"Trust Me, I know what I'm doing."
Was that SledgeHammer?
Or Matty, Kurt, and Joe?
Or Manny, Moe, and Jack?
Look, if you're spouting the correct stuff, just post the words. I have not read the Indenture. I can't afford the $125. But I have access to some info from management that causes me to question the certitude. Since the issue has been on the table for months, I would have assumed more concrete info would have surfaced, were it "in the bag". The "Market" is pricing the TAPS at ~1/3 the return which would indicate some doubt. The current relationship between prices of MDX and MDM is approx. historic. The simple Graham arbitrage formula would suggest that with $14 of upside and $1 of downside at a cost of $3 with a time constant of 15 months (Up 4.67X, Down 0.3X), there must be a significant risk factor.
I must confess that I have a bias about positions like these - I liken them to rooting for Cancer. It's real. Your side may win. But it's a hell of a way to run a civilization. The whole situation smacks of bad faith: from formation of MDM, to issuance of TAPS, to State of CA intervention, to this convention of cockroach lawyerese. (And I actually thought that Crawford was trying to take the friction out of the system.)
It is instructive for investors to know what kind of vermin are out there, so fact away. |
