I believe the HRS decision may form the framework for an ERICY settlement. Why else would HC: 1 Tout the judge 2 'Freeze' his business plan for 3 more months(at least) 3 Be 'entirely comfortable' with the delay
I also believe a formula may be agreed to for compensation...in principle.
To me anything other than a settlement puts HG in serious breach of his fiduciary duties. Licensing is at a stand still. Accruals are fine but show me the money. Arbitration dilutes. Etc. These comments above are quite irresponsible in light of all scenarios except settlement. Trial, appeal and delays in between, we could be looking at another year of just NEC and Sharp revenues. In that scenario whose marbles are on the line?