In other words if he had gotten it right the first time, you would not be posting on this board now, looking less than me, a moron. Does it hurt?
alibi, did he or did he not fail to get it right? If I am a moron and as I said he failed to get it right, then what does that make you?
JB* A supposedly Open-Market acquisition, but one that was done outside (usually lower) the price range traded that day. The transaction could also represent more shares than the exchange reports as having traded all day. In other words, it could not have been an open-market transaction. Yet it is still potentially significant. Private placements and other corporate actions my explain the non-open market nature of the trade. Including them in your analysis is suggested.
In the law of contracts, the doctrine that provides that if a party changes his or her position substantially either by acting or forbearing from acting in reliance upon a gratuitous promise, then that party can enforce the promise although the essential elements of a contract are not present.
This is what golongin2008 still thinks is going to happen, even after the S C said NO!
The CCJ, stated as "fact", the license agreement was never consummated. Is he going to change "fact" to fiction now and award PIP the license agreement? If so, then he will take it upon himself to consummate the agreement. I don't see him having that power.
Eric A. Rose- "We shall say, product in -- that we've developed in smallpox. We have some earlier stage assets with regard to antiviral drug discovery that we think are partnerable. And we believe that a company with our existing assets now is in a very strong position to pursue multiple opportunities."
If the pre-clinical R&D department was paid for by government contracts and grants, then they eliminate it, they are no longer getting financial support from the gov. If this is the case seems they should have done a better job of informing the public they no longer receive this money.
Is SC not asking, how did you come up with that huge damage award after all those proven uncertainties of any profits ever?
PARSONS: "The evidence adduced at trial proved that numerous uncertainties exist regarding the marketability of ST-246 and that it remains possible that it will not generate any profits at all....."
SC: "...and because it is unclear to what extent the Vice Chancellor based his damages award upon a promissory estoppel holding rather than upon a contractual theory of liability predicated on a Type II preliminary agreement,102 we reverse ...."