What "rational noteholder" would take voluntary administration on the hopes that some anonymous poster's rantings about what they
"might" receive from some buyer who has yet to be identified -and all the uncertainty that goes with that including not getting a sale at all in the same time period as the requested extension, getting no interest anyway once in administration, and guaranteed of getting a sale of a possibly valuable asset at a firesale price which may not get them anywhere near their original investment back . This is just as real a possibility as the unsubstantiated assumptions being made here.
Here is a newsflash, at $38 or even $45 this ground is sub economic, so you need a buyer prepared to risk the future direction of oil and with no shortage of forecasters predicting oil could either be $50 or $20 , the number of buyers lined up for this asset right now would be limited .We had one, and we no where that currently stands.The alternative is they grant the extension which also doesn't guarantee
an outcome but it gives noteholders and shareholders a chance to get a much better price for the asset, it can only be sold once after all.
If the best chance of a higher price is time , then why not agree to extension , accrue the interest, take the better conversion terms .
I fail to see how some administrator in Perth, is going to do a better job at selling an asset in the Midland basin in Texas, than the existing management who are based in Texas , where the action or lack of , is and are already talking to the prospective buyers and investment banks , not to mention they have lived and breathed the asset for the last 6years . They are going to be much more motivated to achieving a fair price for the assets than an administrator.
ps You have no idea how the majority of noteholders will vote unless you have discussed it with them personally which I doubt.
Expand
