Replies to post #63677 on Chemtura Corp (fka CHMT)

[jaxstraw]

Just because Danesh mentioned it doesn't make it so, so we don't know that it is so.
It has never been substantiated by any entity and is second hand information at best.
It's best to not ever use it as an argument.
As a matter of fact, Danesh dropped out of the EC effort after the first denial in June never to be heard from again, ( as well as never returning repeated attempts from various equity holders to contact him).
I put no faith in anything he said or did.
What I'm saying is the Trustee replied to our attempts when using it as a leverage point by saying that they had investigated and could find no supporting evidence to it's truth.
It made us seem amateurish by including it in our argument.
We did not do the research and could not substantiate it's validity.
The one thing I've learned in this journey is it's best to deal with facts, you look professional, and the other side can not dispute your claims.

[oaps222]

With respect to the valuation, no one can be accurate. However, there is one thing so clear: the Debtors (like, Bond Holders, Secured Lenders, Creditors, etc.) are trying hard to take Chemtura Co., while the EC (mainly SVP and Canyon Capital) is also working hard to take it as well. The fact is that SVP/Canyon are willing to pay $1.01 for the common share holders, where the offer price of $1.01 is at least higher than the Debtors' offer. It will be interesting to see how it will play out.

Wish you all, the LONGs, the best!!

[sometimes_right]

more recently, wonder if management passed-up possible offers for various assets/divisions at the expense of shareholder equity? There was quite the buzz about at least 3 possible major deals... culminating with only one relatively minor asset sale. I wonder what deals they might have turned down?

Chemtura Completes Sale of PVC Additives Business
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Chemtura-Completes-Sale-of-bw-3511217373.html?x=0&.v=1