Replies to post #87987 on UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

[BrokeAgent]

Personally, I can't understand why the 13 wouldn't have settled by now if they could get off that cheaply.

[rockie101]

With these low figures looks like we are telling the other side what we would take or at least what we are expecting.....that's crazier than I am.

[long uoip]

I hope they negotiate closer to 0.40 per modem given that's what they were pursuing with cox
& it's still on the low end of teece's 0.28-1.06 valuation

btw, thanks for your calculations AllinFun (easy to decipher)

re: "No reason to discuss sub $1 billion figures at this time" ..or anytime

even with the understanding that settlements are not as high as trial verdicts

(what about the extra damages & interest as teece was inferring ?)

[Specialneeds]

I don’t think the attorneys are going to get 30% of the settlement. That number is a yardstick for smaller judgements. I would use 20% when we are talking these numbers

[I-Glow]

This doesn't follow the Chanbond waterfall:

"Global settlement value: $600 million
Attorney Fees (28%): $168 million
$432 million
Bentham (25% net of attorney fees) $108 million
$324 million

CBV (50% remainder) $162 million
UOIP (50% remainder) $162 million"

Here are the Chanbond numbers:

Attorney Fees = 25% of Gross - $150M

Litigation Financing: 100% of Principal = $6M

Litigation Financing Return: 25% of Gross - $150M

IPNav: 22% of Gross - $132M

That equals - $438M

CBV Preference: 100% of net, up to $1M

CBVReturn: 50% of net thereafter

ChanBond Return: 50% of net thereafter

UOIP doesn't own Chanbond so there isn't any payment due shareholders.

Shareholders need to file a lawsuit against Carter stating he didn't fulfill his fiduciary responsibilities to the shareholders.

It is a waste of time writing letters to Judge Andrews as he is the Judge in the patent infringement case.

All letters written to a Judge in the case are entered into the records.

IG