MB is an open class action which I believe means they are not...

MB is an open class action which I believe means they are not limiting the claim as I understand it to their current registered SH's - 250m appears to be a max damages claim value as opposed to the current value for those registered SH only. Personally speaking I'm interested I the shakedown of the causation arguments. Assuming MB can maintain that SGH would have have raised capital for acquisition if they have divulged x then fair enough big mullah to be had. But frankly that is pie in the sky and extremely fanciful. MB will never make that stick. If SGH have failed in anything one can see how arguably there may be a risk surrounding maintenance of projected guidance. The interesting aspect of that will then be a determination of when perhaps they ought to have made a relevant disclosure..... is what was the threshold or catalyst for requiring that ..... it will not be fore instance a case didn't settle on x date..... it will be in the detail. I actually don't think they missed full year guidance by any significant margin on a turn over of almost a billion bucks either. However if there is a finding as above then there will be arguments around what caused the SP to drop.... e.g. SP dropping 50% attributable to Osborne reform announcements isn't a matter for which anyone can be compensated.... nor is short selling. For MB to establish the SP drop was attributable to a particular material non disclosure is a huge ask and hurdle to overcome. There best case would be to argue that a SH would not have purchased if they had know whatever it is that MB may establish should have been disclosed ... that isn't easy to establish .... great in hindsight but doesn't necessarily or always follow and not ever SH will get home on that contention.