bbi is gone for good, page-14

Thank you, NTA is simply indicative of the market price. BHP has enormous goodwill value due to its dominant market position, management and clean balance sheet. BBI has the reverse of that due to its management, messy balance sheet and (increasing) insolvency and dilution risks. You can reach your own conclusions about what an allotment of 30b new shares will do to the market price of BBI.

My calculations are rough back-of-the-envolope stuff. My point is simply based on a premise similar to what Dargie, Melua and persistentone are saying. Management will do this deal because it is their only choice. The CI has the dollars so it makes the rules. Those rules do not have to be fair, nor reasonable. The CI knows BBI's weak hand, it is publicly available information. If BBI was private they could rely more readily on a poker-faced sale of DBCT. So it seems potential bidders want to talk to a liquidator not management.

Questions for the AGM: Why did BBI not put other assets on the block such as NGPL? If it already knew the bad situation regarding bids why did they not seek capital on more favourable terms when time was on their side? Why was the $300m debt mis-stated in the Annual Report? What did the annual report indicate bids were firm? Why should shareholders not sack them?

My posts contain opinion and speculation only. Under no circumstances should you rely upon them.