Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

SPDR Portfolio Short Term Treasury ETF T.SST.U


Primary Symbol: SPTS

The investment seeks to provide investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield performance of the Bloomberg Barclays 1-3 Year U. The fund invests at least 80%, of its total assets in the securities comprising the index and in securities that the Adviser determines have economic characteristics that are substantially identical to the economic characteristics of the securities that comprise the index. The index is designed to measure the performance of short term (1-3 years) public obligations of the U.S. Treasury.


ARCA:SPTS - Post by User

Comment by HCaseon Apr 30, 2009 4:04pm
268 Views
Post# 15957411

RE: Support Silverstone management...by voting no!

RE: Support Silverstone management...by voting no!

tooclassy, I was thinking the same thing.  Management is focused more on CS, at least now, and want to get more liquidity in their silver (SST-SLW) holdings so they can sell it if and when they need the money for their next CS venture.

 

This was the best agreement they could come to with SLW without bogging down in negotiations.  Another way to look at it would be them trying to optimize timing and returns.

 

Of course they can't say "This was the best ratio we could come up with and still get the deal done in a reasonable amount of time, but could you remaining shareholders all vote no so we can go back and squeeze a few more points out of SLW, and when they come back with a better offer, please quickly approve it?"  But they might be thinking that.

 

If they have enough time for the offer to be rejected once, then a new offer made and accepted, and still sell enough SST-SLW to do whatever CS thing it is they want to do with the money, they would be happy to see this happen.

 

If there is not enough time, then they would rather take the shares and run at the currently offered ratio (and then promptly convert the shares to money when needed.)

 

If this is the case, the big question is, what is their drop dead date for the deal to be done?  This answer to this question is tied, of course, to other things, like how quickly the prices of various metals rise (or drop), how quickly the prices of juniors (like SST) rise (or drop), how quickly the prices of intermediates and seniors (like SLW) rise (or drop), the relative rates of those rises (or drops), and the relative timing of the continuation or beginning of those rises (or drops.)  Throw in price guarantees ($3.95 an ounce purchase price for silver) and hedging.  Lock several smart management types in a room with all the beer and pizza they need until they come up with the most likely scenarios, and out pops your answer.

 

Holy cow, I think I just made that sound more complicated than it really is, but maybe that’s what management did (metaphorically) in coming up working out this deal.  At least I hope it was more than just “Hey, John, whadya think?” “I dunno Darren, whadyou think?” “I dunno – Sarah, come over here.  Whadya think about…”

HC

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>