American court hearing recordings and interviews - QVC Group - Listen to the bankruptcy hearing held May 18, 2026 #QVC #HSN

Episode Date: May 19, 2026

What do you make of today’s hearing? Are vultures circling a Houston bankruptcy of an iconic American brand?To me it sounds like a court battle is planned in the QVC bankruptcy, in which investors of the sort sometimes referred to as “vulture investors” - that allegedly bought stakes in QVC when it was already financially distressed - will put on evidence towards trying to propose a different plan for QVC to exit bankruptcy under which they are paid more than the smooth sail in and out of bankruptcy the company lawyers would have preferred.This kind of contentious litigation may be concerning to QVC suppliers, insurers and other interested parties - at a minimum because it is costly and preparation for hearings such as the upcoming distracts bankrupt companies’ management. Maybe that is why the planning hearing is so vague as to what is going on, avoiding references to QVC or the Home Shopping Network? I don’t know. This hearing seemed exceptionally vague. And I thought I heard a reference to an objection deadline of tomorrow but I am not sure. I think things may be possibly be moving too quickly for there to be time for parties to come forward and be heard in the case, but it’s hard to say when what is going on isn’t clear. More information about the QVC bankruptcy is available here including points of contact if people have questions about what is going on in the bankruptcy and deadlines: https://restructuring.ra.kroll.com/QVC/

Let's be honest, buying cannabis shouldn't be complicated, sketchy, or low quality. That's why I want to tell you about mood.com. That's M-O-O-O-D.com. Mood ships federally legal cannabis straight to your door. No medical card, no hassle. And here's the kicker. The quality is better than anything you'll find at your local dispensary. Yeah, I said it. Whether you're into edibles, concentrates, flour, or just looking to explore, you'll find it all at mood. And it's not just the variety that makes them stand out. Every product is sourced from small American-owned family farms that care deeply about what they grow. It's cannabis you can trust, delivered discreetly, and ready to elevate your mood.

And because you're a listener, you get 20% off your first order. Just head to mood.com. That's M-O-O-O-D.com to get started. All right. Good afternoon. It's 1 p.m. on Monday, May 18th. We're here in case number 26-90447 QBC. We're getting a lot of background noise.

I'm going to activate the hand-raising feature. Conference, muted. So if you want to speak, please press 5-star. Okay, 415. Is that you, Mr. McCain? It is, Your Honor, and I apologize. I'm in New York today, so I'm having a little bit of a logistical issue, but that is me. All right, no problem.

All right, Mr. Warner, I just unmuted you. Mr. Nolan, I just unmuted you. And Mr. Glenn, I just unmuted you. Thank you. All right. Mr. Cornfel, are you on? Yes, Your Honor. Okay, you're Jeff.

You're Jeff Nolan today. I'm on the 9900. Yeah, you're Jeff Nolan today. Okay. I've done it before, but I'll be Alan Cornfield when I'm not Jeff Nolan. Okay. You know, your names go into the system and they just stay there. I'm going to have a conversation with my colleague right after this.

All right. All right, so I think all of the matters other than the scheduling conference have been resolved. So, and I did read. And I did receive a letter. And next time, just file it as a status report on the docket. I know in New York the practice is to, here, I'm being told my camera is not on. Sorry. Yep, there we go.

So I know the practice in New York and elsewhere is to send letters, but we generally will just have something on the docket. I know it was put on the docket, so I don't think there's any issue. All right. I've read the letter. So my only concern is if we have half a day on the fourth and we're thinking we can use the time, it probably makes sense to start sooner rather than later because I don't know once the evidence is concluded, how long it's going to take me to rule on the matter. So that's my only concern.

Yeah, Your Honor, for the record, by the way, Mark McCain and Kirkland-Ellis proposed counsel for the debtors, and I believe Mr. Southberg and Ms. Janoranda are here today. You know, to answer any concerns for the debtors that you may have, but really I think it's more the litigator's discussion today. It really is what drives us, the timing, and we're not asking for Your Honor to rework your schedule. You know, we'll take the fourth and move things on. Because I really think as you saw from the joint report, there's more agreement than disagreement. here in terms of like advancing things um and you know to that end you know debtors productions are done right we got a follow up from from mr glenn late last night you know you know on on the

types of follow-up issues you would expect including privilege we'll address that we've already given them a redaction log we'll give them others they've asked for something from the cobrae firm that'll happen um look there are there are two other areas where we have discussed amongst ourselves i'm not saying we have consensus yet but other ways to streamline the hearing that we i would like to flag for your honor that you know be helpful to get your perspective and guidance on. The first is dispensing with opening statements. We've already had multiple status conferences in front of your honor. The issues are going to be very much fully briefed.

We would propose getting right to the evidence, the way of moving things forward. Another is proposed written direct testimony for secondary witnesses. Obviously, with all witnesses being available live for cross and redirect, that's another way to further streamline to hear. and we recognize that Your Honor's court and procedures do allow for that process. So your thoughts on both of those, we will do whatever the court wants

in terms of this. We're just trying to be efficient with your honor's time. And then finally, Your Honor, there is one issue as it relates to the scope of the hearing that I'd probably want to flag for your honor. I say the scope of the hearing, meaning obviously we have the confirmation hearing.

We also have the motion to terminate exclusivity as well. And from the debtor's perspective, you know, I can show up with some fairly obvious points, which is there's very significant overlap in the evidence that will be presented to support confirmation and to defend against the motion-determinate exclusivity. You've already heard that, Your Honor. And obviously, if the court confirms the debtor's plan, the ad hoc preferred groups motion to terminate would be moot. But even if the court denies the plan, it doesn't mean that the ad hoc motion is automatically granted. So if your offer is amendable, what the debtors would propose is

candidly having a joint evidentiary hearing with regards to both motions have closing arguments and a ruling on confirmation first and then if we needed to go there we could then have closing arguments on exclusivity as well so that might be a path forward where we're

trying to be efficient as possible but those are the additional points that Your Honor I wanted to raise at the status quo as it relates to open I tend to agree. I mean, obviously, to the extent anyone wants to make an opening, I'm not going to prevent that from happening. But I find the closing much more helpful than the opening.

Because a lot of times, you know, people basically argue their case at the opening as opposed to telling me where the evidence is going to come in. So that one, I think that's an easy one. As it relates to written direct testimony on the non-major witnesses, again, if you all can agree on it, I'm happy to do it. I would just need it a few days ahead of time to make sure that I had read it before the direct. So that's really the only thing. as it relates to kind of bifurcating the closing and having a ruling first on confirmation and then having a ruling on that, I'm not inclined to do that. I think we should just, you know, tee everything up and argue.

I don't think – I think there is going to be significant overlap, so I don't think that it really – I'm not sure that that's a real time saver. My only question, and this may be more a question for the bankruptcy lawyers, is there anything that is going to be contested that would need any significant time other than the 1990 and the dispute, the termination of exclusivity? Is there any other issue that would require, that you anticipate would require additional, significant additional time? A looming contested an evidentiary issue or just a lag between confirmation and potential emergence? No, no. I'm just saying in connection with the confirmation hearing, in other words, is there going to be, do you anticipate that there's going to be other issues that will require trial time other than, the things that are being addressed in this status conference.

Fair. Your Honor, we're not aware of them. I think Mr. Glenn's arguments, I think, would extend, you know, I feel like I, as he's already articulated, you know, in papers, that, you know, he can make a good faith argument or a best interest of creditors argument arising out of the settlement dynamic. So, you know, he'll attack multiple problems, but I really think that's the future. There's CBI, which is cornerstone valuation components as well, you know, that, that,

that dovetail with the settlement. Those are all, that's part of the structure of the agreement, but the disputes that Mr. Glenn has raised are the only disputes we're aware of. Mr. Susberg, anything that you're aware of? Oh, I got to unmute you. Hold on a second. Go ahead. Thank you, Your Honor.

Josh Susberg, Kirkland, Ellis, on behalf of the debtors. Sitting here today, Your Honor, not aware of anything else of significance, although the objection deadline, I believe is tomorrow. and so there always could be other objections. I don't want to mislead the court. We weren't aware that we were going to be dealing with these preferred holders, but here we are.

And to the extent there's anything else that comes up, we'll be the first to let the court know. Okay. All right. Mr. Glenn or Mr. Cornfield? Your Honor, Andrew Glenn, Glenn, Agra Birdman, and Puentes, on behalf of the ad hoc preferred shareholder group. Your Honor, we'll take your lead on the start date

If you want to start on the gutters preferred start date, that's fine. From our perspective, we do want to be efficient. And for witnesses that don't involve our court issues, we're virtually agnostic on whether it's direct by, you know, by affidavit or in person. We have retained FTI and we believe that we might have as many as three. This is from FTI on the table, and that's how we got to the 10 witness level. In terms of the opening statements, we have not yet filed our confirmation objection,

and we've asked for more time, given that discovery is still ongoing. And we note that some of the RSA parties, most notably the QVI stakeholders have not completed their document production to us. So that doesn't necessarily mean that I will need a opening statement, but given the lag between the confirmation objection, which is obviously designed to help the court frame the issues and what's likely coming down the pike, I would just say that there's a possibility that I might want to do at least a short opening to frame any new issues that weren't captured by the confirmation objection.

You know, otherwise, Mr. McCain and I have done this before, given that we're going to start on the fourth, we'll go back, and you saw the dates that were on the table. We'll sort that out offline. Okay. All right. Yeah, and to the extent that there has to be, you know, some cleanup, but what I don't want to spend the first day on opening statements, I mean, let's spend the first hour on opening statements. Understood. All right. As much as I'd like to do it, you know, for the entire first day.

next. But yeah, we should agree with your honor. We'll coordinate with Mr. Clay. All right. Sounds good. Your honor, Alan Cornfeld, Jessica St. Zelen Jones for the committee with me as my colleague, Michael Warner, also Brad Sandler, is on. Your Honor, we agree generally with the approach articulated by Mr. McCain. We believe in getting started as soon as the court has availability and moving towards the close as quickly as we can. We do expect on the committee behalf to have one witness. It will be a preferred holder that will be an adverse witness. We expect that that witness, unless the witness agrees to come to Houston, will be presented

through deposition, possibly through video playing of a deposition. We don't expect that that will be a long presentations. All right. All right. Anything else we need to talk about today? No, Your Honor. Hopefully this is a sign of how efficient we can be. Okay.

Well, good. All right, so we'll be in recess to my 5 o'clock hearing, and we'll look forward to seeing you all in about three weeks, two weeks. Very good. Thank you. Thank you, Your Honor. Let's be honest. Buying cannabis shouldn't be complicated, sketchy, or low quality.

That's why I want to tell you about mood.com. That's M-O-O-D.com. Mood ships federally legal cannabis straight to your door. No medical card, no hassle. And here's the kicker. The quality is better than anything you'll find at your local dispensary. Yeah, I said it. Whether you're into edibles, concentrates, flour, or just looking to explore, you'll find it all at Mood.

And it's not just the variety that makes them stand out. Every product is sourced from small American-owned family farms that care deeply about what they grow. It's cannabis you can trust, delivered discreetly and ready to elevate your mood. And because you're a listener, you get 20% off your first order. Just head to mood.com. That's M-O-O-O-D dot com to get started.