I think I've been clear all along. I think the settlement is speculative . I have no idea what court does. They may hear appeal they may not.
You just don't get it. A third party verification is key. Involved parties always try to inflate value to get higher price. Ever sell anything?
The court determined that the projections provided to the lenders were a “sound, conservative estimate as to Wave’s expectations at the time.” The reliability of the projections was enhanced because the projections were relied upon by a third party with an interest in getting repaid and because they were not materially different than projections previously prepared by Millenium’s financial advisor. While more aggressive internal projections were not prepared by WaveDivision, the court did not rule out that such projections could be considered in determining the damage award if the projections had been prepared professionally and were in tangible form at the time of the deal and that lower projections were only used to provide a more conservative estimate to its lenders.
A third party was presented with projections at time of transaction to obtain a loan for the transaction. Putting a value on the transaction before the breach.
None of that matters. You need to move on like the siga pumptards. It comes down to award being speculative, contingent etc. It is a messy case and that's why I believe SC hears appeal. They need to put this to rest. I'm not sure which way they rule. And I believe best thing is a settlement and I think parsons wanted that. Pip price has nothing to do with yahoo message board but the uncertainty of outcome and when that will be.
Picking a lower amount does not make it non speculative. You need to look at how parsons crafted award. Any variables in it contingent? Speculative?
May award if non speculative not contingent. Well settled law. If SC hears it is a big if. Did parsons take the speculation out?
I am at a profit in a small position with a stop loss in. I feel pretty good about my position can't say the same for all the pip pumptards that invested based on your bs.
If profits were so easily figured out why couldn't parsons figure it out 5 years ago? A type 2 agreement does not make a profit calculations less speculative.
I'll bet you anything you want. Read English much? "No recovery can be had" that does not say awwww make it up to pip and give them the low end of that range. Lol you are lost.
Sounds like someone desperate. No judge is going to order anything of the sort they are not investment bankers. You are showing more and more how stupid you are.