InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 5
Posts 2099
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/04/2007

Re: HighRider post# 46730

Sunday, 08/21/2011 7:56:29 AM

Sunday, August 21, 2011 7:56:29 AM

Post# of 60938
No it did not - not in chapter 11 reorganization. Diac would have been a creditor in line like everyone else. Secured by the judgement but nothing more. Most arrangements have some language that threatens automatic turnover but it does not preempt federal law. Part of the point of bankruptcy is to protect ALL the creditors, not allow one to steal all the assets. We could have then appealed the judgement as well as sued him for interference. Heck, the way this thing was being spun now we could have even tried to appeal the original judgement. As the only asset of the company the Judge would not allow turnover until it was clear that they company had no other way to settle its debts. With pending litigation against T-Mobile the judge would have protected us until the time that case was over. Years if need be.

The only reason I can see for not wanting to take this path is that it would have opened the internal actions of the company up to public scrutiny. We would have actually seen how management worked.

Water under the bridge. Now the rest of you have better figure out how to protect what little, very little you have left.
Join InvestorsHub

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.