I don't see how you translate the legal condition of the note as...

I don't see how you translate the legal condition of the note as being a weak hand for the shareholders. It's a simple condition which if triggered has a very significant positive impact on the company. Anyone that suggests otherwise is a note holder. I am happy to be wrong on this so let's please have a valid point or two in support of the benefits to shareholders should the note holders be paid in full? As it is, only note holders are squealing when the suggestion to trigger the compulsory conversion clause is discussed.