Nockname,It is dangerous to predict court outcome from the...

Nockname,
It is dangerous to predict court outcome from the limited information from Newspapers.
As reported Stark is questioning what constitute revenue including whether it should include the interests. Unless proven otherwise, as you stated it should include interests under accounting rules. However I believe Stark is bringing the dispute further back in time to the period upon which the parties agreed to amend the covenants, in other words Stark is asking the court to determine what stark/cmq had intented the term “revenue “ to mean at the time of the amendments. Obviously CMQ is asserting the accounting meaning for “revenue” is what CMQ had intended all along.

I think there are other issues being fought over in a trial that ran for that many days. The reported news article is inclined towards CMQ. It will be interesting to hear for anyone who attended the court hearing on what evidences were presented.

It will be interesting to see how the market react tomorrow. As for me, predicting legal outcomes from newspaper article is not something I feel comfortable with!

Good luck.