3 ms·
That seems like a bit of a simplistic view spurred on by people who don’t know what Chapter 11 is. It’s not “we don’t have any more money” or “we aren’t making
by chrismeller 6y ago
That seems like a bit of a simplistic view spurred on by people who don’t know what Chapter 11 is.
It’s not “we don’t have any more money” or “we aren’t making any money”, it’s “we need a little court-mandated breathing room (from our creditors) to change x, y, and z, and then we’ll be ok”.
- gregschlom 6y ago"and then we'll be ok" More like: "and then we'll pay back as much as we can to our creditors, and then if there's still money left at the end we might be ok"
- chrismeller 6y agoWell, in this case perhaps. The shareholders may be screwed, but at least it gives them (Hertz as well as shareholders) a fighting chance, rather than just saying “yep, we had a good run” and washing their hands of everything.
- tablespoon 6y ago> That seems like a bit of a simplistic view spurred on by people who don’t know what Chapter 11 is. > It’s not “we don’t have any more money” or “we aren’t making any money”, it’s “we need a little court-mandated breathing room (from our creditors) to change x, y, and z, and then we’ll be ok”. It really depends on which "we" you're talking about: 1. What you said is probably true, from the perspective of the organization itself (which includes its officers). 2. It's almost always false, from the perspective of the current shareholders. They're going to get wiped out.
- chrismeller 6y agoYes, the we were Hertz in that case, not shareholders.