RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The results ar Well, it was more of a joke...it seems as though Firesole is convinced the lawsuit is going through and that the dividend will be paid, and you seem convinced that the lawsuit will be successful and the dividend will never be paid out. The two scenarios aren't perfectly mutually exclusive, but you could almost imagine they could be...therefore, you could wager one for the other.
WRT the bold text, I agree that the bold text wasn't insignificant or done without intention. I differ in the interpretation though...if they were going after the underwriters I think they would have rolled it back all the way to the IPO a few months before that. I think the bolded text was simply meant to highlight to anyone that saw the previous release that they were no longer just interested in those who were shareholders at the Q3 release, but they had rolled the lawsuit back to an earlier date.
Of course that doesn't answer why they rolled it back in the first place, but I have a guess...I think this relates to how they are going to try their case in court and nothing else, they might be altering their tactical approach. I think they want the focus of the lawsuit to be on other events, not the Q3 release.
Rolling it back to January/February 2012, wasn't likely just grabbed out of thin air. I think they are building the case around the fact that there were many insider sales that occurred just after this period. They likely want to convince a jury that the PSN BOD and upper management artificially inflated the value of the company, dumped many of their personaly shares and were just biding their time until the ball dropped on the poor shareholders that were left holding the bag. They may use this argument and time frame as a means to go after some of the assets of Scott Dawson et al that were dumped. If the judge allows this to proceed to a jury trial, the story of the rich management that inflated a company and ran away with the loot will go exactly as far as how the jury is composed and how the cases are presented.
It is a powerful story that is easier for a jury to understand than the one that involves margin calls, conflicts of interest, bad decisions to approve dividends etc. Just a guess though....