Hi FO. "the simplest explanation is usually the correct one" (derived from Occam's Razor).
How can the sale of our main asset be seen in any way other than as a fire sale?
In Dec 2013 AGS had circa $21.7m in cash
AGS's share of costs (subsequently elected not to contribute) were $21.9m (jan to dec).
I don't know what our legal costs were but the court ordered AGS to pay Q's and HG 's costs of c$4.5m
In Dec 2014 GM made a loan of c$1.27m (well covered) and we had the RI (2 for 11) at 8cents.
April 27 2015 our cash was c$2.2m but rapidly decreasing
Itochu no doubt didn't like the JV partners terms and conditions. No other interest was ever announced and Q always had preemptive right. ... The rest (the confidential settlement out of court and the final offer and acceptance) we all know.
In my experience any potential purchaser would have seen our cash situation as desparate ( with or withour the stockpile). The Americans were no different; they just struck a hard bargain being pixxed off after years of frustration no doubt.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. A salutary lesson for all shareholder. What it neans to the directors we can only guess.
AGS Price at posting:
3.2¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
