price slide, page-146

Austted,

I think you missed my argument being that by not paying the $20 million PPX will be in worse shape from the resulting pressures put on it by customers and particularly suppliers - both requiring /demanding better terms to trade with a company that is saying it it shaky.

Even if suppliers tightenned terms by 7 days say from 21 to 14 days then on say $4 bill of cost, and say 9% interest p.a. this becomes ~ $12 million p.a. Further, each 1% increase in price to cover the supplier's higher risk represents $40 million p.a.

Note: I don't know actual terms but provided these figs as an example.

The above represents the supplier side only ie customer impact to be added.

That is, is IMHO there is a cost to PPX for not paying PXU distributions and this cost potentially far outweighs the benefit of paying.

Even if there was no net benefit ie ~ $0 equation, why would you not pay to deliver potential benefits to PXU and PPX holders as I considered in my earlier post?

Would hope you and others at least accept there is a cost resulting from PPX's non payment of PXU distributions and that this cost is (potentially significantly) more than the $20 mill PXU payment.

IMHO paying the distribution is the no brainer.