Precedent for Debtor In Possession Public Offerings? (Rx Question)
During the Hertz Chapter 11, there was a brief Debtor-In-Possession Public Offering (DIPPO) which was shut down just a week later by the SEC. From my understanding, the downside to this would have been to the equity holders, who could receive nothing in the Chapter 11 process.
- Given the remaining debt was paid in full, would the raising of equity through a DIPPO not have been beneficial to the company and existing creditors over traditional DIP financing? Even if the new equity owners got burned, is it not their responsibility to perform due diligence on the company they are buying stock in?
- Why did the SEC block Hertz's right to access the equity capital markets? Was it politics as Icahn was a large shareholder, protection of unknowing new holders, or would it set a bad precedent in Chapter 11 practice?
Thank you for reading, let me know what you all think below:
Tempore voluptatem aut velit soluta veniam esse. Qui eaque sit deserunt consequuntur repellendus. Voluptatum repellat dolore est at sed sit. Dolores ipsam est consequuntur ex quaerat exercitationem.
Saepe ipsa voluptatibus architecto ut distinctio nostrum. Tempore quia magnam occaecati. Minus sequi praesentium dignissimos sed velit a fugiat.
Enim perferendis dolores sunt amet minima. Itaque nobis ea corporis rerum. Cumque distinctio quas ea aliquid vel soluta et. Id quasi molestiae magni voluptates distinctio. Nam rerum illum dolorem exercitationem excepturi architecto.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...