It doesn’t but it may help you to understand in part why you are...

It doesn’t but it may help you to understand in part why you are in that situation. Misrepresentation by Watchstone of the dilution rate of cases acquired and hiding of a document according to this newspaper article.

It is clearer by the day that we look to have been cheated when buying the Quindell legal arm.

We are now suing Watchstone as a result. What we don’t know is how the claim is set up. Also we were paying external parties for due diligence so if the above is holding true we may no go after them. Time will tell.

Good to see Brad back for the quality of this forum’s sake.

It has been a battle when many posters have no concept of how the market works.

For example some posters say that a 95% dilution will happen.

Those poor souls forget (or try to deceive others) to take into account that a valuation of SGH must be completed before any D4E deal.

Embarrassing with that lack of knowledge.

Further to this do we really need a D4E at this stage?

Clearly the announcements are pointing to that direction too. First the D4E was due to be announced within the first few weeks. Then it changed to ‘in due course’.

To me that cast doubt about whether they have changed their mind on this.

We have a 600mill pounds lawsuit of Watchstone.
We have the 2017 full year results coming up.
We are hiring NIHL staff in the UK (a portfolio that was taken of the balance sheet)
We seem to have organic growth in the family law section in the UK.

So maybe the valuation is not that easy J

And just maybe we don’t need that D4E right away.

All in my opinion.

PS you wouldn’t have been in a loss if you hadn’t sold. But that is your choice.