Dendreonaire, I don't think many people here would disagree with the concept that 10% for management is too much. I have been one of the biggest complainers about the 10% but I'm willing to change my tune if management is successful in keeping the bondies from forcing bankruptcy.

The bondies last motion is on the E&Y site and they come off as losers who are crying foal when they contributed to management looking elsewhere for money. Their motion is lined with them complaining about how the Tenor deal rewards everyone but them creditors a potential huge upside.

They single out shareholders specifically when they say "the shareholders as winners despite the fact that the current value of the sole asset is less than the debt, and despite the fact that they are being asked to risk nothing further to get this benefit (e.g. to fund repayment of the debt). "

The noteholders also say that if the Tenor deal goes ahead "In doing so, it is also attempting to completely restructure the risk profile of the creditors, the shareholders and management to place all the risk, and none of the benefit of success, with the creditors, to reward shareholders (who have no downside) with the most upside, and ensure that management and the directors benefit both in upside and along the way, even if they or many of them are not necessary to the realization of the value from the sole asset. "

I don't disagree with everything the bondies are saying but they have shown that they want it all and we can go to hell. The bondies had multiple opportunities to reach a deal with Crystallex that would have given them the same kind of deal as Tenor or possibly more but chose to roll the dice and try to get everything for themselves at the cost to everyone else.

They need to remember they are unsecured creditors. They should have set up the loan as a secured loan against any award or settlement should Crystallex be screwed over by VZ but they didn't.

They talk about shareholders not putting in anything for the funding of arbitration going forward.

First off what are the noteholders putting in if the Tenor deal is approved. NOTHING at all but they will still get interest on their loan. To date the noteholders have gotten over $70 million in payments on their $100 million loan. Do they deserve the money, YES because that was what they agreed to. Nowhere in the agreement did it say that if the company ran into trouble the bondies would get everything. To insinuate shareholders don't deserve anything back because we are unsecured the same as they are shows them for what they really are.

Secondly the noteholders are wrong about shareholders not funding arbitration. They just aren't doing it the way the bondies want. The bondies want all of us to get $0 for our shares and they will allow us to pay more money for Crystallex shares so they can get the remaining $105 million they are owed. The bondies also want to retain a large part of the settlement and award even after repayment. Seems like a good deal for them but no one else.

Shareholders are giving up 45% of the settlement or award as well as all interest to fund arbitration. That amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars share holders are giving up in future value. The bondies are pissed however that under the Tenor deal the don't get anything more that what they signed up for.

The bondies are now trying to make concessions where shareholders will get 14% if I remember right. I say to little to late. Greed has bitten then in the behind!!!

There is a lot more but I will let people do their own reading of the bondies motions.

I have changed my mind on the 10% for management. If they can get the Tenor deal approved so that we retain 55% of the award then I can live with them getting over paid. 55% is a lot better than 0%.

JJ