Clearing Services for Global Markets A Framework for the Future Development of the Clearing Industry_14 pdf

Eurex Clearing LCH.Clearnet OMX MEFF CCG Others
Average fixed
monthly fees in
2005
EUR
7. Please specify the average monthly clearing fees charged to your firm by the following clearing houses in 2005:
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR
EUR
EUR EUR EUR
EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR
Average monthly
infrastructure/
line/connectivity
fees in 2005*
Average monthly
transaction-driven
fees in 2005
(before rebates)**
Average monthly
event-driven fees
in 2005***
Average monthly
fees charged for
additional
services in
2005****

* Infrastructure/line or connectivity fees are charged by clearing houses for connecting a specific customer location to the clearing house – either through the internet or via dedicated lines. These
lines are commonly leased to the customer for the time he holds his specific clearing member status. The line fee then covers the usage and initial installation of the line(s). Some clearing
houses outsource this service to dedicated telecommunications companies, which in turn directly charge clearing members.
** Transaction-driven fees refer to the per-transaction fees charged by clearing houses. Please specify the average of total transaction fees charged, excluding rebates or differences of fees charged
for product or product groups (e.g. stock indexes, currencies, etc.), but including minimum fees per month. If clearing fees are not itemised separately, please specify the all-in fee.
*** Event-driven fees result from any “event” affecting a derivatives transaction. Such event-driven fees may thus be charged for option exercises, assignments and adjustments, futures contracts
tendered, assigned, cash settled, etc.
*** Additional services can include the service provision for give-up executions, allocations, claims, EFPs, APS executions, transfers, specialised account structures, reports, etc.
Eurex Clearing LCH.CIearnet OMX MEFF CCG Others
Monthly average of
other charges
and depreciation in
2005*
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
* Other clearing-related charges can include penalty payments, e.g. for delayed payments or deliveries, as well as possible charges for service level upgrades, such as non-gratuitous network or
bandwidth upgrades (insofar as this service is not outsourced to another service provider), etc. Clearing-related depreciation can result from investments to clearing-house-specific hardware and
software requirements (i.e. servers, routers and operating software).
9. What kind of rebates did you receive on the fees charged by the following clearing houses and how high were these in 2005?
Please specify:
8. Please specify the monthly average of other clearing-related charges and depreciation in 2005:
Eurex Clearing LCH.Clearnet OMX MEFF CCG Others
Kind of rebate
(transaction fee,
infrastructure fee,
etc.)
% of % of % of % of % of % of
Average monthly
fee rebate
(either in
percentages or

absolute figures)
fee fee fee fee fee fee
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
463 Appendix 4
10. Which of the following intermediaries do you employ for the internal organisation of
derivatives clearing services and how many of each?
No Yes If yes – how many firms?
Back-office vendors

CSDs/ICSDs

Custodians

(Correspondence) banks

Central banks

Telecommunications companies

Others (i.e. consultants, etc.)

Comments:
11. Please specify your average monthly fees paid to the following intermediaries in 2005:
Average Monthly Fee in 2005
Back-office vendors EUR
CSDs/ICSDs EUR
Custodians EUR
(Correspondence) banks EUR
Central banks EUR
Telecommunication companies EUR

Others EUR
Comments:
12. Please specify your cash/collateral tied to the respective clearing houses in 2005:
Eurex Clearing LCH.Clearnet OMX MEFF CCG Others
Contribution to default
fund in 2005
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
Average daily cash
margin at clearing
house in 2005
Average daily
collateral margin at
clearing house in
2005
Average daily credit
lines/capital tied to
ensure funding of intra-
day margin calls in 2005
Funding effort for
minimum capital
requirements in 2005
GCMs: funding effort for
non-segregated
business in 2005
Comments:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
465 Appendix 4
13. Do you maintain excess collateral at the following clearing houses to reduce the number of
margin calls? If yes, please specify :
NO YES
Eurex Clearing
If yes, how high was this on a daily
average in 2005?
EUR
LCH.Clearnet
If yes, how high was this on a daily
average in 2005?
EUR
OMX
If yes, how high was this on a daily
average in 2005?
EUR
MEFF
If yes, how high was this on a daily
average in 2005?
EUR
CCG
If yes, how high was this on a daily
average in 2005?
EUR
Others
If yes, how high was this on a daily
average in 2005?
EUR
Comments:

14. When you initially became a clearing member of the respective clearing house
… did you have any funding
effort for regulatory capital
requirements?
… did you have to hire
additional qualified back-office
personnel?
… did you have to adapt your
operational/back-office
procedures?
did you have to adapt your risk
management structures and
architecture?
No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes
Eurex Clearing
If yes, how high were these?
If yes, how many additional
headcounts?
If yes, pls. estimate the effort in man-
days
If yes, pls. estimate the effort in man-
days
EUR
EUR
EUR
EUR
EUR
(no. of headcounts)
(no. of man-days)
(no. of man-days)

LCH.CIearnet
(no. of headcounts) (no. of man-days) (no. of man-days)
OMX
(no. of headcounts) (no. of man-days) (no. of man-days)
MEFF
(no. of headcounts) (no. of man-days) (no. of man-days)
CCG
(no. of headcounts) (no. of man-days)
(no. of man-days)
Comments:……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
15. Please specify your risk-management-related costs for the respective clearing houses in 2005:
Eurex Clearing LCH.Clearnet OMX MEFF CCG Others
How many headcounts did
you employ for the risk
management of the
respective clearing house
business in 2005?
GRAND TOTAL:
How high were your
average monthly customer
losses (i.e. compensation
or default) in 2005?
EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
PARTS:
Did you outsource parts of
your clearing-related risk

management to a third
party in 2005? If yes, pls.
specify which parts and
the average monthly costs
involved.
PARTS: PARTS: PARTS: PARTS:
PARTS:
EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
16.
Please specify your IT costs for the respective clearing houses in 2005:
Eurex Clearing
LCH.CIearnet
OMX MEFF CCG Others
How many headcounts
did you employ for
maintaining technical
interfaces to the clearing
house in 2005?
Did you outsource parts of
your derivatives-clearing-
related IT to a third party
in 2005? If yes, pls.
specify which parts and
the average monthly costs
involved.
PARTS: PARTS: PARTS: PARTS:
PARTS:
PARTS:
17. How high were your clearing-related back-office costs in 2005? Please provide figures per clearing house or indicate the grand total:

Eurex Clearing LCH.Clearnet OMX MEFF CCG Others
How many headcounts
did you employ in the
derivatives clearing back-
office in 2005?
GRAND TOTAL:
PARTS: PARTS: PARTS: PARTS: PARTS: PARTS:
Did you outsource parts of
your derivatives clearing
back-office to a third party
in 2005?
If yes, pls. specify which
parts and the average
monthly costs involved.
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR EUR
Average monthly error
account in 2005
GRAND TOTAL:
Comments:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
18. In this section, you are asked to compare total clearing costs with total trading and settlement costs. Please consider that the ‘total’
should include both direct and indirect transaction costs.*
STEP 1
STEP 2
Total trading costs are higher by a factor of roughly
Clearing costs
vs.

trading costs
Total trading costs are higher than total clearing costs
OR OR
Total trading costs are lower than total clearing costs
Total trading costs are lower by a factor of roughly
Clearing costs
vs.
settlement costs
Total settlement costs are higher than total clearing costs
Total settlement costs are higher by a factor of roughly
OR OR
Total settlement costs are lower by a factor of roughly
Total settlement costs are lower than total clearing costs
*Total trading/settlement costs therefore also comprise indirect costs such as maintenance of IT infrastructure and other operational costs.
NO YES
Do you regularly compare total trading costs to total clearing costs?
If yes, how often (monthly, quarterly, yearly, etc.)?
Do you regularly compare total settlement costs to total clearing costs?
If yes, how often (monthly, quarterly, yearly, etc.)?
Do you regularly compare total settlement costs to total trading costs?
If yes, how often (monthly, quarterly, yearly, etc.)?
470 Appendix 4
Part 3 Scale effect analysis
19. Various network initiatives (mergers/alliances/partnerships, etc.) could be implemented to
harmonise/consolidate the clearing service industry in the future. Some of the potential benefits
of harmonisation/consolidation are listed below. On a scale from 1 (very low importance) to 5
(very high importance), please rate their importance.
Not Very Very
Important Low Low Medium High High
0 123 4 5

Clearing fee reductions
Reduction of no. of involved
intermediaries
Increased scope for
cross-margining
Harmonised collateral
arrangements
Single margin approach per
product
Optimised default fund
contributions
Lower capital costs
Enhanced netting opportunities
Enhancements to risk mgmt.
best practices
Reductions of risk mgmt. costs
Simplification and
rationalisation of back-office
processes
Increased choice of trading
location
Increased choice of settlement
location
Increased speed of innovation
Single interface to multiple
markets
Single membership gateway
Choice of jurisdiction in which
to clear
Reduction of the no. of technical

interfaces
Harmonisation of systems and
procedures
Enhanced straight-through
processing
471 Appendix 4
Increased scope for
one-stop-shopping
Round-the-clock processing
Independence from trading
platforms
Independence from settlement
platforms
User participation in governance
Commercial set-up of clearing
house (i.e. for-profit or
not-for-profit)
Other:
Comments:
20. If a clearing house decided to offer clearing services for various derivatives product types
(i.e. financial derivatives, derivatives on commodities, foreign exchange derivatives, etc.) via a
fully integrated clearing system, what impact would you expect this to have on the following
transaction cost categories? Please rate the impact on a scale from –3 (significant decrease) to
+3 (significant increase):
Decrease Increase
Significant Medium Small Small Medium Significant
–3 –2 –1 0 +1 +2 +3
Fees charged by
clearing house
Fees charged by

intermediaries
Number of
intermediaries needed
Your average
cash/collateral
(margin) bound at
clearing house
Your contribution to
default fund
Your regulatory capital
requirements
Your total cost of
capital
Your internal risk
management costs
Your IT costs
Your back-office costs
472 Appendix 4
Decrease Increase
Significant Medium Small Small Medium Significant
–3 –2 –1 0 +1 +2 +3
Your total transaction
costs related to clearing
at the respective
clearing house
Other:
Comments:
21. If a clearing house decided to offer clearing services for financial der ivatives and equities
(representing the full spectrum of underlyings to the respective equity and equity index deriva-
tives) via a fully integrated clearing system, what impact would you expect this to have on the

following transaction cost categories? Please rate the impact on a scale from –3 (significant
decrease) to +3 (significant increase):
Decrease Increase
Significant Medium Small Small Medium Significant
–3 –2 –1 0 +1 +2 +3
Fees charged by
clearing house
Fees charged by
intermediaries
Number of
intermediaries needed
Your average
cash/collateral
(margin) bound at
clearing house
Your contribution to
default fund
Your regulatory capital
requirements
Your total cost of
capital
Your internal risk
management costs
Your IT costs
Your back-office costs
Your total transaction
costs related to clearing
at the respective
clearing house
Other:

Comments:
473 Appendix 4
22. If a clearing house decided to enlarge its scale by connecting further on- and off-exchange
marketplaces, thus increasing the volume cleared in existing products, what impact would you
expect this to have on the following transaction cost categories? Please rate the impact on a
scale from –3 (significant decrease) to +3 (significant increase):
Decrease Increase
Significant Medium Small Small Medium Significant
–3 –2 –1 0 +1 +2 +3
Fees charged by
clearing house
Fees charged by
intermediaries
Number of
intermediaries
needed
Your average
cash/collateral
(margin) bound at
clearing house
Your contribution to
default fund
Your regulatory capital
requirements
Your total cost of
capital
Your internal
risk management
costs
Your IT costs

Your back -of fice
costs
Your total transaction
costs related to clearing
at the respective
clearing house
Other:
Comments:
Part 4 Case study analysis
For handling the subsequent questions, please take into account the following guidelines and
definitions:
474 Appendix 4
Guidelines
On the following pages you will be asked to evaluate the following actual and hypothetical
initiatives according to the impact you (would) expect these initiatives to have on your clearing-
related transaction costs:
r
the Eurex/CCorp Global Clearing Link (GCL), Phase I and Phase II;
r
a fictitious clearing link between Eurex Clearing and CME (see Glossary);
r
the merger of LCH and Clearnet from two viewpoints (see Glossary);
r
a fictitious merger of LCH.Clearnet and Eurex Clearing.
Even if a certain initiative has not affected or would not affect your business, please evaluate
the impact you would expect it to have on your tr ansaction costs!
Glossary
Global Clearing Link (GCL) The so-called ‘Phase I’ of the GCL enables clearing
Phase I (EU Link): members of The Clearing Corporation (CCorp) to
clear CFTC-approved EUR-denominated products

traded on Eurex through their existing clearing mem-
bership. This gives CCorp’s customers direct access to
the European product range of Eurex. Phase I is there-
fore often also referred to as the ‘EU Link’. Phase I came
into effect in October 2004.
Global Clearing Link (GCL) ‘Phase II’ of the GCL will supposedly allow clearing
Phase II: members of Eurex Clearing to clear USD-denominated
products traded on Eurex US through their existing
clearing membership. Phase II is therefore also referred
to as the ‘US Link’. Phase II is still pending regulatory
approval.
Merger of LCH and Clearnet: LCH.Clearnet has been employing a phased approach
to the integration process. Full integration will entail
migration to a common technical platform and will
give clearing members the opportunity to clear their
business through either CCP; both will use a common
set of legal and operating procedures. Due to regula-
tory, legal and other complexities, however, these inte-
gration phases will not result in a single consolidated
clearing house entity with a common membership and
legal framework. When evaluating the merger, you will
first be asked to describe the impact the merger has had
on your business so far. Secondly, you will be asked for
the impact you expect the merger to have after full
integration has been realised.
Fictitious merger of LCH. When evaluating this hypothetical initiative, please
Clearnet and Eurex Clearing: assume that both entities are fully integrated, includ-
ing the utilisation of a common technical platform,
475 Appendix 4
which would enable clearing members to clear their

business through a single consolidated clearing house
entity with a single membership and single legal frame-
work. The full spectr um of cross-margining and net-
ting opportunities would be available to clearing mem-
bers. This case study is intended to simulate the impact
of the creation of a single European CCP.
Fictitious Clearing Link When evaluating this hypothetical initiative, please
between Eurex Clearing and CME: assume that the clearing link would enable clearing
members of Eurex Clearing to clear USD Fixed Income
derivatives traded on the CBOT through their existing
clearing membership and that clearing members of
CME would be able to clear EUR Fixed Income deriva-
tives traded on Eurex through their existing clearing
membership. Cross-margining is assumed to be pro-
videdbetweentheEURandUSDFixedIncomederiva-
tives for the clearing members of both entities.
23. Please indicate whether the following initiatives have affected (would affect) your
business:
NO YES
We were affected by the Global Clearing Link, Phase I.
We would participate in the Global Clearing Link, Phase II.
We would utilise a clearing link between Eurex Clearing
and CME (as defined in the Glossary).
We were affected by the merger of LCH and Clearnet.
We would be affected by a merger of LCH.Clearnet and Eurex
Clearing (as defined in the Glossary).
Comments:
24. Do you believe that the proposed fictitious merger of LCH.Clearnet and Eurex Clearing
adequately simulates the benefits and hurdles involved in the creation of a single European
CCP?

NO YES
Comments:
25. Please assess whether the following initiatives (would) provide value-added to your business.
NO YES
The Global Clearing Link, Phase I
The Global Clearing Link, Phase II
A clearing link between Eurex Clearing and CME
The merger of LCH and Clearnet
A merger of LCH.Clearnet and Eurex Clearing
Comments:
26. How do/would you estimate the impact of the Global Clearing Link, Phase I on the following transaction cost categories? Please tick the
appropriate box:
Transaction Costs
Decreased by . . . % + Increased by . . . %
71–100
−
51–70 31–50
11–30
1–10
0
1–10
11–30
31–50
51–70
71–100
Fees charged by clearing houses
Fees charged by intermediaries
Your cash/collateral (margin) bound at
clearing house
Your contribution to default fund

Your regulatory capital requirements
Your total cost of capital
Your internal risk management costs
Your average error account
Your IT costs
Your back-office costs
Utilisation of segregated accounts at CCorp
Your total transaction costs related to clearing
Other
Comments:…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
27.
How would you estimate the impact of the Global Clearing Link, Phase II on the following transaction cost categories? Please tick the appropriate box:
Transaction Costs
+
71–100
−
51–70 31–50 11–30 1–10 0 1–10 11–30 31–50 51–70 71–100
Fees charged by clearing houses
Fees charged by intermediaries
Your cash/collateral (margin) bound at
clearing house
Your contribution to default fund
Your regulatory capital requirements
Your total cost of capital
Your internal risk management costs
Your average error account
Your IT costs
Your back-office costs

Utilisation of segregated accounts at CCorp
Your total transaction costs related to clearing
Other
Comments:
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Decreased by . . . % Increased by . . . %
28.
How would you estimate the impact of a (fictitious) clearing link between Eurex Clearing and CME (as defined in Glossary) on
the following transaction cost categories? Please tick the appropriate box:
Transaction Costs
Decreased by . . . % +
−
Increased by . . . %
71–100 51–70 31–50 11–30 1–10 0 1–10 11–30 31–50 51–70 71–100
Fees charged by clearing houses
Fees charged by intermediaries
Your cash/collateral (margin) bound at
clearing house
Your contribution to default fund
Your regulatory capital requirements
Your total cost of capital
Your internal risk management costs
Your average error account
Your IT costs
Your back-office costs
Utilisation of segregated accounts at CME
Your total transaction costs related to clearing
Other

Comments:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
29. How do/would you estimate the impact of the merger of LCH and Clearnet on the following transaction cost categories to date? Please tick the
appropriate box:
Decreased by . . . %
71–100 51–70 31–50 11–30 1–10 0 1–10 11–30 31–50 51–70 71–100
Fees charged by clearing houses
Fees charged by intermediaries
Your cash/collateral (margin) bound at
clearing house
Your contribution to default fund
Your regulatory capital requirements
Your total cost of capital
Your internal risk management costs
Your average error account
Your IT costs
Your back-office costs
Your total transaction costs related to clearing
Other
Transaction Costs
+– Increased by . . . %
Comments:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
30. How do/would you estimate the impact of the merger of LCH and Clearnet on the following transaction cost categories after full
integration has been realised (see Glossary)? Please tick the appropriate box:
Transaction Costs

71–100 51–70 31–50 11–30 1–10 0 1–10 11–30 31–50 51–70 71–100
Fees charged by clearing houses
Fees charged by intermediaries
Your contribution to default fund
Your regulatory capital requirements
Your total cost of capital
Your internal risk management costs
Your average error account
Your IT costs
Your back-office costs
Your total transaction costs related to clearing
Other
Your cash/collateral (margin) bound at
clearing house
Decreased by . . . % +− Increased by . . . %
Comments:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
31. How would you estimate the impact of the (fictitious) merger of LCH.Clearnet and Eurex Clearing (as defined in Glossary) on the following
transaction cost categories after full integration has been realised? Please tick the appropriate box:
71–100 51–70 31–50 11–30 1–10 0 1–10 11–30 31–50 51–70 71–100
Fees charged by clearing houses
Fees charged by intermediaries
Your contribution to default fund
Your regulatory capital requirements
Your total cost of capital
Your internal risk management costs
Your average error account

Your IT costs
Your back-office costs
Your total transaction costs related to clearing
Other
Your cash/collateral (margin) bound at
clearing house
Transaction Costs
Decreased by . . . % +– Increased by . . . %
Comments:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
482 Appendix 4
32. How high have your investment costs for the following initiatives been to date?
INVESTMENT COSTS
Global Clearing Link Phase I EUR
Global Clearing Link Phase II EUR
Merger of LCH and Clearnet EUR
Comments:
33. Please provide a rough estimate of the following investment costs. How high . . .
INVESTMENT COSTS
do you expect your additional investment
costs to be by the time the full integr ation of the
merger of LCH and Clearnet has been achieved?
EUR
would you expect your investment costs to
be for adjusting to a full merger integration of
LCH.Clearnet and Eurex Clearing?
EUR

would you expect your investment costs to
be for adjusting to a clearing link between Eurex
Clearing and C ME?
EUR
Comments:
34. After how many years do you think the benefits of the following initiatives will (would)
have outweighed the related investment costs?
NO. OF YEARS
Global Clearing Link Phase 1 (EUR Link)
Global Clearing Link Phase 2 (USD Link)
Merger of LCH and Clearnet
(fictitious) Merger of LCH.Clearnet and Eurex Clearing
(fictitious) Clearing Link Eurex Clearing and CME
Comments:
Part 5 Basic respondent information
35. What is your clearing member status at the following clearing houses – and in which year
did you acquire the respective status? Please specify if more than one entit y within your group
is a clearing member at the respective clearing house:
STATUS NO. OF ENTITIES YEAR
Eurex Clearing
LCH.Clearnet
OMX
MEFF
CCG
Others
483 Appendix 4
36. What were your reasons for choosing your company’s clearing member status?
False True
We believe the clearing member status positively impacts our market
reputation.

Clearing services are a (small or large) part of our business model.
We don’t want to leave the clearing of our traded volume to a third party.
We would have preferred a different clearing status, but don’t fulfil the
minimum capital requirements.
We would have preferred a different clearing status, but we consider this
status too costly.
Comments and further explanation:
37. What was your average daily transaction volume per clearing house in 2005 in derivatives
and equities?
Eurex
Clearing
LCH.
Clearnet
OMX MEFF CCG Others
Derivatives no. of contracts
Equities no. of transactions
NO YES
38. Do you operate an integrated risk management for equities and
derivatives?
Comments:
39. Do you operate an integ rated back-office for equities and derivatives?
Comments:
40. Do you operate integrated IT operations for equities and derivatives?
Comments:
41. How would you classify your business focus?
Domestic
Global
Comments:
42. How would you classify your organisational structure?
Domestic

Global
Comments:
43. How do you organise clearing in your firm?
Cost centre
Profit centre
Comments:
484 Appendix 4
44. How would you classify your organisational structure (i.e. functional organisation or
organisation according to business areas/asset classes)?
Functional organisation
Organisation according to business areas/asset classes
Comments:
45. How high is your average equity capital (of the entity you employ as a clearing member)?
EUR
Comments:
46. In how many different asset classes do you conduct business and which are these (equities,
derivatives, commodities, etc.)?

47. How many trading locations/platforms are you connected to and which are these?

48. What is the type and structure of your customer base?

49. Name of your company

(The name of your company is only requested to facilitate the tracking of the questionnaires.
The questionnaire will be made anonymous for the statistical analysis and the publication.
For details regarding the anonymity and non-disclosure, please refer to the non-disclosure
confirmation.)
Thank you very much for your contribution!
Appendix 5

Sample interview guide
clearing members
1. Introductory questions
r
Your company is a GCM/ICM/NCM of some/all of the following clearing houses: Eurex
Clearing, LCH.Clearnet, OMX, MEFF and CCG. What was your motivation for choosing
the respective clearing status?
r
In your opinion, what is the most important service/value-added provided by a CCP?
r
Given that different clearing houses provided clearing services for the same
exchanges/products, what were your reasons for switching your clearing membership from
one clearing house to another?
2. Transaction cost analysis
r
Are you cost sensitive in your choice of clearing location?
r
I have identified the following cost components related to clearing services; is this list
complete? Direct costs – clearing house charges, service provider charges; indirect costs –
cost of capital, risk management costs, information technology costs, back-office costs.
r
Would you say that clearing-related costs generally matter to you?
r
Do you use a cost management system to monitor clearing costs? If not, do you monitor
clearing costs by some other means? Do you monitor direct and indirect costs, or only direct
costs?
r
Which are higher in your company – direct costs or indirect costs? Can you provide a rough
estimate of their relative magnitude, i.e. the ratio of direct costs to indirect costs?
r

The total of your clearing-related costs equals 100 per cent. Please estimate the percentages
for each of the following six transaction cost categories: clearing house charges, service
provider charges, cost of capital, risk management costs, information technology costs and
back-office costs.
r
In what respect do you think your clearing cost drivers are different from those of other
ICMs/GCMs?
r
Can you provide an estimate (in EUR or USD) of your direct and indirect clear ing costs in
2005?
r
Do you see any correlation between clearing-related transaction costs and different st ructures
for clearing service provision (i.e. for-profit vs. not-for-profit clearing houses, user-governed
vs. non-user-governed, vertical vs. horizontal integration)?