Replies to post #32046 on Sears Holdings Corp. (fka SHLDQ)

[chemist72]

Question: So you're saying no shc assets have been legally transferred to Transform Holdco because there has been no "closing" yet on the deal that was agreed to in court?

If that is true, what is the hold up here? Is a POR required for a closing date, thus making the transfer of assets official?

Sorry if I'm confused here. Just trying to figure out where things stand currently in the BK process and what are the most important steps left to be concluded. TIA

[bar1080]

JTFM said: "so, all said and done, the above is why i don't think commons will survive."

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=147416477

[dragon52]

So... What you are saying and we cannot verify this

Because it was a conversation between you and the said author, which he has not clarified nor retracted what was printed... but you are stating that he "agrees" with you. Nice.

i don't agree with your conclusion and here's why.

"after this article came out i corresponded with the author and we exchanged a number of emails.

his conclusion was consistent with mine which is that the continuity of interest requirement necessary for the acquisition to qualify as a 'G' reorganization can be met if the requisite amount of stock is issued solely to selected creditors, such as lampert.

he also agreed the NOLs will be inherited by transform holdco because of 'G' reorganization.

his article summarized the "G" reorganization requirements. i have inserted in each of these requirements how they have been satisfied..."

So, which is it? Reverse Merger or Hostile Take Over or neither... Eddie just gives up his shares and they are worth nothing...