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

Crexus Investment Corp. Message Board

foreverwhiteroses 5 posts  |  Last Activity: May 25, 2016 10:48 AM Member since: Jul 16, 2004
  • Reply to

    Convert. notes refinancing.

    by beauzeau23 May 24, 2016 3:54 PM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses May 25, 2016 10:48 AM Flag

    Why is it standard practice for companies to announce the pricing of a new note issue that doesn't include the pricing? The announcement says $300 mil 5 1/8% due in 2021 but nothing more..... You're left to guess whether it's priced at par, at a discount to par, or a premium..... This is not a BGCP specific problem, I'm just generally grousing.... and I wonder why they chose to not register the notes?

  • Reply to

    same old soup

    by benshometownflooring May 6, 2016 8:36 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses May 9, 2016 10:11 AM Flag

    A niche product people need????? That was my thought originally when I bot in over 4 years ago but thankfully, I gave up on that idea 2 years later when no revenue ramp up appeared. Another 2 years gone and STILL no new revenues. So apparently not a whole lot of people have been convinced they need this product in over 4 years.... Sooner or later, reality has to hit that "people" have already spoken about how necessary MOSY's product the marketplace.

  • foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses May 7, 2016 10:16 AM Flag

    You have to love the wording of the announcement - "Harris & Harris ....will begin to offer ...the opportunity to co-invest with Harris & Harris..." Yes, come along with us on the investment opportunity of a lifetime! Check out our long-term performance for our shareholders and join in on the fun they've had! Who wouldn't want to be offered that opportunity to duplicate the wealth destruction we've achieved for them once again?

  • Reply to

    A Botched Bond Deal?

    by foreverwhiteroses Mar 29, 2016 6:53 PM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Apr 1, 2016 4:12 AM Flag

    Well I'm not quite sure of your point or who's right hand and left hand you're referring to, however, there does seem to be a closer direct correlation of equity prices to bond prices in junk (meaning below investment grade, not junk junk) credits than in higher rated companies. Normally, I would say you're comparing apples to oranges when you say "but the stock went up when the bond went down," but in junk, the direction common takes does seem to have an impact on the direction the bonds take as all 6 IStar bond issues and the preferreds all did better yesterday following the common. That still doesn't negate the argument of a botched bond deal when bond investors in a $275 mill deal suffer immediate declines in the range of 3 points. Just like an IPO, a successful bond deal is normally one that leaves a little bit of meat on the bone for investors to enjoy, thus encouraging future investment in the issuer's securities be they equity or debt. The more likely it is that the issuer needs to return to the table, the more important it is for this to be done imho.

  • foreverwhiteroses by foreverwhiteroses Mar 29, 2016 6:53 PM Flag

    Thursday JP Morgan, Barclays, BoA and Wells Fargo marketed an Istar bond issue priced as 6 1/2% due 2020 to refinance the IStar bonds coming due in 2016. The original issue was increased in size from $250 mil to $275 mil, so you would think the demand for the bonds at this price was well documented in advance. But the price of these bonds has already tanked to 7% +. That's over a 3 point drop. To my way of thinking, that's a badly run new issue, and a poorly run syndicate. The bad taste left in the mouths of new investors creates ill will for potential IStar debt buyers in the future at a time when Istar could use all the encouragement it can muster for potential bond buyers. That bad taste now associated with Istar new issue debt far surpasses the interest savings IStar enjoyed from JP Morgan's mispricing.... This is not how a well run syndicated bond issuance should go.... IMHO, IStar's underwriters did not do them any favors in the long run by apparently pricing this issue too high (too low in yield).