Replies to post #31279 on Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[madprophet]

I still have best case scenarios timelines in place.
The difference is the Judges talking of a remand changes the odds and
probabilities of those timelines happening. best case - worst case scenario
odds are best we end up somewhere in the middle.

The other factor is quite simple math. I personally don't see WDDD being above .40 before May-June. That is about a 30% jump. With all of the recent pullbacks and sell offs in other places I feel I can make 30% or more elsewhere between now and then. So if the price goes down here I readjust where I put my money, if it goe sup great too. I have till May before the POSSIBLE Oil States free money multiplier with a win for them.
Now if new lawsuits are declared by Kidrin, that changes things, and I made a poor decision. I still have my core position, and in my non IRA account have sold none at all, nor will since taxes are an issue. BUt in my IRAs i don't worry about short vs long term gains. It simply comes down to percentage gains. I make 50% or more elsewhere, and the price goes up here only 30% which I FEEL is the max we will see before May-June. I still made an extra 20% on my money which I can buy extra shares here. Now if I make 50% elsewhere and the price goes down here I make even more. FIrst case I make more on my core position here and make little extra elsewhere. Second one I make more elsewhere but lose onm y core position.

Too many people say gotta be in it to win it. I am in it..
and that is applicable for the lead up to district court
more so than anything else as that is where this will finally pop
like WE ALL WANT IT TO! Well except maybe for a few posters who don't any shares.The PPS here might move up or down but no parabolic rise unless a CAFC vacate, an Oil States win, or heading to district court where we can get a settlement or jury award.
May-June is Oil States-
July-Sept is CAFC decision
Those are the next 2 items on the timeline that can create a big jump in share price we know of. Yes Kidrin COULD go after more infringers, but there is no timeline for that other than highest probability being not before a resolution or positive ruling in WDDD favor.
am simply willing to risk all of those things with the extra money I have allocated to spec stocks that I move around.

[abcd12]

We all hear the same oral argument, look at the same information and evidences from the briefs and other sources and each came up with our own conclusions. This is normal.

And it appears to me that people seem to believe that a non-remanded decision by the court is a more likely scenario than a remand decision by the court, and as a consequence the remanded timeline championed by Mad and others is of no concern to most people at this moment, and I don’t see any wrong with that as fas as DD is concerned. And in this interconnected digital world where fake news and scams run rampant, it is perfectly wise for us to not trusting anyone and be skeptical due to the simple facts that we are faceless/anonymous and don't know each other.

I can understand Mad's frustration with people ignoring his remanded timeline, or not taking his remanded timeline seriously for the reason I stated above. But if this court came back with a remand decision, which I think is not likely, then I'm 100% certain that this board will exploded with discussions about the remanded timeline.

I can see a reason for remand by the court on one item that I heard on the tape and it has nothing to do with points raised by Mad and other this board, but I've chosen not to share that remand scenario here because now because I still am trying to understand it, and am consider it a minor thing.

I have few other comments to make:

The "broad brush" concern/comment by the court near the conclusion of the oral can be a worrisome to many, but I'm not at all worry about that comment based on other things that were raised/discussed fully by the court and all parties. (I think we need to remand this oral hearing specific to the "broad brush" comment back to the court and Worlds for further discovery :-) )

Bungie first brought up discovery and objected to any discovery, but the Court responded that discovery is an alternative that Worlds had asked for and can be a consideration if necessary. This is a very standard reply by the court and should be not construed as a leaning in either a remand or non-remand direction.

This court also did ask Worlds if collateral estoppel is an equitable doctrine and asked had Worlds found any cases that say under some circumstances that the court has discretion not to apply collateral estoppels, and Worlds was so thankful to the court for bringing this issue up. I don't know what this means to you, but it further enhance my confident that remand is a less likely scenario in that the court is contemplating an equitable remedy.