InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 16
Posts 888
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/03/2006

Re: trunkmonk post# 1083

Saturday, 03/16/2013 10:10:02 PM

Saturday, March 16, 2013 10:10:02 PM

Post# of 1342
>>they are in BK cause Berg wanted it that way. there were 2 million left in a promisary loan from Berg, valence only needed 1 million more after that to keep the doors open.

I don't mean to nitpik your response - but it's really quiet on here and I think you really did do a good job of pointing out several areas that need flushing out - and I'd love to see a vigorous discussion on many of them. This is a really good one though. Without doubt, this case was thrown into bk purposefully. I think it was Berg's buddy that bought the offending debt just a few months prior at a steep discount. It's a pretty clear sign of the company reaching for a reason to enter. Bankruptcy court - (Chapter 11) as it exists in America is very lenient - for the reason of resuscitating companies - given what was going on in the industry, Valence needed to be in bk court. So there are two reasons to go in to bk in general...both of which are always taken poorly by shareholders....save the company or steal it - really it's both if you are going to steal it. So did Berg throw it in to steal it? To my way of thinking - if that was the case it would have already been over. This case should have been over 3 months ago by all popular accounts - what makes it so truly interesting is that it isn't.

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.