Why wouldn't unsecured be included? Well my fine feathered friend, "unsecured" debt is still ahead of equity holders in any payout. So whether you'd like to focus on secured over unsecured, they both apply the same to former shareholders. Plus +$101,000,000 million is the amount outstanding, not including tax obligations, charges, fees, etc. That figure is creditor's owed only. Shareholders are factually last in line.
Why would I not include all of the debts owed? Why do you think all of the debts were in the proceedings?
None of it matters at this point anyway since the company was liquidated almost 6 years ago and the liquidation ended going on 5 years ago and that result was leaving all of the creditors impaired the secured and unsecured creditors were all left impaired.
No company will ever come and buy a dead, debt ridden, asset less empty nameless shell that not only has old debts attached. Why would they want to square away all of those liabilities to get nothing but an empty shell in return?
Please explain what value the FKA BioAmber Inc shell has other than the negative value of all the old debt.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
