undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdylan6042y ago0 comments

I didn't say it removed the liability of the company. It just means that the company that is left after selling off its profitable assets has the burden of the liability but with nothing but literal toxic assets. They can use the proceeds of the sales to start paying down the debts.

The assets sold would obviously not be the toxic assets.

0 comments

s1artibartfast2y ago

See my response to the sibling post for Clarity on what I mean.

The nature of the liability depends on what is being sold off and the terms of the bankruptcy settlement

dylan604OP2y ago

right, but you introduced "breaking up" into the conversation

s1artibartfast2y ago

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but you said the company would be sold off in individual parts to pay the debt.

My point is that selling it off as a complete company or mini companies doesn't really impact the liability. Both would be possible. What matters from a debt or liability perspective is the terms of the settlement.

In reality, the company is probably worth more as a single entity, sorry I wouldn't be surprised if it stays that way. That would maximize the recovery of damages and repayment of debt.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsdylan6042y ago0 comments

The assets sold would obviously not be the toxic assets.

0 comments

s1artibartfast2y ago

See my response to the sibling post for Clarity on what I mean.

The nature of the liability depends on what is being sold off and the terms of the bankruptcy settlement

dylan604OP2y ago

right, but you introduced "breaking up" into the conversation

s1artibartfast2y ago

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but you said the company would be sold off in individual parts to pay the debt.

In reality, the company is probably worth more as a single entity, sorry I wouldn't be surprised if it stays that way. That would maximize the recovery of damages and repayment of debt.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse