Well, unpopular opinion here I am aware, but I no longer have faith in justice or our system to protect and to serve. Unless you're brunching at your summer homes together.
I WILL NOT SELL IN THE RED. I will sit here until they take the stock to $0.0. I'm going to be sitting here with a portfolio of a tiny handful of stocks clinched in my fist after this reverse split and I'm not letting go because I'm going to be here as lawsuit after lawsuit piles in.
This isn't about persons being unjustly upset or throwing a tantrum because of a simple ignorance about Market or financial mechanics and investment strategy. I hear people trying to suggest that anyone who has invested in AMC and is complaining about a loss right now doesn't understand the risk involved with investing. But this isn't about fair market or risk involved with investing. This is about fraud and collusion and corruption which has been a Casino set up and rigged to fleece people of money. This isn't about true and fair market value of company valuation or investment acumen or inaccurate TA. This is about persons and entities and agencies from the top down actively or inactively participating in allowing the theft of an incredible amount of money from millions of investors who are us citizens. I won't get into any conspiracy theory sort of stuff. But let's just say issuing stimulus checks to provide Capital into a tanking economy so that you have gaslit your citizens into believing that you have done something good for them, which in essence could be an incredible lie and The dumping of money was done as a socially acceptable and politically safe eay to ensure that money was turned right back around and handed in a beautiful little package with a pretty bow back to corporations and the government and one percenters. AMC is not a simple discussion about not understanding the risks of the stock market and investing. It has been a highly manipulated engineered and controlled event by so many hands and powers that I don't know if anyone can even unravel at all. And so Justice is not closing a blind eye and patting people on the back and cheering on Ivy Leaguers and their friends and all of the millionaires and billionaires who in the end will be likely be nonplussed that they have more money to buy another home or an extra car or go on a vacation or to a fancy restaurant on the backs of the persons who they have effectively economically enslaved to continue paying for their lifestyles of excess while suffering in their own. It's tyrannical, and anyone supporting that BS is not ignorant. Stupid, maybe. Lacking empathy, morals, ethics, or basic human decency, most definitely.
I remember going to my first hockey game. I was an ice skater and the guy I had been dating for 10 years through college , grad , and into my first couple of professional jobs loved hockey so he bought season tickets to the local franchise, and we went and watched. And I was shot. I kept asking questions about why they were being allowed to do things which were clearly against the rules, and he laughed and said that it was hockey and they were allowed to do that "a little". I remember that. I questioned him for clarification because it didn't make any sense to me. He explained to me that they were allowed to get away with things that were outside of the rules, like aggressive checking, and the referees were going to allow that. "A little". Or a lot. Really just depending. No Rhyme or reason. No consistency, completely fluid and changeable. And definitely not based on equity or any sort of fairness across different players for teams.
I wasn't aware the law and our justice system worked that way. Okay, I actually was because I'm not totally ignorant to the workings of systems, and I've been present in courtrooms both as a professional providing testimony and personally seeking justice, but I still held out Faith and Hope that what was right would prevail in the end and not be determined by alliances or behind closed door agreements or pocketbooks. Watching this public AMC hockey game, where players were cheating and lying and working outside of orders of the Court and then being allowed to get away with it by the court system, is honestly crushing to anyone who has previously been very patriotic and believed in our country and the principles upon which it was founded. My grandfather was a highly decorated World War II Army vet who kept a lot of boys alive behind the lines in italy. My daddy was at Nellis and getting ready to be deployed to Laos during the Vietnam conflict when I was born. I may be a bleeding heart, but I'm also very patriotic and become choked up and teary every time our National Anthem plays, but I am heart sick and disgusted watching our legal system at play in this game. Which appears to have had the outcome predetermined before the play even started.
My three children and I truly believed truth mattered, and the right people would be held accountable and not get their way and be able to continue bullying, lying, cheating, and stealing based on their social, financial, and political position. We watched as things unfolded and irrefutable evidence poured in, so to see even the Delaware Supreme Court attempt to Gaslight investors into buying the imminent bankruptcy b******* rhetoric AMC tried to Pedal says everything anyone should need to know. With it being completely irrefutable that this is 100% categorically untrue, and was at best highly manipulative, and at worst and more likely, a patent lie, how can we believe in a system which is supposed to Serve and Protect us yet behaves as though either they are blind or deaf or believe us to be stupid.
I am not stupid. My children are not stupid. Millions of other investors are not stupid. We are not wrong. Everything about this is wrong.
I am sorry for your loss. Unfortunately, the facts don't agree with your opinions about the company's financial condition. Even after the ruling today which paves the way for the company to raise new equity capital, AMC bonds are trading with a yield-to-maturity of 30%. If you don't what that means or what it implies, perhaps you have ventured into something that you don't really understand. Even iconic brands and good businesses sometimes end up in bankruptcy and the reason is always the same: too much debt. AMC was dangerously over-leveraged before the pandemic and that remains true today even after all the capital they've raised.
The discount on their debt indicates that where people are actually focused on an actual return from operations they are looking at AMC as high risk of bankruptcy. Once conversion happens and the things propping up both AMC and APE share prices are gone, would have to think we have a new price discovery based on a high risk of bankruptcy (like the debt). Will not be pretty for those holding either (APE at $2 a share implies a market cap of over $3B... for a company with a high risk of bankruptcy about to engage in heavy dilution, that value is sheer insanity).
You clearly do not understand ( or perhaps you don’t wish to understand) what happened. Let’s see what the criminals try with GME. Profitable and no debt. Ryan Cohen isn’t a criminal so that’s a plus.
I am so diametrically opposed to GOP hogwash I am in another universe. It is my actual job to see through bullshit and share the truth of an imaginary situation and all I see when any current member of the GOP speaks is… Germany in 1933. People like to try to romanticize the past, but my grandmother grew up there had she said it SUCKED. She says if you support TRUMP or any of these GOP sycophants, you are among the dumbest SOB’s on planet earth; basically a 97 year old woman born in NAZI germany thinks you are dumb af. I think the fact that I find my self on the same side of the isle as those who are actively trying to criminalize my existence does more to show how wack af our “legal” and “educational” systems are than give testimony to my ignorance. I was lied to. I believed that lie. I am not the bad guy.
That’s nice. Trump is not actually GOP and certainly not a GOP sycophant but that aside what does your grandmother suggest? Perhaps then we’ll see who the “dumbest SOB” truly is.
BTW I hate the actual. GOP. I enjoy telling them to pound sand when they ask me for money.
She says Anyone but trump, or any GOP candidate though she seems fond of nicki Halley 🤢. not sure if you realize how conservative a white Catholic women born in nahzi Germany is but Ive never been introduced to that side of the family. So very af.
However, while the argument might be made it streamlines the process, an equally value assertion could be made that in the chance of any bias or perhaps just different approaches and opinions assignment of cases to different judges might ideally provide a sort of checks and balances which could improve opportunity or chances for fair decision making and potentially raise the likelihood of Justice.
There are, in fact, some countries where decision making is a made by discourse between groups of three judges so, again, ideally there is a more robust and nuanced discussion which would occur leading to final judgment.
I was unsure where things were going to fall yesterday but seeing what I should have, that the court was going to apply the abuse of discretion standard. There was no plain error on the matter of the decision and that was that.
It's easy to feel like hindsight is 20/20 with these things. I would say that there's a bit of retconning with the Supreme Court's logic here. They have just as frequently questioned the ever living hell out of the Court of Chancery's assessment of things when they choose to, so it's the kind of thing that's only obvious once it's done.
Well and part of it is just my inexperience with how things roll. I had recently been reading the appeal of the Robinhood taking away the buy button for meme stocks case and the federal court looked at the trial court's dismissal de novo. So I got in my head that the injunction would be looked at de novo in this situation and then if we got to the bridge of the actual settlement I knew those were looked at based on abuse of discretion from what I had read.
I guess to more clearly state what I meant that if the Supreme Court looked at the SQO de novo that would have a much wider chance of something off the wall happening than under abuse of discretion which is more narrowly tailored. Going to need to re-read the ruling but I wouldn't be surprised if there was some retconning. Just footnote 16 just gave me a vibe that they were a bit annoyed with the whole thing to begin with. Maybe that is just me though.
somewhat a matter of semantics, since the standards for a stay and an injunction are the same under Rule 32, but their point I think is that the trial court enters SQOs and they would have formally entered a stay or injunction pending appeal if anything, and that it should have been styled as such, and shouldn’t have been called an SQO but since you could variously characterize the intent of the SQO requested to be either a kind of stay or an injunction (as the courts have described them many times), it again — to a certain degree — comes down to a matter of semantics. not that the law doesn’t trouble itself with semantics frequently. sometimes the law obsesses about semantics and rightly so, it’s not to be necessarily dismissive of the distinction, it’s just to say that sometimes when such minutiae is invoked, it’s important to look and see whether that kind of rigor is evenly required and applied across all contexts.
FYI, I saw you liked my comment regarding my view of the value of APE yesterday (my view ran counter to the narrative most playing arbitration were saying) and am guessing that was part and parcel of you closing out that side. Based on how things are moving looks to have been a good move. I think Friday is when the fall in share price really hits.
I had felt that APE might hold up until the conversion was complete after the first day of trading just because of pure momentum as usual. Once it clicked to me that Antara had been buying APE at any price blow $1.70 and selling anything above $1.80 that it was because that is where they thought the price would settle so yeah I hit the eject button. Still have my puts on the other end. We'll see how that goes seeing as I'm in options purgatory until the get things set up for the R/S
Chance this is kind of a coincidence don’t you think? Why would VC Zurn pick both AMC cases? I really don’t know that I would be as pumped about the Chancery Court as you appear to be. I smell a rat.
Related cases are always assigned to the same Vice Chancellor handling the existing case involving similar parties and subject matter. It would be crazy to do it any other way and require two judges to get up to speed on identical complex subject matter.
But are cases assigned or can the judges choose the cases. I think that there is a conspiracy. I have zero respect for either Zurn or the Delaware Court of Chancery. She’s completely wrong that the “no opt out” can’t be challenged. It will be I assure you. Sorry but I think that the fix was in before the collusive lawsuit was even filed and if you don’t think that Allegheny is a collusive lawsuit I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. You needn’t cancel me I’m canceling my subscription. You seem like a decent sort but I can’t stomach apologists for this corrupt court or it’s corrupt judges.
(I’m trying very hard to ignore all the nonsense in-fighting you two are doing here in the comments.)
She will sign off on the final judgment as soon as the attorneys finalize their fee, which the opinion says the parties should confer on after the settlement shares have been issued. There’s some question as to whether that means issued “by” the company or issued “to” the shareholders, so we’ll see a filing from the parties with the final fee before she can finalize the judgment for appeal.
Chance, as always thanks so much for your up-to-the-minute updates! May I ask how you access this information? I was looking at https://courts.delaware.gov/opinions/ and I don't see anything from the Supreme Court.
Pretty irritatingly, they didn't put their Order on the website. I got it from FileandServeXpress. As Editor-in-Chief of The Chancery Daily (the legal edition, my day job), we get notifications of literally everything that goes in and out of both the Supreme Court and the Court of Chancery and I review every single one of them every day-- it's somewhat easier being a member of the bar, but there is also access for non-lawyers, although I'm not going to lie and say it's not cumbersome to sign up. It's also $40/document to download things, which is why I uploaded it for y'all to access, just in case the Supreme Court never gets around to posting it on the web. I'm not sure, but it seems very suboptimal, but I guess that's why I'm here, trying to fill these gaps.
I know this legal saga is over as far as anyone investing is concerned but today made me think back to the court case and the discussion about business needs with regard to needing the settlement approved sooner.
If you recall AMC said they needed a ruling sooner in order to be able to raise money in the second half of August as otherwise they would not be able to find a banker to work with in time as they go on vacation through Labor day.
In the end, AMC got the settlement approved a bit later than they hoped for and it actually resulted in them not having a distribution agreement in place till today (9/6/2023). As a result they were not able to fund-raise second half of August.
While no guarantee they would have had a better result fund-raising has the settlement been approved sooner, pretty obvious that as things worked out they are now in major trouble (i.e. with the stock declining so much in value).
In any case, kind of proves the point that AMC was correct in the importance of having the settlement approved sooner than later.
update for anybody still watching this space. settlement shares were paid into my account end of day on Friday, but my other brokers seem to still be pending so it's still a bit uneven.
You’ve been awfully quiet. Despite your endless praise, Zurn failed spectacularly and destroyed shareholders. Nothing can be said I guess. Your court is a joke.
That’s weird because the only the I could find in that was when I mentioned the author (Chance) and that’s when you say you stoped reading, so you’ll have to forgive the question. I would think more comments equate to more sustack hype and free publicity but Idunno. What did I do to you, if you don’t mind another “off topic” question.
Let’s try this again. I get no crops in exchange for renting the land. Not even one soybean. I rent the land for $110/acre. I receive payments in cash. The farmer pays the same rent regardless of the profit he makes after selling his crops. There’s no sharing involved. I believe that the farmer makes about $35K by farming my land after expenses. He has a similar arrangement with multiple landowners.
As a matter of fact I just sold the property for $40K an acre. The farmer is sad.
Hey check out Donald Trump Jr. IG page . Richard Grenell posted the same thing. Your Grandma’s head might explode. Tucker Carlson tonight.
So you did not see “east of Eden” then… still sounds like sharecropping, wether you get a share of the crops of no. LMGTS you are sharecroppping on land you’ve sold? Or you’re making all this up as you go along? Might be hard for you to imagine but a woman who survived in nahzi Germany is beyond any such Reaction. I don’t imagine you’ve ever had to survive by dumpster diving for scraps of beef fat? DJTJ is sadder than his father, because he had a choice and he chose douchebaggery, I wouldn’t waste a second of my time like that. I have a modicum of self respect. I can’t relate to your POV at all. Tucker “Swanson” Carlson is the heir to the Swanson frozen food brand and is only on tv being a mindless automaton because of his family’s money and his lack of self respect. I can see why you don’t like me, as I have a somewhat functioning brain.
1. Why would I bother to make anything up?? The farmer was growing soybeans. I purchased the land in 2013 for $11,000/acre, subdivided into three lots and sold for $40,000/acre in 2023. The farmer is sad. I am happy. Decent return on investment and no Wall Street criminals to deal with. I’m going to buy a condo with some of the proceeds so that I can “share crop” it to a tenant.
WRT your boring grandmother stories I had a great grandmother (also Catholic) who was murdered by the Nazis for hiding Jews. I win. You spelled “whether” wrong.
I don’t like you because I think that you’re a big-mouthed know -nothing idiot. I know that Chance is going to ban me for this but it’s worth it. Your mother should have swallowed.
I will ban you for this kind of bullshit. I should ban you now. I might. I don't know. I'm highly irritated with all the nonsense, off-topic conversation I've had to read through to see if there's anything worth responding to in this thread, ngl.
I don't understand why you want to be harassing me. The farmer got the shit end of the stick in East of Eden, so maybe you saw it, but you certainly didn’t understand it. You are entitled to your own opinion [] and as they say, you are what you eat brah. Author is prolly too busy to give any fucks what either of us think. See you out there kiddo. Stay gold.
I would like for you both to stop fcking fighting on here. You are both needling each other about things that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter at hand, and of course, it predictably escalated. I don’t think either of you can say you are genuinely being kind or nice to one another, but you absolutely cannot say you are moving the conversation forward about anything relevant to what we are here to discuss. So, please, just stop.
Uh, “Sharecropping is a legal arrangement with regard to agricultural land in which a landowner allows a tenant to use the land in return for a share of the crops produced on that land. Sharecropping has a long history and there are a wide range of different situations and types of agreements that have used a form of the system. Some are governed by tradition, and others by law. The French métayage, the Catalan masoveria, the Castilian mediero, the Slavic połownictwo and izdolshchina, the Italian mezzadria, and the Islamic system of muzara‘a, are examples of legal systems that have supported sharecropping.Wikipedia” sounds kinda like share cropping Rae
Trump is the biggest shyster to come out of New York City, he was bred to be it to boot, he is the personification of a petulant child, he never should have graduated kindergarten and certainly never should have been allowed to pay others to accomplish “his” academic achievements. He’s a summers eve only because he’s a useless douchebag. On a lighter note I may have found the authors theme song looking for this other song that was more relevant to this convo, and they are words to live by imo. https://youtu.be/juu9kXky2_o
You don't like Chance? I think she’s dreamy. But I do think she should change her tag line from By Chance to Per Chance but that’s just the Shakespeare nerd in me. “[Smart] girls up front!” -Kathryn Hann
In the final opinion, Zurn addressed it. She considered Grelish's objection and exceptions to her objections to the Special Master's report and recommendations.
"On July 27, stockholder Karen Grelish submitted a filing contesting the July 21 Opinion’s finding that her Objection, and thus her exception, were noncompliant. The next day, I stated I was treating her filing as a motion for reconsideration and set a briefing schedule pursuant to Rule 59(f). On August 4, Plaintiffs filed a response making clear that Grelish’s Objection was compliant under the more lenient standards summarized in the July 21 Opinion, her Objection was filed without including the proof of ownership she submitted, and “[d]ue to an error flowing from [her] multiple submissions,” only Grelish’s non-Objection communications were provided to the Special Master. I thank Plaintiffs for this clarification, and will consider Grelish’s exception as compliant."
So her resubmission from today of the motion to re-argue…..? It seems like Judge Zurn’s denial from the first submission was a bit of a how to on correcting the motion, which she did today. Thoughts?
No. VCZ is of the opinion that Grelish's objections were considered already in the Aug 11 opinion approving the settlement. As the record is closed I would think all these motions of reargument from Grelish are simply a waste of time as they will be summarily denied. You want to appeal that is one thing but to simply file motions with the trial court as if this case is still being decided makes no sense (to me at least).
Well, unpopular opinion here I am aware, but I no longer have faith in justice or our system to protect and to serve. Unless you're brunching at your summer homes together.
I WILL NOT SELL IN THE RED. I will sit here until they take the stock to $0.0. I'm going to be sitting here with a portfolio of a tiny handful of stocks clinched in my fist after this reverse split and I'm not letting go because I'm going to be here as lawsuit after lawsuit piles in.
This isn't about persons being unjustly upset or throwing a tantrum because of a simple ignorance about Market or financial mechanics and investment strategy. I hear people trying to suggest that anyone who has invested in AMC and is complaining about a loss right now doesn't understand the risk involved with investing. But this isn't about fair market or risk involved with investing. This is about fraud and collusion and corruption which has been a Casino set up and rigged to fleece people of money. This isn't about true and fair market value of company valuation or investment acumen or inaccurate TA. This is about persons and entities and agencies from the top down actively or inactively participating in allowing the theft of an incredible amount of money from millions of investors who are us citizens. I won't get into any conspiracy theory sort of stuff. But let's just say issuing stimulus checks to provide Capital into a tanking economy so that you have gaslit your citizens into believing that you have done something good for them, which in essence could be an incredible lie and The dumping of money was done as a socially acceptable and politically safe eay to ensure that money was turned right back around and handed in a beautiful little package with a pretty bow back to corporations and the government and one percenters. AMC is not a simple discussion about not understanding the risks of the stock market and investing. It has been a highly manipulated engineered and controlled event by so many hands and powers that I don't know if anyone can even unravel at all. And so Justice is not closing a blind eye and patting people on the back and cheering on Ivy Leaguers and their friends and all of the millionaires and billionaires who in the end will be likely be nonplussed that they have more money to buy another home or an extra car or go on a vacation or to a fancy restaurant on the backs of the persons who they have effectively economically enslaved to continue paying for their lifestyles of excess while suffering in their own. It's tyrannical, and anyone supporting that BS is not ignorant. Stupid, maybe. Lacking empathy, morals, ethics, or basic human decency, most definitely.
I remember going to my first hockey game. I was an ice skater and the guy I had been dating for 10 years through college , grad , and into my first couple of professional jobs loved hockey so he bought season tickets to the local franchise, and we went and watched. And I was shot. I kept asking questions about why they were being allowed to do things which were clearly against the rules, and he laughed and said that it was hockey and they were allowed to do that "a little". I remember that. I questioned him for clarification because it didn't make any sense to me. He explained to me that they were allowed to get away with things that were outside of the rules, like aggressive checking, and the referees were going to allow that. "A little". Or a lot. Really just depending. No Rhyme or reason. No consistency, completely fluid and changeable. And definitely not based on equity or any sort of fairness across different players for teams.
I wasn't aware the law and our justice system worked that way. Okay, I actually was because I'm not totally ignorant to the workings of systems, and I've been present in courtrooms both as a professional providing testimony and personally seeking justice, but I still held out Faith and Hope that what was right would prevail in the end and not be determined by alliances or behind closed door agreements or pocketbooks. Watching this public AMC hockey game, where players were cheating and lying and working outside of orders of the Court and then being allowed to get away with it by the court system, is honestly crushing to anyone who has previously been very patriotic and believed in our country and the principles upon which it was founded. My grandfather was a highly decorated World War II Army vet who kept a lot of boys alive behind the lines in italy. My daddy was at Nellis and getting ready to be deployed to Laos during the Vietnam conflict when I was born. I may be a bleeding heart, but I'm also very patriotic and become choked up and teary every time our National Anthem plays, but I am heart sick and disgusted watching our legal system at play in this game. Which appears to have had the outcome predetermined before the play even started.
My three children and I truly believed truth mattered, and the right people would be held accountable and not get their way and be able to continue bullying, lying, cheating, and stealing based on their social, financial, and political position. We watched as things unfolded and irrefutable evidence poured in, so to see even the Delaware Supreme Court attempt to Gaslight investors into buying the imminent bankruptcy b******* rhetoric AMC tried to Pedal says everything anyone should need to know. With it being completely irrefutable that this is 100% categorically untrue, and was at best highly manipulative, and at worst and more likely, a patent lie, how can we believe in a system which is supposed to Serve and Protect us yet behaves as though either they are blind or deaf or believe us to be stupid.
I am not stupid. My children are not stupid. Millions of other investors are not stupid. We are not wrong. Everything about this is wrong.
I am sorry for your loss. Unfortunately, the facts don't agree with your opinions about the company's financial condition. Even after the ruling today which paves the way for the company to raise new equity capital, AMC bonds are trading with a yield-to-maturity of 30%. If you don't what that means or what it implies, perhaps you have ventured into something that you don't really understand. Even iconic brands and good businesses sometimes end up in bankruptcy and the reason is always the same: too much debt. AMC was dangerously over-leveraged before the pandemic and that remains true today even after all the capital they've raised.
The discount on their debt indicates that where people are actually focused on an actual return from operations they are looking at AMC as high risk of bankruptcy. Once conversion happens and the things propping up both AMC and APE share prices are gone, would have to think we have a new price discovery based on a high risk of bankruptcy (like the debt). Will not be pretty for those holding either (APE at $2 a share implies a market cap of over $3B... for a company with a high risk of bankruptcy about to engage in heavy dilution, that value is sheer insanity).
You are so wrong. They were no where near bankruptcy and everyone new out including Zurn. It's all corrupt.
Jon please don’t take this the wrong way but we New Yorkers have a quaint saying. “Don’t p*** on my leg and tell me it’s raining.”
You clearly do not understand ( or perhaps you don’t wish to understand) what happened. Let’s see what the criminals try with GME. Profitable and no debt. Ryan Cohen isn’t a criminal so that’s a plus.
Exactly! All the apologists for the criminals sicken me. It ain’t over yet. #FACT
Agreed
You shouldn’t. Take a look at what atrocities were committed against the residents of Maui. See #MauiFires on X
You couldn’t pay me to go to that website because that dude is a wack ass poser
Then you’ll never know what really happened. The MSM won’t tell you. You might try Reddit r/conservatives or communities.win
I am so diametrically opposed to GOP hogwash I am in another universe. It is my actual job to see through bullshit and share the truth of an imaginary situation and all I see when any current member of the GOP speaks is… Germany in 1933. People like to try to romanticize the past, but my grandmother grew up there had she said it SUCKED. She says if you support TRUMP or any of these GOP sycophants, you are among the dumbest SOB’s on planet earth; basically a 97 year old woman born in NAZI germany thinks you are dumb af. I think the fact that I find my self on the same side of the isle as those who are actively trying to criminalize my existence does more to show how wack af our “legal” and “educational” systems are than give testimony to my ignorance. I was lied to. I believed that lie. I am not the bad guy.
That’s nice. Trump is not actually GOP and certainly not a GOP sycophant but that aside what does your grandmother suggest? Perhaps then we’ll see who the “dumbest SOB” truly is.
BTW I hate the actual. GOP. I enjoy telling them to pound sand when they ask me for money.
GOP stands for greedy old phonies
She says Anyone but trump, or any GOP candidate though she seems fond of nicki Halley 🤢. not sure if you realize how conservative a white Catholic women born in nahzi Germany is but Ive never been introduced to that side of the family. So very af.
You might want to look at the YT video I linked about. Did Zurn choose both AMC cases? Why?
There's no conspiracy. It's an intentional assignment process to streamline subject matter when there is an existing case.
However, while the argument might be made it streamlines the process, an equally value assertion could be made that in the chance of any bias or perhaps just different approaches and opinions assignment of cases to different judges might ideally provide a sort of checks and balances which could improve opportunity or chances for fair decision making and potentially raise the likelihood of Justice.
There are, in fact, some countries where decision making is a made by discourse between groups of three judges so, again, ideally there is a more robust and nuanced discussion which would occur leading to final judgment.
Please let me validate your opinion. The Delaware Court of Chancery has outed itself. Court of equity? Bosh.
Well that explains this morning's price movement rather succinctly.
Yes. I had no faith in tbe Court. I sold on Friday.
I was unsure where things were going to fall yesterday but seeing what I should have, that the court was going to apply the abuse of discretion standard. There was no plain error on the matter of the decision and that was that.
It's easy to feel like hindsight is 20/20 with these things. I would say that there's a bit of retconning with the Supreme Court's logic here. They have just as frequently questioned the ever living hell out of the Court of Chancery's assessment of things when they choose to, so it's the kind of thing that's only obvious once it's done.
Well and part of it is just my inexperience with how things roll. I had recently been reading the appeal of the Robinhood taking away the buy button for meme stocks case and the federal court looked at the trial court's dismissal de novo. So I got in my head that the injunction would be looked at de novo in this situation and then if we got to the bridge of the actual settlement I knew those were looked at based on abuse of discretion from what I had read.
I guess to more clearly state what I meant that if the Supreme Court looked at the SQO de novo that would have a much wider chance of something off the wall happening than under abuse of discretion which is more narrowly tailored. Going to need to re-read the ruling but I wouldn't be surprised if there was some retconning. Just footnote 16 just gave me a vibe that they were a bit annoyed with the whole thing to begin with. Maybe that is just me though.
Now what is the difference between a "stay" and a "status quo order" in this context?
somewhat a matter of semantics, since the standards for a stay and an injunction are the same under Rule 32, but their point I think is that the trial court enters SQOs and they would have formally entered a stay or injunction pending appeal if anything, and that it should have been styled as such, and shouldn’t have been called an SQO but since you could variously characterize the intent of the SQO requested to be either a kind of stay or an injunction (as the courts have described them many times), it again — to a certain degree — comes down to a matter of semantics. not that the law doesn’t trouble itself with semantics frequently. sometimes the law obsesses about semantics and rightly so, it’s not to be necessarily dismissive of the distinction, it’s just to say that sometimes when such minutiae is invoked, it’s important to look and see whether that kind of rigor is evenly required and applied across all contexts.
How’s that arbitrage event working out for you? I hope it goes to $.66 before C/RS. #CHECKMATE
I closed out my long end for a profit yesterday. Stay salty. 😘
FYI, I saw you liked my comment regarding my view of the value of APE yesterday (my view ran counter to the narrative most playing arbitration were saying) and am guessing that was part and parcel of you closing out that side. Based on how things are moving looks to have been a good move. I think Friday is when the fall in share price really hits.
I had felt that APE might hold up until the conversion was complete after the first day of trading just because of pure momentum as usual. Once it clicked to me that Antara had been buying APE at any price blow $1.70 and selling anything above $1.80 that it was because that is where they thought the price would settle so yeah I hit the eject button. Still have my puts on the other end. We'll see how that goes seeing as I'm in options purgatory until the get things set up for the R/S
Sure ya’ did 😁.
I’m ALWAYS salty and it ain’t tears. I know something none of ya”ll know (but you will). I kind of feel like adding Nah…. Nah…. to this comment.😎
If you say “James woods is Biden” ima jump off a bridge.
Chance this is kind of a coincidence don’t you think? Why would VC Zurn pick both AMC cases? I really don’t know that I would be as pumped about the Chancery Court as you appear to be. I smell a rat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ttWsDGaI6M
Related cases are always assigned to the same Vice Chancellor handling the existing case involving similar parties and subject matter. It would be crazy to do it any other way and require two judges to get up to speed on identical complex subject matter.
But are cases assigned or can the judges choose the cases. I think that there is a conspiracy. I have zero respect for either Zurn or the Delaware Court of Chancery. She’s completely wrong that the “no opt out” can’t be challenged. It will be I assure you. Sorry but I think that the fix was in before the collusive lawsuit was even filed and if you don’t think that Allegheny is a collusive lawsuit I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. You needn’t cancel me I’m canceling my subscription. You seem like a decent sort but I can’t stomach apologists for this corrupt court or it’s corrupt judges.
Chance why has the VC not signed off on her final ruling yet? What’s the hold up.
(I’m trying very hard to ignore all the nonsense in-fighting you two are doing here in the comments.)
She will sign off on the final judgment as soon as the attorneys finalize their fee, which the opinion says the parties should confer on after the settlement shares have been issued. There’s some question as to whether that means issued “by” the company or issued “to” the shareholders, so we’ll see a filing from the parties with the final fee before she can finalize the judgment for appeal.
Chance, as always thanks so much for your up-to-the-minute updates! May I ask how you access this information? I was looking at https://courts.delaware.gov/opinions/ and I don't see anything from the Supreme Court.
Pretty irritatingly, they didn't put their Order on the website. I got it from FileandServeXpress. As Editor-in-Chief of The Chancery Daily (the legal edition, my day job), we get notifications of literally everything that goes in and out of both the Supreme Court and the Court of Chancery and I review every single one of them every day-- it's somewhat easier being a member of the bar, but there is also access for non-lawyers, although I'm not going to lie and say it's not cumbersome to sign up. It's also $40/document to download things, which is why I uploaded it for y'all to access, just in case the Supreme Court never gets around to posting it on the web. I'm not sure, but it seems very suboptimal, but I guess that's why I'm here, trying to fill these gaps.
Well, this just makes me even more thankful for your generosity!
Thank you so much!
1. Who said that AA was AMC. Of course AA won’t use his own money to save AMC. The guy has been trying to bankrupt the company since he was installed.
I know this legal saga is over as far as anyone investing is concerned but today made me think back to the court case and the discussion about business needs with regard to needing the settlement approved sooner.
If you recall AMC said they needed a ruling sooner in order to be able to raise money in the second half of August as otherwise they would not be able to find a banker to work with in time as they go on vacation through Labor day.
In the end, AMC got the settlement approved a bit later than they hoped for and it actually resulted in them not having a distribution agreement in place till today (9/6/2023). As a result they were not able to fund-raise second half of August.
While no guarantee they would have had a better result fund-raising has the settlement been approved sooner, pretty obvious that as things worked out they are now in major trouble (i.e. with the stock declining so much in value).
In any case, kind of proves the point that AMC was correct in the importance of having the settlement approved sooner than later.
Is there anything VCZ can do because AA did not follow the court's settlement agreement and he lied to the court?
Chance can you please provide the link again to all the legal documents in this case? My email is m4200@aol.com thank you again
update for anybody still watching this space. settlement shares were paid into my account end of day on Friday, but my other brokers seem to still be pending so it's still a bit uneven.
the occ released a memo https://infomemo.theocc.com/infomemos?number=53089 noting that settlement of the the options will be occurring now.
no takesy backsies.
i'll see you all in the BK court for the District of Delaware next year (i kid i kid, it'll probably be in 2025).
You’ve been awfully quiet. Despite your endless praise, Zurn failed spectacularly and destroyed shareholders. Nothing can be said I guess. Your court is a joke.
What are you talking about? I like Chance a lot. It’s you I don’t like. She’s probably going to be annoyed about our very off topic exchange though.
That’s weird because the only the I could find in that was when I mentioned the author (Chance) and that’s when you say you stoped reading, so you’ll have to forgive the question. I would think more comments equate to more sustack hype and free publicity but Idunno. What did I do to you, if you don’t mind another “off topic” question.
Whatever. Go to Donald Trump Jr.’s Instagram page. See statement in black box. OMG! OMG! OMG!
That’s not what “ I know that you don’t know” though. I am available for consults.
Thats a hard pass bruv
That guys smokes more crack that hunter biden though…
He always speaks well of you. 🤷🏻♀️
I met a woman who was DJTJ’s kindergarten teacher “when I asked him to pick up his mat and put it away, he told me to go fuck myself.”
No. It isn’t share cropping.🙄
Let’s try this again. I get no crops in exchange for renting the land. Not even one soybean. I rent the land for $110/acre. I receive payments in cash. The farmer pays the same rent regardless of the profit he makes after selling his crops. There’s no sharing involved. I believe that the farmer makes about $35K by farming my land after expenses. He has a similar arrangement with multiple landowners.
As a matter of fact I just sold the property for $40K an acre. The farmer is sad.
Hey check out Donald Trump Jr. IG page . Richard Grenell posted the same thing. Your Grandma’s head might explode. Tucker Carlson tonight.
So you did not see “east of Eden” then… still sounds like sharecropping, wether you get a share of the crops of no. LMGTS you are sharecroppping on land you’ve sold? Or you’re making all this up as you go along? Might be hard for you to imagine but a woman who survived in nahzi Germany is beyond any such Reaction. I don’t imagine you’ve ever had to survive by dumpster diving for scraps of beef fat? DJTJ is sadder than his father, because he had a choice and he chose douchebaggery, I wouldn’t waste a second of my time like that. I have a modicum of self respect. I can’t relate to your POV at all. Tucker “Swanson” Carlson is the heir to the Swanson frozen food brand and is only on tv being a mindless automaton because of his family’s money and his lack of self respect. I can see why you don’t like me, as I have a somewhat functioning brain.
1. Why would I bother to make anything up?? The farmer was growing soybeans. I purchased the land in 2013 for $11,000/acre, subdivided into three lots and sold for $40,000/acre in 2023. The farmer is sad. I am happy. Decent return on investment and no Wall Street criminals to deal with. I’m going to buy a condo with some of the proceeds so that I can “share crop” it to a tenant.
WRT your boring grandmother stories I had a great grandmother (also Catholic) who was murdered by the Nazis for hiding Jews. I win. You spelled “whether” wrong.
I don’t like you because I think that you’re a big-mouthed know -nothing idiot. I know that Chance is going to ban me for this but it’s worth it. Your mother should have swallowed.
I will ban you for this kind of bullshit. I should ban you now. I might. I don't know. I'm highly irritated with all the nonsense, off-topic conversation I've had to read through to see if there's anything worth responding to in this thread, ngl.
I don't understand why you want to be harassing me. The farmer got the shit end of the stick in East of Eden, so maybe you saw it, but you certainly didn’t understand it. You are entitled to your own opinion [] and as they say, you are what you eat brah. Author is prolly too busy to give any fucks what either of us think. See you out there kiddo. Stay gold.
I would like for you both to stop fcking fighting on here. You are both needling each other about things that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter at hand, and of course, it predictably escalated. I don’t think either of you can say you are genuinely being kind or nice to one another, but you absolutely cannot say you are moving the conversation forward about anything relevant to what we are here to discuss. So, please, just stop.
Uh, “Sharecropping is a legal arrangement with regard to agricultural land in which a landowner allows a tenant to use the land in return for a share of the crops produced on that land. Sharecropping has a long history and there are a wide range of different situations and types of agreements that have used a form of the system. Some are governed by tradition, and others by law. The French métayage, the Catalan masoveria, the Castilian mediero, the Slavic połownictwo and izdolshchina, the Italian mezzadria, and the Islamic system of muzara‘a, are examples of legal systems that have supported sharecropping.Wikipedia” sounds kinda like share cropping Rae
Thank you for the clarification. She apparently favors RINOs. Nicki Hailey. Good God!
I agree with your opinion of the GOP. Neither Trump or I are GOP.
Trump is the biggest shyster to come out of New York City, he was bred to be it to boot, he is the personification of a petulant child, he never should have graduated kindergarten and certainly never should have been allowed to pay others to accomplish “his” academic achievements. He’s a summers eve only because he’s a useless douchebag. On a lighter note I may have found the authors theme song looking for this other song that was more relevant to this convo, and they are words to live by imo. https://youtu.be/juu9kXky2_o
I’m sorry. I stopped reading after “ the”.
You don't like Chance? I think she’s dreamy. But I do think she should change her tag line from By Chance to Per Chance but that’s just the Shakespeare nerd in me. “[Smart] girls up front!” -Kathryn Hann
What about Karen Grelish? Why is it that nobody will talk much about her objection? They “lost” her paperwork. She has a relight to be heard right?
Sorry for the typo. ‘Right’ to be heard. :)
In the final opinion, Zurn addressed it. She considered Grelish's objection and exceptions to her objections to the Special Master's report and recommendations.
"On July 27, stockholder Karen Grelish submitted a filing contesting the July 21 Opinion’s finding that her Objection, and thus her exception, were noncompliant. The next day, I stated I was treating her filing as a motion for reconsideration and set a briefing schedule pursuant to Rule 59(f). On August 4, Plaintiffs filed a response making clear that Grelish’s Objection was compliant under the more lenient standards summarized in the July 21 Opinion, her Objection was filed without including the proof of ownership she submitted, and “[d]ue to an error flowing from [her] multiple submissions,” only Grelish’s non-Objection communications were provided to the Special Master. I thank Plaintiffs for this clarification, and will consider Grelish’s exception as compliant."
So her resubmission from today of the motion to re-argue…..? It seems like Judge Zurn’s denial from the first submission was a bit of a how to on correcting the motion, which she did today. Thoughts?
No. VCZ is of the opinion that Grelish's objections were considered already in the Aug 11 opinion approving the settlement. As the record is closed I would think all these motions of reargument from Grelish are simply a waste of time as they will be summarily denied. You want to appeal that is one thing but to simply file motions with the trial court as if this case is still being decided makes no sense (to me at least).