According to PAU, Tenor's buyout offer will be a whopping US$ 0.30/share.

In fairness, Pau provided a price per share range, and even the possibility that it could be lower. However, once a number is put on the table, only the highest amount is relevant.

The offer is not much, but a big improvement from the previously floated offer (US$ 0.18?). We are still far from what is paid for KRY shares in private transactions, but at least we are moving in the right direction.

But this is part of the usual negotiations mechanics: 1) the offeror floats a low-ball offer to gauge the offeree's initial reaction (which is likely a yawn). 2) the offeror issues a somewhat improved offer to show willingness to negotiate. 3) the Offeree offers his/her rationale for the inadequacy of the offer made. 3) the Offeror establishes the likely deal price "strike zone" (price range within which a deal can be closed). 4) a quasi-final offer is made (no offer is ever final until it is accepted. Remember Yogi Berra? "It ain't over till is over". 5) the final / accepted offer is agreed and made official. 

The foregoing brings me to a couple of important points:

1.- Canadian law requires and the Canadian Securities Commission is known for religiously enforcing the rule that in a buyout transaction all the tendering shareholders must be paid the same price. Thus, independent of when a shareholder tenders his/her shares, the highest price paid MUST BE THE SAME for all. So, if the first / last to tender the shares gets a higher price, those that tendered their shares after / before must be paid the same price. Therefore, the best option for shareholders is usually not to tender their shares if the price is not quite right. This because, even if the deal closes without a shareholder tendering his/her shares, by law, the Offeror must deposit the value of the shares at the highest price paid in an escrow account held by the Court for the benefit of the shareholder. Only then has the Offeror the right to ask the Court to cancel the shares not tendered.

2.- To execute a buyout, the offeror has to make a formal offer with a set price per share and has to manage to convince shareholders holding at least 66.3% of the voting shares in a first round (and 90% in a second round) to tender their shares to be able to take the company private.  If I remember correctly, the Shareholders' Committee and the sign-in shareholders represent close to 35% of the outstanding shares. Add to that the shares owned by those like me who did not sign in and we are closer to 50%.

3.- After the second buyout round, shareholders holding at least 10% stake in the aggregate that disagree with the price offered have the right by law to request an independent valuation to ascertain its fairness. if the CCAA Court decides to side step this requirement (usually justified on the Court's assessment that the valuation done for the offeror by an "independent" expert is fair, the Canadian Securities Commission and the Canadian Business Corporation Director can object to such decision upon a shareholders' request. This only if the stake owned by the dissenting shareholders warrants it and they (the CSC and the CBC) agree with the need for a second independent valuation. If a supermajority (66.3%) of the shares allowed to vote approve the transaction (this excludes the shares owned by "interested parties", e.g. Tenor), no objection is likely to succeed. Hence, an second independent valuation requirement is possible only if at least 33.7% of the voting shares remain untendered after the second-round offer expires (there is a set time limit to execute the buyout offer).  

I am afraid that without a realistic buyout offer, we would not get anywhere close to a win-win situation. After all, the mining data was valued at $300-$350 million in the negotiations with Venezuela (it was bundled in the settlement offer to offset the expected big haircut required to close the deal), and the tax loss carry-forward tax benefit is worth another $100 million, both of which are property of the legacy shareholders. Add to that the 9% share of the Net Award Proceeds and divide sum total by 360 million shares and the math does not work.

Yet, no problem is so big that cannot be resolved by willing and able minds. After all, a win-win deal is much better than no deal.