News Focus
News Focus
icon url

alectric

07/09/10 4:59 PM

#62599 RE: wall_street61 #62596

I don't understand how the Debtors expect to tally the votes because the number of shares bought prior to the BK petition must be substantially less that the 240M outstanding. How would they possibly know which shares were bought before and which were bought after? In my mind the shares are fungible. I bought some before but most after.
icon url

blhawk31

07/09/10 5:22 PM

#62612 RE: wall_street61 #62596

wrong, i think that will make you happy wouldn't it?
icon url

catdaddyrt

07/09/10 5:30 PM

#62624 RE: wall_street61 #62596

icon url

sullivot

07/09/10 7:35 PM

#62645 RE: wall_street61 #62596

When the US Trustee appointed an Equity Committee, and Judge Gerber signed it, it was for the representation of all equity holders, not prepetition equity holders. The communications that I received from Susan Golden about the EC made no mention about special classes of equity classes who were eligible for recovery. If I recall, the only preference was that retail EC members had at least some prepetition shares. Any prepetition language added to the revised Disclosure statement should strike the court as being petty retaliation by the debtors. I don't believe they're helping their case with Judge Gerber or the court.

The debtors revised efforts to "toast" post-petition holders, on top of their blatant effort to screw shareholders in the first place, may well turn their own POR into toast.

Pass the butter.......