Replies to post #25085 on Sunedison Inc. (fka SUNEQ)

[Fangster]

Agree an EC is essential here.
Disagree BK to protect sune - it was filed to protect the creditors from further risk against further losses and gross mismanagement.

[hokieal]

Docket 829 is a great example of the vagueness for me. Yesterday SUNE proposed the sale of some Australia assets (some of which are in BK and some of which are not).

...there are both Debtor Sellers and NonDebtor Sellers (each as defined below) selling their assets in the Sale Transaction...

So they argue that they are hopelessly insolvent based on "the debtor" assets vs. liabilities, yet here is an example of them getting value from the sale of non-debtor assets.

The Debtor Sellers’ Purchased Assets consist primarily of contracts, intellectual property, equipment (including office equipment) and inventory used in the Business (as defined in the APA) to create the platform to sell products to the dealers.

After discussions with the parties that entered into NDAs, including the Buyer, the Debtors determined in their business judgment that the offer by the Buyer was the highest and/or best offer available for the Purchased Assets, and entered into the APA.

So they can clearly and accurately value these assets for sale, but two days ago couldn't value over 10 pages of their own assets (which should include some of the ones for sale here)?

That Equity Committee is needed here before they try a really big sale (such as shares of TERP/GLBL).