From: ratu...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 18:10:45 -0700
Local: Fri, Aug 10 2007 9:10 pm
Subject: Re: Down 95% from February: Bankruptcy or takeover?
> AHM was not a "reasonable" company. It was part of a serious fraud Certainly there were problems with the home mortgage industry, but > perpetrated against the American home buying public and played fast > and loose with consumer lending rules. It was a morally bankrupt > enterprise. your characterization seems unfair. A claim of fraud is a criminal allegation. I have seen no evidence of anything actionable, nor have I even heard word of investigation of such matters. I am not a fan of AHM, but I would say they are guilty of poor judgment, yes. Fraud, no. This seems to be the belief of the feds and most in the industry also. My comparison stands. Compared to GOFH, AHM at least had a real >GOFH does not have debt, only the "Notes". If there are Uuh...yeah. If you read through the agreement, the private "notes" > convenants in the notes that reflect a techncial default please > enlighten me. Those notes were created in May/June during the > "convenant lite" times. held against GOFH are pretty draconian. Full ratchet antidilution etc. The purchasers have the right to PUT notes back on GOFH. It's called debt. Not to mention the rate GOFH is burning through > Even though GOFH is publicly traded, I believe that there are Substantiation of claim, please. > sufficient inside holders that own a majority of shares, so a takeout > is not possible without explicit permission from the powers that be. Even if this were true, the question is: why isn't GOFH's board There is really only one possible reason for the lack of repurchase: You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||