Obbligazioni societarie HIGH YIELD e oltre, verso frontiere inesplorate - Vol. 1
- Creatore Discussione TRADING_IDEAS
- Data di Inizio
- Stato
Mi sembra che il buon joe se ne era occupato di questa società.
Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK) asked a judge to order Bank of New York Mellon Corp. to hand over e- mails showing the motive behind its bid to block the natural gas company from redeeming $1.3 billion in bonds early at par.
BNY Mellon, the trustee for the notes due March 2019, and investor River Birch Capital LLC, which initiated the challenge, haven’t disclosed documents showing how their views on the early call developed, Chesapeake said in an April 8 letter to U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan.
Bank of New York Mellon initially agreed with Chesapeake in February that the early redemption, made on March 15, would meet a deadline for the second-biggest natural gas producer in the U.S. to redeem the notes six years early at 100 cents on the dollar and avoid paying bondholders $400 million in “make whole” interest. The trustee changed its position after River Birch argued Chesapeake had started the process too late.
“BNY Mellon and River Birch have refused to produce documents explaining the origins of this dispute,” Stephen Ascher, one of Chesapeake’s lawyers from Jenner & Block LLP in New York, said in the letter. “Chesapeake is plainly entitled to cross-examine BNY’s witnesses on their bias and motive.”
BNY Mellon should have turned over the e-mails as part of the pre-trial exchange of information, Chesapeake said in the letter. A hearing on Chesapeake’s request for evidence is scheduled for tomorrow at 8:30 a.m.
Deadline Dispute
Chesapeake contends the March 15 deadline stated in the indenture was for the notice of early redemption to be sent to noteholders, while BNY Mellon claims the call would need to be formally completed by that date.
BNY Mellon, based in New York, and Chesapeake are scheduled to face off at trial beginning April 23 over the Oklahoma City- based gas producer’s claim that it made the call on time. Both sides argue the language in the indenture documents backs their respective interpretations of the March 15 deadline.
Chesapeake wants River Birch to hand over documents related to its decision to buy the 2019 notes, as well as its communications with other investors in the bonds, according to the letter. The gas company said it wants to know whether River Birch’s purchase of the notes in February was a bid to speculate on ambiguity over the deadline for an early call.
‘Ambiguous’ Language
Engelmayer, in earlier court hearings, has called the language in the indenture “ambiguous” and said he would rush the trial to resolve the dispute before Chesapeake formally executes the early call in mid-May.
A message left at River Birch seeking comment on the letter wasn’t immediately returned. Steven Bierman, a lawyer for the company and other investors that had intervened in the case, didn’t return a call seeking comment on the letter.
Kevin Heine, a BNY Mellon spokesman, declined to comment on the dispute over the requested e-mails.
Chesapeake, which sued the bank on March 8, needs the evidence to prepare its cross-examination of BNY Mellon’s trial witnesses, according to the letter. River Birch isn’t a defendant in the case.
Last month, River Birch held $16.7 million of the securities, some of which it bought Feb. 15 after it believed Chesapeake had missed the window to redeem the notes at par, said James Seery Jr., a lawyer at the hedge fund, in a March 12 letter to the court.
Bank of New York Mellon said it would call Seery as a witness at trial and later offered to take him off the witness list “to avoid discovery from River Birch,” Chesapeake said in the letter. The only condition was that the energy company had to agree to “not ever assert that River Birch ‘held any influence over BNY,’” according to the letter.
McClendon Deposition
Former Chesapeake Chief Executive Officer Aubrey McClendon will be deposed as part of a lawsuit, as will other people who may have information about the decision to make the early call and what the March 15 deadline was intended to mean at the time the notes were issued.
Chesapeake issued the bonds in February 2012, just before it was disclosed that McClendon, a company co-founder, had been using his personal 2.5 percent stakes in some Chesapeake wells as collateral for loans that weren’t fully disclosed to shareholders.
A group of noteholders with about $250 million in the 2019 bonds had intervened in the lawsuit to make their arguments in court. The group later dropped out of the case.
Chesapeake made the early call after the lawsuit was filed because Engelmayer said in court he didn’t think the investors had a strong case for seeking the make-whole payment, regardless of whether the deadline was met. Chesapeake has said it will cancel the early call if it loses the case.
The case is Chesapeake Energy Corp. v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co., 13-cv-01582, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
To contact the reporter on this story: Erik Larson in New York at [email protected]
To contact the editor responsible for this story: John Pickering at [email protected]
Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK) asked a judge to order Bank of New York Mellon Corp. to hand over e- mails showing the motive behind its bid to block the natural gas company from redeeming $1.3 billion in bonds early at par.
BNY Mellon, the trustee for the notes due March 2019, and investor River Birch Capital LLC, which initiated the challenge, haven’t disclosed documents showing how their views on the early call developed, Chesapeake said in an April 8 letter to U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan.
Bank of New York Mellon initially agreed with Chesapeake in February that the early redemption, made on March 15, would meet a deadline for the second-biggest natural gas producer in the U.S. to redeem the notes six years early at 100 cents on the dollar and avoid paying bondholders $400 million in “make whole” interest. The trustee changed its position after River Birch argued Chesapeake had started the process too late.
“BNY Mellon and River Birch have refused to produce documents explaining the origins of this dispute,” Stephen Ascher, one of Chesapeake’s lawyers from Jenner & Block LLP in New York, said in the letter. “Chesapeake is plainly entitled to cross-examine BNY’s witnesses on their bias and motive.”
BNY Mellon should have turned over the e-mails as part of the pre-trial exchange of information, Chesapeake said in the letter. A hearing on Chesapeake’s request for evidence is scheduled for tomorrow at 8:30 a.m.
Deadline Dispute
Chesapeake contends the March 15 deadline stated in the indenture was for the notice of early redemption to be sent to noteholders, while BNY Mellon claims the call would need to be formally completed by that date.
BNY Mellon, based in New York, and Chesapeake are scheduled to face off at trial beginning April 23 over the Oklahoma City- based gas producer’s claim that it made the call on time. Both sides argue the language in the indenture documents backs their respective interpretations of the March 15 deadline.
Chesapeake wants River Birch to hand over documents related to its decision to buy the 2019 notes, as well as its communications with other investors in the bonds, according to the letter. The gas company said it wants to know whether River Birch’s purchase of the notes in February was a bid to speculate on ambiguity over the deadline for an early call.
‘Ambiguous’ Language
Engelmayer, in earlier court hearings, has called the language in the indenture “ambiguous” and said he would rush the trial to resolve the dispute before Chesapeake formally executes the early call in mid-May.
A message left at River Birch seeking comment on the letter wasn’t immediately returned. Steven Bierman, a lawyer for the company and other investors that had intervened in the case, didn’t return a call seeking comment on the letter.
Kevin Heine, a BNY Mellon spokesman, declined to comment on the dispute over the requested e-mails.
Chesapeake, which sued the bank on March 8, needs the evidence to prepare its cross-examination of BNY Mellon’s trial witnesses, according to the letter. River Birch isn’t a defendant in the case.
Last month, River Birch held $16.7 million of the securities, some of which it bought Feb. 15 after it believed Chesapeake had missed the window to redeem the notes at par, said James Seery Jr., a lawyer at the hedge fund, in a March 12 letter to the court.
Bank of New York Mellon said it would call Seery as a witness at trial and later offered to take him off the witness list “to avoid discovery from River Birch,” Chesapeake said in the letter. The only condition was that the energy company had to agree to “not ever assert that River Birch ‘held any influence over BNY,’” according to the letter.
McClendon Deposition
Former Chesapeake Chief Executive Officer Aubrey McClendon will be deposed as part of a lawsuit, as will other people who may have information about the decision to make the early call and what the March 15 deadline was intended to mean at the time the notes were issued.
Chesapeake issued the bonds in February 2012, just before it was disclosed that McClendon, a company co-founder, had been using his personal 2.5 percent stakes in some Chesapeake wells as collateral for loans that weren’t fully disclosed to shareholders.
A group of noteholders with about $250 million in the 2019 bonds had intervened in the lawsuit to make their arguments in court. The group later dropped out of the case.
Chesapeake made the early call after the lawsuit was filed because Engelmayer said in court he didn’t think the investors had a strong case for seeking the make-whole payment, regardless of whether the deadline was met. Chesapeake has said it will cancel the early call if it loses the case.
The case is Chesapeake Energy Corp. v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co., 13-cv-01582, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
To contact the reporter on this story: Erik Larson in New York at [email protected]
To contact the editor responsible for this story: John Pickering at [email protected]
<< Back
NII Holdings Announces New Sale Of 11.375% Senior Notes Due 2019
RESTON, Va., April 10, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- NII Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: NIHD) (the "Company") today announced the sale, through its wholly owned subsidiary NII International Telecom S.C.A., of an additional $150 million principal amount of its 11.375% senior notes due 2019. The issue price is 107.25% of the principal amount of the notes plus accrued interest from February 19, 2013. The notes were sold in a private placement pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"). The sale of the notes is expected to close on or about April 15, 2013. The notes will be issued by NII International Telecom S.C.A., a partnership limited by shares organized and established under the laws of Luxembourg, and guaranteed by the Company. The notes are an additional issuance of, will be fully fungible with, rank equally with and form a single series with the $750 million of 11.375% senior notes due 2019 initially issued on February 19, 2013.
(Logo: Login )
The Company intends to use the net proceeds from the sale for general corporate purposes, which may include, without limitation, expansion of its existing network, either through capital expenditures for organic growth or acquisitions of other operators; the acquisition of telecommunications spectrum licenses or other assets; the deployment of new network technologies; the refinancing, repayment or repurchase of outstanding indebtedness; or other purposes.
The notes have not been registered under the Securities Act or any state securities laws, and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration under, or an applicable exemption from, the registration requirements of the Securities Act and applicable state securities laws.
This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such an offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful. This press release is being issued pursuant to and in accordance with Rule 135c under the Securities Act.
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including "may," "believe," "will," "expect," "anticipate," "estimate," "plan," "intend," and "forecast," or other similar words. Statements contained in this press release are based upon information presently available to the Company and assumptions that management believes to be reasonable. The Company is not assuming any duty to update this information should those facts change or should it no longer believe the assumptions to be reasonable. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including without limitation, general market conditions, the market for the Company's securities, the performance of the company's business and other risks detailed from time-to-time in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. There is no assurance that the Company will complete the sale of the notes.
NII Holdings Announces New Sale Of 11.375% Senior Notes Due 2019
RESTON, Va., April 10, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- NII Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: NIHD) (the "Company") today announced the sale, through its wholly owned subsidiary NII International Telecom S.C.A., of an additional $150 million principal amount of its 11.375% senior notes due 2019. The issue price is 107.25% of the principal amount of the notes plus accrued interest from February 19, 2013. The notes were sold in a private placement pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"). The sale of the notes is expected to close on or about April 15, 2013. The notes will be issued by NII International Telecom S.C.A., a partnership limited by shares organized and established under the laws of Luxembourg, and guaranteed by the Company. The notes are an additional issuance of, will be fully fungible with, rank equally with and form a single series with the $750 million of 11.375% senior notes due 2019 initially issued on February 19, 2013.
(Logo: Login )
The Company intends to use the net proceeds from the sale for general corporate purposes, which may include, without limitation, expansion of its existing network, either through capital expenditures for organic growth or acquisitions of other operators; the acquisition of telecommunications spectrum licenses or other assets; the deployment of new network technologies; the refinancing, repayment or repurchase of outstanding indebtedness; or other purposes.
The notes have not been registered under the Securities Act or any state securities laws, and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration under, or an applicable exemption from, the registration requirements of the Securities Act and applicable state securities laws.
This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such an offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful. This press release is being issued pursuant to and in accordance with Rule 135c under the Securities Act.
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including "may," "believe," "will," "expect," "anticipate," "estimate," "plan," "intend," and "forecast," or other similar words. Statements contained in this press release are based upon information presently available to the Company and assumptions that management believes to be reasonable. The Company is not assuming any duty to update this information should those facts change or should it no longer believe the assumptions to be reasonable. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including without limitation, general market conditions, the market for the Company's securities, the performance of the company's business and other risks detailed from time-to-time in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. There is no assurance that the Company will complete the sale of the notes.
è ccc ?
CEDOLONE
Forumer storico
BONDS: un po' di tutto in ordine sparso e sparpagliato
Brizione...non sapevo cosa fare durante il weekend e tu mi hai trovato il lavoro
ma non sono convinto se ringraziarti o meno per i listoni...(ps quello di barclays lo vedo x la prima volta, mi intriga assai) . Analizzarli e' come lavorare in miniera
Ma la passione per la ricerca di rendimento ( e ok lo so anche ciofeche
) vince la stanchezza.Ps mio figlio ti ringrazia per avergli fatto saltare la partita di calcio con il papa' del sabato causa "studio di liste con tanti xs"
Brizione...non sapevo cosa fare durante il weekend e tu mi hai trovato il lavoro
Analizzarli e' come lavorare in miniera
Ma la passione per la ricerca di rendimento ( e ok lo so anche ciofeche
Ps mio figlio ti ringrazia per avergli fatto saltare la partita di calcio con il papa' del sabato causa "studio di liste con tanti xs"
potresti provare con la classica frase....
è uno sporco lavoro ma qualcuno lo deve fare .....anche eroe...
$75'000 - $1'000
taglio?
- Stato
Similar threads
Obbligazioni societarie
HIGH YIELD e oltre, verso frontiere inesplorate, vol.3
