novicetrader
9 months ago
There's a 4-page document which comes up, 2nd page of which says this:
ALL HOLDERS OF CLAIMS OR INTERESTS IN NON-VOTING CLASSES THAT DO NOT ELECT TO OPT OUT OF SUCH PROVISIONS, BY EITHER PROPERLY AND TIMELY RETURNING THE ATTACHED OPT-OUT FORM, SUBMITTING ONE
THROUGH THE E-OPT-OUT PORTAL ON THE CASE INFORMATION WEBSITE, OR FILING AN
OBJECTION TO THE THIRD-PARTY RELEASE PROVISIONS SET FORTH IN ARTICLE XII OF
THE PLAN, WILL BE DEEMED TO HAVE EXPRESSLY, UNCONDITIONALLY, GENERALLY,
INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY CONSENTED TO THE RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS AND
CAUSES OF ACTION AGAINST THE RELEASED PARTIES AS SET FORTH IN ARTICLE XII OF
THE PLAN
SmellMyFinger
9 months ago
So, there are basically three (technically, four) voting options:
1) For (opt out)
2) Against (same as #3, as in do not opt out)
3) Abstain (same as #2, as in do not opt out)
4) Refuse to vote (which is effectively the same as #2 or #3)
Therefore, it's essentially only two choices: opt out or do not opt out, and the board conveniently doesn't provide a recommendation because if they did, retail shareholders would know to do the opposite of what the board recommends. However, by not recommending anything, the board is by default recommending inaction (or #4 which is effectively the same as #2 or #3). Ergo, I'm assuming the board doesn't want retail shareholders to choose #1, or opt out.