Do you have any experience in business and insolvency? Obviously not, so why not do some reading from reliable sources. The facts are clear and out in the open, so I am not sure what you are meaning. But for those wanting all the dots joined together:
The New Lenders are trying to keep the company listed on the ASX and have a smooth transition of ownership. I have previously outlined why this is for their benefit. But, if the recapitalisation agreement is not approved, they will have no choice (and will have wasted enough time) but to just take the whole company. While not the path of least resistance for them, they will see it as the only other option and ensure that they get the whole company.
If the New Lenders withdraw their financial support of SGH, the company will be insolvent (as stated by the SGH Market Updates). See the
ASIC website regarding directors obligations if the company is insolvent.
You really should read
this ASIC insolvency guide for shareholders.
Here is a snippet that you should particularly understand:
The administrator is working for the best interests of the creditors. The shareholders are ranked below the creditors in a liquidation.
If the company does go into Administration, the shareholders will end up with zero.
I give you zero for trying. You haven't been able to support any of your claims of high spending on consultancy fees or advertising and you certainly have given no indication of what you think what the process will be if the recapitalisation agreement is not approved. So you say:
"If we get the NO vote through the gloves will be off. " What does this mean exactly. I have stepped you through the facts. So now it is your turn. Or will you just give uninformed opinion with no references and links and say that something is "fishy"?
(20min delay)