InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 16
Posts 888
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/03/2006

Re: paologorgo post# 1293

Tuesday, 07/02/2013 12:26:05 PM

Tuesday, July 02, 2013 12:26:05 PM

Post# of 1343
I'm not quite sure at this point to tell the truth. A simple offer wouldn't require Berg's consent, but according to the extension this was a caveat that the offeror attached - which suggests to me they were not interested at this time in working through the process if Berg was hostile to it, given his control on both the debt and equity side of the capital structure. It's not an auction here - there has never been a 363 motion - which makes this case highly different from most. Was this offer below the claims hurdle or simply below the $$$ amount that Berg is willing to sell at - given that they've never lined this up for auction, it has never been for offered at the best available price (in fact it's never really been offered for outright purchase period). Also not sure how this reconciles with the recent extension of the ROTH and KPMG engagements which were looking for an equity raise. Fee apps are due out soon - would be nice to have a look at what the lawyers have been billing for the last 3 months to get a picture of where this is heading.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.