From my previous post, was pretty much the bottom line...
"It is possible that there will be continued and ongoing Stays, but that seems more hope than reality with the previously mentioned recent events. Ignore the recent events and get bit in the rump. Some need to understand that there is another, very real, possibility - that this CCAA could come to a conclusion very quickly. It is not what folks want to read, but it is just as possible as continuing and ongoing Stays."
It is only a possibility. Not an absolute. People should Be Aware.
Wolf - Thank you for the compliment, but my posts and DD is really no more important than anyone elses. Again, Thank You. You are correct that the judge is not making the company give up whatever noteholders want. That was the past and the last we heard. There has been no disclosure since of what thenoteholders want at this time. Only that noteholders are being unreasonable/greedy. And, early on, the noteholders spoke out of place at the wrong time. Now is negotiation time, setting a Plan. The judge cannot force anything in CCAA. Noteholders must cut a deal or the company gets scuttled and Tenor gets most of the spoils because the company is on an afterburner rate of spending. With no Plan, Noteholders will lose all of their 100 large, which seems to be incentive enough.
JJ - The upcoming arb is not guaranteed. If Fung vapor locks, that is it. At least according to the MIP and what it implies. Early on, the noteholders came up with some things which are, actually, quite typical in CCAA Plans. Wouldn't fly then, but now is the time to negotiate - not earlier when they got slapped down. The noteholders want a Plan because it is a contract for the repayment of the 100 large. Right now, noteholders are completely out of the loop. Sure, shareholders enjoy that, but CCAA wants a Plan showing the guarantee of some sort of repayment in the future - even for the evil noteholders. The situation is more sticky than just getting money back. Note what Tenor did. Company Board infused with Tenor to make sure they get paid back. Typically in CCAA the Big Dawg, such as the noteholders, would be doing what Tenor did during negotiation of a Plan. For noteholders it is now about getting some control to guarantee payment. Likely Tenor is blocking giving up or making additional Board seats. That is, if they are all not in cahoots as I still think they all are.
Longk - The "little" things show the judge has not necessarily reversed course, but changed course. The Noteholders spoke out of place long ago and got slapped down. Everyone enjoyed it then. Now it is negotiation time, making a Plan, and asking for it all is not necessarily unreasonable. To shareholders, yes (funny that the company did not insist on shareholders having a say in the Plan as is done in CCAA at times). To Noteholders, maybe not. They should agree somewhere in the middle. There are three typical possibililities in CCAA. 1. Company comes out with Plan and shareholders retain some equity; 2. Company comes out with a Plan and shareholders lose all equity; 3. Company agrees to no Plan and is scuttled. Two out of three, shareholders lose. If "3" then Tenor likely gets the spoils and keeps "key" players on to finish out the arb. Both shareholders and noteholders lose out.
Look guys, not saying it is going to happen. Just a possibility and folks need to Be Aware. Odds in CCAA history are saying a Plan, sooner than later, is most likely. Fung and company is negotiating with shareholder equity, because they have nothing, absolutely nothing, else. Fung likely will use the court/mediation as an out for whatever the give-away is. Filings show Class A preferreds issued for Tenor. Class B's available, but not yet issued. Maybe "B" is for "Bondies."
