SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : Ben Ezra Weinstein (BNEZ)
BNEZ 0.00Sep 18 5:00 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: heatseeker who wrote (6435)12/13/1998 10:00:00 PM
From: otcbbbaby  Read Replies (1) of 9391
 
Heat: In litigation the entire idea is to make the other side pay for everything. Depositions and discovery cost money. Working in the dark costs money, too. By not giving away information BNEZ accomplishes two things: AOL will have to pay mucho bucks to find out the basics such as float and right now AOL has no idea whether BNEZ has legitimate damages. For example, the reverse split was very good (in a twisted sort of way) for the litigation. It shows damages suffered by the company and shareholders: damages that can be traced back to the AOL error and damages that could be worth millions. If the company had to float millions of shares that also counts as a damage that AOL could be held liable for in court. But AOL doesn't know the float. So it is working in the dark in terms of what kind of shape BNEZ is really in. Remember, the pleadings state that BNEZ had lined up financing until AOL's errors cost it the deal. The loss of that financing, per the pleadings, has cost the company millions in real expenses and loss of capital. If the case continues, I'd expect the company to force AOL to spend as much money as possible to find out any info about BNEZ. Its a sound legal strategy. Hope this helps.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext