LOL a lawsuit for what? Why would they need to pay him to keep his mouth shut? They have an NDA that would keep his mouth shut. I assume you are referring to that when mentioning a lawsuit. But anything they would pay him to shut up about would not be covered by an NDA. The only thing I am aware of that an NDA doesn't cover would be crimes. But then the CEO couldn't sue him for that.
The "logic" of negative points of view is laughable. I wish someone from the bear side of things could produce something negative without trying to spin up conspiracy theories. Apparently that is impossible. Which is why I am still here. If the bears have to resort to exaggeration and conspiracy theories there must be no real negative points available.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
