SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (479317)5/8/2009 8:23:04 PM
From: rich evans1 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573377
 
I think the big banks with 70% of the secured debt concluded that getting 29% of their 6.9bill secured debt was all they would get thru applying bankruptcy laws. The DIP financing of the US government would have priority over secured creditors and the asset sale under 363 b1 would not get enough dollars to repay the US government its dip financing plus all the 6.9 bill owed to the secured creditors. Thus by these legal machinations and maneuvers under Bankruptcy law, that is how it ends up. The secured creditors have no standing or right to decide What the US government does with the new company which bought the assets and stock with us gov money. They can negotiate with Fiat, the Union, dealers as they chose.
Rich



To: Joe NYC who wrote (479317)5/9/2009 9:29:48 AM
From: Alighieri  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 1573377
 
This is self explanatory with anyone with common sense and not in denial.

There is a difference between dissolution and trying to save a company...and there is no shortage of sideline quarterbacks with the predisposition towards political posturing while this work is underway.

Al


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News