Moatable Inc ADR (MTBLY)

[Chrysanthemis]

Dear downthehatch,

thanks for drawing my attention to the new developments. I went to have a look on the web site, and the latest filings are intriguing.

The most interesting part is, in my view, the transcript from a hearing on April 14th (incidentally :) the day when the share price took off), from which I quote the following statements from the judge (my emphasis added):

"I understand that there are going to be some objections...But I'm prepared to, understanding what those objections are now and having reviewed them, I'm prepared to approve the settlement over those objections."

"The settlement agreement will provide for distribution of the settlement to the coalition shareholders based on their current holdings."

"They [the plaintiff's lawyers] asked me to think about it [the legal fee], and I have. I spent last night, most of the night, thinking about it. And I think that the upper limit of where we would start to be allocating to much settlement proceeds to the lawyers...would be...52-and-a-half million dollars."

"...we know that certain of the shareholders who have standing, who conflate standing with right to recovery, will want to go to the Appellate Division, and may. And I would like to reduce the potential issues so that the only issue that the Appelate Division is looking at is...that they're entitled to recovery based on what they held at the record date, which is simply not tenable as a matter of law."

From all this I surmise that the judge has moved from his previous position, now agrees that the derivative action cannot benefit former shareholders, and is prepared to approve a judgment which gives roughly 245 MUSD to the Renren shareholders, except the Defendants and their Directors.

Which translates into a payment of roughly:

245 MUSD / Z = 31.51 USD per ADR.

[Z = 7.754.623, see my previous post https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=166489154 ]

And on that basis, it is not difficult to understand that the share price has been up towards the 30 USD level.

I understand that the judge asked for limited changes to the settlement and that subsequently the plaintiffs tried to negotiate such changes with the defendants, who refused to play ball.

This led to the most recent motion from the plaintiffs to renew/reargue the motion to approve the settlement.

And with the most recent sounds from the judge, it seems quite likely to me that this will happen.