Replies to post #149805 on BioAmber Inc (fka BIOAQ)

[moola26]

Amazing stuff!! We are GOLDEN!!
MAJORITY HOLDING STRONG$$$$

[Lucky77Dice]

Yep...Another outstanding DD post Eagle sir...That pretty much settles this...Additionally..Upfront gonna be a hard lesson for some here..Unfortunately...
Cheers..

[trader59]

PTT Global’s non-binding letter of intent, which they chose not to convert into an actual bid, still would have resulted in shareholders getting nothing had they done so. Their proposed bid range of up to $60M wouldn’t have covered the debt.



LCYB’s original bid included an earnout. Their final bid, the one that was accepted and the transaction closed under, did not.



You really should spend your free time reading the 6th monitor’s report so you’d understand what actually happened instead of wasting it reading LOI’s that have been dead for nearly 7 years.

[THEDOG 17]

Holy cow Eagle what a post !! There you have it bio amber lives on !!! Good Things Coming Very Very Very Soon!

[User-656209]

Sounds like a good plan for BioAmber Eagle. The real stooges said that you had left for good SMH. Wonder why they lied???

[Real McCoy]

Former Bioamber has no assets or employees of any kind.

Why are you submitting bids that weren’t chosen or LOIs that didn’t materialize as bids when it counted now 6.5 years later??

[TheRealMrPirate]

Yawn! fka bioaq March 14th, 2025'
FKA - (formerly known as) as in "no longer"

[New money98]

Notice the aggregate 40-60m, we got upfront 4.3m hmmm Aggregate=total Upfront=?, pwc said the violist deal was the better deal. Now we will soon see the Aggregate amount of the deal

[randomwalk007]

So it’s been 70days since IE last posted. Whether it’s valid or not, he’s the only one remaining on this board offering a useful take supported with evidence. There used to be about four people that would provide compelling info 4-5yrs ago. Unfortunately, a non-binding LOI is what is suggested we BIOAQ shareholders should hang our hopes on. It is also interesting/indicative that 2025 was a termination date in another LOI, yet still there has been zero corporate activity reflected to shareholders. Anything grounded in reality or expected action?