Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Aahh...iNEXTV (AXC) The NEXT Thing! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hal Campbell who wrote (3927)	6/13/2001 1:27:37 PM
From: killybegs	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4169

Notes from a longterm holder/observer of Ampex…I’m passing along with all the usual caveats…. “Re the debt situation, I note from the November 2000 10Q filing for Ampex and the exhibit attached concerning the Senior Discount Notes issued by Ampex Data Systems that DDJ Capital Management is the Manager and Holder agent for the investors in the Discount Notes. DDJ manages the funds on a discretionary basis for folks like General Motors Employee Global Pension Group. So they hold the notes for investment. (source 10Q filed 11/00, Exhibit 4.1) DDJ Capital Management was and is the largest holder of the 12% Notes issued in January 1998. From the S-3 filed 3/20/98 registration statement, DDJ held 561,000 of the warrants issued with the 12% notes and that indicates a holding of 16.5 million out of the 30 million issued at that time. Don’t know what they bought of the 14.4 issued in July 1998, but they hold at least 16.5 million or 37.5% of the entire issue. What’s the point? Well, since DDJ holds 100% of the bridge loan and 37.5% of the 12% notes, it seems logical that they will continue to be accomodating in extending the maturity of the bridge loan if needed since it is in their best interest to do so. Also, it is noted that the collateral in the “collateral agreement” is the licensing agreements to receive royalties which totaled 13.3 million in 1999. I take some comfort that the deep pockets represented by DDJ should provide assurance that the royalty payers will negotiate future licensing agreements without looking solely at the Ampex balance sheet as presently constructed. DDJ certainly has an interest in seeing existing royalties and future royalties continuing to be collected.