On the latest SEC filing by ACAS, they have decreased the value of American Driveline to $35M from an investment of $119M. The current filing assigns a zero value to the Common Stock, Preferred Stock and warrants. The $35M is associated with the current secured debt.
Can someone interpret this action for me. I am aware that BDC's are required to value portfolio companies that are not publicly trade. What is the significance of this evaluation to a franchisee?
To all my friends on the Board. Those who don't remember Mr. Dunlap might have forgotten that he has an axe to grind regarding ACAS and AAMCO. There was a law suit that he can't put behind him and he even developed an entire website trying to make it look as if this was a big issue. What I mean by that is that this site linked to articles that he wrote under different organization names .. so that it looked like there was this big controversy, but in fact it was just one guy (Mr Dunlap) who feels like he's been wronged.
Now, I'm not going to comment (because I don't know or really care) about the merits of his complaints and their lack of remedy. I'm only posting this because one might infer from the tenor of his post/question that he's new to ACAS and the ACAS, AAMCO and the relationship. To the contrary, Mr. Dunlap knows more about the minutia of these companies and their history than I or anyone else I know on this board.
Now what he suggests about the writedown may be correct. I'm not arguing that. It's just if I wanted to know what the details were, I would have looked up his old posts, found his user name and asked him .. not the other way around!
AAMCO Transmissions, Inc. v. James M. Dunlap (Counterclaim). Filed January
19, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Pennsylvania and removed to
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on February 9, 2007 as Case No. 07-00562 (TJS).
AAMCO terminated Dunlap's franchises in Portsmouth and Chesapeake, Virginia due to
Dunlap's failure to timely pay amounts owed to AAMCO and chronic failure to timely submit to
AAMCO business reports and repair orders as required by his Franchise Agreements. When
Dunlap refused to comply with the post-termination provisions of the Franchise Agreements,
AAMCO initiated the lawsuit. Dunlap filed counterclaims in the law suit alleging breach of