any sellers of aet&d no.1 non-voting shares?, page-5

Purchasing AET&D No 1's for .2 a pop can only be of benefit if AET&D No 1 realises some kind of absorption into whoever takes on the assets.

There is an ownership anomaly over the AET&D assets as I see it and it goes like this.

I still cannot see the legal right PIH holders on Oct 13 2010 have in owning AET&D No 1 shares whether they are voting or not according to the Beppa deal struck in Oct/Nov 2009. There may be a perceived right seeing as the Beppas received 37% of their initial cost, to participate in PIH.

I think there is probably cause to challenge the validity of the Oct 13 2010 distribution but that will depend on the distributions effect and the determination of the affected parties.

Brookfield obviously hold a big chunk of AET&D No 1 so it indicates holding their options open and controlling the outcome as much as possible of course.

Who makes the decisions of how AET&D No 1 rules over AET&D No 2 ???, AET&D No 2 has a vote over the actual sales of individual assets only and to receive the proceeds if any, I think there are no other rights existing to AET&D No 2.

As majority holder, can Brookfield buy/sell AET&D No 1 to/from whoever without consulting other AET&D No 1's or AET&D No 2 ??, as a convenient way of dumping it or as a convenient way of swallowing it, same for any other entity ??

By paying out 37% of the Beppas initial cost, PIH overall may think they own AT LEAST 37% of AET&D (which brought next to zero value to PIH) and the ex-beppas own the balance but this has never been articulated by Brookfield and wasn't part of the Beppa deal.

Interesting side note is that the BBI assets were devalued by about the same percentage that Beppas ended up with of PIH.

As you can see I think that Brookfield have reasons to be interested in gaining some value from AET&D.

ifandwhen