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.
The same thing. The liquidation was the second proceeding after the failed restructure (the first proceeding).
I’m waiting for answers at the end of every exchange you get stumped. Do you really want and need me to link the 6th report with the unredacted APA and then go through the mind numbing exercise of debating whether Transaction is different than the Purchase Agreement or whatever completely debunked nonsense you have in mind?
They aren’t worried. The judge effectively certified and indemnified them.
Gibberish. There are no documents missing. The APA is the Transaction and it’s been released in its entirety. And then everyone went home.
Yeah. You busted them. Then they got the judge to sign off on a clear APA and for good measure wrote the 10th Monitors report to beg shareholders not to believe anything other than the documented liquidation.
This is a trick question. There are no missing docs in an organized bankruptcy in a publicly traded company, at least, no missing documents with material information reasonably expected to have an impact on the share price.
What was posted is irrelevant as, like it or not, we’ve all moved into an era post-ruling of that case. And the result is all completely public, no matter what the company thought it was worth or hoped would happen before the bankruptcy proceedings began.
And I am now formally requesting a preview of the new theory that will arrive May 21,
This has no impact on the agreed and documented purchase price and/or on shareholders as of the time of trading cessation. I promise on May 21 a new theory will have to be dug up. And one no doubt will.
Nothing other than 4.34M makes any sense. That’s what was reported.
4.34m is the better than nothing. That was the best option. It could have been a lot worse. They could have waited to declare bankruptcy until a point where there were much greater liabilities than what they ended up with.
I haven’t followed any of the twitter action. I am absolutely 100% certain in the outcome and I would call it embarrassing at best and outfight nefarious at worst for anyone to claim otherwise.
Yes it’s over. There is no DD, that concept doesn’t make sense given the outcome. I’m only here observing the insanity.
This has been debunked and explained so many times and was ultimately settled by a letter from and LCY lawyer, which was overkill and redundant.
Yes, this has been shed light upon with a powerful blinding spotlight many times. What was described was that granting the bankruptcy relief of accepting the 4.34M keeping the creditors at bay and not pursuing intrusive legal action was in the best interest of all the stakeholders and the benefit of such relief outweighed the hardship of granting it.
Interesting, I had not understood that the debt wasn't discharged at the end of the bankruptcy. I suppose if it was it would have necessitated cancellation, so your statement makes sense as to why there wasn't a forced cancelation.
It was a bankruptcy with an initial desire to seek restructure. That failed so it went to liquidation. It is not cancelled because the executives resigned when restructure failed as they were not needed through the liquidation portion. Now there is no one to cancel the stripped shares, so FINRA did what was in their power and permanently suspended.
What? Wikipedia aggregates and mirrors other publicly reported information. This wasn’t a restructure. The best bid was accepted in the liquidation- that was in the best interest of all stakeholders. And the benefit of granting the bankruptcy relief- namely the allowance of an organized process to accept the best bid possible- did outweigh the potential hardships in the alternative. But make no mistake- you lost any investment here.
The information on Wiki is consistent with the Monitors reports, not a replacement for it. A summary would be a good way of putting it.
When the Monitor said the Longs weren’t getting paid and the judges approved and secured creditors did not object, it means the Longs aren’t getting paid. And then later LCY said specifically the Longs weren’t getting paid for good measure.
You realize everything on that page comes from the monitor reports right? So really it’s do you believe the losing bidder over the Monitor reports, which included approval from the judges?
It is truly an opinion pulled out of nowhere.
That write up looked correct to me. Wikis policy is to change or remove items that can’t be verified or are contradicted by public info. It’s not infallible because it’s limited by the quality of its sources. But either way, there will be no correction to the wiki Bioamber page as it all came from the public reports often referenced here.
There was a buy out? But most here are bragging about the suspended shares they still own. Why or how could anyone believe this garbage?
The "documents" could not possibly be more overwhelmingly condemning of any ludicrous possibility of shareholders being paid.
It was a gamble prior to the restructuring attempt. It has not been a gamble since. There are no gambles in court supervised Monitor reporting for public companies.
Not possible. And insane.
Even if you humor the ludicrous impossibility of a share purchase, if a company bought shares in another, the purchase amount would not impact the income statement in the form of a deeper loss, it would hit the cash flow and balance sheet.
Understood and agreed.
It is unreal that the remaining waning resistance to acceptance is “in your face! It’s liquidated, suspended and voided, but not canceled!”
Subsequent to this quote, an orderly and publicly reported process was conducted to try to restructure the company. It was reported that the restructure attempt failed and all employees were let go/resigned. Then an orderly and publicly reported process was conducted to liquidate the company, and the results of that were reported. Then trading was suspended, the ticker deleted, the charter of the company voided.
There have been a handful of companies come back from SEC suspension, usually always after correcting a filing delay. Almost always those trading resumption’s are short lived anyway. Never had a company resumed trading after FiNRA suspension. It’s been explained why here many times by the same folks who’ve outlined how all these events- resignation, restructure attempt, liquidation, suspension/delisting and voiding- are completely consistent with the public Monitors reports. There is 0 indication anyway to be found that contradicts the reports or the event trajectory.
Who’s “they”? The “they” who would have to cancel the stock don’t work on, for, or on behalf of the company anymore. Another “they” - Finra, did what’s in its power to prevent harm, which is suspend it and delete the ticker forever. I’m not sure why permanent suspension and deletion, followed by charter voiding, is a badge of honor better than cancellation.
But what if the bankruptcy is closed and over and no restructuring has occurred?
Saying you get more confidence as the waning nonsensical theories get debunked, and predicted things like delisting, voiding, LCY's written confirmation that they're moved on, etc, is just intellectually dishonest, in my opinion.
In order to keep the dream alive you cannot commit to a date. So no one will give one. Nor any kind of details about the proposed transaction. Nor any proof whatsoever than anyone is working on it, for or on behalf of the company.
Is this confidence that the "second transaction" is happening on this date? Nothing will happen of course. So is there no second transaction when nothing happens by end of month?
This is just complete wreckless nonsense.
So in other words, the scope and intent of the CCAA included restructure. Too bad it failed and the CCAA is now closed. So there was never some weird liquidation within CCAA and then recap outside of it- which is generally what is being argued by the few remaining hopefuls.
Me too.
There is absolutely no chance whatsoever. Never has been.
The person who gave you that analogy bamboozled you.
The company doesn’t have anyone working for or on behalf of it to cancel said shares.