Speculated scenario #1:
Takeda disturbed that CEO unnecessarily reminds investors of possibility of BK futher driving stock price down (among other poor decisions) and starts to question the wisdom of keeping on a CEO who seems to have done everything to benefit AMGN instead of AFFY during this past quarter. So they bring in TBG to replace the untrustworthy and/or incompetent execs so they can get the investigation and the buyout done without further problems.
CON: TBG usually does chapter 11 stuff so that makes me nervous.
Speculated scenario #2:
With Takeda taking more of the rights for the drug it is now safe for AFFY to file bk and the CEO's second "possible bk" p.r. was just a considerate heads-up to investors because he planned all along to go bk and he feels bad they are going to lose even more of their money.
CONS: Why would Takeda fund an investigation just to have AFFY go bk? Why did AFFY pay off its debt recently if it planned on filing bk? The only difference between AMGN's drug and AFFY's is a few peptide chains and these type of drugs all have similar side effects which are not a problem if you just follow procedures as prescribed on a warning label.. so just slap a warning label on the thing! It just doesn't seem reasonable that this would go to bankruptcy with everything setup for a buyout and quick fix as it is.
I just don't see the arguments for a bankruptcy over a buyout. Is it because the lawsuits can go unpaid with a bk, instead of getting inherited by Takeda under a buyout?? I don't think lawsuits are that avoidable. I still see this as a buyout but could someone explain why it would be a bankruptcy instead? Or why the original CEO was so intent on having people believe it was going to go bankrupt if it is in fact an impending buyout???