Breaking Update: Court Unseals Potentially Devastating Testimony-Romney Said Stocks Sold at 1/10th

[onenote]

61. I've just spent a couple of hours quickly reviewing the entire transcript

and if there is anything there that anyone will give a rat's ass about, I missed it.

Its a dry as dust, painfully detailed and redundant, walk through of how, in 1991, Romney came up with his opinion of what the value of various classes of stock were in 1987. As best I could tell, there was no discussion of the relationship between that opinion and what the IPO price was in 1989. There was a discussion of how the company sold stock (not public but to a round of private investors) originally at .80/share in 1986 and for $2.90 in 1987 and how Romney himself bought less than he was entitled to buy in 1987 because he felt $2.90 was too high at that time given the restrictions on the stock's transferrability and other factors and how in 1987 or 1988 the board was hoping to be able to get $6/share in an IPO and thus rejected a low ball offer from Sears for the company.

In short, if there's something in this testimony that is worthy of spending any time on, someone should point it out. I suspect that what Allred is hoping is that her client can talk so she can talk about things that aren't in the testimony, such as whether he painted a more pessimistic picture of what he thought the company's prospects were to her than he believed, although his testimony indicates that two years before the IPO happened, he believed there was only a 25 percent chance of the IPO hitting $6.