> I imagine the other companies you mentioned would like to be able to do
> the same thing and if they could reach a similar agreement with those
> suing them, would. I just think it's something Halliburton is getting
> away with because they can, meaning the lawyers and asbestos creditors
> committee agreed to the $2.8 bln cap (actually that $2.8bln, plus 59
> million shares of Halliburton stock, plus some bonds are going to be put
> into a fund for all present and future claimants.)
1. Is there any obvious reason why Halliburton's asbestos claimants would agree when no others would? Is the cap appreciably higher on a per claim basis than anything previously offered?
2. Once there's been this agreement, what's the point of bankruptcy? Shouldn't they just be setting up a trust? If they are going bankrupt because they can't afford the settlement, then won't bankruptcy put the settlement into jeopardy? Especially if the half entity that is going bankrupt dissolves rather than re-emerging?
Michael