Some more interesting comments
"finkie: You are missing the point. Bondholders are being invited to dilute their security for what exactly? One or two more interest payments, just maybe, while others will be invited to share what we have for whose benefit? Not bondholders, for sure. No thanks. I would rather take the pain now. If that means less that 100p, so be it. Let's resolve this now as the future for bondholders does not look good. In your parlance, let's take the pain now for it is not up to us to make the books balance. We are not equity investors. Besides, it might be a wake-up call for this lousy so-called government if WASPS is the first to go under."
"
I'm a noobie here, and I won't be staying. I've been a retail bond investor for many years and have never seen anything like this before.
It seems bizarre to expect existing bondholders to *release*, rather than *waive*, parts of their covenant package; in their previous consent solicitation in 2017/18, and in all others that I've been involved with, temporary waivers, or tinkering at the margins, of potential temporary default events, have been asked for - in exchange for consideration in the form of increased interest coupons, consent fees etc. Nothing appears to be on offer here.
It feels as though they expect to remain in permanent covenant breach - in which case, if security over the stadium is solid, where is there any incentive for bondholders to agrre to any of this? Aren't we better off allowing the whole pack of cards to collapse now, so security can be enforced?"