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.
No, that would be insane. The court ordered the contents of the agreement to be kept confidential until the deal closed in both its form as the Purchase Agreement as an inserted Exhibit in another document.
The Purchase Agreement is the same thing as the Exhibit, but the drafter of this confidentiality provision wanted to shut down the opportunity for someone to be able to leak the contents of the Purchase Agreement by virtue of leaking the unredacted Appendix to the Monitor's report.
The Monitor has been released, meaning there is no one waiting around on some additional deal to be revealed.
Wow. Whoever told you this was the case should be shot.
Now you're mashing up the APA with a snippet.
Yes, my comments follow from the APA, as always.
I don't understand why this is so hard. In the APA excerpt you've quoted it describes a "Liquidation Team". So yes, again, OF COURSE, the company was liquidated. Common knowledge. OBVIOUSLY. Is it still active? I guess so, technically. It sits there with no money, assets, employees, and with all the debt.
This will only get darker for you to keep asking weird, wrong rhetorical questions that aim to mud up what was reported with absolutely zero answers yourself on what you propose may happen/has happened that is inconsistent with what has been reported. Soon the class action will be closed, and nothing. Then the 2 years will pass, and nothing. Why not just throw up your hands? Turn these folks loose?
You're the one saying you have an "opinion" that is valid in the face of one presented in detail to the specific contrary, only you don't know what it is (when, who, how, etc).
Unfortunately no
ANYONE who claims to have read the documents and does not believe the company was liquidated and will never trade again is either unbelievably bad at this or simply not being truthful in their assessment. Denial will do that.
The word “interpretation” has no place here or in any bankruptcy proceeding. The role of the Monitor is to clearly and plainly set forth the facts to the investing public.
The nature of these institutional buys are algorithm based exposure to certain industries based on a strategy devised and sold by the institutions to their investor bases. There is not a human on the other end of these institutional buys carefully weighing the merit of investing in Verb. It just isn't there yet.
Exactly.
Notice how no one will provide a date by which they will admit this is over.
No it’s on to this “2 years from date or merger” absolute complete and utter hopeless hogwash. The 2 years is a reference to a requirement that you continue to operate the assets purchased for 2 years in order to receive the tax benefits. Not remotely a reference to a (snickers) 2 year delay to report a transaction for a delisted company.
1) there is no new name of the corporations, the liquidated corporations are dead as described, but there are surviving assets to be renamed and folded into the purchaser
2) I think you are answering your own questions here. Their obligation is to use "commercially reasonable efforts" to change the name, and there is still snippets brought out here with the name still on them, precisely because there are no employees to do anything about it.
This really is over. Turn these folks loose.
The forecast period is 2018-2028, so while they’ve tried to freshen up the report with mentions of Covid-19, the data was assembled prior to the failed restructure and ultimate liquidation of BioAmber. Which makes sense because of course the company was liquidated.
Hey you could all accept what was announced here and I promise there would be absolutely 0 interest in the board. Most have. Just a couple more I think.
Not getting a lot of takers when. Or how. Or who. In fact, there is not one assertion I can think of that has been presented for any of those basics. Should prob give up.
Can we get you down for a date over the next few months where you’ll accept nothing is going to happen, or are you also saying “soon” with no actual belief anything will happen soon?
Haha, so the CEO of this company can refer to a message board poster as a "bed wetter" but if someone postulates that a company with a history of delays may delay a launch they are going to be investigated by the SEC? Unhealthy thought.
Looks like another “event” date passing by with a whimper.
I’d like for this to be the last time, but it probably won’t be. I’ll say it again, since you’re implying.
I am part of an evil short organization. Remember this company had $3k in short positions when it ceased trading, and that position needs to be protected.
You’ll see representatives of my evil short organization at all the bankrupt companies where posters claim for years that someday they’ll be compensated, while visitors stop in and snicker.
You’re down for “2022”. Bad faith, like I said, but at least you’ll be done at some point.
And in case it needs to be said again, there is no chance anything will happen before then.
Great! Can we get you down for a date by which this will happen or you will accept that it won’t?
You also should be turning these folks loose. You know there's never been another stock halted that has restarted more than a year later, and there's no hope of that here either. Turn them loose!
You must be kidding.
95%+ of value was lost here and you’re talking about losing money due to bad advice by not buying?
That wouldn’t be “very very soon”. It wouldn’t be “very soon”. It wouldn’t even be “soon”. Right?
And no company has ever resumed trading one year after delisting, nor has a secret transaction ever taken one year to announce. I know several will still be saying a deal is happening when it gets to 2022, but as I’ve said, that’s just bad faith.
While I consider than range to be bad faith, I suppose we can mark you down as giving up at the end of 2022. I am certainly positive nothing will happen before that date. Or after, of course.
Very..very soon
So we can expect you to accept you were wrong if nothing happens within a month, does that sound fair?
If it’s private no one will have the document. That’s what private means. But that’s probably why you’re asking because you just want to keep punting with absolutely nothing to support you. Literally nothing.
Why don’t you just provide a signed STA, which is the only document you have keep citing, or else admit this is over?
You’re asking for a lease agreement involving a private company.
Why not just accept when the court approved the liquidation?
I know it’s impossible. Especially given what we learned from the APA. Which is why I keep saying it is only the address in the patent holders name for patent purposes.
Are you saying there was a secret transaction but only the author of this patent address document knows?????? I can’t image you could seriously think that, so I’ll assume not.
It’s also been proven many times that it was not signed.
It’s also been proven the company was liquidated for 4.34m and you haven’t heard from them in 2 years.
No I don’t have a copy of the lease with regard to the patent address for the liquidated company, do you? Should I? Should anyone?
But- I can prove to you that the liquidated company has no employees or money- how’s that?
You’d like someone to provide evidence they are not paying a lease? They have no money, no employees, but someone changes the address for a patent that was purchased from them and it gives you cruel hope. You know they had no money and no employees at the time of the liquidation. How did they raise more money without any filings?
Seriously give this up. There is just nothing.
This isn’t a glitch, it’s an old contract written before the company went bankrupt and got liquidated.
You’ve been misled.
I’m working to get you turned loose.
You’re getting the examples mixed up.
Why are you asserting how the purchaser should organize its purchased assets? And why on earth would you assert something that directly conflicts with the reported outcome? Why won’t you accept your roasting and turn these poor folks loose??
All wrong.
You wouldn’t be changing the deceased persons address. You would be changing the address of the beneficiary of the warranty.
IE - turn these guys loose!!!
Remember he got roasted after posting that.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=158545885
I hope he does the right thing and turns you loose.
And if they bought the company there wouldn’t be a need for 2 addresses in the first instance. They are organizing the assets they bought, what do you care how or why? You know for a fact the company wasn’t bought or else you wouldn’t have any shares. Would you please give this up? It will only get more embarassing. Turn these folks loose. They are blindly following this crap, which you know is useless.
Mistake bringing up that judge, since you know with 100% certainty that when she signs off on the class action absolutely nothing will happen.
You could: a) go digging for snippets that are inconsistent with the stated result that has been so ruthlessly confirmed for 2 years or b) turn em loose!!!!!!!! Allow the die hards closure. You have nothing that is compelling, nothing at all.