Replies to post #45012 on BioAmber Inc (fka BIOAQ)

[broken_clock]

Just to add on to that. This is from PwC:



And from the attorneys in the US ch 15:



But if you read through the earlier post from today there will always be a spin on these legal documents. Generous and rosy monitors and lawyers. truly comical

[kevroc]

And let's not forget, PWC called this sales transaction a SISP themselves:

PWC managed THIS SALE and INVESTOR SOLICITATION PROCESS within the "liquidation scenario."

I wonder why they didn't just say:
"... the Monitor managed the liquidation, pursuant to its expanded powers..."

Instead... they "managed the SISP", they did NOT manage a liquidation.

Please see excerpt provided in broken_clock post #44320

[TenKay]

"What you say is true only in the case of an actual "liquidation" (or pennies on the dollar for some assets only), but all clues are pointing to this not being the case here"

a) PWC refers to it as a liquidation
b) the Court filings refer to it as a liquidation
c) they are ONLY selling the assets and using the money to pay off some creditors (definition of "liquidation")
d) and the assets are being sold for pennies on the dollar...which (as you say) is usually what happens in a liquidation

No "clues" required.

It's what the documents say.

[Penman1]

In regards to Longstrong's message here, let's recall Sorhay's message posted above. These messages complement each other.

In the PWC reports we need to distinguish between "boilerplate" phraseology and actual new information.

Meanwhile, we know these things:

1. We know the resolution of the BioAmber "liquidity crisis" caused by a creditor calling in a debt has been adjudicated in Canada by a Canadian judge under Canada's CCAA law.
2. We know the "deal" is done.
3. We know who made the deal.
4. We know that, for some unspecified and unexpected reason, the details of the "deal" are still under seal, except for the fact that apparently the real assets of the holding company, BioAmber, Inc. (USA) were sold for $4.3M, excluding Canadian assets.
5. We know BioAmber stock has not been pulled or replaced from the market and is still selling.
6. As far as we know, the former CEO of BioAmber has not sold his shares.

I won't stipulate this as a fact, but as a presupposition: Canada's CCAA law deals with these kinds of "liquidity crises" differently than the U.S. Bankruptcy Laws.

And I won't stipulate this as a fact, but as a presupposition: The resolution of company "liquidity crises" in concert with the CCAA Law has been know to ensure that "all stakeholders" including those who invested in the company by purchasing unsecured common stock are not excluded from the "deal" through mediation by the court.

These are most of the key facts we know. Feel free to add other known "facts" to the list. Now I'll let the experts debate what they mean.