I’m not insisting on proof of the final outcome. I’m pointing out the lack of proof for the jackpot award being promoted now. Those are different things.
Saying there is “no proof of anything until the process is completed” goes too far. There may be no final judgment or final settlement number yet, but that does not mean the case cannot be evaluated. This is not some new legal frontier where everyone is guessing in the dark. We have the complaint, the court’s rulings, the surviving claims, the narrowed scope, the statutory framework, and precedent that applies to securities cases. Those facts do not prove the final settlement value, but they do provide a basis to judge a possible outcome.
You also say, “This case has been as much about the pain and risk the defendants are exposed to during discovery.” What proof do you have of that? Discovery can create cost and risk, yes. It can be expensive, distracting, and sometimes it reveals facts that change the value of a case. But saying this case has been “as much about” discovery as actual damages is just your opinion.
If the argument is that discovery may create leverage and may lead to additional settlements, fine. That is possible. But that is a long way from saying this case supports some huge award.
Same with the idea that discovery may reveal other causes of action. It may reveal additional facts, but new claims are not automatic. NWBO would still have to amend, survive motion practice, prove causation, and connect any new claim to legally recoverable damages.
So my point remains the same. Possibility is not proof. Discovery pressure is not the same as actual damages. And based on the current record, I barely see a path to even a few million, let alone the billions being promoted here.
Market Data 
Markets 
