InvestorsHub Logo

Bouf

04/01/20 3:54 PM

#259854 RE: marjac #259850

I think she made a classic largely subjective judgment based on hindsight bias, which the secondary considerations doctrine is designed to prevent. But then she did not look at the secondary considerations correctly, as the Markman piece explains well.

ferretmoney

04/01/20 4:05 PM

#259860 RE: marjac #259850

I can’t help but think that her action came not from stupidity but from deliberate political intent. Catastrophic damage to a company and its shareholders in pursuit of her agenda meant nothing to her. I believe sanctions are in order.

james murphy

04/01/20 6:56 PM

#259954 RE: marjac #259850

marj your opinion and all others mean little in that the ruling of Judge DU will stand.Amrn as a company is fcuked and only a BO will save investors some money instead of waiting for 3 years to hear WE STAND BY JUDGE DONT know fcul all but I know how to destroy a 10 billion company and INVESTORS.