Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM
Johnny get off the pipe my friend....... Liberty has 40% Ownership,..... and will decide, based on that investment, whether or not they want to convert their ownership to Common Shares......
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM
Johnny get off the pipe my friend....... Liberty has 40% Ownership,..... and will decide, based on that investment, whether or not they want to convert their ownership to Common Shares......
That actually sounds like something they'd do....
Of course that would impact the full dilution, with Liberty still getting their 40% of the common. My numbers in this case would take full dilution up to about 7.6BB. With Liberty's 40% being about 3.04BB -- and the other 9.9% being about 740MM (roughly).
740MM more shares to Liberty for $530MM worth of debt, would be equviolent to about $0.71/share, as converted.
--------
Quote:
Originally Posted by homer985
Homer.... I don't think conversion is a question. What I think is the question is When?? not if.....
Do you guys think the FCC would get involved?
One sat company buying another sat company.
As long as it's 49.9%, there's no issue -- even if they did exceed 50%, there's no issue as they're not in the same market.Quote:
Originally Posted by RMAN
Homer, can you please help me understand this?
What are the standstill restrictions that "cease to apply after two years"? Can you please offer some clarity on this? I want to know when and how they can take a controlling stake and if they could partner with another larger holder or 2 before the three year period is up. I'm also curious about the change of control debt covenants. Could Liberty and another partner or partners swoop in and buy SIRI on the cheap and merge it with DirecTV? Since Liberty owns a large stake in DirecTV, it would be like selling SIRI to themselves......
http://investor.sirius.com/secfiling...=930413-09-841
Quote:
"The Purchaser has agreed not to acquire more than 49.9% of our outstanding common stock for three years. Certain of the standstill restrictions will cease to apply after two years."
Demian, your kidding right.... do you really think that anyone reading through the BS of this filing can give you some kind of security around your investment today??? That's a scary amount of insecurity...Quote:
Originally Posted by Demian
Homer, true, I know this. I discount this fact as relevant. As you can see by my supposed timing of the purchase, admittion to this would not be helpful to the BK scare agenda.(If they acquired the shares during the huge drop under .12 cents, then they could "legally" acquire them later. I mean why wouldnt they have bought shares when it went under .15 cents? They would be crazy not too. But of course they cant do that during all what was going on.Quote:
Originally Posted by homer985
Homer, do you know to what extent the SEC filing on acquiring the shares must state details of how they acquired them, where, and how much they paid? As Liberty, cant they just put this transaction in a section that could mask this information? Basically Homer, I will respect that its impossible if it is indeed impossible to hide this information. There has to be a way for companies to hide certain details. For instance, on a banks balance sheet, you dont see how much money they make shorting gold, what you do see though is how much they made on "commodities". It just says that, no break down. So is there a similar way for maybe Liberty to hide this transaction?Quote:
Originally Posted by Demian
Read my post very carefully!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Demian
The key word to look for is: CONFIDENTIAL
The only people that know are Mel / Malone