Luckydog, I see what you are trying to say about the relative...

Luckydog, I see what you are trying to say about the relative 'buy-in' price that both the BBI and BEPPA holders would/may have compared to what is being offered now, but I think you are overlooking the fact that BBI and BEPPA are two different types of 'shares'. BBI is an equity holding where shareholders get the potential benefits of good management, good profits, dividends, capital growth, etc (IF THEY EXIST) but also accept that if those things are not achieved then they may receive less or none of their investment back. They are the owners of a business that may fail and must be prepared to loose everything. Preference holders on the other hand do not generally get to participate in the upside of good management, profits, etc. They just get their interest (BEPPA hasn't received any yet) and their money back (or converted to an equivalent $ amt of shares) when the debt matures - that's when/IF everything goes well. The trade off for not being entitled to share in the upside is that they are better protected (or should be) on the downside when things go wrong, i.e. like have preference to certain assets or funds upon sale/administration. What is happening now is KIND OF like the borrower (BBI) asking to repay the 'bank' (BEPPA) 40 cents instead of the $1.00 that it is owed AND at the same time asking the 'bank' to give them (the borrower who failed)an additional 4 cents out of the goodness of their heart. There is no relevance to what a BBI holder paid for their shares when considering what BEPPA holders are entitled to and I don't say that to be harsh and it's a not a good outcome for either. It's just the commercial reality of the types of holdings that they both are.

That is my simple explanation....and why BEPPA holders are not content ....it is not completely accurate, but conceptually in the ballpark I think.


Holding BEPPA; minimal BBI