A very interesting situation.As a recent investor in BFC I have...

A very interesting situation.
As a recent investor in BFC I have the luxury of ignoring history (I know, at my peril) and of looking at the bigger picture: here is a company with a turnover of $100 million and rising, with a NTA of 15 cents a share and that trades at 8 cents a share. To me it appears BFC has a very good chance of having turned the corner from a disastrous first few years to have a quite promising business future. The disgruntled have good reason to be disgruntled and the IMA with BAM is the worst possible structure for a new company that goes wrong in its first years. It doesn't work for shareholders but it has protected BAM, but the terms were all laid out in the prospectus for earlier buyers.
Assuming that Resolution 1 was voted down and that R 2 would have been passed, the BFC Board doesn't work any more. Since most of the BAM-aligned parties are large BFC shareholders, they can't vote on IMA matters. (One for the minority shareholders there).They may feel that a voluntary termination of the IMA is the lesser of all the evils they face: what they lose in BAM fee revenue should be offset by a potential increase in the share price when the minority shareholders are released from the IMA skim.
A very interesting situation.