Marjac ...I need to move on to other things for awhile but I suggest you and others on this board forget the shoulda/coulda ....except todays reality ...and discuss the plan going forward .
If we accept Jefferies law prof views that the appeals case is 50 % chance of winning ...its obviously 50% chance of losing ...for both sides .
So if you and I were in a legal dispute ....and we both accept that either side had a 50% chance of losing would we settle ? If you thought your client ...say you were advising the generics ...only had a 50% chance of winning ...would you advise them to settle ...knowing now they have far more to lose then just their legal fees.
Right now the generics have a 50% chance they will lose the right to sell generic vascepa if they lose the decision in April 2021 . They will lose the right to enter a huge market and then Teva arrives in 2029
What would you advise both parties ...assuming you are not a biased share ( bag ) holder in AMRN...:---)
marjac - could not agree more. These guys are out to protect themselves. We are told the bare minimum about everything but the robust nature of the trial results. I wonder how much the Board of Directors even knows (or asks). We probably have to wait for a book deal for JT to find out everything. God knows that won't happen until at least 2030 after they've milked the 600K into retirement.
You are correct about the gambling if indeed that was a decision they made. Imagine playing Russian Roulette for a million dollar prize and the gun held 100 bullets and there was only 1 real bullet in it (99%) chance. How many people would take the chance..... Let me rephrase that - How many people would take the chance prior to the patent ruling that just came out :)
We need a damn town hall skype meeting with management!
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
