News Focus
News Focus
Followers 7
Posts 838
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 12/27/2008

Re: Stanner post# 29412

Wednesday, 07/20/2016 7:49:01 AM

Wednesday, July 20, 2016 7:49:01 AM

Post# of 38496
That is an incorrect statement regarding class 4

I heard the audio and took notes. In some sections, I listened to it several times to be sure I recorded EXACTLY as the judge had spoken. I have noted the approximate time in the audio the statement was made if they want t play it back. Regarding class 4, this is EXACTLY what she said, ver batim,

The POR calls out common shares under Class 4 with the phrase "If the Debtor is a corporation, entities holding preferred or common stock in the Debtor are interest holders," where the Debtor is AmeriResource. However, the judge never mentioned "common shareholders" or "common shares." She said simply this about Class 4,

"class 4 that was impaired and did vote" (4:45)

So ALL class 4 interest holders, which is not common shareholders, had the right to vote. I am a shareholder and received no notification of voting rights because I am not part of the impaired group, e.g. I will not suffer losses.

Also, the judge made a clear statement about Payroll Funding regarding shares with,

"in return of the 100% of the shares of the stock of the Debtor" (2:15)

These shares then are NOT newly issued shares, but "shares of the stock" once owned by the Debtor, AmeriResource, which infers all remaining preferred and common shares. 80% of preferred shares would be extinguished owned by Janovec.

Where Real Traders Talk Markets

Join thousands of traders sharing insights, catalysts, and charts.

Join Today