How is this good for shareholders?
I am pretty sure the company needed to raise money, this is good for the company as they have raised $4m+. The alternative would be to not raise $4m+ and.....??? The company raising needed funds even at not so desirable terms is still a positive for the shareholders when compared to the alternative of not raising funds.
Obviously no shareholder is going to be happy with the change from 4.5c and 1:3 options going to 4c and 1:1 options. As a long term holder I would of preferred the original term sheet. No share holder has said anything different. You are stating the obvious.
Instead of continuing to prattle on why don't you inform us of what they should of done differently?
The QIC deal fell through as EQR could not meet the original terms and the revised terms were not agreeable so they walked away.
They went to market for funds and got squeezed. Do you think the company chose to reduce the CR terms to a worst deal even though they could of got better? I imagine this was the best the market was willing to offer and EQR took it.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
