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.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (35585)	5/19/2009 2:29:26 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

As I have said, Tim... ANYONE with skin in the game can propose any plan of reorganization to the Court that they want to. There is no ban on ideas or plans..... Yes you've said that multiple times, but its pretty meaningless, esp. the idea on bans on ideas. No one is arguing that it is illegal to propose plans. and there certainly have been no other participants in the bankruptcy case willing to put forward the BIG BUCKS that are required to operate the company during this time in bankruptcy so that it is even possible to reorganize it into a more viable form. So what. The fact that the government is putting a lot of money forward may make it get its way, but that doesn't mean its way is a good idea. It can be reasonably argued that putting the money forward is a bad idea itself, but even if you disagree that doesn't mean that whatever the government decides is the best way that things could be done, or even that it isn't a really poor way of doing things. Also its not just that the government has put money in to Chrysler, its that the government has put money in to the other creditors (in a number of cases even pressuring them to take it), and is using that as a way to control their "vote" on the issue. Now, as far as your comment "shouldn't be followed"... as I have discussed above, since there ARE NO OTHER PLANS that have been presented to the court for consideration Even if that's true, its irrelevant to the question of whether the proposal is a good plan.