(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
|
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:
|
Media
Contact: Wendi Kopsick/Jeremy
Fielding
Kekst and Company
212-521-4800
|
Investor
Contact:
Michael Lynch
Chief Financial Officer
201-934-2577
|
·
|
“Management
and the dissident have substantially the same strategic plan…Disrupting
the board in the final few months of its wind down does not seem to
provide any advantage for shareholders in
general.”
|
·
|
“Management
and the board have a strong record since emerging from bankruptcy…Since
that time, shareholders have experienced a 120 percent TSR [Total
Shareholder Return] (including cash distributions). The company’s nominees
have been on the board during this period of strong
performance.”
|
·
|
“In
contrast, the dissident’s nominees do not appear to have relevant industry
experience…The dissident has not adequately proved that the inclusion of
its nominees to the board will ensure a more timely or efficient
liquidation of the company than is currently in
place.”
|
·
|
“The
Dissident has failed to provide a substantive plan that departs from the
Company’s current strategy.”
|
·
|
“We
do not believe the installation of the Dissident nominees is necessary at
this time. We see no evidence suggesting that the Company is delaying or
is otherwise unwilling to complete the anticipated liquidation in 2009.
Thus, we find no reason to believe that the election of the Dissident
nominees would provide more meaningful returns to shareholders than
management’s current strategy.”
|