Fantastic. If even a fraction of the claims prove fruitful, I'll toast you several drams of Islay's finest!
One quibble - saying that a child wouldn't make such a mistake as the Tunisian legal team rather makes me feel my own children are underachieving. Maybe "undergrad"?!
Perhaps. Was a long time ago, but it’s still an unbelievable mistake for an actual firm to make. Decision would have to have gone through two teams, a paralegal and compliance. Crazy stuff.
I find the history intriguing and the case compelling but management less so.
I like 3rd party funding as it offers an independent expert assessment in exchange for typically 30% of the award (it'll be higher if claim is low $$ but not here) - a good trade off IMO.
This management rejected that and instead has more than doubled the sharecount (i.e. ~50-60% dilution) ex oppies (extra 20%), and issued debt.
Amateur hour.
I view the other assets as a drain on time & $$ resources but maybe I am biased as I am here for the litigation play (albeit it kinda ties in with funding issue above).
Consequently we have massive cash burn, a weak balance sheet, diluted SHs and distracted management.
P.S. shame ICSID does not publish memorial/counter-memorial/etc similar to other cases as they are good reading
Fantastic. If even a fraction of the claims prove fruitful, I'll toast you several drams of Islay's finest!
One quibble - saying that a child wouldn't make such a mistake as the Tunisian legal team rather makes me feel my own children are underachieving. Maybe "undergrad"?!
Perhaps. Was a long time ago, but it’s still an unbelievable mistake for an actual firm to make. Decision would have to have gone through two teams, a paralegal and compliance. Crazy stuff.
A strange combination - prohibitively expensive complacency.
Fantastic write up - thanks for sharing.
I find the history intriguing and the case compelling but management less so.
I like 3rd party funding as it offers an independent expert assessment in exchange for typically 30% of the award (it'll be higher if claim is low $$ but not here) - a good trade off IMO.
This management rejected that and instead has more than doubled the sharecount (i.e. ~50-60% dilution) ex oppies (extra 20%), and issued debt.
Amateur hour.
I view the other assets as a drain on time & $$ resources but maybe I am biased as I am here for the litigation play (albeit it kinda ties in with funding issue above).
Consequently we have massive cash burn, a weak balance sheet, diluted SHs and distracted management.
P.S. shame ICSID does not publish memorial/counter-memorial/etc similar to other cases as they are good reading