GREY:ZARFF - Post by User
Comment by
Methodon Dec 24, 2018 2:29pm
65 Views
Post# 29155111
RE:RE:RE:RE:Voted NO
RE:RE:RE:RE:Voted NOrad10 wrote: Method wrote: The only issues I see with voting no is that the receiver will likely get more than the equity holders and the convertibles are an impediment to any deal for less than $42.5m in value.
The idea that they can pay PIK interest is unfortunately not possible so that’s when they will default and go into receivership.
The receiver will get more. The equity is worthless and you can't expect them to work for free.
The convertibles are not an impediment. They are trading where they are for good reason. Any prospective buyer is looking at the whole enterprise value. They can make an offer for the debentures or ask to cancel the change of ownership redemption clause. I would be very receptive to that idea if there was a firm offer on the table.
As for PIK in lieu of March interest - of course it is doable - just another amendment requiring a 2/3 majority vote like any other. Which debenture holder would vote against that? Nobody in their right mind.
1. Why pay the receiver more than the equity holders? Shouldn’t we just want to pay the least so there is more for the debenture holders?
2. The converts are an impediment because you need the equity holders to agree to a deal unless we are in receivership but then of course the process is extended for 12-18 months.
3. Management does not seem to want to go down that path and you would need equity holder support as it would be more than 25% dilution. Many more costs and we probably won’t get equity holder approval.