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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Royal Oak-RYO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: roger fontaine who wrote (1652)	3/26/1999 2:03:00 AM
From: Michael Bidder	Respond to of 1706

Roger, Thanks for the updates (Some of us are still reading this board). I think it's been over for a long time now. Everyone is going through the motions. The fat lady has left the stage and is singing at another venue, perhaps a funeral home (LWN). Michael Bidder

To: roger fontaine who wrote (1652)	3/26/1999 8:31:00 AM
From: Daniel Chisholm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1706

Roger, thanks indeed for the update. Where did you get it? Since I am still short (in fact, I significantly increased my short position recently), news of the twists and turns are still very much of interest to me. Michael Bidder, I think that in some sense "it's over", however the devil is in the details. There is now no way, no how (IMO) that any value can be salvaged for the common shareholders. However many others also have exposure to this (senior and junior creditors, suppliers, employees, etc). Hopefully the bankruptcy of the company can be resolved in the least painful and least wasteful manner. Prior to Royal Oak I'd never heard of Judge Farley, but (from the news releases at least) it sounds like he's running a pretty tight ship. - Daniel

To: roger fontaine who wrote (1652)	3/26/1999 2:10:00 PM
From: Daniel Chisholm	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1706

Another update, I got an "indication" for Royal Oak's bonds today, apparently the 12.75% are indicated at 18 bid 25 offer. I'll have to go over the numbers again, I was expecting a lower quote. Does it make sense that you can buy a claim on these assets at 25 cents on the dollar? Let me take a quick whack at it (without the balance sheet in front of me - hopefully I'll remember all the big bits). Trilon's CCAA (court supervised superpriority) financing (call it $10M US) comes first, then Trilon's $120M (US) senior. $175M (US) at 25 cents on the dollar is $43.75M (US). Add these numbers up and I get $174M US. Does this mean that the bonds are priced to indicate an expected liquidation value (or CCAA resolution "expection value") of the company (i.e., principally Kemess) of $174M? Anyone agree with me? Anyone disagree with me? Anyone listening at all? ;-) - Daniel