Directly addressed the underlined words, those being that the company was anticipating $0 in uncollectible, or bad debt. This is what anyone would expect from a company aiming to sell a restructure plan and continue operations. My comment that they likely couldn’t collect it all when things shifted to a distressed/liquidation plan is utterly consistent.
The company failed, declared bankruptcy, attempted restructure and failed, was liquidated, suspended/deleted and then had its corporate charter revoked. How could echoing the same comments from the Monitor, court, Monitors lawyer and the buyer itself, that the company has been liquidated and rumors of additional deals are completely unfounded, be considered pushing a false narrative?
