Well Richard, seems like a pretty wild accusation. Personally, I think the whole PN bribing creditors thing is garbage. This is a throw it against the wall and see what sticks strategy. It is all about diversion, and for some reason people are buying it. Everyone is trying to explain away the obvious answer as to why CPRK failed, so let me recap:
CPRK failed because Dotson spent millions of other peoples money on the wrong equipment (60 plus million). CPRK failed because Management valued nepotism over compentance. CPRK failed, because it's CEO blacked out entire months of his life during a critical time for the company as a side effect of pain killers perscribed after his back surgery. CPRK failed because it's CEO had no clue how to manage and track money. CPRK failed because it did not pay it's bills. CPRK failed because of gross incompentance, and the inabiltiy to admit the same and get help early on. CPRK failed because it treated it's creditors with disrespect and disregard.
This garbage about PN getting in the way of CPRK obtaining financing is ridiculous. Are you telling me that PN somehow had a connection into every potential lender they went too? Are you really going to argue that this one potential issue kept CPRK from getting LTF for 2 years? I also highly doubt that creditors colluded in any actionable way with PN that can be proven. Even if they did, proving it without money trails and documentation is going to be near to impossible. My guess, none exist because there was no collusion.
Whether anyone wants to admit it here or not, there is a very real possibility that CPRK will go 7. I will say it again, IMO, the only winner here will be Waltey, the IRS, and very most Senior creditors. You need to look at the facts and the track record. The past will determine the future. Think like a judge. Liquidation will keep more poor dumb investors from getting hurt. Conspiracy theories and best guesses will not sway a judge. This mill never made a cent of profit. Lot's of people were hurt. All facts easy for a judge to identify. Judges err on the side of caution. They don't want more people hurt. They will not risk it.
I know, I know, The Judge approved DIP financing, and why would he do that if it were just going to end up in 7 anyway. Okay, great, but was it enough to do anything but buy time for the judge to make an educated decission? But, but, We have CPRKSA, and we are doing so much. Again, I wouldnt expect anything less, but will it make a difference. I will be very surprised if it does. The question you have to ask is will a judge risk allowing a company with no profitable track record continue on to raise additinal monies, and potentially hurt additional lenders and investors while at the same time putting it's current creditors in a worse position. I dont think so. Anyway, I hope I am proven wrong, but I dont see it. GLTA.
