InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

clawmann

12/27/11 12:46 PM

#353880 RE: jackfburns #353876

I still think we don't have a reasonable explanation of that provision, but I am inclined to believe that it is most likely driven by bankruptcy law.

I know that a plan can be crammed down over a dissenting class of creditors, but only if it can be shown that the dissenting class will do at least as well under the plan as in a liquidation.

However, I don't know if that rule applies to a dissenting class of senior equity; maybe it does, and that is why the plan provides that if the preferred class dissents, then commons get nothing, which would then mean that the dissenting prefs would do no worse under the plan than they would under liquidation.

Just an educated guess.

icon url

umaw

12/27/11 2:53 PM

#353903 RE: jackfburns #353876

Jack Burns! Mr. willingham does not care about a paltry 200k when he stands to make millions being on the board of the newco! Would you not trade 200k for 3-5 million. The deal stinks! Plain and simple! I smell a rat somewhere! And he sits on board with Kostoros! Really????