Concordia Healthcare Corp. T.CXR.R

Delisting Notice

[meetoo1600]

For anyone who cares about my opinion, it is that the delisting notice is completely irrelevant for the following reasons: 1. The time frame: Whatever is going to happen with this company -- good or bad -- it will be determined long before the notice period expires, and, even if it is not, the Nasdaq is known to be quite liberal when it comes to granted extensions, at least up to one year. Nasdaq makes its money by having companies listed, not delisted. It has to delist them in certain circumstances to maintain its integrity, but it is never anxious to do so, because it means losing a customer and losing revenue; 2. A delisting only means that the company's shares would no longer be able to trade on the Nasdaq exchange. Trading will still be available under the symbol CXR on the TMX, which does not have a US$1.00 minimum. There is nothing about the company, at the current time, which threatens its TMX listing; 3. If management and the resulting shareholders -- whomever they may be -- value the Nasdaq listing, they will make sure that the restructuring deal results in a share price greater than US$1.00. I am pretty confident that they will do this anyway, but protecting the listing, and the liquidity that comes with it, might function as an additional reason for doing so. Rad10 has noted that this could be achieved post restructuring by doing a reverse split, but I do believe that they will do it in two steps if they have to at all. They will do it as part of the restructuring; and 4. Finally, for all the people following this situation -- which is like watching paint dry -- the giving of the Delisting Notice has no bearing whatsoever on what will happen. It's still all about the restructuring deal, and what will happen with it. Until that is known, nothing else matters. On a separate note, Mr. Hulot, you should have a little more respect for rad10. He is not a shorter trying to push the share price down. He has disclosed that his investment is higher up on the food chain, and it matters little to him whether the stock goes up or down. I do not happen to agree with his prediction with respect to what will happen with this stock, but I do agree that there is a real possibility that his call could be right. It shouldn't be, but it well could be. The fact is that we really do not understand all of the factors at play, and we will only have a better understanding once the restructuring deal -- or lack of one -- is announced.

[rad10]

Tx Meetoo - you are spot on.  Any restructuring deal will have to include a reverse split IMHO. Hulot is fun - he has ridden Concordia all the way down - catching more falling knives than one of Jack the Ripper's victims. He is also a regular contributor on @ bagholder quotes - which is quite an accolade.

[MrHulot]

Hey Rad, That crack about Jack te Ripper wasn’t bad. Creativity unusual for you. I will have you know I have brought my average down to just below $3 by trading this latest volatilty. My original losses have been well mitigated and I am poised to take advantage in the case of a favorable outcome. If not favorable, I can take the loss like a man and know that I fought hard and didn’t get scared out

[daveinmiss]

Excellent Meetoo. I for one value your opinion - and you deliver with clarity, logic, knowledge and insight. Indeed, reading your posts, helped convince me to get back in. You clearly laid out both sides of this coin flip so whatever the result, the risk is mine but of course am hoping to thank you down the line. For sure, the potential for a NASDAQ delisting is totally irrelevant. I only posted

[meetoo1600]

daveinmiss, if they achieve a share price above US$1.00 by a consolidation (reverse split), it will not necessarily help you.  Sure, your individual shares will be worth more, but you will have fewer of them. The issue is not about the number of shares that result from the restructuring.  It is about what percentage of those shares, if any, are allocated to the existing (pre

[rad10]

excellent considered opinion Meetoo.  Some random musings and back of napkin calculations.............. Unsecured bond holders will not allow any percentage to existing shareholders that enhances significant appreciation from the current common share price.  Why should they? Note holders aren't going to commit economic suicide - but they are also unlikely to accept a

[meetoo1600]

rad10, ask yourself why the common stock always are left with something in these restructurings. You are doing strict numbers, but the result is rarely determined strictly by the numbers.  In order to complete a restructuring under the CBCA, they will require a fairness opinion from an independent expert.  That opinion is not likely to use my conservative post-restructuring value of $1

[daveinmiss]

meetoo, thanks again as you answered my post re: Irrespective of Debt but I am left wondering who does retain the expert that prepares the fairness opinion. My guess is Concordia, thus in fact Concordia shareholders. If this is right the person would likely be beholden to management that in practical terms is the one paying with shareholders' money. So the bottomline question is whether

[meetoo1600]

The expert witness respecting fairness is supposed to be an agent of the court, but whoever provides this opinion will likely be retained by management and be influenced to give whatever opinion management wants.  The facts are malleable enough to support a wife range of possible results. Regarding common shareholders grouping for representation, I do not believe that that is typically done,

[rad10]

hi Meetoo et al. - If indeed you do hit this one out of the park I will be thrilled for you!  A low but predictable double digits return is all I ask for - preferably compounded over several decades!

[moon56]

"tick, tock...  up goes the stock".  330,000 traded.  Up 29%. Could this be it? If so, my sincere appreciation to meetoo 1600!