Talk:Canwest

Stalking horse

Haida Chieftan, the source you give only supports the first sentence. In the second sentence - the group who are protesting do not own 97% of Canwest's assets. The Oct 6th proposal would give 97% to share between ALL Canwest's creditors - the protesting group are only part of the overall creditor group. Also, there's no such thing as a 'stalking horse auction' The source refers to a 'Stalking horse offer, where the debtor cuts a deal with the most likely looking party before the auction, which enhances the value of their bid to the debtor. It's a legal process, the stalking horse offer should become the starting offer in the auction. The protesting group want to be allowed to take part in the auction and outbid the bank's stalking horse offer. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Restructuring and creditor protection

Is there a reason why the financial events of the past year are taking up such a large portion of the article? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Angelo Gordon hedge fund wishing CanWest's monopoly Canadian news disclosure infrastructure theirs. http://www.friends.ca/news-item/9088 Quote, "CanWest's bondholders include a number of Canadian and U.S. distressed debt funds, including West Face Capital in Toronto and New York-based Angelo, Gordon & Co. These funds have the firepower and expertise to complete the CanWest deal on their own, if RBC Dominion cannot come up with a potential investor, or if the offers are not deemed suitable." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haida chieftain (talk • contribs) 21:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Uh, yeah. Is that supposed to be an answer to my question? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

How about "because Haida Chieftan thinks it's very important". I'm not sure if we really understand why.......--Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I've reverted the addition until we do understand why. That section already smacks of WP:RECENTISM. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Vote to disclose that CanWest bonds sold below face value. IT IS ONE THING NOT TO MENTION IT, SOMETHING ELSE TO CENSOR IT.

Convenant that CanWest pretax earnings to be above certain amount, or vendor financing agreement could demand principle back. Not sure how this convenant right to demand immediate repayment is enforcable in Canada; CanWest shareholders already paid most of the purchase price of newspapers. And Hollinger paid a fine to CanWest for misrepresenting newspapers pre tax earnings. [[1]]. Quote,"Jan. 29, 2009 Canwest receives an arbitrated award of about $51-million for unresolved adjustments and claims surrounding the acquisition of newspaper assets from Hollinger." Quote, "March 12, 2009 Canwest receives $34-million in full settlement of money owing from an arbitration award in its dispute with Hollinger International Inc."

Active concern of both our nations' securities regulators, that Hollinger International (Sun-times) as part of their US Chapter 11, in the disposition of the vendor financing agreemnt at 15 cents on the dollar. Holliinger International not banckrupt, if their CanWest bonds valued at real value. [[2]] [[3]] [Fifty nine papers sold for 5 million cheats the free market.] Issues with a Canadian company selling Canada's newspapers, and transfering the vendor financing agreement off shore to avoid Canadian taxes. [[4]] Could be that, certain hedge funds owe Canadian taxes on the the sale of the Canadian newspaper vendor financing agreement bonds. It is not right to depict these bonds as regular, as bonds registered under rule 144A [5], restricted from being sold on the open market in North America. --Haida chieftain (talk) 20:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

And what does any of that have to do with Angelo Gordon's hedge fund? —C.Fred (talk) 20:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

That's not what I asked. Wikipedia is not the Financial Post, Bloomberg, or CNN Financial. The intricate financial dealings of Canwest do not belong in a general article. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Neil, I'm in agreement with you there. While some information should be presented about Canwest's current situation, it should not overwhelm the article, and every minute detail does not need to be presented. I also agree that information added should benefit the general reader; the article should not be skewed to cater to Canwest owners or any other party with a conflict of interest with the subject. —C.Fred (talk) 20:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Western world ethic is that the free press be accountable. DO NOT NOT COVER UP FRAUD. Why did CanWest settle with Hollinger in 2009 concerning the sale of Canada's newspapers in 2000, when the same agreement as the same time (hollinger's vendor financing bonds) were demanding the expropriation of CanWest shares? [[6]] Arbitrator should have struck down the clause to demand full principle payment based on a Canwest pre tax earnings. Hollinger has acknowledge the earnings disclosed to CanWest were deceptive and inaccurate -- reduces right to expropriate CanWest shares based on pre tax earnings then, should it not?

Have a question. Can the CanWest article mention the 275 million cash payment in 2003 to reduce the interest rate from 12.125% to 8% on the Canadian newspaper vendor financing bonds. Can this 275 million gift be disclosed on wiki? --Haida chieftain (talk) 01:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The answer to the second question is easy: No. It's not a gift; it's a payment related to debt, either repayment or restructuring. To call it a gift is to introduce bias into the text. —C.Fred (talk) 01:28, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Right of article to mention CanWest debt restructuring. Yes the word gift is a point of view, so will change. Thanks. No nation's newspapers should pay a 12.125% interest rate. Usury. Basically, certain factions will pay whatever to buy the free world's voice, makes CanWest's assets very valuable. --199.60.104.100 (talk) 01:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Question: Do small nations' affected by news monopolies, have the right to read about the sale price details of those assets in wikipedia? Specifically: wiki readers from Canada; and CanWest shareholders; and the millions and millions of Canadians that read these newspapers deserve consideration; also other parts of the Engligh World, like New Zealand, Austrialia, and Ireland etc, also touched by CanWest news programming -- there are strong feeling here that the truth be told; inotherwords, simply said, this has a a high public interest, and the article should honour this. According to Goldman Sachs Canadian filing, sources the Globe and Mail, CanWest bonds (Hollinger's CanWest newspaper vendor financing bonds) sold for 15 cents on dollar. To censor that CanWest bonds claiming to own CanWest, sold for 15 cents on dollar -- let's the reader down, and let's our civilization down. [7] --Haida chieftain (talk) 21:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a newspaper, it is an encyclopedia. It's not our job to hold CanWest accountable. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I've reverted Haida Chieftan's most recent edits. I wish he'd explain what he wants to say, rather than inserting scraps on uncontextualised text, not supported by references. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Is there any support to cut down this section to maybe two paragraphs? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, you've got it from me. A couple of sensible paras describing the current goings on in broad terms would be more useful than what we have at the moment.Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Date disconnect with BS, IS figures

Since Haida chieftain removed the equity figure from the infobox repeatedly, I've updated it and the assets to the figures as of 11/30/09 (i.e., after 1Q 2010). However, this creates a disconnect with the income statement figures. I don't think a rolling 12-month income statement figure is appropriate (it borders on synthesis), and trying to annualize from 1Q10 results is even worse. Does anybody object to having the income statement figures be for FY 2009 and the balance sheet figures, instead of as of the end of FY 2009, as of the end of the first quarter of FY 2010? —C.Fred (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Canwest. --RrburkeekrubrR 23:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC) --Haida chieftain (talk) 23:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Rrburke has rescinded that warning, since he feels your edits were in good faith, albeit a content dispute. —C.Fred (talk) 23:27, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

"For the three month period ended November 30, 2009 Canwest reported net earnings of $653 million." Ten disposition, non operating profit. http://www.canwestglobal.com/investors/investor_documents/F10/q1/Canwest_Q1_2010_Release.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.60.104.100 (talk) 21:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Apropos the above, I have removed this from the article CanWest when it filed for creditor protection, the Company's reported a Canwest reported net earnings of $653 million (includes the gain of 570 million from the sale of Ten) for the three months eneded Novemeber 30, 2009.

The two are obviously connected. Anyone venture as to what Haida Chieftan is trying to say? Is it that CanWest inflated its earnings by including the value of the sale of Ten, and is the point that the sale income went to creditors and shouldn't have been included as income? Am I right (HC, is this what you are trying to get over???), is this actually correct in Canadian financial law, and is this something that should be in the article. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

"If the details of CanWest's debt transactions are that significant to the reader, then they'll have been covered in secondary sources. Can you point to an article in a secondary source (a newspaper, Maclean's, etc.) that has covered it? I wish that debt restructurings—or even C$400 million payments made on debt in default in the course of restructuring it—were unusual, but they're not. What makes this debt transaction unusual—and can you explain it with analysis in an independent source and not your own analysis?" Answer. CanWest failed in its duty to do its best for CanWest shareholders, when CanWest voluntarily bought back bonds, dollar per dollar, unusual debt transaction when the bond market is selling the same bonds below a dollar.' If bonds bought for .15 cents on the dollar, and adding in the 8% interest rate, that's a 700% profit. Could someone enter into the article that CanWest bought back bonds dollar per dollar? --Haida chieftain (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Could you provide a decent financial source that says this, and makes some sensible commentary. As I believe I've said before, if you just want to draw attention to CanWest's wrongdoings, start a blog. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC

Haida Chieftan, I have moved your edit on the voluntary filing, and have edited it. The word 'voluntarily' does not need to be highlighted, italicised, put into quotes, or any other thing designed to signify that you have some point to make. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

archived old sections, rants and soapboxing

Ok, so I manually archived any of the rant / soapbox sections or sections that looked like there was no outstanding items to be discussed. If you feel there was a subject that still needed discussion and you're not currently a banned user editing as an IP sockpuppet please feel free to drag said section out of archive. I've configured Misza bot to archive sections that are more than a month old and have set up the archive links at the top of this page.

From now on I recommend that any tendentious editing, disruptive comments or general asshattery from banned users / sock puppets be reverted on sight as to not muck up the valuable parts of this talk page with nonsense. Hope this helps the well meaning editors of this article have more productive discussions! Nefariousski (talk) 23:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Delisting(?) from TSX to TSX Venture

When was Canwest taken off of the TSX and moved to TSX Venture? If that move is similar to being delisted from NYSE, that's worth mentioning in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 04:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Canwest's stock was delisted from the TSX main board on November 13th, and started trading on the venture exchange on the 16th. The delisting was triggered by their filing for protection under the CCAA. Mlaffs (talk) 05:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Have you got a link to a news story on it? —C.Fred (talk) 00:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

From the CBC.  єmarsee  • Speak up! 05:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)