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.
From a $13 dollar IPO to 5 cents in 2 1/2 years....must be some kind of record!
You can hint all you want, I don't own a single share of this. It's not worth the risk at this point. If they give the class action a 'small negotiated claim' as you are referring to, it will take a large recovery from the stockholders since there is only a small pile of money left over to begin with.
Nobody is trying to shake. The MM's aren't conspiring and manipulating computer trading programs for this junk.
Maybe the writing is finally on the wall? You ever thought of that?
Big boys or not, that doesn't mean squat. Go research Litespeed and their 25-30% or so of buying up Dynegy while in BK. They were paying a cost basis of around 55 cents and after the re-org, they realized about 30 cents on their investment. It was only around a 12-15 million loss.
I didn't own a share of it either.
Furthermore, you should probably do some research concerning the indemnification clauses in the articles of incorporation that former management will be using to shield themselves from liability. In other words, if the company sues them and wins, the company has to pay for their liability, which means the company gets a net goose egg.
They are in the process of dissolving the company now. There will be no re-listing, as there is nothing to re-list. They will file a 15-12G and it will stop trading.
I don't give advice, but my thoughts are whether you need a tax write off this year or next?
The debtor reviews the claims in detail. Since the claims are nothing more than an extension of the creditor's committee, you won't see the CC trying to get claims denied, unless they have no merit at all. That's who they are supposed to be representing.
I don't count any stockholder filed claims. I do count the class action claim.
I use a combination of the claims that the debtor recognizes in their petitions and I add the claims that may have been a result of a 'trigger' because of the filing.
When you use the BK petitions, you have to look at every last subsidiary and look at the top 30 claims listed. Some large claims may not be filed against the parent/us assets.
You are correct, it will come down to how certain claims are treated. I have my doubts whether those highly paid professionals will resolve the class action claim correctly. Even if they do it right, the payout is still only in the high twenty cents. Wrong, around a nickel.
There's a couple of things that may happen that would change that range of recovery, but I'm not going to make a public statement about what they are.
As you can tell, I'm not that confident about how and who is pulling the levers.
Exactly what is this 'usually you have a penny per million' deal?
What are you talking about? Being traded? This is an empty shell.
Where do you get this '50 cents on paper'?
The claims register total (not counting duplicate claims) totals approximately 121 million.
They sold the US assets for 79 million and the BVI assets for 45 million. They had a few million on hand, which the professionals will eat up in fees.
79+45=124-121=3/69.7 shares = 4 cents per share.
I'm out.
This isn't worth fretting over.
You go right ahead and keep thinking that. If there was any truth to what you say, then all those hours the EC, CC, and Debtor's attorneys are charging citing the class action must all be because they don't know as much as you. Well, I stand corrected, maybe the EC attorney does.
Can't that ipad go to the bmc website and total all the claims in the claims register and subtract that number from the sales proceeds?
.50-.70?
Proof that people still use stone tablets for arithmetic?
Are we still under the belief that the class action claim is a zero? Along with a few million more?
Apparently the market disagrees with me and they think it's worth less than 28 cents.
I think everybody is upside down at this point and the consensus was that a global settlement would have happened by now. You may be able to buy some claims from the claims traders, as they are probably re-thinking their buys.
I've got some PINES, but not enough to matter. The equity is still being traded at a premium and I'll wait to see what the conversion looks like on the other side of confirmation. I'm sure you remember Lightspeed buying all of that Dynegy stock and then taking and maintaining a 50% haircut when the Plan became effective. The newco stock is trading around $22 and it has to get to 40 something to break even. No thanks.
Let's keep milking RX. Another 110K in fees just for Elliot Greenleaf for the month of October. That's only 1/3 of the Equity Committee's force.
BTW Rafael, I know you're reading this, I just wanted to note how strange it is that you're billing for 510b, 10b5, indemnity articles, class action, etc when you were totally clueless from the onset of the case.
Much like you stating that you delegate all that work to paralegals....and I see you billed 4X the time for yourself as the 4 paralegals on the payroll combined.
But hey, if the members of the EC keep letting you suck the life out of the estate then knock yourself out. Apparently they don't need the money.
Why did you think that? The money isn't there. You're lucky they even got a bidder for the BVI assets. That's the only reason this thing will pay out, and the payout will be probably 28-30 cents tops after several months or more likely a couple years, with the first distribution in and around 25-26 cents and the second and final making up the remainer.
Mr H, couple things. One, the entire Brooks clan has changed their respective lawyers since there was talk of a global settlement....so it's safe to say there's not one. Second, that $185 seizure number that you see in the news articles and what not calculates all those pens and trinkets at cost. The actual cash and cash equivalents is around 20 million less. You can find this info in the docket although I can't remember off hand the specific docket number. It was mostly all cash in the accounts. The few securities are some odd ball foreign stock and stuff and of course a little bit of pbsoq. Not enough to amount to any windfalls for sure.
No settlement means drag on. Brooks has plenty of time to appeal over and over....it's not like he has anything better to do at the pokey.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1331427/000114420413054257/v356918_8k.htm
As previously reported, on September 13, 2013, AgFeed Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) entered into an Agreement for the Sale and Purchase of Shares (the “Agreement”) with Ningbo Tech-Bank Co., Ltd (“NTB”) and its subsidiary Good Charm International Development Ltd. (together, the “Purchasers”), whereby the Company would sell to the Purchasers, and the Purchasers would purchase and acquire from the Company, all of the outstanding capital stock of AgFeed Industries, Inc. (British Virgin Islands), a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company and the parent company of the Company’s Chinese subsidiaries (the “China Transaction”). The China Transaction is subject to Sections 105, 363 and 365 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”), including an auction process and the entry by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”) of an order approving the Agreement and the China Transaction (the “Sale Order”).
According to the corporate organizational chart, the parent company is AgFeed USA, which owns, among others, AgFeed Industries (Nevada) which owns, among others, certain foreign companies that are not included in the bankruptcy (because the US BK courts don't have jurisdiction), one of which is AgFeed Industries (British Virgin Islands) which is a separate company and subsidiary of AgFeed Industries (Nevada). AgFeed Industries (BVI) in turn owns 8 different Chinese companies that own various assets on the ground in China.
Now I don't claim to be a tax expert, but it's widely known that shell companies are set up in tax havens (BVI) for a reason....to avoid paying U.S. taxes.... so when the shell is sold (which is what is happening here in my understanding) one would think uncle sam would want his cut, ie, repatriation. Now if this is not the case, meaning there's all upside avoiding taxes by setting up a shell in the BVI, making all the money you can, and then returning the proceeds by selling the shell, untaxed, then that's certainly a good deal to me.
I just don't think that will happen. The tax rate for repatriation is normally the corporate tax rate minus any foreign liability in the BVI (probably little to none). Maybe they have a good CPA.....oh....now that's funny.
A lot of good questions asked about repatriation and such, but don't count on a competent FAQ section being on the EC website. They're spending time asking about waterfalls when they don't even know what the claims are, if the sale will go through, and what will be the net proceeds after what will probably be a 35% + tax liability. I'm not counting on more that 30 million to pay all the valid claims, settlements, and legal fees....with the remainder, if any, going to stockholders.
Your guess is as good as any. Although my guess for creditors is around $45 million. Looks like this deal will drag out for years to come, imo. Class action wants it all and Terry Brooks filed an updated claim. That doesn't look like anyone is agreeing to anything.
And the guy holding the cards is sitting in jail after Park and Co messed up the sentencing. You would think the incentive for a global settlement would have been to do it heading into the sentencing hearing...and that didn't happen.
You know that 'FAQ' deal you seem to have a problem with, well why don't you handle it there.
Let me quote you again:
Don't count out the DOJ just yet, as they appointed 4 more people to the equity committee today making a total of 7 committee members.
They may read the same filing and decide to make a change at the helm. They ought to.
Mr. H, you didn't have to wait long. I see a new one today about EC counsel.
Mr. H, that's not the half of it. Expect to see some light shed on their tactics via a court filing. Until then, follow this link for a idea....
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-05/arent-fox-law-firm-loses-bankruptcy-client-when-judge-finds-ethical-breach.html
“We do not believe we did anything unethical,” Rafael X. Zahralddin-Aravena, a lawyer at Elliott Greenleaf, said in a phone interview.
I'd suggest posting a FAQ section on that website so you are not answering the same questions over and over.
1102 doesn't require personal service.
Mr. H we both seem to have ourselves a stalker....funny how the lawyer folk don't like the truth being told.
from post 2552:
I happened to have been on the dog and pony call. If you noticed, there was a question about filing a Plan of Liquidation asap and appointing a Liquidating Trustee. EG didn't necessarily like the idea of that (because they would be off the dole in short order, if they ever got on it to begin with), because they said a Liquidating Trustee wouldn't do a thorough job finding hidden value with D&O causes of action, marketing China etc., but when the follow up question about whether or not they they had ever acted as Liquidating Trustees the answer was "oh yeah, we are acting as Liquidating Trustees right now in another case".
Do you not see the obvious? LT's are crap.....unless they are the LT. Uh huh.
That's what all law firms want. A group of creditors or equity holders to represent on an official committee that can't think for themselves. They want to pull all the levers unchecked.
now the EC's objection to the examiner, doc 360 paragraph 16:
http://s22.postimg.org/gdtts43tt/feedqdoc360.jpg
http://docs.bmcgroup.com/Agfeed/docs/deb_1-13-bk-11761_360.pdf
Translation: ad hoc counsel became EC counsel but didn't like the idea of a liquidation trustee pursuant to the dog and pony show for the ad hoc group but NOW since it appears there may be enough money left over for the fulcrum security to be common equity, EC counsel embraces the idea of being the Liquidating Trustee (that they didn't like the idea of to begin with) since they intend on becoming the Liquidating Trustee once a liquidation plan is confirmed and the EC dissolves, aka, they get to keep billing.
Just sayin.....
The length of the sentencing didn't have anything to do with the government's appeal, as that lies within the discretion of the court. I am waiting on their brief, but I'd imagine they were not happy that the judge didn't adjust the forfeiture amount upward based on the recent case law that applied.
Brooks, on the other hand, knew in advance of the sentencing the government's position as far as forfeiture and restitution. The pre-sentencing report contains the government's position and amounts of requested restitution. Brooks apparently decided against a global settlement when he hired new counsel (which he does often) whom obviously advised him to drop settlement talks and fight to the bitter end. Supposedly Brooks is losing his mind, but allowing his new lawyers to parade into the sentencing hearing without a global settlement was just retarded.
He needs to hire new counsel again, because the one he has now is more worried about padding invoices (ie delays and more delays) than getting his client the best deal possible.
Does that quick search turn up an originating link? If so, post it. It's a supposed press release....those have links. Made up press releases don't. If it is false, then that is a 10b-5 securities law violation.
Any more press releases will be deleted if they don't contain a verifiable link.