Welcome to IFR

The Bank for International Settlements has launched a euro-denominated fund for central banks to invest in green bonds, aimed at meeting growing demand for climate-friendly investments from official institutions. The move follows a similar US dollar-denominated fund launched in September 2019. The funds are open-ended and will manage US$2bn in green bonds for central banks, and the BIS said it expects that to "grow considerably". The BIS, which represents 140 central banks and monetary authorities, is trying to drive the adoption of best market practices and reporting standards to deepen the green bond market and prevent "greenwashing", whereby financial instruments claim to be green but are not. The BIS said its funds are a simpler and more efficient way for some central banks to gain exposure to green bonds. They invest in high-quality bonds that back environmentally friendly projects, such as renewable energy production and energy efficiency. The European Central Bank said on Monday it would invest in the fund as part of its sustainable and responsible investment strategy that targets an increase in the share of green securities in its own funds portfolio. It said the investment complements direct purchases of green bonds in secondary markets. The ECB said it holds green bonds amounting to 3.5% of its own funds portfolio, which has a total market value of €20.8bn, and plans to increase this share over the coming years. The BIS funds have been developed with support from an advisory committee drawn from central banks. They are part of the BIS’s green bond fund initiative, which helps central banks to incorporate environmental sustainability objectives in the management of their reserves and capital. The two funds are structured according to Swiss law and belong to the BIS Investment Pool family and are managed in-house by BIS Asset Management. To be eligible, bonds must comply with the International Capital Market Association’s Green Bond Principles and/or the Climate Bond Standard published by the Climate Bonds Initiative, and have a minimum rating of A–.

BON ECON

2 min read

EMEA

People & Markets

India tables new NBFC regulations

India's central bank has drafted sweeping new rules governing the shadow lending sector that will see the country's largest non-banking financing companies subject to bank-like regulations. In a discussion paper released on Friday, the Reserve Bank of India proposed introducing a four-tier structure to regulate 9,000-plus shadow lenders. The top layer, which will be empty for the time being, will comprise NBFCs that the central bank sees as posing an elevated systemic risk. The upper layer, which will be made up of the top 25–30 NBFCs identified as systemically important, will be subject to regulation more akin to banks. Among the changes, shadow banks in the upper layer will have to maintain a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 9%, will be subject to differential provisioning requirements depending on their exposure, and will be obliged to list on stock exchanges within a specified period of time. The middle layer, which would comprise all non-deposit taking NBFCs designated as systemically important and all deposit-taking NBFCs, will see the current requirement for separate lending and investment exposures scrapped in favour of a single exposure limit of 25% for an individual borrower and 40% for a group of borrowers. The base layer, which would comprise the vast majority of NBFCs, will see the entry-level 'net owned funds' required to register as a shadow lender hiked to Rs200m (US$2.74m) from Rs20m currently. The proposals come as India looks to get to grips with its shadow banking sector, which has been in crisis ever since Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services defaulted in September 2018, shutting access to the capital markets for all but the best-rated firms. India already tightened liquidity rules for NBFCs in November 2019, when it mandated that shadow lenders with assets of at least Rs50bn would have to implement a 100% liquidity coverage ratio in phases over four years starting from December 1 2020. They have to maintain high-quality liquid assets, mostly government, sovereign-guaranteed debt securities and cash, that are sufficient to fund cash outflows for 30 days under the LCR. The RBI also called on NBFCs to improve their monitoring of liquidity risks by breaking down their liquidity statements into 1-7 days, 8-14 days, and 15-30 days as opposed to just 30 days previously. The central bank also said any negative asset-liability mismatch should not exceed 10%–20% of cumulative cash outflows in the respective time buckets. Market participants said that RBI’s proposals went in the right direction as they will curtail the regulatory arbitrage enjoyed by large non-bank lenders against banks in terms of capital, provisioning, corporate governance and disclosure norms. "These proposals are a progressive step and will only help in strengthening the NBFC sector," said Ajit Mittal, group president at Indiabulls Housing Finance. The proposed measures will align large NBFCs with banks, although they may cause short-term costs such as higher provisioning, capital requirements and compliance costs, said Nirmal Bang Institutional Equities in a note on January 25. The central bank has asked market participants to respond to the proposal by February 22.

P&M

3 min read

Emerging Markets, Asia

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

Blowout Tesco bond highlights SLB’s flexibility

Tesco's first sustainability-linked bond issue secured a strong response from the euro market last week and underscored the instrument's flexibility as a funding tool for corporate borrowers. Announcing an accompanying tender offer for euro and sterling bonds alongside the new issue, Tesco (Baa3/BBB–/BBB–) was seeking to take out high coupon, high cash price bonds and replace them with a lower coupon note, while at the same time aligning its financing with environmental goals. Bankers said that as far as they are aware, this is the first instance of an SLB explicitly financing a buy back of conventional bonds. “If you look at the bond market overall the majority of it is refinancing, but here you can clearly see you are moving from normal funding to ESG-linked financing,” said Agnes Gourc, co-head of sustainable finance markets at BNP Paribas. Investor interest was clear. The book for the €750m July 2029 bond offering reached more than €5.75bn, enabling leads BNP Paribas, Citigroup, MUFG and RBC to set the spread at 75bp over swaps, 10bp–20bp through where some bankers placed fair value. The coupon was 0.375%. The bonds subject to the tender have coupons ranging from 2.5% to 6.125%. The yield offered by a Triple B rated corporate and the concurrent tender were key factors in supporting demand and pricing, but it was the ESG structure that drove the broader participation. “It being an SLB was a big support. We wouldn’t have achieved that level of concession otherwise. Investors said as much,” said Anjuli Pandit, primary markets sustainability manager at BNPP “Triple B is something of a sweet spot in this environment and it was in conjunction with a tender offer so the deal will be debt-neutral, but investors also see a real value in the structure, and they keep that in mind when thinking about the pricing.”Flexible funding The decision by Tesco to fund a tender offer using proceeds from the SLB is emblematic of the benefits of KPI-linked bonds for those corporates that do not necessarily have the assets that a use-of-proceeds bond – such as a green bond – would require, but nonetheless want to align their financing strategy with their broader ESG goals. “We view sustainability-linked bonds as a flexible instrument to allow us to use funds for general corporate purposes and want to encourage growth in this market,” said Lynda Heywood, Tesco's group treasurer. Gourc also stressed the flexibility offered by SLBs. “For issuers geared towards operational expenditure rather than capital expenditure it is not always easy to find the right category of assets for a use-of-proceeds bond, but with an SLB you have a focus on corporate strategy," she said. The most important structural issues for any SLB are the so-called key performance indictors and potential penalties if they are not met. For Tesco to avoid a 25bp coupon step-up starting July 2027, it must reduce its Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by financial year 2025–2026 from a 2015–2016 baseline. One surprise was that as a household British name the retailer chose to issue in euros rather than sterling. However, the pricing and demand available in the currency tipped the scales towards the single currency. “The pricing in euros looked better in this part of the curve, but the goal here was to explain the company's ESG strategy to a wider audience and the euro market is attractive. It has a large number of ESG minded accounts,” said Pandit. Traditionally, sterling investors are less concerned with ESG investing than their European counterparts and, while this is changing, it is still something that factors into issuers' choice of currency. The bond issue is not Tesco’s first foray into KPI-linked financing. In October, it added science-based targets to a £2.5bn sustainability-linked loan, becoming the first UK company to do so. T

BON

5 min read

EMEA

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

Ed Clark, Robert Hogg

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

Blowout Tesco bond highlights SLB’s flexibility

BON

5 min read

EMEA

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

Ed Clark, Robert Hogg

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

France reopens ultra-long end with a flourish

The stellar response to France's longest deal in almost five years demonstrated the underlying strength of the euro SSA market after the recent Spanish hiccup and also showed the keen level of interest for ultra-long dated bonds, even though such paper falls outside the scope of ECB buying. The sovereign's 50-year deal on Tuesday was the first real test of the market after Spain lost over €75bn of demand for its 10-year the week before – although that deal was still more than five times subscribed – and the response to France was emphatic. Final order books for France closed in excess of €75bn (including €2.45bn from the leads), setting a record level of demand for the issuer while the deal size of €7bn (up from the planned €5bn) is the largest ever at the 50-year tenor for any issuer. “The book was very impressive but numbers in terms of order books don’t mean a lot," said Anthony Requin, chief executive at the Agence France Tresor. "The fact that the quality of orders coming from the long investor community was sufficiently strong to push the envelope from €5bn to €7bn, that’s a testimony of the appetite for long-term bonds with high duration, high convexity and also liquidity.” Once bitten, twice shy Although the collapse in orders for Spain was on a whole new level, the AFT can probably relate better than most after its €5bn 2052 note issue last January. "The order book dropped from €38bn to €26bn when we tightened the spread, maybe 1bp too tight in the view of some investors. It’s always a trade-off between price and volume you are looking to achieve," said Requin. As France approached the market this time there was little doubt that the Spain trade was on the minds of many. “I think what happened with Spain spooked quite a few sovereigns," said a banker at one of the leads. France began marketing at 9bp area over the 1.75% 2066 OAT before pricing the deal at plus 7bp, leaving a 1bp new issue premium. “Pricing at 7bp over was not exactly cheap, it’s within the realms of what we normally see. Could we have tightened more? We’ve seen deals come at crazy levels, sometimes way through fair value but I think they handled the trade perfectly, in a very responsible way. It’s not like the level was very conservative to start with,” said the lead banker. Following the success of the deal more supply at the long end is expected, with three other issuers looking at longer-dated deals, according to the banker. “The last time we had a similar wave of long-dated issuance was in 2016 and you could argue that the background dynamics are the same – investors looking for yield – although the yield environment is very different.” Hunt for yield In 2016, France, Belgium, Spain and Italy all brought 50-year deals in the space of six months, with France first into the market. That May 2066 OAT offering was priced with a yield of 1.916% versus 0.593% for Tuesday's deal, a record low for a 50-year French syndication. "The hunt for yield continues," said Peter Goves, fixed income research analyst at MFS Investment Management. "Given how just so much of the EGB market now has negative yields, a positive yielding security from a relatively high credit quality sovereign which offers liquidity helps explain the investor attention." While the trade is well outside the 30-year limit for the ECB's asset purchase programmes, the central bank's actions have applied indirect pressure on demand dynamics, according to Requin. "The ECB has increased appetite for longer-dated bonds that offer a bit more yield, so while it’s true that investors who bought the bonds are not waiting for some ECB buying to take place, its purchases haven’t been without an impact on the transaction's success.” The transaction's leads were BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan and Societe Generale. Additi

BON RATE

4 min read

EMEA

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

David Cheetham

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

Brexit forces swaps trading shift to US

A large chunk of interest-rate derivatives trading has migrated to US venues this year following the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union, dealing a blow to the City of London and highlighting the importance for the UK of reaching a post-Brexit agreement on financial regulation with the EU. Volumes of euro interest-rate swaps transacted on US-based platforms known as swap execution facilities, or SEFs, jumped from 21% in December to 39% in the first two weeks of January, according to data provider IHS Markit, while sterling swap volumes registered a similar rise. That came amid an equivalent drop in trading volumes on UK and EU-based derivatives trading venues. The sharp move in activity came in the wake of the UK and EU failing to reach a “mutual equivalence” agreement on cross-border regulation of derivatives trading following the UK’s departure from the trading bloc. A permanent shift to New York would be particularly damaging for London and that prospect further raises the stakes in negotiations as the UK and EU look to iron out an agreement on financial services in the coming months. But industry experts note it could also harm EU-based companies if the cost of trading derivatives rises as a result of the impasse. "The market was primarily based in the UK. But the market is global and quite agile – it will shift. This is what we expected to happen with the lack of equivalence," said Kirston Winters, managing director at IHS Markit's MarkitSERV. "The key thing is liquidity pools are fragmented. The worry participants have is, what are you doing to prices and liquidity if you're fragmenting the market?" The UK and EU have a virtually identical regulatory framework for derivatives trading, including a requirement for cleared swaps that are sufficiently liquid to be transacted on venues that are broadly similar to US SEFs. But that hasn’t stopped Brexit from throwing sand in the gears of these markets after the transition period for the UK leaving the EU expired at the end of last year. Not recognising each other’s derivatives trading rules meant that EU-based entities could no longer transact swaps on venues based in the UK – and vice versa – come January 1. Instead, EU and UK-based entities can only trade on local venues or in countries with which equivalence agreements have been struck, such as the US. Global hub That is particularly problematic for London, the foremost centre for derivatives trading globally, including the US$495trn interest-rate swap market. Around US$3.7trn in these swaps changed hands daily in the UK, according to a 2019 survey from the Bank for International Settlements. That’s about half the entire market and over 30 times more than France’s share, the most prominent EU country trading these swaps. So far, at least, the US has been the main beneficiary of the lack of an equivalence deal. Nearly half (45%) of sterling swap trades in January have been traded on US SEFs, according to IHS Markit. US dollar swap transactions also increased, with US SEFs capturing 83% of these markets, up from 75% in December. "Market participants can easily minimise regulatory risk and access the same liquidity by trading on SEFs," said Nicholas Bean, global head of electronic trading solutions at Bloomberg, which operates derivatives trading venues in London, Continental Europe and the US. "Whether this is a long-term trend remains to be seen. However, it is likely to persist at least until the EU and UK deem each other's venues equivalent" for the purposes of derivatives trading, he added. One result of the current standoff over equivalence is that UK-based branches of EU banks have to comply with both sets of rules, not allowing them to trade on venues in either jurisdiction. That means US SEFs are one place where all the major dealers can trade at present. "Since clients are always looking for the deepest liquidity pools, it’s not a surpri

RATE

6 min read

EMEA

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

Christopher Whittall

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

France reopens ultra-long end with a flourish

BON RATE

4 min read

EMEA

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

David Cheetham

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

Gazprom unflappable in the face of headlines

Gazprom continued its habit of brazening out geopolitical events on Wednesday, selling a US$2bn note following the arrest of Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny and on the same day as Joe Biden's presidential inauguration. The state-owned Russian gas company has a bold history of issuing in the face of headlines that would paralyse other borrowers. In 2016 Gazprom was out in the euro market a little more than 24 hours after Donald Trump had been confirmed as US president. In 2017 it placed a jumbo sterling bond on the day the UK government formally began the process to leave the European Union. Then, in March 2018, it printed a deal on the day the UK said it was kicking out 23 Russian diplomats, the biggest such expulsion since the Cold War, over a chemical attack on a former Russian double agent in Salisbury. Only Gazprom's management knows whether this pattern of issuing at politically sensitive times is a coincidence or by design, although a lead banker on last week's deal said the timing was unrelated to the wider goings-on in the world. "The Gazprom deal date, the inauguration and Navalny are pure coincidence," he said. "The plan was to do the deal as soon as possible, so January 20 was the earliest possible given customary financial and legal procedures related to the new issue." Analysts are wondering whether the new administration in Washington DC will impose a new round of sanctions against Russian companies or individuals following the detention of Navalny last week. "It seems like the first real test for the Biden team," said Tim Ash, senior EM sovereign strategist at BlueBay Asset Management. Gazprom could see Nord Stream 2, a US$11bn gas pipeline project to connect Russia and Germany, suspended or scrapped. European Union lawmakers were expected to support a resolution on Thursday calling for the bloc to stop the completion of NS2 in response to the arrest of Navalny. And on Tuesday, the US – on President Trump's last full day in office – sanctioned one of the Russian vessels destined to finish the pipe-laying works. None of this stopped Gazprom attracting a peak book of US$3.9bn for its eight-year note as the banker said investors had displayed few significant concerns. "In the worst outcome – NS2 is not finished – Gazprom would simply have to deal more with a more uncomfortable partner in Ukraine. But this fact doesn’t substantially influence the company’s profit and loss or cashflow," Ash said. "Of course, there is always talk about sanctions. However, it’s more used to push for a new issue concession than as a reason not to invest." Gazprom began marketing the January 2029 note at 3.25%–3.375% before pricing at 2.95%. Olga Budovnits, a portfolio manager at Main Partners, said Gazprom (Baa2/BBB–/BBB) appeals to investors for a number of reasons. "It's the only Russian entity that will not face US economic sanctions in the foreseeable future – otherwise, Europe will not be able to pay for the gas it's using – it's solid investment-grade and not too frequent an issuer either," said Budovnits. "It's a very calm, conservative bond for a certain group of investors." Gazprombank and JP Morgan were global coordinators, and joined as bookrunners by IMI-Intesa Sanpaolo, SMBC Nikko and VTB Capital.

BON

3 min read

EMEA, Emerging Markets

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

Robert Hogg

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

Brexit forces swaps trading shift to US

RATE

6 min read

EMEA

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

Christopher Whittall

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan 2021 - 29 Jan 2021

Cases of mistaken identity left to fend for themselves

When Thomas Meyer checked the stock price of his company one morning in early 2019, he almost fell off his chair. Shares of Auris Medical, a business he founded in 2003 that develops treatments for vertigo and hearing loss, were set to open up more than 50% in pre-market trading in New York. “We saw that the stock was up, but we had no clue,” he said, recalling that day. “But after some searching on the internet, it didn't take long to come across some investor forums – mostly retail investors – which we read and shook our heads in disbelief.” Investor forums were buzzing with news that Johnson & Johnson, one of the world’s biggest medical equipment and drug makers, was to acquire Auris in a US$3.4bn deal. But it was a different Auris. The rally in Auris Medical was a case of mistaken identity. The Johnson & Johnson statement should have been a clue: it clearly stated that the Auris it was buying was a privately held company. By definition, there were no listed shares. Still, trading in Auris Medical was frantic. Volumes that day were more than 10 times normal levels. “We knew that there was another Auris because they had reached out to discuss some questions around trademarks and how we could handle things,” said Meyer. “And we also received enquiries from hospitals seeking to buy their surgical robot. So we had seen some real-life confusion.” “But what happened on the stock market is really crazy – I cannot say it in other words – because it basically suggests that you have some computers or some monkeys running an investment process, picking up key words, not really reading what's coming out, simply pushing the buy key.” Surprisingly frequent Such cases of mistaken identity happen surprisingly often. Most recently Signal Advance, a seemingly dormant company that develops sensors, saw its shares surge almost 10-fold after Elon Musk told his followers to “Use Signal” – referring, of course, to a completely different company. Similarly, Zoom Technologies, which makes components for mobile phones, saw its shares rally in March after being mistaken for the video conferencing provider Zoom. Further back, Tweeter Home Entertainment, a bankrupt chain of home electronics stores, surged when Twitter said it was going public. Vadim Balashov and Andrei Nikiforov from the Rutgers Business School have researched the issue and found that about a quarter of stocks that share similar names or ticker symbols regularly see movements that are “hard to attribute to anything but investor confusion”. “We urge the regulators to study the issue and publicise the list of the tickers which are most often confused,” they wrote, adding that brokers could also introduce additional checks on their platforms for such tickers to ensure that investors – especially retail – are buying the right stock. No action Regulators, for their part, have little to no powers to prevent investors from unwittingly buying the wrong stock. IFR spoke to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, but both declined to answer specific questions on the issue. While the SEC does have the power to suspend trading in stocks when it is in the public interest, it rarely uses that power in cases of mistaken identity. Zoom Technologies was a rare example of such a suspension, with the SEC pointing to the lack of any filings since 2016 as a primary reason. Most cases of mistaken identity are left to correct themselves. Some have been mistaken for many years: the FORD ticker belongs to Forward Industries, while the HP is assigned to Helmerich & Payne. Companies are under no requirement to put out statements to correct cases of mistaken identity. “While we do not maintain statistics on the frequency of these instances, we are aware of some instances in which retail investors have mixed

7 min read

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

Gareth Gore

IFR Events

IFR hosts a comprehensive programme of conferences, seminars and roundtables throughout the year, providing authoritative insight into the trends and outlooks for specific regions and asset classes.

View Events Calendar

IFR Digital Edition

Access a digital replica of IFR's print magazine, updated each Friday. Plus regular Special Reports and Roundtables, covering industry themes and trends.

Latest Digital Edition

Bellwether

Pawn film

Speaking on Goldman Sachs recent earnings call, CEO David Solomon took a break from DJ-ing to throw cold water over the current craze for special purpose acquisition companies – or SPACs. "Like many innovations, there's a point in time as they start where they have a tendency maybe to go a little bit too far and then need to be pulled back or rebalanced in some way. And that's something, my guess is we'll see over the course of 2021 or 2022 with SPACs.” Solomon may have a point – Bellwether is no expert, but it has been noticed that sponsors have started giving SPACs silly names. Last week a sponsor launched one called the Queen’s Gambit. It’s a reference to an opening move in chess which has sprung to prominence recently, thanks to a Netflix drama of the same title. When investment opportunities get named after TV programmes it’s probably time to follow Solomon’s advice and remember that markets, rather like the queen in chess, can move in any direction. WHEN GOLDMAN LAUNCHED Marcus two years ago, it named the digital consumer bank after the bank’s founder Marcus Goldman. As Goldman looks to expand in the UK, maybe it’s time to update the brand story and rename it after Marcus Rashford instead. The Manchester United striker has won national acclaim for leading a one-man campaign to force the UK government to provide free school meals to underprivileged children during the Covid-19 pandemic. What better role model for a bank looking to shed its old vampiric image in favour of something more cuddly? In fact, why doesn’t Goldman go the extra mile and buy the player outright? Anything to prevent United winning the Premier League. AFTER ALL, GOLDMAN has history with Manchester United stars. David Beckham gave a presentation to Goldman bankers in November 2017 – after being tapped to do so by Jim Esposito, global co-head of investment banking. Apparently Esposito got to know Beckham on the sidelines of their sons' school football matches. AT THE OTHER end of the Markus spectrum is Markus Braun, the former CEO of Wirecard. Any association with him seems to end badly. Deutsche Bank almost got through an entire financial quarter without suffering a hit to its reputation, until revelations in a leaked email exchange between board member Alexander Schuetz and Braun. Schuetz told Braun to “finish” the Financial Times because the newspaper had published a series of critical articles about the disgraced payments company’s accounts. And by finish he didn’t mean “finish reading”. So potentially damaging was the revelation that Deutsche’s chairman Paul Achleitner – who after presiding over Deutsche for a scandal-ridden decade has about as much authority as a supply teacher – intervened with a public rebuke for Scheutz. Scheutz remains in his job, although for how much longer is a matter for debate after Ingo Speich, a fund manager at Deka, one of the 20 biggest shareholders in Deutsche, called the incident “a very high reputational risk”, adding that “the ball is in the supervisory board’s court”. Bellwether waits to see whether the board is capable of returning the ball without falling over the net and breaking its racquet. SINGAPORE AIRLINES MADE its debut in the US bond market earlier this month but the achievement didn’t find favour in some quarters. Disgruntled that SIA had used US banks to tap the, err, US market, Benjamin Puah Hong Beng was moved to write a letter of complaint to the Straits Times demanding to know why no Singaporean banks were involved on the deal, especially “when we have award-winning local banks like DBS Bank, which has been voted best bank in the world”. (Has it? The best bank? In the world? Who was voting? DBS employees?) Anyway, the correspondent – let’s call him “suspicious of Singapore” – was at pains to point out

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

More Bellwether

IFR Events

IFR hosts a comprehensive programme of conferences, seminars and roundtables throughout the year, providing authoritative insight into the trends and outlooks for specific regions and asset classes.

View Events Calendar

IFR Digital Edition

Access a digital replica of IFR's print magazine, updated each Friday. Plus regular Special Reports and Roundtables, covering industry themes and trends.

Latest Digital Edition

Bellwether

Pawn film

IFR 2367 - 23 Jan - 29 Jan

More Bellwether

Welcome to IFR

Asset Class

Region

Display

IFR Events

IFR Digital Edition

IFR Events

IFR Digital Edition

Our Privacy Statement & Cookie Policy