I too will look to your assessments too. Later ...
A few other points; 1) I stand corrected, there have indeed been outcome out the US. I do apologise. I roughly maintain a US Case spreadsheet, but as up to US case 22 no valuation estimate was ever made, and since case 21 to 44 & CAN 2 no outcome is reported, as yet. It is sadly, a shoddy effort. Prior to US case It is impossible to keep track, based on the IMF-Bentham announcements.
2) It is interesting that IMF-Bentham publish a quarterly "Case Investment Portfolio" yet talk "Estimated Portfolio Value" in their AGM and so point to the two base methodologies there within the EPV? Two methodologies deemed mutually inappropriate between the Western US/Canada operations & Australia/ Hong Kong.
I don't go to Case Investment Portfolio in my valuation. I simply heed it as a good gauge of future growth, and so I am not too concerned how it'll permeate into judgements or otherwise as a tool for my future revenue projection.
3) I consider if rather poor form for Andrew Saker to gloss over the Lost Appeals at the AGM.
I can understand why he will want to wish these away, however the significance of these over the last three years mean these deserve some serious, considered top billing to a quorum of concerned shareholders. Do not fob equity holders. I expect better. A higher standard.
Lost Appeals are now approximately $56.9 - $12.9 (2016) $28.6 (2015) $15.4 (2014) m in cases turned against IMF-Bentham. That is $56.9 m taken directly from shareholders pockets, at the eleventh hour.
4) Another unaddressed issue is that Mr. Michael Bowen displeases 'someone of some power' on Mr. Bowen's appointment to this board.
This is a an ongoing unhappiness, and concerns me that egos come into play in this share. This must be resolved, it has gone on too long.
