InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,127.79
(
1.26%
)
US TECH 100
17,466.40
(
0.27%
)
Dow Jones
38,675.68
(
0.00%
)
Brent Oil
83.39
(
0.31%
)
Bitcoin
63,954.11
(
-0.07%
)
Post# of 143885
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (2) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (2) Next 10 Prev Next

trader59

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 191
Posts 16401
Boards Moderated 8
Alias Born 01/29/2018

trader59

Member Level

Re: 101King_Kong101 post# 66787

Sunday, 03/31/2019 6:35:31 PM

Sunday, March 31, 2019 6:35:31 PM

Post# of 143885
And PWC thought the buyer would want the contracts for those non-assertion rights, even prepared a motion to have them assigned to that buyer, providing they'd pay the royalties that were due for the time the plant ran in 2018:

https://www.pwc.com/ca/en/car/bioamber/assets/bioamber-033_092418.pdf

Problem was, the buyer changed his mind, and elected not to take them, could have had them for just ponying up the $409k in royalties. Guess those contracts aren't such a windfall after all.

The NOL's are worthless, BioAmber has no operations, and cannot be purchased to use the NOL's.
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (2) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (2) Next 10 Prev Next

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.

Sign Up