Discussion in 'Business, Careers & Education' started by mikeman, Feb 2, 2011.
Yes, because Yahoo has a large stake in Alibaba. They're going to make billions off the IPO.
Then squander it. The move in the price is smoke and mirrors.
I'm baffled by the reasoning behind a jury awarding $23B to a widow do a smoker. The number is likely to be reduced to double digit millions or less, so why do they bother with this process?
Because lawyers are involved.
LOL, I suppose my question is as redundant as the process.
The family has been award $16M in compensation and the punitive damages are likely to be completely overturned. The stock is now barely effected by it hours into the trading day.
Agreed. The headline $23B will be remembered and advertising for the law firm. The end result will be forgotten. I still don't get how a family gets many multiples of what someone could have earned in their lifetime for lost wages. Was a bus driver really going to make over $10M in his lifetime? Not just poking at this case but other cases as well.
16 million in compensation? No way in hell that guy had that sort of economic worth.
And you know this because you slept with him?
On top of that, is it news to them that smoking is bad for them? It's been fairly well known for about 60 years.
While this is a fantastic plea to emotion I have been involved in enough law suits to know, in broad strokes, how economic worth of an individual is usually arrived at. I sincerely doubt this poor gentleman has that much in future potential net earnings. I do not know Florida's laws for non-economic compensatory damages but I do know it has been capped by more than one state. 250k is a number the pops to mind, but again, don't know if Florida is so capped.
The soda industry is the next one in the cross hairs. It's where we were with tobacco in the 70's.
Imagine that, bad earnings being a drag on stock prices.
I'm not sure what the question is here. Yes, juries return goofy verdicts. But they're supposed to award what they think appropriate, guided by whatever factors the judge gave them. Those factors don't include many of the considerations reviewing courts use when reducing awards.
I haven't really paid attention to this. Are you sure it's just lost wages gong into that number? You're right that a lost wage claim per se should just be a projection of what the person likely would make over their earning years. But lots of other things go into an award of compensatory damages.
There are definitely caps like that in many states in medical malpractice cases. Some states may well have them in other types of tort cases too - but I haven't followed the whole tort reform movement in a number of years.
Eh, I understand the point you're trying to make, but soda today /=/ tobacco in the 70's by a long stretch.
The compensatory were $16 or 17 million. It was punitive that went into the billions.
I'm surprised it hasn't become an issue for them yet.
Who'd a thunk it, drinking sugar water leads to diabetes. I don't see this as quite the same, but I expect it will eventually become an issue.
No real point LD, just shaking my head at the 'process'.
Separate names with a comma.