Business Spectator article with Larkin:
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Michael-Larkin-$pd20090209-P4BUA?OpenDocument&src=sph
Couple of points:
Tony Boyd did not seem to understand, initially, the background of the BBIPL subordinated guarantee. Make no mistake - BNBG/BNB010 holders will be debt holders in BBIPL - subordinate to the senior facilities - but debt holders none the less.
The "restructuring fee" is EVERY BIT AS BAD as I have pointed out in prior posts. This is financing BNB with compounding "credit card" debt. It is terminal to the long term interests of the equity holders.
Larkin is completely a creature of the banks. He has drawn the line between those who have access to sequestered assets and those who do not. BNBG and BNB010 holders, in Larkin's mind - are on the wrong side of the ledger.
Larkin is a complete banker Quisling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidkun_Quisling)
The ordinary holders should summon a SGM - and sack the board!!
Larkin should spend his time trying to refinance, find M&A partners, convince the banks to take a debt for equity swap. Instead, we get his "excuses for failure".
BNBG holders - be warned - Larkin is coming for your money. You will not get a sausage unless you are prepared for a fight.
The only point of leverage BBSN holders have is the threat to spoil the bankers party by tipping things into administration.
BNB
babcock & brown limited
