<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The Deal Sleuth</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Disrespectfully tracking mergers, buyouts and other bad deals</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:47:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Where&#8217;s The Arbitrage In The New Merger Arbitrage ETF? by Arbitrage-free merger arbitrage Abnormal Returns</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/wheres-the-arbitrage-in-the-new-merger-arbitrage-etf/#comment-4355</link>
		<dc:creator>Arbitrage-free merger arbitrage Abnormal Returns</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=439#comment-4355</guid>
		<description>[...] takes issue with the new merger arbitrage ETF.  (Conflict-of-interest noted.)  While Kirchner has a number of questions about the fund&#8217;s strategy he makes an obvious point.  There is no arbitrage in the IQ ARB Merger Arbitrage ETF.  He writes: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] takes issue with the new merger arbitrage ETF.  (Conflict-of-interest noted.)  While Kirchner has a number of questions about the fund&#8217;s strategy he makes an obvious point.  There is no arbitrage in the IQ ARB Merger Arbitrage ETF.  He writes: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Merger Arbitrage Book by Arbitrage-free merger arbitrage Abnormal Returns</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/merger-arbitrage-book/#comment-4354</link>
		<dc:creator>Arbitrage-free merger arbitrage Abnormal Returns</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:39:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?page_id=362#comment-4354</guid>
		<description>[...] Kirchner, the author of a book on merger arbitrage, a blogger at The Deal Sleuth and the manager of a mutual fund Pennsylvania Avenue Event-Driven [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Kirchner, the author of a book on merger arbitrage, a blogger at The Deal Sleuth and the manager of a mutual fund Pennsylvania Avenue Event-Driven [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Where&#8217;s The Arbitrage In The New Merger Arbitrage ETF? by Kyle D'Silva</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/wheres-the-arbitrage-in-the-new-merger-arbitrage-etf/#comment-4342</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle D'Silva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 05:20:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=439#comment-4342</guid>
		<description>Excellent analysis Thomas. I would not touch that product with a ten foot pole. I think it is incredibly misleading that they have labeled it as an arbitrage product. In fact, it might be borderline fraud.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent analysis Thomas. I would not touch that product with a ten foot pole. I think it is incredibly misleading that they have labeled it as an arbitrage product. In fact, it might be borderline fraud.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Free eBook by Money Turtle</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/free-ebook/#comment-4318</link>
		<dc:creator>Money Turtle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:26:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?page_id=228#comment-4318</guid>
		<description>An excellent eBook. I&#039;m looking forward to reading your merger arbitrage book.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An excellent eBook. I&#8217;m looking forward to reading your merger arbitrage book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Where&#8217;s The Arbitrage In The New Merger Arbitrage ETF? by Dave</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/wheres-the-arbitrage-in-the-new-merger-arbitrage-etf/#comment-4302</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:04:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=439#comment-4302</guid>
		<description>http://www2.standardandpoors.com/portal/site/sp/en/us/page.topic/indices_lomerger/2,3,6,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.html

The wording likely gets by the SEC because S&amp;P is doing the same thing with their S&amp;P Long-Only Merger Arbitrage Index   

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=SPARBM%3AIND</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www2.standardandpoors.com/portal/site/sp/en/us/page.topic/indices_lomerger/2,3,6,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.html" rel="nofollow">http://www2.standardandpoors.com/portal/site/sp/en/us/page.topic/indices_lomerger/2,3,6,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.html</a></p>
<p>The wording likely gets by the SEC because S&amp;P is doing the same thing with their S&amp;P Long-Only Merger Arbitrage Index   </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=SPARBM%3AIND" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=SPARBM%3AIND</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Where&#8217;s The Arbitrage In The New Merger Arbitrage ETF? by Dave</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/wheres-the-arbitrage-in-the-new-merger-arbitrage-etf/#comment-4300</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:55:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=439#comment-4300</guid>
		<description>I completely agree with you.  I looked at their strategy and was wondering where the arbitrage was and then I put their algorithm for choosing which deals to buy in a spreadsheet and was kind of amazed that they are doing a fund based on this.  If a&lt;b&lt;c is all you need to figure out the probability of a deal closing then we should all be managing billion dollar merger funds.  And shorting indexes?  So take half of a relatively uncorrelated strategy and correlate half of it to a long short fund.  Pure genius...or not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I completely agree with you.  I looked at their strategy and was wondering where the arbitrage was and then I put their algorithm for choosing which deals to buy in a spreadsheet and was kind of amazed that they are doing a fund based on this.  If a&lt;b&lt;c is all you need to figure out the probability of a deal closing then we should all be managing billion dollar merger funds.  And shorting indexes?  So take half of a relatively uncorrelated strategy and correlate half of it to a long short fund.  Pure genius&#8230;or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Harold Hamm&#8217;s Hiland Buyout Has Upside by Chuck</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/harold-hamms-hiland-buyout-has-upside/#comment-4284</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:39:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=414#comment-4284</guid>
		<description>looks like this story is still going on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>looks like this story is still going on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Harold Hamm&#8217;s Hiland Buyout Has Upside by Chuck</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/harold-hamms-hiland-buyout-has-upside/#comment-4260</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:16:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=414#comment-4260</guid>
		<description>nice call</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nice call</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Harold Hamm&#8217;s Hiland Buyout Has Upside by Craig</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/harold-hamms-hiland-buyout-has-upside/#comment-4257</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 02:46:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=414#comment-4257</guid>
		<description>Nice analysis. I had looked at this going private deal previously, but with the lower figures and only based upon market price to purchase price. The spread was not enough for me to take on the risk so I passed. However after I read your blog post yesterday and realized the shareholders meeting had passed and the vote was not obtained, immediately purchased some as the risk profile had changed. Did not expect such quick news, with a boosted offer price, but was a really nice surprise this morning! Appreciate very much the content you put out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice analysis. I had looked at this going private deal previously, but with the lower figures and only based upon market price to purchase price. The spread was not enough for me to take on the risk so I passed. However after I read your blog post yesterday and realized the shareholders meeting had passed and the vote was not obtained, immediately purchased some as the risk profile had changed. Did not expect such quick news, with a boosted offer price, but was a really nice surprise this morning! Appreciate very much the content you put out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hiland: The Worst Deal Among MLP Consolidations by Chuck</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/hiland-the-worst-deal-among-mlp-consolidations/#comment-4254</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:18:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=403#comment-4254</guid>
		<description>looks like they are getting the company for the price they wanted, they have the votes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>looks like they are getting the company for the price they wanted, they have the votes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Clarium&#8217;s Peter Thiel Is Bearish On Innovation by Chuck</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/clariums-peter-thiel-bearish-on-innovation/#comment-4251</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:26:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=409#comment-4251</guid>
		<description>I can argue that CDOs and CDS are technological innovations.  I haven&#039;t looked into it, but I don&#039;t think that Paypal lead to an increase in GDP.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can argue that CDOs and CDS are technological innovations.  I haven&#8217;t looked into it, but I don&#8217;t think that Paypal lead to an increase in GDP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hiland: The Worst Deal Among MLP Consolidations by PlanMaestro</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/hiland-the-worst-deal-among-mlp-consolidations/#comment-4248</link>
		<dc:creator>PlanMaestro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:52:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=403#comment-4248</guid>
		<description>I almost got caught doing merger arbitrage before the squeeze. I was very comfortable with the margin of safety if the deal did not go through goven that it was clear that natgas was going to recover. However a squeeze was not in the plans. 

The current price is a robbery. If there is a way to give more notoriety to this thief?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I almost got caught doing merger arbitrage before the squeeze. I was very comfortable with the margin of safety if the deal did not go through goven that it was clear that natgas was going to recover. However a squeeze was not in the plans. </p>
<p>The current price is a robbery. If there is a way to give more notoriety to this thief?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About by Mike</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/about/#comment-4244</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:47:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-4244</guid>
		<description>I just initiated a small ($100k) position in Penn Avenue. Could you drop me a line as I have several questions before I add additional funds.

                     Mike</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just initiated a small ($100k) position in Penn Avenue. Could you drop me a line as I have several questions before I add additional funds.</p>
<p>                     Mike</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hiland: The Worst Deal Among MLP Consolidations by Dave</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/hiland-the-worst-deal-among-mlp-consolidations/#comment-4243</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=403#comment-4243</guid>
		<description>The Hiland article is very interesting. Are the limited partners potentially subject to any phantom tax if the merger is consummated? Will there be any surprises in the final Schedule K-1 to the LP&#039;s? This is a partnership, not a corporation. These are units, not shares. The federal tax treatment is not the same. Please note the comments below from the proxy to the shareholders, Page 131-2.  Could you please confirm that there will be no phantom tax from non-recourse liabilities. Thanks for your work with the blog.

Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations 
-Tax Consequences of the Hiland Partners Merger 
--Recognition of Gain or Loss.
 
Generally, a Hiland Partners common unitholder’s initial tax basis for its common units will have been the amount he paid for the common units plus its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities. That basis will have been increased by its share of Hiland Partners’ income and by any increases in its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities. That basis will have been decreased, but not below zero, by distributions from Hiland Partners to the common unitholder, by the common unitholder’s share of Hiland Partners’ losses, by any decreases in its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities, and by its share of Hiland Partners’ expenditures that are not deductible in computing taxable income and are not required to be capitalized. A Hiland Partners common unitholder has no share of Hiland Partners’ debt that is recourse to Hiland Partner’s general partner, but has a share (generally based on its share of Hiland Partners’ profits) of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities. 
 
A common unitholder’s amount realized will be measured by the sum of the Hiland Partners merger consideration received by him plus its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities. Because the amount realized includes a common unitholder’s share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities, the gain recognized could result in a tax liability in excess of the cash received as the Hiland Partners merger consideration. However, because of the prices at which the holders of Hiland Partners common units have purchased such common units, it is not anticipated that existing Hiland Partners common unitholders will recognize additional taxable gain as a result of their allocation of such nonrecourse liabilities of Hiland Partners.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Hiland article is very interesting. Are the limited partners potentially subject to any phantom tax if the merger is consummated? Will there be any surprises in the final Schedule K-1 to the LP&#8217;s? This is a partnership, not a corporation. These are units, not shares. The federal tax treatment is not the same. Please note the comments below from the proxy to the shareholders, Page 131-2.  Could you please confirm that there will be no phantom tax from non-recourse liabilities. Thanks for your work with the blog.</p>
<p>Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations<br />
-Tax Consequences of the Hiland Partners Merger<br />
&#8211;Recognition of Gain or Loss.</p>
<p>Generally, a Hiland Partners common unitholder’s initial tax basis for its common units will have been the amount he paid for the common units plus its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities. That basis will have been increased by its share of Hiland Partners’ income and by any increases in its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities. That basis will have been decreased, but not below zero, by distributions from Hiland Partners to the common unitholder, by the common unitholder’s share of Hiland Partners’ losses, by any decreases in its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities, and by its share of Hiland Partners’ expenditures that are not deductible in computing taxable income and are not required to be capitalized. A Hiland Partners common unitholder has no share of Hiland Partners’ debt that is recourse to Hiland Partner’s general partner, but has a share (generally based on its share of Hiland Partners’ profits) of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities.<br />
 <br />
A common unitholder’s amount realized will be measured by the sum of the Hiland Partners merger consideration received by him plus its share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities. Because the amount realized includes a common unitholder’s share of Hiland Partners’ nonrecourse liabilities, the gain recognized could result in a tax liability in excess of the cash received as the Hiland Partners merger consideration. However, because of the prices at which the holders of Hiland Partners common units have purchased such common units, it is not anticipated that existing Hiland Partners common unitholders will recognize additional taxable gain as a result of their allocation of such nonrecourse liabilities of Hiland Partners.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Free eBook by A Aiden</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/free-ebook/#comment-4229</link>
		<dc:creator>A Aiden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:46:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?page_id=228#comment-4229</guid>
		<description>Well done.. nice book.. Good to read.. Thanks for the nice ebook..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well done.. nice book.. Good to read.. Thanks for the nice ebook..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Cash Shells: SPACs, MathStar, PetroSearch and Cadus by Dr. Kris</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/07/28/cash-shells-spacs-mathstar-petrosearch-and-cadus/#comment-3978</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. Kris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2009 23:08:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/07/28/cash-shells-spacs-mathstar-petrosearch-and-cadus/#comment-3978</guid>
		<description>Thomas,

Thanks for alerting me to your articles on my website.  Had they come up in the first couple of pages on my Google search of blank check companies, I would have had much more information that I could have used in my article.  (I probably should also have done a search on SPACs.) 

The arbitrage aspect is certainly interesting and unfortunately not available anymore.  Had I read your January article when it came out!

Sincerely,

Dr. Kris
Founder, StockMarketCookBook.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thomas,</p>
<p>Thanks for alerting me to your articles on my website.  Had they come up in the first couple of pages on my Google search of blank check companies, I would have had much more information that I could have used in my article.  (I probably should also have done a search on SPACs.) </p>
<p>The arbitrage aspect is certainly interesting and unfortunately not available anymore.  Had I read your January article when it came out!</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Dr. Kris<br />
Founder, StockMarketCookBook.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Free eBook by Sivaram Velauthapillai</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/free-ebook/#comment-3972</link>
		<dc:creator>Sivaram Velauthapillai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2009 02:11:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?page_id=228#comment-3972</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m having problems downloading the book... I tried twice and, after receiving the e-mail with the code, it doesn&#039;t work...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m having problems downloading the book&#8230; I tried twice and, after receiving the e-mail with the code, it doesn&#8217;t work&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Will Shareholders Vote Down Entrust&#8217;s Private Equity Buyout? by 1stwealth</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/07/05/will-shareholders-vote-down-buyout-entrusts-private-equity-buyout/#comment-3901</link>
		<dc:creator>1stwealth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 23:00:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=337#comment-3901</guid>
		<description>I have also written an ebook about an alternative trading strategy that can be used to profit when shares are rising without owning a share. Find out more at my blog site, http://firstwealth.wordpress.com. Drop by and leave me a comment.
Michael</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have also written an ebook about an alternative trading strategy that can be used to profit when shares are rising without owning a share. Find out more at my blog site, <a href="http://firstwealth.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://firstwealth.wordpress.com</a>. Drop by and leave me a comment.<br />
Michael</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Pershing Square Misleads About General Growth&#8217;s Equity Value by Jay (market folly)</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/pershing-square-misleads-about-general-growths-equity-value/#comment-3873</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay (market folly)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 19:48:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=331#comment-3873</guid>
		<description>Great post and lucid counterarguments.  Your highlight of the &#039;bankruptcy101&#039; section is right on the money as it&#039;s apparent Ackman is targeting others to piggyback him into this play.  Every bit helps I guess, considering how unfriendly the credit markets and the commercial real estate landscape are currently.  He is up pretty substantially on his position already though.  

We&#039;d agree that there will be some value left in the equity, though heavily diluted.  Curious as to if you think there is still value in the debt then?

Thanks again for the piece.

Jay
marketfolly.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post and lucid counterarguments.  Your highlight of the &#8216;bankruptcy101&#8242; section is right on the money as it&#8217;s apparent Ackman is targeting others to piggyback him into this play.  Every bit helps I guess, considering how unfriendly the credit markets and the commercial real estate landscape are currently.  He is up pretty substantially on his position already though.  </p>
<p>We&#8217;d agree that there will be some value left in the equity, though heavily diluted.  Curious as to if you think there is still value in the debt then?</p>
<p>Thanks again for the piece.</p>
<p>Jay<br />
marketfolly.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Pershing Square Misleads About General Growth&#8217;s Equity Value by valorem</title>
		<link>http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/pershing-square-misleads-about-general-growths-equity-value/#comment-3871</link>
		<dc:creator>valorem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:59:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedealsleuth.wordpress.com/?p=331#comment-3871</guid>
		<description>Thank you, finally a rational interpretation of his presentation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, finally a rational interpretation of his presentation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
