You'd think that if the red-handed companies concluded that they had to pay up-- we can't win; we either pay XX now or XXX later-- they would acquiesce to equal pressure from us (EDIG/DM) to let concrete settlement numbers be announced. It's commonly done with other companies. If the pressure for non-disclosure comes from EDIG/DM why is that? We don't want big red-handed companies to know how much or how little we're settling for? If EDIG/DM is looking out for the shareholders by not disclosing the how little, that would be disappointing but make sense because the big R-H companies would obviously like to know that information. But if we are reaching strong settlements it should be announced vigorously and used, along with the facts of the case, as a tool of intimidation to win even greater settlements. A welcome side effect would be to cause more people to buy more shares. Maybe even me.
Newport Tom