Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
100k of those were mine. Before any of the gainsayers jump on my buy, I know that the price quickly fell to 35. However, I think this has legs and I didn't want to be kept out for a measly $500 which has happened way too many times in the past when trying to get the absolute bottom. When this x-bags, I'll be happy to have spent that extra.
I came here from the coking vector and the PR about building the powerplant in Columbia. Hope they also realize that they can generate a LOT of free energy from the excess heat generated during the conversion to coke.
Interesting stock. GLTA.
We don't know, it just does. ref: today, see.
Ironic, eh?
I tell you that guy is a jinx.
:) Ut, oh! Clay posted another chart! :)
Clay posted another chart. We all know what that means. Stock is going down.
Just teasing you, Clay. :)
They're still cheap. Easily a 4-bagger left. Who would turn that down?
as bankruptcy takes a while... a long long while.
I couldn't sell either even though I was tempted to do some daytrading flipping on the dips and swings.
I just couldn't do it! I could not bring myself to sell.
There was a little pull back at the end of the day. You might be able to get some below 4 bits on Monday. There would still be the potential of a double bagger there.
Dude, you totally don't get it. I listened to Sandridge's hearing on conference call. I think I may have missed only about an hour of the hearing. I wasn't able to listen in on this case but they were argued and decided completely differently.
First of all, please note the wording of the motion. In Sandridge's case, it was a motion "to appoint an EC." That put the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt on the equity holders. In THIS case, the wording is reversed. It was "to NOT appoint an EC". That put the burden on the opposition to prove their numbers beyond a reasonable doubt. Well, guess what, there is a TON of reasonable doubt about the creditors' and company's numbers.
Listening in on the Sandridge hearing, that judge wasn't ever going to appoint an EC. He gave a hearing as he had to but the reality was he gets his rocks off by listening and watching two lawyers go toe-to-toe in the court room. In his ruling, the judge even apologized to one of the witness for letting the lawyers go to far. He as much said that he enjoys watching two lawyers duke it out.
Yes, I know that most BK cases go against shareholders. But, THIS ISN'T MOST BK CASES. First of all, on a broad level, even with "mosts" each case is still decided individually. Secondly, this case's merits WERE SUBSTANTIAL.
Sorry to have to emphasis too many things but it was obvious that without them, you wouldn't get it. Maybe, you still won't.
I doubt if you own shares here so you don't have a dog in the fight. Regardless, if you did anything but buy these shares, you have lost this fight because THE JUDGE RULED.
You missed the dip. It was from 12:30-14:00. This stock is not going to see $0.30 for months if ever again.
I had bought at .06 commons several months ago in retirement account.
What is chances they are wiped out? Better to sell in put in "preferred."
In this case, the Judge RULED the equity is NOT long gone.
I read all of your letters, but it is my belief the equity was long gone." The stock fell in seconds!
You misunderstand the nature of the motion. Normally, it would be stated in the positive, "Motion ... to appoint an EC". But, that puts the burden of proof on those supporting the motion, ie those wishing to appoint the EC must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one SHOULD be appointed. In this case, the judge changed the motion to "not appoint an EC". That puts the burden of proof on those who oppose an EC. So, the default judgement, unless clearly proven otherwise, would be to appoint one even if no evidence was presented in support of the EC. Think "innocent until proven guilty". In this case the EC is innocent (and will be appointed) unless those opposing it can prove beyond a reasonable doubt (lower standard in civil/financial cases).
The analysis presented by the equity holders and especially the SEC filing provide substantial "reasonableness" in favor of the appointment. To overcome that reasonable doubt created by the Equity Holders would take a lot more than what has been presented by the company and creditors.
Given the work done by Martin Bienenstock, et al, I would gladly pay my fair share of that legal bill.
Anyone know how to email this Forbes article to the judge?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bryanrich/2016/10/11/are-post-bankruptcy-oil-and-gas-stocks-huge-buys/#6798b0168aaa
That must be what prompted the sell off. Hmm, may have to short in the future based on the fact that Clay posted a chart. ;)
re:Extinguished. No plan has been announced. There was a court hearing on Tuesday regarding the establishment of an Equity Committee. There was strong testimony FOR the creation of the EC including a letter from the SEC recommending such. Hence the PPS surge from $0.07 to $0.27 the last couple of days. Judge is expected to rule tomorrow. I suspect we have exhausted the buyers willing to buy before the judge rules. Hence the price drop today as some are profit taking.
If the EC is established, I highly doubt the common will be extinguished as the testimony said there was $1-2Billion in equity left after paying all of the bills.
Wells Fargo CEO Stumpf resigned immediately.
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20161012006336/en/
Don't know how that impacts BBEP but I'm hoping a new regime will stop promoting illegal practices.
Not until BK exit will they move to a different exchange.
This is just a SWAG but my thought is that while they have "traded" they haven't settled (ie, cash has not changed hands). Why would it take so long to settle, one might ask? Hmm, BB, et al, didn't want the trade to appear on any of the monthly statements leading up to the EC hearing? Or, as Uranium pointed out, this cash will simply go to the first lien holder. Who is that, one might ask? Well, well, guess who? Wells Fargo.
Hmm, why does this name keep appearing when something non-transparent happens? There is a high correlation between that name and common equity taking it in the short hairs.
Debt CANCELLED creates CODI.
See all of the previous posts here and other boards about BK stock about CODI: what it is: what it isn't; when would it apply; and when it wouldn't.
No, we are not going to repost all of that information. Do a search on this board for CODI. One with find a wealth of information and your question will be answered.
What if, one as a bank owner, colluded with the management to erase a liability for the bank and harm the company shareholders in the process? The $10M bonuses were just legal payoffs.
I have no issue with the bondholders or even most of the creditors.
My issue is with Wells Fargo when they promised to buy the oil at $82 and reneged on that promise. I've looked at several of these BK. I got into this game because I did my DD in researching the companies' hedge positions. I bought these stocks long because if they were able to exercises those hedges, they would have been very solvent and profitable. My mistake was thinking that those hedges would be valid. What's hidden deep in the details of these BKs is that those hedges are canceled. This is why WF wanted these BKs.
It's one thing for a loan to go bad for a bank. In the fractional banking world, a bad loan isn't that bad and may be a good thing with the proper accounting, etc. Having to actually honor one's derivatives, that is an entirely different matter. This would have been a real purchase of real goods with real money. That hits a bank's RESERVE. Because of fractional banking a reserve loss costs about 10 times as much. The only way I know of to cancel these contracts is through BK, which can nullify ANY contract. WF didn't want to buy the oil (honor the contract) and forced many of these companies into BK to nullify those contracts.
In this case, Breitburn sold $82 hedges for less than $60 in this last quarter. WHY in the world would anyone do that? Who were these hedges (with an $22/barrel intrinsic worth) sold to? I'm guessing WF. Holding both sides of those futures contracts would allow them to cancel them. The $10M in bonuses was the payoff to make this happen.
You say, "Pay your bills.". I say, "Honor your contracts."
Distribs are suspended. Probably wont resume, if ever, until BK exit.
Yes, but not necessarily at par value.
Ed, P's don't get their par back and then commons. They are "Preferred" which means that in any distribution, their stated distribution ($0.178 per share per month) must be paid first, then commons. Their PPS is in no way guaranteed at a higher price over commons.
$0.06PPS > $2.68PPS at 75% fractional return. I'll still take that. Hell, if I had another dime to put in, I'd buy at $0.25.
Bankruptcy. If we don't get an EC, then management and creditors will make up fictitious numbers to exclude the equity from getting a return.
Ok, to restate $3.57 with preferreds. see previous post.
No, they have priority not that those shares are worth X number of commons.
Their price is typically based on the gauranteed dividend/distribution not because they are worth some multiple of the common.
VNR is not in bankruptcy (yet) and that's legal CYA. Don't look at imagined possibilities, look at what has actually happened. In every case where CODI has been applied there was only cancellation and no exchange. Everytime there has been an exchange then no CODI was generated.
Includes those 57MM shares. But even if they don't.
$1B/ (213MM + 57MM) shares = $3.57
Because LINN CANCELLED and didn't exchange. SD and TPLM exchanged and have no CODI.
$4/share at valuations.
$1B min equity/213M outstanding shares = $4.67
Per IRS Pub 908, Pg 26. Exclusions
"Do not include a canceled debt in gross income
if:
The cancellation takes place in a bank-
ruptcy case under the Bankruptcy Code,"
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p908.pdf
Please provide referenced proof of this.
CODI is applied at the bankruptcy EXIT and only at the exit. IF and only IF, there is a cancellation and not an exchange. If the creditors received anything, regardless of how little, that is an exchanged. So, if the creditors exchange $1B of debt for 50 barrels of oil that is their problem, not a cancellation causing CODI for the equity holders.
Technically, management doesn't assign CODI; the IRS does. But, they have made their rules quite clear and management can use those rules to avoid CODI.
This is one of the reasons why the EC is so important. The EC will ensure that whatever the plan is, that it won't create CODI for the equity holders.
Floor at .183
My thoughts also.
From what I have read, it seems da Judge is holding the debtors feet to the flames.
Everyone is waiting for the Court hearing on Oct 11. Until then not much matters in regards to BBEPQ.
Could be worse. I also check-in with the Yahoo Finance communities. Their BBEPQ board is quite active but it's noise ratio is quite high. Lots of grade school name calling, etc. I check-in because about 1 post out of 100 has really good stuff. Just get used to skipping certain nicks.
Think of Wells Fargo as a bad purchaser instead.
until this last line wherein you blew it.
Since when is it thievery for lenders to repossess something the borrower couldn't pay for?
The $14.84 in cash covers my cost. Wouldn't be excited about the $2.29 in stock but the cash makes this pure profit. The rest is just icing on the cake.
Wonder when this all gets disbursed.