Speaking to both sides is always a good move. Then have an objective think.
Too much bonding and mateship doesn't always result in truth.
For all we know the Canadians formed the view after dealing with Mgt and Board members that they were all totally incompetent and that there was a high probability of losing their $$.
But. The Canadians we were dealing with are reputable financial lenders. Nobody negotiates a deal and then suddenly varies it after a due diligence process in the reputable world without good reason.
Or alternatively, a better deal came up for them, someone's cat died .... the possibilities are endless.
No the serious possibilities are not endless.
Consider this: the lenders are in the business of financing, so they do deals all the time.
It's not one better deal came about as lender so you terminate the other one!
You'd do both. They have lines of credit open to them to do multiple deals.
It's how you make money. But you also must manage risk.
The reality is the terms changed, and the reason for that immediately after due diligence meant the lenders didn't pull out of the deal.
ADO did. Because the terms showed what a weakened situation we were in.
It was a near-death experience and from what I can see, a self inflicted flesh-wound.
What I don't swallow from all of this is that RM and FC were necessarily "saviours".
Facts?? that we know:
- FC either cannot be trusted or are incompetent if they actually accidentally loaned out their shares to shorters to put up $$ in the shortfall for the last CR.
VERY TRUE!!
They are either incompetent or didn't care about the impact on the SP.
- GC did not complete any major deals with the 80+ companies he has been spruiking for years.
VERY TRUE!
I have to say that GC has little credibility with me whatsoever as former CEO as a result. Which is one reason I hold the theories that Diasource are a nasty bunch, and the Canadians ditto, ...etc. are more likely a cover for lack of competence, certainly with strategy.
The fact that the ADO financing fell over at the due diligence stage tends to indicate that either RM or GC or both, were irresponsible or lazy or lacked the smarts to manage ADO competently. This isn't wild conspiracy theory, it's within the realms of logical deduction.
You'd imagine that Diasource as takeover target wasn't keen on keeping them in control of the company at that point. Who would?
- Twin is the smartest of all of us - by being a director he is getting back $$ he has lost for himself and his friends and family for encouraging them to invest. If he did not lose $$ because he traded ADO while smiling, waving, chasing breadcrumbs/loaves and pumping the stock while trading then we the future of ADO is looking very perilous!
Yes, a case can be made that Twin's been looking after himself all along. So much for mateship and HC group bonding...
Certainly the argument that he's on the Board to advance communications with shareholders is doubtful.
The situation is we now have a strong Chairman, sound CEO, and good financial management. Thankfully Hurrel has remained as long as it took to get that result.
ADO can still succeed but the hubris involved with previous officeholders such as GC and RM needs to take a back seat.
ADO may yet thrive...
IF FC can manage to stay out of it and not drive any suicide missions.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
