Aimia Inc T.AIM.PR.A

Case study: How to steal control of a public company

[DaneOddments]

Tom Finke and the other pawns of the Jefferies / MassMutual private placement buyers won the vote, supposedly.  But if we remove the 10.5 mil. shares that were wrongfully issued to them at less than half of Aimia's liquidation value a mere 8 months ago, and the 5 mil. wrongfully issued to Paladin also at less than half of Aimia's liquidation value just over 1 month ago, then the 54.6% votes in favor becomes only 43.9%, a very different outcome.

So I guess the lesson here boys and girls is to win, by any means possible, and worry about your code of ethics and other ESG nonsense later.

Now get ready for phase 2: the cementing of control.  I expect a cash and stock merger with Tom Finke's busted SPAC, Alliance Entertainment  (AENT $31.17) should do the trick, or maybe a Jefferies client might be more deserving of Aimia's seemingly endless largesse.

I would say "Oh, Canada" but these are Americans.

[Growthnvalue]

Agreed. Though the ruling was disappointing, the private placement was at least addressed witht he courts. But the AGM delay and convenient, self interested issuance to Paladin should be illegal. Why would Mithaq stay invested here?  

[DaneOddments]

I think Mithaq has no choice.  No one to sell to.  What they should do is go back to the CMT and get the 5 mil. shares issued to Paladin at $2.50 invalidated.  Last time (the 10.5 mil. share private placement at $3.10) Aimia tricked the CMT by making them think Aimia needed the money.  No such excuse available this time.  That issuance was purely a brazen act of

[nkbourbaki]

You make good points and obviously I share your frustration with the status quo. However, let's not pretend that Mithaq was playing within the rules to build their position.  And it's interesting to note that many more "outsider" votes were cast for current management than for Mithaq.  i.e. if you subtract the Paladin+PP+insider votes from Aimia's total then you get

[DaneOddments]

I'm actually not sure what Mithaq might have done to break or bend the rules in terms of the way they built their stake, but I do know that they paid market prices, or above, and have an average cost of over $4.00, and none of their buying in any way diluted or harmed any other shareholders. Whereas the current regime deliberately diluted us, massively, and two times in less than 8 months, to

[nkbourbaki]

Yeah, I get it.  I had to fight with myself and really hold my nose to vote for the current team, and I am by no means fully convinced I made the right decision.  No question at all that there's been a consisteny to the greasy behaviour.  The Paladin deal was disgusting.  So much so that I'd expect Mithaq could seek remedy in the courts if it weren't for the fact

[ThatKaren]

It seems like new suckers are born each day as I see a few larger managers buying starter positions. Have not seen press coverage about Jefferies, about the Eric Hauser/Mark Hauser conflict or about the disgusting Paladin settlement. Seems no one cares... And somehow shareholders voted for this dishonest crew. Based on people who I know abstained, it seems they got about 90% turnout for the vote

[Catscratch]

Don't think any shareholders are happy here.  Probably picking the lesser of two bads and keeping the board on a very short leash.    PWC fees are ridiculous for company of this size.  The board's history on compensation and conflicts of interest has not been good.  The company needs to earn the market's trust though actions. ... They better be buying back