Shareholder Meeting? I've been wondering this whole time if Susman's goal is to get the valuation level to the amount that Preferred are declared a specific dollar amount. Not some hazy etheral possible amount but a declared amount. I believe then that the Susman as a counsel for his client would have a seat at the table to discuss and review their stated amount. I've wondered for some time if this is Susman's back door way of having a shareholder meeting? Should say the preferreds be declared a monetary amount, would the Susman have the right to go before the court and state that the Preferreds as a receiving party is having problems with debtor and want to declare their rights to have a shareholder meeting? We know that the court dewl tracked the issue do to the fact that equity was at the time in no way in the money and there was no reason to high jack the bk into a non issue. But, if the Preferreds a declared specific dollar amount, is it then a non issue? Wouldn't it be a reasonable issue to bring before the court? Could this be another reason no one want equity in anyway definablly in the money? If there is even one true dollar allocated to a preferred member would it not trigger rights for shareholder meetings and valuation? Is this why debtor and so many other members are clinging so hard to the 160 million valuation? How much would it upset the apple cart if a specific dollar amount went to equity? Is this why Susman is quieter than we believe they should be? They don't want to blow that shot? Is the goal: Get Preferred a specific dollar amount, then get the shareholder meeting?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
