Donk's "Romans" (ST, Cavazzo, et al) will wait for a BK, to take JJ and Goldie out of the picture, reduce their holdings (performance options), and eliminate any payment that could be due to their "change of control" protection.
Then will contract with NIH to get back control of Thymosin beta 4 (may already have this in hand),
recover control of RGRX patents,
do a major reverse split,
put new management in place,
and eventually spin it back into one of their other holdings.
A plausible scenario, but I think July is a bit early for RGRX's armageddon. And I think you are bit conused on part of thesis......you posit that RGRX goes BK..and Cavazzas/ST swoop in to buy assets in bankruptcy liquidation...then they go to NIH and re acquire rights to TB 4 (won't be hard or expensive, the NIH wants it developed).....but they you say that they "do a majopr reverse split"?? Be aware that if RGRX goes bankrupt, it will no longer exist. There will be nothing to do a reverse split on.
Yes, ST/CAvazzas woudl put new people on TB 4, they'd probably keep Goldstein around. Finkel is toast. Don't forget that ST/Cavazzas own 40% of RGRX stock..and there isn't a single share that they show a profit on.
In Title 11 of the United States Code (the Federal Bankruptcy Code), there are four bankruptcy filings:
Chapter 7 - Liquidation
Chapter 11 - Reorganization
Chapter 12 - Adjustment of Debts of a Family Farmer with Regular Annual Income
Chapter 13 - Adjustment of Debts of an Individual with Regular Income
Chapter 11 is what they would do. My scenario is they wipe out all equity and reorg with a capital contribution from ST as I said before. So current equity holders get wiped out, "new co" equity is established, the holders of the convertible get a small piece or just paid off, any other major equity holder would have an opportunity to participate via a contribution and ST gets the rest.
At this point I think whatever is going to unfold is already tied up with a nice little bow and everyone who is anyone is already under the sheets. If there were a single lawsuit (although probably warranted) I would be surprised and even if there were, I am guessing it would be dismissed without much thought by the courts. Their question would be - "You have a better idea?"
This is business. Business is never "equitable" and equity holders simply have no rights. They are going to do what is best for them without any thought for the retail investment community and the court will simply look at what is best for the company.