InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 44
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/09/2017

Re: rfarmer post# 4488

Monday, 09/10/2018 1:47:49 PM

Monday, September 10, 2018 1:47:49 PM

Post# of 4715
I'm a small fish with less than 100k of old shares.
Assuming like everyone else that 207M wasn't the final #, I would assume one or more majority shareholders with a much bigger bank roll than I will have the means and the ability to instigate litigation. I'm sure there are lawyers with intimate details of this "transaction" that are diligently finding ways to make their case valid or not. It's how lawyers make money. They don't have to be right and they don't have to win necessarily. They just have to have enough to make a case and inconvenience ATT.
IMO Once the sharks smell blood in the water, there will be plenty of scraps for the bottom feeders. - so what am I doing? Besides checking this board every now and again, just living life man.... just living life.

This of course only matters if ATT did in fact pay more than 207M. Evidence of that doesn't exist in public.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.