4 ms·
The overarching question is: why should the County have thought the hedge funds are overpaying for the claim and to take the money and run? Usually when you ha
by Scoundreller 2y ago
The overarching question is: why should the County have thought the hedge funds are overpaying for the claim and to take the money and run?
Usually when you have several suitors that purely have profit in mind, you're the mark. Doubly so when their cost of capital is higher than your own.
> to allocate expensive legal resources in chase of speculative claims
On a claim this big, the bankruptcy trustee takes care of that for you. They're literally a fiduciary. The cost would be reading whatever gets mailed to you, but at the end of the day, there isn't much control you have over the ultimate outcome.
And uhhh, in terms of credit worthiness, Kaseya has an interesting history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaseya_VSA_ransomware_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaseya_VSA_ransomware_attack .
- s1artibartfast 2y agoThey don't have to be overpaying. It was a win win. The way I read it the county got more money this way than if they held it. They they sold the stake ultimately worth 17 million, but they got their rights back, which they resold for 16 million. As long as they sold their stake for 1 million or more, they are in the green.
- Scoundreller 2y agoThe rights were back to them at the time of default. It was independent of the claim sale. (They won on the reselling of the naming rights too by leasing them out for more per year than ftx)
- s1artibartfast 2y agoThanks for the clarification. I thought the two were tied
- kelnos 2y agoOverpaying or underpaying was irrelevant: the dollar amount they got was what mattered, and they were satisfied with that amount.