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.
>>so if some entity wants to come and steal burnstone they will most likely have a very hard time doing so, ultimately failing and having to work a deal that satisfies the black empowerment group (tranter) and that could possibly be a share price offer
Assuming for the moment that 100% of the rest of your logic is spot on, does Tranter own GBG shares like you?
>>When the bid has been 10K or less for weeks....I know that even YOU get the idea.
$2,500 on the bid at dang near the all time low does not get MY panties all up in a bunch, sorry. Probably a MM picking up shares at .045 or so to resell them to retail at .049 for a quick 10% anyway. ;)
It may be 500k shares, but it's less than $2,500 buckaroos.
>>I just wish whatever is going to happen would happen
I'm reminded of the old proverb: Careful what you wish for ;)
Thanks Coho.
I just found this which does a good job of discussing 145 voting issues.
http://sacommerciallaw.com/2012/11/20/counting-your-votes-the-voting-rights-afforded-to-creditors-under-business-rescue-by-don-mahon/
I was going back through previous BRP notices. Looking back now, the delay seems to have originated around the time the BRP was set to issue the voting universe. Per section 145, concurrent creditors (s Africa term for unsecureds) only get votes to the extent of their likely recovery in liquidation. This, rather than delays in the bid solicitation process, appears to explain the two week delay in seeing the plan. I'd say someone got an unpleasant surprise when they saw the voting universe and the only logical party would be the unsecureds. Unfortunately I will be camping with my daughters starting Thursday for a week and will have limited Internet access......yes I know I will be greatly missed on here when all the hoopla starts.
Interesting that the delay in publishing the BRP was due to creditor requests under section 145(5) of the Companies Act. It would appear the creditors are jockeying for position vis a vis each other within the claims hierarchy.....that usually means the are all looking at a pie that is way too small.
I looked at them today....they haven't filed yet...not sure how they had a q already a few days ago....it's going to be a pre-pak with equity getting nothing, at least as it currently appears to be heading.
>>Does this cancel the Waterton deal? What happens to the 15 million?
Did anybody bother to read the document? Dismissal, if granted, wouldn't reverse what has transpired during the pendancy of the Chapter 11 - they are simply saying we've liquidated the assets and there is not enough money in the pot to justify the continued ongoing administrative expenses of being in Chapter 11 - it's quite expensive. Since the secured creditors gets everything that is there - basically what is left of the 15 mm in cash plus the NPI, there is no need for the court to supervise the division of assets (cash and NPI) between the various classes of creditors.
Both Chapter 11 and Chapter 7 can be liquidating - the only difference is that Chapter 7 is always a liquidation and it's typically a firesale liquidation. Chapter 11 can be a reorganization or a liquidation - in both cases it's a managed process. Rodeo Creek stated that a Chapter 7 would be impractical and inefficient because 'there are no remaining assets for a Chapter 7 trustee to administer or liquidate' - ie it's already been liquidated, so unsuccessfully that they can no longer afford the admin costs of winding up under Chapter 11.
Page 11 paragraph 31 discusses why conversion to Chapter 7 would be "impractical and inefficient"
>>So, is there a chance of dismissal? Sounds like this might be in our favor?
I'd suggest reading the doc. From page 11 paragraph 30: "effectuating a Chapter 11 plan is simply not practical in light of the status of these cases especially given the results of the auction. As noted above, because the Debtors have sold all of their assets, there is no business left to reorganize or liquidate"
Here's a great doc to do some DD on the GBG-Waterton JV [cough, snicker]. Rodeo Creek is moving for dismissal of the the Chapter 11 proceedings......because the auction was so horrible there is barely even $$$ for admin claims. ouch.
http://www.gcginc.com/cases/rodeocreekgold/pdflib/541_50301.pdf
See Page 2, paragraph one - as I've been saying all along, the NPI, whatever it's worth, will go straight to the DIP lenders - unsecured creditors will get the big zippo. This time it's not me saying it - it's GBG saying it.
I already did....it took 5 minutes to figure out it's about a year old.
>>I think with gbg we are looking at much longer odds, say drawing a royal flush at the poker machine.
Indeed. And there are better odds elsewhere in bk pennyland. GBG could be a 100 bagger - anything is possible - but the odds of it happening are probably around 1,000 to one. 1,000 to one odds on a 100 bagger isn't a smart bet. You want at least 10 to one odds on that 100 bagger.
http://web.archive.org/web/20120817013320/http://www.greatbasingold.com/careers.cfm
I hopped in the waybackmachine - that job opening was on their career page back in August of '12 - that was the only historical snapshot I could find.
There is no date on it - looks like a google cached file to me....just sayin'
from GBG website 2 seconds ago:
http://www.greatbasingold.com/careers.cfm
Careers
If you aspire to be part of a progressive, proactive, forward looking and multi-disciplinary mining team which approaches business with enthusiasm and dedication, Great Basin Gold provides a prime opportunity for you.
Great Basin Gold is an international company listed on the TSX, NYSE MKT and JSE Exchanges, with assets that include two emerging mines located in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa and Nevada, USA, and further exploration projects in Tanzania and Mozambique. We are a dynamic young company, focused on building a diversified base of high-quality mineral properties.
At Great Basin Gold, we believe the people who comprise our team are our most valuable asset, guiding the company towards achieving significant success throughout every phase of the mining process.
+Corporate
There are currently no openings. Please check back soon.
+Burnstone
There are currently no openings. Please check back soon.
>>Or Loews
Or Berkshire
Or Vodafone
Look, I agree that market cap may be a more fitting measure than enterprise value for a well managed, cash flow positive going concern. But trust me, at the first whiff of financial distress, you better switch to enterprise value 100%, because the debt really does matter when there is doubt over the ability to service it. Great Basin is not a Loews or Bershire or Vodafone. But hey, don't take my word for it - if you believe in just looking at market cap it's a screaming buy and you should back up the truck tomorrow.
Enterprise Value is market cap plus liabilities....it's especially important in a liquidation as it represents the hurdle that must be cleared for equity to make money. Market cap of two or three million is absolutely pointless when there is roughly 650 million in liabilities in front of you.
That's the most ridiculous statement I've seen on this board. So two gold mining companies both have a market cap of 3 million......one has debt of two million and the other has debt of 650 million...and you are going to sit there and tell me market cap gives the truer picture as compared to enterprise value.....good luck with that.
I'd say Credit Suisse put in the stipulations....I'll bet they are in that 'side letter' that has been referred to in a couple of the docs. Credit Suisse as secured lender is going to get that NPI via it's secured debt with a lowball valuation of whatever it's worth.
I read the permit, I don't read it as 'ramping production'. It's still a trial mine....and the mill is still 300 miles away one way. Waterton isn't as stupid as GBG mgmt trying to ramp production with those logistics. Looked to me like they are just trying to relocate existing wastewater disposal.
If you go to the Rodeo Creek docket and search for the APA (asset purchase agreement) filed a few days after the auction, it's very explicit.
In Vancouver, the joke is that NPI stands for 'No Payment Intended', technically it's a Net Profits Interest. You get the difference between getting a cut of the top line vs the bottom line right? There is all sorts of fluff that can be put between the two. I'd rather have a 1% NSR than a 10 or 15% NPI.
It wasn't a royalty....it was a NPI.....HUGE difference.
>>Hey Finbar,
Tell me one thing you have been right about so far?
that Hollister would sell for a fraction of the rest of this boards predictions.....how's that?
You should focus on enterprise value at this point GPB, not market cap.
>>In my own opinion. I think the stock is being manipulated. So when the RS does happen. There will be a handful of people with the majority of the shares controlling the price. Allowing it to drop far enough to shake out the rest of the week hands. Before it begins to slowly rise back up in a JV that everyone will cuss when they first hear about it in the BRP.
Sounds conspiratorial to me.
It's not a grand conspiracy....it's a court supervised process for dealing with insolvency. It's that simple.....no secret JVs, no need to reverse split anything...it's just about getting the various classes of creditors more than they would have gotten if everyone just walked away. The only good news is that this will all be much more clear in a week.
I read something today that it was JCI stealing XIDE's WalMart account that pushed them over the edge. I may take a look at XIDE if and when it get's significantly cheaper.
Wasn't able to listen in on the court call Thursday, nor have I seen anything other than that the judge confirmed the request. Was pondering earlier this evening why the marketing is taking as long as it is. I think on one hand the universe of potential partners is not huge, and the extension request noted that there were three strategic buyers in earnest negotiations. One thing sticks in my head though - I wonder if the delay is not related to a private letter ruling request with IRS on the structure of a deal that would preserve the NOLs. The NOLs here are extremely valuable. We know from the second fee app of debtors counsel that they were researching NOL preservation in connection with a deal back in February. I believe it's possible to structure a deal that preserves them within certain parameters, but it would be tricky. Requesting a PLR would be a smart move, and I believe they can typically take two or three months to get an answer back. May not be the case at all, but it does actually quite a bit of sense.
Wow, can't say I've ever heard Rule compared to Cramer. Don't say that to Eric Sprott. You do know there is a difference between what one hopes to see and what one expects to see right? Most respected voices in the sector agree that several hundred miners will hit the wall shortly one way or the other. Being in the industry, its not what they 'hope' for....but it will clear the deck of bad properties and bad management, and there will be great deals to be had in between those two horrid places.
Wrong directional bias unfortunately.
>>Do you have any links to support your argument or are you rubbing balls together to get that value.
I'm just rubbing my balls together....of course, that is loads better tha. Smacking them with a hammer..which is what the longs here are doing (they just don't know it yet). As I posted last month, when I asked Rick Rule what he thought the Burnstone was worth his reply was twenty million....negative twenty million. :0. He thinks it's an albatross, geologically. Just remember you guys all thoroughly mocked me as certifiably insane when I guestimated 70 million on Hollister. I'm always hopelessly optimistic, but I'm aware of my bias. :)
>>Come on bashers, tell me how I am going to loose it all.
I prefer the term realist, but I believe I'm considered a basher here, so I'll answer your question. Burnstone will go for no more than 200 million - and likely much less - Hollister already gone for 15 - you're about 450 to 500 million short of zero pps. It's pretty straight forward. :)
>>A bit more investigation would show that it's indeed likely he has worked with Mr. Dombrowski while serving on one of these committees (yes, even if there is no 'link' to unequivocally prove it).
I would hazard to guess Chemtura?
>>A bit of investigation would have shown that the poster has actually served on not one, but two, official equity committees. This alone means he has more knowledge about the process than most, if not all, people on this board do
I wouldn't say 'all', given that I've been on three ;) (course, I think I was on the same page as Mssr. WallStreet)
Not really sure where this case is going anymore, but this was in the motion to extend time to reject exec. contracts yesterday. Depending on how the Bechtel executory contract is handled, there wouldn't necessarily need to be much cash from either a sale or the lawsuit to put equity in the money.
13.
Many of the
Debtors’ executory contracts pertain to intellectual property and may have terms that run into the future for a substantial number of years. The immediate assumption
of such contracts would require the Chapter 7 Trustee to take certain costly future actions,
including payment to maintain certain intellectual property that underlie
the executory contracts.
It would be impractical and unnecessary for the Chapter 7 Trustee
in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy
case to assume the contracts for the full contract terms or to agree to pay all required intellectual
property fees while the Chapter 7 Trustee is still assessing the assets in these Estates
and
negotiating with a stalking horse bidder. Likewise, a rejection of valuable contracts at this time
could result in a reduction in the value of the Estate’s assets.
14.
Given that the Chapter 7 Trustee is
seeking a purchaser of substantially all of the
Debtors’ assets,
the Chapter 7 Trustee makes this request to extend his time to assume or reject
executory contracts and unexpired leases of personal property
>>Who has a little time to do some DD on how many times Ron has already done this type of acquisition, merger and JV?
Zero, because this isn't an acquisition, merger or JV...it's an orderly liquidation.
We will see how that strategy works for you RB right soon now won't we. :)
The problem is the definition of 'successful'. You guys are assuming it means that equity retains value. That isn't what the definition of BRP success is unfortunately. 'Success' means creditors and other stakeholders do better than they would have under a liquidation. That is the 50/50 proposition. You can look it up if you don't believe me.
Why would Rockland give two hoots about shares in BCON? They got the assets and the only thing left is an empty shell. Control of a bk shell is negotiated with the debtors trustee, and there is zero sign of that on the docket. Nothing on the docket to indicate anything other than a wind down of whats left, which is nothing. Looks like a last gasp sucker run. I'm not complaining as I found 40k shares from back before the auction that I forgot to sell....they are sold now. Anyone buying here should call debtors counsel. The only odd thing is that I can't really see mass promotion in the usual places. I would love to figure out where this is coming from.
I also believe that Burnstone will be sold for an obscene amount....though I'm sure we are talking about opposite poles of obscenity.