The company will defend itself as long as there's stock to sell in the hands of their convertible note holders not yet sold. The Trustee's position is stronger with the additional 14 months of inactivity and the fact the term sheet is still unsigned. The judge will still rule on "legal," but with the twist that the viability of the plan has been harmed by the inactivity and the fact the "plan" proposes to hand over cash the company just doesn't have, not to mention the amounts owed to the CEO and another for "running" a dead company. I'd call it a coin flip.
This is no sort of investment. The Trustee is telling the truth, straight from the CEO's own words, when he says the company has been dead for nearly 6 years and has nothing that a real business would have (employees, location, bank account, assets). Even if you take the "plan" at face value, they're proposing to start from scratch with the same idea that they went bankrupt doing, but with 3B shares in the O/S and funding coming from another toxic lender, funding they won't get unless they do a registration for the discounted stock they hand over to the lender so it is immediately free trading. That's right in the term sheet. Why on earth would anybody with a great "idea" want to start from scratch in this horrible financial condition when you could be debt free and with zero shares in the O/S??
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
