RE:RE:Update on the CVRWell letsgo, it is worth posting my calculations and prediction as to what happens under the CRV. We need to understand the philosophy behind what the board is doing. The current position of Amber and Paulson (A and P) combined is about 34% of current outstanding shares. Of course if we go to arbitration since Tenor gets 50% of any award, Amber, Paulson and us have our return cut in half if there was no dilution.
However, this game by the board to prop up the US vultures, under the dilution the 54 million shares passed their way helps them to retain about 29%- 30% of any arbitration award whereas we get shafted as we do not participate in the dilution. The firgoing happens under a "yes" vote. The CRV has the same result.
Anna's response as to how the residual 29% is distributed under the CRV is quite telling. Tenor gets about 52%, Amber and Paulso get about 19%. She said the remaining 29% would be distributed at the Board discretion (another way of saying the screwing will continue). I predicted she would have the remaining 29% distributed according to current share holdings (no dilution), but remember A and P already have 19% of the arbitration award right off the top. Slippery Anna and the board will have preserved the A and P financial outcome as if there was no Tenor involved while our return is diminished by about 2/3 at least. I know this is tedious reading but I have pasted a previous post below.It explains how the lack of transparancy by this board is designed to keep us in the dark. It is deliberate, drip by drip!
The Infamous CRV
I hope everyone took a hard look at the CVR! It is just another way of achieving the same result as the dilution under a yes vote.
Under the CRV Tenor is awarded roughly a bit over 50% of any arbitration award and the "participants" a bit over 19%. Under the yes vote dilution the participant share would be about 29.2% (Amber 18.1% and Paulson 11.3%) based on their share holdings after dilution. On the surface it appears that we are doing better with the CRV and the participants somewhat worse at 19%. Along with the IFC, us and a few others we would appear have about 29% to share, the participants 19%.
Not so fast, the proposal by the board gives no detail other that Tenor and participants take of roughly 71%. I have asked and received no response as to the makeup of the remaining 29% and its distribution. It is incredibly important to us.
It is my guess that since there is no dilution that all 106 million or so outstanding shares will come into play. Since the participants currently control about 34.3% of outstanding shares (Amber 22.85% and Paulson 11.47%) when added to the 19% they are "awarded" from arbitration under the CRV their overall take again matches what they would have achieved under a yes vote. Since they hold 34.3% of outstanding shares that amounts to an additional 10% of the arbitration award bringing them back to their 29% threshold.
That leaves 19% of any arbitration award to be shared amongst roughly 70% of all remaing outstanding shares. That is us, IFC and directors and other investors. Amber and Paulson will collect about 29% of the arbitration while holding 34.3% of outstanding shares. The rest of us with 65.7%, twice as many shares, will collect about 19% of the arbitration. You do not have to be a math whiz to conclude that if the participants receive a $1 return, we receive about 35 cents, probably less.
Anyone thinking we would do better if we are forced into the CRV needs to give their head a shake. We can choose being shot or gassed. Both these options have to be off the table. The board must have truly thought we are stupid. The lack of transparancy and conspiracy to defraud us will be their undoing.