Twin Butte Energy Ltd TBTEF

Shareholders asked too much; now Ad Hoc asks too much

[Diesel44]

I might have voted for Reignwood back in the day if mgmt/shareholders asked for a small token; but mgmt/shareholders were far too greedy (2x more than debentureholders?!?  give your head a shake) - no choice but to vote no; and take chances with CCAA or Receivership. And I didn't need Ad Hoc around to take that decision.

Now Ad Hoc asks we cover legal AND Macquarrie success fee.  I had a pretty good feeling of Ad Hoc initially, and shared most their public statements.  I likely would have agreed to the legal portion, which was hourly-based/backed, and Bennett Jones is a strong reputable firm.  But also asking for a Macquarrie success fee of that magnitude?  When it appears MacQ had nothing novel to add to FTI's process?  That is far too much of an ask and has turned me off Ad Hoc's request altogether - if anything created value for debs in this receivership process, it was rising oil prices as the process unfolded - so thanks OPEC for that, thanks FTI for apparently running a competent process, but no thanks MacQ.  So to Ad Hoc's request - a straight No.  

Deb holders - I agree with the others - let FTI know today your views whatever they are so they can bring them to tomorrow's hearing - have a look at the seventh report, and let FTI know which category you're in.  

I let FTI know my views with a quick email to [e-mail] letting them know how many debs I had and my views; they were happy to receive it and didn't ask for more than that.  Pretty simple (it was shorter than this post even)