20 buyers now circling Virgin Australia
No Mick. "Unequivocally" was unequivocally the wrong adverb to use. Middleton J effectively said to the parties: Go away and sort this information sharing issue out, or I will.
However, I know where my money would be, if I were silly enough to bet out the eventual outcome.
However, I know where my money would be, if I were silly enough to bet out the eventual outcome.
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call me stupid but why would Bain be prepared to put up over $600 million as an immediate injection along with presumably $20-50 million so far in costs of getting the process to here if they weren’t somewhat assured of taking over the company? I know that amount of money is probably loose change to these people but I’m guessing they don’t get that cash back if it falls over.
Big business isn’t my area but doesn’t it defy logic and fiscal sense to pump that much cash into something you “might” own?
If the administrator had the cash to run a skeleton operation (But not ramp up) until the approval of any deal, why didn’t Bain just wait until then to inject the cash. Is it simply about being able to ramp up and protect their possible investment for down the track and $600 million is just the cost of doing that?
Big business isn’t my area but doesn’t it defy logic and fiscal sense to pump that much cash into something you “might” own?
If the administrator had the cash to run a skeleton operation (But not ramp up) until the approval of any deal, why didn’t Bain just wait until then to inject the cash. Is it simply about being able to ramp up and protect their possible investment for down the track and $600 million is just the cost of doing that?
Last edited by Boeingpilot738; 12th Jul 2020 at 00:46.
No Mick. "Unequivocally" was unequivocally the wrong adverb to use. Middleton J effectively said to the parties: Go away and sort this information sharing issue out, or I will.
However, I know where my money would be, if I were silly enough to bet out the eventual outcome.
However, I know where my money would be, if I were silly enough to bet out the eventual outcome.
In terms of there being any doubt as to the court's ruling against the applicants, was there any? The application was refused, with costs, save paragraph 5 which simply related to the provision of notice of any further applications to the Court.
If the administrator had the cash to run a skeleton operation (But not ramp up) until the approval of any deal, why didn’t Bain just wait until then to inject the cash. Is it simply about being able to ramp up and protect their possible investment for down the track and $600 million is just the cost of doing that?
I presided at a meeting of the Committee of Inspection held on 1 July 2020 at 11am. At the meeting, I informed the Committee of Inspection that the Administrators had caused the Virgin Companies to enter into a facility to fund the ongoing administration and had granted security to support that borrowing.
A cash injection to cover the loan amount was almost certainly a requirement for a compliant proposal. That's the Bain cash injection.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: BAO
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'if' bit, would seem to be the problem/and has been for the whole journey (hence, the events of the process)- the show did not have the endurance to traverse the process/administration, apparently........
rgds
S28- BE
rgds
S28- BE
Last edited by Section28- BE; 12th Jul 2020 at 01:26. Reason: sorry, 'Mick' has it covered/nailed- shall leave it here....
<snip>
Pari Passu means that all members of the same class of creditor have to be treated EQUALLY. That also extends through time. If that were not the case, companies could finance themselves forever by defaulting on their current debt and then taking on new debt, then defaulting, rinse and repeat.
The practical market for defaulted bonds revolves around buying worthless national bonds and then, when the country tries to borrow more from the IMF, world bank, etc. sticking it to them to pay out their existing bonds before they can borrow again. Patient traders make lots of money this way.
<snip>
Pari Passu means that all members of the same class of creditor have to be treated EQUALLY. That also extends through time. If that were not the case, companies could finance themselves forever by defaulting on their current debt and then taking on new debt, then defaulting, rinse and repeat.
The practical market for defaulted bonds revolves around buying worthless national bonds and then, when the country tries to borrow more from the IMF, world bank, etc. sticking it to them to pay out their existing bonds before they can borrow again. Patient traders make lots of money this way.
<snip>
Only read this article if the words Trump, China & Bonds interest you. Slightly relevant to this story only.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...que-china-debt
Mick,
Where did you come up with that unequivocally conclusion? Is it stated somewhere? The application for the Panel was not refused, it was withdrawn!
"The application concerned, among other things, whether certain circumstances regarding the process conducted by the Administrators of VAH were unacceptable and had the effect of precluding an alternative deed of company arrangement being presented to VAH’s creditors at the second creditors’ meeting (see TP20/40). The Panel is satisfied that it is not against the public interest to consent to the applicants withdrawing their application.
The Panel will publish its reasons for the decision to consent to the withdrawal in due course on its website The Takeovers Panel."
The Federal Court requested (cautioned) the Administration to give as much information as possible and yes, to provide notice in advance of any changes to current Deed.
They agreed on that as far as I am aware.
There is nothing that says otherwise, I posted that hearing for clarity. Did I miss something?
Where did you come up with that unequivocally conclusion? Is it stated somewhere? The application for the Panel was not refused, it was withdrawn!
"The application concerned, among other things, whether certain circumstances regarding the process conducted by the Administrators of VAH were unacceptable and had the effect of precluding an alternative deed of company arrangement being presented to VAH’s creditors at the second creditors’ meeting (see TP20/40). The Panel is satisfied that it is not against the public interest to consent to the applicants withdrawing their application.
The Panel will publish its reasons for the decision to consent to the withdrawal in due course on its website The Takeovers Panel."
The Federal Court requested (cautioned) the Administration to give as much information as possible and yes, to provide notice in advance of any changes to current Deed.
They agreed on that as far as I am aware.
There is nothing that says otherwise, I posted that hearing for clarity. Did I miss something?
The matter that was being discussed was whether the bondholders had a right to information above and beyond what they would be entitled to as creditors. And the ruling was that they were not. They will get access to the same information as all the other creditors prior to the second creditors' meeting such that they can make informed and considered decisions at that meeting. Neither being a bondholder nor an unsuccessful bidder confers on Broad Peak Investment or Tor any special rights or privileges beyond that ordinarily conferred on them as creditors.
Separately, that application to the Takeovers Panel, frankly, was never likely to have even been heard by them. It was an attempt to work around the Federal Court ruling on the confidentiality of the Bain proposal. I suspect that when the Takeovers Panel publish their reasons, one of them will be that that matter was then currently before the Federal Court and applications for relief sought by the applicants was available through recourse to that Court.
Last edited by MickG0105; 12th Jul 2020 at 08:33. Reason: Clarification re parties
The rights of the bond holders and the doca will perhaps be decided in court. Nothing is set in concrete despite what Mick thinks. This is a wrestling match, not a Kabuki play.
Looks like the bondholder issue is behind us!?
https://www.flightglobal.com/strateg...139279.article
https://www.flightglobal.com/strateg...139279.article
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: BAO
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Federal Court- 10 July 2020
Written Judgment of the proceedings of 10 July 2020 (published 15/07/20), should it be of interest.
Link here: https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services...2020FCA986.pdf
rgds
S28- BE
Link here: https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services...2020FCA986.pdf
rgds
S28- BE
Latest. I take this to be a last minute attempt to block Bain. My gut feel is that Bain will have proved to have completely overpowered and outmaneuvered Deloittes, the Unions, major creditors and the Federal Government. When the full extent is known, most people will want to vomit.
I would expect Bain is now “feeling up” major creditors to get them onside. That involves a combination of stick and carrot, but mainly stick. Contrary to popular opinion, creditors managers couldn’t give a rats about. losing other people’s money, they are much more concerned that they won’t get blamed. Bain will exploit that fear to get them lined up behind its DOCA. I give Temasek and Tor no chance.
https://www.theage.com.au/business/c...20-p55dqk.html
I would expect Bain is now “feeling up” major creditors to get them onside. That involves a combination of stick and carrot, but mainly stick. Contrary to popular opinion, creditors managers couldn’t give a rats about. losing other people’s money, they are much more concerned that they won’t get blamed. Bain will exploit that fear to get them lined up behind its DOCA. I give Temasek and Tor no chance.
Virgin Australia bondholders trying to derail the bankrupt airline's sale to Bain Capital are pushing administrators Deloitte to let them meet Virgin's management, unions and other creditors to help finalise their rival relaunch proposal.
Singaporean hedge fund Broad Peak and Hong Kong investor Tor on Monday sent Deloitte a draft Deed of Company Arrangement (DOCA) that would see them and other bondholders owed a combined $2 billion take control of Virgin, a spokesman for the bondholders said..........
.......
Broad Peak and Tor, which are owed $300 million, and others bondholders fear they will receive less than 10¢ in the dollar under the Bain deal, and propose swapping their debt for equity while pouring $800 million in fresh cash into Virgin to recapitalise the business.
"We have the funds and the ability to implement this proposal and firmly believe that our proposal represents the best option for Virgin Australia, its employees, creditors, stakeholders and the Australian community," a spokesman for the bondholders said.
"Engagement with Virgin management, unions, lessors and other stakeholders is a priority for the bondholders, starting this week."
Singaporean hedge fund Broad Peak and Hong Kong investor Tor on Monday sent Deloitte a draft Deed of Company Arrangement (DOCA) that would see them and other bondholders owed a combined $2 billion take control of Virgin, a spokesman for the bondholders said..........
.......
Broad Peak and Tor, which are owed $300 million, and others bondholders fear they will receive less than 10¢ in the dollar under the Bain deal, and propose swapping their debt for equity while pouring $800 million in fresh cash into Virgin to recapitalise the business.
"We have the funds and the ability to implement this proposal and firmly believe that our proposal represents the best option for Virgin Australia, its employees, creditors, stakeholders and the Australian community," a spokesman for the bondholders said.
"Engagement with Virgin management, unions, lessors and other stakeholders is a priority for the bondholders, starting this week."
https://australianaviation.com.au/20...paign=21072020
Virgin Australia’s administrator has told creditors it won’t be accepting a rival bid from bondholders – despite a Federal Court judge insisting the group can put their alternative proposal to a vote.
Deloitte made the declaration in a letter sent on Friday, which also confirmed that ‘winning’ bidder Bain has already pumped $125 million into the business to keep it trading. More
Virgin Australia’s administrator has told creditors it won’t be accepting a rival bid from bondholders – despite a Federal Court judge insisting the group can put their alternative proposal to a vote.
Deloitte made the declaration in a letter sent on Friday, which also confirmed that ‘winning’ bidder Bain has already pumped $125 million into the business to keep it trading. More
Last edited by Chris2303; 21st Jul 2020 at 01:35.
https://australianaviation.com.au/20...paign=21072020
Virgin Australia’s administrator has told creditors it won’t be accepting a rival bid from bondholders – despite a Federal Court judge insisting the group can put their alternative proposal to a vote.
Deloitte made the declaration in a letter sent on Friday, which also confirmed that ‘winning’ bidder Bain has already pumped $125 million into the business to keep it trading. More
Virgin Australia’s administrator has told creditors it won’t be accepting a rival bid from bondholders – despite a Federal Court judge insisting the group can put their alternative proposal to a vote.
Deloitte made the declaration in a letter sent on Friday, which also confirmed that ‘winning’ bidder Bain has already pumped $125 million into the business to keep it trading. More
Now wait for the injunction given the Judge's order....
I suspect Deloittes hands are tied by clever Bain. That injection of $125 million would have done the trick. I would expect there is a clause in that heads of agreement that Deloittes agreed to giving Bain the rights to recover $250 million from Virgin and Deloittes if the deal doesn't go ahead. That means Bain wins even if it loses. I've had a VC try that on me.
Apparently break fees are not uncommon in deals of this size. What isn’t clear to me is how the administrator can ignore a ruling, and if in fact they may be solely on the hook for any such fee if things unravel with Bain. The sale may have been conducted completely above board, but it doesn’t quite smell that way.
Austral, Deloitte can’t ignore the ruling. What they are saying is just ultra aggressive crap from Clayton Utz. They have a reputation as attack dogs. Just because Deloittes says something does not make it true. This is what I mean about llying they all do it at that level. They will ignore Middleton unless the bond holders stump up money and take it back to his court. Even then they may appeal.
‘’They will say anything and the only way to stop them from #4@%ing you over is to take them back to court. Naturally if you have no money legal agreements are unenforceable at that level.
To put that another way, as a consumer you have rights and there are standards for consumer. protection, mortgage agreements, house and car sales, etc. At the Deloitte / Bain level it’s the law of the jungle. Look at that POS Clive Palmer for example.
‘’They will say anything and the only way to stop them from #4@%ing you over is to take them back to court. Naturally if you have no money legal agreements are unenforceable at that level.
To put that another way, as a consumer you have rights and there are standards for consumer. protection, mortgage agreements, house and car sales, etc. At the Deloitte / Bain level it’s the law of the jungle. Look at that POS Clive Palmer for example.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: BAO
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"IT" is Seriously- 'Rockin' over at the Fed Court.... Apparently????
Bloody- ALL GO/Trading in Real-Time....
Shall just leave the 'bulk' link here: https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services...rgin-australia
For those that maybe 'interested'- to have a trawl through/or not.
Anybody got a 'CFM56-7B24' to Loan for a bit/tad...???, it's OK- just askin.......
rgds all/& Be Well
S28- BE
Shall just leave the 'bulk' link here: https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services...rgin-australia
For those that maybe 'interested'- to have a trawl through/or not.
Anybody got a 'CFM56-7B24' to Loan for a bit/tad...???, it's OK- just askin.......
rgds all/& Be Well
S28- BE
The bloody all go ‘trawl’ and Well Be ‘tad’ you’ll be good link /arn 22 trap 21 UHF !*: https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/a...on-2872020.pdf
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: MEL
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jayne Hrdlicka isn't letting the grass grow under her feet while she waits for Bain to officially take over Virgin Australia and appoint her as either Chairwoman or a Board director, Hawaiian revealed today that she has been appointed to the board of Hawaiian Airlines. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12351852