...but nonetheless it seems to me that this is likely the best solution for essentially everyone, with the glaring exception of the bondholders.Mark me as a hopeless finance romantic, but from my perspective, the mistreatment of the bondholders by the government is a pretty serious issue. The bondholders in question hold senior debt, which means under the rule of law, they have senior rights to the company's assets. But under the rule of Obama, that seems to no longer be the case, as some union benefits, which should be junior to the bondholders in the pecking order, have been elevated to equal status by Obama fiat. This is a wonderful political gambit by Obama, thrilling to to his constituency, even if leaves tired, old, rule of law cranks like me feeling chill. I am guessing any potential lenders in the future will share my queasiness. Why loan anyone money if the government can wipe out your claim at its whim. I thought Obama was trying to revive the credit markets, not suffocate them.
As far as the bankruptcy itself goes, I have already demonstrated by inability to comprehend bankruptcy law, and I'll leave it to the smarter legal heads on KP to sort out mysteries like section 363 of the bankruptcy code.
Finally, if you haven't read any of the allegations concerning intimidation by the Obama administration, you absolutely need to take a gander at this. Pretty lively stuff, and while it is purely he-said-she-said at the moment, you must be well into your second pitcher of the Kool-Aid not to believe this type of thing is going on.
UPDATE: I found a nicely presented argument from a hedge fund manager echoing some of my thoughts above. It's hard to pity hedge funds or their managers, considering some of the astronomical bonuses that have been received over the last decade, but before you give Obama a giant huzzah and gleefully throw those greedy hedge funds under the bus, at least consider their point of view.