NoWay
It's time to play the game
Domanda... sapete se questo vale per tutte le Business Development Companies?
Note that Triangle is a Business Development Company--thus has an added layer of protection in the fact that BDC's must have asset coverage ratios on preferred stocks of 200% or more and 300% on debt--thus if net asset value falls they must sell common stock to pump up the asset coverage ratio. If you want to understand more on the Securities Act of 1940 and how it adds safety to debt issues and preferred stocks of closed end funds (and thus Business Development Companies) you can read the article we wrote on Seeking Alpha years ago (no we don't get paid if you access the article) which explains it all in detail. In the article we walk through a real life example of how one of the Gabelli Funds had asset coverage of 633% on preferreds which fell to 293% during the financial meltdown in 2008. They then sold over $1,000,000,000 in common the next couple of years driving the coverage ratio above 1000%. When a closed end fund (BDC) violates the 'act' all sorts of hell rains down on them--for one they must discontinue any dividends on common etc while in violation of the asset coverage ratios--and this would be a disaster to any BDC.
Note that Triangle is a Business Development Company--thus has an added layer of protection in the fact that BDC's must have asset coverage ratios on preferred stocks of 200% or more and 300% on debt--thus if net asset value falls they must sell common stock to pump up the asset coverage ratio. If you want to understand more on the Securities Act of 1940 and how it adds safety to debt issues and preferred stocks of closed end funds (and thus Business Development Companies) you can read the article we wrote on Seeking Alpha years ago (no we don't get paid if you access the article) which explains it all in detail. In the article we walk through a real life example of how one of the Gabelli Funds had asset coverage of 633% on preferreds which fell to 293% during the financial meltdown in 2008. They then sold over $1,000,000,000 in common the next couple of years driving the coverage ratio above 1000%. When a closed end fund (BDC) violates the 'act' all sorts of hell rains down on them--for one they must discontinue any dividends on common etc while in violation of the asset coverage ratios--and this would be a disaster to any BDC.