Advocates for DuPont Management Downplay & Backpedal Growing DuPont Imprelis Disaster! $2.00 A Share, NO BIG DEAL?!
Good Morning, Bonjour, Guten Tag, Buon Giorno,
Readers, we have noticed in recent days over the internet that certain proponents for DuPont Management have been claiming shelling out $1 or $2 billion for Imprelis is "no big deal", given the size and revenues of the mighty DuPont Company of Delaware.
Are they giving us insight into the mindset and strategy of DuPont Management? [When we raised this point on the MON board in response to a viciously vindictive heckler, dirty operatives had our post quickly DELETED AND CENSORED.] Taking a page from the twenty-year DuPont BENLATE scandal, which has cost over $2 billion to date, are DuPont execs going to drag this Imprelis implosion out over many years, stonewalling claims and protracting litigation with every dirty trick possible? Then they pretend Imprelis is having only a very minor impact on quarterly earnings, nothing to worry Wall Street about. In short, a $2 billion Imprelis consumer fraud fiasco is "NO BIG DEAL"
Merely the morning opinion of one individual investor, DD, MON, & SYT shareholder, and long-time student of the DuPlicitous DuPont, where $2.00 per share is apparently NO BIG DEAL.
Readers, in a cryptic, tiny-print footnote in the Q1 2012 earnings DUPONT PRESS RELEASE, April 19, 2012, DuPont's secretive and evasive Management claims DuPont...
"intends to seek recovery" from unnamed "insurance carriers" for Imprelis claims, which exceed $100 million.
Well, folks, it has been a year since the first claims began flooding the DuPont Company's internal Claims Resolution process as well as in the courts of the land. DuPont has already taken charges against earnings of $225 million by March 31, 2012. Where is this "recovery" from secret insurers?
We strongly suspect but cannot prove that any insurance carrier or reinsurer is balking in shelling out money to DuPont, given the cogent claims of plaintiffs and Imprelis victims in court of fraud on the part of DuPont and certain named DuPont executives. It is a contravention of public policy to insure against fraud perpetrated by the insured, and it violates the insurance laws of most states.
Hey, Ms. Kullman, DuPont Chieftess, where are those touted "recoveries" from secret insurers? Frankly and personally, we believe DuPont's long-suffering shareholders will be stuck with the entire bill for this fake Imprelis "Innovation" and hundreds of thousands of dead trees littering the landscape all across the land.