1Mes
Sorry, but somehow I don't quite understand this.
Firstly, that shareholders of a company can be expropriated by it at all, shouldn't some residual value be paid, and secondly, what framework conditions must be in place for such a thing.
Can someone perhaps help me and clarify this?
Firstly, that shareholders of a company can be expropriated by it at all, shouldn't some residual value be paid, and secondly, what framework conditions must be in place for such a thing.
Can someone perhaps help me and clarify this?
•
22
•
@Exxsye Put simply, if the residual value of the company suggests that the shareholders would be left empty-handed in insolvency proceedings anyway, the otherwise unavoidable insolvency may be prevented by such a measure.
•
11
•@Exxsye varta is insolvent and can no longer maintain business operations on its own.
In the event of insolvency, debt capital always takes precedence over equity capital! Since even the creditors have to waive roughly 40% of their loans, it is clear that there is nothing left for equity providers (shareholders).
The company is simply over-indebted and bankrupt...
Consequence: total loss for shareholders. The sole purpose of Starug is to offer the company and its employees prospects for the future as part of a restructuring process.
The case is just like Steinhoff, for example.
Stay away from highly indebted companies that do not have sufficient assets!
In the event of insolvency, debt capital always takes precedence over equity capital! Since even the creditors have to waive roughly 40% of their loans, it is clear that there is nothing left for equity providers (shareholders).
The company is simply over-indebted and bankrupt...
Consequence: total loss for shareholders. The sole purpose of Starug is to offer the company and its employees prospects for the future as part of a restructuring process.
The case is just like Steinhoff, for example.
Stay away from highly indebted companies that do not have sufficient assets!
•
22
•