperforming real-estate
developer (RED) loans and real estate owned (REO) assets on behalf
of financial institutions in Spain. The company manages REDs and
REOs with a gross book value of around EUR31 billion as at
September 30, 2021. In the 12 months ended September 30, 2021, Haya
generated revenue of EUR192 million and company-adjusted EBITDA of
EUR60 million. Haya is controlled by Cerberus Capital Management
L.P., which advises funds that indirectly, through Promontoria
Holding 62, B.V., own 100% of Haya.




=====================
S W I T Z E R L A N D
=====================

CLARIANT AG: Moody's Puts 'Ba1' CFR Under Review for Downgrade
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service placed the Ba1 corporate family rating of
Clariant AG (Clariant, the company), the Ba1-PD probability of
default rating and the Ba1 ratings assigned to its CHF160 million
senior unsecured Swiss Bonds due in 2024 and CHF175 million senior
unsecured Swiss Bonds due in 2022 on review for downgrade. The
outlook has been changed to ratings under review from stable.

RATINGS RATIONALE / FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR
DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

The rating action follows Clariant's announcement[1] that the
publication of the company's Q4 and full year 2021 results will be
delayed due to an internal investigation into accounting issues
related to certain provisions and accruals. The publication of the
2021 audited annual report will be postponed as well. The
independent investigation by Deloitte started in September and
there is no guidance as to when the audit will be completed.
Moody's believes that the internal investigation indicates
potential governance and internal control issues. Depending on the
outcome of the investigation and the time it will take to resolve
the issues, the rating could be under negative rating pressure and
it could be downgraded if the direct financial impact turns out to
be more severe than indicated by the company.

Clariant stated that it is reviewing whether employees incorrectly
booked provisions and accruals, with the aim of steering the
Company's results to meet internal and external targets. The
company may be required to restate previously published financial
statements and quarterly reporting for 2020 and 2021. It is
currently not yet clear whether these issues also extends to
accounting periods prior to 2020. Clariant expects that the results
of the investigation will not impact the cash and cash equivalents
reported in the years under review.

More positively, Clariant reiterated its previously published
guidance for the 2021 EBITDA margin to be in the range of 16% to
17% for continuing operations and also announced preliminary
continuing operations sales of CHF4.372 billion for 2021,
equivalent to a 13% increase in Swiss francs. The preliminary
financial results for 2021 are in line with Moody's expectations.
If confirmed, these financial results would indicate a more
adequate positioning within the Ba1 rating especially after
Clariant received in January 2022 proceeds of CHF615 million from
disposal of the pigments segment. Based on Clariant's sales and
EBITDA margin guidance for 2021, the rating agency projects that
the company's Moody's-adjusted EBITDA to Debt metric would fall to
just under 4x at the end of 2021 compared to 4.2x in 2020.

However, a more severe financial impact as a result of the
investigation than currently indicated by Clariant could result in
negative rating pressure. In addition, the rating agency could
revisit its assessment of the company's governance and could as a
results increase the quantitative requirements for the current Ba1
rating for Clariant.

The review will focus on the internal control issues that have led
to the current situation and the actions the company will take to
avoid them in future. Confirmation of Ba1 ratings is likely if the
investigation is being concluded swiftly thereby preventing the
company from losing access to the debt and equity markets and if
the financial impact remains as limited as expected by Clariant.
Downward pressure is likely should the investigation not be
concluded swiftly, if it results in a material financial impact or
if internal control failures are severe and not sufficiently
rectified.

LIQUIDITY

Moody's considers Clariant to have strong liquidity with an
estimated current cash position of well over CHF1 billion including
the CHF615 million from the Pigments transactions. Accordingly, the
company does not rely on continued access to the CHF445 million
committed revolving credit facility. Nevertheless, the rating
agency would consider it credit negative should Clariant lose
access to the facility for example as a result of non-compliance
with the financial reporting requirements. However, Moody's
currently expects the company to retain full access to the credit
facility and, if necessary, to obtain waivers.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Corporate governance considerations were among the key drivers of
this action, reflecting the investigation into potential accounting
issues and the delay of the results publication. These issues are
considered highly negative under Moody's governance assessment.

Headquartered in Muttenz, Switzerland, Clariant AG (Clariant) is a
leading international specialty chemicals group with three core
businesses: Care Chemicals, Catalysis and Natural Resources. As of
LTM June 2021, excluding discontinued operations, Clariant
generated Moody's-adjusted EBITDA of CHF653 million on revenue of
CHF3.95 billion.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Chemical
Industry published in March 2019.


DDM HOLDING: Fitch Puts 'B' LT IDRs on Watch Negative
-----------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has placed DDM Holding AG's (DDM) and DDM Debt AB's
(DDM Debt) 'B' Long-Term Issuer Default Ratings (IDR) on Rating
Watch Negative (RWN). Fitch has also placed DDM Debt's EUR200
million senior secured bonds' (SE0015797683) 'B' long-term rating
on RWN.

The rating actions follow lower-than-expected capital deployment in
2021, which led to sharply lower gross collections, a material
reduction in EBITDA and consequently an increase in DDM's gross
debt/EBITDA ratio to around 5.3x at end-2021, exceeding Fitch's
previously identified negative rating trigger of 4.5x. Net leverage
also increased, albeit less pronounced (to around 3.6x).

The rating actions also consider DDM's planned acquisition of a
small Swiss-based specialist bank (Swiss Bankers Prepaid Services
AG), which was announced in December 2021 and subject to customary
approvals is expected to close by 2Q22. Swiss Bankers is focused
primarily on prepaid credit card services and in Fitch's view, the
planned Swiss Bankers transaction could negatively affect the
generally cash-generative nature of DDM's business profile and
increase its exposure to strategic and integration risks. Fitch
expects to resolve the RWN within six months.

DDM is a small Switzerland-domiciled and Stockholm-listed debt
purchaser with operations largely in south-eastern Europe (notably
Croatia). Sweden-domiciled DDM Debt is fully-owned by DDM.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The RWN on DDM's and DDM Debt's Long-Term IDRs primarily reflects
Fitch's view that DDM's current gross leverage ratio is no longer
commensurate with its rating. Fitch has placed the ratings on RWN
rather than downgraded them because DDM's credit profile remains
supported by materially better net leverage and likely improvements
in its quarterly run-rate EBITDA in 1H22, due to revenue
contribution from sizeable non-performing loan (NPL) portfolios
acquired in late 2021.

In 2021, gross collections were EUR60.7 million compared with
EUR123.3 million in 2020. While collections in 2020 were inflated
by around EUR60 million due to DDM's accelerated exit from Greece,
collections in 2021 were negatively affected by lower-than-forecast
capital deployment and delays in scheduled collections on already
deployed capital. DDM's EBITDA (adjusted for portfolio
amortisations) improved towards the end of 2021 but its 4Q21 "cash"
EBITDA of EUR10.8 million remained considerably lower yoy (EUR15.3
million in 4Q20). As a result of lower revenue on invested assets
and higher finance expenses due to an increase in outstanding debt,
DDM reported a modest net loss for 2021 (EUR6.8 million, EUR2.9
million if adjusted for one-off refinancing expenses).

DDM's gross debt/adjusted EBITDA ratio increased sharply to around
5.3x at end-2021, up from around 1.4x at end-2020, as a result of
both lower adjusted EBITDA and a material increase in outstanding
debt (to EUR200 million from around EUR138 million at end-2020).
DDM's net leverage ratio (3.6x at end-2021) benefited from a
higher-than-anticipated cash buffer at end-2021 (around EUR65
million). Based on DDM's run-rate adjusted EBITDA, Fitch expects
DDM's gross leverage ratio to improve in 1H22 but to remain close
to its negative rating trigger of 4.5x. Fitch expects DDM's net
leverage ratio to increase materially as a result of cash deployed
to fund the Swiss Bankers acquisition, which will not materially
contribute to DDM's consolidated EBITDA in 2022.

Fitch views the planned acquisition of Swiss Bankers, primarily a
provider of prepaid credit cards, as opportunistic, with limited
synergies with the existing debt purchasing core business. DDM's
management expects the EBITDA contribution of Swiss Bankers to be
low in 2022 before improving to pre-pandemic levels (EBITA of
around CHF10 million in 2019) in 2023.

DDM's Long-Term IDR reflects its small size versus rated peers and
more volatile performance and more concentrated business model.
Compared with higher-rated peers, DDM's franchise is small (120
months estimated remaining collections (ERC) of EUR299 million at
end-2021) and concentrated by geography (Croatia accounted for 57%
of ERC for the next three years at end-2021) and type (81% secured
NPL based on end-2021 ERC to be received within the next three
years).

DDM relies on third-party servicers for the collection of unsecured
NPLs and uses a related company (Ax Financial Holding S.A.) for the
collection of some of the secured debt. In Fitch's view, the
reliance on external collection services limits the value of DDM's
own franchise. DDM's risk controls are adequate but controls will
likely be stretched by ambitious growth expectations, in Fitch's
view.

DDM's liquidity position is acceptable, with around EUR65 million
in unencumbered cash and EUR27 million draw-down capacity under the
company's revolving credit facility (RCF). However, DDM's cash
position will quickly normalise (to around EUR16 million-EUR18
million over the business plan horizon plus EUR27 million RCF),
partly due to the acquisition of Swiss Bankers. DDM's funding
profile is long-term but concentrated, with virtually all its
funding due in 2026.

The rating on DDM Debt's senior secured notes reflect Fitch's
expectation of average recoveries, resulting in an equalisation of
the bonds' ratings with DDM's Long-Term IDR. This is largely
because despite their secured nature, the notes are junior to DDM's
EUR27 million RCF and represent DDM's main outstanding debt.

DDM has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for financial transparency,
in view of the significance of internal modelling to portfolio
valuations and associated metrics such as estimated remaining
collections. This has a moderately negative influence on the
rating, but is a feature of the debt purchasing sector as a whole,
and not specific to DDM.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- Inability to reduce DDM's trailing 12-months gross debt/EBITDA
    ratio to below 4.5x within the six-month RWN horizon and in
    the absence of a clear deleveraging strategy to sustainably
    maintain cash flow leverage below this threshold would lead to
    a downgrade of DDM's ratings, likely by one notch.

-- Inability to improve DDM's trailing 12-month EBITDA/interest
    expense ratio (around 1.9x at end-2021) to above 2x on a
    sustained basis could also lead to negative rating action.

-- An indication that the planned Swiss Bankers acquisition
    materially increases DDM's exposure to operational,
    regulatory, or liquidity risks, weighing on Fitch's assessment
    of DDM's risk profile, would also be rating-negative.

-- In addition to these issuer rating-specific considerations,
    worsening recovery expectations, for instance as a result of a
    layer of more senior debt, could lead Fitch to notch the
    secured notes' rating down from DDM Debt's Long-Term IDR.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- The RWN on DDM's issuer and issue ratings reflects that upside
    potential for the ratings is limited in the short to medium
    term.

-- An improvement of DDM's gross debt/EBITDA ratio to comfortably
    below 4.5x could lead to an affirmation of DDM's ratings
    within six months.

-- In the long-term, materially larger, more diversified
    franchise supporting a more stable company profile, in
    conjunction with maintained or improved financial metrics,
    could lead to an upgrade of DDM's Long-Term IDR.

-- The secured notes' rating is principally sensitive to changes
    in DDM Debt's Long-Term IDR. In addition, improved recovery
    expectations, for instance, as a result of a layer of more
    junior debt, could lead Fitch to notch up the notes' rating up
    from DDM Debt's Long-Term IDR.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Financial Institutions and
Covered Bond issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario
(defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in
a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating
horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative
direction) of four notches over three years. The complete span of
best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating
categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario
credit ratings are based on historical performance.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

DDM Debt AB (publ) has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Financial
Transparency ' due to the significance of internal modelling to
portfolio valuations and associated metrics such as estimated
remaining collections. However, this is a feature of the
debt-purchasing sector as a whole, and not specific to DDM. This
has a moderately negative impact on the credit profile, and is
relevant to the rating in conjunction with other factors.

DDM Holding AG has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Financial
Transparency due to ' due to the significance of internal modelling
to portfolio valuations and associated metrics such as estimated
remaining collections. However, this is a feature of the
debt-purchasing sector as a whole, and not specific to DDM. This
has a moderately negative impact on the credit profile, and is
relevant to the rating in conjunction with other factors.

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.




===========================
U N I T E D   K I N G D O M
===========================

CLARITY PRODUCTS: Goes Into Liquidation
---------------------------------------
Laura Joffre at Pioneers Post reports that former social enterprise
Clarity Products went into liquidation earlier this month,
according to documents posted on Companies House website.

In January 2022, Social Enterprise UK launched a crowdfunding
campaign to support former workers, Pioneers Post relates.  Also in
January, an employment tribunal found the company had subjected an
employee to sex and race discrimination, Pioneers Post recounts.

London-based Clarity Products Limited, which was renamed Jublee
Number 7 in December, produced toiletries and homecare products,
and was known as one of the UK's oldest social enterprises.  After
it was bought out of administration by businessman Nicholas Marks
two years ago, the company ceased to operate as a social
enterprise, and it later emerged that some employees hadn't
received their full wages, Pioneers Post relays.

The company, which employed around 85 people, most of whom have a
disability or long-term health condition, closed and made
redundancies last year, Pioneers Post recounts.  The factory's
gates were locked by bailiffs on March 15, 2021, and no-one has
been back since, according to former employees, Pioneers Post
discloses.

Jublee appointed voluntary liquidators on February 10, 2022,
Pionners Post relates.  According to Pioneers Post, the statement
of affairs provided by Mr. Marks shows the company owes creditors
just over GBP1.3 million, and has assets deemed to be worth zero --
meaning it wouldn't be able to repay any debts.

Nick Simmonds, the appointed liquidator, told Pioneers Post that he
had started his investigation and that his conclusions might differ
from Marks's assessment.


DERBY COUNTY FOOTBALL: Administrators Review Formal Offers
----------------------------------------------------------
Sky Sports News reports that Derby County Football Club's
administrators are reviewing the offers to buy the club that were
made before Wednesday's 5:00 p.m. deadline and are seeking
clarification on a number of issues before deciding on a preferred
bidder.

It is still not clear how many bids were lodged, but Sky Sports
News understands a number of late enquiries were made by parties
other than the three who had already expressed clear interest in a
takeover.

Complete confidentiality now surrounds the process, as the
administrators study the financial details of each bid and discuss
the finer details of the terms presented by the would-be buyers,
Sky Sports News discloses.

It may be Friday -- or later -- before any announcement is made
about which buyer has been selected to move to the next stage and
try to complete a takeover, Sky Sports News notes.

Whilst there has been no comment from any of the interested parties
or the administrators themselves, Sky Sports News believes former
Newcastle owner Mike Ashley did make a formal bid to buy Derby
shortly before Thursday's deadline.

It isn't yet clear whether offers were tabled by the American
Carlisle Group, or by the consortium of local businesspeople headed
by former Derby chairman Andy Appleby -- both of whom have been
involved in extensive talks over a potential takeover in recent
months, Sky Sports News states.

The EFL has set a deadline of Monday for the administrators to
prove they have sufficient funds to complete their remaining
fixtures this season, Sky Sports News discloses.

After a month's extension already, it is thought the EFL's patience
is wearing thin, though the organising body may stop short of
removing Derby's right to play in the Championship, so long as they
are reassured that proper progress is being made, and that security
over the club's immediate financial future is close at hand, Sky
Sports News relays.

The administrator, Andrew Hosking, told Sky Sports News he was
confident they would be able to appoint a preferred bidder by the
end of this week -- a key move in proving to the EFL that Derby
have sufficient funds to fulfil their remaining fixtures this
season.

This sort of brinkmanship is to be expected from the three parties
interested in buying Derby, with each likely to submit their bids
at the last minute to avoid any confidential figures being leaked
to their rivals, according to Sky Sports News.

                About Derby County Football Club

Founded in 1884, Derby County Football Club is a professional
association football club based in Derby, Derbyshire, England.  The
club competes in the English Football League Championship  (EFL,
the 'Championship'), the second tier of English football.  The team
gets its nickname, The Rams, to show tribute to its links with the
First Regiment of Derby Militia, which took a ram as its mascot.
Mel Morris is the owner while Wayne Rooney is the manager of the
club.  

On Sept. 22, 2021, the club went into administration.  The EFL
sanctioned a 12-point deduction on the club, putting the team at
the bottom of the Championship.  Andrew Hosking, Carl Jackson and
Andrew Andronikou, managing directors at business advisory firm
Quantuma, had been appointed joint administrators to the club.


EUROSAIL-UK 2007-5: Fitch Cuts Rating on Class D1c Notes to 'CC'
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Eurosail-UK 2007-1 NC Plc's class C
notes and removed them from Under Criteria Observation. Fitch has
also downgraded Eurosail-UK 2007-5 NP Plc's class A, B and D notes
and Eurosail-UK 2007-6 NC Plc's class C notes. Five tranches have
been removed from Rating Watch Negative (RWN). The remaining notes
have been affirmed.

        DEBT                  RATING            PRIOR
        ----                  ------            -----
Eurosail-UK 2007-6 NC Plc

Class A3a XS0332285971   LT AAAsf  Affirmed     AAAsf
Class B1a XS0332286862   LT B+sf   Affirmed     B+sf
Class C1a XS0332287084   LT B-sf   Downgrade    Bsf
Class D1a XS0332287597   LT CCCsf  Affirmed     CCCsf

Eurosail-UK 2007-1 NC Plc

Class A3a XS0284931853   LT AAAsf  Affirmed     AAAsf
Class A3c 298800AJ2      LT AAAsf  Affirmed     AAAsf
Class B1a XS0284932315   LT AAAsf  Affirmed     AAAsf
Class B1c XS0284947263   LT AAAsf  Affirmed     AAAsf
Class C1a XS0284933719   LT A+sf   Upgrade      A-sf
Class D1a XS0284935094   LT BB+sf  Affirmed     BB+sf
Class D1c XS0284950994   LT BB+sf  Affirmed     BB+sf
Class E1c XS0284956330   LT B+sf   Affirmed     B+sf

Eurosail-UK 2007-5 NP Plc

Class A1a XS0328024608   LT B-sf   Downgrade    B+sf
Class A1c XS0328025241   LT B-sf   Downgrade    B+sf
Class B1c XS0328025324   LT CCCsf  Downgrade    Bsf
Class C1c XS0328025597   LT CCCsf  Affirmed     CCCsf
Class D1c XS0328025670   LT CCsf   Downgrade    CCCsf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The transactions comprise non-conforming UK mortgage loans
originated by Southern Pacific Mortgage Limited (formerly a wholly
owned subsidiary of Lehman Brothers) and Alliance & Leicester.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Off RWN: Fitch placed Eurosail 2007-5's class A and B notes and
Eurosail 2007-6's class B and C notes on RWN in September 2021 due
to a change in the rating determination for notes with a
model-implied rating (MIR) lower than 'B-sf'. Under the updated UK
RMBS Rating Criteria Fitch now determines a rating in the range of
'Csf' to 'B-sf' instead of up to 'B+sf' for notes with a MIR lower
than 'B-sf'. This is reflected in the downgrade of Eurosail
2007-5's class A and B notes and Eurosail 2007-6's class C notes.

Sequential Principal Payments: Fitch expects Eurosail 2007-1 to
continue amortising sequentially. Pro-rata amortisation is being
prevented by a number of triggers, including the cumulative loss
trigger, which is not able to be cured. The sequential amortisation
and non-amortising reserve fund have allowed credit enhancement
(CE) to build up for all notes. This supports the upgrade of the
class C notes.

Eurosail 2007-6 breached the 90 days plus arrears trigger of 22.5%
in June 2020 and has continued to pay sequentially since. The
current breach is around 1%, which could imply that principal could
repay on a pro-rata amortisation again shortly. If the sequential
payments prevail for an extended period, the mezzanine notes could
be upgraded due to increasing CE.

Tail Risk Not Mitigated: Fitch believes Eurosail 2007-5 will be
exposed to significant tail risk. In Fitch's back-loaded default
distribution scenarios, the transaction is likely to repay
principal on a pro-rata basis until the aggregate principal amount
outstanding of the notes is less than 10% of the original pool
balance. At the same time, the transaction's reserve fund will
amortise and the fixed senior costs the transaction must pay will
deplete any excess spread available to meet interest payments on
the notes as the pool balance shrinks.

Elevated Senior Fees: All three transactions have been incurring
increased senior fees since 2018. Fitch has reflected this in its
fee assumptions by setting its expectation for ongoing costs by
reference to amounts incurred in 2018 and 2019. Fitch does not
expect the very high fees incurred in 2020 and 2021 to be
sustained. The increase in senior fee assumptions has a negative
impact on the most junior notes in the transactions and contributed
to the downgrade of Eurosail 2007-5's class D notes.

Increasing Longer Dated Arrears: Three-month-plus arrears have
increased for all three transactions over the past two years and
are continuing to trend upwards. Due to the previous moratoria on
repossessions, servicers have not been able to proceed with
possession orders, which has led to an increase in longer-dated
arrears. Fitch expects longer-dated arrears to remain elevated
until the backlog of repossessions can be cleared. These loans
attract a foreclosure frequency (FF) floor in Fitch's analysis and
a continued increase could have a negative impact on the ratings.

Foreclosure Frequency Macroeconomic Adjustments: Fitch applied FF
macroeconomic adjustments to the owner occupied non-conforming
sub-pool, because of Fitch's expectation of temporary mortgage
under-performance.

The end of the government's repossession ban has resulted in
renewed uncertainty over borrowers' performance in the UK
non-conforming sector, where many borrowers have already rolled
into late arrears over recent months. Borrowers' payment ability
may also be challenged, with the end of the coronavirus
job-retention scheme and self-employed income support scheme. The
adjustment is 1.59x at 'Bsf' while no adjustment is applied at
'AAAsf' as assumptions are deemed sufficiently remote at this
level.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- The transactions' performance may be affected by adverse
    changes in market conditions and economic environment.
    Weakening economic performance is strongly correlated to
    increasing levels of delinquencies and defaults that could
    reduce CE available to the notes.

-- Additionally, unanticipated declines in recoveries could also
    result in lower net proceeds, which may make certain notes
    susceptible to negative rating action, depending on the extent
    of the decline in recoveries.

-- Fitch conducts sensitivity analyses by stressing both a
    transaction's base-case FF and recovery rate (RR) assumptions,
    and examining the rating implications on all classes of issued
    notes. A 15% increase in the WAFF and a 15% decrease in the
    WARR indicates downgrades of up to four notches in Eurosail-UK
    2007-1, 2007-5 and 2007-6.

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- Stable to improved asset performance driven by stable
    delinquencies and defaults would lead to increasing CE levels
    and potential upgrades. Fitch tested an additional rating
    sensitivity scenario by applying a decrease in the WAFF of 15%
    and an increase in the WARR of 15%. The ratings for the
    subordinated notes could be upgraded by up to five notches in
    Eurosail-UK 2007-1, 2007-5 and 2007-6.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance
transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as
the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings
are based on historical performance.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset
pools and the transactions. Fitch has not reviewed the results of
any third party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

Fitch did not undertake a review of the information provided about
the underlying asset pools ahead of the transaction's initial
closing. The subsequent performance of the transactions over the
years is consistent with the agency's expectations given the
operating environment and Fitch is therefore satisfied that the
asset pool information relied upon for its initial rating analysis
was adequately reliable.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Eurosail-UK 2007-1, 2007-5 and 2007-6 have an ESG Relevance Score
of '4' for Customer Welfare - Fair Messaging, Privacy & Data
Security due to the pool exhibiting an interest-only maturity
concentration among the legacy non-conforming owner-occupied loans
of greater than 40%, which has a negative impact on the credit
profile, and is relevant to the ratings in conjunction with other
factors.

Eurosail-UK 2007-1, 2007-5 and 2007-6 have an ESG Relevance Score
of '4' for Human Rights, Community Relations, Access &
Affordability due to a significant proportion of the pool
containing owner-occupied loans advanced with limited affordability
checks, which has a negative impact on the credit profile, and is
relevant to the ratings in conjunction with other factors.

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.


OASIS CARE: Coronavirus Pandemic Prompts Liquidation
----------------------------------------------------
William Telford at BusinessLive reports that The Oasis Care Home,
in Plymstock, has gone into liquidation after blaming the Covid
pandemic and staff shortages for forcing its closure.

The care home shut in January 2022 and an online meeting of
creditors was called for Feb. 16 when it was decided to voluntarily
wind up the company, BusinessLive relates.

According to BusinessLive, liquidators at Plymouth accountants Mark
Holt & Co have now been appointed by creditors to close down The
Oasis Care Home Ltd.

The company's bosses blamed "intolerable pressures" caused by the
coronavirus pandemic, and a lack of staff, for the firm's demise,
stressing they had "no option" but to close, BusinessLive
discloses.

The independent care home had 32 single bedrooms or suites.  Prices
advertised by the company ranged from GBP675 per week to GBP995 per
week depending on care requirements.

Directors said it had become "impossible to recruit or retain
sufficient staff" to provide the correct standard of care,
BusinessLive notes.  Financial and operational challenges facing
the care sector were also given as reasons why the care home could
not continue, BusinessLive states.


STUDIO RETAIL: Formally Appoints Administrators
-----------------------------------------------
Ashley Armstrong at The Times reports that about 1,400 jobs have
been put at risk after Studio Retail, the online retailer, formally
appointed the administrators Teneo last night to handle its
collapse.

The company formerly known as Findel stunned the City last week
after suspending its shares, saying its request for a short-term
GBP25 million working capital loan had been turned down by its
bank, HSBC, The Times relates.

The demise of Studio Retail, which had a market capitalisation of
GBP100 million, comes despite it making more than half a billion in
sales and GBP41.7 million pre-tax profits last year, The Times
notes.

According to The Times, Paul Kendrick, chief executive, had said
that its GBP1 billion sales target was "eminently achievable" in
last year's annual report despite cost pressures.


TRITON UK: Fitch Alters Outlook on 'B-' LongTerm IDRs to Negative
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Triton UK Midco Limited and Synamedia
Americas Holdings Inc. (collectively referred to as Synamedia)
Long-Term Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs) at 'B-'. Fitch has upgraded
the rating for the senior secured first lien to 'BB-'/'RR1' from
'B+'/'RR2' which reflects the company's unchanged debt structure.
Since the second lien term loan will remain in place, Fitch has
assigned it a 'B-'/'RR4' rating. Synamedia previously proposed
refinancing the entire debt structure with a $390 million first
lien term loan, but that is no longer expected to occur.

The Rating Outlook has been revised to Negative from Stable
reflecting Fitch's concerns about Synamedia's reduced liquidity and
weak FFO Fixed Charge Coverage.

Synamedia's 'B-' rating reflects strong recurring sales of 71% for
the LTM ending 2QFY22, long-term relationships with strong
customers, enterprise license agreements that provide some cash
flow assurances, and low leverage. The rating also considers the
secular declines for pay-TV, the company's small scale, weak FFO
coverage and Fitch's concerns about liquidity.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

No Longer Refinancing Debt: Synamedia previously proposed a $390
million first lien offering to refinance its debt. However, the
refinancing is no longer planned at this time leaving the existing
debt structure in place. The first lien debt rating is upgraded one
notch solely because the existing debt structure includes the
second lien term loan. Therefore, the recovery prospects improve
for the first lien debt and the rating for the first lien term loan
is now 'BB-'/'RR1'.

Negative Outlook: Fitch has concerns about the company's liquidity
and weak FFO Fixed Charge Coverage which was 1.4x at the end of
FY21, and Fitch projects it will fall modestly by the end of FY22.
Fitch has concerns that it could be below 1.5x by the end of FY23
as well. Other concerns are around the reduced cash position,
although the $50 million revolver due October 2023 is undrawn. The
company had $22 million of cash on the balance sheet as of Dec. 31,
2021. This is $38 million lower than the $60 million available as
of June 30, 2021 and the reduced balance reflects the seasonality
of the business and annual bonus payments made in 2QFY22.

Synamedia negotiated the foregoing of quarterly amortization
payments from September 2020 until June 2021 in relation to the
second lien credit agreement via an amendment executed in June of
2020 with the sole second lien lender. In September 2021,
amortization payments returned to the original repayment profile
and appear burdensome for the credit profile.

Leverage Profile: Fitch calculates that leverage was 3.5x at the
end of FY21 and was a tick lower at 3.4x for the LTM ending 2QFY22.
However, EBITDA weakness was evident in 1HFY22 when compared to the
prior year period given the benefit of 1HFY21 Sinclair contract.
Following a number of contract wins, Fitch believes the company may
improve results in 2HFY22 vs 1HFY22. As a result, Fitch projects
leverage to be in the range of 4.1x to 4.6x by the end of FY22.
With debt amortization and modest EBITDA growth, Synamedia's
leverage should moderately decline over time. Uncertainty over the
business combined with secular declines and weak FFO fixed charge
coverage cause Fitch to rate Synamedia at the lower end of the 'B'
category despite its low leverage profile.

Reduced Financial Flexibility: In FY21, Synamedia was modestly FCF
positive. Fitch expects the company to be FCF negative at the end
of FY22 and if the company is successful with improving revenues,
FCF could be positive beyond then, although this is uncertain. The
ability to weather business deterioration is a key differentiator
among the 'BB' and 'B' rating categories and sharp acceleration in
traditional pay-TV declines could severely impair Synamedia's
business if its other product offerings do not fully offset pay-TV
deterioration. With the burden of high interest expense and
significant amortization payments, Fitch believes that Synamedia
may need to draw on its undrawn revolver within the next few
quarters.

Pay-TV Decline: Negative secular trends in the pay-TV universe are
continuing and Fitch forecasts low double-digit declines in FY22.
Developing markets remain fluid with some experiencing meaningful
declines to date although other regions providing an offset.
Additionally, pay-TV operators in Synamedia's largest customer's
markets are increasingly offering gateway set top boxes. Overall,
Fitch sees ongoing smart card declines across Synamedia's largest
customers although some protection in the form of enterprise
license agreements (ELAs) should benefit the company. Growth in
Synamedia's content protection and infrastructure for hybrid
bundles may offset legacy business declines, although it is
uncertain given the lack of visibility beyond FY22.

Customer Concentration: Synamedia's five largest customers
represent about 48% of total revenue in FY21, down significantly
from 60% in FY20. Historically, two customers, Comcast and AT&T
individually represented more than 10% of total revenue (data
unavailable for FY21). Together with its limited end-market
diversification, Synamedia's diversification factor is consistent
with a single 'b' rating under Fitch's Ratings Navigator.
Synamedia's largest customer did make a 20% equity investment and
participated in the equity injection in 2019.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

While Synamedia's post-carve out financial results have been
challenged reflecting the secular declines in the pay-TV market,
the company's cost cutting initiatives have resulted in EBITDA
margin. Synamedia remains a market leader with a #1 or #2 position
in its product categories. The company has limited diversification
(relative to broader technology peers) with predominantly all of
its business derived from video content protection in the pay-TV
space. Moreover, Synamedia has meaningful customer concentration
with more than half of its revenues derived from a handful of
pay-TV operators.

Synamedia has meaningful growth prospects particularly in its cloud
products and in the shift by pay-TV operators to a hybrid/IP
distribution model as well as anti-piracy and targeted advertising
technology. While recently improved, Fitch believes the company
would struggle withstand a sharp acceleration in the rate of pay-TV
subscriber declines without significant impairment to its credit
protection metrics. Fitch established a strong linkage between
Triton UK Midco Limited as holdings and Synamedia Americas Holdings
Inc., the issuer of debt and primary operating entity, given legal
and operational ties. No country ceiling constraint or operating
influence factored into the ratings.

Fitch rates the IDRs of the parent and subsidiary on a consolidated
basis, using the weak parent/strong subsidiary approach and open
access and control factors, based on the entities operating as a
single enterprise with strong legal and operational ties.
Furthermore, the IDRs are consolidated since the subsidiary cannot
be notched higher than its standalone credit profile.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

Fitch's key assumptions within its rating case for the issuer
include:

-- Overall revenues are down significantly in FY22, rebounding in
    FY23 due to new contract wins;

-- Adjusted EBITDA margins remain close to 19%, fairly in line
    with results from FY21;

-- Capex around 2% of revenues;

-- No dividends, acquisitions or divestitures over the rating
    horizon;

-- Debt reduction limited to required amortization which is
    substantial given the company's FCF;

-- No changes to the structure of the debt except that Synamedia
    extends maturity date of the revolver which is due Oct. 2023
    prior to Oct. 2022.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Developments that may, individually or collectively, lead to a
stable outlook:

-- Improved maturity profile and enhanced liquidity;

-- Expectations for FFO Fixed Charge Coverage to be above 1.5x
    and EBITDA/Interest Paid over 3.0x on a sustained basis.

Developments that may, individually or collectively, lead to
positive rating action:

-- Total debt with equity credit is expected to be sustained
    below 5x, and;

-- There is an increased expectation of stabilized revenues
    particularly in the Video Platform segment and greater
    visibility into the expected contribution of next generation
    offerings.

Developments that may, individually or collectively, lead to
negative rating action:

-- Fitch's expectation that FFO Fixed Charge Coverage is below
    1.5x and Operating EBITDA/Interest Paid is below 3.0x on a
    sustained basis;

-- Sustained revenue declines exceeding 5% annually;

-- Sustained negative FCF;

-- Dividends or leveraged acquisitions.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Non-Financial Corporate
issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of three notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of four notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings are
based on historical performance.

LIQUIDITY AND DEBT STRUCTURE

Reduced Liquidity: Cash on the balance sheet has been reduced yet
the company's $50 million revolver remains untapped. The company
had $22 million of cash on the balance sheet as of Dec. 31, 2021.
This was lower than the $43 million as of Sept. 30, 2021 and $60
million as of June 30, 2021. The revolver matures in October 2023
and following that, the 1L term loan is due in 2024.

Synamedia negotiated the foregoing of quarterly amortization
payments from September 2020 until June 2021 in relation to the
second lien credit agreement via an amendment executed in June of
2020 with the sole second lien lender. In September 2021,
amortization payments returned to the original repayment profile
requiring the company to make amortization payments which appear
burdensome for the credit profile.

ISSUER PROFILE

Triton UK Midco Limited and Synamedia Americas Holdings Inc.
(collectively referred to as Synamedia) is the leading global video
technology provider to satellite, cable, telecom and over the top
video distribution operators.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Synamedia has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Management Strategy
due to the apparent weak implementation of the company's strategy
relative to its carve-out transaction rationale. This has a
negative impact on the credit profile and is relevant to the
ratings in conjunction with other factors.

Synamedia has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Governance
Structure due to the lack of independent directors. This has a
negative impact on the credit profile and is relevant to the
ratings in conjunction with other factors.

Synamedia has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Group Structure due
to the complexity of its ownership structure and associated related
party transactions. This has a negative impact on the credit
profile and is relevant to the ratings in conjunction with other
factors.

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.




===============
X X X X X X X X
===============

[*] BOOK REVIEW: Hospitals, Health and People
---------------------------------------------
Author: Albert W. Snoke, M.D.
Publisher: Beard Books
Softcover: 232 pages
List Price: $34.95
Order your personal copy today at
http://www.beardbooks.com/beardbooks/hospitals_health_and_people.html
Hospitals, Health and People is an interesting and very readable
account of the career of a hospital administrator and physician
from the 1930's through the 1980's, the formative years of today's
health care system. Although much has changed in hospital
administration and health care since the book was first published
in 1987, Dr. Snoke's discussion of the evolution of the modern
hospital provides a unique and very valuable perspective for
readers who wish to better understand the forces at work in our
current health care system.

The first half of Hospitals, Health and People is devoted to the
functional parts of the hospital system, as observed by Dr. Snoke
between the late 1930's through 1969, when he served first as
assistant director of the Strong Memorial Hospital in Rochester,
New York, and then as the director of the Grace-New Haven Hospital
in Connecticut. In these first chapters, Dr. Snoke examines the
evolution and institutionalization of a number of aspects of the
hospital system, including the financial and community
responsibilities of the hospital administrator, education and
training in hospital administration, the role of the governing
board of a hospital, the dynamics between the hospital
administrator and the medical staff, and the unique role of the
teaching hospital.

The importance of Hospitals, Health and People for today's readers
is due in large part to the author's pivotal role in creating the
modern-day hospital. Dr. Snoke and others in similar positions
played a large part in advocating or forcing change in our hospital
system, particularly in recognizing the importance of the nursing
profession and the contributions of non-physician professionals,
such as psychologists, hearing and speech specialists, and social
workers, to the overall care of the patient. Throughout the first
chapters, there are also many observations on the factors that are
contributing to today's cost of care. Malpractice is just one
example. According to Dr. Snoke, "malpractice premiums were
negligible in the 1950's and 1960's. In 1970, Yale-New Haven's
annual malpractice premiums had mounted to about $150,000." By the
time of the first publication of the book, the hospital's premiums
were costing about $10 million a year.

In the second half of Hospitals, Health and People, Dr. Snoke
addresses the national health care system as we've come to know it,
including insurance and cost containment; the role of the
government in health care; health care for the elderly; home health
care; and the changing role of ethics in health care. It is
particularly interesting to note the role that Senator Wilbur Mills
from Arkansas played in the allocation of costs of hospital-based
specialty components under Part B rather than Part A of the
Medicare bill. Dr. Snoke comments: "This was considered a great
victory by the hospital-based specialists. I was disappointed
because I knew it would cause confusion in working relationships
between hospitals and specialists and among patients covered by
Medicare. I was also concerned about potential cost increases. My
fears were realized. Not only have health costs increased in
certain areas more than anticipated, but confusion is rampant among
the elderly patients and their families, as well as in hospital
business offices and among physicians' secretaries." This aspect of
Medicare caused such confusion that Congress amended Medicare in
1967 to provide that the professional components of radiological
and pathological in-hospital services be reimbursed as if they were
hospital services under Part A rather than part of the co-payment
provisions of Part B.

At the start of his book, Dr. Snoke refers to a small statue,
Discharged Cured, which was given to him in the late 1940's by a
fellow physician, Dr. Jack Masur. Dr. Snoke explains the
significance the statue held for him throughout his professional
career by quoting from an article by Dr. Masur: "The whole question
of the responsibility of the physician, of the hospital, of the
health agency, brings vividly to mind a small statue which I saw a
great many years ago.it is a pathetic little figure of a man, coat
collar turned up and shoulders hunched against the chill winds,
clutching his belongings in a paper bag-shaking, tremulous,
discouraged. He's clearly unfit for work-no employer would dare to
take a chance on hiring him. You know that he will need much more
help before he can face the world with shoulders back and
confidence in himself. The statuette epitomizes the task of medical
rehabilitation: to bridge the gap between the sick and a job."

It is clear that Dr. Snoke devoted his life to exactly that
purpose. Although there is much to criticize in our current
healthcare system, the wellness concept that we expect and accept
today as part of our medical care was almost nonexistent when Dr.
Snoke began his career in the 1930's. Throughout his 50 years in
hospital administration, Dr. Snoke frequently had to focus on the
big picture and the bottom line. He never forgot the importance of
Discharged Cured, however, and his book provides us with a great
appreciation of how compassionate administrators such as Dr. Snoke
have contributed to the state of patient care today. Albert Waldo
Snoke was director of the Grace-New Haven Hospital in New Haven,
Connecticut from 1946 until 1969. In New Haven, Dr. Snoke also
taught hospital administration at Yale University and oversaw the
development of the Yale-New Haven Hospital, serving as its
executive director from 1965-1968. From 1969-1973, Dr. Snoke worked
in Illinois as coordinator of health services in the Office of the
Governor and later as acting executive director of the Illinois
Comprehensive State Health Planning Agency. Dr. Snoke died in April
1988.



                           *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter-Europe is a daily newsletter co-
published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Marites O. Claro, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Ivy B. Magdadaro, and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2022.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1529-2754.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The TCR Europe subscription rate is US$775 per half-year,
delivered via e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for
members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription
or balance thereof are US$25 each.  For subscription information,
contact Peter Chapman at 215-945-7000.


                * * * End of Transmission * * *