There is no mystery here.
<<After the firing of Bramson and the hiring of Strickland at AMPEX and subsequently driving the stock price to 0 (almost) and Chapter 11 bankruptcy, anyone know why Hillside is so anxious to gain control of AMPEX?>>
Why do you say that Bramson was fired. Would a fired CEO get to maintain the same NYC office as he always has, along with an office assistant, office supplies, etc.? Would he get paid a consulting fee? The Board would have been empowered to fire the CEO, but can you identify a single instance in which the Bramson appointed Board voted against Bramson's instructions?
<<Also, why are they so fearful of a full audit and review of AMPEX's operation?>>
What do you mean besides the regular audits and reviews? Do you mean a forensic audit? At any rate, why would you expect officers and the Board to want anything investigated?
<<In addition, it sure would make more sense if Ampex would disclose the report(research/review)findings of M-CAM and Commercial Strategy to the bankruptcy court since Ampex have not disclosed it to the shareholders and are attempting to eliminate the equity shareholders through Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.>>
It might make sense to you to want the disclosure of such information, but why would you expect Ampex officers and the Board to want such disclosure?
<<By not disclosing the report findings, which they had a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholder to disclose, it sure make them look bad and suspect.>>
To borrow the words of the CFO in another context, "I'm sorry you feel that way."
<<What are they hiding?>>
No comment for now.
<<If Hillside succceeds in the takeover of Ampex, they would be paying only about $50M+ with a simple debt for equity swap.>>
I do not understand how you are concluding that Hillside is paying $50 million. And whom are they paying?
<<Anyone know who is master minding this takeover?>>
You act like there is some sort of mystery here. As a wise Roman said long ago, "Cui bono," which basically means "Who benefits?" The "mystery" is then solved. It's particularly easy in this case. |
