Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 1
And miracle of miracles, lo and behold, today (14 months later) a check showed up in my mail. It's like I've seen a unicorn --- a shareholder lawsuit that actually distributed some proceeds to shareholders. I've never heard of that happening. My gratitude to those who brought this about.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Oops. Defective subtraction skills. 6 - 2.3 = 3.7. 3.7M/38M= 9.7 cents/share potential payout. Even more paltry than previously miscalculated.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
9 cents, that's a pittance. I received the letter too but haven't had a chance to read through it yet. If they gave 9 cents back on each option I held, that would be one thing, but I assume that's not going to happen, just on my long shares.

My guess is they will still go public in Hong Kong or China sometime in the next couple years for several times what they paid to take the company private

-mekong
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I am on an email list of former Yongye shareholders and there have been some emails going around about the settlement. One of them reached out to a lawyer. See his thoughts below:

I will exclude myself and here is what the lawyer told me:

If you do not want to participate in the proposed Settlement and do not want to be bound by the order(s) that the Judge may enter, you should exclude yourself from the Class. The procedure for doing so is described in the Notice and we’ll go over the procedure with you if you’d like. If you do not want to participate in the proposed Settlement and instead want to bring some other action in the future when you believe that Yongye may go public again, as you have indicated you are considering doing, then you should file a request to be excluded from the class. If you do not exclude yourself, then the release in the case (if the Court approves the Settlement) would bar future claims based on the facts and events in this action. The defendants would certainly argue in such future case that you were barred from bringing it unless you exclude yourself from this litigation. We do not express an opinion on the merits of your bringing such future action or the likelihood of its success.

Again not sure I would get more money later on but I would rather fight them when they try to go public again than accepting those peanuts but again do not recommend you to do as I will, it is a personal choice but just sharing my choice.


I am sure that Yongye wants to resolve this before they go public in China or HK, so that shareholders don’t go after them once they see their market cap is much higher than when they went private. It would obviously be an indication that they took the company private at a very low valuation and make it harder to settle for peanuts as they are trying to do now.

On another note, one of the China stocks I used to follow got a go private offer from the CEO who owns over 50% of the company. The company is China Yida (CNYD) and at the time the offer came out, they were trading around 3.50 shares. The offer was made at 3.17 and was actually below the market price. The stock has drifted lower and is now down to 2.27, which gives today’s buyer a 40% premium. Back in 2010, CNYD traded as high at 72 (post reverse split) and the current market cap is around $9M. The company has a lot of debt and has stopped communicating to shareholders (they say in order to decrease its costs) other than the required SEC filings, so I would not invest in this company if it were not for the offer. I am pretty sure the offer will be accepted by the special committee in the next couple of months. I don’t own the stock, but may buy some shares based in my expectation of the deal closing.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The idealist in me says I should forego my share of these peanuts and hold out on the hope of future litigation. But the realist says that a majority of non-buyout shareholders already caved at the merger vote. It seems unlikely that there will be enough bitter holdouts to make future litigation a reality. Does anyone have an opinion on the likelihood of some major shareholders excluding themselves this time?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I too received the settlement info and it did come from my broker so I'm not sure if/why a previous poster received his package directly. In any case does anyone have any thoughts on the following, it makes no sense to me: The package states that the class is comprised of "...who held or owned any such stock at any time during the period beginning on and including October 15, 2012 through and including July 3 2014." But then the information they request is 1. number of shares owned at close of trading on May 2, 2014; 2. shares purchased or sold between May 3 and close of trading on July 3; 3. shares still held at the close of trading on July 3, 2014

So in one of my accounts I held YONG during the class period (say sometime in 2013) so supposedly I am a member of the class. But when I went to fill out the document it was nothing but zeroes as I had sold it all prior to May 3, 2014. So nowhere am I asked to provide proof that I owned YONG in 2013. Makes no sense to me why they include people in the class who owned shares prior to May 3, 2014, but sold them all prior to May 3, 2014.

Am I missing something? The package does not speak to what shares are eligible to share. Are they shares owned prior to May 3 and held until the "merger"? Or only shares purchased May 3 and after and held until the merger? There is no clarity that I can see.

Thanks for listening!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
brogers611,

Sorry, I haven't looked at this board for a long time. You raise an interesting point. I agree that it seems wrong that the claim form uses May 2, 2014 as a starting date. To me, the sensible starting date would be October 15, 2012. But sensible is often not equal to legal. It's probably too late to change anything now as the settlement hearing was supposed to be March 3rd. I can only offer my condolences as another unfortunate soul who got involved with this wonderful company.

Truman Trout
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I dug out this rather uninteresting link showing the minutes of the March 3rd settlement hearing. It looks like the settlement process is underway and the court will recheck status Sept. 1, 2016! See those wheels of justice spinning.

https://www.clarkcountycourts.us/Anonymous/CaseDetail.aspx?C...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
And miracle of miracles, lo and behold, today (14 months later) a check showed up in my mail. It's like I've seen a unicorn --- a shareholder lawsuit that actually distributed some proceeds to shareholders. I've never heard of that happening. My gratitude to those who brought this about.
Print the post Back To Top