"Too many PXUPA holders are simply here to cause PPX despair to...

"Too many PXUPA holders are simply here to cause PPX despair to try force them to pay more than they paid (themselves for PXUPA), almost a blackmail strategy "

A funny logic, Firsova! When does anyone ever invest in anything not expecting to get back more than what he or she paid for it? So, is the motive behind every investment a 'blackmail' strategy?

You also say: "If the offer of fair value is not accepted I suspect PPX directors will get back to running their business and ignore hybrid holders again just as Mr Boon did , and over time repair the PPX business and then come back to hybrid holders when the stock is say 40c , and offer 50-70 PPX for each hybrid"

Another funny comment! I hope the directors keep focussing on improving the business, because without this, whether there is conversion or not, all holders will be doomed sooner or later. However, if PPX sp does get to 40c after the directors have improved the business, PXUPA will also be well on the way to full recovery of its face value and be very likely selling at more than $50 per security on the market, whence an offer of 50-70 PPX for each hybrid will represent only half of the PXUPA market price at the time!!

It is interesting that several posters have argued for PXUPA holders to accept (if an offer is made) conversion at ratios ranging from 100 to 200 PPX shares per PXUPA security, even if the proposed 'fair' conversion ratios at the lower end are well below even the current PXUPA market price. And the basis of some of these arguments is that because PXUPA is not receiving any income, its real value on NPV basis is lower than the market price. But they conveniently forget that the same argument can be applied to PPX, which is not producing any income for the shareholders and, therefore, on the same NPV basis, should also be valued similarly lower than the current market price. So these proposed ratios won't work... and we are back to the circular and erroneous arguments confusing value with market price whichever way it suits one!!!

As I have argued in my previous two posts, if the company wants to maximise value transfer from PXUPA to PPX, earlier an acceptable offer is made to PXUPA holders the better while the PXUPA price is so low despite its higher ranking vs PPX in case of default. The longer the company waits, the harder it would be for PPX to benefit at the expense of PXUPA... because of the following:
(i) if company's performance improves over time, PPX value (and market price) will go up, and so will PXUPA's, so PXUPA holders will await exit at close to the PXUPA face value... ie. opportunity to take out PXUPA at a significantly lower price is lost, or
(ii) if the company's performance continues to deteriorate, the directors may be forced to put the company into administration, in which case PPX value will definitely be zero, but PXUPA may still be left with some residual value!

And I agree with those posters who are suggesting that if the company wants to make an acceptable offer to the PXUPA holders it must be in conjunction with a complete and sustainable capitalisation proposal for the company going forward, including any CR if intended!

(Holding both PPX and PXUPA)