You are on page 1of 2

Hearing Date: August 20, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) Objection Deadline: August 9, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.

(Eastern Time) Name Address 1 Address 2 Telephone: Fax: Eastman Kodak Shareholder


Bankruptcy Case No. 12-10202

SHAREHOLDER OBJECTION TO DEBTORS FIRST AMENDED JOINT CHAPTER 11 PLAN OF REORGANIZATION Dear Honorable Judge Allan Gropper, I respectfully request the court to deny confirmation of Debtors First Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization (the Plan), because there is sufficient evidence of potential breaches of fiduciary duty and potential violation of securities laws by Debtors in formulating the Plan. 1. Debtors breached their fiduciary duty when they signed an exclusive Backstop Agreement for the $406M rights offering with four hedge fund groups, who accumulated controlling and blocking positions in Debtors' unsecured notes and claims at prices less than 15% of their face values, without a competitive bidding in the financial markets and excluding the equity holders from this rights offering. 2. Debtors adopted a poison pill on August 1, 2011 to preserve their tax attributes by restricting equity ownership to 5%. This reduced the take over potential of Kodak when the share price was trading at $3. Debtors stated that this action was in the best interests of the equity holders. After the petition, Debtors extended the poison pill with an order from the court until bankruptcy emergence. But, in formulating the Plan, Debtors breached their fiduciary duty by ignoring the substantial value of the preemergence tax attributes and did not provide a comparative earnings and cash flow analysis of the tax attributes under IRC Section 382 (1) (6) as compared to under IRC Section 382 (1) (5). 3. Debtors spent $5.8B cash to buy back Kodak shares at an average share price of $48 during the last ten years (2012 10-K) with a view that this share price did not reflect the true value of the company. On the other hand, in the Plan, Debtors estimate that Kodak is now worth only $72M excluding the $406M rights offering plus fees, and after $2.2B unsecured claims are canceled. How is this possible? 4. Debtors announced a partnership with Uni-Pixel on April 16, 2013, and another partnership with Kingsbury on June 27, 2013 to produce next-generation touch screen sensors which will potentially 1

double their US earnings and cash flows after 2014. But, the Plan is based on an incorrect low reorganization value that does not include any incremental earnings and cash flows in the functional printing business as compared to the earnings and cash flows Debtors reported both in the January 22, 2013 8-K and August 3, 2012 8-K. 5. Debtors earned close to $400M annual profits from the IP licensing business before the petition date. But, the Plan is based on only $20M annual earnings from IP and brand licensing businesses during the 2014-2017 projection period. 6. Debtors licensed their 7,500 remaining patents to the 18 Consortium members, who purchased the imaging patent portfolio of 1,100 patents from the Debtors for $527M. But, the Plan does not include any revenues and earnings from these licensing agreements. 7. Debtors breached their fiduciary duty when they signed an agreement with KPP to sell the Consumer Imaging business for $325M cash proceeds without a competitive bidding to get the best market price. In addition, Debtors did not disclose the future supply revenues and earnings from the KPP deal and did not include these incremental revenues and earnings in the Plan. 8. The information disclosed by Debtors with numerous public statements and several SEC filings are misleading and inconsistent with the Disclosure Statement and the Plan information. There is sufficient evidence of violation of securities laws by Debtors. Some examples are as follows: (a) Debtors reported 20,000+ US patents in the 2010-10K report, and then only a total of 7,100 US and international patents in the Disclosure Statement. (b) Debtors denied bankruptcy rumors on October 3, 2011, and then filed bankruptcy three months later on January 19, 20128. (c) Debtors stated that the tax attributes were important for the company when they announced the Poison Pill on August 1, 2011. Then, they ignored the tax attributes in the Plan. (d) On January 19, 2012, in a Kodak employee Town Hall meeting, Kodak President, Laura Quatela stated that Kodak could rake $6B from the licensing of imaging patents over the next four years and potentially more if it inked a deal with Apple or Google. On December 19, 2012, the imaging patents were sold for $527M. (e) In September 2012, Kodak CEO, Antonio Perez stated We are in the drivers seat, we could have sold the patents earlier, but we wanted to wait to get our price (valued at $2.2B or more). On December 19, 2012, the imaging patents were sold for only $527M. (f) Kodak CEO, Antonio Perez, made several public statements such as Kodak is an asset rich company and investment community misunderstands the objectives of the bankruptcy. Then, in the Plan, Debtors valued the company at only $72M, even after $406M cash from the rights offering and cancellation of $2.2B unsecured liabilities.

.>> Sign here 2