(But not in a case that wasn't 'in the money' yet was it....)
As well as I. I know you have. Trident. Sure I'm cynical, because I've lived it. I think the better question is why did YOU sat there on the call and didn't ask anything of substance? You've got some experience.
The one glaring admission you fail to leave out of your comment is that in the Trident case the stalking horse bid showed equity to begin with.....which is not the same here.
Why don't you come clean and tell everyone here that if the debtor wants to sell all their crap, an EC can't do a dang thing about it?
Furthermore, why don't you show us ONE case where the UST has appointed an EC based on bad books and a market tested stalking horse that falls well short of covering liabilities?
Cynical, honest, hey whatever.
How many weeks was it in the Trident case after the stalking horse showed equity was in the money until an EC was appointed? About 5 weeks was it? Even after the UST KNEW equity was in the money.