I just got my proxies today and proposal #3 is a dozy. They want the right to sell shares below NAV. At $15.83, this is unnecessary and undesirable. They still have a lot of uninvested capital. And the stock backlash from a move like that could be brutal.
Go to proxyvote.com, enter the control box # on the proxies they sent you, and vote no #3!! (1 & 2 are fine...vote yes)
Proxy-Proposal#3 ??? If AINV wants to raise capital to exploit some unusual opportunities, WHY doesn't it first offer its discounted shares to existing shareholders?
Otherwise Prop #3 smells...and is a slap in the face to its exising shareholders.
This is just a step toward maintaining the per share "dividend". Lookout for a RETURN OF CAPITAL disclaimer in the future as part of the "dividend", i.e., the dividend will NOT be 100% from earnings.
A little over a year ago I took a chance and bought some bonds on margin, actually a lot of bonds. They were in default but would pay when they had enough money and were in a position to possibly make up most if not all back interest. One bond did pay back and the other did not. WHen they were priced up near par I decided to sell since there was no more reward for the risk, and I paid off my debt and made a nice profit. My point to telling you this is that sometimes you have to take risk when no one else will or can take the risk. Management did not say that a stock sale below NAV was going to be done any time soon, but that they wanted the flexability to be able to take advatage of possible opportunities that may arise. I have read your posts before and think that you are here because you think that AINV is a well run company. If that is true then I think that maybe you need to give them the benifit of the doubt and support them. And please lets not talk politics since everyone has an opinion and most are different from each other. Lets be glad that we at least can come together and make some money in this crazy time.
Finally someone who gets it. We all are taking risk by buying into any stock. If you are buying when the stock is below NAV should you not be worried that the company would not make it, or are you looking to the future when your investment will pay off at a much higher rate than if you waited for recovery. Every stock in the financial sector that I own have stated in their conferance calls that there are many great opportunities to invest in that will reward there share holders in the future. I think that management has to be trusted to do the right thing otherwise why would you trust them with any of your money?
Another day, another 5 figures of equity...
I do appreciate the fight all of you are putting up to keep my taxes low. I don't believe I should have to pay for all of Bush's spending crap either...
Voting against #3 in no way disparages the management. It was wrong to suggest that. We all need to manage things to the best of our ability and without limitless resources, and they are no exception.
All this boils down to is a fundamental disagreement about a very very small issue of operations, and particularly the timing of it. I'm sure most of our board members voted for Bush twice, and that was a horrendous mistake on any level. That was their opinion and best judgment at the time, and it proved to be incredibly wrong. They feel this is best for the company, I don't. It ends up not being entirely their decision to CHANGE THE EXISTING BUSINESS PLAN. Changing the business plan requires approval of the shareholders at large.
So I do understand the business plan: it includes NOT spinning shares below NAV today. They want to modify the business plan. They probably also want Bush's policies to serve a 3rd term. Hopefully, neither will happen.
BTW, I supported #1 and #2, but I'm starting to agree with the person who voted against the board members for suggesting #3. Although I'm not sure the people on the ballet have anything to do with the resolution.
I trust management enough to vote them to keep their jobs. I think that's a good start, no?