Synergy Pharmaceuticals Inc fka SGYPQ

[Opti Mist]

here is another update from the Facebook group:

Emrah Coban shared a link.
Conversation Starter · 3 hrs
Here is an update from our valuable study group member Abhishek. He recused himself from this facebook group for some reasons that i might disclose in the future. Ok, i am posting here what he has shared in the other FB group. This can give you more insight on the last hearing.
Meanwhile, let me say this, forming of the official equity at complete discretion of US Trustee but behind the scenes, our study group is doing all it can to expedite the process.
Here is the update from Abhishek.
[Edited]
If you guys did not notice already. Synergy already filed a revised motion for stalking horse bid procedures.
https://cases.primeclerk.com/Synergy/Home-DownloadPDF…
This looks to be right out of their playbook. If you guys remember, they did the same with the second interim order, where they faced opposition from UCC and ad-hoc committee and they revised the motion right before the hearing to find common ground (went from 12m DIP to 8m and 110m roll-up to 16m roll-up).
Getting to the merit of this amendment. Looks like they have already pushed the auction date by 2 weeks and amended the min "up bid" to be 1 mil (vs 2 mil). This is a good news for us.
While the hearing is still ongoing and we have to wait to see what the outcome is, know that the ad-hoc committee lawyers have enough ammo to push this bid for 4 weeks (we have DIP lender ready to wait till may) and trustee also seems to be convinced by our arguments in her objection.
I'm looking forward to:
1. Get the sale pushed for 4 weeks (I.e. in march).
2. Get an official equity committee formed.
I hope the judge sees what Synergy's lawyers are trying to do here. Fingers crossed.
[Updates]
I did read the wsj article, the amended motion and given the limited updates from hearing today, here's what I'm able to decipher:
1. At some point after all the objections were filed, a compromise or understanding was made between the lawyers and they agreed to these terms.
2. If you see in Synergy's rejoinder, they mentioned that in this motion they are only asking court to set the rules for BHA and sales process, so that marketing can start and objections related to anything more or less are misplaced.
3. With #2 in mind, the amendments made to the bidding procedure are good over all.
4. On one hand, we have lost the cause of getting 4 more weeks, on the other hand, we have gained a few good things.
5. Now there can be partial bids, I.e people can bid for partial assets and Synergy can pick two separate bids from two separate bidders to maximize. This was an objection from L&W and got accommodated. This is good because for ex. a company focusing on cancer therapies will pay more for dolcanatide than BHC or at least there's a chance of this happening.
6. In determining a higher bid, synergy will have to consider severance separate from cash consideration of the bid.
7. In determining better bid they have to consult with consultation parties, which included Jefferies, the UCC's banker. Previously it was on their own discretion. This was again a L&W objection.
8. The amendments now allow bidders to bid not just for sale, but for restructuring as well and Synergy will have to consider it, with consultation parties.
9. Any bid with non-cash considerations will also be allowed. These were all objections by L&W and they are all good.
10. Good faith deposit won't be used to pay SHB immediately etc.
At the end, all our value is in IP, so a fair sale/ chance of restructuring is what we need. The sale process is not pushed out long enough, but I guess the amendments made make this process a lot more competitive. Lets just hope there are lenders\buyers who are ready to restructure\buy this for a lot more.
Note: Again this is my interpretation. I could be wrong. ??
[Update]
Another important point I missed, All the bids need to be delivered to all parties including "Counsel to Official committee of equity SH" (it's a new addition to the list). It give's me a hint that it's at-least being considered and equity committee is also considered consultation party. ??