Tween... I know where you're coming from on this and your logic is sound.
BUT....Expectation damages are a tad removed from reality for a good reason.
How would Siga shareholders feel if ST-246 had become a huge seller and they obtained multiple
hundreds of million dollar renewal orders rom BARDA based solely on their efforts after 2006?
Then multiple hundreds of millions of dollar orders from foreign nations that were obtained solely through sales efforts of Siga's staff many years after their dealings with PIP had ceased. Would it be fair to award PIP a billion dollars more in damages even though foreign contracts and multiple BARDA oders would
have been total pie in the sky back in 2006? No. So the expectation damage standard prevents that type
of unjust enrichment. It's not perfect by any means, but it's the best the system has frankly.
Frwdlook... Thanks. If we're speaking of "expectations" as far as Siga, the company, since 2010...It has been an investor's nightmare. From 16 to $1.33. Senate and Congressional investigations re the awarding of the BARDA contract in the first instance... Claims of conflicts of interest, etc....You name it. CMRX being able to cut the current BARDA contract in half from the initial award by eliminating options to renew. Insiders selling millions of dollars worth of stock in the 13's and not buying back one share on the open market since. Unable thus far to obtain FDA approval for ST-246. No foreign sales of ST-246 since day one. No other pipeline product even reaching Clinical Phase 1 status. Large salaries and stock options awarded, then sold by insiders. Large multi hundred million dollar judgment likely awaded to PIP v Siga, not to mention the costs involved in defending that litiation, to no avail. Other than those items it's been fun!
Drod...The law on expectation damages is most definitely counter intuitive to what can be reality looking
back in 20/20 hindsight. No doubt about that.
If ST-246 had become a huge worldwide seller of say 2 billion dollars or more per year, PIP would still be straddled with only the " one contract" estimate, and at the rate of $100 per course. They would not be entitled to ANY foreign sales as such could not have been reasonably expected at the time of the breach. They are not entitled to any future BARDA awards to Siga as such could not have been reasonably expected at the time of the breach.
Obviously the award is so glaring now because ST-246 has been such a dismal failure. The original BARDA contract being cut in half (or was it worse?). No foreign sales. No FDA approval. Congressional investigations, etc.
csmclemore....ALL "expectation" damages are "speculative", otherwise they would be liquidated damages.
A child can "expect" to get all "A's" in school, but if he/she is dumb as dirt, are those "expectations" realistic?
You are confusing the term speculative, with realistic expectations based on known events, and realistic forseeable future events. If you were certain of those events, we could called your damages "20/20 hindsight damages"...lol!
Both Siga and Pip had resonable expectations back in 2006 that St-246 could be a prime anti viral
for both the national smallpox defense stockpile, as well as the Department of Defense. Otherwise, why in the heck would Siga bother to spend millions of dollars, and many years, to develop it?
PIP's expert testified that their calculations showed that realistic forseeable sales of St-246 to the
Government and DOD would total around 14.9 million courses. Siga's expert did not refute that
figure to any material degree, nor the cost of each course at $100. If Siga felt those projections
were so "unrealistic" and "speculative" why not attack it during the trial?...Not five years later on
appeal? It is what is on the record that matters....
By the way csmclemore.... Parson's never ruled that estimates of damages were "too speculative".
He ruled that the claims of express contracts between the parties were lacking in certain fundamentals
to enforce them under general contract law. That is why he went the "equitable" route which was then
reversed. The SC specifically held on appeal that Parson's could award "expectation" damages if he
felt such were warranted, and supported by the record.
I'll say this for the 99th time just like I said Parson's would hand Siga their head in the next ruling (the current one) and was met with cursings....99 thumbs down...."PIP is poop" remarks, and tons of vulgarities from buyhighsellow, and others...
The stock is trading like BK IS DEFINITELY ON THE TABLE....How friggin stupid are most of you folks here anyway?...Seriously. I hope your parents are at least fairly rich, or you married well, cause most of you people are dumb as dirt. This is the Titanic and you're in the buffet line waiting for them to poach your eggs. Except for a few here like Drod...Tween...Play....and some others, this is one of the dumbest group of shareholders I've ever seen on any Board, and that includes quite a few in the last 32 years....Most of your frankly deserve to go down with this ship.
Just ask yourself why PIP isn't trading HIGHER? No...It's not because they feel they will lose any Appeal in the next few years (lol)...It's because all Siga has to once the judgment is prepared and filed with the Court,
is walk down the street to their local Joe Schmoe bankruptcy attorney, file re-org BK, and eventually discharge the current judgment in full. Siga remains an operating company....cash stays in the bank...
debts are paid....the contract with BARDA remains in full force....etc. Current common shareholders are bascially wiped out though. Since management owns mostly options, and not common, they don't lose much at all, and then they simply give themselves the same options and shares when the newly re-organized company comes into being.
Thanks Play and same to you. I frankly think this entire situation is bizarre, and PIP and Siga should have resolved it a long time ago. Now I think it frankly might be too late. GL my man, and I know you have, or will, make it back tenfold already in alot of other issues....
Play....What may not be clear to everyone here is that Parson's is only allowed to use what was testified to at the time of trial and what is on the record. That is why he repetively refers to "the experts testimony", etc.
All the things you mentioned may well have been an issue at the time of trial, but it was incumbent on Siga to raise those issues via expert testimony. It was Siga themselves who were quite rosy about the future of ST-246. It was Siga who came up with, or very close to, the figure of $100 per course. Siga never offered expert testimony to controvert the 14.95 mil courses projected by PIP. Whose fault is that?
Continuing to blame Parsons for Siga's incompetence either during trial, or in their negotiations with PIP that resulted in the "bad faith" finding, is no ones fault but their own. Unfortunately, Siga shareholders are the ones who have paid dearly for it...Not the people who were responsible.
Sorry Drod re Siga (and MDWD as well thus far)... It's looking to me like a BK filing might well be in the cards if they can't work something out with PIP. You were a long time loyal shareholder, unlike most of the putz's here now. You deserved better...And quite frankly,so did I.
Good points frwdlook as I was appying post judgment legal rates of interest rather than pre-judgment interest rates. Most likely significantly different. I think 6% for post judgment interest back in 2006 is probably correct.
You're obviously an attorney so what is your area of expertise? Where did you go to law school?
A judgment is an unsecured obligatioin unless the creditor takes action to make it "secured"...(ie, record a judgment lien against real property that may be owned by the debtor, etc). An unsecured debt can be dischaged in full in a bankruptycy proceeding. Since this judgment is not based in fraud or other action
that might not be dischargeable, BK would resolve the problem quite frankly.
Other general unsecured creditors debts could be honored and paid in full by Siga, and business would
probably continue on as usual. Debts of secured creditors could also be affirmed and paid as incurred.
The judgment however could be discharged in full. Once this judgment becomes final and the precise
amount of it is ascertained, it is likely to be well in excess of the entire assets of the company. Therefore,
by definition, Siga would be "insolvent".
No need to appeal the case and try and post a cash bond to do so. Of course, current shareholders would be wiped out as well, so in that respect it might be somewhat problematic to most of you here. But Siga would go on to live again with a clean balance sheet, still lots of cash in the kitty, and a whole new set of enthusistic shareholders!
Drod.... Judges are simply human beings....not robots. This one found that Siga acted in "bad faith" during their negotiations with PIP. "Bad faith" is as close to fraud as contract law can define. Parsons hated Drapkin
and basically called him a liar. He did not like being reversed on what he felt was more than a practical resolution to the issues, and was fair to both parties. He was leaving the bench and had absolutely nothing
to lose reputation wise. He was not going to allow Siga to escape the litigation scot free after finding that
they basically screwed PIP during the negotiation process. No way that was going to happen.
Maybe the SC will find he over stepped his boundries and the law once again. Stay tuned for that in about another 18 to 24 months, if not even longer. The issue is where will this company be in another 2 years regardless. The only thing worth fighting for is the money in the bank now, and what will come in within
the scope of the first BARDA contract in the months ahead. What should happen is the parties sit down
and appoint a third party CPA team to review all transactions re the BARDA contract to date. Then arrive at an agreeable net profit figure to date. Split that figure. Agree to apply the forumula and over sight to the remaining funds that will come in. Split that. And wrap it up.
Sure as heck beats BK frankly.
Minnie....Actually quite a few new ones...TSRX's from CBST; DRTX's....now MDCO's....But that's not the issue really. All of the recent ones simply proved "non inferiority" to what was already out there...Zyvox and
Vancomycin. The latter one is now generic, so a major pricing advantage to Dalba. DRTX needs to hit hard on how much their once per week, primarily outpatient, antibiotic, can save the hospitals. And that's likely alot if they pencil it out and get on board.
We're totally screwed now. Stock is down .02 to $2.47 which means we could literally go to zero any day now. Dang! Should have paid attention to TA!!!!