On 04/12/2016 07:59 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Craig Haynie <cchayniepub...@gmail.com
<mailto:cchayniepub...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The legal case does not hinge on whether the device works. As the
agreement is worded, IH pays IF and WHEN the ERV signs a document
that the device performed to certain specifications. IH does not
have an option to bail if they don't agree with the report.
Two things:
1. There is more than one ERV.
Who are the others? IH has the right, in the agreement, to have advisors
who question and observe the ERV, but they don't sign the final document.
2. It would be insane to pay $89 million based on a report written by
Penon. I would not pay 89 cents. It would be insane to agree he is an
expert. I am sure I.H. did not do that.
Absolutely! Which is why the agreement is strange; or at the very least,
wouldn't have been made unless Darden was confident in the device
beforehand. As I read the agreement, IH doesn't have an opt-out clause,
and this makes sense from Rossi's point of view. Rossi will do the
one-year test if an outside ERV, whom both groups agree upon, make the
final decision. I doubt he would have signed it if, at the end, IH could
just opt-out.
Craig
