Thats my view, what is it I am missing(?). I dont have issue with the Court. I do know that if your dont present properly in your defence you can and will just plain lose. Like in nature when creatures BLUFF, if you do not Bluff back then you are backin down, you DIE. IMO: JB raised an insufficient DEFENCE thinkin that yes he did in fact issue shares and he considered that actionable to defeat. When in reality this SOP is itself defensible at a COURT of LAW. An EMPLOYER by LAW must recompence just reward to his HIRES. It is an unreasonable demand thus, just as the law of USARY in overcharging interest in the State of New York. JB just didnt want to blow the HDI deal. Granted this was intimidating to him. But this is not SURVIVOR and shareholders are not supposed to be walking the "HALL of SHAME" (hoodwinked) all by a&p,not. Some aspect of this settlement smells like stinky fish in DENMARK(?). One of the things relied upon to creat a contract by a financier so that they are not put into $LL jepordy is that the company is to be run in an ongoing manner as such a time when entering into the loan aggrements. Having a contract to EXTORT is never a legality that is what i say stinks. So by default the punishing of shareholders is not acceptable as a deterrent for any decisions made by the CEO. This case folded awful fast. Most I see in the stocks go on for 2 or 3 years at the least. Fishie still stinks,so what am I missing before I TEBOW? Forgive my typos as well. Thinkin out loud and that is still legal in the USA!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
