What was the big idea behind killing the liquidbits deal?
The main problem was that it was they weren't offering to pay cash. They wanted to pay a very small amount to a select few companies to get their hands on the chips and then if they decided to build a mine and after they got their investment back they would maybe pay up to 6 million dollars back to creditors. So the likely outcome for customer creditors was that we would have ended up with $0. If you have a choice between keeping something that is worth a few million and declining in value so you could look for another buyer or $0 for it right now which would you take?
weird that there wasn't a back and forth where some cash might have come forward..."this deal or no deal". Especially since there wasn't anything waiting in the wings.
where are the new ideas to use the declining value chips? Is there an email address for the CRO to send some ideas too because it sure seems like there are none?
There were negotiations in the sense that Liquidbits negotiated with Hashfast (ie: Monica, Simon, etc...). It's just that Hashfast's idea of a "good" deal and the creditor's were different and they didn't include the creditors in meaningful negotiation. Now that the CRO is in control he is much more likely to negotiate a deal for the creditors that the bankruptcy judge will actually approve. I posted the CRO's contact email back a few pages in this thread.
The timing was off because the creditors "committee" was formed just shortly before the deal negotiations were almost completed and the rush to get it in court, combined with incompetent legal teams, caused the judge to throw it out. Those that truly understand business terms, M&A, and the court system, would understand it was form over function that the judge was largely referring to and the HashFast counsel and LB counsel, both of whom made big bucks on this, should have known that and worked better on it.