I love it. This your best "positive" post ever. And I can understand why threw in the following:

"Hell no.  Many firms have taken and lost contingency cases; it's a roll of the dice."

You just didn't want to be known as the new competition for DABOSS...

I disagree with your ;point that DM was enaged in th roll of the dicewhen they signed on as the attorneys of record in this case on a contingency basis, with the provision that they will front costs that may exceed many millions. You are not giving them the credit due to DM. Lt m explain.

There are rull of the mill contingrncy fee agreements, and then there Contingency Fee Agreement that make you get a motgage on your house to pay for costs, because you are sure you will win the case.

Let me give you an example of the latter...

I signed up a case on contingency and agreed to front the costs, which are to be taken off any settlement, about 3 weeks ago. It was a no brainer that this was a case that would produce positive cash. The only question was "How Much, and How fast". 

I refuse to beleive that DM did not do a comprehensive evaluation of the EDIG case, at the highest level of their corporate structure, and they must have concluded that "It was a no brainer" that EDIG's case would produce some cash for them, with the only question being "How Much and How Fast.", before they signed on along the lines they did... 

I am not trying to second guess DM or any one here. I am merely saying that in the real life of trial attorneys such as the standard for "Sticking your neck out." It is NOT a "a roll of dice", as you put it. It using your knowledge and experience and put your arse on the line on  SURE BET...