Just a quick comment.In negotiations it is always best to know...

Just a quick comment.

In negotiations it is always best to know what each side has to lose (and gain). Whilst the banks may have written down a portion of the debt owed to them by BNB (including subs) we (the new owners) must first get a grasp on what there number one aim is, this would obviously be payment of loans.

From my limited undertanding this is not possible from assets sales as the debt exceeds the capital value. IF the companies cash flow is secure enough that interest repayments can be satisfied whilst also allowing funds to accrue then periodic principal payments can be made (stating we will set the interest rate and zero and instead take a management fee i.e. 20% is simply misleading). The real question is how secure is the cash flow, what is the risks of the cash flow not continuing?

What I believe got peoples backs up was not the fundamental aspects of the BNB restructuring plan but the expenses associated with such a plan (meaning any surplus cash was being chewed up by management and the financiers)

Perhaps a change of tact for us noteholders should be not of say a better offer but one of "business partner" in the similar vein to the financiers. This may be via a restructure of the notes to bring down the face value (in line with something similar to the financiers have done i.e write downs) though also receiving interest just like the financiers.

If the pool of debt is say $6bil, of which $600m is the note holders the interest repayments should be made on a prorated basis, as would be an principal reductions over time.

To be looking to extract capital out of the business by way of a buyback of the notes will deter and requirements for new external funding, this is when the financiers will dig in heels and say why should you get your money out if we can't get ours. Yes this is very simplified approach but along the lines of one in all in.

Just some muzings on a saturday morning.

Cheers

Clever1