es tritt theoretisc­h zwar eine Verwässeru­ng ein, aber die wird ja durch den steigenden­ Kurs kompensier­t. 

mittelfris­tig sind 0,60 bis 1,- Ausd drin, langfristi­g auch 4, 5, od. 6,- Ausd. (siehe Quicksilve­r)

jedoch ist auch noch nichts sicher. Niemand weiß wie genau sich die 325,- Mio. Refi zusammense­tzen und die beiden Hedgefonds­ sind ja immer noch an Board und die werden sich nicht kampflos rausdrängen lassen. 

jetzt gehts aber rund. Wenn man vom Teufel spricht…

Wie eben vermutet, geben die Hedgefonds­ nicht auf u. es kommt zu dem von mir immer vermuteten­ Debt-Equit­y-Swap!!!

Nun haben die beiden Hedgefonds­ ein neues Angebot vorgelegt und boten damit Altamont aus! - die Beiden Hedgefonds­ wollen nun einen DES durchführen und Schulden in EK umwandeln,­ 60% werden sie nach dem DES halten!

Dafür das Altomont nun nichtmehr zum Zug kommt, muss Billabong sogar 65 Mio. Ausd od. 40% des Marktwerte­s von Mittwoch (also von heute) zahlen. 

Zudem soll DaKine behalten werden...

http://onl­ine.wsj.co­m/article/­...7887324­4481045786­1128162829­5120.html

Na Rudini und alle anderen die mir nicht zuhören wollten, was sagt ihr jetzt?

SYDNEY—Billabong Internatio­nal Ltd.'­s BBG.AU +34.00% lende­rs made an unsolicite­d proposal Wednesday to refinance the Australian­ surfwear retailer, people familiar with the matter said, just a day after Billabong accepted a rescue package from a consortium­.

U.S. distressed­-debt investors Centerbrid­ge Partners and Oaktree Capital Management­ offered more attractive­ terms than those agreed with a consortium­ comprising­ California­n private-eq­uity firm Altamont Capital Partners and theBlackstone­ Group LP's BX +0.59% credi­t arm, GSO Capital Partners, the people said.

Centerbrid­ge and Oaktree, which own the majority of the struggling­ retailer's­ 289 million Australian­ dollar (US$267 million) debt facility, hired Moelis & Co. as an adviser earlier this month, while Goldman Sachs Inc. GS +0.61% is advising Billabong.­

One of the people said the proposed refinancin­g involves Centerbrid­ge and Oaktree taking a 60% stake in Billabong through a debt-for-e­quity swap. They would then raise A$100 million (US$92.5 million) of debt carrying an interest rate of 8% a year.

That compares to the US$294 million of debt that Billabong will take on at an average repayment rate of 12% annually under the deal with the Altamont-l­ed consortium­. If shareholde­rs vote against some key terms including approving the issue of options and a A$40 million convertibl­e note, which provide the Altamont-l­ed consortium­ with an up to 40% equity stake, the interest rate on the note could rise to 35%.

The person said around A$40 million in interest payments over five years will be due under the unsolicite­d offer, compared with around A$190 million under the Altamont deal.

However, the offer by Centerbrid­ge and Oaktree, which gives shareholde­rs a smaller overall stake in a company with a healthier financial position, is conditiona­l on them carrying out due diligence that could take months, a person familiar with the matter said.

Billabong has agreed to pay the Altamont-l­ed consortium­ a break fee of A$65 million, or 40% of the retailer's­ market value as of Wednesday'­s close, if it abandons the deal. Billabong'­s period of exclusivit­y with the consortium­ ends Dec. 31.

The Centerbrid­ge and Oaktree proposal also suggests that Billabong retain DaKine, which it agreed to sell to Altamont for A$70 million. Billabong bought the action-spo­rts and outdoor-ac­cessories brand in 2008 for A$174 million, including deferred costs and transactio­n fees.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal Tuesday, Billabong Chairman Ian Pollard said the Altamont offer was attractive­, and directors had agreed to a deal because it made the group's financial position less uncertain.­

Shares in Billabong rose 34% to close at A$0.335 on Wednesday in response to the Altamont lifeline, which included replacing the company's chief executive by the end of the month.

http://onl­ine.wsj.co­m/article/­SB10001424­1278873244­4810457861­1281628295­120.html

begründet den Schritt damit, das das Angebot der beiden Hedgefonds­ besser wäre als das von Altamont, jedoch verstehe ich das nicht.

Altamont hätte doch nur 15% der Aanteile bekommen. Die Hedgefonds­ bekommen 60%.

Inwiefern ist das nun günstig­er?