InvestorsHub Logo

Poor Man -

08/20/23 4:33 PM

#622473 RE: W_W #622458

This is an excellent post.

I would add there is now a window to settle that is in everyone’s best interest. If NWBO waits too long or asks for too much, this could drag on and the company would lose the opportunity to benefit from non dilutive capital while it experiences a liquidity shortfall.

On the other hand, if the defendants wait too long, NWBO may be in a stronger position later to continue to press for a larger settlement.

I doubt that QE takes the MTD all that seriously to use that as a reason to advise their clients not enter into a settlement now.

learningcurve2020

08/20/23 4:38 PM

#622475 RE: W_W #622458

Exactly. Slow roll. Statute stuff.

>>admits no wrongdoing in the settlement. Therefore, anyone else who wishes to pursue legal action against the defendant needs to have their own evidence.

ADVFN_doclee

08/21/23 4:28 AM

#622587 RE: W_W #622458

Thanks W-W. Really that means that it is up to the Financial Regulators to take note of what it is all about and then perhaps ?subpoena? NWBO (et al) for the evidence that they had garnered to assess whether they have been breaking any rules etc and if they have, hopefully mount an action against the MMs (aka, the defendants!). At the very least one might hope that the Regulator plugs the gaps in the current rules that enables spoofing to occur.

Thank you for correcting my error - I'm mortified, coming as I do from a family of lawyers!!!