21-01-2003 22:09									#91
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

That's ok in principle, but sometimes avoiding liquidation of the enterprise means that an uncompetitive allocation of capital survives, creates overcapacity, and goes into bancruptcy again. Steel and I think airlines would be examples. The "bankruptcy risk is incorporated in the interest rate charged", probably, but they can restart with much less debt...

Are there any plans for a Ford bailout ?

	21-01-2003 22:27									#92
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler That's ok in principle, but sometimes avoiding liquidation of the enterprise means that an uncompetitive allocation of capital survives, creates overcapacity, and goes into bancruptcy again. Steel and I think airlines would be examples..

Sure so the banks have to make a decision, is the value of the company higher as a going concern (ignoring previous financing...that is a sunk cost) or is it more valuable to liquidate the company. For instance if the company just made some bad investments but the core of it is a cash-producing machine. Or if there is a strong brand. Or very good and complex operations (that will be disrupted by a liquidation). Of course that is a judgement call. They have to decide that taking equity in the company and keeping it around (or selling to a finaincial buyer) is worth 40 cents versus the 30 cents they get for the airplanes...errr...I mean assets . And of course, even if that value IS 40 cents, that represents an estimate. With a fair amount of uncertainty. So it shouldn't surprise us to see the thing go into bankruptcy again. Nothing lasts forever. Including reorganized companies.

Regarding "overcapacity" etc.: Obviously the creditors have to make decisions based on their own interests. Not "industry structure". Of course, sometimes a bankruptcy can make it easier for industries to get the anti-trust guys to let them do what they want to do. create oligopolies.

Of course the management and workers and politicians have an incentive to keep the company around even if liquidation is better for the banks.

quote: The "bankruptcy risk is incorporated in the interest rate charged", probably, but they can restart with much less debt...

Not sure what your point is. Mine was the very simple one that the bankers take default into account as a risk when they set rates. We shouldn't get too excited by some bankruptcies of airlines and resultant haircuts for GE Capitol and Pratt and Whitney and such.

quote: Are there any plans for a Ford bailout ?

Nothing I've heard. But one could see how it could be a political issue. And Bush has already caved similarly with the steel industry. There is also the precedent of Chrysler. Still it wouldn't surprise me to just see it allowed to go though bankruptcy. I'm not an expert in the politics here.

	21-01-2003 22:32									#93
	Put an end to popups!

Not sure how the extra cute smilies snuck in. They ARE little devils.

	21-01-2003 22:34									#94
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

The issue with your first point is how much creditors control the outcome. I do not know the specifics of US law, but at least the judge has a good deal of discretion. I don't know what role the management plays.

"Not sure what your point is."

If you write off 90 % of the debt, is a higher lending cost enough to outweigh that advantage ? Bancrupcy can be a competition advantage.

	21-01-2003 22:35									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by GP Not sure how the extra cute smilies snuck in. They ARE little devils.

You've made it look like I was flirting with you.

	21-01-2003 22:41									#96
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

There is a very good section in the Brealey and Myers on bankruptcy law and practice. Obviously this stuff has implicit effects on the financing structures that companies use, the interests rates, etc. If the bankruptcy law differs from the ideal it will effect the cost of capital. For instance, equity-holders have an incentive to run a company in the ground. If their stock value is negative, they have nothing to lose by keeping the company going...and to do very risky experiments. This is why there are pages and pages of legalese covering debt agreements. It's also why bankruptcy courts tilt a little more towards creditors and against management/shareholders.

	21-01-2003 22:49									#97
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler The issue with your first point is how much creditors control the outcome. I do not know the specifics of US law, but at least the judge has a good deal of discretion. I don't know what role the management plays.

The judge/court controls it. I address this a little in another post.

quote: If you write off 90 % of the debt, is a higher lending cost enough to outweigh that advantage ?

I'm still not getting it. I was referring to the interest rate with first debt load. Any future debt will be at a different rate reflecting the new capital structure. The old write-off is a sunk cost. Of course, if the management is profligate and is still there, new lenders will charge a higher rate because of the higher risk of future defaults. But if thats not the case and the overall business is sound, new lenders will be willing to come in without a huge premium.

quote: Bancrupcy can be a competition advantage.

huh? And so? Really puzzled. Please break it down for me. Is this anything wrong? Bankruptcy is just an adjustment of the financing structure (assuming the entity stays around.) Why shouldn't companies do that? Or creditors do that, if it is value-maximizing?

	21-01-2003 22:54									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by GP There is a very good section in the Brealey and Myers on bankruptcy law and practice. Obviously this stuff has implicit effects on the financing structures that companies use, the interests rates, etc. If the bankruptcy law differs from the ideal it will effect the cost of capital. For instance, equity-holders have an incentive to run a company in the ground. If their stock value is negative, they have nothing to lose by keeping the company going...and to do very risky experiments. This is why there are pages and pages of legalese covering debt agreements. It's also why bankruptcy courts tilt a little more towards creditors and against management/shareholders.

(Extending remarks)

Aaron Brown makes the point that bankers can also have an incentive to screw equity-holders. That they may want to tip the company into bankruptcy at the first hint of danger. (Kinda complicated...but the lend money with an implicit risk profile...once lended, they have an incentive to revise that risk profile.) So this is another reason for having all the covenants so long and legaleseish.

He also makes the point that managment is assumed to act in the interests of equity-holders and that courts act with this assumption. But that may not always be the case. Management can in effect cut a deal with bankers to steal the company. So he argues for bankruptcy courts to take this more into consideration.

	21-01-2003 23:04									#99
	Put an end to popups!

quote: You've made it look like I was flirting with you.

Well aren't you?

	21-01-2003 23:06									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: You've made it look like I was flirting with you. Well aren't you?

Go study some bankruptcy law.

	22-01-2003 13:29									#101
	Increase the size of your Attachments

"And so? Really puzzled. Please break it down for me. Is this anything wrong? Bankruptcy is just an adjustment of the financing structure (assuming the entity stays around.)"

Well corporations and bancruptcies are legal constructs. How would an "unregulated" market handle this ? I know this is a fiction, but easy to do for say a purchase. But what is the "market solution" for illiquidity and/or overindebtedness ?

You say "If the bankruptcy law differs from the ideal" - what is the ideal ?

	22-01-2003 18:39									#102
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler "And so? Really puzzled. Please break it down for me. Is this anything wrong? Bankruptcy is just an adjustment of the financing structure (assuming the entity stays around.)" Well corporations and bancruptcies are legal constructs. How would an "unregulated" market handle this ? I know this is a fiction, but easy to do for say a purchase.

The bankruptcy law has a benefit in that it gives the ground rules for helping a creditor recover part of his assets. And it enforces seniority of debt and the covenants. An unregulated market would almost be like some libertarian fantasy where contracts are not enforced by the government. The result of not having a bankruptcy law would be greater hesitancy to lend. Some of the adjustments might be: higher interest rates, more detailed investigation of who money is lent to (corporate officers character), general preference for equity financing over debt (because of higher debt interest rates)...ummm...I don't know maybe they could keep the CEO's heart in a box? Maybe the banks could hire Guido to get their money back?

I don't see how you can have limited liability corporations without bankruptcy. Bankruptcy just gives a legal mechanicsm to have the debt-holders take over the company and the stockholders walk away.

I'm not srue what you mean by your purchase example. If I buy something and don't pay for it (let's assume not bankruptcy...just don't like to pay) than the law can be used to make me pay. Civil suits and wages garnished, no? Anyway, what's your point re purchases?

quote: But what is the "market solution" for illiquidity and/or overindebtedness ?

I don't know. I'm not sure I understand the question, but if I do, I don't know the answer. Maybe if you gave a specific example, I would see what point you are teeing up more.

quote: You say "If the bankruptcy law differs from the ideal" - what is the ideal ?

Well I'm sure that it does, since everything does. It's just that the manner and extent that it does will affect financing. For instance, I am more likely to get a good bankruptcy proceeding in the US than in Botswana. So the cost of debt in Botswana is higher (there may be other reasons...but this is one.) When people lend money, they have to take defaults into account as part of the risk. Since bankruptcy is how debts are worked out (resolved) when the borrower can't repay (and providing they can't make an arrangment/negotiate a settlement).

Umm...I guess an ideal bankruptcy process would be fair and always correct (no Roe v Wade decisions!) in resolving debt seniority and covenants (wether broken or not). It would be immediate (no time delays). It wouldn't cost any money. No cost for lawyers.* Umm it would have the wisdom of Solomon in approving the value maximizing workout plan (maybe even of devising it). B and M make the point that the Eastern Airlines workout took 2 years and that an immediate liquidation would have served debtholders best, but that at the end of 2 years, the company was ADMINISTRATIVELY INSOLVENT.


*Brealey and Myers, chapter 18 talks about this. They cite some sources which show large costs to the legal process.

	22-01-2003 21:30									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Hmmm... I need to make the argument broader... a few points and questions:

"An unregulated market would almost be like some libertarian fantasy where contracts are not enforced by the government."

Which is why I said it is a fiction. There is a difference, however, if the state just enforces our purchase agreement, or if it creates legal personalities, creditor hierarchies, write-offs etc. So if the state requires that we get an allowance for our purchase, it's clear it is messing with the free decision of market participants. The problem is how to establish that benchmark for bancruptcy law.

"The result of not having a bankruptcy law would be greater hesitancy to lend."

Depends. If you get your debtors as slaves instead of writing off debt....

"I don't know. I'm not sure I understand the question, but if I do, I don't know the answer."

I think you understand, and I don't know the answer either. Which makes it, for example, hard to understand why many simply praise restructuring over liquidation bancruptcies.

	22-01-2003 22:20									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler Which is why I said it is a fiction. There is a difference, however, if the state just enforces our purchase agreement, or if it creates legal personalities, creditor hierarchies, write-offs etc. So if the state requires that we get an allowance for our purchase, it's clear it is messing with the free decision of market participants. The problem is how to establish that benchmark for bancruptcy law.

Not sure where you are going. The creditor hierarchies exist prior to the bankruptcy proceeding. Do you mean just that the court adminsters the process. Yes. That's true. I'm not sure wether that is just an extension of contract enforcement (but in a complicated situation) or if you think it is more. Perhaps it is similar to a court adminsitering a contested will? Maybe you are saying that the court becomes more of an executor? But, we should remember that not all bankruptcies end in court either. Banks and creditors do workouts on their own. It goes to court because the creditors and debtors can;t come to agreement (and debtors are in default) or maybe even because the debtors can't come to agreement even among themselves.

quote: "The result of not having a bankruptcy law would be greater hesitancy to lend." Depends. If you get your debtors as slaves instead of writing off debt....

That's my point about a limited liability corporation. Common stock equity holders are not responsible for debts. Equity is an implicit call option. The bankruptcy provides a legal process to turn the assets over to the debt holders once the company is insolvent (i.e. equity negative, using face value of debt.) If you didn't have this process of bankruptcy, and had slavery instead you wouldn't have limited liability corporations. I can imagine a more tangible thing like having stock-holders personal assets at risk. Slavery takes it a little far...but to top you, we could go to a "pound of flesh".

quote: "I don't know. I'm not sure I understand the question, but if I do, I don't know the answer." I think you understand, and I don't know the answer either.

I was honest when I said I didn't understand. I like to try to break things down into very tangible examples. ("Company A does practice B raising issue C with Debt-holder D" or something like that.) Sometimes I'm not sure what claim you're making and I don't want to take the discussion (or even argument) down a long path to find out, "I was talking about something different."

quote: Which makes it, for example, hard to understand why many simply praise restructuring over liquidation bancruptcies.

The WSJ article is just making the simple point that the business may be more valuable as a going concern than if liquidated.

I don't think the article (or I) am in favor of keeping together businesses that would be more valuable if liquidated. I am actually in favor of dismembering NON-BANKRUPT companies that would be worth more liquidated. (This happens sometimes where a company has bad managment, but a big cash pile and the stock is valued at less than the value of cash minus debt.)

	26-01-2003 17:19									#105
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Colon Where is Spikey when you need him.

Hehe, a belated entrance. I see the discussion has now moved on to yawn inspiring bankruptcy procedures, but were there any threads left dangling from the more interesting discussion that preceded it?

	26-01-2003 21:11									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Anybody have any take or info on Wyeth?

	30-01-2003 05:32									#107
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Who's this boob?

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentS...p=1012571727092

	30-01-2003 05:46									#108
	Put an end to popups!

UVA, Wharton, Air Force (Capt) and Alex Brown M&A. Sounds like a tool.

	30-01-2003 05:47									#109
	Put an end to popups!

A friend of yours?

	30-01-2003 06:05									#110
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

(edit) I would had uncle Thomas kick him out of UVa if I would have known he was there.



Some of you will be overjoyed to note that in the Fed's Survey of Consumer Finance just released, Average Debt Burdens in the States United declined to 12.5% of Pre-Tax Income in 2001 from 14.4% in 1998 and 14% in 1992. Setting the stage for huge new potential borrowings at the untapped personal level.

Of course in their quarterly survey they say it has been increasing, but that is govy stats for you - pick your methodology!



NB in discussions about the weakness in the dollar of late that it has mostly just unwound its strength vs the euro post conversion... 1.02 to 1.08. Which is very understandable given the wide divergence in short term rates with the extra Fed eases and lack of similar action from the ECB. Easiest trade in here for the hedgies has been to short USTs vs EU paper.

	30-01-2003 06:07									#111
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Man, this guy has all guns blazing. Reading the actual letter, it seems like he should have kept his powder dry on Europe. Instead, he has 3 full paragraphs dissing them. He has a lot of interesting arguments, but he may be doing a disservice to them by a 120 db presentation.

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentS...p=1012571727088

	30-01-2003 06:13									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Next come the Europeans, who see options an unfair competition and need to pull us down to their own miserable levels of opportunity and performance. Europe has tried and failed to use options to motivate innovation and spread ownership.

Unable to unleash the creative power of their own economies, Europeans, particularly bureaucrats, are appalled at the willingness of American workers to accept low wages and willingly work 50 and 60 hours weeks in return for a sliver of ownership in their own business. Using "convergcnce of accounting standards" as a political grail, they plan to lower America to their own pitiful level of innovation and labor mobility.


What was wrong with that??

	30-01-2003 06:40									#113
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Well, at least he got a regulatory comment published in a major financial publication. Is that a first? I bet you that the SEC staff doesn't even read these. Well, they might skim it quickly...

	30-01-2003 06:48									#114
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by DanS ...major financial publication....

I thought it was in a silly little euro publication??

	30-01-2003 06:54									#115
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The UK isn't in Europe. For shame!

I thought it was the 51st state?

	30-01-2003 07:07									#116
	Tired of ads?

Banned GP informs me by PM that the UK will have to wait in line. Canada is the 51st state. The UK the 52nd.

	30-01-2003 10:04									#117
	Tired of ads?

And in a few months Iraq will be the 53rd

	30-01-2003 11:01									#118
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Make that Iraqorea. Very funny stuff on The Daily Show from Tuesday...

When did GP get banned? can't he just run over to Imran's and post from Emory?

(side note:
This Iraq for oil stuff is just so freaking ignorant it just makes my head spin. The economics of that type of deal are just ridiculous!)

	30-01-2003 13:34									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Interesting links, Dan. I would have expected signs of panic from the Wall street cronies a bit earlier, though. Reasonable accounting is their worst foe, after all. I suppose he's also got some sour grapes in his stomach after nasdaq flopped in Europe.

"This Iraq for oil stuff is just so freaking ignorant it just makes my head spin. The economics of that type of deal are just ridiculous!)"

Tell that to Bush.

Snapping some oil wells is silly. Maintaining strategic control of ME oil supplies makes a lot more sense though. He should just come clean on it, instead of making up one excuse after another.

Last edited by HershOstropoler on 30-01-2003 at 13:46

	30-01-2003 13:38									#120
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Btw, does that mean we can welcome Warren Buffet to the circle of pitiful opportunity-lacking Euros?