I guess time will tell the easiness of the conditions.
The one which most concerns me relates to EEGC collateral, which Sure Capital must evaluate (at EEGC expense), and which must be acceptable to financial institutions (likely that means buyers of the notes).
The specified collateral is basically all of the assets of EEGC. It is important that they get a high valuation, as the July 9 PR states that the notes to be issued by Sure will be 'principal protected,' likely by that collateral.
There is no indication that Sure will put their own assets behind these notes (does anyone have evidence to the contrary).
As a positive perspective, the July 2 PR states that the Agreement is based upon the WHK Denison/RPS Energy valuation of $3.3B, much discussed in this forum (still over $2B for Bellevue/Thunderbolt alone). Presumably, Sure Capital read this work before signing the Agreement -- the RPS Energy report is available on the EEGC website -- so additional evaluation required should be nominal, as Sure Capital will already have taken the 2% discussion into consideration.
This evaluation will then be 'market tested' (condition related to collateral acceptable to financial institutions) as Sure Capital looks to find investors for the 'principal protected' notes; since they are being marketed that way, investors will need to believe the RPS Energy report satisfies.
It is worth observing that equity investors are not satisfied by the report, that is why the market cap is $10M; will note investors be more satisfied?
