IMO a shareholder lawsuit against Ihub and/or indi

IMO a shareholder lawsuit against Ihub and/or individual members has nothing to do with the share price.  IMO Treaty's is claiming damages because some of the defendants have effected TECO's ability to raise capitol though other means than dilution.  In addition Treaty's terms for financing maybe more costly due to this tortious interference.  If TECO is forced to dilute due to no other means of raising capitol then that directly effects shareholder value.  IMO shareholders should wait to see what Treaty's discovery process uncovers at a minimum before any shareholder action is taken against these defendants.  IMO shareholders should wait for the lawsuits outcome and assuming favorable for Treaty then file their own lawsuit.  On the other hand if Treaty's outcome directly benefits shareholders then a judge might see a shareholder lawsuit as frivolous since we would have already recovered any losses through Treaty's lawsuit.  If Treaty is leveraging shareholder loss as part of their complaint then I assume they will reimburse shareholders for their losses if they recover losses through the lawsuit.  They could buyback and retire shares with any recoverable fines from the defendants and that would directly reimburse shareholder equity.  IMO these defendants will file bankruptcy if they are worth a dime to begin with.  If shareholders learn that the defendants don't have any self worth going after them on their own will be a waste of time and money.  Bottomline;  wait to see how Treaty does with their lawsuit first.