Yes. the us trustees office did a poor job trying to validate their choice by quoting from a dictionary rather than the us bankruptcy code. the judge seemed incredulous that it was the only arguement they could make. a new trustee, from the area to reduce expenses since people presume there is no money to pay them anyway, will remove neutrality from the question.
BTW, Dicon is a huge asset that even the trustee and his attorneys agree upon. and, the list of creditors that include the sports venues and teams is not applicable as the services were not performed therefore they need no payment. if they resold the space there are no damages either except for what might be a diffeence between what spng was going to pay and what they resold it for. my guess is that since costs continue to rise in many of these venues the teams sold the space for more than what spng was going to pay anyway.
so you're whole involvement in spng is to get the trustee replaced. I thought that might be the case..
and the bold area is totally your opinion .. zero facts to back it up .. contract are contracts ..hoping and wishing you can get out - just does not make it happen
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
