court activities, page-23

The argument hinges on what defines profit.
Seems those that know these things better than you or i (ie big money investors) have decided its not the way CHM sees it, but as you say they will get their time in court if TS wishes them to argue this point.
Apart from that im not sure what CHM is pushing forward towards... the precipice perhaps?
About all you can say is CHM has been a sandbox for solicitors to play in with a board of directors salivating at even a whiff of a payout however remote it is.
Gardie you defended the company for a long time but not once have you sympathised for the shareholders who have lost a lot, after all isnt that what your hero Benny said , that he was "doing for the shareholders" when he really "meant doing it to the shareholders".