Replies to post #39668 on Tauriga Sciences Inc (fka TAUG)

[rawman]

Perhaps the Company felt it could close an acquisition, and that the fundamental value could potentially far exceed one cent - organically

And perhaps it could have!

"PERHAPS" and "COULD" is not PROOF! "PERHAPS" and "COULD" are SPECULATION and NOT WELL-FOUNDED SPECULATION AT THAT! In order to assess damages the court will require substantiation of the claim, i.e. MEANING "PROOF"! The "what coulda been arguments" cannot be PROVEN, thus will have little consideration, when examining any potential damages TAUG may have suffered due to the Cowan auditing error!

Listening to the attempt at "PROVING" that Seth Shaw may have changed his ways and actually did "EXTENSIVE DD", then was about to pull the trigger on an acquisition, which COULD have succeeded despite TAUG's history of 100% partnerships failures, would be a mind-numbing exercise! YEP...THE "ARGUMENT" WOULD BE WISHFUL THINKING! IMO...TAUG BETTER BE PRAYING THE CASE WILL BE HEARD BY A JURY! A judge hearing the case, would likely "toss" all of the "but I coulda been a star" arguments in a heartbeat!