Bankruptcy Judge Slams Charter Founder Allen > Besides lecturing, will judge reject Allen's plan?

reply to fAcEtIOUs

Re: Besides lecturing, will judge reject Allen's plan?

If I had a choice between screwing Allen and screwing JP Morgan, I'd slam the bank every time. It's not like they will miss the money-- $8 billion is about one day's worth of credit card and overdraft fees to them. And if they do... well, I'm sure our government still has some bailout money left lying around.
--
Trusting the Democrats to fix our economy and give us health care is like trusting the fox with keys to the henhouse, a brand new gas stove, and a pantry full of goodies for side dishes. In the end, all will be dead and nothing but lies will be told.

While I am no fan of the banks, this was pretty much Allen's screw up and I do not think he should be able to profit from it.

reply to NOVA_Guy
That is an incredibly ignorant post. You would suffer a Bank to lose money over the net loss of a bad investment or You would push tax payer money to save Paul Allen, one of the richest men in america a pittance of money (against his total net worth)? This is from a poster who is criticizing Obama for trying to provide universal health coverage, the irony is overwhelming.

Paul Allen setup charter during the dot com boom and took the company public in an IPO near the end of the boom, raking in billions to compensate for his initial investment while at the same time retaining controlling interest in the company. Now a plan is proposed to wipe out much of the debt (at a severe loss to every lender) that also places the interests of an equity investor above those of a lender and you support it? As I said the irony and hypocrisy is overwhelming given the politics you espouse in your personal signature. Sounds like you fit in well in the Cheney view of the world, screw the masses for the benefit of the few. Bet he's your personal hero.

reply to zed260
Considering the bond holders and the banks both "own" Charter's debt, one shouldn't be favored over the other.

well the banks have secured liens on charters holdings so they would be paid first if its liqudated

if anythings left after paying banks it goes to bond holders then unsecured creditors etc

reply to NOVA_Guy
Say what you want about banks, but they've fronted a significant portion of the capital that Charter seems to have pissed away and they deserve their fair share of compensation/loss. "Screwing" the banks isn't exactly a great precedent to set in the credit world.

reply to zed260
Fair enough. Assuming the banks do hold $8B of the $22B in debt, then I'd guess there's not much negotiation to be done. And banks are banks. They have no desire to be a cable company and most definitely would sell the assets off assuming they take ownership. Any idea what Charter is worth?

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_Communications

acording to wikipedia 14.6 billion in assets in 2007

however since then i believe they've sold many systems so its probably less now

however in the event of liquidation given the way the econmy is and stuff they would probably sell for less so pretty much the bond holders would lose more in liquidation

I understand that, that's why I was wondering if you are aware of any realistic valuings. I don't own any Charter debt, just curious.

well i guess maybe 20 percent recovery for most of the bond holders but some bond holders have priatory over others

anyway charter would probably go for 11 billion i guess sounds about what they would sell for

reply to rahvin112
While this is completely off-topic, but since you brought it up... the US Government stepped in to take over a whore house in Nevada after it failed to pay back taxes and they couldn't even keep that from going bankrupt -- what makes you think it will succeed in running an entire healthcare system??

It's not "universal health coverage," it's universal health MANAGEMENT. The Democrats are selling you, and every other "the government can do no wrong" sucker, a pill of goods when they tell you that there will be no rationing of healthcare. Healthcare is a LIMITED RESOURCE and there are not enough doctors as it is right now -- this is something Congress (and Obama) have failed to address: who will get what and when? Have you ever read any of the proposed healthcare bill? It reads like stereo instructions that were written by a lawyer; it makes very little sense and there is plenty of "wiggle room" for Congress to essentially do whatever the hell it pleases. Furthermore, if their public option plan is so great and wonderful, why did they explicitly exclude themselves and their families from the same great coverage as the rest of us peons? Because it sucks!

Democrats live in some sort of utopia inside their minds... the rest of us live in something called reality.

reply to NOVA_Guy
Trusting Republicans is like...well like what happened with the stock market and this current recession oh and these two never-ending wars which costs us billions every month. It took a Democrat to get us out of at least one of them and now we have "some" regulation of these greedy losers. Republicans wanted to do away with Social Security and let folks use the Stock Market....well, if that had happened most would have little to no money to fall back on. Social Security, Medicare and yes. UNIVERSAL health care is the way to go. Cut the military budget to where they will be using sling shots..cut foreign aid...get rid of illegals and all will be right with the world. The U.S. spends more on health care and schools and get a lousy return for our dollar. I saw a report recently that proved that. Doctors want tort reform...hey Doc, just stop cutting off the wrong leg and you won't have to worry about being sued. I don't know any poor doctors but they are all whining and at the same time they are in bed with the companies that feed off of us.

reply to rahvin112

reply to Sky King
to blame everything on the Republicans is just so bad. your SAVIOR actually use to sue banks to get them to loan money to people with little income. Oh by the way SS Medicaid and medicare are all going under and have been for a very long time. there actually operating in the red. Same is true for the POST OFFICE. So no to Universal Health Care, and like someone above said go read it, its chaulk full of loop arounds and yes there is nothing preventing them from rationing in it. One reason they won't take it themselves, so if it won't be mandatory for them why me? that should speak for it self. And to put it gently well Obama actually plans on spending more than bush if his plans go through.

reply to matrix3D

reply to matrix3D
Sorry for going WAY off topic, but you could start a thread about puppies and it'd end up in a healthcare debate.

said by matrix3D:

---

While this is completely off-topic, but since you brought it up... the US Government stepped in to take over a whore house in Nevada after it failed to pay back taxes and they couldn't even keep that from going bankrupt -- what makes you think it will succeed in running an entire healthcare system??

---

said by matrix3D:

---

It's not "universal health coverage," it's universal health MANAGEMENT. The Democrats are selling you, and every other "the government can do no wrong" sucker, a pill of goods when they tell you that there will be no rationing of healthcare. Healthcare is a LIMITED RESOURCE and there are not enough doctors as it is right now -- this is something Congress (and Obama) have failed to address: who will get what and when?

---

said by matrix3D:

---

Democrats live in some sort of utopia inside their minds... the rest of us live in something called reality.

---

reply to matrix3D

reply to LowRider

theres a difference between giving and taking ones own money. This would not be an opt out option for those who chose to opt out. I would love to opt out if i could but even if i do guess what there going to charge me 2 and a half %. why should i pay into something i don't want or need? explain that. why are liberals always trying to take someones elses money? people pretty much get free health care now so why a big over haul on a bill these idiots haven't read (well maybe now some have)? Private insurence will disappate my friend cause busness won't beable to compete with the gov. why should we get rationed care in the first place? i suggest you read up on single payer health care. its not all that great. the gov can't fix SS, medicade, medicare and the old post office but by god we should trust them with health care? please answer the last question cause you can't. Not to mention but the plan dosen't even oust illeagals. How much you wanna bet the gov will take money from this money pit to....