% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. Message Board

  • mungerian mungerian Apr 6, 2005 4:00 PM Flag

    Doubletalk continues

    From Monday�s KKD press release:

    <Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. (NYSE: KKD - News; the "Company") announced today its subsidiary, Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corporation, closed senior secured credit facilities aggregating $225 million, comprised of a $75 million first lien senior secured revolving credit facility, a $120 million second lien senior secured term loan and a $30 million second lien prefunded revolving credit and letter of credit facility.>

    Note that the credit facilities were described as �closed�.

    From today�s 8-K:

    <Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corporation ("KKDC") intends to enter into a First Lien Credit Agreement dated as of April 1, 2005 by and between KKDC, the Company, the other subsidiary guarantors party thereto, the lenders party thereto, Credit Suisse First Boston, Cayman Islands Branch, Wells Fargo Foothill, Inc. and Silver Point Finance, L.L.C. (the "Credit Agreement").

    KKDC intends to enter into a Second Lien Credit Agreement dated as of April 1, 2005 by and between KKDC, the Company, the other subsidiary guarantors party thereto, the lenders party thereto, Credit Suisse First Boston, Cayman Islands Branch and Silver Point Finance, L.L.C. (the "Second Lien Credit Agreement").>

    Now, we're told KKDC �intends to enter� credit facilities dated April 1.

    Looks like they jumped the gun with that press release the other day. Wonder why they'd have done that, maybe the banks or other creditors breathing down their necks?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • You make a good point.

      Silver no doubt thinks it controls the Krispy Board with its "fire Cooper and we'll default the loan." And it probably does -- Cooper or whomever Silver chooses well entrenched even though it's the Shareholders not the Creditors who have the vote.

      The much maligned, much pilloried Krispy Board -- first flummoxed by the Livengood and the McAleers, subverted by Wachovia, preached to by McCoy, investigated by the SEC and the Special Committee, subpoenaed by Justice, hoodwinked by Cooper, and now bullied by the Wall Street sharks.

      But what if? What if at some point the individual members of the Board were to dig in their heels. Enough�s enough. What if they were to begin to understand that Silver is out to screw the Shareholders and that Cooper's fees are draining cash at a fearsome rate while he is stands hat in hand for his multi-million "success" fee ("success?" SUCCESS FOR WHOM??) What if at this late date the Board were to get its dander up and tell Cooper, Silver and all to take a walk? This on advice of counsel as a last clear chance for the Krispy Board to demonstrate shareholder concern and just possibly to do what Silver hopes to do, but with at least some faint hope of salvaging something for the shareholders; save employees from the butcher's block, reduce material costs and franchise fees and otherwise honor the franchisees as they can, and demonstrate its fiduciary duty to act in the interest of the Company not the vultures.

      Tell Silver and Cooper to take a walk. Stand to be counted. Save some small portion of their reputations and their dignity. Cover their personal exposure. Demonstrate good faith to the SEC and to Justice. It'll probably never happen. But it could. Silver, the laughing stock of the Hedgies. The Board stepping up and taking charge. The Board in some small part redeemed. Free at last. Free at last.

      They didn�t do it when they first approved the financing, why now? Could they even have understood what they were agreeing to? Will the reality begin to sink in at this late date? Fun to think about. The joke'd be on Silver. Outsnookered by the Hillbillies. The other Hedgies laughing their asses off.

      The Shareholder Meeting is in the offing and it�s the Shareholders not the Creditors who have the vote.

    • You sound like the former owners of houses that I bought at foreclosure auctions.

      Die hard people who wouldn't take $225,000 for a house worth $300,000 and that has a $100,000 mortgage... They walk away with $125,000 in their pocket.

      Nothing better than buying the house for $180,000 at auction... then they walk away with $0... I walk away with $120,000 in equity right there and then.

      I respect them, they stood up for what they believed, just like Custard made his last stand...

    • If my only choice was to sell something worth $300 million, I would sell it for $300 million.

      If you are trying to say that Krispy's only choice was to sell the company, you are a lunatic. They aren't in the position to be forced to sell anything. If they were, they would have sold the company. They wouldn't have gotten financing.

      You are making a circular argument. In your lunatic mind they had no choice but to accept the loan from Silver (even though it isn't as bad as you purport) and somehow that means that they had no choice but to sell the company or get nothing.

      Lunatic, absolutely lunatic.

    • <<< I thought about what you said with an open mind and decided that only a lunatic would say it. If you own something worth $300 million would you sell it for $225 million? >>>


      What if your only choice was between selling it or getting nothing? Would that change your mind?

      KKD had no choice but to accept the loan, no more extensions. KKD was taken to a Pawn Shop...

    • I thought about what you said with an open mind and decided that only a lunatic would say it. If you own something worth $300 million would you sell it for $225 million?

      Who wins if Krispy uses the $225 mil loan to get back on track? The shareholders and the lenders win.

      Who wins if Krispy doesn't get back on track? Nobody. The lenders and the shareholders will lose their investment.

      Now crawl back into your lunatic hole if you think a lender would give a company $225 million with the hope that they will go under. It's more lunatic that you are defending this lunacy.

    • Lunatic,

      Think about it... with an open mind...

      If you have a company that is worth $300 million and you can grab it for $225 million...

      I am not going to tell you that they are going under because the lenders want them to go under right now. I will say that worst case, the KKD goes under and they get the firm. Best case, KKD repays the loans when due and pays 9% or so interest until then.

      Who wins, the lenders. Who lost already, the shareholders.

    • Isn't it interesting that we suddenly get these aggressive, slightly crazed postings all of a sudden attacking short postings, from a screename created this morning?

      This is not someone new, just someone we had all learned to ignore.

      You too will be on ignore soon if you keep this up.

    • I think that it has to do with the idea that KZC brings independence to the table.

      KKD is not in as deep a mess as Enron, but if I were lending $225M, I would want someone that I can trust at the helm. The BoD let prior management do whatever was done.

      If he quits or is fired by the BoD, then the loan is due and payable. BoD is probably not trusted by lenders.

    • I'm not him... he stays above my level... I'm just here pointing out how stupid you are. I like have you've just changed your screen name because you've made such stupid comments in the past.

      Welcome back but you're still an idiot

    • You're dog gone tooting I criticized it. The same poster said

      "The lenders are apparently insisting that kroll stick around; they have (speculatively, since we still don't have the loan document) defined one particular default event to be something that kroll could do (presumably quit).

      So, kkd and kroll amended THEIR services agreement so that kroll wouldn't do whatever it is that the lenders are not allowing."

      And followed it up with

      "This effectively prevents the board (or future board if Kourage or Hall or somebody else were to try to stack it) from replacing Kroll."

      If you follow the entire thread instead of one small part of it you would see that this poster (di_v) jumped to a conclusion about why KK amended their agreement with Kroll and that it must mean that Kroll can't be replaced. He hasn't even seen the 8K for the loan doc yet and came to this rash conclusion.

      He's a lunatic and so are you for defending him. Or are you HIM? a multialiased lunatic?

    • View More Messages
21.000.00(0.00%)Jul 27 4:00 PMEDT