downside risk, page-89

"If it went into administration, potentially the suitors could get the assets cheaper," Mr Wilson said.

This is what I don't get, he says it right there - the *potential* to get the assets cheaper. It's not like the assets will be simply given away. Cheaper as in 60% cheaper doesn't sound like an outcome one could reasonably expect.

I can't believe that a full takeover bid is not enough for the banks to refinance, quite seriously what more do they want. I don't understand why logic can't prevail - the banks extend until FIRB makes it's judgement, and the shareholder vote is fast-tracked (if they're concerned about it being voted down).




"I can certainly answer that: the internet service provider Eisa was under a takeover bid from Austar for 20cps in 2000 but the bid failed to reach the 90% minimum acceptance level (reached 87%) and so was withdrawn. The company went into administration immediately and Austar bought most of the assets anyway. Shareholders got zero. I am not saying that will happen in this case but it cannot be considered an impossibility."

That's certainly the kind of info I was looking for, and be great to hear of other examples. In this situation I read the takeover was for $13m, keen to hear if any more similar examples (for large companies).