Patedecouil

@PleasrDAO Victor from California

First person who guesses our special guest in Tasmania gets flown out ✈️

@AjAqrabawi @jake2b Genius at work

Great observation Jake. Please allow me to hijack your post and offer some DD. Freeman Capital Management were the owners of the 2024 bond notes, this was openly disclosed by Jake Freeman himself in a letter he wrote to the board. When we discovered the “Make Whole Call” provisions exercised by the company on April 12th (Kevin Malone’s reporting), one thing stood out is that they only applied to the 2034 and 2044 notes, leaving the 2024 notes untouched. Now imagine the company hasn’t died off, and instead engages in a complex M&A transaction after a long Chapter 11 restructuring process. Imagine also that this process involved delisting the old stock, resulting in defaulted or lost shares and debt obligations. Well then if at some future point, former shareholders receive a return in value based on the proportion of their invested stakes, that same advantage wouldn’t extend to bondholders. They’ll have no compensation. And because the company handed the bondholders an option, on several occasions, to convert the debt to shares, any concern about fairness to bond holders is immediately disregarded. Some comments on the bond exchange deal brokered by Lazard in late 2022: Although the public exchange was meant to commence on October 18th and expire by November 15th, it was extended again and again and again, ultimately terminated on January 5th, but after each dreadful extension there were supposedly hard efforts to renegotiate the offerings; what’s weird is that when we reviewed the amendments they made it looked like very little was actually changed by the BBBY management to make the offering more persuasive. But despite the failure on surface level, we do see interesting developments occur in two private offerings: Private Offering #1 involves a single existing holder, contributing to a 3.5M$ debt-to-equity conversion. Private Offering #2 engages several institutional holders, leading to a much more substantial debt-to-equity conversion. So despite the unfavorable outlook publicly, these behind-the-scenes actions revealed some progress with significant institutional participation (only concerning the 2034 and 2044 bonds). One week after terminating the bond exchange deal, on January 13th we found on Pitchbook, a $25,000/year data service, reported the company had undergone a leveraged buyout (LBO), meaning some aspects had already been acquired through a private sale. Another pitchbook data entry revealed that buybuyBABY was the subject of a leveraged buyout on January 13, 2023. That same January 13th, and this is very important, BBBY defaulted on their ABL with JPM. In August, we received a notice about an at-the-money offering of shares, specifically 12 million shares to be sold via Jeffreys. Cool, they demonstrated the capacity to raise capital by selling shares. An updated Form S-4/A on October 28th made available an additional $150 million for an At-the-Money (ATM) offering. When BBBY held their Q3 shareholders meeting on January 10th, they disclosed using the revenue from holiday sales to purchase more inventory. There were references to missing targets, possibly related to the going concern notice. Why the fuck didn’t they take advantage of the ATM offering and sell shares for the $150 million they announced? On January 13th, BBBY was forced to default on the ABL terms, as indicated by JPMorgan, the administrative agent. The 10Q that was later released on January 26th highlighted certain events of default, emphasizing the failure to prepay an over-advance and satisfy a financial covenant, among other things. But even that same 10Q balance sheet suggested that BBBY actually had sufficient liquidity to fulfill the defaulted payment. So BBBY seemingly had multiple avenues to meet the debt obligation payment on January 13th, either through the liquidity seen on their balance sheets, maneuvering accessible funds, using revenue from holiday sales to service the debt and buying less inventory, or fucking offering shares from the $150 million ATM they already authorized. BBBY seemingly intentionally did not meet their obligations, resulting in the default with JPM. What “among other things” could have caused the default? Looking into the original ABL loan agreement, which Whoopass actually managed to find from June 19th 2020, you can explore ARTICLE VII Events of Default. Notable reasons include events requiring full payment of material indebtedness, forced proceedings related to liquidation or bankruptcy, and a change in control. Well at that time, BBBY had neither filed for bankruptcy nor undergone liquidation. Did a change in control occur? Interestingly, one criterion for a change in control was defined as the acquisition of over 40% of the company's voting power by any person or group. Quick tinfoil, five days after the LBO was reported on Pitchbook, five days after the default that I’m thinking was likely caused by a change in control, which entails the acquisition of over 40% of the company’s voting power, RC tweets a meme containing the headline “Ryan Cohen Buys all stocks”. And the time that was indicated on the image is seen to be 4:07. The price of BBBY on the exact minute candle at which time he posted his tweet was $4.07. You can’t make that up. A week earlier he had tweeted a quote from the Titanic in which Rose asks Jack to draw her like one of his French Girls, wearing this, only this. Importantly, that scene features the famous blue diamond necklace, which is thought to be lost, Rose later reveals to be holding unknowing to everyone the entire story, it also features the butterfly hairclip resembling the butterfly featured in BBBY's final tweet before selling their IP to Overstock. And since we’re on the topic, the Kirkland and Ellis repeatedly referred to Sue Gove as having the job of turning around the Titanic, and everyone seems to be in agreement on the theme. But let’s lay off the tinfoil. Do we have any other evidence a change of control occurred on January 13th? Here’s evidence I don’t think anyone else noticed, during the bond deal, we saw an attempt to remove of some the restrictive covenants on the old bonds. Specifically on page 75 of the original offering it states “The proposed amendments with respect to the old Notes would remove the following sections in their entirety from the Supplemental Indentures. Section 5.1 Offer to purchase upon Change of Control Triggering Event. a) If a change of control triggering event occurs, unless the company has exercised its right to redeem the notes of a seires, the company will make an offer to each Holder of the Notes of such series to repurchase all or any part of that Holder’s Notes of such series on the terms set forth in such Notes. In the Change of Control Offer, the Company will be required to offer payment in cash equal to 101% of the aggregate principal amount of Notes repurchased, plus accrued an unpaid interest, if any on the Notes repurchased. b) With respect to the Notes of each series, within 30 days following any change of control triggering event, or at the company’s option, prior to any change of control, but after the public announcement of the transaction that constitutes or may constitute the change of control, a notice will be mailed to holders of the Notes of the applicable series …. And repurchase the Notes of such series no later than 60 days from the date on which the Change of Control Triggering event occurs." So in smooth brain terms, the old bonds have a covenant in their agreement basically saying that if there’s a change of control triggering event, defined as the consequence of a “non-involved party” becoming a majority owner of 40% or more of the company’s common stock, then BBBY would notify the bondholders within 30 days and will be forced to buy back their bonds at 101% face value 60 days from the date of that notice being mailed before the change of control actually occurs. If LBO of January 13th was the triggering event, 30+60 is 90 days afterwards we should have seen the company repurchase their bonds. 90 days from January 13th is April 12th. On the exact date, April 12th, we get a tweet from our friend Kevin Malone who suddenly discovers an influx of “Make Whole Call” provisions exercised by the company, essentially resulting in the repurchase and cancellation of large numbers of their bonds. "Make Whole Calls" pertain to corporate bonds and represent a contractual clause enabling the company to retire the bond prematurely by settling the remaining debt. The January 13th LBO was not a failure, it was a triggering event for a change of control transaction which has likely been hidden by NDAs and had not yet occurred hence the lack of any SEC filings disclosing the new ownership. And here’s an interesting oddity to consider, on January 26th, BlackRock submitted a Form 13G where they simply disclosed a 14% ownership stake in the company. But the filing was an amendment to an earlier 13G filed on January 20th. The key modification that was made from the previous filing was an update on the voting rights for their shares, they went from lacking voting rights to having them. What motivations would lead a company like BlackRock that doesn’t typically concern itself with the corporate governance of a dying home goods retailer want with shareholder voting rights? I can only imagine it was intended to dilute the voting rights of a particular individual who has secured control over the company with a >40% stake. TLDR; 2034 and 2044 bonds will be converted to equity, 2024 bonds (held by Jake Freeman) will not. The bonds were likely involved in an LBO that began on January 13th but did not consummate until post-Chapter 11. This is why nothing but the IP was offered during the auctions. RC holds the majority of shares.

Why are 𝙤𝙣𝙡𝙮 the 2024 $BBBYQ #BBBYQ bonds PCO? Hmm, odd enough on its own but quite the timing leading up to this week’s court hearing!

@Sixquatre Le retour de vacances de l'équipe technique 🤣

C'est quoi l'annonce de fou que vous attendriez pour le #SixInvitational2024 ?

@Bone_Cracking My face when I wake up too early

Dog, nearly completely covered in mange, makes an amazing recovery

@Shookapik Justine got faya..

Ca fait peur quand même les avancées de l'IA 😱

@WHITEMAN_YOLO @PhantomBlack699 @badattrading69 *RETARDED*

@PhantomBlack699 How can @badattrading69 and Platnum read all this info and not understand they ret*rted? 🤓 📖

$BBBYQ - Time to lay the SPACDOWN Last week I speculated that $BBBYQ Acquisition CO LLC is part of a SPAC in this tweet x.com/phantomblack69… As we know, Buybuybaby IP was sold July 2023, yet the website wasn’t trading for 126 days, as a comparison Overstock consummated the IP rights within 14 hours and were trading. This has led me to believe there was an equity carve out occurring and a shared service agreement being drafted during the 126 days of inactivity. Recently my speculation has increased due to the naming structure of two entities involved in this transaction we are currently experiencing and the newly re-launched buybuybaby.com, here is the mailing address on the website: The name BBBY Acquisition Co, LLC is simply a placeholder name. Companies are formed with placeholder names until they have a chance to come up with a permanent name. This name appears transitory in nature. if we also look at this Delaware based entity formed on the date of the name change from Bed Bath & Beyond: Another company with the acquisition name structure, I believe these companies are holding companies to acquire other companies. We found 38 separate entities of 20230930-DK-BUTTERFLY-**. Here’s some examples of companies with this naming structure making acquisitions: Riverstone Acquisition Corp II is a SPAC that acquired Lucid Motors, an electric vehicle company Bain Capital Acquisition Corp is a SPAC that acquired ViewRay Constellation Acquisition Co LLC is a holding company that owns a portfolio of businesses Churchill Downs Acquisition Corp is a SPAC that acquired Churchill Downs Incorporated This type of company is often used to consolidate ownership of multiple businesses into a single entity. Remember, copies of the company name change were sent to Christian O'Nagler & Tamar Donikyan of Kirkland & Ellis. Both lawyers are SPAC/IPO specialists. But who owns Buybuybaby? Here’s a screenshot from their customer support this week Picture credit u/Famous_Audience6542 The chat confirms it’s not owned by Dream on Me and is a private company held by private investors, sounds like a SPAC to me. So, what’s a SPAC? A SPAC acquisition is a type of business transaction in which a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) acquires a private company. SPACs are also known as "blank check companies" because they are formed with the sole purpose of acquiring another company. Who is the private investor? I believe it to be Teddy Holdings LLC. The entity owned by Ryan Cohen, who has trademarks in ALL relevant categories he filed in August 2022, filed 4 days before selling his stake in $BBBY whilst having material non-public information. The trademarks are all live and filed legally in good faith with intent to use in commerce. This man does not give up because a board said no. Here is a screenshot from the Wayback Machine from July 2022 of teddy.com. Ryan Cohen has been preparing for this hostile takeover armed with $120M & Carl Icahn’s proxy solicitors. You will all learn what activist investing is. Teddy is the next Chewy. Who will facilitate the deal? Lazard Freres, have served the debtors (Bed Bath & Beyond) as investment banker throughout the Chapter 11 reorganization. One of the services they provide as investment banker to assist the debtor company in securing additional financing or investments to support its reorganization efforts, such as issuing new debt, seeking equity investments, or arranging for debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing. In fact since the start Lazard have given this Chapter 11 the title project.butterfly.2023.wg (Source: Docket 29 Page 65) Lazard have substantial experience in SPAC’s here’s some two Lazard-backed SPACs that raised $500 million in IPOs from 2021 reuters.com/article/us-laz… The SPAC is the vehicle, Ryan Cohen is the driver, Lazard are the mechanics and MOASS the destination. So where are we now? -$BBBYQ Shares being held in a liquidating trust as confirmed by Wells Fargo and AST -High probability of fraud and an ongoing RICO case, I will make a tweet this week highlighting the indications -We expect the Sixth Street Super Senior Secured debt to be used, if not already to make a credit bid on Buybuybaby, referencing docket 2040 where Sixth Street were interested in BABY on a stand-alone basis and were preparing a credit bid. -The best way whoever is funding through Sixth Street is a credit bid and providing debt for equity, providing previous shareholders equity in the new carve out/spin off and preserving between $1.6bn-$2.6bn in NOL’s (assuming the additional $1bn share repurchase losses incurred by overpaid executive Mark Tritton) -The plan can be changed as long as it benefits the debtor’s estate and all stakeholders and there hasn’t been substantial consummation, the credit bid can also occur at any time, there’s over 380 hours of redacted legal information still. -I expect a Form 10, S-1, S-4 or an 8-K to be filed soon and a corporate action issued to brokers who had $BBBYQ equity on their books. -The strong indications of fraud will allow us to move to a free and fair market such as tZERO, which is why the DTCC needed to be removed prior to share issuance and why I believe Overstock have absorbed the entire Bed Bath & Beyond brand, the CEO has stepped down and they have moved to the NYSE. This is a once in a lifetime play, congratulations on your patience and ability to comprehend what’s occurring. I provide you knowledge, knowledge is power and power is UNWAVERING CONVICTION.

@PhantomBlack699 Once again Salvatore, thanks for your hard work. This is the shit i am not able to explain to my mother since i'm higly retarded and can't even count to 3. 🙏🙏

@Shookapik @UniverseIce Les bandeurs on va les attraper

Poor European Galaxy S24 consumers, using inferior memory in 2024: Android world's last 8GB RAM, inferior processor: the most garbage Exynos2400 in its class, inferior OS: One UI 6 with the least smooth and most faulty in its class

@Shookapik Dis leur Shookapik

Vous en avez pas marre de vous plaindre de tout et n'importe quoi, en moyenne y'a + de 60% des joueurs qui finissent jamais leur jeu. Une campagne un peu plus courte c'est toujours positif, ca devient infernal de devoir mettre 40h+ dans un jeu pour en voir la fin..

@Shookapik Que des sources chaudes

C'est grave les gens qui chient H24 sur Squeezie, il fait une prise de parole c'est un bouffon, il dit rien c'est un bouffon. On aimerait bien vous voir à sa place un peu..

@peruvian_bull Sure it is my friend.

The basket is real

@SusanneTrimbath @cvpayne Tell'em mama

@cvpayne Let's stop using the term "retail". #HouseholdInvestor = #Voter #RetailInvestor = #YMMV => "Ya pays ya’s money and ya takes ya’s chances."

Time for Many in Financial Media to Stop Dissing Retail Investors while Hyping Scamsters. My Takeaway foxbusiness.com/video/63331465…

@InvestorTurf *grab popcorn, ready for some blood*

If you have a problem with InvestorTurf statements, you can take legal action, as lawsuits are based on facts. However, we know you won't do so because you anticipate the consequences. Additionally, your company, Virtu, is running a scam designed to rob retail investors, and you are well aware of it. We won't be making any further statements in regards to your silly comments.

@Damian_Kidd I felt good looking at it. Keep going mate, it's amazing.

Zero One Four Over and Out.

It's getting straight into my DRS sweet GME tendies 😎😎

Allez, go RT

@arthur_grllrd @CryptoMad89 @MadSkullz_NFT @avax Ca défonce !

@SchneiderGeoff5 @GoodValueCrypto Oui comme Robinhood ? 👀👀 Clairement etoro c'est poubelle, personne ne doit mettre de sous dans ces comptes. Si c'est gratuit, c'est toi le produit. Tes "actions"sont prêtées, tu achètes un CFD, pas de transfert possible, et j'en passe. Vraiment c'est poubelle.

@GoodValueCrypto Une des pires tout dépends de quoi on parle, elle est très simple, fluide et une interface très agréable par rapport à toutes les autres donc bon. On a des spreads certes mais pas de frais en investissements

🚨 FLASH - Le trading d'actions et de #crypto va bientôt être disponible sur Twitter 🐦 Twitter vient d'annoncer un partenariat avec eToro pour permettre aux utilisateurs de trader directement depuis l'app. Un choix étonnant, eToro étant l'une des pires plateformes du marché 🤷

@ChrisCa93099037 @GoodValueCrypto Exactement, que des CFD, pas de transfert possible, des clauses de fermetures arbitraires de positions en cas "d'événements exceptionnels", tes actions détenues dans un compte omnibus 100% obscur... Tu leur demande une preuve d'achat ils t'envoient chier, etc... Pire plateforme.

@GoodValueCrypto eToro, c'est pas la plateforme où si tu achètes du BTC, tu ne peux pas le transférer sur ton wallet privé ?!

@GoodValueCrypto 100% Gamestop, 100% drs. Une note sur 10 ?

🕵️‍♂️ J'ANALYSE VOTRE PORTEFEUILLE Vous êtes très nombreux à me solliciter en DM pour me demander mon avis sur votre portefeuille et vos positions. Je vous propose le concept suivant : vous m'envoyez votre portefeuille anonymement, et je l'analyse via un thread. Explications 👇