"If you agree not to violate a law, common sense says you have already violated that law? That makes no sense at all."
Of course it makes common sense. To believe otherwise one would have to believe that the requirement that Bordynuik and JBI be permanently restrained and enjoined from violating several of this country's (that is to say, the US's) securities laws was imposed JUST IN CASE they were tempted to violate them. Now THAT makes no sense at all. The punishments, to which the defendants expressed their consent, were designed to fit the "crimes", not pulled out of the SEC's dumper. This is why I used the phrase "lead any reasonable person to believe" in my post.....
"The litigation costs would have far exceeded this "staggering" fine you speak of."
Try not to ignore the context that I provided with the hope, which I should have known was futile, that I would not have to provide further explanation (it really doesn't). Please read it again (as you quoted it):
"For a company that can only muster a 3 digit quarterly gross profit on its primary product line it's staggering."
The proposed fine is 222 times the most recent quarter's P20 Gross Profit. Get it now?
ps. The rest of the context which was ignored is as follows:
"For one that has multiple processors that consistently turn 4,000lbs of plastic into fuel on an hourly basis, it would be a pittance."
Both comparisons were eminently fair and accurate. The only distinction is their relative certainty....we KNOW the most recent quarter's reported P20 Gross Profit.
But can it core A apple?
Yes Ralph, of course it can core A apple.
