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, up to March 2nd, will determine how the story continues and whether NEVS has a future. A quick update to complement 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 relief - probably
The creditors seem to be in favor of a haircut, that is the trend today. More than two fifths are said to be in favor, even if some parties show a certain distrust. For NEVS the decision is vital; around € 32 million could thus be written off; the way to get a new shareholder through a capital increase would be easier. Now the judges have the next word. If they give way, the haircut could be final in about 6 weeks. NEVS has announced that it will then leave the reconstruction.
Trouble threatens but from elsewhere, and that could be really big.
Negotiations about the brand name - or not?
Saab AB and its press officer accused NEVS lawyer Lars Eric Gustafssson of lying today. It's about the claim that the future owner of NEVS has been exploring the trademark rights with Saab AB since December. Saab denies that - a tough accusation.
Saab AB press spokesman Sebastian Carlsson made it clear that there had been no negotiations with a foreign carmaker about reusing the brand name for a number of months. When Svenska Dagbladet asked whether it could be called probing, he also said no. "No, you couldn't call it that ..."
Lawyer Lars Eric Gustafsson, on the other hand, continues to use the term “exploratory” that he mentioned in the court file.
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.