^You are taking this very personally.
Godism is the president of Marc’s fan club if you haven’t noticed and would probably defend him on an OJ-like murder charge.
Thanks Bill, I appreciate that.
That pretty much sums it up. Good job.
Thank you.
When considering downside risk, one who owns an asset should consider a long out option. The asset owner pays a premium for the downside risk protection and thats it. If the asset declines in value the seller of the put pays the long. For those unfamiliar with the legal profession, put options are an option. Just saying…
thats all us folks outside of america… where it could only in such a place be
I suppose the question becomes who owns the asset, and who owns the put, in this case?
I’m not seeing how the payoffs to a suit are equivalent to a long put. At least not a “Standard” put - in a standard put, you receive the payoff unconditionally as long as the value of the underlying is less than the strike. However, a lawsuit has a payoff that (1) isn’t directly tied to value, (2) pays off only if the suit is won, and (3) Has an uncertain premium (i.e. the cost can vary greatly.
So, in this case, the person suing has to be much more strategic, and assess the likelihood of winning and trade this AND the magnitude of the likely payoff at various points and play them off against the increase in costs (laywers don’t work cheaply).
Of course, I could be wrong - it happens a lot. If I am, show me where.
Nearly 20 years ago to this day, OJ *WAS* found not guilty for the criminal charge of murder…
#DidntYouHear?
I’m sorry but it seems to me questionable if you are complying with the same rules you ask others to abide by?