I assume unsuccessful means there was no outcome, as @Violetaxl9 suggested above. This would mean nothing has changed for Beam. It still owns 50% of the Zoleo JV and the terms of the relationship with Roadpost remain intact, but the company has blown over $4,000,000 on legal fees.
My impression is that, from here, Beam could:
1. Initiate formal legal proceedings against Roadpost
- This would mean another expensive, drawn-out battle.
- Given the arbitration failed, I assume Beam's case is not as strong as management initially believed.
2. Continue with relationship as it stands
- Nothing has changed and the existing terms prevail (in Roadpost's favour...).
3. Negotiate further privately to achieve an amicable resolution
- Either company proposes acceptable amendments to the relationship.
- Either company makes a satisfactory offer to buy the other out.
#1 is probably unacceptable due to the costs and uncertain outcome after six months of arbitration.
#3 would be nice, but is unlikely to produce a result unless either party substantially revises its view of the JV's value.
That leaves #2...
In which case, Beam would continue the relationship but may need to re-evaluate how much effort it puts into Zoleo.
Realistically, as it stands, Zoleo is heading towards the end of its shelf life. Other products are eclipsing its features and it may no longer make sense for Beam to invest in upgrading the hardware or features.
Beam could look to refocus its efforts elsewhere (e.g., Iridium GO!) and build other products that are sufficiently different from Zoleo so as not to infringe on the JV's rights.
Obviously, we'll find out more in the coming days, but those are my initial thoughts.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
