|
|
|
|
|
|
by gigitrix
1199 days ago
|
|
|
They have been pretty clear that they want to do this. And the balance sheet as liquidity skewed as it is is healthy, I would be extremely surprised if they get less than 95% back. These "movements" are folks asking for normal processes to be suspended for the sake of that 5% or whatever and it's going to muddy the waters vs asking for the obvious "give us some liquidity now since you can immediately secure a huge chunk of it and businesses need it" |
|
|
The big question is how much of the "run" has been paid, or will have to be paid at 100% because of transactions initiated before receivership. I also think 95% is a little bit optimistic from the get-go.
> They have been pretty clear that they want to do this.
An unspecified dividend at an unspecified time sometime next week is better than nothing, but it's still pretty toxic.