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.
Not sure why the adhoc equity committee would accept the agreement to receive $200k monthly per the stipulation. Wouldn’t it have been better to have an official EC? At least an official EC would be recognized by the court and be free to push for discovery, valuation, etc. without undue restrictions, and management would have to engage with them. With this stipulation, it seems to me like the adhoc professionals are only looking out for themselves. I hope I’m wrong though
I wonder why the EC is so quiet. No motions to employ professionals, etc. Is the EC functional at this point?
Over 119M shares were shorted today. Now unless the company does something really stupid (like announce new share offering) between now and tomorrow's open, i expect this to explode again tomorrow. Dunno why anyone would want to be short this stock.
Never mind, i got my answer - doc 342
i'm aware it was approved. i was just wondering where the UST is with appointing one and who the members are. Do you know?
Anyone know the status of the equity committee appointment?
Based on the price action, I'm guessing the judge denied the Wexford motion and the hedgies are selling out. They did put up a good fight though.
Hearing for DIP and EC appointment was continued to today. Anyone know what the outcome of that is? TIA
was anyone privy to the court hearing today? Please provide an update. TIA
Did this company ever get their exclusivity period extended?
Commons get to retain 5% of the company. it's all in the disclosure statement.
Proof?
The current plan provides that only ALLOWED existing equity interest will be entitled to recoveries allocated to equity under the plan.
It goes further to define ALLOWED as any "claim or interest arising before the effective date", which according to the plan is a date to be selected in the future - this date usually occurs after the judge has approved the plan of reorganization. The hearing for approval is currently set as Dec. 6.
The definitions of "allowed" and "effective date" are contained in doc #18 filed on 10/24
So here's what to do if you haven't received the election form - contact your broker and ask them to send one to you. A lot of the shares are held in street name and KEY simply sent out these forms to the brokerage houses for onward transmission to their clients. Obviously some brokerage houses are more efficient than others at disseminating this type of information.
What happens if you did not receive and turn in an election form?
This only means you don't get the cash option. You will still get the equity and warrants, if you're still a holder at the effective date. The election form is for you to simply indicate that you want cash in lieu of equity and warrants, and to grant releases.
Shareholders who don't turn in an election form will automatically be deemed to have granted all releases, and will be entitled to the plan distribution (warrants and shares only, but not cash), if they are still holding as of the effective date.
This is blatantly false. The fact that a shareholder did not receive an election form DOES NOT mean that he is holding worthless stock.
If you're holding shares and haven't yet received an election form, your best bet is to contact your broker and get one, fill it out and send it in asap if you want the cash option.
Even if you don't get one, the plan of reorganization clearly states that all shareholders that do not return a completed election form will be deemed to have granted all releases and will receive the plan securities - the only difference between those who receive and return an election form and those who don't is that those who do will have the option of getting cash in lieu of warrants and shares, while those who don't will get the shares and warrants, instead of cash. In my opinion, the shares plus warrants are worth more than the cash.
The record date for participating in the plan distribution is the date of plan effectiveness, which will be sometime in December 2016 or Jan. 2017.
All this information is contained in doc #78 filed on 10/26.
You're only partially correct.
The plan is to give existing shareholders either
1. Shares (which at the end of the reorg will represent about 4.6% of the reorganized company) plus 2 sets of warrants at different prices; or
2. Cash in lieu of 1 above.
Existing shareholders will be required to select which of those two options they prefer. The cash out option is contingent on the company being able to raise enough cash from the key holders that participated in the rights offering to buy out the remaining shareholders.
Chances are the ex-div date will be fixed at sometime subsequent to the payment date based on SEC rules for large dividends. In which case those who are selling today will not get the payout and brokers will be responsible for routing the payments to the appropriate holders as of the ex-div date.
why is it still trading then if record date was yesterday?
Point of correction: the equity holder record date is indeed August 30 and a plan of liquidation has already been filed and will be set for hearing on September 21. I just saw this on an 8K filing.
This absolutely makes no sense. The company just applied to have its exclusivity period extended to end of November and that hearing is set for later in September. The shareholder record date can not possibly be set for august 30. The August 30 deadline is for claims, not equity ownership.
Yep, it does sound like a buyout is underway. People who sold earlier today totally misread the news.
This stock will end up at zero, that's for sure, but not before it bounces around a lot. You see, this is no ordinary bankruptcy. It's supposed to be a prepack, but not all the creditors are on board. Blackstone and the junior unsecureds signed the RSA and left Claren Road out in the cold. As you can imagine, that didn't go down well with Claren Road and they've already started accusing Blackstone's GSO capital of wanting to rush this case through BK court before gas prices get a chance to recover. It didn't make any sense to me that Claren Road would get the same share of equity as the unsecureds, even though they are senior to the unsecureds. Further more, the fact that the valuation at which GSO is getting converted is almost a third of that at which the other creditors are getting converted is totally nuts.
Is it possible that the creditors all hug it out and come to an agreement before trying to get the court to approve the RSA? Absolutely. But if they couldn't agree prior to BK filing, my sense is they won't agree without the intervention of the BK court judge -- that's probably the reason they haven't put forward a motion to approve the RSA at this point. So we're probably going to be hearing arguments about valuation and what not.
Needless to say, this is shaping up to be one of those contentious BKs and as the drama plays out in court, the share price will bounce around accordingly and buyers at these levels will make some money if they exit at the right time.
In addition to all of that, over 95% of the float traded in the 4 trading days just after the BK announcement. I initially thought that was due to short covering but the short interest prior to BK was low. So my sense is that some hedge fund(s) has accumulated and will be moving this up as we move along.
Watch this space, this stock isn't done just yet.
The fact that equity is not being completely wiped out plus the fact that there's over 8M shares short, should send this thing to parabolic levels before it eventually settles down.
Dude get a clue already. Existing shareholders would get warrants to buy 20% of the company at a pre-determined strike price. It's all in the court docs and was stated by the company in their press releases. They got all the votes they needed to satisfy the conditions under which warrants would be issued to current equity holders. Some current debt holders will receive new equity, and some would receive warrants plus new equity.
Anyone attending the hearings today and tomorrow? Please provide updates with details of what's going on. TIA
Did anyone read the UST objection to the POR yet? it's a pretty interesting read. My take is that the company might want to settle with shareholders in exchange for any releases against officers and directors. This is not looking like it's over yet. I must say I was pretty impressed that the UST would stand up for shareholders, that's a very rare occurrence.
She's in effect saying regarding the POR: it contains releases by equity holders and these releases are being forced on shareholders since they are not receiving anything in exchange, so it's not fair. if the company wants to remediate the issue, they have to send equity holders documents and specifically request them to sign some sort of a waiver agreeing to the release, otherwise the POR is DOA (dead on arrival). Your guess is as good as mine as to what the outcome of this would be. The UST is also arguing that the releases be obtained from both current and former shareholders. Grab your popcorn fellas, this is about to get interesting very quickly.
Lawyers for Su, the largest shareholder of VTGDF
In today's court hearing, the judge granted the lawyers for VTGDF's largest shareholder an extension until Tuesday to file an objection to the disclosure statement. If anyone has information that could help them in their filing, please send to them. Their address is as follows:
Name: Deirdre Brown
Email: brown@hooverslovacek.com
In light of the fact that valuable assets were transferred from the VTG parent company to OGIL just prior to the bankruptcy filing, I think that constitutes fraudulent conveyance. Please send any information you think could be helpful.
The largest shareholder is fighting the case. If the US Trustee is paying attention, the aggrieved shareholder does have some very salient points. I suspect some sort of settlement will be the final outcome of this mad heist.
Is there any reason the U.S Attorney is appearing in these Bankruptcy cases? I don't usually see that happen
didn't they already sell sub-sea yet?
Looks like the uncle John sold for $1.4M. I think the only assets left at this point are the BP claim and the NOLs
anyone wanting to take over the shell in a reverse merger will have to take on the outstanding liabilities, which at this point far outweigh the assets by almost $100M. Why would anyone want to do that?
no idea when the new eta is. However with the motion to have execs pay tied to collection, I suspect they'll be collecting soon, which would probably explain the notice to shorten that motion... these guys are milking the company for all it's worth
They also have the receivables from Pemex, which per the first day declarations should come to about $42M. In addition, they have equity in other subsidiaries which they have not sold yet. It's looking like creditor recoveries might be much better than anticipated and that should drive SP at some point.
What about the BP claim? Think that will get liquidated as well?
So I just asked around and have been informed that some documents to hire financial advisors and mining consultants for the EC should hit the docket either today or tomorrow. I expect this case will most likely end in a valuation fight.
Actually it's you who is wrong. PJS was going to be hired but that never went through as the EC got reconstituted and PJS along with Susman Godfrey terminated their contract with the EC. See dockets #458 and 467.
Am I the only one who's getting concerned that the EC is not putting forward motions to hire consultants? We should be hiring a valuation and mining consultant at the very least so that we give equity a strong base from which to argue for recovery. The EC objection to the disclosure statement seemed very weak from a valuation standpoint and I think the debtors are going to use that as leverage and probably revise projections such that equity no longer gets warrants -- that way they don't need equity to vote in favor of the plan in order to have it confirmed. Just me thinking aloud and at the same time hoping I'm wrong.
Thanks a lot for the summary lentoid. Just out of curiosity, what did the CEO have to say about the massive write downs?
Well, regardless of who's pre-BK or post-BK, the bottomline is that the EC definitely does not need to be fighting with its lawyers. The debtor is trying to wipe out equity and the EC should be working with experienced professionals to prevent that from happening. I'm actually surprised that SG is being replaced by some relatively unknown law firm in the Bankruptcy space. That does not sound like a smart move at all.
Point of correction... he didn't have to resign from the EC in order to purchase shares, he already had those shares prior to being appointed. He resigned shortly after he was appointed and my sense is that he does not want to be hampered by the trading restriction that comes with being an EC member in the event that trading opportunities arise. Someone might view this as a negative -- if he knows that equity might get something good at the end of the day, why not just ride till the end?
I on the other hand would view that as a positive (coupled with the fact that the EC did not object to the POR on 5/22). I'm guessing the POR has been amended to reflect a more reasonable distribution to equity. Just a guess though, and I've been wrong before.