So you are thinking they will get all 132 million? It sounds in the WSJ article you posted that 4Kids was partly at fault, as they knew about the ARS and sat on their hands basically. It sounds like Lehman took Foster to the cleaners and Foster was too dumb to see what was going on. Being dumb does not me you get all your money back. However, I hope you are right...:)
Except that fooling a trained and experienced accountant gives pause. Any accountant knows that two things can't be known to them: collusion and unrecorded transactions. The WSJ article indicates both were present in LBI's dealing with 4Kids. How this turns out will be interesting
Those ARS was so opaque that even security professional on wall street had no chance of deciphering them. What is the chance that a CFO whose specialty is in accounting rather than investing know any better? And we should be reminded that lehman was the custodian of the account so they (lehman) had direct control of what securities were bought.
IMO that $10M cutoff for distinguishing small vs large investor was arbitrary (so is QIB btw). Institutions are not immune to ignorance. Especially when evidence suggests the custodian was deliberately deceitful.
for treble damages they'd have to go through a few rounds of discovery and 4kids would probably have to show clear intent to defraud or cause harm.. it might be out there in an email chain or two, or it might not. the violation of fiduciary duty seems pretty clear and there's probably some extra damages attributable to that, but it's probably a lot more useful to look at $45m as an upper bound than a lower bound, jmo.
ok I see what your saying now...it does seem like your logic is sound...hard to believe they will get that much especially since deek is chiming at least 7-15 million when he normally would be the one ringing the bell that they will get maximum. Hope you right..45 million plus isnt 130 million but I would probably still go out to eat at red lobster :)