Update 18: 50 clock
Yesterday Michèl was visiting Trollhättan; NEVS gave him a glimpse into the documents granted for today. The next hours and days, to the 2. March will decide how the story goes on, and whether NEVS has a future. A short update as a supplement to his Article.
Today, NEVS has filed an application for renewal of the reconstruction phase with the competent court for a further 3 months.
With the option to leave earlier if there is a sale or the entry of a majority shareholder. The pending decision of the creditors on the desired haircut will also influence the opinion of the court. The meeting of the believers took place today in Trollhättan.
Debt cut - probably
The creditors seem to speak out for a haircut, that is the trend of the day. More than two-fifths should be in favor, even if some parties feel some mistrust. For NEVS, the decision is vital; around 32 million could be written off; The path to entry of a new shareholder through a capital increase would be easier. Now the judges have the next word. If they clear the way, the haircut could be final in about 6 weeks. NEVS has announced that it will want to leave the reconstruction.
Trouble threatens but from elsewhere, and that could be really big.
Negotiations for the brand name - or not?
Saab AB and its spokesperson accused NEV's lawyer Lars Eric Gustafssson today of lying. It is about the claim that the future owner of NEVS has been exploring the trademark rights with Saab AB since December. That denies Saab - a harsh accusation.
Saab AB Spokesman Sebastian Carlsson clarified that for a number of months there had been no negotiations to reuse the brand name with a foreign car maker. On the demand of the Svenska Dagbladets, whether it could be called probing, he denied this as well. "No, you can not call it that ..."
Lawyer Lars Eric Gustafsson, on the other hand, continues to use the term "probing", which he cited in the court record.
If the assertion of the Saab AB is correct, then this could have serious consequences for NEVS. The complete construct is based on the assumption that the brand name will be used again. With no prospect of exploitation, NEVS is much less sustainable. The court could look at the facts very closely, and decide in case of doubt against NEVS.