Just pulled up the docket on Pacer. Full disclosure: No position and obviously for now can't even take one as it's halted in Canada and while it appeared to unhalt in the US last week, no market is being made in the foreign ordinaries that I can find. Didn't contribute to the fund...cause I got no skin in this, but I will follow pretty much every commodity space bk that goes though the process because they are my two favorite sectors rolled into one.
Has anyone ordered this from the transcriber? Generally one can find some nuggets in the initial hearings, especially one moving fairly quickly as this one seems to be with 80+ entries on the docket already. I've ordered a few in the past on other cases - they are expensive, and you don't know what you're paying for in terms of valuable dd until you pay up front - and they can run a few hundred bucks depending on size and whether or not you are the first person to order a copy
|
62
|
Transcript regarding Hearing Held 02/04/2014 RE: First Day. Remote electronic access to the transcript is restricted until 5/8/2014. The transcript may be viewed at the Bankruptcy Court Clerk's Office. [For information about how to contact the transcriber, call the Clerk's Office] or [Contact the Court Reporter/Transcriber Reliable, Telephone number (302)654-8080.] Notice of Intent to Request Redaction Deadline Due By 2/14/2014. Redaction Request Due By 2/28/2014. Redacted Transcript Submission Due By 3/10/2014. Transcript access will be restricted through 5/8/2014. (related document(s)31) (GM) (Entered: 02/07/2014) |
Also noticed that the CS fee structure for the DIP loan is being filed under seal. That's a load of crapola - never seen that done before. I'm pretty sure from memory that CS did the DIP loan on Great Basin Gold - those terms were public and they were atrocious - I couldn't believe the court approved them and Sprott Lending even objected because they were offereing DIP financing on actual reasonable terms and couldn't believe what CS was asking for - huge % success fees on auction results (it turned out in the case of GBG that the auctions were horrible and those didn't come into play - but it was surprising to me they were able to put them in the first place). I can almost gaurantee they've been filed under seal to prevent the terms from being known - not to protect any propreitary practices as claimed in the motion to file under seal.
Also seeing in the first day affadavit the language about the RSA contemplating that the prepetition lenders will acquire substantially all of the assets of TID in exchange for a credit bid - so definitely zero to lose here. That the company also contemplates a bidding and marketing process to seek higher and better offers reads like an afterthought. I've seen this many times before where a debtor claims to engage in a marketing process, but it's intentionally less than half a$$ and done primarily to 'prove' the assets are worth less than the debt threshold. The 'marketing' is done by a bunch of green 24 year olds in Vancouver who spend more time hitting on the bartenders at the Cactus Club than they do on the phone searching for interest. My opinion only. The very short runway to requested confirmation in 90 days - the fact that a motion for bidding procedures still hasn't been filed - it really suggests to me that any effort at higher and better offers is all for show.
No interest to form an unsecured creditor committee - who sometimes can actually be aligned with equity where a secured creditor tries to run roughshod over a case.
Not trying to be Debbie Downer - to the contrary this is exactly the kind of case where equity needs to act and act fast. The pace and direction of the case is such that it might be far easier than normal to enlist the help of the US Trustee who will step in to act as referee if a good compelling case is presented - and based on the articles I saw over on Seeking Alpha, I think you guys have way more compelling material assembled than I've ever seen before. Need to get the assigned US Trustee on board. Certainly would help if you had interested buyers for the rigs in hand who would state that they've not been marketed too - that's a huge factor and really gets the judges attention. There is a slang term of "K-Marting the court" - basically where mgmt claims to have fully marketed the assets when they haven't and reap an obvious windfall right after the assets go out the door on the cheap - very embarrasing case for the Courts.
That's my 2 cents for what it's worth.