I don't see what difference it makes. If BRY's board does not wish to extend the merger, than its basically dead even if Linn could unilaterally extend it. It goes from a friendly merger to what essentially amounts to a hostile bid at that point and the chances of success drop significantly.
The "unilateral" termination language isn't coming from Bloomberg, its coming directly from BRY. I don't see how anyone can possibly interpret that language as anything other than BRY cooling to the merger. Companies disclose risks all of the time without using that type of language. You could say "sure, the house may burn down in certain conditions - nothing is guaranteed", you don't have to say "we're facing a real fire hazard that could turn this whole place into an inferno that will reduce your dogs and children to ash".
BRY's board may believe they've earned their elevated share price on their own and the Linn bid simply forced the market to recognize they were under valued. If they believe that, than its better to just let them walk away now. They're going to either ask for too much or make life difficult in the vote.
Had Linn never made this bid, they may never have crossed swords with the SEC over DCF & damaged their share price, so its possible they're ready to walk away as well. Honestly, paying this much for production in eco-centric CA probably wasn't the best idea in the first place. They should stop chasing zebras and go back to horse trading.
It sounds like you might be assuming both trades would close on the same day?
Options have a limited life and shares do not. They can buy/sell LINE units today to pin the price where they want it, then reverse those positions next week when the price recovers. The options expire over the weekend.
BA, UPS, etc are all corporations. LINE is a partnership. Two totally different tax situations.
If your LINE K-1 shows CA source income, than yes, you could have to file a return in CA. Check the 540NR filing instructions for the filing thresh holds.
Most likely because those metrics are specific to MLP's.
You have to remember the merger is structurally taking place between two Corps (LNCO & BRY). Reading between the lines, its seems apparent their concerns were focused on giving the BRY shareholders a reasonable level of comparability between each company's financials before asking them to vote on the merger.
Over 2,000 October 28 calls and 200 Sept 27 puts just moved as well. Lots of volume this morning.
Also about 500 put contracts moved early this morning. Mostly Sept 26's and Oct 18's.
That's a fair point about the meeting date.
9-30-13 is the date they will check the roles to determine who gets to vote what units/shares. The actual vote itself hasn't been set. Probably because the amended S-4 they intend to file hasn't actually been filed or approved yet.
Cash distributions have nothing to do with whether or not a K-1 gets issued to you. The income is split between the partners based on how much they own & for how long, not on who got how much cash. Completely different than owning a corporation & getting dividends.
I'm curious to see their reasoning for the short, but Kinder's SEC filing last night revealed they will be giving a presentation at Barclay's on Thursday. Maybe that was planned for a while and the filing just happened last night, but it wouldn't surprise me if they plan to aggressively address whatever Hedgeye puts out.
Kinder also announced they're giving a presentation at Barclay's on Thursday. They're going to fight this much more aggressively than LINE did initially.
His tweet was only given credibility because of what happened to LINE after he shorted them.
KMI/KMP isn't LINE. There is no huge hedging position to question here. We'll see what tomorrow's report brings, but I'm not worried right now.
Yes, that is what the PR says. It reads "Informal SEC Inquiry" (note - it doesn't say investigation)
MUI = Matter Under INQUIRY
An INQUIRY (MUI) is a very different animal from an INVESTIGATION.
The term "Informal" seems to be confusing you. Again, "Informal" simply means the SEC doesn't have subpoena power. An informal inquiry is not the same thing as an "informal" investigation.
I don't see discussing the potential end to the SEC inquiry as a definite negative. If the company announces the closing of the inquiry next week, than that could generate a small rally.
MUI is the inquiry stage. Informal just means no subpoena power.
Investigations, "formal" or "informal", require public disclosure. Management voluntarily disclosed the MUI and the SEC has not issued a statement that I'm aware of.
It's a MUI now, not an investigation.
Section 2.3.1 on pg 16 of the SEC manual provides the general rule that MUI's should be closed or elevated to investigations after 60 days. While that is different from mandating an "automatic" elevation, 60 days is the guideline for all practical purposes.