RE: wonder what the news is gonna be this time?Solvency test must go with what is in the agreement: market asset value must exceed total debt. KPMG says "no".
If this rumour has any substance (highly unlikely because PWC would need more than just a couple of weeks to pore over all of BCE's books and make sure eveyrthing was kosher), and PWC looked at it, then did they apply the same rules?
Irrelevant anyway because the banks will say - "KPMG said BCE would not be solvent per agreement so we don't have to lend". If the banks have any reason at all to suspect the client may not be solvent, they are not obligated to lend, regardless of any letters of credit signed. In fact, they are legally required to withhold the loans if they are unsure.
"But PWC said we would be solvent" "But KPMG said you wouldn't be"
Both sides will dig their heels in. It's going no where fast.
KPMG has to come to that onclusion on their own. PWC's opinion doesn't matter. Furthermore, KPMG will have to convince the banks how they erred the first time. The banks need to be confident to proceed.
Somehow I doubt these two at Bloomberg (Jonathan Keehner and Jason Kelly) are privy to the kind of knowledge they purport to have from BCE. That would be highly confidential information. So the whole thing smells fishy to me.
BCE only traded up $0.05 in after market trading on the NYSE. Market isn't buying it.