Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Yep...The creditors woulda got more from the local junk sisters as scrap at $ 4.3M here...Obviously they could”nt meet the terms set forth as a “ qualified “ bidder...Let UPFRONT here be a lesson for those who misinterpreted the term...sir...BTW...Shares are still uncancelled...intact and safe...Just checked...
I don”t believe they would continue an research project and continue to use a component that would no longer be available for future events that makes no sense at all…
Wholly chit ! …This round of DD drop is precise and quite overwhelming to say the least sir…Shocking information in fact…Many thanks …Your contributions and DD to this board are greatly appreciated…
Good question sir..I don”t think they pulled it out of thin air though..lol...
That was a good DD watch...greatly appreciated..
Yep...Lets wrap up another week of shares being uncancelled, intact and safe...most definitely...
Incredible DD...as usual..sir...How many times have you settled this now with all your DD and evidence..Greatly appreciated..
I”m not surprised being the shares remain uncancelled , intact and obviously safe…Some great DD by the way…sir…
I guess your interpretation of the monitors reports vary from others here…If you feel you did the right thing concerning this stock…so be it…we been down this road already…G.L.
Nah..looks like some of you did”nt read the provisions in determining “ qualified bidder “ necessity..It was very transparent regarding the qualification process…
Absolutely ! The “ qualified bidders “ must have met the requirements you mentioned in your post and as per the monitors report…to be even considered…
Okay then…so you can’t name a new supplier to the components which are “ essential “ in operating the plant should they resume an bio succinic acid operation…other than they sought assurances from the petitioner to those components…
Obviously you can”t supply a newer supplier name in providing the components…cause they were already assured of the components from the petitioner should they resume a bio succinic acid operation…BTW…LCY NEVER asserted they had retained a new component supplier…So why would anyone assume or let alone entertain such a notion…LCY bought the operations…Bioamber wouldsupply the components which are “ essential “ ( extremely important; absolutely necessary ) in operating the plant….That’s where it”s at unless you or anyone else here…have information inconsistent or differential with that monitors report…
Can anyone show a new supplier and not just suggest the purchaser sought a new supplier to those components…I hardly doubt it…but let’s just put that out there..for the sake of those who suggest that…SMH..
No…They clearly stated they needed the components…in which they never purchased …however sought assurances they would be available…if you disagree who is the so called new supplier ..Likely you can”t cause it”s common knowledge they retained assurances to those components…They purchaser admitted they needed them
So what…3 yrs- 5 yrs…We know they need those components and needed assurances for the resumption of bio succinic acid…Got a new supplier name…doubt it…cause they need the components…
Just what they said...They needed assurances to those bomponents should they resume a bio succinic acid operation...It”s that simple...This fact is undeniable...it”s in black and white...
Yep..LCY will benefit too...Good thing they sought assurances to the components from bioamber that are “ essential ( extremely important; absolutely necessary ) in operating the plant....
“ I know some of the folks there “…ahh haa haa..lmfao ….Good one !…sir…BIOAQ for the W….
Dead stocks will never continue to trade after a CCAA process closure…Where”s Hyman?…We all know this…
Again…If you truly believe a stock will continue to trade for over 13 months upon a CCAA proceedings closure…and never retain a future value..You likely have unfortunately miscalculated a potential worth…The obligations to the parties involved have greatly contributed in potential appreciation of these intact shares..
Yep…The better understanding of the CCAA role should have been beneficial to all here…as Hyman indicated on many occasions here…fundamentally concerning “ restructure “..The first indication was the purpose of CCAA…Secondly to allow the trading of shares to continue for over a year upon closure of the agreement…All parties including Bioamber…Pwc..CCAA and other parties involved are obligated to disclose and / or cease trading upon any discovery of shares being compromised in any specific manner regarding would be purchasers / sellers of the stock upon closure…We all are aware of this and the potential repercussions concerning the parties involved in that transactions…The hodge podge “ of shares being no good is inconsistent as per my portfolio also..saying shares are no good is to the likes of locating an old undocumented sulphur well at this point…GLTA…
Well…They sought assurances it will be available…as it is “ essential “ ( extremely important; absolutely necessary should they resume a bio succinic acid operation…That pretty much determines the continued needs from the Petitioner…
I don”t recall the monitors report stating “ they did not want them” …yawn…I do recall them seeking assurances to those components though..either way…They wanted them…obviously…
Thanks Eagle ….sir …for the 4th and precise assignment add drop..That pretty much should glue any doubts out there together…
It”s to bad the Purchaser never bought the components that were “ essential “ ( extremely important; absolutely necessary ) in operating the plant …Atleast we do know they sought assurances to those components from the Petitioner should they resume a bio succinic acid operation….Yep….Sounds like “ best interests “ of all stakeholders to me…
Nah….CSCS presented their facts very clearly…very seasoned in presenting facts to say the least…
Yep….Last I read from CSCS…Jet ski”s and speedboats were in order for holders of this stock in future…The DD in their posts was most outstanding and a nourishment of knowledge…It would make no sense for CSCS to continue posting or convince anyone here to resist forfeiture of shares likely….why bother…However I do disagree somewhat in the last post and oversight of at least one item…New tractor…soon…
Shares are intact and uncancelled...That does not constitute dead by any means...as some here claim to be the case...
The evidence of your DD is striking and most overwhelming !..sir...This definitely should settle any doubt Bioamber exists..
I”m just the messenger and reading the STA...The purchaser DID seek assurances to the components that they did not purchase...It”s in the STA agreement...
Unless someone can explain how some other components from who knows magically came into play...lets be reasonable here...
It was made very clear the components were “ essential “ ( extremely important; absolutely necessary ) should the purchaser resume a bio succinic operation....That is cut and dried...and acknowledged by the monitor...
Well then it would be just an old piece of pipe ready for a torch...without those components...in which the Purchaser never purchased..but DID seek assurances they would be available...so I guess we will all continue to wait to see....
Well then fair enough...Always looking for views or opinions outside the box...some appreciated...some not...However it”s in my view the Purchaser never bought the components that were “ essential “ in operating the plant as clearly stated in the STA...However were assured by the Petitioner to those components should they resume a bio succinic acid operation according to the monitor...Additionally I don”t see anything being shipped out of that plant since the sale of the company...The same old trailer is still sitting on that dock since the sale...
It would absolutely make no sense to seek assurances to components that are “ essential “ in resuming bio succinic acid operations…The shares are also intact and uncancelled…The CUSIP is only suspended…Do you have any evidence to substantiate them to never hold a value ?
That is Purchaser...apologies to all....
It”s to bad the Petitioner never bought the components which are “ essential “ ( extremely important; absolutely necessary )in operating the plant...Good thing though; The Petitioner sought assurances to those components should they eventually resume a bio succinic acid operation...
Yep....Got that there right Dog !! Oh boy ! Throw the darn bone !
Yep…Thanks for the link to that library from CSCS…The non fiction section of course….