Posted On: 02/01/2016 2:52:10 PM
Post# of 72447
I'm thinking that Aruda structured his payment of shares to his lawyers such that he got most of the first batch of shares, and the lawyers got most of the 2nd batch. I agree, Aruda did not buy, he just stuck the shares he didn't have to give the lawyers into his account.
My GUESS, and it is only a guess, is that he gave the lawyers 30%. With a case like this I think they would have wanted a big pay-off to take a rather risky case on contingency. So lets GUESS that they got 4.8 million shares. That would leave him with 11.2. A smart person would sell a couple million so they had the cash to invest and live comfortably, and then hang on to the rest. That seems to add up about right.
And that would account for the supply we've seen, the rest of the lawyer's share coming onto the market.
My GUESS, and it is only a guess, is that he gave the lawyers 30%. With a case like this I think they would have wanted a big pay-off to take a rather risky case on contingency. So lets GUESS that they got 4.8 million shares. That would leave him with 11.2. A smart person would sell a couple million so they had the cash to invest and live comfortably, and then hang on to the rest. That seems to add up about right.
And that would account for the supply we've seen, the rest of the lawyer's share coming onto the market.
(0)
(0)
