|
|
|
|
|
by marvin
2242 days ago
|
|
Why do you consider that unreasonable, when the free-market option is bankruptcy? They got to keep 5%, rather than 0! The terms of the emergency loan was a certain debt:equity ratio, so in order to qualify, their very high debt load had to be reduced. This could be accomplished in any way the company desired, and it turned out that the only viable pathway was to allow bondholders to convert their loans to new shares at a favorable price. This led to a 95% dilution for existing shareholders. If they hadn’t done this, proper bankruptcy would have been the next step. |
|