I am looking at this very objectively, the same as you do with all of your posts/analysis.....
If it was a requirement, then why did the court accept the fees and the petition?? The fact that immediately there after Neiger wrote a letter indicating he did not sign, nor is he representing SPNG says something..... these guys aren't new to this subject domain!! Probably, the dates will be pushed back until all the errors and omissions have been corrected. After all this is a company in distress and so I believe the court will try to help out as long as they are able to comply with rules and precedences(don't want to set a bad precedence).
I think I have addressed all of these in my above response. Once again, the gist of my response is 'flexibility' and not setting a bad precedence.
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.