"Kilpatrick" will take us down the same road as BKUNQ since they have the precedence of the so called "success story" of Bank United. This is why it has been mentioned that the parties involved seem so jovial when interacting during court. They have the plan, they have the presedence set, and they can satisfy the "big boys". Attorneys work for the big players, not for the common average joe.
With the same captains driving this boat, how can anyone here logically say they will take a different route in this case than they took in BKUNQ?? The BKUNQ case is touted throughout the news as the revelation of bankruptcy reorganization, do you really think Kilpatrick wont follow this so called model plan to a "T"??
Only thing I can think of that may be different is the outstanding share count difference in each case. Just thinking out loud, but if for some strange reason BKUNQ had a substantial number of shares floating around out there once the big boys had their fill, wouldn't it make sense to cancel those if you could?? The more shares/debt that can be canceled legally and still maintain NOLs is money to the bottom line, right?? Now, for some reason if in the case of CORS there's not a significant number of "left over shares", could they just let us tag along for the ride?? That's why the share count of this board would be interesting. I'm really thinking that this board may hold a significant position if consolidated. Hell, we might be "Mr. Big"!! A significant "group" of investors will carry a lot more weight than a single shareholder.
There are smart people here, we should plan to protect our investment, not just sit and dream that someone will give us a big payday.
I'm grasping for straws here, comments?
