Categories
Brandon Blog Post

STALKING HORSE BID: DO YOU REALLY WANT 2 STALK YOUR ADORABLE HORSE?

stalking horse bid
stalking horse bid

This blog was originally published on July 21, 2015. It was updated on March 22, 2021.

Bankruptcy Sales: What Is a Stalking-Horse Bid?

A stalking horse bid, in the Canadian insolvency context, is an attempt by a company (and/or its Monitor, Receiver or Trustee ) in a Court supervised insolvency proceeding, to set what will be the baseline that must be met and beaten by any other bids for the assets. The intent is to maximize the value of its assets as part of a Court supervised sales process and to discourage any bid below a certain value.

A stalking horse is a process that allows a potential buyer (the stalking horse bidder) to make a public bid for a company’s assets in order to set a floor price for the amount of money to be received by the company’s creditors in a (bankruptcy) sale. The stalking horse bidder will get to purchase the company’s assets if no other bidder comes forward. The stalking horse provision allows for the bidding process terms and conditions to be set in a court-supervised sale.

In this Brandon Blog, I describe the stalking horse bid process and how it works

What’s a stalking horse bid? Example of a stalking horse bid

According to Wikipedia:

“The term stalking horse originally derived from the practice of hunting, particularly of wildfowl. Hunters noticed that many birds would flee immediately on the approach of humans, but would tolerate the close presence of animals such as horses and cattle. Hunters would therefore slowly approach their quarry by walking alongside their horses, keeping their upper bodies out of sight until the flock was within firing range. Animals trained for this purpose were called stalking horses.”

In an insolvency context, a stalking horse bid stands to test the market to see how the market values the assets for sale. If the market values the assets less than the amount of the stalking horse bid, then no one will bid higher and the party who made the stalking horse bid will be successful in acquiring the assets.

If the market values the assets more than the amount of the stalking horse bid, the higher offers will be made for the assets and for the Court to consider for approval. Presumably, a higher offer will be approved, the purchaser will purchase the assets and the stalking horse bid will not prevail.

stalking horse bid
stalking horse bid

How a Stalking-Horse Bid Works

The stalking-horse bid method allows a distressed company to avoid receiving low ball bids as its assets are being sold. Once the stalking-horse bidder has made its offer and it has been negotiated and court-approved, other potential buyers may submit competing bids for the company’s assets.

By setting the low end of the bidding range, the insolvent company hopes to realize a higher price on its assets. Insolvency proceedings are public. The public nature allows for the disclosure of more information about the deal and the buyer than what would be available in a private deal.

Stalking-horse bidders can generally negotiate which particular assets and liabilities it hopes to acquire. After the stalking horse bid is negotiated resulting in an asset purchase agreement, it will be necessary for the company, Receiver or Trustee to obtain Court approval of not only the stalking horse bid but also for the entire sales process to be implemented.

If the company is attempting to restructure and requires “bankruptcy protection”, then those corporate proceedings would be either under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”) or the Proposal provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (the “BIA”). In that situation, it is the company making an application to the Court with the support and assistance of the monitor or proposal trustee.

If it is a corporate receivership or bankruptcy proceeding, then it is either the receiver or bankruptcy trustee making the application. In the case of bankrupt corporations, then it is the bankruptcy court that needs to approve the stalking horse bid, the entire sales process and approve the sale.

What does it take to get bankruptcy court approval?

When applying to the Court, approval for an entire sales process is being sought, a component of which is the stalking horse agreement. The Court has various considerations in determining if a stalking horse sale process should be approved. They are:

  • Is a sale transaction warranted at this time?
  • Will the sale benefit the whole “economic community”?
  • Do any of the debtors’ creditors have a bona fide reason to object to a sale process of the business?
  • Is there a better viable alternative?”

In the event the stalking horse bid is not the successful winner because of the other potential bidders at least one made a better offer, it is normal for the stalking horse purchaser to receive some form of compensation. The compensation is for the time, cost and resources invested to perform its due diligence, to make its offer which was found to be reasonable in the circumstances and to expose that offer to the marketplace to stand as a stalking horse bid, and for that bidder to not end up as the successful purchaser.

Our Firm has been involved in situations where the stalking horse bid has been both the successful bid unsuccessful bid. If the compensation, commonly known as break-up fees, is fair and reasonable, it will not dissuade other purchasers from coming forward in the sales process, and it will also be fair to the stalking horse bidder if they are unsuccessful. It is fair to the stalking horse bidder to have these bid protections incorporated into their offer.

The Court in considering the approval of a stalking horse bid also considers if the breakup fee, and the entire stalking horse bid, has been negotiated between arms’-length parties and has the support of the stakeholders involved in the insolvency proceeding.

stalking horse bid
stalking horse bid

The Pros and Cons of Being A Stalking Horse Bidder for Assets In Bankruptcy

There are various pros and cons to being a stalking horse bidder and making the stalking horse bid. First the advantages:

  • First to tie up the company’s management, perform due diligence thereby dealing exclusively with the company for the proposed purchase of its assets.
  • Gaining the advantage of time and access to the company’s financial information.
  • Having the time to be able to understand the company’s problems and challenges.
  • Getting under contract for the assets the purchaser wants to acquire.

The cons of making the stalking horse bid are:

  • Making sure that you set the break fee high enough to fully compensate the stalking horse bidder.
  • Not having too long a time period between approval of the stalking horse bid and the time when other bids must be submitted to avoid the assets or the company’s operations worsening through the process.
  • Would it have been better not to have been the stalking horse bidder and see how the company and its assets fare before having to submit a bid?
  • If the stalking horse bidder is not a secured lender, is there a likelihood the secured lenders will bid their security which will outbid yours?
  • If there is more than one acceptable bid, then an auction process is required to determine the successful bidder. The stalking horse bidder may not wish to participate in such an auction and will end up losing out.

Can a secured creditor credit bid? Cirque du Soleil agrees to ‘stalking horse’ takeover bid from lenders worth $375M

One of the most recent high-profile successful stalking horse bids was the Cirque du Soleil insolvency proceeding under the CCAA. In that case, a takeover proposal from the Cirque du Soleil’s secured creditors has been approved as the benchmark bid for a court-supervised auction of the insolvent entertainment company.

That is called a credit bid. When the secured creditor bids all or a portion of its outstanding loan. This will be done in situations where the secured creditor believes that the value of the assets to be sold is less than the amount owed, yet the company’s assets can be used to run a viable business. In that situation, the secured creditor would rather bid its security with the company debt to take over the assets.

By making a credit bid, the secured creditor potential purchaser does not need to come up with cash for the purchase price. However, cash will be required to make certain payments to parties the company business cannot operate without and to have working capital going forward.

If they bid the full amount of their loan and get outbid in other purchase agreements, it means they get fully paid out. Otherwise, they get the assets to run the company, bring it back to financial good health and profitability. Eventually, then they will sell the healthy company to recoup their money plus make a profit.

Stalking horse bid summary

If your company is experiencing financial difficulties, don’t waste your time stalking horses or any other animal. Seek the advice of your professional advisers. The earlier you seek financial help the more options will be open to you. Contact Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. today. We’ll review your corporate issues and come up with a sound plan so that Starting Over, Starting Now you can enjoy financial peace of mind.

stalking horse bid
stalking horse bid
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

PARK LANE CIRCLE-PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES CAN’T CHANGE THE RULES

40 Park Lane Circle, a mansion located in Toronto, was for sale in a proposed auction and has become quite the source of notoriety these days, although nothing and no one can rival Mayor Rob Ford in the headline grabbing department. Pictured below, it’s being referred to as the Bridle Path’s own Palace of Versailles. Located at 40 Park Lane Circle, it was most recently listed for$13.98 million.

PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES CAN’T CHANGE THE RULES TO SUIT THEM-40 PARK LANE CIRCLE

40 Park Lane Circle, Toronto

COURTESY: CONCIERGE AUCTIONS

In the 40 Park Lane Circle case at hand (which our Firm was not involved in), the Receiver two months earlier made application to Court and obtained Court approval to conduct an auction of the main asset, a luxury home worth millions of dollars at 40 Park Lane Circle which is in a very fancy neighbourhood of Toronto. After the fact the Receiver was presented with an offer for the Property from a set of purchasers. Unfortunately the Receiver’s report did not explain how the offer came about, specifically whether the offerors were aware of the Court-approved auction process at the time they made the offer. The Receiver made a motion to discontinue an auction sale process and approve an offer to purchase the 40 Park Lane Circle real property. After the recent decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice Brown of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) in HSBC Bank Canada v. Mahvash Lechcier-Kimel, 2013 ONSC 7241, the Receiver’s motion was denied and the auction was allowed to proceed. According to the latest reports the bidding is now closed and the sale is pending.

As Court Officers, we live in glass houses. Every action we take is on display for all to see. All stakeholders to the process are watching how we conduct the administration, and invariably, a party who thought they should be obtaining a better result for themselves will not be satisfied. Accordingly, the sales process has to be seen to be fair, even handed and transparent. The case of 40 Park Lane Circle is very interesting as it highlights that a fair, open and transparent marketing process in accordance with the seminal “Soundair” case is more important in the eyes of the Court, than what might be thought of as the highest potential offer.

What is the “Soundair” case and why is it so important? The criteria to be applied when considering the approval of a sale recommended by a receiver were first set out by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Royal Bank vs Soundair Corp. and hence referred to as the “Soundair principles” which are used when deciding whether a receiver who wishes Court approval to sell a property has acted properly, a Court is to consider and determine:

a) whether the receiver has made a sufficient effort to get the best price and has not acted improvidently;

b) the interests of all parties;

c) the efficacy and integrity of the process by which offers were obtained; and

d) whether there has been unfairness in the working out of the process.

As Trustees & Receivers, we are often asked when selling an individual’s or a corporation’s assets in a Court supervised administration, why can’t the Receiver or Trustee deviate from the Court approved process, or why can’t the Receiver or Trustee share with the party paying the costs of the administration the appraisal information. The answer, which we have always known to be the case, is that the Court and its Officer, be it a Receiver or Trustee, must ensure the integrity of the sales process. By the decision of the Court, the 40 Park Lane Circle property sale is no different.

Our firm has been involved in numerous cases where assets were sold in a Court supervised process. Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is a full service insolvency and financial restructuring practice serving companies and individuals throughout the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) facing financial crisis or bankruptcy that need a plan for Starting Over, Starting Now. We pride ourselves on our openness, transparency and maintaining the integrity of the process. Contact us today.

Call a Trustee Now!