Replies to post #109928 on BioAmber Inc fka BIOAQ

[Real McCoy]

I didn't say it was inaccurate. I said the data was not up to date with the failure of the recapitalization and liquidation of Bioamber. See the table of contents:



See the dates in common?

No, with this proven, AGAIN, can you PLEASE provide any evidence from the Monitor's reports or otherwise, dated AFTER the publicly reported failure of the SISP, that shows any notion of a "second transaction"?

[Brucebannerr]

The simple fact it has the dead debt ridden shells name on it proves its inaccurate. Im really surprised some worthless shareholders haven't been buying up these garbage reports. They fell for the second transaction fantasy . Why not throw a little more money away.

[toncatmad]

There is not one single second transaction mentioned in the monitors reports.
What was mentioned is that if the company was sold as a whole in the SISP’s then they could have set it as a 1 or 2 part transaction. It is also stated that the common shares could have been wiped out by amending the article of incorporation if needed. None of those things were needed as the SISP’s failed and the company was liquidated.
Now that we have that out of the way that the part you’re are referring to in the monitors reports was BEFORE the company was liquidated and before the SISP’s failed to catch a buyer for the company as a whole. So now that we know that was beforehand and that after the 6th report was unsealed we know this was a liquidation and not a sale.
Will you provide a link to proof of this second transaction or will you keep stalling and deflecting because of the fact that you have ZERO proof and already know you lost your investment