the next leg up could push the sp past 22c , page-16

Alf

Everything is presumptions at this stage, however, when asked why not wait until values in property prices go up again as most expect in the future, GR replied drawing attention to the debt due at the end of this year. SuperLLC.

CNP has it's problems but why involve CER?? The common demonator is SuperLLC (problem trust for both)

Can CER sell a 100 percent owned property in another trust to pay down debt that is only 50percent owned in another trust?

The other reason I'm thinking along these lines is the timing. They would like a proposal to be completed before the end of the 2nd quarter of this year. Probably in the hope that this can be executed or at least proposed to the banks involve for further extension.

I believe SuperLCC is the concern for CER/CNP that has sparked the whole capital transaction issue.

For CER the other trusts seem to be long dated or Geared moderately or insignificant. This certainly does not rule out the other trusts from being tampered with but there may be different banks involved with the different trust. How do you explain to a bank that you are thinking of selling an asset linked to a partically loan facility to pay down another loan for another bank??????

If our calculations were correct and superllc was sold at book value at last valuations book value (june09) then CERs NTA may increase as equity may come back. Impairment in joint venture is 635million or slightly above 27c per share. I am however unsure what would happen to these funds as i think CNP would still have money owing????? Maybe someone could answer this for me :/

Im under the impression that CNP has negative equity in superLLC so i'm unsure how it will work. They might have to sell other properties or management to another business.

To sum up my hypothesis.
Why sell/dilute a stable trust to get money to pay off debt to another bank for another trust that is in the same country and has similar properties???? pointless?

Thoughts??