Twin Butte Energy Ltd TBTEF

RE:RE:New Materials from Receiver

[kasparovisme]

PetroExplorer wrote:

mhastings wrote: Circulated are:

- Affidavit of Murray D'Angelo (National Bank); and 
- Receiver's 7th Report

D'Angelo states:
- National Bank never agreed to pay Ad Hoc fees of CCAA arrangment was accepted (para 18 of Maguire Affidavit)
- National Bank never agreed to support a restructuring plan in CCAA (para 20)

National Bank also says the Ad Hoc's recapitalization plan was inpractical (therefore not considered), that neither Macquarie nor the Ad Hoc had anything to do with bringing the buyer to the table, since Macquarie wouldn't sign a confidentiality agreement they were not involved in the sales process and never accessed confidential Twin Butte information. 

Will review the 7th Report and post later.  

Interested to see this 7th report.  So who is telling the truth?  I wouldn't want to shake hands with National Bank, after what they did to us, by forcing the company into receivership, and wiping out all shareholder equity.

Did this happen or not?  Quote from Maguire affidavit:

"I am advised by Macquarie Capital and believe that on August 25, 2016, John Brussa informed Sandy Edmonstone that there was insufficient Debentureholder support to pass Twin Butte's CBCA arrangement.  I am further advised by Macquarie Capital and believe that John Brussa further indicated that Murray D'Angelo of National Bank, the Administrative Agent of the Banking Syndicate, had offered to arrange for the payment of the legal and financial advisory costs of the Ad Hoc Committee if its members voted in support of the CBCA arrangement."

Who is right and who is wrong?

With regards to the confidentiality agreement, I think Macquarie and the Ad Hoc wanted access to previous dealings, to try and pare off a property sale.  The Receiver didn't want to give them any special treatment.

It is a situation where a small group like the Ad Hoc Group, that didn't have access to $100 million of cash, couldn't compete with a Chinese company, funded by the Chinese Government.  The only thing they could hope for was to try and shave off some value in a property sale, but if the Receiver didn't want to throw them a bone, there wouldn't be much they could do.

National Bank didn't do anybody any favours here.  The issue is if CCAA was properly filed, National Bank would have been kept in check, to try and allow for some other resolution.  But without preferential access to all information, there wasn't much Macquarie could do.

The dilema of Debenture Holders: not taken care of by the TBE board, then forced to fight for themselves, which meant hiring expensive help.  And now, having to continue to fight the Receiver, who wants to argue against them, for whatever reason.

E

Have you ever heard of "hearsay" it what people say when they don't want to be accountable.
this maquire guy is full of it .. I heard from a guy that heard from a guy... So convoluted it even avoids a slander suit. 

 I be read report as well as some additional last min affidavits just sent out by Bennett Jones  on behalf of Adhoc and themselves. Bennett Jones is freaking out that now every one is finding out that there  little merit to their claim for fees.