Replies to post #87640 on BioAmber Inc fka BIOAQ

[youngster-moon]

Judges word: “It is not necessary for the purposes hereof to discuss further this ensuing aspect of the Visolis transaction which resulted in agreements having been reached between secured creditors”

AGREEMENTS?!?!?!
There would not be the need to reach any agreements with secured creditors if the deal is only $4.3M
NO NEED TO DISCUSS FURTHER?!?!
What details is PwC hiding again

THERE IS MORE TO COME CLEARLY

BeSt InTeReSt Of AlLsTaKeHoLdErS doesn’t not result in cancelling shares

[Greenvestments]

They paid 4.34m already and the process hasn't closed yet so wouldn't that mean there's more to pay?
I think the second screenshot is there to point out they are strictly referring to one of the transactions

[Longstrongsilver]

Except they didn’t. UPFRONT is UPFRONT. The only thing the court did was explain that one increased the UPFRONT payment in lieu of “earbout payment” . Literally nowhere in that paragraph or any other does it say in lieu of “the rest of the payment” , “in lieu of any other payment” , and “etc”