Pensez-vous qu’un plan de départ volontaire sera mis en place s’il y a Sauvegarde ?
Non, la sauvegarde est protectrice pour l'entreprise et les salariés. Elle n'est mauvaise que pour les actionnaires. Paul Saleh est réellement sincère dans ce qu'il dit :
« …
there are a lot of example of companies that have just really emerged well and perform extremely well post that process. » (« process » = restructuration de dette avec sauvegarde, voir version intégrale en milieu d’article). Business will keep going as usual, only the capital structure will change.
Voir plus bas version complète.
C'est le statut quo qui serait mauvais pour les salariés. Car les commandes s'effondreraient. Avec une capital restrucurée et une dette réduite. Ce que dit Paul Saleh c'est que les nouveaux actionnaires seraient les créanciers, il n'y a plus besoin de faire de ventes d'actifs pour rembourser la dette.
La situation du dépeçage, scénario actuel serait destructrice d'emploi car les repreneurs peuvent ne pas reprendre tous les salariés. Saleh ne ment vraiment pas sur le fait que Business keep going as usual.
Le scénario actuel qui est d'essayer de faire perdre le moins de valeur possible aux actionnaires, se fait au détriment des salariés, sauf pour les 3000 salariés actionnaires via le FCPE.
Je rappelle les paroles de Paul Saleh :
Michael:
Hi Paul. So thank you very much for this really helpful conversation and all the information. They will help us in our discussions with my customer, Mercedes, tomorrow. Next week we have our meetings with the global procurement head and I feel well prepared. But to be honest, I don’t feel well prepared when I talk to my daughter. And if she’s asking me, is there risk of getting artists getting bankrupt? What’s the answer?
Paul Saleh :
I think there’s a variation on the theme. I think, let me just actually, it’s interesting you mentioned that, but for the interest of the team, there was some news at one point that we were going to what they call an ad hoc mandate. And so if you read it in the press, let me just really demystify it for you. What it is, is that you’re going to a court that appoints a, basically think about it as a mediator. And the role of the mediator is just really to facilitate conversations between two parties. And so if, for example, things stall with the banks and we feel that the benefit is to just really go and have a mediator that can kind of accelerate the discussions, because so many times that’s what their role is, then you just really do that. That doesn’t mean that, hey, we’re just in trouble, but it is a mechanism used for that.
There’s another mechanism that people mention, which is called consolidation. And what that means is that, again, it’s a little bit more advanced in a sense that the mediator in the first place, and this is a place where they are actually that party that is acting on behalf of the tribunal in a sense, has a little bit more authority to force people to do certain things. So that’s the second level of, you know, it’s like in war game, death com one, death com two, or whatever you want to call it. The last one is just really what they call safeguard, which your daughter’s asking, hey, is there a possibility that the company may find itself in that predicament? It’s just also it’s only when all these other type of activities have not borne fruit and you are just absolutely stuck. That is when the tribunal, in a sense, or discussions come up with a very quick solutions to just really try to bring everybody together. But then in this case, is there forcing the outcome in all cases?
Let me just make sure that you understand a bankruptcy in the form that people are talking about is one in which the company re-emerges very quickly with all their with a different set of creditors, where the bondholders and the people have given, you know, extended debt to the company with what they call get their debt converted into smaller amount and another amount in equity. Right. So that’s not that it’s not the elimination of the company just stop existing.
It’s just really exist in very quickly with a different form of a capital structure where the debt holders become owners and their obligations get reduced. And there are a whole lot of example. I’m just giving you there are a lot of example of companies that have just really emerged well and perform extremely well post that process. So that that we want to go there is just to give you the sense that we’re trying to find a solution, as I mentioned to you, that is really reasonable for everybody, which is the one that is currently on the table [Ndrl: là il est même en train de dire qu’une restructuration c’est cool]. But there are a few mechanism along the way that can be used to just really expedite a resolution. So you can tell your daughter that is not right now in the cards. And right now, the management have confidence that they’re going to be able to steer the ship and avoid having to use that mechanism [Ndrl: Bullshit].
And that’s a different that’s a different than total bankruptcy where you just really liquidate everything and the company’s to exist. This is what we’re talking about. So if you’re talking about self-guards, the company still exists, but the capital structure is reorganized. It’s much more like every organization that is if you think about it.
Hopefully you can talk to her.
Map to Paul :
Damned, Paul, you forgot to tell Michael’s daughter that his father will lose all his savings on his PEE (FCPE). Why are you so mean !!
