Moving the Shrimp to Fiji, if the plan works.
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.
I don't think the news will hit for while. It's on the grapevine. Do you know Jesus?
It' about 80,000 shares. Did he get them yet?
Did somebody dare to short this? Did someone sell?
Go slow, that is a lot of money at these prices.
It's not a distribution. It the next Bershire Hathaway.
I don't want you to miss it, brother.
Are you buying neighbor? Do you have enough shares?
No comment
It's coming Carlos. No problema me hijo.
Good luck! I hope I don't get voted off the island. I think of myself as a survivor.
Shiver me timbers! It appears like there is a mutiny afloat.
Especially, how do you sell something that wasn't realized or forecast prior to the buyout?
I'll assume that the quotes showed as a result of a market makers interest.
I believe I did, but my memory of it is failing. I know I have a lot to re-read and digest, but the ongoing operations suggest such different perspectives. I don't see any management, let alone a buyout with a purchase price.
I imagine the 67 million was part of the details that they can't disclose, and it's disappearance is a telltale sign of the type of detail that they can't disclose.
Could it be the reason why we hold all of the voting stock of La Salle, or was that already part of our arsenal? Is that why TAC no longer has any say?
This spaghetti isn't very nutritious. The "clam-up" sauce has a distasteful bite. They don't peel the onion very well, but it still might make you cry.
I own the common shares, and so do you. The Liquidators are supposedly working for the creditors with a fiduciary responsibility to all parties, and a final mandate to clear up external, not internal, issues.
I believe that is it. The largest asset we have is the vote, and the liquidators are exercising that instead of liquidating. They are reaching outside their job description and might even be abusing their authority to do so. The only way to find out would be to consult with another Bermudan Liquidation expert.
I don't know if they actually did so, but I would think that their own claim for fees is superior to any claim by La Salle, yet they have paid La Salle.
Par value is just a number used by bean counters. By now the 10 cents worth of beans have grown moldy and are pretty worthless.
That is the nature of a holding company. You don't own anything but shares of other entities. The last I remember, this was a holding company.
I understand the necessity to "wind up" the proceedings in Bermuda, and to make sure that everything is settled by law, but why is the JL so involved with intercompany matters? I would think the external creditors would be the only business of the courts, and emerging from BK in the US would simply be satisfying the external creditors. This word spaghetti is really bothersome. Because the Bermuda courts use "winding up" instead of BK, and then say it is "liquidation," it appears they have no choice but to shut the doors and sell everything off. Yet a few years down the road, and people are still writing new business in a syndicate formed after the courts became involved.
Now they say that the voting interest is an asset, but don't ask the shareholders to vote.
The debt almost surely respresents the remaining portion of the liquidation preference and the unpaid dividends. If nothing else, they appear to have quantified that, and it does appear to closely match the numbers. Approx 45 million would be liquidation, and the balance would be unpaid dividends for several years.
I can see the confusion clearly. What Canopius would have picked up was simply the stock of the UK subsidiaries, giving them control of the assets and making them responsible for the liabilities. As far I know the reserves for syndicate 839 were transferred out of the US, and would have been independent of the subsidiaries assets, although those subs were assigned to managing them during the runoff. I know this is clear as mud to the casual observer.
I am thinking that if it becomes any clearer, they would have no problem taking the funds, and recieve no complaints, because nobody will know where the funds came from or who they are owed to. Nobody has paid interest on them for so long, they must belong to the new underwriters, right?
I don't see where Canopius bought it. Especially if you read the 2007 report where they specifically disclaim ownership. I see them managing it, and I don't enjoy the thought of them purchasing it on the cheap under the noses of the JPL, however I recognize that possibility. Was that declared in a specific release that you can provide?
But how does that apply? You can purchase the business, and back the reserves, but that doesn't make the reserves yours. The reserves are stated, and the underwriting is always dependant upon available reserves. The reserves belong to the payoff of the insured, or to the original investors in the syndicate when the insured has no claim. The only thing available for purchase is the underwriting capacity based on net reserve availabilty, industry formulas, and regulatory requirements. The reserves are what makes an insurance entity viable. They do exist, and they are an asset of an insurance company. They are, however, balanced against the contigent liability of claims.
Whatever Canopius purchased and began to back should somehow be segregated into a theirs and ours type of distinction. Or they should begin to pay interest on the reserves they are writing against.
It should go pretty good with the spaghetti.
This is the statement I laugh at:
"The timing of the completion of the Company’s liquidation is dependent on the completion of the liquidation of its subsidiaries and realisation of any remaining assets. These subsidiaries and the status of their liquidations is outlined below along with a description of the final realizable asset."
Where did they outline how they intend to squeeze out the $87 million for La Salle? Where did they outline any of the remaining assets? Are we supposed to laugh at this joke?
I would think that net reserve was a significant number. We can't forget 20% interest in S4444 either. I don't why they keep saying TGL distribution is unlikely with those kind of numbers unless they are willfully ignoring them. This think looks more and more like word spaghetti. "Winding up" equals liquidation and liquidation equals distribution, but you can't distribute a 20% interest of a going concern, and you can't distribute the "net reserves" of a runoff reinsurance pool.
I guess we can take consolation in the recognition that this is the first reinsurance "winding up" that Bermuda courts have ever had to complete. Is the $87 million to La Salle so large that the liquidators can't see past it into the net reserves, or are they denying that interest? Is it our error? Is there not such a defined interest in those two syndicates? The 8k appeared to say that they would explain the interests, and fails to mention either the 839 or the 4444 syndicates.
I just read the old La Salle filing, and it mentions "the transaction" and completion of "winding up." Apparently, "emergence" is never anticipated by the Bermuda court and liquidation is the end result. They did say that syndicate 839 has become an RITC to expedite the liquidation. Surely they cannot monetize reserves, but evidently they don't even have the actuarial support to even estimate the ratio of reserve to claims. Their main concern appears to be squeezing the $87 million out of the $563 million, and they evidently do not have enough information to do so, based on allowable claims.
I just wonder why they mention "the trasaction" but do not disclose the details. You would think a transaction like that would carry enough significance to explain.
I found a little bone. Maybe it is just cartilage. This was in an old Canopius filing.
"Finally, I would like to mention the outstanding performance of the team who manage the affairs of Syndicate 839(“S839”). S839 is the predecessor Syndicate to S4444 and has continued to be managed by Canopius since the MBO in December 2003. Penny Whitwell and her team has consistently delivered excellent results, reducing the forecast loss from £40 million at year end 2005 to £17 million at eventual closure at the end of 2007. It is a source of regret that Canopius did not benefit directly from this improvement: as part of the MBO structure, Canopius had no underwriting interest in this syndicate’s results."
- Canopius annual report to shareholders.
(I used google's cached version in case the original page is password protected)
The $536 million question. Who does?
I placed all of my orders at the ask. Then they took the string and formed it into a noose just for me. At least I am confident that the price I paid will look pretty silly if our perceptions of the DD is even reasonably correct. I can't quibble much about the difference if this trades over a dollar in a year or two.
And of course, I already have the shares, so I won't get left standing at the altar when the bride shows up.
Have you seen Miss Moneypenny? I have been looking for the Loan Ranger.
Another repeat. I assure you that I didn't really think the punchline was that good.
repeat posts? I kept getting errors. Mr. Moderator, would you delete this?
Has Mr. Bond been working with the LOAN ranger?
Are these trees being shaken or stirred?
Nobody is gathering anything but moss and dust on these shares. I think I will go back to bed. I think I figured out what was bothering me about the efficient market theory. It depends on efficient and honest PR's. I can't count the number of dishonest PR's which have led investors astray. I can see the lack of efficiency when the JPL doesn't come right out and say: "There is $xx.00 worth of equity in the shares of YYY company." Without a big name analyst whom is willing to stake his reputation on the comments, we just squirm around.
The financial gymnastics involved in this operation would give an analyst about 6 months of reading, and a headache every day while he was reading it.
I tell you what, if this thing eventually goes to the moon, I think I won't be able to find a wastebasket large enough for all of the B/S written on "efficient market theory"
I sure wish I knew where the error in the logic was. The rule of thumb is that all of the information available reflects on the market price of the shares. I must be missing something.
Oh well, it's only a few meals. I won't starve.
Gave up on the surf and turf. I just sacrificed a steak and lobster dinner for 2200 shares.
"if any surplus remains, distribute to equity
security holders."
The magic words. TWKGQ is the equity class of security of this company. LSRAF is technically a debt security.
Even as recently as '02 they had active call centers with hundreds, or even thousands of employees. I am surprised that there was no mention of the closures in Canada, but the current occupations of Rick and Gary suggests that they were closed or traded off. Possibly the Candian goverment took the call centers over. The Canadian government had subsidized the centers, and probably the training of the workers. I know the main reason for the lack of filings is Sarbanes-Oxley and the related expenses, and that a certain filing (13-15?) excludes them from filing at all.
As far as I know, after filing a notice they don't have to file reports, and it is up to them to provide press releases. The option is only available for companies with less than a certain number of shareholders, and is most often used by companies with a desire to cover their tracks.
Most of the others seem to want to hear about distributions. The only reason I would want a distribution is so they can take the money, and I can buy their shares with mine:)