2016-02-22_ENFORCEMENT - C1982056

Home Browse Search

some of the commentary is a social back water. 28 Jan 2016, 11:10 AM T12432 Nasir, Back in 2010 when Peabody was buying MacArthur, there where many in the organization suggesting they should spend the money outside of coal and way less than $5b. Iron Ore was the alternative, as it utilized the same marketing and customer base as Met coal. But Greg was very much ego driven and felt being the biggest something was more important than being commodity diversified. Well, he is now the biggest alright ... the biggest looser (of shareholder equity). Having that said, Peabody would most likely still be in poor shape today if they had purchased an Iron Ore Operation. Buying high and selling low is rarely a good strategy. 28 Jan 2016,11:23 AM Nasir Khan T12432 - What I liked about Boyce was that he divested all Appalachian coal through Patriot, which later became bankrupt. The idea of buying McArthur was also right as that out BTU close to the customers in Asia compared to Arch, Walters and Alpha natural. What I did not like about Boyce was his conviction on coal supercycle and hence debt financing of McArthur. At that time Peabody's market cap was $16B and he could raise about $413 with only 25% dilution. 28 Jan 2016,11:45 AM T12432 Nasir, The bundling up of poor assets into Patriot was a bit of a crappy act on the workforce and environmentally. They were floating it off for failure in an effort to ovoid closure costs and pensions. He lost a lot of respect over that. 28 Jan 2016, 12:00 PM fliper2058 David, I think you pretty much spell it out. The bonds are telling the story and although there is remote stories of firms recovering from these levels they are very rare. The float of 20m shares and small market cap make the stock not a proper reflection of the situation. BTU needs far greater steps in order to get out of this tail spin. Tendering for all unsecureds would reduce