FOR CONTRACT 351 HAD CEASED ON DECEMBER 14, THEY CANNOT REFUSE ACCEPT SUCH A SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT IN THE LOAN FINANCING
WE ARE THEREFORE BEING OFFERED AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO
TERMS.
LIKEWISE.
3. GEMMILL AND I ARE CONVINCED THAT THE MTRC BOARD COULD NOT
1STORE THE REVISED NET PRESENT VALUE OF THE JAPANESE BID AND THAT, UNLESS WE HATCH IT, METCAN WILL LOSE THE CONTRACT. UNFORTUNATELY THE WAIVING OF INTEREST BY H.M.T WAS PRESENTED
IT AS A DECISION INDEPENDENT OF JAPANESE EXIM BANK SUFFORT. IS VITAL THAT ECGD SHOULD NOT REPEAT NOT ATTEMPT TO CHECK OUT THE NEW TERMS WITH THEIR JAPANESE OPPOSITE NUMBERS BECAUSE EXIM WILL:-
(A) (B)
KNOW THAT WE HAVE BEEN TIPPED OFF:
COMPLAIN FORMALLY TO THE MTRC TO THE EMBARRASSMENT
OF CUR INFORMANTS:
(C) DENY ANY INVOLVEMENT:
(D)
SET TO WORK TO UNDER-CUT ANY MATCHING WHICH WE MIGHT OFFER.
4. I NEED TO KNOW URGENTLY WHETHER WE CAN FIND ANY MECHANISM WHICH WOULD ENABLE METCAM TO WAIVE INTEREST CHARGES FOR A MATCHING PERIOD 1.5 TC PEDUCE THE NET PRESENT VALUE OF THEIR BID BY ABOUT
IF WE CAN DO SC IN RETURN FOR A FORMAL ASSURANCE BY 65 MILLION.
THE ATRO THAT ALL TRADING, FINANCIAL OR COMMERCIAL, WHICH AFFECTS CONTRACT 351 HAD CEASED, I THINK WE CAN GAIN THE DAY FOR
NETCAM.
MARCH
PNNN