InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

PickStocks

01/07/12 12:52 PM

#355632 RE: jhdf51 #355630

January 11th if I am not mistaken is the next court date..
icon url

clawmann

01/07/12 1:16 PM

#355642 RE: jhdf51 #355630

I disagree. If that were an issue, the EC would have justified the 70/30 split on that - more compelling - justification. But they didn't. They only said they thought it was "fair" but the judge can and might change it; and they said not one word about negative consequences for the deal or the NOLs if she did.
icon url

jackfburns

01/07/12 1:19 PM

#355647 RE: jhdf51 #355630

Sorry, jhd, I just don't see how the whole deal would be at risk with a NO vote. If U's are unhappy because JMW decides to "strictly" follow APR, well there's not much they can do about it.

The EC "proposed" a 70/30 split, but it concedes that JMW may change it. We just don't know yet - but, as claw has pointed out - she almost certainly will change it if P's vote NO.
icon url

McChief

01/07/12 2:07 PM

#355668 RE: jhdf51 #355630

I don't think anyone except equity really cares how the equity split ends up if that's all that gets changed. I don't think a chag in the split % will jeopardize the settlement. Just my very HO.