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.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Yellow Media Inc T.YLO



TSX:YLO - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by onerealityon Jun 19, 2012 11:50am
135 Views
Post# 20030150

RE: Redemption versus Retraction??

RE: Redemption versus Retraction??
"If what you say is true ie. that no matter what YLO can just issue 12.5 commons, then why even add a retraction right in the first place?"
 
 
 
When the prospectus was written both equaled $25 so it was $25 in money or shares. That is pretty standard. The $2 limit is for anti dilution, but who would of thought back then that the commons would go under $2? Those that understood got out when they seen it was possible.
 
 
 
" I seem to recall some posters mentioning the reasoning behind retraction was to avoid exaggerated dilution in the event the share price would be extremely low due to unexpected circumstances. "
 
 
 
So you are saying it is better to pay over $500 million then issue a couple of hundred million common shares?...Come on. You are smarter than that.
 
 
 
"The board of directors' first legal obligation is the interest (this survival) of the Corporation"
 
 
 
Yes it is. Read my previous statement again.
 
 
 
"and by logical extension the interest of the shareholders are one of their top priorities."
 
 
 
Lestat, you are new to this but I am not and I will tell you that the company's and the present shareholders best interests are diametrically opposite at this point in time. Why do you think they are treating you like mushrooms? (Keeping you in the dark and feeding you compost)
 
 
 
"Extreme dilution, when legally avoidable, would be counter to the interest of the Corporation. That answers your "why not just 12.5 em""
 
 
 
Again, so giving out $500 million that they do not have, is more in the company's best interest that issuing a few hundred million shares?...Again...Come one, you are smarter than that..
 
 
 
"Some people could argue that holding such a position might encourage the BoD and/or Pref A holders to also invoke the letter of the law "
 
 
 
Well some people are not very intelligent if they believe this will play out any differently that it has for the last  100 times this scenario was in play. Mind you the message boards of those companies shared the same delusions as some on this board do. If you feel the laws are new just because you are, or that the laws will be rewritten because you guys are so much more special that all the other shareholders throughout all the years that have been in exactly the same situation, then you are entitled to that. Go to the grave with a nose full of porcupine quills, it is no skin off my back. I am just telling you the way it is. Heed it or ignore it. It is totally up to you.
Bullboard Posts