---

        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, January 25, 2019, Vol. 20, No. 018


                            Headlines


G E R M A N Y

AIR BERLIN: Etihad Files Suit Against Administrators in London


I R E L A N D

CADOGAN SQUARE XIII: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. F Notes


I T A L Y

CAPITAL MORTGAGE 2007-1: Fitch Affirms CCsf Rating on Cl. C Notes
SIENA MORTGAGES 07-5: Fitch Affirms Class C Notes Rating at Bsf


P O R T U G A L

ENERGIAS DE PORTUGAL: Moody's Rates Subordinated Notes Ba2
ENERGIAS DE PORTUGAL: Fitch Rates Proposed Hybrid Notes BB(EXP)
ENERGIAS DE PORTUGAL: S&P Rates Subordinated Hybrid Securities BB


R U S S I A

BALTIC LEASING: Fitch Puts BB- LT IDR on Rating Watch Positive
UNITED CONFECTIONERS: Fitch Affirms B LT IDR, Outlook Stable


S P A I N

GRUPO ANTOLIN-IRAUSA: Moody's Lowers CFR to B1, Outlook Neg.


S W I T Z E R L A N D

CEVA LOGISTICS: Moody's Affirms B1 CFR, Alters Outlook to Neg.


T U R K E Y

ANADOLU BIRLIK: In Talks with Lenders to Restructure Debt
ORDU YARDIMLASMA: Fitch Assigns BB+ LT IDR, Outlook Stable


U N I T E D   K I N G D O M

FLYBE GROUP: Gets GBP1MM in Public Subsidies Amid Financial Woes
GRIFFON FUNDING: Moody's Withdraws Ba2 Rating on Class B1 Notes
PATISSERIE VALERIE: Parent Shuts Down 71 Branches After Collapse


X X X X X X X X

* BOOK REVIEW: EPIDEMIC OF CARE


                            *********



=============
G E R M A N Y
=============


AIR BERLIN: Etihad Files Suit Against Administrators in London
--------------------------------------------------------------
Stanley Carvalho at Reuters reports that Abu Dhabi's Etihad
Airways on Jan. 23 said it has begun legal proceedings in London,
disputing a claim by the administrators of Air Berlin for damages
of up to EUR2 billion (US$2.26 billion).

State-owned Etihad filed its case in the High Court in London on
Jan. 23, a company spokesman told Reuters, and believes that the
case initiated in December by the German airline in Berlin should
be determined by the English court.

According to Reuters, the insolvency administrator's lawsuit said
that Etihad had not complied with its financial obligations to
Air Berlin.

Etihad, which had withdrawn backing for Air Berlin only months
after saying it would continue to provide funding, said in a
statement that it had "invested in Air Berlin as a UK public
company" and that its relationship is subject to the jurisdiction
of the English courts, Reuters relates.

Air Berlin acknowledged the statement made by Etihad but said it
still believes "the jurisdiction for this lawsuit is Berlin",
Reuters notes.


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


CADOGAN SQUARE XIII: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. F Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, announced that it has assigned the
following provisional ratings to notes to be issued by Cadogan
Square CLO XIII DAC:

EUR 1,500,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2032, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

EUR 246,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2032, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

EUR 40,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2032,
Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

EUR 26,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

EUR 26,000,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

EUR 22,000,000 Class E Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

EUR 9,000,000 Class F Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

Moody's issues provisional ratings in advance of the final sale
of financial instruments, but these ratings only represent
Moody's preliminary credit opinions. Upon a conclusive review of
a transaction and associated documentation, Moody's will endeavor
to assign definitive ratings. A definitive rating (if any) may
differ from a provisional rating.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's provisional rating of the rated notes reflects the risks
due to defaults on the underlying portfolio of loans given the
characteristics and eligibility criteria of the constituent
assets, the relevant portfolio tests and covenants as well as the
transaction's capital and legal structure. Furthermore, Moody's
is of the opinion that the collateral manager, Credit Suisse
Asset Management Limited, has sufficient experience and
operational capacity and is capable of managing this CLO.

Cadogan Square CLO XIII DAC is a managed cash flow CLO. At least
90% of the portfolio must consist of senior secured loans and
senior secured bonds and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist
of unsecured senior loans, second-lien loans, mezzanine
obligations and high yield bonds. The portfolio is expected to be
at least 65% ramped up as of the closing date and to be comprised
predominantly of corporate loans to obligors domiciled in Western
Europe.

CSAM 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 4.5 years reinvestment period.
Thereafter, purchases are permitted using principal proceeds from
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk, and are subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the seven classes of notes rated by Moody's, the
Issuer will issue EUR 36,900,000 of subordinated notes which will
not be 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 August 2017.

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. CSAM Limited's investment
decisions and management of the transaction will also affect the
notes' performance.

Moody's modeled the transaction using CDOEdge, 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
August 2017.

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

Par amount: EUR 400,000,000

Diversity Score: 48

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2,850

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.55%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 42.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.5 years

As part of its analysis, Moody's has addressed the potential
exposure to obligors domiciled in countries with local currency
government bond ratings of A1 or below. According to the
portfolio eligibility criteria, obligors must be domiciled in a
jurisdiction which has a Moody's local currency country risk
ceiling ("LCC") of "A3" or above. In addition, according to the
portfolio constraints, the total exposure to countries with a
local currency country risk bond ceiling ("LCC") between "A1" and
"A3" shall not exceed 10.0%. As a result, in accordance with its
methodology, Moody's did not adjust the target par amount
depending on the target rating of each class of notes.


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


CAPITAL MORTGAGE 2007-1: Fitch Affirms CCsf Rating on Cl. C Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Capital Mortgage Series 2007-1's class
A1 and A2 notes and affirmed the class B and C notes, as follows:

Class A1 (ISIN IT0004222532): upgraded to 'A+sf' from 'BBB+sf';
Outlook Stable

Class A2 (ISIN IT0004222540): upgraded to 'A+sf' from 'BBB+sf';
Outlook Stable

Class B (ISIN IT0004222557): affirmed at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable

Class C (ISIN IT0004222565): affirmed at 'CCsf'; Recovery
Estimate (RE) of 0%

The transaction is a securitisation of Italian residential
mortgage loans serviced by UniCredit S.p.A. (BBB/Negative/F2).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance Continues

Asset performance has remained overall stable since the last
surveillance review in February 2018, and Fitch expects this
trend to continue. Over the past 12 months (four interest payment
dates), the pace of new defaults has slowed, allowing recoveries
to outpace new defaults on each of the last four interest payment
dates. As a result, the principal deficiency ledger (PDL) balance
has continued to fall, decreasing by EUR12 million over the past
12 months.

The reported cumulative gross default ratio is 13.7%, up from
13.4% one year ago. Fitch notes that this is not far from the
15.0% interest deferral trigger that would postpone the payment
of interest on the class B notes until after clearing the
aggregate PDL balance.

Increased Protection

At the October 2018 payment date, credit enhancement for the
class A1 and A2 notes was 11.6%, up from 8.3% one year before.
Increased protection and the continued stable asset performance
support their upgrade to 'A+sf'.The class A1 and A2 notes are pro
rata in interest and principal and so have the same rating.

The class C PDL balance still accounts for 100% of the class C
notes, which is reflected by the distressed rating of 'CCsf' for
this tranche and its unchanged Recovery Estimate of 0%.

Payment Interruption Risk Constrains Ratings

Fitch's analysis considers whether the transaction can maintain
timely payments to noteholders following a disruption to the
collections process. The cash reserve is depleted and no
replenishment is possible until the aggregate PDL balance is
fully cleared. Fitch has capped the rating of the class A1 and A2
notes at 'A+sf', within five notches of the servicer's rating,
which also acts as collection account bank (ie, borrowers pay to
the servicer in the first instance), in line with its
counterparty risk rating criteria.

Commingling Risk Immaterial

Collections from the portfolio are transferred within two
business days to the account held by the issuer at the account
bank. Therefore, in line with Fitch's counterparty risk rating
criteria, commingling risk is viewed as an immaterial risk driver
and no commingling loss has been sized in the analysis.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The class B and C notes' ratings are highly reliant on recoveries
from the large stock of outstanding defaults, and recoveries are
volatile.

Recovery cash flows consistently lower and slower than Fitch's
assumptions, reverting the clearing trend of the class B and C
PDL, may put pressure on the ratings of these tranches.
Conversely, higher and faster recoveries than expected,
accelerating the clearing of the PDLs, could trigger positive
rating action on the mezzanine notes.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO RULE 17G-10

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

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.

Fitch did not undertake a review of the information provided
about the underlying asset pool ahead of the transaction's
initial closing. The subsequent performance of the transaction
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, 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.


SIENA MORTGAGES 07-5: Fitch Affirms Class C Notes Rating at Bsf
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Siena Mortgages 07-5 Srl, Series
2008's (SM07-5 Series 2) class B notes, revised the Outlook on
Siena Mortgages 09-6 Srl's class C notes to Negative and affirmed
all other classes of notes, as follows:

Siena Mortgages 07-5 Srl (SM07-5)

Class A (ISIN IT0004304223) affirmed at 'AAsf'; Outlook Negative

Class B (ISIN IT0004304231) affirmed at 'AAsf'; Outlook Negative

Class C (ISIN IT0004304249) affirmed at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable

SM07-5 Series 2

Class A (ISIN IT0004353808) affirmed at 'AAsf'; Outlook Negative

Class B (ISIN IT0004353816) upgraded to 'AA-sf' from 'Asf';
Outlook Stable

Class C (ISIN IT0004353824) affirmed at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable

SM09-6

Class A (ISIN IT0004488794) affirmed at 'AAsf'; Outlook Negative

Class B (ISIN IT0004488810) affirmed at 'AAsf'; Outlook Negative

Class C (ISIN IT0004488828) affirmed at 'A-sf'; Outlook revised
to Negative from Stable.

The three prime Italian RMBS transactions were originated by
Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena (BMPS, B/Stable) and its
subsidiaries.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Strong Credit Enhancement for Senior Notes

Credit enhancement (CE) for the class A notes of each transaction
has continued to build up, due to repayment of the underlying
portfolios and the sequential pay-down of the notes. CE for the
senior notes of SM07-5 and SM07-5 Series 2 is above 34% and for
SM09-6 about 50%. This supports the affirmation of the
transactions' class A notes at 'AAsf'.

Increased Protection for Mezzanine Notes

CE for SM07-5 Series 2's class B notes has increased to about 23%
from 20% one year ago, so they can withstand higher rating
stresses. This underpins their upgrade to 'AA-sf'.

CE for the class B notes of SM07-5 and SM09-6 is also strong at
about 22%, supporting their affirmation at 'AAsf'. In Fitch's
view, SM07-5's class B notes are more protected than SM07-5
Series 2 due to a tighter cap on their coupon (3.7% vs. 4.7%),
which explains the different ratings for the tranches despite
them broadly carrying the same CE and the portfolios' interest
rate features being similar.

SM09-6's class B notes have broadly the same CE as the
corresponding tranche of SM07-5 Series 2 but have a slightly
higher rating. Despite having a higher cap on their coupon, the
mismatch between the potentially fixed-rate assets and the
floating liabilities (although with a cap) in SM09-6 is much
lower than in SM07-2 Series 2, providing more protection to SM09-
6's class B notes.

Limited Resilience of Class C Notes

The lack of equity in SM07-5 and SM07-5 Series 2 and the very
limited CE of their class C notes provided by the available cash
reserves leave the ratings of the junior classes vulnerable to
excess spread changes. Fitch notes that as the transactions move
into their tail, the weighted average (WA) cost of the notes may
be higher than the yield of the portfolios, and will be higher
than the flows paid by the swaps to the issuers. As a result,
Fitch expects payments to those tranches to rely on cash reserve
drawings. Fitch has affirmed the SM07-5 and SM07-5 Series 2's
class C notes at 'Bsf' because in the agency's view, there is
still a limited margin of safety from the current balance of the
cash reserve.

As it approaches its tail, SM09-6 is exposed to a similar rise in
the WA cost of notes. However, the class C notes benefit from a
larger cash reserve balance (9.8% of the rated notes) with a
target still equal to its original target amount. This explains
their higher rating and affirmation at 'A-sf'.

Cash Reserves Below Target

Each transaction's cash reserve is below target, ranging from 85%
(SM07-5) to 95% (SM09-6) of its target amount. The target cash
reserve balance of SM07-5 and SM07-5 Series 2 is the floor, so
those reserves cannot amortise further. Fitch understands from
BMPS that the cash reserve of SM09-6 cannot amortise any longer
due to the irreversible breach of the cumulative default trigger.

Although the reserves are not at their target and can be further
drawn to provision for new defaults, Fitch believes that their
size, after factoring in further expected drawings, is enough to
cover at least three months' senior costs and interest payments
on the rated notes, protecting against payment interruption risk
on the notes.

Residual Set-off Risk Negligible

Fitch considers deposit set-off risk as negligible in the
transactions given their very long seasoning (longer than 10
years) and the average current loan balance of below EUR65,000.
This is the maximum amount that on average can be lost on each
loan and would be fully protected by the deposit guarantee scheme
(which covers individual losses up to EUR100,000). Furthermore,
bonds issued by the originator before the deals closing dates in
2008 and 2009 are very likely to have been fully redeemed by now.

Commingling Risk Immaterial

Collections from the portfolios are transferred daily to the
accounts held by the issuer at the account banks. Furthermore,
all transactions benefit from dedicated commingling reserves.
Therefore, Fitch views commingling risk as an immaterial risk
driver in the three transactions.

Other Counterparty Risks

The only source of CE for SM09-6's class C notes is the cash
reserve, currently held at Deutsche Bank AG, London branch (DB;
BBB+/Negative/F2), which has a 'A-' deposit rating. The rating of
this tranche is currently at the same level as the account bank's
deposit rating. This rating will be capped at the account bank's
deposit rating, even if CE for this tranche increases. The
Negative Outlook is in line with that on the account bank's
Issuer Default Rating (IDR).

In its analysis, Fitch has not given credit to the swaps provided
by BMPS given the low rating of the swap counterparty. However,
the agency has run some sensitivities with the swaps still in
place, to check if the hedging is dragging funds out of the
structures.

Sovereign Cap

Italian securitisations can achieve a maximum rating of 'AAsf',
six notches above Italy's Long-Term IDR (BBB/Negative). This is
the case for the class A notes in each transaction and also for
the class B notes of SM07-5 and SM09-6. The Negative Outlook on
these tranches mirrors that on the sovereign.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Changes to Italy's Long-Term 'BBB' IDR and the rating cap for
Italian structured finance transactions, currently 'AAsf', could
trigger rating changes on the classes rated at this level.

If the performance of the underlying pool of SM07-5 Series 2
continues to be stable and CE for the class B notes continues to
build up, this tranche may be upgraded.

Credit protection for the class C notes in SM07-5 and SM07-5
Series 2 is tight (below 3%) and only depends on the cash
reserve. Further drawings on the reserve funds leading to lower
CE may lead to negative rating action on these tranches.

A different interpretation of the cash reserve amortisation
conditions in SM09-6, whereby the cash reserve could amortise,
will deprive the class C notes of CE, putting pressure on their
rating. The target amount of the reserve would be 5% of the
outstanding rated notes and the released amounts would be used to
repay the unrated class D notes.

A downgrade of DB's deposit rating would cause a downgrade of
SM09-6's class C notes.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO RULE 17G-10

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


===============
P O R T U G A L
===============


ENERGIAS DE PORTUGAL: Moody's Rates Subordinated Notes Ba2
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned a Ba2 long-term rating to
the Fixed to Reset Rate Subordinated Notes due 2079 to be issued
by EDP - Energias de Portugal, S.A. The rating outlook is stable.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The Ba2 rating assigned to the Hybrid is two notches below EDP's
senior unsecured rating of Baa3, reflecting the features of the
Hybrid. Its maturity is 60 years, it is deeply subordinated and
EDP can opt to defer coupons on a cumulative basis. The rating is
in line with that of the existing hybrid notes issued by the
company.

In Moody's view the Hybrid has equity-like features which allow
it to receive basket 'C' treatment (i.e. 50% equity and 50% debt)
for financial leverage purposes.

As the Hybrid's rating is positioned relative to another rating
of EDP, a change in either (1) Moody's relative notching practice
or (2) the senior unsecured rating of EDP could affect the
Hybrid's rating.

EDP's Baa3 rating is supported by (1) the company's position as
Portugal's largest utility, and that its diversified business and
geographical mix help moderate earnings volatility; (2) the
strategic focus over 2016-20 on free cash flow and deleveraging;
and (3) the slowly improving domestic economy, and a gradually
reducing tariff deficit. These positives help offset certain
potential risks, including hydrology resources volatility in
Iberia, an uncertain economic outlook in Brazil, and a relatively
high dividend payout and leverage.

RATIONALE FOR STABLE OUTLOOK

The stable outlook is based upon EDP's ongoing delivery of EBITDA
growth, capital discipline and deleveraging in accordance with
its strategic plan, such that retained cash flow (RCF)/net debt
is sustainably in the low double digits and funds from operations
(FFO)/net debt in the mid-teens (both in percentage terms).

WHAT COULD CHANGE THE RATING UP/DOWN

The rating could be upgraded in the event that improving
conditions were to be reflected in more rapid and extensive
deleveraging than currently contemplated, such as would be
reflected in RCF/net debt in the mid-teens (in percentage terms)
and FFO/net debt of around 20% on a sustainable basis.

The rating could be downgraded if deleveraging were to be
significantly delayed or reversed or there were a significant
downturn in the company's operating environment, as would be
evidenced by RCF/net debt and FFO/net debt in single digits and
the low-teens respectively (both in percentage terms).

The principal methodology used in this rating was Unregulated
Utilities and Unregulated Power Companies published in May 2017.


ENERGIAS DE PORTUGAL: Fitch Rates Proposed Hybrid Notes BB(EXP)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned EDP - Energias de Portugal, S.A.'s
(EDP, BBB-/Stable) proposed deeply subordinated hybrid
securities' an expected rating of 'BB(EXP)'. The proposed
securities qualify for 50% equity credit. The final rating is
contingent on the receipt of final documents conforming
materially to the preliminary documentation.

The expected rating reflects the highly subordinated nature of
the notes, which Fitch considers to have low recovery prospects
in a liquidation or bankruptcy scenario. The equity credit
reflects the equity-like characteristics of the instruments
including subordination, maturity in excess of five years and
deferrable interest coupon payments. Equity credit is limited to
50% given the notes' cumulative interest coupon, a feature
considered more debt-like in nature.

The newly proposed hybrid is not expected to replace the existing
EUR750 million hybrid issued in 2015, which has a first call date
in 2021 and will therefore retain its equity content. Fitch
understands from the company that both outstanding hybrids will
be part of the long-term strengthening of EDP's capital
structure. EDP will use the proposed hybrid proceeds to finance
or refinance, in whole or in part, its Eligible Green Project
portfolio.

The notes' rating and assignment of equity credit are based on
Fitch's hybrid methodology, "Corporate Hybrids Treatment and
Notching Criteria" published on November 9, 2018.

KEY RATING DRIVERS FOR THE NOTES
Deep Subordination and Deferral Option: The proposed notes are
rated two notches below EDP's Long-Term IDR given their deep
subordination and consequently, the lower recovery prospects in a
liquidation or bankruptcy scenario relative to the issuer's
senior obligations, and the deferral option.

50% Equity Treatment: The proposed securities qualify for 50%
equity credit as they meet Fitch's criteria with regard to deep
subordination, remaining effective maturity of at least five
years, full discretion to defer coupons for at least five years
and limited events of default. These are key equity-like
characteristics, affording EDP greater financial flexibility.

The interest coupon deferrals are cumulative, which results in
50% equity treatment and 50% debt treatment of the hybrid notes
by Fitch. This is a feature similar to debt-like securities and
reduces the company's financial flexibility. According to Fitch's
criteria, the agency would reduce the equity credit of 50% to 0%
five years before the effective remaining maturity date.

Effective Maturity Date: The proposed notes' maturity is 2079.
Fitch treats the day on which the replacement intention language
expires as an effective maturity date. Under the instrument
terms, this date coincides with the second step-up date, which is
not earlier than 2039. From this date, the coupon step-up is
within Fitch's aggregate threshold rate of 100bp, but the issuer
will no longer be subject to replacement intention language.

The second step-up date is defined as 2039 (assuming five-year
plus three months non-call), if the issuer is rated below
investment grade by another rating agency 30 days before the
first reset date. Otherwise, the second step-up date would be
2044.

Early Redemption: The issuer has the option to redeem the
proposed notes on the 90-day period prior up to a day in April
2024, which is the first call date (assuming five-year plus three
months non-call), and on any coupon payment date thereafter. In
addition, there are extraordinary call rights in case of adverse
changes to tax or rating agency treatment as well as a call right
in case of minimum outstanding amounts and a change of control or
gross-up event.

The change of control, if followed by an event-driven downgrade,
is designed to trigger an interest rate increase of 500bp as a
way to compensate the creditors. However, the issuer would have
the right to redeem the notes in this instance. Its view is that
the change of control provision cannot force an event of default
as redemption is designed as an option for the issuer and not a
right of the creditor, while the 500bp increase is within the
limit, according to its methodology.

Full Ability to Defer: EDP can opt to defer coupons on a
cumulative basis without any constraint at a given time. The
company will be obliged to make a mandatory settlement of
deferred interest payments if it chooses to pay cash dividends or
make other distributions on junior instruments, including parity
securities interest payment, or repurchase of share capital or
equally ranked securities.

KEY RATING DRIVERS FOR THE ISSUER

Expansion Capex Anticipated: Fitch estimates capex for 2018-2020
at EUR5.6 billion, which is EUR800 million higher than its last
year's expectations. This is due to the expectations that US wind
farm capex will capture full production tax credits (PTC) before
they are phased out gradually from 2020 and also that there will
faster-than-expected progress in its Brazilian transmission
projects. In the absence of managerial actions, this would put
temporary pressure on leverage metrics for 2018-2019 until
contribution from the new assets starts to materialise.

Measures to Stabilise Net Debt: Fitch expects EDP to offset
higher capex with additional asset divestments, US tax equity
partnerships and hybrid capital issuance to keep net debt flat or
slightly decreasing by end-2019. Ongoing tariff deficit (TD)
sales, liability management actions and opex savings should also
contribute to the net debt control goal. Fitch expects funds from
operations (FFO) adjusted net leverage to be around 5.0x in 2018-
2019, from 5.3x (4.8x adjusted by TD related cash taxes) in 2017
and slightly improving further in 2020. Fitch forecasts the
impact on the FFO adjusted net leverage of the proposed hybrid to
be -0.1x, assuming a similar size to the one already outstanding.

Further Deleveraging Postponed: EDP has a target of 3.0x net debt
to EBITDA (as reported by EDP, not including regulatory
receivables (RR)) by 2020 and achieved a EUR3.1 billion net debt
reduction in 2016-2017, largely through disposals and TD
monetisation. Net debt-to-EBITDA decreased to 3.7x by end-2017
from 4.2x by end-2015.

However Fitch estimates the 3.0x target achievement to be delayed
to beyond the current business plan, due to operating challenges
affecting actual earnings (ie. FX, weather conditions and
regulatory adjustments). For 2020, Fitch forecasts 3.7x net debt-
to-EBITDA (as defined by EDP), in line with 2017.

Harsh Stance on CMEC Revenue: Fitch has seen a more aggressive
stance from the Portuguese regulatory authority and government on
the maintenance of the contractual equilibrium mechanism (CMEC).
The controversial final CMEC adjustment, to be recovered annually
between 2018 and 2027, was finally established in April by
Entidade Reguladora dos Servicos Energeticos (ERSE) at EUR154
million, far from the EUR256 million claimed by EDP.

Moreover, EDP was notified in September of the decision of the
Secretary of State for Energy to charge the company EUR285
million related to an alleged non-recurring and past
overcompensation received under the CMEC regime. An additional
EUR73 million charge is still under regulatory scrutiny. EDP has
revised down its net income guidance for 2018, and announced it
would start a litigation process. Conservatively, Fitch has
included the alleged impact as operating and non-recurring cash-
outflow over 2019-2021.

CTG's Tender at Early Stage: China Three Gorges Corporation
(CTG), which is CTG Europe's ultimate parent, is currently
working to obtain the regulatory approvals for its tender offer
for EDP and EDP Renovaveis (EDPR). In addition, another pre-
condition of the takeover offer is that EDP's general
shareholders meeting must approve changes in the company's bylaws
to bypass the current limitation in voting rights for CTG Europe.
Fitch views both events as still being at an early stage (the
offer will not be launched before 2H19) and therefore will take
no rating action until there is material progress. EDP's
management stated that the price offered is not reflective of
EDP's value.

Limited Impact from PSL Criteria: CTG is rated 'A+'/Stable,
equalised with the Chinese sovereign. CTG's standalone credit
profile, to which Fitch would most likely link the rating of EDP
according to its Parent and Subsidiary Linkage (PSL) Criteria, is
currently 'BBB'. Should the acquisition materialise, Fitch sees
limited rating impact on EDP, ie. within a single notch uplift to
no impact.

LV Electricity Distribution Renewal Risk: Electricity
distribution low voltage concessions in Portugal, largely
operated by EDP, mature between 2016 and 2026, with the bulk of
them maturing between 2021 and 2022. The Portuguese government is
seeking to introduce more competition (tendering process) and
higher efficiencies (grouping current 278 too small to be
efficient municipalities into two to five territorial areas).
Fitch expects this to be a lengthy process, as the timeline for
the tenders is uncertain.

Fitch considers renewal risk as limited, as Fitch expects any
concession loss is accompanied by a reimbursement value broadly
aligned with the value of the regulatory asset base (RAB), and
the tendering process potentially leading to lower overall
returns. The LV concessions represent around EUR1 billion in RAB
and Fitch estimates them to contribute around EUR130 million to
EDP's EBITDA (4% of total consolidated).

Declining Portuguese RRs: Fitch forecasts RRs owned by EDP at
EUR0.7 billion by end-2018, down from a peak of EUR2.5 billion in
2014. Fitch expects EDP to continue selling its RRs at a pace
that largely mirrors new annual and decreasing TD created in the
system. This implies limited impact on working capital and cash
taxes paid forecast for 2018-2020.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

EDP is smaller than Iberdrola S.A. (BBB+/Stable) and Enel S.p.A.
(BBB+/Stable) and its business risk profile has a lower share of
fully regulated businesses, although it benefits from a higher
share of long-term contracted and incentivised renewables
business. The higher leverage and larger leakage due to
minorities within EDP justifies the two notches of rating
differential from peers'.

Fitch does not apply the one-notch uplift to the senior unsecured
rating as the regulated EBITDA share is below 50% (or 40%
including 10% of contribution from renewables).

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

  - 2018 EBITDA slightly below EUR3.4 billion (excluding non-
recurring items) and a CAGR of around 2.5% for 2018-2021, driven
by organic growth largely in wind and transmission projects in
Brazil;

  - Average gross capex of EUR1.9 billion a year;

  - Divestment plan linked to wind and mini-hydro plants at
around EUR920 million and net tax equity credit cash-ins at
around EUR400 million for 2018-2021;

  - Dividends in line with a dividend floor of EUR0.19 per share;

  - Declining Portuguese RR on balance sheet driven by TD sales
of EUR0.9 billion on average for 2018-2021, in line with new TD
generated in the period, and no meaningful TD created in Spain
and Brazil;

  - Special levy in Portugal treated as restricted cash and cash
outflows related to alleged overcompensation for CMEC plants;

  - Brazilian real and US dollar to depreciate against the euro
to 5.45 and to 1.27 respectively by 2021;

  - Potential impact from future tenders from low voltage
electricity distribution concessions in Portugal and CTG's tender
offer are not included in its rating case;

  - Issuance of EUR750 million hybrid capital in 1Q2019, eligible
for 50% equity content.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Future Developments That May, Individually or Collectively, Lead
to Positive Rating Action

  - FFO adjusted net leverage trending towards 4.5x (2018E: 5.0x)
and FFO fixed charge coverage above 3.7x (2018E: 3.7x) on a
sustained basis, assuming no major changes in the activities' mix
other than that expected by Fitch.

  - Sustained positive free cash flow, together with the
consistent reduction of the TD in Portugal in line with Fitch's
expectations.

Future Developments That May, Individually or Collectively, Lead
to Negative Rating Action

  - FFO net adjusted leverage above 5.0x and FFO fixed charge
coverage below 3.2x over a sustained period, for instance as a
result of negative developments on the upcoming tenders for
electricity distributions concessions, delays in the divestment
plan or greater regulatory scrutiny than expected by Fitch.

  - Substantial increase of operations in emerging markets with
higher business risk or a substantial shift in business mix
towards unregulated activities that is higher than expected by
Fitch, which could result in a tighter credit ratio guideline for
the rating.

LIQUIDITY

Strong Liquidity: EDP had EUR0.9 billion of available cash and
cash equivalents, and EUR5.3 billion of available committed
credit lines at end-September 2018 (EUR5 billion due after 2019).
This liquidity position is enough to cover debt maturities and
operating requirements up to 2020.

Standard Funding Structure: EDP has a largely centralised debt
structure with no impact on the ratings. Capital-market debt
issued by the parent is issued via Dutch-registered finance
subsidiary EDP Finance BV. The relationship between EDP and EDP
Finance is governed by a keepwell agreement under English law.

EDP Brazil is ring-fenced, self-funded in local currency and non-
recourse to EDP. As of September 2018, around 82% of EDP
Renovaveis net debt was inter-company (ie parent)-funded.


ENERGIAS DE PORTUGAL: S&P Rates Subordinated Hybrid Securities BB
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its 'BB' long-term issue rating to
the proposed 60-year, optionally deferrable, and subordinated
hybrid capital securities to be issued by Portugal-based energy
utility EDP - Energias de Portugal S.A. (EDP; BBB-/Stable/A-3).
The transaction remains subject to market conditions. S&P expects
the total amount of hybrid debt issued will be of benchmark size,
which is significantly less than 15% of capitalization.

S&P considers the proposed securities will have intermediate
equity content until the first call date, which it understands
will fall no earlier than five years from issuance, during which
period the securities will meet our criteria in terms of
subordination, permanence, and deferability at the company's
discretion.

S&P derive its 'BB' issue rating on the proposed securities by
notching down from its 'BBB-' issuer credit rating on EDP. The
two-notch differential between the issue rating and the issuer
credit rating reflects our notching methodology, which calls for:

-- A one-notch deduction for subordination because the rating on
    EDP is at 'BBB-' or above; and

-- An additional one-notch deduction to reflect payment
    flexibility -- the deferral of interest is optional.

S&P said, "The number of downward notches applied to the proposed
securities reflects our view that the issuer is relatively
unlikely to defer interest. Should our view change, we may
increase the number of downward notches that we apply to the
issue rating.

"In addition, to reflect our view of the intermediate equity
content of the proposed securities, we allocate 50% of the
related payments on these securities as a fixed charge and 50% as
equivalent to a common dividend, in line with our hybrid capital
criteria. The 50% treatment of principal and accrued interest
also applies to our adjustment of debt.

KEY FACTORS IN S&P'S ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUMENT'S PERMANENCE

The issuer can redeem the securities for cash at their first call
date (which S&P understands will be no earlier than five years
after issuance), five years and 90 days later, and then on every
interest payment date. If the issuer decides to call, it has
stated that it intends, but is not obliged, to replace the
instrument. This statement of intent, combined with EDP's
commitment to reduce leverage, makes it less likely that the
issuer will repurchase the notes on the open market. Although the
proposed securities are long-dated, they can be called at any
time for events such as change in taxation, gross-up, rating, or
a change of control event, which S&P deems external or remote.

S&P said, "We understand that the interest to be paid on the
proposed securities will increase by 25 basis points (bps) at
least five years after the first call date, and by a further 75
bps at the second step-up, at least 20 years after the first call
date assuming the issuer credit rating on EDP is 'BBB-' or
higher. We view any step-up above 25 basis points as presenting
an economic incentive to redeem the instrument, and therefore
treat the date of the second step-up as the instrument's
effective maturity. For issuers in the 'BBB-' category, we view a
remaining life of 20 years as sufficient to support credit
quality and achieve "intermediate" equity content. The
instrument's documentation specifies that if EDP is downgraded to
non-investment-grade -- that is, 'BB+' or below -- the economic
maturity of the hybrid securities will diminish by five years,
and still maintain the instrument's permanence."

At the first call date, the instrument will have less than 20
years (less than 15 years if EDP is non-investment-grade) to
maturity. Therefore, we will no longer view equity content as
"intermediate." Although we consider that the loss of equity
content could be seen as an incentive to redeem, we do not think
that this should prevent us from assessing the instrument as
"intermediate" until the first call date, as the issuer has
underpinned its willingness to maintain or replace the
securities, despite the loss of the preferential treatment, in a
statement of intent.

KEY FACTORS IN S&P'S ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUMENT'S DEFERABILITY

In S&P's view, the issuer's option to defer payment on the
proposed securities is discretionary. This means that the issuer
may elect not to pay accrued interest on an interest payment date
because doing so is not an event of default. However, any
outstanding deferred interest payment will have to be settled in
cash if EDP declares or pays an equity dividend or interest on
equally ranking securities and if EDP redeems or repurchases
shares or equally ranking securities. S&P sees this as a negative
factor. That said, this condition remains acceptable under S&P's
methodology because once the issuer has settled the deferred
amount, it can still choose to defer on the next interest payment
date.

KEY FACTORS IN S&P'S ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUMENT'S SUBORDINATION

The proposed securities (and coupons) are intended to constitute
direct, unsecured, and subordinated obligations of the issuer,
ranking senior to their common shares.


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


BALTIC LEASING: Fitch Puts BB- LT IDR on Rating Watch Positive
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has placed Baltic Leasing JSC's Long-Term Issuer
Default Ratings on Rating Watch Positive. This follows Bank
Otkritie's recent purchase of 99.5% of BaltLease.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

IDRS

The rating action follows the recently concluded ownership
change. This has helped reduce contagion risks from BaltLease's
previous troubled shareholder, Otkritie Holding, and improved
transparency around BaltLease's governance and shareholding
structure. The RWP reflects the potential positive impact that
shareholder support may have on BaltLease's IDR. Fitch will seek
to further clarify Baltlease's evolving relationship with its new
shareholder, Otkritie Bank, and the parent's ability to provide
support in case of need.

As of January 9, 2019, Otkritie Bank became 99.5% owner of
BaltLease. Otkritie Bank is in turn owned by the Central Bank of
Russia (CBR), having been rescued in 2017. Otkritie Bank acquired
20% of BaltLease from Otkritie Holding and 79.5% from Bank Trust,
which obtained the stake in September 2018.

In Fitch's view, the potential for contagion risks has receded.
Moreover, BaltLease has gained access to longer term and cheaper
shareholder funding. Otkritie Bank allocated a five-year RUB10
billion committed line to the company in November 2018, helping
it replace less favourable loans from other banks. On a
standalone basis, BaltLease's ratings appear balanced, based on
its size and franchise strength and operating environment with
limited potential for an upgrade.

Prior to the finalisation of the new shareholder structure,
BaltLease was exposed to high contingent risks stemming from
Otkritie Holding (previous owner of Otkritie Bank and Bank Trust
before their failure and bail out by the CBR) and high debt,
including double leverage where 79.5% of BaltLease's shares were
pledged as collateral for one of Otkritie Holding's associated
entity's debt at Bank Trust (see 'Fitch: Baltic Leasing's
Expected Ownership Change Credit Positive' published on August
28, 2018).

BaltLease's ratings reflect healthy through the cycle performance
in challenging operating conditions, robust profitability (ROAA
of 5%-6% in 2017-9M18), low credit losses, helped by solid
underwriting and collection function, minimal exposure to direct
market risks, adequate liquidity positions and low leverage.

The debt/tangible equity ratio was at a comfortable 3.5x at end-
2018. Fitch expects that low growth of auto sales will translate
to moderate lease book growth of below 10% in 2019. This could
increase the ratio to around 4x in 2019, but this would still be
commensurate with the ratings.

SENIOR DEBT RATING

The senior debt rating is aligned with BaltLease's Long-Term IDR,
reflecting Fitch's view of average recovery prospects for
unsecured senior creditors in case of default. This in turn is
driven by the low proportion of company assets that have been
pledged to secured creditors (27% of the lease portfolio at end-
2018).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

IDRS AND SENIOR DEBT

The RWP on the BaltLease's ratings will be resolved once Fitch
concludes assessment of its parent's ability to provide support
in case of need.

The rating actions are as follows:

Baltic Leasing JSC:

Long-Term Foreign- and Local-Currency IDRs of 'BB-': placed on
RWP

Short-Term Foreign-Currency IDR of 'B': affirmed

Senior unsecured debt of Baltic Leasing LLC of 'BB-': placed on
RWP

In accordance with Fitch's policies the issuer appealed and
provided additional information to Fitch that resulted in a
rating action that is different than the original rating
committee outcome.


UNITED CONFECTIONERS: Fitch Affirms B LT IDR, Outlook Stable
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Russia-based JSC Holding Company
United Confectioners' (UC) Long-Term Issuer Default Rating (IDR)
at 'B'. The Outlook is Stable.

UC's 'B' rating is heavily influenced by weak corporate
governance practices despite the company's strong business
profile and moderate leverage being consistent with those of
higher-rated peers. The Stable Outlook reflects its expectation
that outflows to related parties will not increase and the
company's funds from operations (FFO) adjusted leverage will
remain below 4x. A conservative balance sheet should enable UC to
maintain adequate access to external liquidity to refinance its
short-term debt. Consistent evidence of improved governance
practices, including track record of restrained related-party
transactions, and greater financial transparency while
maintaining a conservative financial structure could however
result in a positive rating action over the medium term.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Promotion-Driven Market Growth: Russian confectionery sales
volumes grew in low single-digits in 11M18 but demand was largely
driven by promotional activities of confectionery producers,
eroding sector profitability. As consumer sentiment in Russia
remains subdued and Fitch does not expect a rebound in 2019,
Fitch forecasts strong competition to continue in all segments of
the confectionery market. Therefore, Fitch projects that UC will
sacrifice a portion of its EBITDA margin to grow its sales
volumes over 2019-2020. Positively some growth in UC's sales
volumes is likely to be also supported by new product launches
following recent investments in production lines.

Leader Despite Market Share Losses: UC's market share declined to
12.8% in 1H18 from 15% in 2015 and Fitch does not rule out
further erosion if the competitive environment does not improve.
Nevertheless, the company remains the market leader and Fitch
does not envisage a material weakening in the company's market
position, which could put pressure on its rating. UC has a strong
portfolio of nationally recognised brands. large scale across the
major confectionery categories and a wide distribution network
across the country. Therefore, Fitch expects UC's business
profile to remain strong for the 'B' rating category over the
medium term.

Volatile EBITDA: The rating factors in the volatility of UC's
EBITDA as it is vulnerable to prices of hard-currency linked
agricultural commodities, such as cocoa, sugar, milk powder and
nuts. Favourable raw material prices boosted UC's EBITDA in 2017
to unsustainably high levels but Fitch expects a normalisation in
2018. Its medium-term expectations for EBITDA margin also
incorporate continuing competitive pressures in the confectionery
market and growing bargaining power of retailers as the food
retail market consolidates. Therefore, Fitch assumes EBITDA
margin at or below 10% over 2018-2021, which is lower than the
average EBITDA margin of 13.4% for the past 10 years.

Loose Corporate Governance Practices: UC's 'B' rating is heavily
influenced by weak corporate governance as potentially affecting
unsecured creditors. However the company's credit metrics and
business profile are commensurate with a higher rating. Sizeable
loans to related parties, a lack of management and board
independence, and the portion of UC's cash being held at the
related Guta Bank are major constraints on the rating.

Manageable Related-Party Outflows: Fitch assumes that outflows to
shareholders and related parties will remain at manageable levels
over the medium term, allowing UC to maintain its FFO adjusted
gross leverage below its negative rating sensitivity of 4x (2017:
1.3x) and retain adequate access to bank financing. Fitch
understands from management that Guta Group remains committed to
keeping UC's external debt burden at manageable levels.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

UC is smaller than the leading Latin American confectionery
producer Arcor S.A.I.C. (Local-Currency IDR BB/ Negative) and is
less geographically diversified, but has similarly strong brands
and credit metrics. UC has the same scale and single-country
asset concentration as Turkish food and beverage producer Yasar
Holding A.S. (B-/ Stable) but has lower exposure to FX risks and
a more conservative capital structure. UC has weaker corporate
governance than Arcor and Yasar, which currently restrains its
rating at 'B'.

No Country Ceiling or parent/ subsidiary aspects have an impact
on these ratings.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

Fitch's Key Assumptions Within Its Rating Case for the Issuer

  - Low-single digit growth in sales volumes in 2019-2021

  - Selling price increases in line with CPI in 2019 and below
CPI in 2020-2021

  - No sharp changes in cost of key raw materials

  - Capex of RUB2.5 billion per year over 2019-2021

  - Cash distributions (dividends, loans to related parties and
investments in non-core assets to support the strategy of Guta
Group) close to prior-year net profit over 2019-2021

KEY RECOVERY RATING ASSUMPTIONS

The recovery analysis assumes that UC would be considered a
going-concern in bankruptcy and that the company would be
reorganised rather than liquidated. Fitch has assumed a 10%
administrative claim.

UC's going concern EBITDA is based on 2017 EBITDA. The going-
concern EBITDA estimate reflects Fitch's view of a sustainable,
post-reorganisation EBITDA level upon which Fitch bases the
valuation of the company. The going-concern EBITDA is 50% below
2017 EBITDA to reflect the company's exposure to imported raw
materials and volatility in cocoa, sugar and milk prices. Fitch
has increased the EBITDA discount to 50% from 10% as Fitch
believes that EBITDA was unsustainably high in 2017. An
enterprise value (EV) multiple of 5x is used to calculate a post-
reorganisation valuation and reflects a mid-cycle multiple. It is
in line with multiples Fitch uses for Russian companies in retail
and packaged food/ beverage sectors.

Rouble bonds are issued by the finance company OOO United
Confectioners-Finance, but Fitch treats them pari passu with
senior unsecured debt of operating companies due to public offers
(akin to guarantees) from three major production plants. The debt
waterfall results in a 100% recovery corresponding to 'RR1'
Recovery Rating for the senior unsecured rouble bonds (RUB1.3
billion outstanding external obligation at end-September 2018).
However, the Recovery Rating is capped at 'RR4' due to the
company's Russian jurisdiction. Therefore, the senior unsecured
bonds are rated 'B'/50%/'RR4', in line with UC's IDR.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Developments That May Lead to Positive Rating Action

  - Consistent evidence of improved corporate governance
practices, including track record of restrained related-party
transactions and greater financial transparency

  - FFO-adjusted gross leverage sustainably below 3.0x (2017:
1.3x)

  - EBITDA margin at least around 10% on a sustained basis (2017:
14.1%)

Developments That May, Individually or Collectively, Lead to
Negative Rating Action

  - Sustained material deterioration in free cash flow (FCF)
generation, driven by operating underperformance

  - FFO-adjusted gross leverage sustainably above 4.0x

  - Larger-than-expected distributions to Guta Group or material
investments in non-core assets not offset by greater pre-dividend
FCF

  - Deterioration in liquidity position or inability to refinance
short-term debt

LIQUIDITY AND DEBT STRUCTURE

Adequate Liquidity: At end-September 2018 Fitch-adjusted
unrestricted cash of RUB0.4 billion and available undrawn
committed bank lines of RUB3.2 billion were sufficient to cover
short-term debt of RUB2.3 billion. Fitch has adjusted short-term
debt by excluding short-term tranches (RUB4 billion) under
committed long-term revolving credit facilities due in 2020, 2021
and 2024 as Fitch expects these to be rolled over.


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


GRUPO ANTOLIN-IRAUSA: Moody's Lowers CFR to B1, Outlook Neg.
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service downgraded Grupo Antolin-Irausa, S.A.'s
corporate family rating to B1 from Ba3 and the probability of
default rating to B1-PD from Ba3-PD. Concurrently, Moody's
downgraded Grupo Antolin's senior secured notes to B1 from Ba3.
The outlook is negative.

"The rating downgrade reflects our expectation that Grupo
Antolin's operating profit margins and financial leverage will no
longer be commensurate with our expectation for the previous Ba3
rating," says Matthias Heck, a Moody's Vice President -- Senior
Credit Officer and Lead Analyst for Grupo Antolin. "The negative
outlook reflects challenges for Grupo Antolin to improve its
financial leverage to below 4.5x (Moody's adjusted debt /
EBITDA), which we believe is an appropriate level for its B1
rating," added Mr. Heck.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating downgrade reflects (i) a continued challenging
automotive industry environment, with only very marginal growth
prospects for 2019 and greater risks emerging, including ongoing
trade and tariff disputes, rising interest rates and lower
consumer spending amid higher fuel prices, (ii) a weaker than
expected operating performance in the second half of 2018,
combined with some, albeit limited, prospects of recovery in
2019, and (iii) operating profit margins of well below 4%
(Moody's adjusted EBITA) as well as high financial leverage in
excess of 4x (Moody's adjusted debt / EBITDA) also in 2019, which
are both no longer commensurate with a Ba3 rating.

At the end of September 2018, Grupo Antolin's leverage (as
measured by debt / EBITDA, adjusted by Moody's) increased to
5.7x, from an already elevated level of 4.2x at the end of 2017.
The increase resulted from a drop in operating margins to only
2.4% on the back upfront cost and delays of several new projects,
the underperformance of two major plants in the US, and continued
pricing pressure from original equipment manufacturing (OEM)
costumers. Moody's adjusted EBITA (LTM September 2018), after
4.6% in 2017. Whilst the pressure in the first half of 2018 was
largely expected, a result of new factories and model launches,
as well as sales declines in the UK and underperformance of US
plants, Grupo Antolin also revised its full year guidance on
November 26, 2018, following an initial revision three months
before.

The company outlook reflects several project delays, ongoing
underperformance of US plants, a negative impact of Brexit,
emerging market currency weakness, increasing pricing pressure
from customers, as well as a negative impact of the
implementation of the new emission testing standard WLTP in
Europe. The company now expects approximately 7.0-7.25% reported
EBITDA margin, which is 100-125 basis points lower than
previously expected, and financial leverage (defined by the
company) of approximately 2.6x, compared to previously
"approximately 2.0x". Grupo Antolin has also lowered its guidance
for capital expenditures for 2018 to approximately 5.8% of sales,
a reduction of 70 basis points, which will mitigate the negative
impact of lower profitability on free cash flows and liquidity.

The B1 rating reflects its expectation some earnings improvements
over the next 12-18 months, driven by the positive impact of
recent model launches and the discontinuation of related upfront
cost, and the restructuring of several production facilities,
which have been underperforming. In the context of the ongoing
challenging automotive industry environment, however, Moody's
does not expect that the company will be able to improve its
financial leverage and operating profit margins in the next 12 to
18 months to the levels achieved in 2017.

Moody's considers Grupo Antolin's liquidity profile to be
adequate. As of the end of September 2018, the company's cash
balance was around EUR166 million and it had full access to its
EUR200 million revolving credit facility (RCF). While the group's
RCF is subject to financial covenants, the capacity to test
levels (<3.5x net debt/adjusted EBITDA and >4x EBITDA/financial
expenses) has been sufficient as of September 2018 and is
expected to improve based on year end 2018 numbers. After the
group's bond issuance in Q2 2018, the company has no major debt
maturities until 2022.

RATIONALE FOR THE NEGATIVE OUTLOOK

The negative outlook reflects challenges over the next 12-18
months for Grupo Antolin to de-lever to the range of 4.0x-4.5x
(Moody's adjusted debt / EBITDA) required for a B1, given the
highly competitive industry environment and execution risks
related to restructuring measures. The negative outlook also
reflects challenges to improve EBITA margins (Moody's adjusted)
to more than 3%.

WHAT COULD MOVE THE RATING -- UP/DOWN

Moody's could consider downgrading Grupo Antolin's ratings if
leverage remained above 4.5x (Moody's adjusted), or EBITA margins
(Moody's adjusted) remained below 3%, or free cash flow became
materially negative. A weakening of liquidity could also result
in a rating downgrade.

Conversely, Moody's could consider upgrading the ratings of Grupo
Antolin, if the group's leverage improved to sustainably below
4.0x, with EBITA margins being comfortably above 4%. An upgrade
would also require sustained positive free cash flow.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Global
Automotive Supplier Industry published in June 2016.



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


CEVA LOGISTICS: Moody's Affirms B1 CFR, Alters Outlook to Neg.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the B1 corporate family
rating, B1-PD Probability of Default Rating of CEVA Logistics AG,
as well as B1 instrument ratings of CEVA Logistics Finance B.V.,
a leading global integrated logistics provider. Concurrently,
Moody's has changed the outlook to negative from stable.

The decision to change the outlook reflects the expected impact
of CMA CGM S.A.'s ("CMA", B1 Negative) strategic plan for CEVA on
its financial profile, which is currently below Moody's
expectations, and the risks associated with the implementation of
the plan to return CEVA to financial metrics in line with its B1
rating.

The rating actions are driven by:

  - Moody's adjusted leverage for the last twelve months ended
September 30, 2018 is 5.3x, as a result of higher than expected
drawings under the revolving credit facility ("RCF") and EBITDA
underperformance. Moody's now expects leverage to reduce towards
4.5x over the next 18 months.

  - The implementation of the business plan is expected to result
in integration/restructuring costs as well as additional capital
expenditure to be incurred over the next two years, which
together with higher interest expenses and working capital
outflows, results in the group not being able to generate
comfortable free cash flows in the next 12-18 months.

RATINGS RATIONALE

In late 2018, CEVA unveiled a new strategic plan as a result of
CMA's intention to launch a tender offer to acquire a controlling
shareholding in CEVA. Whilst Moody's believes that the strategic
partnership offers significant long term benefits if well
executed, it also results, on top the group's current
underperformance, in negative free cash flow generation within
its rating horizon. The group's Q3 results have been considerably
impacted by operational issues in Contract Logistics Italy during
Q3 2018, and higher than forecasted working capital outflows
resulting in Moody's adjusted leverage for the last twelve months
ended September 30, 2018 at 5.3x, one turn higher than its 2018
forecast.

CEVA's B1 corporate family rating reflects the group's: (i)
relatively solid business profile given the scale, global reach
and breadth of the group's service offering; (ii) large and
diverse blue-chip customer base with high retention rates and
entrenchment in customers' operations in Contract Logistics (CL);
(iii) upside potential from greater scale and improved efficiency
in Freight Management (FM) as a result of the acquisition of
CMA's freight management business.

Conversely, the rating is constrained by: (i) exposure to
cyclical automotive, consumer and retail industries as well as
freight rates volatility; (ii) sustainability of operational
margin improvements in a low margin and highly competitive
industry; (iii) negative free cash flow generation expected over
the next 12-18 months.

Moody's continues to view CEVA's liquidity as adequate, on the
assumption that the change of control triggers in the group's
committed facilities are successfully addressed. As at September
30, 2018, the group had $368 million of cash available plus $225
million availability under its committed RCF and $53 million
availability under its asset-backed facilities.

The B1 ratings on the Senior Secured Bank Credit Facilities are
in line with the CFR, reflect their priority ranking in the event
of security enforcement and their large share in the capital
structure.

RATING OUTLOOK

The negative outlook reflects Moody's view that the group's weak
credit metrics will leave limited room for further
underperformance within the B1 rating category, with Moody's
expecting operational improvements under CMA's stewardship,
notably on free cash flow generation and synergies, to be evident
in the next 6-12 months.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE

An upgrade is unlikely in the next 18-24 months given that CEVA
is weakly positioned in the B1 rating category. There could be
upward pressure on the ratings if, for a sustained period of
time: (i) leverage falls below 3.5x; (ii) good liquidity profile
with FCF/Debt above 5%; (iii) EBIT/Interest above 1.5x.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO A DOWNGRADE

There could be downward pressure on the ratings if any of: (i)
leverage remains above 4.5x for a sustained period of time; (ii)
continued negative free cash flow generation (iii) EBIT/Interest
below 1x, or (iv) weakening liquidity.

LIST OF AFFECTED RATINGS

Issuer: CEVA Logistics AG

Affirmations:

Corporate Family Rating, Affirmed B1

Probability of Default Rating, Affirmed B1-PD

Outlook Actions:

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Stable

Issuer: CEVA Logistics Finance B.V.

Affirmations:

BACKED Senior Secured Bank Credit Facility, Affirmed B1

BACKED Senior Secured Regular Bond/Debenture, Affirmed B1

Outlook Actions:

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Stable

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Global
Surface Transportation and Logistics Companies published in May
2017.


===========
T U R K E Y
===========


ANADOLU BIRLIK: In Talks with Lenders to Restructure Debt
--------------------------------------------------------
Kerim Karakaya and Ercan Ersoy at Bloomberg News report that
Anadolu Birlik Holding AS, the parent company of one of Turkey's
largest food producers is in talks with lenders to restructure a
portion of its US$2 billion debt pile.

Two people with knowledge of the matter said the company wants to
extend maturities on loans it took out to finance investments in
the energy sector, Bloomberg relates.

According to Bloomberg, one of the people said the company is
seeking to restructure less than half of its total debt and the
negotiations may be finalized within the next two months.

Anadolu Birlik is the latest in a string of Turkish energy
companies struggling to pay down their foreign-currency loans,
Bloomberg discloses.


ORDU YARDIMLASMA: Fitch Assigns BB+ LT IDR, Outlook Stable
----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned Turkey based Ordu Yardimlasma Kurumu
Holding a Long-Term Issuer Default Rating of 'BB+'. The Outlook
is Stable.

The 'BB+' rating reflects Oyak's' blended income stream, which
Fitch assesses as below investment-grade, being supported by
strong loan-to-value and leverage metrics, which are in line with
the investment-grade category and higher-rated peers. This is
because the ratings are constrained by Oyak's limited
diversification away from the Turkish economy and dependency on
the company's largest dividend contributor Erdemir.

The  ratings are nonetheless above the 'BB+' Turkish Country
Ceiling, reflecting Fitch's expectations that Oyak has sufficient
structural enhancements that would mitigate transfer and
convertibility risks.

The Stable Outlook reflects its expectation that Oyak will
maintain a strong balance sheet at the holding company level,
despite out lower dividend expectations and stressed cash
outflows for pension payments in the next three years. Fitch does
not treat these payments to members as debt, but views them as
quasi-dividend payments that ultimately have an impact on its
holding company free cash flow (FCF) calculations.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Blended Income Stream 'BB' Rating: Based on its analysis of the
three subsidiaries that generated 88% of Oyak's dividend income
at end-2017, Fitch calculates a 18.4% probability of default for
Oyak, which maps to a 'BB' in its rating factor table. Fitch then
applies a single-notch discount to arrive at a Blended Income
Stream Rating of 'BB-' to reflect the subordinated nature of
dividend flows versus taxes and debt.

Fitch has not applied an additional notch uplift to the  Blended
Income Stream Rating for diversification, as dividends are mainly
dependent on Erdemir and Oyak Cement, which had relative dividend
weightings of at 57% and 20%, respectively, at end-2017 .  Fitch
has, however, applied a  two-notch uplift to the 'BB'- income
stream rating, supported by factors such as dividend control,
very strong  LTV and conservative leverage metrics.

Strong LTV : Its stressed LTV ratio for Oyak is significantly
below 25%, which is in line with the 'A' rating category under
its methodology, and is in line with Oyak's higher-rated peers.
When calculating Oyak's LTV ratio, Fitch takes into account debt
in SPVs such as ATAER and BIREN, despite the absence of parent
company guarantees and cross defaults. Although Fitch believes
that Turkish asset values could fluctuate, Oyak has ample
headroom to withstand economic shocks in the domestic economy and
maintain a solid LTV ratio in line with high investment-grade
ratings.

Conservative Leverage: Fitch views Oyak's financial structure as
being in line with an 'A' rating category, despite its three-year
dividend forecasts being more conservative than management's.
Fitch expects dividend inflows from Erdemir to slow in 2020,
driven by expansion plans at the subsidiary level, and stressed
domestic interest rates considerably.

Volatile Dividends:  Fitch views Oyak's dividend volatility at
weak investment-grade level, due mainly to fluctuations in
upstream cash flows from equity participations. The volatility
arisies not from operational shortfalls or heavy investments in
subsidiaries, but from subsidiaries' reporting currency being in
US dollar. Although Oyak has almost ultimate control on dividend
flows, as witnessed by changes in equity flows, the lack of
diversification of equity investments could drive volatility in
cash flows.

Liquid Assets: Fitch views Oyak's asset liquidity as being
consistent with the 'BBB' rating category, with 62% of the
group's equity participation portfolio value coming from publicly
listed companies. Oyak's asset portfolio is more liquid than
other Turkish holding companies' and international peers' as they
can easily be converted into cash to serve pension payments.

Conservative Financial Policies: Fitch believes that Oyak's track
record of abiding by the group's internal financial policies,
which are strict owing to the group's status as a quasi-pension
fund, compares well to high investment-grade peers'. However,
Oyak prefers to invest into manufacturing, infrastructure, energy
and heavy industries, avoiding industries that directly serve
end-customers. Although this strategy has been successful so far,
such businesses are more cyclical and volatile than that of high
investment-grade peers, which typically invest in the utilities
and consumer goods sectors.

Payments to Members:  Fitch views payments to pension members as
quasi-dividend payments being ultimately subordinated to senior
unsecured financial debt obligations of the group. This is driven
by its belief that the fund has deferral mechanisms in place for
liquidity crunches and that any withdrawal requests should be
passed through the General Assembly first. Therefore these
payments are not deemed as part of holding company funds from
operations (FFO), and debt coverage calculations.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

Oyak's business profile as a supplemental pension fund for the
military is unique among Fitch-rated holding companies. While
there are no publicly rated direct peers, it shares similarities
with Turkish corporates, such as Sabanci and Koc Holding and
international peers such as Exor and Criteria. Oyak is one of
Turkey's largest holding companies with solid market positions in
steel, autos and cement markets. Oyak's size and diversification
is broadly in line with Koc's and Sabanci's, but the group has
less end market diversification than higher-rated peers such as
Criteria Caixa S.A. (BBB/Positive) and Exor S.P.A.

OYAK is exposed to Turkey, despite diversifying its asset base
into financial assets and real estate to smoothen cash flows.
This is partially mitigated by Oyak's leverage metrics and LTV
that are significantly better than peers' and in line with the
'A' rating median, which is a key rating strength.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

Fitch's Key Assumptions Within Its Rating Case for the Issuer

  - Lower dividend income in the medium term, driven by increased
capex needs at subsidiaries.

  - Opex  in line with historical averages.

  - Increasing interest rates.

  - Broadly stable-to-slightly increasing payments to pension
members.

  - Limited portfolio activity; no sizeable M&A

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Developments That May, Individually or Collectively, Lead to
Positive Rating Action

  - Improvement in the credit quality of its portfolio, which may
drive an upgrade in blended income stream rating calculation.

  - Increased diversification of cash flows, with less reliance
on any single asset, accompanied by improved geographic
diversification.

Developments That May, Individually or Collectively, Lead to
Negative Rating Action

  - Fitch-adjusted LTV ratio sustainably above 35%

  - Weakening in the credit quality of its portfolio, leading to
a blended income stream calculation below 'BB'.

  - Fitch-adjusted dividend interest cover below 3.5x (19x at
end-2018)

  - Decreased diversification of cash flows leading to increasing
dependency on any single asset.


LIQUIDITY AND DEBT STRUCTURE

Strong Liquidity: At end-June 2018 Oyak had TRY3.6 billion of
cash and TRY4.4 billion of financial assets (mostly time
deposits) , comfortably covering TRY196 million of short-term
debt on its standalone balance sheet. This also covers its
conservative cash outflow assumptions for the pension members in
its forecast period of the next four years.


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


FLYBE GROUP: Gets GBP1MM in Public Subsidies Amid Financial Woes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Spero at The Financial Times reports that troubled UK
regional airline Flybe was given an increase of GBP1 million in
public subsidies by ministers and local authority officials as it
struggled to stay afloat because of poor results and large debts.

The government allowed the airline to switch a flight route from
Gatwick airport to Heathrow, where it could offer more services
by using its existing landing slots at London's main
international hub, the FT relates.

According to the FT, the move, which was announced in November,
led to a higher subsidy because of the increased flight frequency
at a more expensive airport.

It also freed up valuable flight slots at Gatwick, which Flybe
subsequently sold as part of its efforts to raise cash, the FT
states.


                         About Flybe

Flybe Group PLC -- https://www.flybe.com/ -- operates regional
airline in Europe.  The Company operates in two segments: Flybe
UK, which comprises the Company's main scheduled United Kingdom
domestic and the United Kingdom-Europe passenger operations and
revenue ancillary to the provision of those services, and Flybe
Aviation Services (FAS), which focuses on providing aviation
services to customers, largely in Western Europe.  The FAS
supports Flybe's United Kingdom activities, as well as serving
third-party customers.


GRIFFON FUNDING: Moody's Withdraws Ba2 Rating on Class B1 Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has withdrawn the rating of the class
B1 notes issued by Griffon Funding Limited.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

GBP118.6M Class B1 Loan Notes due 2031, Withdrawn (sf);
previously on May 31, 2018 Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has decided to withdraw the rating for its own business
reasons.


PATISSERIE VALERIE: Parent Shuts Down 71 Branches After Collapse
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mamta Badkar at The Financial Times reports that the parent
company behind cafe chain Patisserie Valerie has closed 71
branches, resulting in more than 900 job losses a day after it
collapsed into administration.
According to the FT, twenty-seven lossmaking Patisserie Valerie
branches, including one of its founding cafes on Old Compton
Street in Soho, central London, plus an additional 25 concessions
in Debenhams, Next and motorway and service areas and 19
Midlands-focused Druckers patisseries have been closed, KPMG,
which is acting as administrators, said on Jan. 23.

The combined closures have resulted in 920 redundancies, the FT
states.

Patisserie Holdings, the restaurant group chaired by noted
entrepreneur Luke Johnson, was undone by an accounting fraud,
which produced accounts showing GBP28 million in cash rather than
the GBP9.8 million in net debt that was actually on its books,
the FT relates.  The irregularities were first revealed in
October, the FT recounts.

The administrators on Jan. 23 said 122 shops remained operational
while they sought a buyer for the business, the FT notes.


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


* BOOK REVIEW: EPIDEMIC OF CARE
-------------------------------
Author: George C. Halvorson
George J. Isham, M.D.
Publisher: Jossey-Bass; 1st edition
Hardcover: 271 pages
List Price: $28.20
Order your personal copy today at https://is.gd/0ChYOC

Halvorson and Isham worked together as leaders of the Minneapolis
health-care organization HealthPartners; Halvorson as chairman
and CEO, and Isham as medical director and chief health officer.
From their positions as leaders in the health-care field, they
have gained a broad, thorough understanding of the structure,
workings, and the problems of America's health-care system. Their
"Epidemic of Care" written in a readable, lucid, jargon-free
style is a timely work for anyone interested in the pressing
matter of satisfactory health care in America. This includes
government workers, politicians, executives of HMOs and
hospitals, and critics of health care, to individuals making
choices about their own health care. It is a notable work both
practical and visionary that one hopes legislators and heads of
HMOs will take in. For Halvorson and Isham make their way through
the daunting complexities of today's health-care system to put
their finger on its core problems and offer practicable solutions
to these.

The two main problematic issues of contemporary health care are
health-care costs and quality of care. These two authors offer
solutions taking into consideration both of these. They put forth
balanced proposals instead of the many one-sided ones which
stress cutting costs at the expense of care or favor care
regardless of costs, costs usually born by government from tax
revenues. In the authors' comprehensive, balanced proposals,
corporations and businesses of all sizes, government agencies,
health-care organizations of all types, state and local
governments and health organizations, and also individuals work
together cooperatively for the goal of affordable, effective, and
widespread up Before outlining their program for dealing with the
problems in health care, which are only growing worse in the
present system, the authors relate information on different parts
of today's system most readers would not be aware of. Then they
analyze it to focus in on what is causing the problems in the
particular area of health care. In some cases, misconceptions
held among the public are cleared up, paving the way toward
agreement on what are the real problems and coming up with
acceptable solutions for them. The percentage of the cost of HMO
membership and insurance premiums going for administration is one
such misconception.

"People guess, in fact, that HMO and insurance administration
costs are about 30 to 40 percent of premiums and that insurer
profits add another 10 to 20 percent of the total cost." This
means that anywhere from about 40 percent to 60 percent of
payments for HMOs or insurance doesn't go for health care.

The authors clear up this misconception giving rise to much
confusion in trying to deal with the serious problems facing the
health-care field, as well as a good deal of resentment against
HMOs and insurance companies, by citing that "health plan
administrative costs, including profits and marketing, average
from 5 to 30 percent of total premium, depending on the plan."
This leads to the conclusion that it is not a sudden rise in
administrative costs or the greed of health-care providers that
is mainly responsible for driving up the costs of health care and
will continue to do so for the foreseeable future without
effective change in the field. Rising costs of health care from
new technologies, consumer expectations and demands, and also
misuse of drugs and treatments making patients worse or
prolonging their medical problems are the main reason for the
rising costs. The frequent misuse of modern-day medicines and
treatments cited by the authors is an issue that is starting to
receive attention in the media.

The price of prescription drugs is one health-care issue already
receiving much attention that the authors address. In this
discussion, they note that because of committees of physicians
and pharmacologists set up by HMOs to identify which drugs were
most effective for specific medical problems and set standards
for prescribing these according to HMO policies, "all Americans
benefited from the new focus on drugs that actually work." Before
these committees, eighty-four percent of drugs developed by the
pharmaceutical companies were what were know as "class C" drugs
that were little better than placebos. As the authors note, in
those days not so long ago, drugs were being developed and
marketed more to generate sales than remedy medical conditions.

The high cost Americans pay for prescription compared to buyers
in other countries is another matter the two authors take up. In
this, they take the position of American buyers of prescription
drugs by making the point that they should not be singled out to
bear the disproportionate share of the research and marketing
costs going into the drug prices since numbers of persons in
countries around the world gain health benefits from the drugs.
The wasteful similarities between some prescription drugs, the
misuse of some, and growing concerns over costs and use of the
drugs with persons under sixty-five are other topics dealt with
in the discussion and analysis of the issue of prescription
drugs.

Halvorson and Isham's fair-minded overview and critique of
today's health-care field should be read by anyone with an
interest in and concern about this field central to the quality
of life of Americans and the economy. While they recognize that
the field's dysfunctions have such deep roots and thorny
complexities that "there is no single villain responsible for our
troubles and no silver bullet to cure them," undoubtedly some and
likely a number of the two authors' approaches to resolving
particular troubles or even their solutions to certain problems
will be adopted. There is just no way out of the current health-
care crisis other than the clear-sighted, comprehensive,
cooperative way Halvorson and Isham present.

George Halvorson is currently chairman and CEO of Kaiser
Permanente, one of the U. S.'s largest health-care organizations.
Isham continues as medical director and chief health officer of
HealthPartners.



                            *********

Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers'
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than US$3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look
like the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell
short.  Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at
historical cost net of depreciation may understate the true value
of a firm's assets.  A company may establish reserves on its
balance sheet for liabilities that may never materialize.  The
prices at which equity securities trade in public market are
determined by more than a balance sheet solvency test.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book
of interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go to
http://www.bankrupt.com/booksto order any title today.


                            *********


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 2019.  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 * * *