Mr. McCoy, what is there to agree or disagree? What to you mean by "liquidated", such a negative word?
Do you mean, "liquidated" as in "Stalin liquidate millions of Kulaks in the 1930s," meaning they died and disappeared forever? If this is your sense of the word, then NO!, I do not agree with your statement. For you're implying that like Kulaks losing all their property through Stalin's liquidation process, they had no need for the property, since after their liquidation, their previously owned property now had not value for them.
BioAmber is more than a name of a company. It's referent includes its scientific and economic assets as measured by shareholder investments over years. Seen in this light, "liquidation" does not mean "all BioAmber value" was annihilated by PWC and those whose interests PWC served thought the legal process.
Indeed, BioAmber was not annihilated, which you mean by "liquitated," but it's technologies live on, and so does value of its shares which shareholders invested in. As a matter of fact, this is why the CCAA process exists: to preserve company value through a cooperative process with other interested parties.
You do agree, Sir, this is the intention of the CCAA process, right?
