Just had another thought...what if the employees knew back in 2009 that they would never get the parachute claim, but were entitled to their vested stock option. However, if they brought up their stock option claim with call price at $40/share back in 2009, there would have been plenty of questions on why they thought eventual return on commons would be above $40 to make their claims worth anything.
So in order to prevent the questioning of how much value the employees thought were in bankruptcy remote safe harbored assets, the court allowed them to drag on their "parachute claims" instead. Now that the last of their stock options have vested in 2018, the judge is finally going to say, "sorry no parachute claims, but i will allow your vested stock options at $40/share!"
Wow!!
Could we really be looking at a windfall? I cannot imagine common escrow return above $40/share with 75/25 to the end enforced though...so if this happens then 75/25 will likely not apply to bankruptcy remote assets.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
