Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Blind greed.
I think that's correct, at least what I recall...900 million. That has always been something that's puzzled me about all his machinations - with that many shares, just go for a per-share distribution after costs. Seems that would be buckets of $$.
Would the settlement amounts have been written as numbers or written out in words for the sake of precision? Which would require more line space?
Good question.....who put the UOIP shares on the market? What became of the proceeds of the sale of the shares?
Lowball, indeed - and that includes the sale of the patents? Sweet cheeses.
SN - do you think the Cisco settlement was for the UOIP suit?
Agree, well said.
OK. You are free to act or not act. I choose to act in what I feel support my interests.
Take care.
Exactly. Please re-read my post. The belief that there are multiple "classes" is based on conjecture.
Groan.......
Hi rockie...if you mean that all legal fees are reimbursed first, then remaining funds distributed based on shares owned, that would be my approach and hoped-for approach. Well said!
Maybe we could all agree not to fight among ourselves and join together to work for our desired outcome, a favorable settlement for UOIP shareholders? After all, at this point, there isn't anything concrete to fight over, only legal actions that need to be supported in order for us to have a chance for a favorable outcome, right? And who isn't in favor of a favorable outcome? All shareholders should be! Let's all pull together towards that end, to the extent of our ability including statements on this forum.
Exactly, agree 100%.
Everyone, please note that no "new rules" have actually been proclaimed - since the UOIP legal action is derivative, my understanding is that any favorable decision to shareholders results in any monies recovered be paid to UOIP.
Since UOIP currently has no director or board, the court would likely appoint a custodian with fiduciary responsibility operating under the supervision of the court...in my understanding, "the court" means the judge that hands down the decision. Where, to whom and how the monies awarded to UOIP would be distributed would be decided by the custodian and approved by the court.
Someone hypothesized an outcome in which the custodian MIGHT, and I want to stress MIGHT, allocate funds to shareholders based on participation vs. non-participation in contributing to the shareholder legal actions and that conjecture, that HYPOTHESIS was taken as a proclamation by some not for what it was, which was conjecture. Or, if you prefer, an hypothesis.
At this point, no one knows what the outcome will be - or if we will even prevail. I BELIEVE we will, though, and KNOW that only through aggressive, active legal action that we may prevail, and that action costs money and I choose to contribute to the extent of my ability.
There are no "new rules". He is just blowing smoke. "Trust Billy" turned out to be bad advice and he can't adjust to things as they are.
That's what I meant by implicit - when one buys stock, certain things are assumed, same as when a company SELLS stock to shareholders. Once the company sells stock, ownership is shared, not exclusive to the company and the company has an obligation to the shareholders - actually a bunch of obligations. The idea that a company could legally issue and sell shares of a company owning specific assets (patents) and then enter into legal action to protect/enforce those patents but then just - well - somehow FORGET that there are hundreds of millions of outstanding shares of the companies stock.....just strains credibility. I hope the judge can see that.
Maybe...."lied in wait" Or "lied in waiting" means to speak untruthfully while waiting.
Besides, we're shareholders that had been repeatedly assured our interests were being looked after - implicitly as a matter of law and explicitly during the legal proceedings that led to the mysterious settlement and, apparent, sale of the patents to the 13 or some or one of them. We don't have to make any noise - as shareholders in UOIP, we each own a portion of UOIP and UOIP owns Chanbond. Ergo, we each deserve a portion of the settlement and patent sale funds in proportion to our share ownership. Legally, we can't simply be ignored, but we were and an attempt to ignore us continues....but, it seems to me that, since we have legal representation we can't be ignored and Billy and his lawyers are just waking up to that fact - we are part owners of UOIP and we didn't just walk away, didn't let them sweep legitimate owners under the rug they wove.
The idea that we have been lying in wait, ready to pounce while Billy and his legal team did the heavy lifting is absurd and laughable. The question is why are the lawyers for Billy conspiring to defraud legitimate shareholders and what will a court do about it?
And isn't the phrase "lay in waiting"? They can't have that poor attention to detail.
I can't keep up with all her twists and turns....I'm impressed with your memory.
Do you mean in her Declaration? I don't know. And the way I understand this whole mess is from a layperson's common sense point of view - which lawyers might twist into pretzels - but my common sense tells me that if Deidre's very clear Declaration can be applied and enforced, UOIP owns Chanbond and is entitled to any proceeds from legal action taken on Chanbonds/UOIPs behalf AND - don't the shareholders own parts of the company they hod shares in? It seems so straightforward to me, but, as I've said many times, I'm not a lawyer.
How do you see it?
Seems Deidre's Declaration clearly establishes that UOIP owns Chanbond....interesting pacers.
That would work for me.
Let's give him a chance to answer first........
That's a very good question.....anyone know?
I couldn't agree more....
I'm in for about $20k, live pretty much on SS and had similar reservations as you but back in June '21, the call started coming out for help, I checked out what they were doing and where and how and I'm in regularly, it is the only fair way we will see anything from Carter, that is, to beat him in the legal effort and with recent postings here, I'm feeling good about it....just hope I live to see a resolution given how slowly the courts work and how adept lawyers are at delay tactics.
How is it that the actions taken result in the release of Pacer information in the case? Who takes that action so the pacers are seen in the light of day? Once again, I'm not an attorney, so if you can help me understand this, it is much appreciated.
Democratic Republic, not Demographic....
Agree that Carter - or his team look bad. Inept. Good for us!
Not being an attorney or familiar with this type of process, I don't know the answer to your question.....maybe someone else can answer.
It's not like Rader can unread or forget what he's read, regardless of whether or not he returns or destroys the filing....sheez.....unless the court can order a lobotomy for Rader - and, once again, not being an attorney, I'm not sure, but I don't think judges have that power (I hope not but it would explain how some attorneys behave, lobotomized). Or maybe they think she has one of those flashy devices used in Men In Black movies and she can use it on Rader?????
yeah.....and, my take is that they know that THEY are the ones that violated the court order not to release information, not Rader.....and they are scrambling around trying to find a way to deflect their responsibility...it's a classic CYA move IMHO. If the judge moves against anyone, she should move against them. But then, I'm not an attorney.
No doubt.
What the judge will do, not Deidre. Unless you mean that will be her advice to Deidre....
What are you thinking she will do?
Yeah, we know. We've known for quite a while.
In other words, he told them pretty much what the Ukranians on Snake Island told the Russians.....go f*** yourself. Good for him.
Yeah - what I'm thinking is if the accidental release of the aritration information "causes" or leads to financial consequence for their client - Billy - then he would have cause to go after the attorneys, no? What a mess. This will all just go on and on.
I believe it is more than that - first, they sound desperate and likely are. Second, and more important, they know they really screwed up and that they are the ones in violation of the court orders and ABA rules and they are trying to shift the blame to Rader. If I can see it, so will the judge. And, it is just wild that they interpreted BA's post as her having the information they released....they must be really scared. I'm no attorney but it would seem a lapse like this leaves them open to malpractice or whatever it is called when a law firm's mistakes cost their client a bunch of $$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Your post still made them wet their pants, so they must have really screwed up.
Sloppy, indeed. That filing had the tone and feel of a kid whose sibling took their ball and wouldn't give it back appealing to mommy for intervention. The lawyers asking for intervention are the ones that violated the courts order not to share the information, not our lawyer, so the claim that he is guilty of violating rules of the ABA or the court is laughable and I hope the judge notes that.
Everyone please note that Billy's lawyers are, without a doubt, monitoring this board. They even quote a specific post. Yikes.
And, as AJ noted, what is the big deal about the shareholders finding out about a disbursement of funds that they have legal claim to?
Things have gotten more interesting. Can't wait to see what the judge does.