InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 8
Posts 1223
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/12/2018

Re: I-Glow post# 72616

Saturday, 05/25/2019 4:14:38 AM

Saturday, May 25, 2019 4:14:38 AM

Post# of 143873
Not to be too simplistic here but responding to the comment regarding today’s court order.

___________________________

“Bioamber shareholders didn't win anything - the court approved the liquidation of assets - and that happened”
___________________________

Question-
What did this particular shareholder request of the court this date and what relief did the court provide?

Answer-
A particular set(s) of contracts to be reviewed by the shareholders counsel so they could examined (full scope). PWC was ordered by the court to turn the specific requested items over. The request was granted. These are some of the same items that the shareholders attorney has been requesting for nearly 8 months. Just for expediencies sake alone, PWC could have complied and had this process completed in those past nearly 8 months of time.

Looking at PWC, they are the ones “charged” by the court to walk this process through the system. I believe if anything, the court did something beneficial to PWC to address some previous (IMO) missteps by PWC. It’s called exposure. That’s getting off into to the weeds too much because it’s just that an opinion that me addressed through legal means at another time.

Shares are safe.

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.