Paul, I respectfully disagree with your analysis regarding a potential T acquisition of AGRP's interest in TGNT. As I view it, AGRP is trading at a forty percent discount to NAV, excluding the value of TruePosition. The reason cited for the discount is the embedded capital gains problem attributable to AGRP's holdings in T (formerly TCI).
If AGRP were induced to sell its controlling interest in TGNT to T, perhaps an accommodation could be worked out with T or with the shareholders of AGRP to address and eliminate the embedded capital gains problem AGRP allegedly faces. This could, conceivably, allow AGRP's shares to trade at their full value, which is in excess of $90 per share excluding the value of TruePosition and the premium T would have to pay AGRP to acquire effective control of TGNT.
Succinctly, if T were to acquire AGRP's forty percent interest in TGNT and, in the process, an arrangement could be made to solve the embedded capital gains problem, the shareholders of AGRP would find themselves in an enviable position despite the fact that AGRP's portfolio would then consist largely of T shares plus the present unrealized value in TruePosition.
If such a scenario were to play out and I, as a shareholder of AGRP were now sitting with shares that were now trading at more than $100 per share, I might still decide to hold my stake in AGRP depending upon what I perceived to be the value of TruePosition. If not, I could liquidate my position in AGRP at its full value for a hefty profit.
I say all of this irrespective of the fact that you and I have a different view of value of TruePosition.
Comments, please. |
