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 : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric Yang who wrote (9470)	3/14/1998 5:07:00 PM
From: Phillip C. Lee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213176

Eric, There is no point to worry about bond/stock conversion because those bondholders are not the same group of stockholders. We all have discussed here the whole morning. You could review all we are talking in this morning. Phil

To: Eric Yang who wrote (9470)	3/14/1998 7:45:00 PM
From: J R KARY	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213176

Hi Eric how's your Hong Kong visit going ? The bond conversion is at $29 but it appears they can convert for any amount if AAPL agrees . The last prospectus (supplement #6) was filed 12/17/97 and it lists all the previous amendment dates in the beginning : sec.gov My notes from the 12/97 study are in my office but my overall take was as I posted earlier - these owners/trustees are pros and they are out to enhance shareholder value for their own benefit . Going short is not beneficial unless they saw receivership coming AND they also saw no asset recovery . Converting to stock is mildly dilutive as they abandon a note secured at $24/shr and give up 6% interest . When you check the names of the trustees in the 424B (3 & 5) forms you will see no rookies . My gut feel is they have periodically sent a EDGAR message to Jobs , maybe converting some shares , to keep him moving the stock up as possibly Amelio promised . They must be happy now though . On Hong Kong - how does AAPL's future look there ? Enjoy the trip , your stock is not snoozing, Jim K.