"Paau mischaracterized the judge not caring about the 60%."

I think you have misunderstood what I said. My claim is that: "a court won't hear the argument". The merits of the 60% rate are irrelevant if it is never heard in court.

Selling the "mining data" idea seems to come up when clutching at straws. Even $200m doesn't get us to "a minimum of $1". I do give you credit for at least trying to justify your $1 claims. Maybe Crystallex has something of value to GRZ but I suspect it is more of comedic rather than monetary value.

I've seen a couple of posts suggesting "negotiations". What's that all about - who is negotiating what and with whom and when?