Dave ... regarding your assessment of MIDLP split vs. dividend ...
You are right, in the sense that the 3:2 split alternative
accelerates the possible dilution attendant on the 1:35 conversion
which may or may not occur on 1 Oct 98 (pending stockholder vote).
Several posters have already expressed their desire to vote to
postpose the conversion of all MIDLP to 1 Oct 99 (or whatever) ...
as well as their desire to postpone it indefinitely, since they
prefer to never convert. Because of the various uncertainties,
I think it's premature to predict the relative benefits.
Characterizing the company's actions as "unethical" seems
to me to be slightly exaggerated ... I might use the word "confused"
or "uncertain" or even "ill-considered" ... and I can clearly see
how the confusion arose from the company's expression of intent outrunning their understanding of their options.
The split alternative comes with a mix of features, some good, same bad.
The dividend alternative comes with a mix of features, some good, some bad.
I myself feel ambivalent ... either way, I don't see a clear balance of advantage/disadvanteages to either alternative.
You concern about the possible dilution timing IS valid ... but so much is unknown at this point to be able to predict which way things
will settle out.
I hold a lot of MIDLP and even more MIDLW ... so we're in the same boat, experiencing the same breezes, if that helps at all. You are not alone in your concerns ... what we need now is more information, which will take time, rather than heated words.
Besides, the "dividend" press release is on record ... the company stands to take some pain if the split can be unambiguously shown to
be of detriment to the stockholders, eh?
From that point of view, we have the best of both worlds.
You technical concern IS valid, tho ... if you state your concern in different terms in the future others might be more enabled to respond to your content instead of your "tone". Thanks! |
