No. There's no conspiracy or evil intent to overdrug, mislead, and profit.
I realize some people are very concrete thinkers and have problems thinking abstractly. Let me give a couple examples so you learn.
and also a couple fun stories that may have a point.
I was contracted by some out of state attorneys around a decade ago to sue Google when they split the stock into 2, a google A and a google B stock(s). The company was immediately sued by about a dozen law firms, naturally (one of which was Pomerantz in NYC, one of the firms which sued AVXL several years ago when the stock collapsed after the 32 patient trial helped to cause a share price collapse). The google lawyers and these shareholder fiduciary plaintiff firms had reached a settlement in our state, google's charter state, underwhich the complaints would go away, there would be some truly trivial changes in the proposed stock split, and the plaintiff firms would pick up an agreed 27 million dollar fee to split amonng them, and their financial expert fee around 760 grand, something like that.
My people and i felt naturally, this was out and out theft, such a large fee.....to earn that sort of fee, based on the required, submitted hourly rates of about 300 bucks an hour, the lawyers would have had to do nothing for over a year, except manufacture the proffered fee affidavits. Not work on the litigation, just do the fee submission paperworkd (which was all software,)....divided 27.5 million by the requested hourly rate, and you can see that many of the lawyers would have had to have worked 24/7 for over a year, on this case only, but never would have still approached the requested amount, and every firm admitted they had many other clients they reqpresented at the same time......Anyway, we said they had filed fraudulent affidavits, which they obviously were, and the chancellor cut their fees by almost 20 million, with the stroke of a pen and with less than an hour's worth of oral argument (he did not cut the expert fee) He also attributed the idea of cutting the fee to himself, hilariously, even thought the attorney's for both side had already agreed on the attorney fee, which had also been blessed by a court ordered special Master, a retired federla judge.......you would think they would me mad at me, and they were, but the Pomerantz attorney and I walked out of the courthouse together, and he was more inclined to talk about sports as I recall, not mad in the least.
I came back to my office after the hearing, and had a next client who had picked up a wallet on the grounds of a race track. The survellience film showed her picking it up by the betting window, looking around, quickly taking out the cash, and dropping the wallet back on the ground. She was arrested for theft. She felt, naturally, that she had done nothing wrong whatsoever, even though there were many forms of identification in the wallet of the owner's.
Do you have a prayer of what I am trying to express. Accountants and stat types are very concrete thinkers. They are system people. Whatever the system says or permits, is fine by them. There are some great videos on Utube of "Karens" which probably escape a certain kind of mentality.
I am waiting to buy Anavex. The people who invented the company assets and who are managing it, were not, and are not, accountant types. They are big picture people. They see big issues.
I am expecting positive news here. I have some anavex but yesterday loaded the boat with gold etfs, doing rather well. ....seeing big picture stuff that escapes others...
