Replies to post #2462 on Trident Microsystems, Inc.(fka TRIDQ)

[mrholty]

Here is Rodney McFadden's latest on this case:

http://thediligentinvestor.blogspot.com/2012/05/trident-microsystems-completes-sale-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheDiligentInvestor+%28The+Diligent+Investor%29

Trident Microsystems Completes Sale of TV Business; Seeks Permission to Expedite Sale of Audio Unit

Readers should note that the closing of the STB and TV Units may well mark the point in the case where halcyon times may give way to discord and divisiveness, at least for a while; not so much between the Debtors and any of their Committees but rather between the Equity Committee and NXP. Given that the Equity Committee has filed a Motion for a Rule 2004 Exam of NXP as well as certain of its affiliates and directors and given that NXP has been non-responsive to any related requests for production of documents or tendering of witnesses for deposition, to say the least, it is going to get very interesting. While it is early in the process to know anything for a certainty, suffice it to say the Rule 2004 Exam Motion filed by the Equity Committee provides a broad outline of a set of transactions the contours of which would appear to suggest that the purported business relationship between NXP and the Debtors may instead be tantamount to the archetypal Parasite/Host relationship. The Rule 2004 Exam motion will be heard before the Honorable Judge Sontchi on May 15, 2012.

[eastunder]

NXP Responds to Rule 2004 Examination Motion

http://thediligentinvestor.blogspot.com/2012/05/nxp-responds-to-rule-2004-examination.html

On May 9, 2012, NXP filed papers [Dkt. No. 553] in the Trident Microsystems Chapter 11 cases refuting each and every assertion made by the Equity Committee in its Rule 2004 Examination Motion and has asked that the Motion be denied.


NXP contends that the Equity Committee, in a “blatantly improper attempt to assert
negotiating leverage,” has engaged in abuse and harassment through its “procedurally defective, overly broad and unduly burdensome discovery”. It contends that the Equity Committee has proceeded with a “lack of good faith” and that it “has not complied with its obligation to engage in a meaningful meet-and-confer conference with NXP”. Despite its status as largest creditor, largest customer, largest shareholder (approximately 60%), and despite its past representation of various board seats and high level executive positions, NXP represents that it “...was never in a position to control Trident and force it to take actions not in its best interest.”


It appears that the Equity Committee’s view of the world and that of NXP could not be more discordant. While the Committee paints a picture that would reveal NXP as a bully that imposed its will and systematically bled the estate of all of its cash until there was no more blood letting to be had; NXP casts a different light, presenting itself as a victim of the Equity Committee’s attempts to leverage “nuisance value” from them.


Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, or whether the truth lies somewhere in between, it is clear that the gloves have now come off.