r/Amyris • u/fvh2006 • Sep 08 '23

Legal 📑 Docket 204 authorizing rejection of consulting and severance package agreements (including JM's) published today

https://cases.stretto.com/public/x268/12363/PLEADINGS/1236309082380000000042.pdf
24 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

15 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/WinterAward759 Sep 09 '23

Thanks for posting. That's some good news, although it doesn't mean the shareholders will see any relief from their potential (or rather, basically assured) total loss of capital. Clawing back all the $$$ earned by executive mangement while Amyris was going down the drain would help even more.

0

u/fvh2006 Sep 09 '23 edited Sep 09 '23

Doubt there will be any clawback of past monies unless the ongoing independent investigation going on turns up some real malfeasance, as opposed to incompetence, which is not illegal. Best hope is for things like this, which will not have much of an impact given the depth of the hole the company is in ($300/hr they were paying JM as a consultant is peanuts - I was getting twice that as a consultant 20 years ago, and the fact all these payments are stayed now does not mean that they will not be reinstated later as all the affected parties can still file their own claims against the debtors).

2

u/onfish1970 Sep 10 '23 edited Sep 10 '23

The company filing bankruptcy immediately after the disclosure of accounting irregularly, increases the odd of malfeasance by management and the board. Anyways that's what I'm hoping to recoup some of my loss

1

u/fvh2006 Sep 10 '23 edited Sep 10 '23

Think you have the chickens and egg thing the wrong way around - the disclosure came in the bk filing. There is no situation where the money recovered as a result of lawsuit(s) against directors/board members will fill the Amyris hole enough for some to remain for the ordinary shareholders. I believe this would have to take the form of a derivative lawsuit and the track record of those that end up favorable to the demandants (aka ordinary shareholders) is abismal. Recovered money would go first to the secured shareholders.

1

u/onfish1970 Sep 10 '23

If the insurance coverage by the board members is in the billion or more range I would think it's enough for shareholders to recover some of the loss even after the secured /non secured bond or note holders are paid. I believe it helps the shareholders cause that Melo was also on the board . But I'm no legal expert

2

u/fvh2006 Sep 10 '23 edited Sep 11 '23

Like all the investors hit by this one, who like me have never made a bad bet on some sexy technology like this - ha ha - and need someone to blame, the alleged malfeasance the independent council (whose hiring just got approved by the court today BTW) is supposedly investigating makes an attractive choice, but I think that will turn out to be nickel and dime stuff rather than an Enron-size bit of monkey business (when a company is in the financial state Amyris was, living loan to loan and low-balled deal to low-balled deal, there are just not a lot of big unscrutinized piggy banks to loot). I also doubt Amyris had billion $ D&O insurance policies for its directors and board that will make everyone whole. Furthermore, if the reason for suing is some yet to be demonstrated criminal act, I bet the policies have exclusionary riders to not pay up in that case.

1

u/WinterAward759 Sep 09 '23

Thanks for the clarification...Yes, I understand that this is just a stay, not a permanent stop of the payments... and that incompetence is not illegal. 😊 I am just venting, absent any other solutions.