InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 135
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/23/2018

Re: downthehatch post# 1021

Saturday, 05/14/2022 10:01:31 AM

Saturday, May 14, 2022 10:01:31 AM

Post# of 1063
Thanks for this alert.

The most interesting facts I found among these filings is that the Plaintiff's law firms now argue for a significant lower fee: 22.5% of the total, instead of the 33% that they sought initially.

Furthermore, they provide an interesting quantified assessment of the outcome, should the settlement and this fee be approved:

Here, by contrast, distributions to Renren Shareholders, net of a 22.5% fee, will far exceed the value of their investments in Renren during the relevant period. Given the minimum per ADS distribution under the defined “Settlement Amount,” the distribution net of fees and expenses will exceed $29 per ADS (and will be $29.98 per ADS, before expenses).


Now, the judge stated in the hearing (14 April) that

...the upper limit of where we would start to be allocating too much settlement proceeds to the lawyers such that it would be unfair would be 17-and-a-half percent or 52-and-a-half million dollars. That's where I think the range is.


On the assumption that the settlement will be approved - and the judge has in the same hearing declared his willingness to do so - it seems unlikely to me that the fees will go beyond the 22.5%, but the judge may possibly lop off a few percent from this.

In this case, we would face a payment of at least 29 USD per share, and possibly up to a few dollars more. On this basis, and knowing that there is also some residual value in the stock due to its Kaixin holding, I do not consider the current stock price (27.7 USD) excessive.