I agree
Does not make any sense to me either... below is something I found that has probably already been posted a while ago but given the court appearance tomorrow I thought I would re-post it . When you read what the judge writes you have to wonder why Macquarie has not already settled this...going to court does not seem to be in their best interest
In his 2013 ruling, first noted by Toll Road News, Schweitzer wrote that Syncora presented sufficient evidence that more than bad math and bad luck was at play.
“Far from being an independent third-party, Syncora alleges that Maunsell had a clear economic incentive to provide unrealistically optimistic projections designed solely to help the defendants sell the transaction,” he wrote. “Maunsell was routinely paid undisclosed success fees by Macquarie, on top of Maunsell’s standard engagement fees, for projects that Macquarie successfully acquired as a result of Maunsell’s forecast.”
The judge also wrote in that 2013 decision: “It is eminently reasonable to infer from this collection of facts that Macquarie knew but intentionally concealed from Syncora the fact that Maunsell was not an impartial consultant, that the undisclosed success fees which Maunsell received incentivized Maunsell to inflate its projections, that those projections thus were not prepared in good faith, nor could they be relied upon as an objective assessment and that Macquarie had a strong motive to present them as otherwise.”
