o
|
Preliminary Proxy Statement | |
o
|
Confidential, for the use of the Commission only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) | |
o
|
Definitive Proxy Statement | |
þ
|
Definitive Additional Materials | |
o
|
Soliciting Material Pursuant to Section 240.14a-12 |
þ No fee required. o Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11. |
1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: |
2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: |
3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act
Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was
determined): |
4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: |
5) Total fee paid: |
o Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. |
o Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided
by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the
filing for which the offsetting fee was paid
previously. Identify the previous filing by
registration statement number, or the form or schedule
and the date of its filing. |
1) Amount previously paid: |
2) Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.: |
3) Filing party: |
4) Date filed: |
Exhibit No. | ||
99.1
|
Letter from ATS Inc. to Energy Partners, Ltd. Stockholders, dated November 8, 2006 |
| EPLs board has told us that it needs two more months until mid-January to run its process and they want us to suspend our consent solicitation and suspend our offer to buy your shares during those two months. Valuing EPL is a straightforward process if the board would give us the information that weve requested, we could complete our analysis of the additional data in a week it should not require two months! |
| We will not wait. We have no intention of extending our offer beyond November 17, 2006. Any other potential buyer will encounter the same commodity price environment that we have DO YOU, AS A STOCKHOLDER, WANT TO BEAR THE RISK OF FURTHER EROSION OF THE COMMODITIES MARKETS RESULTING IN A MID-JANUARY BEST OFFER OF LESS THAN $23 PER SHARE? | |
| We have no intention of purchasing any shares in the offer unless the conditions to our offer have been satisfied and we do not intend to extend our offer unless our consent solicitation is substantially successfully completed or the conditions to our offer have been otherwise satisfied by November 17, 2006. |
| The board stated on page 9 of its September 14, 2006 Schedule 14D-9 that there is nothing to prevent the stockholders of the Company from receiving a control premium for their shares in the future however, by adopting a poison pill, the board has taken the choice of whether or not to accept our $23 per share offer away from its stockholders! |
| Here are the facts the Stone merger was announced over six months ago our offer was announced over two months ago a Delaware judge confirmed over a month ago that EPL could respond to unsolicited offers even while the Stone merger was pending since that time, not one party (other than ATS) has publicly announced its interest in acquiring EPL! | |
| Since our offer was announced over two months ago, EPLs board has not taken affirmative steps to facilitate your ability, as an EPL stockholder, to consider and accept our offer EPL didnt reach out to us until this week more than 60 days after we first made our offer, more than a month since a Delaware judge first confirmed that EPL could talk to us under the terms of EPLs now-terminated merger agreement with Stone, four days after we specifically asked to sign a confidentiality agreement and just 10 days before our offers expiration date. The board has now conditioned any review of confidential data on our keeping our offer open until mid-January. WHAT IS THE DOWNSIDE TO YOU, THE EPL STOCKHOLDERS, IF THE BOARD GIVES US THE INFORMATION WEVE ASKED FOR IN OUR TIMEFRAME? |
| On page 8 its September 14, 2006 Schedule 14D-9, the Board noted its belief that [EPL], both on a stand-alone basis and on a combined basis with [Stone] should provide greater value to stockholders than our $23 per share offer. |
| But on October 11, 2006, EPL voluntarily terminated its merger agreement with Stone, paying $8 million to do so and bringing to more than $51 million the fees paid to or for the benefit of Stone. |
| Consider the expenses recently and voluntarily incurred by the board: |
Termination fees under Stone merger agreement
|
$51.5 million | ||
Change of control severance plan
|
$12.8 million1 | ||
Premiums for enhanced D&O insurance coverage
|
$2.2 million | ||
Bankers
|
|||
Petrie Parkman
|
$2 million2 | ||
Evercore
|
$8 million3 | ||
Bank of America
|
$5 million4 | ||
UBS
|
$2 million5 | ||
MacKenzie Partners
|
??? | ||
Legal Fees (3 law firms)
|
??? | ||
What else...?
|
??? | ||
TOTAL
|
$83.5 million (or at least $2.14 per share6 ) plus ??? ... and increasing every day |
| This $2.14 per share spent or committed to be spent by EPL is only what has been publicly disclosed so far who knows how much more of your money has been spent or will be spent blocking our offer! |
|
(1) | See page 3 of EPLs Schedule 14D-9 filed with the SEC on September 14, 2006 (the Schedule 14D-9). Aggregate expense figure assumes a qualifying termination of each subject employee following a change of control under the applicable plan. | |
(2) | Petrie Parkman was paid $1 million in connection with its initial engagement and is entitled to an additional $250,000 for each additional opinion delivered to EPL. See page 9 of EPLs Schedule 14D-9. EPL paid Petrie Parkman an additional $1 million to participate in the strategic alternatives evaluation process. See Item 5 to EPLs Amendment No. 5 to EPLs Solicitation/ Recommendation Statement on Schedule 14D-9 filed with the SEC on October 13, 2006 (14D-9 Amendment No. 5). | |
(3) | Evercore received a $1 million engagement fee and is entitled to a payment of $7 million upon the earlier of September 5, 2007 and the consummation of any sale of EPL. See page 9 of EPLs Schedule 14D-9. | |
(4) | Banc of America received a $1 million engagement fee and is entitled to a payment of $4 million upon the earlier of September 5, 2007 and the consummation of any sale of EPL. See page 9 of EPLs Schedule 14D-9. | |
(5) | See Item 5 to 14D-9 Amendment No. 5. | |
(6) | Assuming 38,952,550 shares outstanding as of November 1, 2006 as reported in the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 6, 2006. |
| EPL reported on page 10 of its Quarterly Report on 10-Q which it filed with the SEC on November 6, 2006 that it had expensed $3 million of other [Stone] merger related costs in just in the third quarter of 2006 alone. Although Its unclear whether this is in addition to the other expenses described above, it is clear that EPL incurs more and more costs and fees every day. |
| Rather than continuing to spend more of your money, shouldnt EPL just show us any information that could actually matter to our bid? | |
| Perhaps it is telling that the board has spent $2.2 million of your money to further insure itself against stockholder suits on a going forward basis...What are they afraid of? |
Sincerely, | |
Mark Chatterji | |
President |