I read this article from the WSJ that came out Friday after the hearing where the judge heard the arguments and my impression from solely reading this is, that this case will continue.I realize that my coming to a conclussion based soley on an edited piece could be a mistake.If you have any articles written on the court hearing please post them I will check back next week.
From the article
"Despite claims by merchant trade groups that there is widescale opposition to the settlement among retailers, Mr. Wildfang said there is overwhelming support for the deal. Only a tiny fraction of merchants eligible to participate in the settlement objected to the deal, he said."
It doesn't sound like the merchants lawyer agrees with you
Just read that article and it chimes the same message. Plaintiffs have no valid arguments and are trying to take huge sums of money away with the ability to take more money away every couple of years. They merely make noise and hope mommy Congress brings out legislation that will help win votes for reelection.
Regardless of what the legislative or judicial branch of government desides the market is content with an ongoing issue and the price is right under 90,but until the Feds appeal is heard there will will always be the possibility of a sizable drop in the stock price pursuant to what happens in court similar to the drop recently from about 194-195 to 170 on the day of that hearing.BTW I always think there is a good posibility that there are those out there in the shadows that already know what will be said in court before it is said.
Towards the bottom of the piece the judge seems to think that this should be resolved by the legislative branch of the government when he states:
Judge Gleeson summed up the feelings of some industry executives, analysts and retailers who are skeptical that the swipe-fee debate will go away regardless of the settlement’s fate: “Is this ever going to come to an end without comprehensive legislation?”