Not a class action because most likely the facts are correctly stated. If they are going to beat expectations, then that is all that needs to be said. None of the extra facts would need to be volunteered at this time.
So, that makes me want to make an analogy. After years of playing poker, there are things that stand out like a sore thumb.
If someone intentionally flashes you three or four good cards out of the five cards in their hand, they generally have a very weak hand. Now sometimes flashing is blatantly obvious and sometimes it is done almost slyly to look unintentional, but the outcome is the same. Just like if someone keeps looking at their hand over and over again, then they are trying to see what possible hand they can make, versus looking at it once and covering their cards on the table (meaning hand is made, no need to look again). Additionally, if someone bets and looks you straight in the eyes, then 9 times out of 10 they are trying to convey strength and this is one of the oldest bluffs in the book. The guy you don't want to call is the one that bets and then looks away or is even shaking. He is trying to convey weakness and his shaking is showing the involuntary movement associated with the adrenaline of having a monster hand.
I have no doubt these figures are correct, but I question the calculated motive of releasing so much information at this point in time.
Sorry to go off on a tangent. I'm just trying to use my experiences with a bouquet of humanity to communicate my skepticism. |
