3 ms·
> there is no reason one debt holder (pensioner) should have absolute precedence over another (lender, who sometimes lends enough to get the company past bad ti
by eropple 8y ago
> there is no reason one debt holder (pensioner) should have absolute precedence over another (lender, who sometimes lends enough to get the company past bad times).
Yes, there is a reason: people matter more than companies. Lenders can price that risk in. If that makes lenders "stay away"? Then the executive teams that get their golden parachutes get screwed too, and I'm frankly pretty okay with that.
And let's be real: pensions are virtually never (you might find one large example; you won't find ten) destroyed to save a business. They're destroyed to make their assets worth more in a flip. We need not be dishonest in this discussion.
- RestlessMind 8y agoIf lenders stay away, then execs get screwed and rest of the company gets screwed as well because now everyone is out of their jobs. Isn't that a worse outcome overall?
- eropple 8y agoThe majority, when it isn't all, are functionally already out of their jobs. These bridge investments exist to provide the runway gut the company and sell off its assets. I have no real problem with PE firms not getting to do that at the expense of people who the company have promised things to.