settlement for Equity
messages.finance.yahoo.com/...66102&tof=4&frt=2#766102
If you review the hearing on the 6th you can clearly understand that a settlement is forthcomming and Equity is in the money. Please read:
3 THE COURT: Good morning. Before we begin, I wanted
4 to announce that we have a visitor from Germany, Judge Nietzer,
5 observing. So I'm sure the parties will be performing their
6 best today.
7 MR. ROSEN: On their best behavior, Your Honor.
8 THE COURT: I didn't want to say that.
(Funny that BR started off wrong and Walrath poked him. Lovers quarrel?)
7 Your Honor, when I stood before you, I believe it
8 was on May 24th, I was there to announce that we had -- we were
9 announcing a tentative settlement that had been reached among
10 the equity committee, the creditors' committee, the debtors and
11 what was referred to as AAOC or sometimes, in olden days, known
12 as the settlement noteholders.
13 Your Honor, I am pleased to report that all the
14 parties have been diligently working towards getting this
15 documented. However, in something as complex as it is,
16 unfortunately, it has taken slightly longer than we had
17 anticipated. And we had hoped to be before you today with the
18 seventh amended plan on file.
2 We have spoken with counsel for the equity committee
3 and, specifically, with respect to the discovery that the
4 equity committee had been undertaking prior to reaching this
5 tentative settlement and the need for the equity committee to
6 continue to finish that discovery. And last night, I spoke
7 with Mr. Sargent on behalf of the equity committee and he
8 indicated that he thought it would take about seven days to ten
9 days to complete that discovery. And we would push back the
10 hearing in order to accommodate that discovery time frame.
11 Of course, Your Honor, if we're successful in
12 documenting what needs to be documented with respect to the
13 seventh amended plan, we would come back and revisit that time
14 frame yet again like we were going to do today.
15 So what we're asking Your Honor at this point is in
16 order to allow the parties to continue, number one; in order to
17 allow the equity committee to do what they needed to do to
18 complete their process, number two; and then file if, in fact
19 they decide to do so, a comprehensive objection to the modified
20 sixth amended plan that we push back the 29th and 30th to right
21 after the July 4th weekend.
18 MR. ROSEN: We do, Your Honor, but I don't know what
19 the rest of your calendar looks like that day. And we know
20 we'd take longer than an omnibus usually does.
21 THE COURT: Well, I can give you the 5th but the 6th
22 is tied up all day.
23 MR. ROSEN: Your --
24 THE COURT: 7th and 8th have other hearings. I can
25 put you on standby. I know on the 13th I can give you the
Page 28
1 entire day.
2 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, if I could suggest --
3 THE COURT: -- and the 14th.
4 MR. ROSEN: -- perhaps we start on the 5th and come
5 back on the 7th?
6 THE COURT: If there's time. We have hearings
7 scheduled but, as you know, they may come off.
8 MR. ROSEN: Yes. And again, Your Honor, I'm hopeful
9 that we reach closure with respect to this other documentation.
10 And perhaps we won't need that day for a confirmation hearing.
11 THE COURT: The afternoon of the 6th may become free,
12 too. So let's just start on the 5th --
13 MR. ROSEN: Okay.
14 THE COURT: -- and see what the 6th, 7th and 8th
15 reveal --
16 MR. ROSEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
17 THE COURT: -- when we get there.
(This speaks volumes to everyone. Walrath offers up a bunch of good available days. Read again how BR pretty much demands the 5th saying “Yes. And again, Your Honor, [heavy sarcasm] I’m hopeful that we reach closure….” We all know the documentation he refers to is the settlement agreement, and maybe his career. I wonder what the visiting judge thought about this exchange!)
Then
MR. COFFEY: Good morning, Your Honor. Jeremy Coffey
19 with Brown Rudnick on behalf of the Trust Preferred group.
20 Just a couple of quick points. One, I understand there have
21 been ongoing negotiations between the parties. We have not
22 been part of that. We'd like to be. We had a meeting
23 yesterday with the settlement noteholders. I'll call it
24 preliminary but constructive.
(Why involve them when they will be paid in full. They would just slow things up.)
7 While we don't know the details
8 of it, my understanding is that what's being discussed is
9 fairly significantly different than what is on the table
10 currently.
(BR told them just enough to make them shut up about the settlement. I love his next statement showing he is irritated that Coffee is even bringing it up at this time “Your Honor, I think we're in violent agreement. That's exactly what I said.”)
Then
MR. COFFEY: Good morning, Your Honor. Jeremy Coffey
19 with Brown Rudnick on behalf of the Trust Preferred group.
20 Just a couple of quick points. One, I understand there have
21 been ongoing negotiations between the parties. We have not
22 been part of that. We'd like to be. We had a meeting
23 yesterday with the settlement noteholders. I'll call it
24 preliminary but constructive.
(Why involve them when they will be paid in full. They would just slow things up.)
7 While we don't know the details
8 of it, my understanding is that what's being discussed is
9 fairly significantly different than what is on the table
10 currently.
(BR told them just enough to make them shut up about the settlement. I love his next statement showing he is irritated that Coffee is even bringing it up at this time “Your Honor, I think we're in violent agreement. That's exactly what I said.”)
Then BR hints again
19 MR. ROSEN: I mean, if we are fortunate to finish the
20 documentation associated with a seventh, we would be filing a
21 disclosure statement. If the Court thought it was appropriate
22 to do it on that date, we would consider that. But otherwise,
23 it's only the sixth on that date, Your Honor.
(Obviously, if this was the start of a trial, it would not start on the 5th. The 5th is only good if BR is presenting a settlement agreement for the court to consider. That only involves BR clucking for a while and opportunity for others to be heard.)
(Hodara then brown noses a bit and reiterates: )
3. And so, I'll be quite brief
4 because Mr. Rosen not only said it correctly that Mr. Hodara
5 and the committee have been riveted on the concept of making
6 sure that satisfactory to creditors gets confirmed as promptly
7 as possible. And, of course, we have, as Mr. Rosen reported to
8 the Court at the last status conference overwhelming support in
9 the votes that came in on the sixth plan. So we are very
10 pleased that that plan has not only remained viable but that
11 Mr. Rosen has arranged with the Court for a date that is as
12 close now as July 5th. And that is, I think, as early a date
13 as we could have hoped for given the circumstances that have
14 developed. We also appreciate the report that the equity
15 committee has said that they can get their discovery done if we
16 need to go back down that route in a period of time that
17 enables a hearing to go forward on July 5th.
(What does it take for investors to see the word SETTLEMENT here?)
(Bop or someone, what is this “tranquility hearing” that BR said was so important?)
(Then Mr. Strochak gave a brilliant basic contract law argument why the suit against the board must be dismissed. (Non-parties to a contract are not liable) The debt verses equity argument will happen later, if at all. But what most folks miss is that Strochak stated openly in court that whether they are equity or debt, it doesn’t matter, they will get something. i.e. commons will be paid. Does this make everyone feel better? Steinberg tried the “complaint must be viewed most favorable to plaintiffs” crap, and accuses them of being “hypertechnical”; legalese for oops, I messed up and they caught me. He tries to throw wrap at the wall but it doesn’t stick. Walrath then gives him some lessons in contract law, gives them the real reason for her decision, which they both failed to raise/argue, and kindly gave them another month or so of earnings until this all goes away, and not having to grant a summary judgment dismissal.)
(Then Sargent, on the phone, makes a suggestive clarification: )
19 The reason that I suggested to Brian on the phone last
20 night was that July would work if that'll give us the three
21 weeks. But I think implicit in that agreement is the
22 understanding that the parties who are on the other side of
23 that discovery are not going to object because this very
24 compressed time frame is too short. You know, we're agreeing
25 to try to do this in such a tight time frame to try to
Page 81
1 accommodate, on the one hand, the need to complete these
2 settlement negotiations without moving forward on the
3 discovery. On the other hand, if the settlement negotiations
4 fall apart, we need to go forward as quickly as possible on
5 confirmation.
6 We don't -- there's three depositions that we need to
7 take. Those have been noted and then continued or cancelled
8 several times. The parties are well aware of that. We've
9 drafted a motion to compel and provided that to the other party
10 over a month ago so they're well aware of that and I think the
11 only other piece of discovery that we need is a fairly narrow
12 30(b)(6) from the debtor. So as long as we're not going to end
13 up back in front of the Court in two weeks with somebody saying
14 we don't have enough time to respond to this, we're perfectly
15 fine with this schedule. So I just wanted to make that clear
16 for the record.
17 THE COURT: All right. Hopefully, I won't have to
18 deal with that issue but the party's positions are on the
19 records.
20 MR. SARGENT: Thank you.
(The take-a-way from this is amazing. BR said nothing in response to Sargent or Walrath, yes you heard me, nothing.)