Replies to post #117700 on BioAmber Inc fka BIOAQ

[unbeREEvable]

Wow, powerful good... I like ORGN

[Pnypnchr]

Koan IS King here! Thank you Koan.
I have governed myself accordingly and there is NOT anyone here going to change that.

[trader59]

Nah…

Taking this on point by point on a factual basis:

Which is it? There are no NDA's or there is "only one"? The NDA pertaining to Crane was created after the alleged transaction closed

That was not an NDA, it was an order from the judge to Crane to not disclose the information in the contract.

No shit! NDA's don't let people lie. They simply provide that people, businesses, lawyers, or courts do not disclose certain material information to the public. That means not saying certain things. Lying means saying things which are not true. There is a GRAND CANYON of difference between the two.

If there were an NDA hiding some super secret mega-million dollar transaction, then all the information in the court records documenting the complete liquidation of the company for $4.34M, that being the total proceeds of that liquidation, the resignation of the directors and officers, the termination of the remaining employees, the shutdown of the company, would be a lie. All of it. They cannot lie and say all there is for the secured creditors is $5.2M out of a total debt of $40M. They cannot lie and say there’s nothing for the unsecured creditors. They cannot lie and say there’s nothing for the equity holders.

Ahhh, so now it is being framed as a "complete" liquidation. What is wrong with an "exceptional" liquidation? That would be more consistent with how the Canadian judge defined it. One could copy and paste the actual words the judge used, but it has been copied and pasted so many times it is almost embarrassing to highlight that "complete" has never been uttered by any judge in reference to BioAmber Inc.'s case.

What would you call a liquidation that sold everything, including the plant, patents, trademarks, tools, movable equipment, etc, everything but some office equipment in the US, some inventory and tools? That’s “complete.” Everything of value was sold, and the company had nothing for business operations afterwards.

The more plausible and common sense answer is that if BioAmber Inc. shares were off the proverbial table, then that would have been easily and publicly dealt with by LAW and in court through either an amendment to articles or an outright share cancellation.

Yet somehow, amazingly, magically, that has never happened.

Every board member, creditor, lawyer and judge involved in the BioAmber Inc. case has never signed off on any such cancellation or any such amendment to articles.

After all, since everything that happened here IS the LAW, why all the secrecy with the fate of the shares? Since it IS the LAW, any share cancellation or amendment to articles would certainly be PUBLIC -- IT CANNOT BE HIDDEN because THAT WOULD BE BANKRUPTCY FRAUD.

Understand?

DO GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY

Shares weren’t “off the table,” the buyer had zero interest in purchasing the company as a going concern, and even if one of those bids contemplated during the SISP had actually happened, the shares would have been cancelled on the spot. Know how I know? Neither of those potential bids covered the debt, all of the proceeds would have gone to creditors.

The Canadian judge couldn’t cancel the shares and PWC and the US judge didn’t, but neither did they discharge the remaining debt. So what? What’s the result? An empty, dead, debt ridden shell company that doesn’t even have an active corporate charter due to non-payment of taxes and that has common shares held by the bagholders under a CUSIP since FINRA suspended it and deleted the ticker. Big win there…

Governing oneself with those shares is uncomplicated. They’ll never trade again, ever.

Since we’re determined to pretend this secret mega-million dollar transaction exists, answer one simple question:

Why’d a company with a mere $100M of total liabilities go bankrupt if it is worth $100’s of millions of dollars? Why’d their creditors and the courts let them get away with it?

[THEDOG 17]

He got you Trader sorry ! Nice post Koan!!! Good Things Are Coming Very Very Soon!!!!!

[Real McCoy]

I see this was already roasted but given its dishonest and could succeed in garnering some false hope, I'll double down.

"Which is it? There are no NDA's or there is "only one"? The NDA pertaining to Crane was created after the alleged transaction closed."

Glad to see you are willing and able to nitpick this language. I hope you will be willing to answer my question below.

"NDA's don't let people lie. They simply provide that people, businesses, lawyers, or courts do not disclose certain material information to the public. That means not saying certain things. Lying means saying things which are not true. There is a GRAND CANYON of difference between the two."

Needless to say, an NDA does not allow you to say a company was liquidated if it was actually recapitalized or purchased.

"Ahhh, so now it is being framed as a "complete" liquidation. What is wrong with an "exceptional" liquidation? That would be more consistent with how the Canadian judge defined it. One could copy and paste the actual words the judge used, but it has been copied and pasted so many times it is almost embarrassing to highlight that "complete" has never been uttered by any judge in reference to BioAmber Inc.'s case."

You can read the APA and Monitors reports detailing the SISP attempt, Liquidation and approval, and subsequent lengths the Monitor went to to make sure shareholders understand they get nothing and come up with your own description of the liquidation. It was a complete liquidation, an exceptional liquidation, and a liquidation, in the same way your post below was complete garbage, exceptional garbage, and just plain garbage.

"The more plausible and common sense answer is that if BioAmber Inc. shares were off the proverbial table, then that would have been easily and publicly dealt with by LAW and in court through either an amendment to articles or an outright share cancellation.

Yet somehow, amazingly, magically, that has never happened.

Every board member, creditor, lawyer and judge involved in the BioAmber Inc. case has never signed off on any such cancellation or any such amendment to articles.

After all, since everything that happened here IS the LAW, why all the secrecy with the fate of the shares? Since it IS the LAW, any share cancellation or amendment to articles would certainly be PUBLIC -- IT CANNOT BE HIDDEN because THAT WOULD BE BANKRUPTCY FRAUD."

No one has any obligation to give you the closure you need in the format you choose to state you need it. FINRA deleted the ticker and terminally suspended the CUSIP. The Monitor told you. The Purchaser told you. The Company told you in its last press release, and there hasn't been a peep or financial statement in 3 years.

Question for you: did this "deal" go down in 2018 or does it remain to be done?

Note- if it went down in 2018 you'd have to explain how the shares kept trading into 2019 even though they were "purchased". And if its going down ahead, you'd have to explain who is negotiating it and approving it.

[Brucebannerr]

Key words " since the CCAA and BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS ENDED"
Now we all saw that NDA the judge ordered . Where's the fantasy court ordered NDA ?

[Psychodman]

Bioamber Inc shareholders and others which will all be revealed were scammed. If anyone did set up a scheme this massive, there’s not a cell deep enough for them to rot. Right now, there could be as many as 15 entities involved with numerous persons from each entity. Time will tell if any perpetrated a fraud and who all participated. Sure looks like it stretches all the way to Asia.

Addressing present false documentation to courts- People do it all the time. Everyone always thinks they will be the ones to get away with it. Even the major entity that’s been caught before.

Where is MA hiding??

I’m sure those statutes like RICO were created for giggles because No one intentionally sets up an organization to commit patterns of fraud.

Those law makers must have been out of their mind to have statutes for fraud and worse that would never be used.

Just my humble opinion