Author Topic: TFG / TGONF - Tetragon Financial  (Read 28520 times)

thepupil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Re: TFG / TGONF - Tetragon Financial
« Reply #60 on: January 05, 2021, 09:31:36 AM »
they led the $200mm December 2019 Series C alongside Softbank and another investor, at a $10B valuation

they invested ~$150mm, and now have $170mm (7 ish %) of NAV in the instrument ( i assume the slight writeup represents a preferred coupon accrual)


Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5955
Re: TFG / TGONF - Tetragon Financial
« Reply #61 on: January 05, 2021, 09:39:50 AM »
Gotcha, thanks. Dont follow TFG really. I took a flyer on small bits of Bitcoin and Ripple(labs) some years back. Before the money left my account I realized it was the definition of high risk and speculative and that all the risks associated with the millions of disclosures about "loss of investment" definitely applied. The "its not a currency" issue has been around forever as well. So one would have to wonder what exactly the underwriting process at Tetragon is if this catches them so far off guard that it changes the entire outlook of their investment that they made barely a year ago. Will be interesting to watch for sure.

rosemontseneca

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: TFG / TGONF - Tetragon Financial
« Reply #62 on: January 05, 2021, 12:14:04 PM »
Interesting that the pref has that feature.  Presume it might have been drafted that way with this issue in mind.

The lawsuit probably means Tetragon already asked nicely to be redeemed and was told no.  Delaware courts are efficient, so the injunction at least probably gets heard soon.  If (big if) the documentation is cut and dry and if the cases moves quickly, Ripple may have have to file BK or get one of its other investors to cash Tetragon out.

Either way, feeling much better about Tetragon's recovery than I did before.

Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5955
Re: TFG / TGONF - Tetragon Financial
« Reply #63 on: January 05, 2021, 12:52:13 PM »
Unless they(Tetragon) act desperately(which the current action seems like thats a possibility), I dont think their investment will be even close to 0 or even impaired significantly. The combination of Ripple being both a private company, and a crypto related company, leads to lots of ignorance and assumption. If this was public(and with that, had a bit more concrete info) I'd probably be a dip buyer. The issue in part seemed political, and everything I've seen says its been going on and debated for years. See:

https://fortune.com/2020/12/21/ripple-to-be-sued-by-sec-cryptocurrency-xrp/

So even in terms of recouping the entire $200M Series C, we're talking about a company that per the valuation of its Series C, is 10x bigger than Tetragon. Before the company announced that the SEC was pulling this, it would have easily IPO'd at $20-30B. So raising a few hundred million to redeem, or an 8 figure sum to settle with a new administration, is chump change. If I had to predict the exact outcome, I'd wager on a 7 or low 8 figure "Settlement" and then a few compromises and this then continuing to exist as it has, with a following IPO, which occurs with a valuation much greater than $10B. Of course I could also be entirely wrong and it could be permanently impaired like no company before it, and it goes out of business because of the SEC...IDK. Ive never actually seen the later happen even in instances where I was certain it should have. Here, the entirety of EVERYTHING, comes down to the "interpretation" of something that is 1) ambiguous, and 2) a guideline put in place many years AFTER Ripple starting doing its thing.

In order for Tetragon to get 0, Ripple would likely have to be wiped out. In such a case we are assuming this is a BILLION dollar problem, which significantly exceeds some of the big bank, mortgage fraud settlements from the GFC. That sounds utterly preposterous to me.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2021, 12:57:38 PM by Gregmal »