I think no one is going to "buy the company"...
They may buy "some of the assets of the company"... without buying the debt, which will allow the banks to apply the price they get for the assets held at sale against what they're owed by the company... and still continue a banking relationship with the new owners of any surviving components that are carved out.
For employees, that may or may not work out depending on who buys how much of what, where, etc. Whatever doesn't get bought... gets closed.
For shareholders, that's a plan that virtually guarantees losing everything... A bankruptcy filed a few years ago would have been better, as court protection of the company from the mismanagement and the lenders might have saved the business. But, the banks didn't want to save the company... intact.
It does leave questions about who the buyers are, and the nature of the relationship between any buyers, and those who are conducting or forcing the conduct of the sale...
Are these "arms length" transactions... or does one of the VP's at one of CPIC banks have a second cousin who is buying the assets really cheap... using a loan he got from his uncle at the same bank... after the bank forced the company deeper in debt, while preventing them from succeeding... by giving away free stuff instead of advertising, etc.?
The banks will try to force it into a corner where it looks like there are not any options left for saving any of it... then cut off the cash... and they probably will succeed in killing it.
the new owners will know all they have to do is not be stupid and give away free stuff... and they'll do better than CPIC.
It's shareholders... who are being screwed... by the giveaways.
The banks are just trying to drive the deal price down... to ensure the sale can't cover their debt... which leaves the company unable to escape, and they WANT that, to ensure they can stick the fork in it in a way that prevents it coming back, so that there won't be a reason to ask questions.
What they're doing... is trying to screw shareholders out of everything there is... all of it...
And, unless shareholders sue them for it, they'll succeed.
Other questions... about the nature of the banks interest. Were the banks big shareholders a few years back, when the former CEO spun out all that cash ? Did they then sell their shares, at or near the top of the market, and then go short the shares, making even more money from the forced failure... basicaly getting paid for their holding 3 times... while still leaving them still owning the debt, and owning the company (or its assets) even after their losses on the loans are balanced against trading profits taken out over time ? None of those questions get asked without a proper bankruptcy... rather then the "show up at the morgue and have the coroner issue the death certificate" style BK they have planned.
Why would management go along with it... instead of fighting for the company and its shareholders ? Well, did they make a lot of money during the good times... and might they want to borrow money from the same banks again, in their next gig ?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
