Kodak - Chapter 11: Quiebra

mas informacion
http://www.google.com.pe/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=kodak%20chapter%2011&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&ved=0CEoQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democratandchronicle.com%2Farticle%2F20130805%2FBUSINESS%2F308050051&ei=gx8AUvPlKYOgyAGmvYHoDA&usg=AFQjCNH_R4Kiny-80HAGxtMGHf6i-QghUA

Written by

Matthew Daneman

Staff writer

Filed Under
Business
Kodak

NEW YORK — Eastman Kodak Co. stock was worth about $15 five years ago. Today it’s going for roughly 13 cents and will likely cease to exist within a few weeks.

A group of shareholders made what was likely a last-ditch effort Monday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court to prevent that end, with a four-plus hour hearing on the possibility of a committee to represent their interests in Kodak’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Such committees, such as the unsecured creditors’ and retirees’ committees, have enormous power in negotiating terms and conditions of the bankruptcy.

And existing shareholders, if given their own such committee, would be able to get their own evaluation of Kodak’s assets around the globe, could try to work out a different bankruptcy plan that would see them own about a third of post-bankrupt Kodak, and should start issuing subpoenas to the various financial firms buying and selling Kodak debt to look for possible insider trading, testified Kodak shareholder Robert Saikaley, a Canadian day trader.

“Shareholders are being wiped out ... and we have no voice, they’re just throwing us off,” Saikaley said. “There’s no transparency. I’m a shareholder — I have a right to know.”

Much of the hearing was taken by testimony from two expert witnesses hired by shareholders: Maulin V. Shah, founder of intellectual property consulting firm Envision IP, and Elise Neils, managing director at Brand Finance USA Inc. In both cases, the point was to show to the court that Kodak is a business Sutter’s Mill, with such untapped veins of gold as its patent portfolio and its brand name.

Shah testified about a quick evaluation of Kodak’s patent portfolio and its potential value, saying that with the company talking about patent licensing income of $250 million to $350 million a year, the patents themselves could be worth anywhere from $1.6 billion to $2.5 billion. Neils said the brand could be worth anywhere from $400 million to $1 billion.

Written by

Matthew Daneman

Staff writer

Filed Under
Business
Kodak

(Page 2 of 3)

The question of what Kodak’s worth has huge implications for the thousands of unsecured creditors, such as suppliers, that Kodak left with unpaid bills when it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January 2012. Kodak’s plan for getting out of bankruptcy has it paying back roughly 4 to 5 cents on the dollar. Kodak shareholders would get nothing and their stock would be canceled when the company emerges from bankruptcy, supposedly in early September.

However, Kodak on Monday vigorously disputed the consultants’ numbers and the whole idea there’s substantially more money to be had.

Testifying for Kodak, David Kurtz, global head of the restructuring group at advisory investment bank Lazard Freres & Co. LLC, said Kodak’s patents and brand are in fact part of the company’s value, but that their net worth is a lot less. The $250 million-$350 million in annual licensing revenues was what Kodak used to make, not what it expects to make going forward, especially since almost all that past licensing money came from the company’s digital imaging patents, which were sold last year, Kurtz said. And Kodak anticipates making about $14 million through 2017 on licensing its brand.

Kurtz said he’d been in numerous conversations in recent months with potential buyers of Kodak’s trademark and that the dollar figures being discussed were not “anywhere near” the Neils numbers, though he did not give specifics.

Aside from brand and patent issues, one key argument shareholders have made regarding supposed untapped Kodak wealth has to do with its net operating losses — more than $3 billion in tax credits the company has amassed which will largely be lost with its emergence from bankruptcy. But their value is far less than estimates shareholders have used, Kurtz said. Kodak would not face a U.S. tax bill until 2020 at the earliest, and then only if it meets its forecasts. Even in that case, he said, the net operating losses would have only minor value

Por desgracia no pinta bien, en la noticia que pone Ricardo se lee esto:
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Allan Gropper rejected the idea of a Kodak shareholder committee once before, in 2012. And Monday, in an exchange with Wayne Greenwald, a New York attorney specializing in bankruptcy issues and representing a collection of shareholders seeking the committee, Gropper seemed as if he may be leaning that way again.
Este juez me da que no está por la labor...

Written by

Matthew Daneman

Staff writer

Filed Under
Business
Kodak

(Page 3 of 3)

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Allan Gropper rejected the idea of a Kodak shareholder committee once before, in 2012. And Monday, in an exchange with Wayne Greenwald, a New York attorney specializing in bankruptcy issues and representing a collection of shareholders seeking the committee, Gropper seemed as if he may be leaning that way again.

First, he pushed Greenwald on the 4-5 percent repayment plan for unsecured creditors, pointing out the shareholders never showed that number is flawed. Shareholders would only be in line for any money after unsecured creditors are paid off 100 percent.

“While I understand that’s what the creditors are getting, I don’t have the information to say whether they can get more,” Greenwald said. “That’s one of the reasons an equity committee is necessary.”

But, Gropper replied, given that unsecured creditors have their own committee trying to get as good a deal as possible, “Do you believe the committee has been asleep at the switch to the tune of 95 percent?”

“I can’t say I believe it,” Greenwald said. “I can’t say I don’t believe it. I don’t have enough information

si sabemos que juez puede rechasarlo por que al pareser puede haber una colucion y eso lo sabe el tribunal supremo de jsuticia usa quien puede ordenar la equidad recuerden el juicio del juez de boston que encoro indicios de colucion el otros casos mismos participantes

Eso no lo sabes ni tu ni yo...pintar no pinta bien. Yo ya de perdidos al rio y a ver si suena la flauta. Tengo un riesgo medio en cuanto a volumen, 48.000 a precio de 0,13. He tenido la posibilidad de salir perdiendo nada o poco.
Creo que se ha convertido en una ruleta y poco tiene ya de bolsa tradicional. No confio mucho ni en el juez ni en la justicia pero sí en la especulación que se crea en este tipo de acciones

Don Ricardo,me pone usted de los nervios. Si es rechazado el comite olvidese de el. NO,REPITO, NO conozco ningun caso en que una instancia superior contradiga a un juez en esta cuestion. Paciencia,pero no pensemos en cosas extrañas...