Replies to post #5509 on Visteon Corporation (VC)

[RiskEpt]

As an oversea investor or gambler, I have been collecting VSTNQ stocks from 0.22,. 0.56 , 1.00 and 1.82 in last two months. My guts tell me that VSTN has future. Last year around this time, DAN and AXL barely skipped from bankruptcy and now their stocks are traded above $10’s. Although I can not convience myself to dump my VSTNQ stocks before May 24, I have few concerns need all your help to clarify:

1. During the hearing on May 12, the judge mentioned that “Frankly I view this as a valuation of a $2 billion company done on the back of a cocktail napkin,” As $2 billion is about the same price that BOD labeled on Visteon. In English, could I assume that the Judge’s words give us a hint that he will agree with BOD on the value of Visteon?

2. I am not familiar with USA Bankruptcy procedure, but if BOD gets all it wants on the hearing of May 24, does it mean that VSTNQ will be canceled within few days after the hearing?

Thanks ahead for all your’s thoughts and comments.

Joe from HK

[U2StpM]

Well I don't know what the judge is or isn't thinking. I don't think the judge allows ideas that you mention to invade his thoughts, they could lead to some sort of prejudgment of the case. I also can not see the judge doing anything as you suggest, because that is, or can be prejudgment.

I think the judge meant what he said. You guys, the lawyers, are gonna yell and scream, beat your chests about anything that is said or done. So we'll just dispense w/all the extra, side, or other stuff, and it'll be just you guys. You guys got X( whatever the # of days till next hearing) days to get your stuff together. Then you'll all bring your rocks in here and pile 'em up an' we'll see what you got. You can throw'em at each other, cut, slash, do what ever you want and at the end of the day I'll decide where we are.

The judge has clearly shown no favor to any side, except for some advice to the HFs. He is giving all sides an equal opportunity to present what ever they want. After it has all been presented and argued over he will do his job, which is judge what Has Been Presented, and make decisions about the issues before him based on what has been presented to him and the applicable law.

That's what I see.