Thanks Rocky.
I sure consider you a most knowledgeqble person and an expert with facts and data, but often reticent to give stock advice, which is very appropriate, imo.
Re-visiting the 'global settlement' matter, if we may please. Give the fact that they quickly settled the two 2009 cases with the same language appearing in the Alpha case, which appears to be going against them from the sounds of Judge Crotty, can one realistically assume from a management perspective to settle this thing once and for all and assume similar potential liability on all 50 case to possibly emerge and therefore determine the amount of new shares needed that way? Or would counsel never let them do something like that, i.e., prove yourself guilty before any charges are even brought and focus purely on the four claims, which I sdem to be reading you saying.?
Other-wise, this thing of lawsuits could drag on forever and ACTC is now proposing the worse case scenario in their 'global settlement' statement and finding a path with a proposed adquate numer of shares to clearing up all debt and in the process, make themselves more appealing for a jv possibility in 2012?
If there's any attorney's in this field of speciality, could this mean some sort of bankruptcy is being contemplated, given the potential 50 claim focus/planning and provisions for ACTC to accomodate the aggrieved parties (perhaps with a pool of dollars established by the courts as reasonable for aggrieved parties to file claims against) and then work their way out of to eventual profitability?
Given the process for approving more shares, it seems to me the release of the december data could easily be postponed to , say, january and then, remotely tied into a major jv possibility announcement to soften the blow of the share dilution?
At some point next year, ACTC need a new infusion of cash for continuing operations, I'm guessing, hence, the guess of a jv after good news at that later stage of data assessment.?
