The problem with everything Bass is claiming is that he can not explain his own behavior as far as short and distort. if he was coming as an activist and presenting a case against UDF management in order to take over management (a very lucrative gig - fyi), he could have been believed. instead he went for forcing the fund to go under so he could buy the assets on the cheap. you can see why anything he claims now should be taken with a grain or two of salt. 90% of the damage he created was to unitholders and to the IV trust. UDF itself is not much of the damage that is sued by him. UDF doing any purchasing of older loans for newer funds is being claimed to be a ponzi like behavior. that is a very tangible claim. please show how the loan is not worth the amount paid for by the new fund. its a very simple test. show that and you have a chance of proving something that is not even related to your direct actions that caused most of the damage.
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.