Resolute Forest Products Commences Takeover bid of Fibrek

[FFHWatcher]

Still don't adjust offer price up. What are they thinking?

 

67M shares deposited @ $1. when share price is trading at $1.30 plus another offer on the table at $1.30 (67M x $0.30 = $20M!!).  Absolutely bizarre.  I would love to be a fly on the wall at a Resolute meeting re: Fibrek or an FFH meeting re: Fibrek.  I am speechless thinking that Resolute is pouring resources into this .... at $1.00.  Imagine if they actually got the number of shares required? 

[Alekbaylee]

As of the close of business on February 10, approximately 66 million common shares of Fibrek had been deposited to the offer, representing approximately 52% of the outstanding common shares.

 

As of the close of business on February 23, 2012 approximately 67 million common shares of Fibrek had been deposited to Resolute's offer, representing approximately 51.5% of the outstanding common shares.

 

So in 2 weeks, they managed to get only another 1 M shares, for roughly the same percentage.

I doubt they will get to the needed threshold without increasing their bid up a bit.

 

Interesting to watch.

[FFHWatcher]

FFH Watcher: Working Capital adjustments are common to ALL take-overs, not just private ones, as the same basic valuation issues have to come to practical resolution. The adjustments just don't get the press because they're normally very small relative to the purchase price (often a rounding difference in EPS terms), & they are the outcome of negotiated collection (sufficient effort in the collection effort, etc.)

 

Look at the sale of the 407ETR by the Province of Ontario to a private consortium of toll-road investors. Sale proceeds were $3B+. The working capital adjustment was $10M, & paid roughly 6 months later through a seperate money bill passed in the Ontario Legislature.

 

SD

 

 

I think the point I was making is that when a company offers to buy a company for $15.00 the public shareholders get $15.00.  No more, no less.  As far as a PPA goes, how does it immediately affect working capital?  I see how it adds to revenue with minimal expenses in the future but it isn't like a $30M 'bonus' gets paid into the coffers of FBK at any one point in time.  What if FBK decides to close and shutter and write down the RBK mills entirely just after the deal is to close?  What if NBSK goes to $600/tonne?  Are shareholders on the hook to give some of their money back?  Maybe Resolute or Mercer should write something like that into the deal?  All that I am trying to say is, things that happen after an acquisition date are a risk, both positive and negative.  That is baked into the price.  If Resolute can get enough shareholders to say yes at $1, good for them.  If MERC can get them at $1.30, good for them.  As for writing in contingencies based on what may or may not happen a few months after an acquisition is approved by shareholders, I say it ain't going to happen.  Shareholders can't have their cake and eat it too and neither can buyers.  Either approve the deal now or turn it down.  Same goes for the $1.30 from MERC.  Maybe shareholders should counter with an earn out based on future EBITDA? :-)

 

Nortel should have wrote contingencies into their purchases.  "If we have to write this $5B purchase off to $0. in the next 24 months, we want all our money back".  Similarly, the business owner that sold Google the technology for Adwords should have had a contingency built into it based on profits for the next 5 years (actually, private companies do this all the time but I have never seen public company M&A do this).

[FFHWatcher]

As of the close of business on February 10, approximately 66 million common shares of Fibrek had been deposited to the offer, representing approximately 52% of the outstanding common shares.

 

As of the close of business on February 23, 2012 approximately 67 million common shares of Fibrek had been deposited to Resolute's offer, representing approximately 51.5% of the outstanding common shares.

 

So in 2 weeks, they managed to get only another 1 M shares, for roughly the same percentage.

I doubt they will get to the needed threshold without increasing their bid up a bit.

 

Interesting to watch.

 

Who the heck tendered $1M shares at $1. when they could sell them on the open market for $1.30?  That must be illegal.

[alertmeipp]

now that the MERC warrant is ceased, i think they are waiting to see what MERC/FBK will do next before the up the bid.

 

Love to see Prem in action to squeeze the pennies from us.

[Parsad]

now that the MERC warrant is ceased, i think they are waiting to see what MERC/FBK will do next before the up the bid.

 

Love to see Prem in action to squeeze the pennies from us.

 

Wait a sec!  First it isn't Prem making the tender.  Second, the bid by Resolute is there on the table.  Mercer's bid is a dilutive bid, even though it looks good solely based on market price. 

 

So for any short-term shareholder who simply wants to profit from the acqusition, the Mercer bid is what appeals to you because you are squeezing the most pennies you can in the transaction...but you don't care one iota for the actual business, employees, customers, etc.  For any long-term shareholder of the business, who wants to see long-term shareholder value increased while maintaining their percentage ownership, how can the Mercer bid be the one you would want to support. 

 

Everyone puts their own interests first...be it the short-term and long-term shareholders of Fibrek & Resolute, or the executives of both companies.  The correct decision seems to rest solely on what your own considerations are.  Cheers!

[FFHWatcher]

Just for fun, what do you think happened first.  Did FFH go to ABH and say, 'can you guys do something about FBK?' Maybe buy it for nothing or at least put it in play with the off chance that you get it.  Or did ABH approach FFH and say, 'we want to bring FBK into ABH and here is why it is a good deal for ABH shareholders.' 

 

If you were a long term FBK shareholder and you accept the ABH offer, how is that shareholder possibly going to participate in the success of FBK, as it would represent such a small piece of ABH.  Or are you suggesting to just leave FBK as a stand alone pubco?

 

How is Mercer's bid truly dilutive?  If either company are successful in acquiring the company, dilution is a moot point.  If ABH gets the company at $1.00 than they would have to cough up more money but that cash should be sitting in FBK bank account.  The dilutive part of the deal affects the number of shares needed for the Abitibi bid to go through, I assume.

[Alekbaylee]

FBK appeals the BDR decision.

 

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/927105/fibrek-to-appeal-decision-cease-trading-private-placement-of-special-warrants

 

Hubert T. Lacroix, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Fibrek added: "We were surprised to learn during the hearing that in mid-November 2011, only two weeks before signing a hard lock-up agreement with Abitibi for a $1.00 offer, Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited refused to sell its common shares of Fibrek to Mercer for a superior value than that of the Abitibi bid, after having been approached by Mercer.

 

"We also realized that Steelhead Partners, LLC, who has indicated in writing having tendered its common shares of Fibrek to Abitibi, has accumulated 96% of its 6,479,000 common shares of Fibrek after the Abitibi bid was announced.  It appears that the majority of those purchases were made at a price above the $1.00 Abitibi bid. One could ask 'what is the business purpose of entering into such a trade?' This is a troubling question. It seems strange that any investor would buy shares at prices above $1.00, only to tender them to a lower bid, and this when there is a superior offer by Mercer on the table, at $1.30.  It is important to note that Steelhead owns 13% of the outstanding common shares of Abitibi valued at approximately $200 million, with Abitibi representing approximately 15% of the Steelhead portfolio," concluded Mr. Lacroix.

 

To Fibrek's knowledge, Abitibi has not obtained all regulatory approvals required to satisfy the conditions of its offer and has not waived its minimum tender condition of 66 2/3%. Consequently, Abitibi is not currently in a position to take up and pay for any Fibrek common shares tendered under its bid which are subject to the right of withdrawal.

 

 

[SharperDingaan]

The only shareholders affected by dilution are those making a lower offer. Everybody else sees the higher price of the competing offer & are not affected – because the company will no longer exist.

 

Remove the conditional strings on the Merc financing, reprice at the $1.30 bid, & make it effective immediately. A little less dilution, but the share count still goes up. The $ themselves are not from Merc, they are just flowing through them.

 

Attack the lock-up. Make it fiduciary extremely difficult for ABH’s remaining shareholders to continue supporting the lock-up, by strangling their financing & Quebec business.

 

Change the game. This entire fiasco is because FFH owns too high a % of both ABH & FFH. FFH is supposed to be a passive investor, but because of their % they are being dragged into operations decisions that they are not equipped to deal with. The solution is to merge both ABH & FBK into a 3rd & big player, & dilute their holding to a more normal <30% of the combined entity.

 

Change the end-game. Drop the ABH bid as it has served its purpose. Support FBK management to counter the Merc bid for inclusion of a PPA  A/R  & improve shareholder value. Maybe even indirectly finance a portion of the PPA A/R should it occur. Demonstrate goodwill, then aim for merger.

 

SD

 

 

 

[lessthaniv]

I'm not so quick to conclude that FBK will be allowed to do the warrants. The regulators will want to know that the issue was truly needed for corporate reasons and not just as an anti-takeover tactic. Given that the funds have gone to escrow and would likely be redeemed should Mercer win their bid the courts may side with ABH. Fibrek went to great lengths to state the purpose of their issue in the press release but I'm not so sure the courts (or exchange) will approve. Fibrek is trying to force ABH to come with a bigger bid and should they turn the offer friendly the warrants can be redeemed. Not sure that is going to fly ...

 

From the release:

 

Mercer has also agreed to purchase 32.32 million special warrants of Fibrek on a private placement basis, at a price of $1 per special warrant for total subscription proceeds of $32.32-million. The special warrants are convertible into common shares of Fibrek on a one-for-one basis. Conversion of the special warrants is automatic in certain events and otherwise at the option of Mercer subject to certain conditions. The special warrants are also redeemable by Mercer or Fibrek in certain events at their subscription price, including in the event that Fibrek receives and supports a superior proposal. The proceeds of the private placement will be deposited in trust at closing and will be releasable to Fibrek on conversion of the special warrants or to Mercer in the event of a redemption. Proceeds from the private placement are initially to be used by Fibrek to reduce net debt given (i) the recent costs associated with its strategic alternatives review process in response to Abitibi's unsolicited offer, (ii) the high level of RBK pulp inventories and lower than anticipated sales which have resulted in a five-week market shutdown of the Fairmont mill effective Feb. 20, 2012, and an increased need for liquidity, and (iii) capital expenditures required in connection with Fibrek's power-generation initiatives and other growth and diversification opportunities. Completion of the private placement and the conversion of the special warrants is subject to a number of conditions, including the approval of the Toronto Stock Exchange, but is not conditional on the successful completion of the Mercer offer. In the event the Mercer offer is not completed, the private placement will provide Fibrek with necessary financing to continue operations and the execution of its strategic plan

 

You misunderstood the press release.  The warrants are redeemable by FBK if it receives a superior proposal and therefore ABH is not at all prevented from submitting a superior proposal.  This isn't shark repellent - in fact its the opposite.  The warrants are meant to dilute the hostile $1.00 bid so ABH can't get control of FBK through abusive actions to the minority shareholders.  If ABH reduces their minimum tender from 66 2/3 to 50% and takes up the current 52% tendered, MERC will exercise the warrants and dilute ABH to 42%.  ABH knows this and therefore will not take up shares now.  All they can do is withdraw or bump their bid.  I think we'll see the latter.

 

Also, there's another valid reason for the warrants - FBK burned through cash defending itself against ABH.  A financing makes sense.  Go back to the Perpetual / Profound deal, you'll see a precedent for this:

 

http://www.bennettjones.com/BennettJones/images/Guides/external7446.pdf

 

Hey Jetsfan,

Do you still think I misunderstood the press release?

 

[Alekbaylee]

At least/last, Quebec Regulators allow MERC bid...

 

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/business/quebec-regulators-allow-mercer-bid-for-fibrek-halt-trading-in-special-warrants-140298263.html

 

ABH :  :P

[triedtestedand]

Nice little shakedown in the first 30 minutes of trading ... ~3.5M shares traded, with low at $1.19 ... now back to $1.24 and volume stalling ... maybe the game is just how many shares will Steelhead buy as loss leaders, and at what price?

 

And since "Roll Up the Rim to Win" is back, here's my timdbit of the day ... besides owning almost 15% of ABH (their largest single holding by more than 2x any other), Steelhead owns shares in Smith & Wesson (who'da thunk), and ... Mercer!  That's right, a new position as of December 31st, 2011 ... to the tune of 850K shares, or 1.5% of the company.

 

http://www.nasdaq.com/quotes/institutional-portfolio/steelhead-partners-llc-83128?sortname=valuesofshare&sorttype=1

 

Hmmm ... Doesn't that make it a bit harder for them to poo-poo the value of the MERC stock component of their offer?

 

Oh what tangled webs we weave ...

[lessthaniv]

I'm not so quick to conclude that FBK will be allowed to do the warrants. The regulators will want to know that the issue was truly needed for corporate reasons and not just as an anti-takeover tactic. Given that the funds have gone to escrow and would likely be redeemed should Mercer win their bid the courts may side with ABH. Fibrek went to great lengths to state the purpose of their issue in the press release but I'm not so sure the courts (or exchange) will approve. Fibrek is trying to force ABH to come with a bigger bid and should they turn the offer friendly the warrants can be redeemed. Not sure that is going to fly ...

 

From the release:

 

Mercer has also agreed to purchase 32.32 million special warrants of Fibrek on a private placement basis, at a price of $1 per special warrant for total subscription proceeds of $32.32-million. The special warrants are convertible into common shares of Fibrek on a one-for-one basis. Conversion of the special warrants is automatic in certain events and otherwise at the option of Mercer subject to certain conditions. The special warrants are also redeemable by Mercer or Fibrek in certain events at their subscription price, including in the event that Fibrek receives and supports a superior proposal. The proceeds of the private placement will be deposited in trust at closing and will be releasable to Fibrek on conversion of the special warrants or to Mercer in the event of a redemption. Proceeds from the private placement are initially to be used by Fibrek to reduce net debt given (i) the recent costs associated with its strategic alternatives review process in response to Abitibi's unsolicited offer, (ii) the high level of RBK pulp inventories and lower than anticipated sales which have resulted in a five-week market shutdown of the Fairmont mill effective Feb. 20, 2012, and an increased need for liquidity, and (iii) capital expenditures required in connection with Fibrek's power-generation initiatives and other growth and diversification opportunities. Completion of the private placement and the conversion of the special warrants is subject to a number of conditions, including the approval of the Toronto Stock Exchange, but is not conditional on the successful completion of the Mercer offer. In the event the Mercer offer is not completed, the private placement will provide Fibrek with necessary financing to continue operations and the execution of its strategic plan

 

You misunderstood the press release.  The warrants are redeemable by FBK if it receives a superior proposal and therefore ABH is not at all prevented from submitting a superior proposal.  This isn't shark repellent - in fact its the opposite.  The warrants are meant to dilute the hostile $1.00 bid so ABH can't get control of FBK through abusive actions to the minority shareholders.  If ABH reduces their minimum tender from 66 2/3 to 50% and takes up the current 52% tendered, MERC will exercise the warrants and dilute ABH to 42%.  ABH knows this and therefore will not take up shares now.  All they can do is withdraw or bump their bid.  I think we'll see the latter.

 

Also, there's another valid reason for the warrants - FBK burned through cash defending itself against ABH.  A financing makes sense.  Go back to the Perpetual / Profound deal, you'll see a precedent for this:

 

http://www.bennettjones.com/BennettJones/images/Guides/external7446.pdf

 

Hey Jetsfan,

Do you still think I misunderstood the press release?

 

Yes I do.  The warrants were meant to neutralize the oppressive lock-ups, not thwart a take-over.  The BDR made an enormous error.  I don't see how FBK's appeal cannot be successful.

 

I'll admit you got lucky on your call.  It was definitely a 100:1 shot.

 

Ya ... that's what happened.

[Parsad]

I'm not so quick to conclude that FBK will be allowed to do the warrants. The regulators will want to know that the issue was truly needed for corporate reasons and not just as an anti-takeover tactic. Given that the funds have gone to escrow and would likely be redeemed should Mercer win their bid the courts may side with ABH. Fibrek went to great lengths to state the purpose of their issue in the press release but I'm not so sure the courts (or exchange) will approve. Fibrek is trying to force ABH to come with a bigger bid and should they turn the offer friendly the warrants can be redeemed. Not sure that is going to fly ...

 

From the release:

 

Mercer has also agreed to purchase 32.32 million special warrants of Fibrek on a private placement basis, at a price of $1 per special warrant for total subscription proceeds of $32.32-million. The special warrants are convertible into common shares of Fibrek on a one-for-one basis. Conversion of the special warrants is automatic in certain events and otherwise at the option of Mercer subject to certain conditions. The special warrants are also redeemable by Mercer or Fibrek in certain events at their subscription price, including in the event that Fibrek receives and supports a superior proposal. The proceeds of the private placement will be deposited in trust at closing and will be releasable to Fibrek on conversion of the special warrants or to Mercer in the event of a redemption. Proceeds from the private placement are initially to be used by Fibrek to reduce net debt given (i) the recent costs associated with its strategic alternatives review process in response to Abitibi's unsolicited offer, (ii) the high level of RBK pulp inventories and lower than anticipated sales which have resulted in a five-week market shutdown of the Fairmont mill effective Feb. 20, 2012, and an increased need for liquidity, and (iii) capital expenditures required in connection with Fibrek's power-generation initiatives and other growth and diversification opportunities. Completion of the private placement and the conversion of the special warrants is subject to a number of conditions, including the approval of the Toronto Stock Exchange, but is not conditional on the successful completion of the Mercer offer. In the event the Mercer offer is not completed, the private placement will provide Fibrek with necessary financing to continue operations and the execution of its strategic plan

 

You misunderstood the press release.  The warrants are redeemable by FBK if it receives a superior proposal and therefore ABH is not at all prevented from submitting a superior proposal.  This isn't shark repellent - in fact its the opposite.  The warrants are meant to dilute the hostile $1.00 bid so ABH can't get control of FBK through abusive actions to the minority shareholders.  If ABH reduces their minimum tender from 66 2/3 to 50% and takes up the current 52% tendered, MERC will exercise the warrants and dilute ABH to 42%.  ABH knows this and therefore will not take up shares now.  All they can do is withdraw or bump their bid.  I think we'll see the latter.

 

Also, there's another valid reason for the warrants - FBK burned through cash defending itself against ABH.  A financing makes sense.  Go back to the Perpetual / Profound deal, you'll see a precedent for this:

 

http://www.bennettjones.com/BennettJones/images/Guides/external7446.pdf

 

Hey Jetsfan,

Do you still think I misunderstood the press release?

 

Yes I do.  The warrants were meant to neutralize the oppressive lock-ups, not thwart a take-over.  The BDR made an enormous error.  I don't see how FBK's appeal cannot be successful.

 

I'll admit you got lucky on your call.  It was definitely a 100:1 shot.

 

Ppphhhtt!  Yeah right.  The warrants were not to thwart a take-over.  And the executives at FBK aren't worried about their jobs.  Cheers!

[lessthaniv]

Decision is posted (in french): http://www.bdr.gouv.qc.ca/documents/decisions/2012-012_Abitibi_c_Fibrek_GLOBAL.pdf

 

Pretty much what I said in response to the press release I still don't understand, no?

Anyways, enough of the gloating on my part. I've had my fun for the day and with that, I'll move on.

 

TTT,

 

Without the dilutive warrants in the way, I wonder if ABH will now reduce their minimum tender to 50%?

[SharperDingaan]

I think the point I was making is that when a company offers to buy a company for $15.00 the public shareholders get $15.00.  No more, no less.  As far as a PPA goes, how does it immediately affect working capital?

 

Your statement is incorrect. Working capital is just A/R - A/P & represents the outstanding short-term receipts and liabilities that are expected to convert to cash within the next 90-120 days. To ensure that an adequate collection effort will continue immediately following the sale, the seller agrees to repay the buyer whatever agreed A/R is not collected. Without the working capital adjustment process a seller has an incentive to terminate their collection staff immediately following the sale, pay them an inflated severance, & leave the buyer with a significant A/R write-off - & the need to re-hire/hire replacement collection staff at a higher average rate.

 

Re the PPA. Agree the PV of the PPA, Db A/R, Cr Equity. The $ amount of the A/R is the best estimate as to the PV of the power today net of all uncertainty - the same definition as for every other A/R on the books. Total A/R increases, A/P remains the same, & working capital increases. Because this specific A/R is significant, material, & unique - collection is defined as a deal signing within X days of purchase. Db long term asset, Cr A/R when the deal is signed.

 

The buyer will argue the uncertainty makes it impossible to value the PPA. The seller will argue no sale - we wait for the uncertainty to clear, & then value the PPA. There is no sale unless there is BOTH a willing buyer AND a willing seller, and ALL institutional shareholders have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to maximize the value of their holdings.

 

The coercive transfer of FBK IV to ABH IV is also a criminal act. No different to a drug lord abducting the family's of all the major ABH shareholders - & then informing the head of each family that they will agree to transfer the IV of ABH to their worthless shell - or risk not seeing their family's again. These criminals just wear better suits, talk politely, & don't use guns - but otherwise, what is the difference in the process?

 

SD   

 

   

 

   

[finetrader]

Without the dilutive warrants in the way, I wonder if ABH will now reduce their minimum tender to 50%?

 

What makes you think they could do that?

[triedtestedand]

Finetrader:

 

The ABH circular states that it is a condition that they could waive.  Even though they have reserved such right, it might get into the "majority of minority shareholder" question, no?  So the possibility is there ...

 

That said, doing so might actually enlighten us about the (currently muzzled) lockup shareholders' influence (or lack thereof)  and/or motivations, as I would see it going against spirit of original lockup agreements. It would certainly lay to rest any notion of fair and friendly, eh?

[lessthaniv]

Without the dilutive warrants in the way, I wonder if ABH will now reduce their minimum tender to 50%?

 

What makes you think they could do that?

 

Page 28 of the Circular.

 

 

We have the right to waive the Minimum Tender Condition and, if we were to do so, there can be no assurance

that we would be able to successfully consummate a Second Step Transaction.

Under the terms of the Offer, and subject to the terms and conditions of the Lock-up Agreements, we have the

right to waive one or more of the conditions of the Offer, including the Minimum Tender Condition. In the event we

were to decide to waive the Minimum Tender Condition and were to take up and pay for more than 50% of the Fibrek

Shares, we may not be able to successfully consummate a Second Step Transaction or our ability to do so may be

delayed. In addition, the market for Fibrek Shares not tendered in the Offer may be less liquid than the current market

for Fibrek Shares and the Fibrek Shares may be potentially delisted from TSX. In such event, it is possible that Fibrek

would become a controlled but not wholly-owned subsidiary of Resolute

 

With Steelhead's buys and subsequent tender ...  As of the close of business on February 23, 2012 approximately 67 million common shares of Fibrek had been deposited to Resolute's offer, representing approximately 51.5% of the outstanding common shares.  If they wanted to play ball they could drop the minimum tender. Fairfax/Pabrai/Oakmont/Steelhead and anyone else that has tendered to make up the 51.5% would exit gracefully (Note: all are big holders of ABH already) and everyone else would be left scratching their heads. 

 

 

 

[alertmeipp]

They won't get the control and synergies by just being the major shareholder though.

 

But sooner or later, those ABH shareholders will buy enough FBK shares in the market to tender to ABH.

 

And that's legal?

 

 

[st96dgx8]

Decision is posted (in french): http://www.bdr.gouv.qc.ca/documents/decisions/2012-012_Abitibi_c_Fibrek_GLOBAL.pdf

 

1) Is there a way to obtain a transcript of the BDR hearings and the evidence submitted for the case?

 

2) The BDR opines that the termination fee granted to Mercer is beyond the range usually granted in such circumstances... 2.9% of Enterprise Value is par for the course. But it looks like BDR is using the equity value as opposed to the enterprise value as the denominator. JetsFan--Do you have the termination fess as a % of mkt cap for prior txns in Canada?

 

4) How do you read paragraph 20 of the decision? My french isn't great but it appears that part of the regulators concern stems from the fact the warrants creat uncreate uncertainity for Resolute or "any new initiator." But doesn't this BDR decision discourage any new initiator? Seems illogical for the BDR to be worried about the warrants/termination fees discouraging a new initiator when their decision makes it virtually impossible for someone other than the old bidder (ABH) to purchase Fibrek.

"[20]

CONSIDÉRANT que les termes et conditions des bons de souscription créent une incertitude pour Résolu ou pour tout nouvel initiateur compte tenu que Fibrek se réserve le droit de mettre un terme ou non aux bons de souscription;"

 

5) What if the clock runs out on the hard lockup? Would Oakmont/Pabrai be willing to tender into a higher offer? As far as I can tell Pabrai and Oakmont aren't ABH shareholders (please correct me if I am wrong) and therefore likely to switch to the higher bid.

 

The longer this battle drags on, the higher the probability that the new PPA is signed before a bidder secures a sufficient # of votes.

 

If ABH succeeds in acquiring two-thirds of the shares at ~$1 per shares, our only recourse is to exercise dissent rights.  I will solicit interest from fellow shareholders at the appropriate time. More on this later...

[triedtestedand]

a) A columnist at the Financial Post is keeping this in the news:

 

    http://business.financialpost.com/2012/03/01/fight-for-fibrek-drags-on/

 

b) Along lines of the above, apparently a number of minority shareholders have contacted Quebec's security regulators to have their voices heard about the warrants ruling, the handling of minority shareholder rights in this case,  etc.  If you want to do similar, you'll obviously want to do it sooner than later, and I've been told that you can direct your message to the AMF.  The Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF) is the body mandated by the government of Québec to regulate the province's financial markets and provide assistance to consumers of financial products and services.  Their email is information@lautorite.qc.ca . 

[Alekbaylee]

A solution is clearly required: the neatest would be for Abitibi to up its offer to above $1.30 (Mercer secured a $8.5-million break fee) and, if successful, ensure that a majority of minority shareholders support its offer.  If not, then it should get out of the way.

 

+1

 

Will tender my shares to MERC.

[triedtestedand]

a) I noticed another article today in the Financial Post ... it looks like some minority shareholders have a channel into that route:

 

  http://business.financialpost.com/2012/03/02/regulators-idle-as-fibrek-shareholders-fume/

 

 

b) Anyone from Montreal area looking to check out the Quebec court system?  I've learned that the FBK appeal is scheduled for:

 

        Palais de justice (Court House) de Montréal

        1 Notre-Dame Est

        Montreal

        Room 14.02 or 14.06

        9:30 AM

        Monday, March 5th

 

Proceedings are open to the public.  Although not likely to be Law&Order material, as far as financial matters go, it might have some spice.  You probably can't bring in popcorn though.  (SD -> You're not a Montreal area person, are you?)

 

[st96dgx8]

a) I noticed another article today in the Financial Post ... it looks like some minority shareholders have a channel into that route:

 

  http://business.financialpost.com/2012/03/02/regulators-idle-as-fibrek-shareholders-fume/

 

 

b) Anyone from Montreal area looking to check out the Quebec court system?  I've learned that the FBK appeal is scheduled for:

 

        Palais de justice (Court House) de Montréal

        1 Notre-Dame Est

        Montreal

        Room 14.02 or 14.06

        9:30 AM

        Monday, March 5th

 

Proceedings are open to the public.  Although not likely to be Law&Order material, as far as financial matters go, it might have some spice.  You probably can't bring in popcorn though.  (SD -> You're not a Montreal area person, are you?)

 

 

Thanks for the update Triedtestedandtrue. Do you know if the appeal will heard in English? And is it only for one day? I might come up from NYC.