just to be clear, this is exactly what i said about the forbearance agreement that i believe you are referencing in your little rant..
"for the rest of your questions about the default and sr creditors, read all 3 of the documents filed on nov 5, 2015 and make sure you fully comprehend those documents. the answers to all of your questions are in there."
if the sr subs did receive equity in bankruptcy, they would likely become the majority holder, and their vote would be required in order to get majority approval for a tender offer. the same would be true even if the sr creditors receive equity. you can just decide one day to take a company private...it requires approval by a majority of shareholders.
also, as long as the reorg plan meets certain criteria, and the sr subs don't have to accept the offer of equity. it can be given to them against their will (this is called cram down).
you do seem to be getting angry, though. is your anxiety running higher as this all starts to unfold? if so, the next month should prove to be quite interesting for you.
lol, i never said the missed payment was due to the forbearance agreement. i said it was explained in the forbearance agreement. learn to read.
i'm not sure what you mean when you say "it is a payment plan by court order". i have asked you before, and you never replied...what do you mean by that? are you referring to the fact that they went through the prepackaged bankruptcy in 2013? or, are you referring to the bankruptcy in 2009/2010? if so, that in no way prevents the company from taking the measures they have taken. if you believe that i am missing something, please cite the relevant law and anything from any court order that proves your point. thanks, in advance. i can't prove that something preventing this doesn't exist (it's extremely difficult to prove a negative), but if you are correct, you should easily be able to prove that something does exist that prevents this.
trust me, i understand the legal system, especially as it pertains to bankruptcy. i'm willing to bet you are once again confused and this is another example of you saying "nah uh, you're wrong!!!!!!! " without being able to back up what you're saying.
also, even if the decision to default on the sr sub note was a decision made by the company, once again, it was not strategic. it would have been on the advice of legal counsel to avoid having a preference paymentthat would likely end up being contested by the sr secured creditors via a preference claim and reversed by the courts anyway.
you're confused because once again you look at the whole thing backwards. this isn't a strategy that dxm is implementing because they plan to benefit from it. this is a strategy forced on dxm by the senior creditors because THEY plan to benefit from it by minimizing the losses they will take.
the default on the sr sub interest payment wasn't a "strategic default". it was a default forced by the senior creditors due to the pending financial covenant breach that almost happened last quarter and will happen this quarter.
i know, it's crazy to think the senior creditors can exert that much control over the company considering they have only lost well over $6,000,000,000 already and still have $2,000,000,000 at stake, but they do have the legal ability to force this situation on dxm.
why do you always spell his name jeo? is that intended to be some sort of anti-semitic joke?
like i said, they would just extend the forbearance agreement to allow the workout of the reorg plan to continue.
this was filed a short while ago...
"Pursuant to the First Amendment, the forbearance period (the “Forbearance Period”) under the Forbearance Agreement, which was previously set to expire at 11:59 p.m. (New York time) on November 23, 2015, was extended such that it will expire no later than 11:59 p.m. (New York time) on December 14, 2015. The Forbearance Period remains subject to early termination upon the occurrence of certain termination events previously disclosed in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on November 5, 2015."
they were trading around 2.90 at the beginning of november. they last traded at 4.12 on november 23. they're still priced as if they're worthless at a 96% discount, even though they have gone up a little bit from a 97% discount. if that improvement is your glimmer of hope, you should be afraid about your long equity position. but, congrats if you managed to buy them around 2.90.
nice try, but the company began warning that they would likely breach their covenants in their june 30 10-q, which was filed on 8/7/15. the board made the decision to give joe walsh a raise on 8/27/15.
rather than making up how you would like this to work in fantasyville, you should sit back and take notes to learn how it actually works according to law.
"They are legal owners of the equipment, they can do whateer they want with it."
this company doesn't really own any "equipment". they own some computers, servers, desks, etc, and that's about it. but, the company is limited in what they can do with that stuff due to the covenants. what's your point here?
you are correct that corporations are legally allowed to issue dividends. they are also legally obligated to comply with contracts they have signed. the covenants prevent the company from paying dividends. the creditors could very rapidly block the dividend in court before it was ever paid. are you being serious, or do you really not get it?
the forbearance agreement expires at 11:59PM tonight. assuming everything is going well, the sr creditors' administrative agent will likely just extend the forbearance agreement if more time is needed to finalize the plan. the expiration of the plan won't necessarily trigger any news right away.
they have to have 10 consecutive days of market cap above $15m by december 28th to avoid being delisted. it's going to be a miracle if they can pull off a restructuring and get everything accomplished in a manner to get market cap above $15m in time for that to happen, and even if they do, existing shareholders will have been wiped out by then anyway.
there is a potential for them to change from nasdaq global select to nasdaq capital market, but in order to pull that off, they would have to register and list some of the debt. that's probably not going to happen.
my gut tells me they will probably get delisted, moved to otcbb, those shares will get cancelled in bk, and then they will emerge with new shares that meet the requirements to be listed on one of the nasdaq markets.
either way, they are likely getting delisted soon due to their market cap.
the company cannot issue a dividend. their debt covenants prohibit it. I know you will ask me for proof of that...from their last 10-q:
"Each of the senior secured credit facilities described above contain certain covenants that, subject to exceptions, limit or restrict each borrower's incurrence of liens, investments (including acquisitions), sales of assets, indebtedness, payment of dividends, distributions and payments of certain indebtedness, sale and leaseback transactions, swap transactions, affiliate transactions, capital expenditures and mergers, liquidations and consolidations. For each senior secured credit facility, we are required to maintain compliance with a consolidated leverage ratio covenant and a consolidated interest coverage ratio covenant (the “Financial Covenants”). Each of the senior secured credit facilities also contain certain covenants that, subject to exceptions, limit or restrict Dex Media's incurrence of liens, indebtedness, ownership of assets, sales of assets, payment of dividends or distributions or modifications of the senior subordinated notes. "
the company can't just destroy anything of value. what do you mean by that?
"Op cash flow is actually up since last quarter."
op cash flow was $89m in q2, $63m in q3. however, quarter over quarter cash flow trends dont tell you much due to normal seasonality, you need to look at year over year. cash flows in 2015 are down 35% since 2014. there is most definitely a collapse in cash flows, and ther has been a sustained trend of both cash flow and ebitda declines along with revenue declines.
"They are banks, they most certainly do not want to record this as a non-performing loan "
please tell us about the accounting for these credit facilities. whats the gaap?