Yep, especially because none of them is actually in the statement of claims. Shareprice volatility? Nope, not in the statement of claims. What about conflict of interest? Nope, not even worth a mention apparently. I don't think even the latest $200 million is in the statement of claims. Furthermore, if you look at the particulars for the damages claims you would find discrepancies in the timings but also that all of them are highly speculative in nature with the causal links being "inferred" by ISX.
As you can read from the example above, ISX was merely in discussions stage with Lottoland. Feel free to read the particulars yourself but the damage claims are very speculative, the logic of which runs contrary to the view that ISX often uses to describe past contracts. The view that it isn't possible to forecast the revenue to be generated from a contract, even a signed one. Yet for the claims suddenly it is possible to forecast revenue from an imaginary one? Not just for a year by the way, but for 5 years!!!!!!
