BioAmber Inc fka BIOAQ

[New money98]

True, but there is no doubt that a stay was issued on the Restructuring PROCESS in order to proceed with the newly named Liquidation PROCESS. 2 named processes!!!

[New money98]

True, but there is no doubt that a stay was issued on the Restructuring PROCESS in order to proceed with the newly named Liquidation PROCESS. 2 named processes!!!

[Lucky77Dice]

Yep…Another great find Eagle sir…That pretty much settles this right there..Upfront gonna be a hard lesson for some here…unfortunately…

[Koan]

FINRA suspended the CUSIP.

"The CUSIP number was canceled. - I-Glow"

Tax season must be fast approaching, the shareholder pant sniffers are getting desperate.

What is the CUSIP number?

CUSIP# 09072Q106
ISIN# US09072Q1067
SEDOL# BF2YLH8

DO GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY

[Real McCoy]

The liquidation or liquidation process is not in doubt.

[New money98]

Thank for clarifying once again that it was a Liquidation PROCESS!!!

[Pnypnchr]

LFGoooooooooooooooo
$ugar Glider, I hope your writing a book on all of this, because it will make you a trillionaire!

[I-Glow]

The CUSIP number was canceled without that the Stock is dead - in most cases it isn't a Chapter 15 Bankruptcy but both Judges signed off on the liquidation.

Then in the US a Trustee is appointed that know after the case is closed they file the court documents with FINRA and the stock is canceled. Even with that I have seen Q stocks go on for years without filing with FINRA but it still means that the Stock is worthless/dead.

What exchange does Bioamber trade - what is the CUSIP number - what is the PPS?

It has been 5 years and the ticker is still dead.

There are still a few living in pinky fantasyland - but you still lost your investment.

And in 5 more years you will still have worthless stock in your account.

IG

[Real McCoy]

Fair enough. Note that none of my posts occurred before the monitor played out its duties. I have no desire to see anyone lose money.

[Real McCoy]

Correct. They were gone and it was liquidated in another country. So FINRA just deleted the ticker instead. Got it?

[$ugar Glider]

Thank you for gentlemanly response, you do your job...a gentleman perhaps...a scholar my friend not so convinced. Soon this board will end, if you do not hold short, I must consider you" lucky or wise. However, if you are caught by your own machinations, I hope you find some wisdom from your behavior, that serves you well in future endeavors.
PS BIOAQ, I did not buy a bankrupt stock or science, I have been here long before the fuss. Win or lose it will not impact important aspects of my life. In some aspect as my life is drawing to a close. I will die a fool to some and a dear friend and teacher to others. I do not hold malice or ill wishes to anyone who posts, whatever they post. Perhaps we can share a beer after this nonsense is done. Sincerely $ugar Glider

[JamStar]

They weren’t canceled because nobody was supposed to cancel them…

[Real McCoy]

It’s literally up to them. Maybe they want to keep the supply chain familiar. Who knows. Who cares?

[Real McCoy]

Do you want to see the trade name language?

Note- you will be humiliated again.

[Jrossco]

Wrong yet again bucko…..

[$ugar Glider]

And of what value would it be to ask for a patent to be issued in the name of a Different entity which you own "that you say is bankrupt, when you plan to go public...and seek investors.? Do pray tell enlighten us.

[fireballka7]

Oh Really...... lets take a closure look at that statement shall we?



WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT SAY??????? Maybe you should read the APA

[Real McCoy]

You are not in the offensive in any way. Any “expertise” you have is an absolute joke in light of believing a 5 year old liquidation was a lie covered up by an NDA. NDAs don’t contain confidential information. People who don’t believe liquidations when everyone is gone for years after are dumb.

[$ugar Glider]

LOL...you can't remember the last falsehood you told; you are habitual. Of course, you are correct, the NDAs relate to structure of confidentiality, the Judge knows everything. Take time to stop and read your posts. Be careful, Devil Lance is on your tail. Just a heads up one of my areas of expertise is in Pretrial Forensics'. lends itself to anything verbal and behavior; behavior is also expressed in deceptive messaging. Gunna be fun my friend. Suggest you learn awareness and as my Semitic friends say... "Know whom before you stand, before you speak" or as E B White put in print in Charlotte's Web " Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive!" Or something like that. The ice is thinning for detractors. I can sense it cracking. 😘

[Gold prospector]

You guys are funny !

[Gold prospector]

lol!!!!!

[Real McCoy]

Then why was all the con men posts rebutted to the dirt with no response?

[Filterthenoise]

I witnessed a FUD roast today $BIOAQ

[Pnypnchr]

Why would 6 people Beat a dead horse for 5 years 25/8/366? Especially when they can't even lick their own balls.

[Real McCoy]

The buyer specifically was granted the right to use and renew patents and do other business in the name of the former owner. Common for continuity purposes. If you don’t like it read the APA.

[Gold prospector]

Why would they grant a patent to a dead company?

[TheRealMrPirate]

So that's a no huh? No you haven't read the 10th PWC Monitor's Report to the court.
Awesome. Good to know that's all you got.

Still, you do have the right to remain silent.

DO GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY

[Real McCoy]

After a thorough explanation with the comment that he’s not explaining again- you take from that that he can’t explain???

[Koan]

There you have it, folks!

I've explained it many times, no longer am I explaining anything.

Four seconds later...

I'll respond when I please. - TheRealMrPotato

Responses without explanation. One must therefore assume the intended purpose is to continue to chastise, berate, insult, discourage, harass or otherwise sniff the pant legs of shareholders for whatever reason. Keep in mind, this is a group of people you claim has already "lost everything". And yet, the pant sniffing continues! Maybe it's those pesky shares. Oh those wonderful shares!

Still, you do have the right to remain silent.

DO GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY

[Real McCoy]

Has anyone not roasted you completely in response when you say this?

[TheRealMrPirate]

Nah I'm good. Public board.
I'll respond when I please.

[Real McCoy]

They weren’t canceled because there is no one to cancel them. It was liquidated in another jurisdiction (CCAA).

[Koan]

We all look forward to your silence.

I've explained it many times, no longer am I explaining anything.

You have the right to remain silent.

DO GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY

[JamStar]

Truth like… the shares weren’t cancelled on purpose, truth?

[Filterthenoise]

Bioamber Inc is Active $BIOAQ

[trader59]

Yeah, because monitors in bankruptcy proceedings are known for hiding clues within their reports and motions, and one of the most subtle is the "capital letter vs lower case" diversion, takes a real internet detective to pick that out....
SMH
Fortunately, they published the Asset Purchase Agreement, so there isn't any doubt what got sold and what didn't.

https://www.pwc.com/ca/en/car/bioamber/assets2/bioamber-043_120718.pdf

They also told the courts, the creditors, the public (including shareholders) over and over there was not a purchase of the shares, and the shareholders were getting nothing. They told that lawyer that Tacpans and the shareholders hired to represent them, too. Wonder why nobody has flipped that guy an hour's pay and asked him if the liquidation and shut down really happened.

[Real McCoy]

No, embarassing.

The context of that comment was a budgeted line item - “forecast fees for the sale of the company”. I don’t have much issue with it, and remember when they wrote it they didn’t think they’d see this kind of insanity and delusion.

What else would you call a budgeted line item in a bankruptcy whose goal was to sell the company? I guess they could have changed it to “liquidation” as at that time it was known but again they had shown the SIGNED APA at this point and didn’t know they would be dealing with learning disability several reports later.

No one has ever said they sold the equity in this company, or any “Company” here, which makes sense as that was never announced and shareholders were never informed. And obviously it doesn’t need to be stated that a material event like an equity sale did not occur 5 years ago with no obligation to report it - LOL.

[TheRealMrPirate]

Tomato, tomatoe, Potato, potatoe.
There was NO sale of The Company: neither the parent or any subsidiaries.
Yes, the shares are stuck with Delaware 4612067.
BioAmber Canada was the head office, you remember what a head office in a corporate setting does, no?
"The Company" was liquidated - as in all 3 entities, stripped of "all" it's assets.
No more Canadian head office, no more Sarnia operation.
All that's left is an abandoned shell, one that is no longer legal.
I've explained it many times, no longer am I explaining anything.
9th report, try the 10th. Read it yet ? You must be aware of what a timeline is no?
Sorry about your luck.

[Koan]

You do not know what you are writing.

I've stated many times on this very board, if you don't know what you're reading, seek the advice of a professional who can explain it to you.

Good for you. Anyone can say this. Here, I'll say it to you. If you don't know what you're reading, seek the advice of a professional who can explain it to you. This, of course, is the ultimate non-answer. Feel free to explain what you are saying, versus putting the responsibility on the reader to navigate the murky waters of your semantics. Take that as professional advice.

9th Report - Section 26.- : Relating to BioAmber Sarnia Inc.

No. "Relating to BioAmber Sarnia Inc." is absolutely incorrect according to PwC themselves. The word "Company" (with a capital "C") specifically means all three companies, e.g. BioAmber Inc. (where the shares are), BioAmber Sarnia Inc., and BioAmber Canada Inc. So when PwC says, "sale of the Company", they are referring to all three companies. This information is so critical that PwC defines it at the top of each report:



Accordingly, since BioAmber Inc. is the US Parent company and sole shareholder of BioAmber Sarnia Inc. and BioAmber Canada Inc., a "sale of the Company" must necessarily include BioAmber Inc.'s shares (as a company) in the subsidiaries it owns, namely BioAmber Sarnia Inc. and BioAmber Canada Inc. Shareholders own shares in BioAmber Inc., and BioAmber Inc. itself owns shares in its subsidiaries. Note line item [6] from the Pinsonnault judgement:




Next.

Everyone knows what happened to the operations of the company.

Which "company"? Because when you write it with a lowercase "c" (is that on purpose?), you could be referring to any one of three separate legal entities.

Further monitor reports also clearly state that the "sale of the company" nor any of the subsidiaries did not progress.

You did it again. Why are you keeping the word "company" in lowercase? Which company?! Do you know what you are writing? You suggest readers seek professional advice and that's exactly what you should seek as you are either playing games or you are woefully incompetent.

Now, you and others have continued to argue that there was no "sale of the Company". You must, at minimum, account for Section 26. in the Ninth Report. Did PwC make an error on Section 26? Did they actually mean to use another word, such as "liquidation of the Company", or "asset sale of the Company"? Or did they mean to say, "sale of BioAmber Sarnia Inc." or "sale of BioAmber Sarnia Inc.'s assets"?

Note that if PwC makes an error they have a responsibility to correct it before the court, in particular any error that is material to creditors or other stakeholders. This is easy enough to understand in a case where PwC might make an error on a particular number, for example if they reported the assets have a bid for 43,340,000 USD, when in fact they meant 4,340,000 USD. PwC would have to cite the error and correct it, otherwise in failing to do so and omitting such a correction they would risk being liable for gross negligence or willful misconduct.



At no future time did PwC cite and correct Section 26. from the Ninth Report, i.e. "sale of the Company".

DO GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY

[trader59]

Here's yet another link to the judge's final order in the CCAA proceedings. They are closed....

https://www.pwc.com/ca/en/car/bioamber/assets2/bioamber-064_070319.pdf

It's not surprising that you'd present this delay in a government division finishing an irrelevant dissolution of a very dead company, or that one division of a government is unaware of the goings on in another as some sort of evidence that the final order was fake, the liquidation was fake, the resignation of the officers was fake, etc., etc., since you have to continue the hopium charade because of participation in the fabrication and pumping of the lie told here. But there's really nothing more pathetic than an internet troll, and that's really all you're doing now.

[TheRealMrPirate]

You're welcome to sit here for 20years, makes no difference.
You're not getting paid but the back & forth is entertaining.