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.
Since no one else was obviously stepping in I chose to do that.
Been in enough boards with idiots on the sidelines posting nonsense posts boasting how many shares they've purchased. Such nonsense only detracts from the value of a board and lessens its credibility.
'and if anything I'm trying to strengthen the board by reiterating what the rules are for those too dense to read.
Have a nice day.
Rude is abstaining from the rules of the board one's participating in. How anyone but him/her was being rude is beyond me.
...and that was an intelligent reply how?
'and how does that original post fall in line with the rules of this board? http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97139135
How in the world does it add value or even register as being positive since any idiot can post the same?
...and this contributes to the value of this board how?
""Companies such as SolarCity, Sungevity, SunPower and Sunrun are installing panels at a heady pace, and adding jobs along the way.""
Excellent! Thanks for the share.
Proposed Alternate Plan of Reorganization to be submitted by a Shareholder(s)
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/proposed-alternate-plan-of-reorganization-to-be-submitted-by-a-shareholders/
EXACTLY!!!!!
'and for all we know this could drag on for months.
judge approved the restructuring process? Really???
The judge merely approved the KPP deal amongst other items.
As for the POR/Disclosure Statement? Not yet.
Good Luck to you Terra and everyone one of us.
Just as long as everyone here understands that what Terra has written is his own opinion and NOT that of that particular domain:
kodak-shareholders.com
The way you wrote it Terra
was as if the exact reference to the following:
""Old shareholders will be part of the equation for 15% about to keep tax attributes of the NOL check Kodak-shareholders.com""
could be found at that site as a stated fact. Whereas it's not.
Terra, where on that site is there a reference
to what you've written exactly?
terragord7:
""Old shareholders will be part of the equation for 15% about to keep tax attributes of the NOL check Kodak-shareholders.com.""
Docket 4114 - With Objections Galore
to the Disclosure Statement
Agenda for June 25th
dm.epiq11.com/KDK/Document/GetDocument/2387681
Yup...lot's of trouble connecting
to kodak.boards.net
At one point had an easier time using my phone but then that didn't last long either.
Envision IP : Summary of Kodak's US Patent Portfolio
A quick read from a document RECENTLY put forth by Envision IP and their call for a thorough and true evaluation of Kodak's IP Holdings.
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/summary-of-eastman-kodak-companys-united-states-patent-portfolio/
BTW, More Still To Come...
No Clue.
The individual who'd posted that item at that forum is also a regular at the Kodak.Boards.Net forum
He's supposedly got one or more submissions (concerning his thoughts) to the court which have yet to be posted as dockets.
Feel free to head over to that board to read/watch &/or participate.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act & the KPP Deal
Please read the following in its entirety. Thx
http://www.sarbanes-oxley-forum.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=3275&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
Letter: Disclosure as per Rule 2019
Letter to Judge Gropper
Re: Eastman Kodak – Case 12-10202 (ALG) –Disclosure of economic interests by secured and unsecured creditors as mandated by Bankruptcy Rule 2019
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/letter-to-judge-gropper-re-eastman-kodak-case-12-10202-alg-disclosure-of-economic-interests-by-secured-and-unsecured-creditors-as-mandated-by-bankruptcy-rule-2019/
Letter in support of Potential Insider Trading
The following was a follow-up to the original letter to the court regarding the Alleged Insider Trading
Letter to Judge Gropper
Re: Letter in support of Potential Insider Trading by 2nd Lien Lenders and other Secured & Unsecured Creditors/Debt Holders
Court Submitted Docket #3901
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/letter-to-judge-gropper-re-letter-in-support-of-potential-insider-trading-by-2nd-lien-lenders-and-other-secured-unsecured-creditorsdebt-holders-docket-3901/
A newer version of the Kodak Traded Debt Spreadsheet has been posted.
This newer version has the contents of Docket 769 included within the sheet (Debt Holdings on April 2, 2012)
Mind you on this page are links to allow one and all to better view the information found within...AND you could even download the originating Excel File.
Have a look:
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/trading-of-kodak-debt-spreadsheet/
Most likely boiler plate fodder.
But if any of you are seriously concerned then you should seriously consider writing a letter to the Judge + US Trustee as for an EC as well as an independent valuation of the company.
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/
Trading of Kodak Debt Spreadsheet
Featuring Data From Dockets# 153, 1390, 1715, 2389, 3371 & 3689
The list within the spreadsheet details all the entities that have either owned, and/or traded: Secured 2018 Notes, Secured 2019 Notes, Unsecured 2017 Conv. Notes, Unsecured 2013 Notes, and Unsecured Claims.
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/trading-of-kodak-debt-spreadsheet/
A tremendous amount of letters?
I wouldn't go that far. I'd say the number of letters are no where near what they could be. It's never too late folks to write to the judge and the US Trustee displaying your distaste for the POR and more.
I hope others are motivated to write letters as well.
That is, those others who are shareholders and feel they've been wronged.
In the past week alone I believe 9 or more letters had reached the court.
Numerous have been posted to that blog with more to be added.
Letter to Judge: Kodak’s Unreported Value of Patents and Cross-Licensing Agreements
As per Docket #3786
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/letter-to-judge-gropper-re-kodaks-unreported-value-of-patents-and-cross-licensing-agreements-docket-3786/
Insider Trading Creditors + Lenders : Docket 3774
Please share this far and wide!
http://dm.epiq11.com/KDK/Document/GetDocument/2313120
+ Reposted within the Kodak Shareholders Blog:
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/letter-to-judge-potential-insider-trading-by-2nd-lien-lenders-unsecured-secured-creditors-debt-holders/
For Current Shareholders: Blog with detailed analysis of the true value of Eastman Kodak. Also accompanied within are letters to the court and additional items. With more to come.
http://www.kodak-shareholders.com/__Blog/category/analysis/
Re: Arguing Back and Forth is pointless...
""-MOST OF ALL, it can be used to control the competition. Whether it be high licensing fees which will increase product cost, leverage for dropping other lawsuits, or blocking importation all together.""
Well stated Mic! As Laura Quatela stated in that townhall meeting just hours after they filed for BK. The Strategic value of the patent(s) cannot be gauged. Actually, these were her exact words:
"Then you ask the question, well what would this be in the hands of a Google against Apple? 'or in the hands of Apple against Android? 'or in the hands of Sony against Apple? 'or in the hands of Apple against HTC? These are companies that are really warring with each other in the wireless space. That's probably a bigger value. We can't gauge it......"
She says that after making mention that the 'Management Model' would bring in "$6 billion over the next 4 years".
Not to mention how going about the 363 method with a stalking horse and subsequent auction would certainly increase the resulting 'pre BK value'.
I'm with ya' pal!
Looking forward to a Good Week Ahead.
GLTA !
btw, glad to see this particular board is absent all the incessant and childish back and forth bashing that can only give one a headache.
Such as that which exists on other board(s).
That was awesome! Thanks for posting.
'and yup, Kodak's missed out on a whole lot due to Perez' lack of imagination and leadership.
Heck Yeah!
Yup! Very little confidence today even when the DOW went into green territory.
I've a list of 23 stocks from varying industries I watch every day. Didn't say I own all of them, I just like to watch them.
Only several up them are green today. 'nother words, the market tanked today. That's all.
Re: Not seeing any specific dates of that common purchase.
That's what I was thinking.
Thanks
As I read it, it was revealed that they had that many shares. Not that they just recently purchased it. Or am I reading it wrong?
BTW, jul2jul, a link is here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/01/us-kodak-debtholders-idUSTRE80U1TG20120201
It was definitely a nice close.
Re: Ditto, While I enjoy Apple's innovation, their "Walmart" dominance
I know how you feel Micgrow,
Thing is, IMHO, Apple comes nothing close to the innovation of Google. Apple might happily embrace their own Ipad and Iphone creations yet Google has embraced much more than that. Google's behaved in more a manner relative to an entity wishing to exhibit community, social and national awareness than Apple can ever touch. From their delving into solar panels and the Lunar X Prize to investments reaching far and wide for the sake of our society.
Google acts as if it's got a mission. Apple acts as if, 'F'-YOU if don't like what we're doing. We're still going to sell millions of ipads and iphones with or without you! Too bad that arrogance will (hopefully) catch up with them and bite them in the rear end one day...hopefully sooner than later. Bullies always get their comeuppance.
Re: Apple has the power and $$
Somehow I'd prefer Google to be the ones to purchase. Regardless of whether stockholders benefit from any of this or not.
'just don't care for bullies.
Re: The Big Question is WHY?
That's the $64,000 question, isn't it.
Here's an article from the WSJ which mentions Perez was to retire in 2009 and how the Board talked him out of it.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903454504576488033424421882.html
All I can think is that, he began taking them on the path of no return and they needed the man with the idea to continue that idea. So in the end, we've the Board of Directors to blame?