Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I agree. With my Mod hat on.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Saldiven wrote:
@KK: Keep in mind that over the same time, the per-unit-cost for that item has gone up by almost 50% and the company as a whole has been engaged in sweeping cost cutting policies.

The sales figures are dollars, not units (boxes). Thus the cost per unit is irrelevant to the question of overall revenue.

I'm sorry if I was unclear. I just meant that the combination of cost cutting and price increases, while not totally alleviating the issues of reduced revenue, can combine to make the bottome line still appear profitable. This overall profitability would lead someone just looking at the shareholder reports to assume the company is doing just fine, even though their revenue stream might be less solid that it could be.

The bottom line in the balance sheet is not profit, it is income balanced against outgoings, (also assets, etc).

GW's income varied up and down during 2006-2012, but it did not plummet 75%. (Their profit varied also.)

 Sean_OBrien wrote:


Under penalty of perjury that should just be the US market. Remember - that is evidence that GW is using to demonstrate the value of their trademarks in the US market only...not saying that they wouldn't have goofed, but it is reasonable to assume that it is fairly accurate.

Considering other things that GW has been caught doing in this trial, I wouldn't put a 'mistake' past them...Or even a massage of the data.

 skyth wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:


Under penalty of perjury that should just be the US market. Remember - that is evidence that GW is using to demonstrate the value of their trademarks in the US market only...not saying that they wouldn't have goofed, but it is reasonable to assume that it is fairly accurate.

Considering other things that GW has been caught doing in this trial, I wouldn't put a 'mistake' past them...Or even a massage of the data.

massaging data is commonplace. If you were ever involved in some way (or know someone who was involved) in a legitimate lawsuit that involved an independent medical legal report, both sides will have their evaluator check you out, one report is completed honestly to the best of the doctor's ability and says you have a serious injury, the other says you're whinging and need a slap across the face, and then a tylenol for the slap, and continues to get paid irrespective of how cursory his inspection is, because he knows, that the insurance companies will keep paying them if they keep saying "no, you're fine, no insurance money for you". We can expect the same things here, and I haven't been following this thread closely, so I don't actually know whether GW hired its own experts to refute the report produced for CHS, but given that it hasn't popped up, I'm assuming--and more importantly shocked and surprised at--a lack of an expert on GW's side.

Yes - but it is simple sales data...produced by GW. The worst case scenario would be that they included Canada into it, because someone at GW Memphis wasn't able to figure out how to run a report for only US sales.

SELECT * FROM CorporateFinanceMonkey WHERE clue > 0
0 zero rows were returned

back to topic, I don't forsee how GW can use these numbers effectively to show that CHS is doing them any great harm. If anything this shows that the harm was done way before CHS ever got into the mix.

IIRC These figures were mostly about proving that GW had sold products with the relevant trademark names in the US before CHS started selling those products. No sales, no trademark.

I had considered going to watch the opening of trial but then I realized that I'd need to rent a rowboat in order to transverse the vast lake of slime that Moskin leaves behind as he enters the court.

Looking at that data it seems obvious why GW seems keen to do relatively minor updates to box sets.

Also the trial starts been pushed to June 3rd.

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
SELECT * FROM CorporateFinanceMonkey WHERE clue > 0
0 zero rows were returned

back to topic, I don't forsee how GW can use these numbers effectively to show that CHS is doing them any great harm. If anything this shows that the harm was done way before CHS ever got into the mix.

GW is not claiming lost profits as damages. GW is claiming Defendant's profits. It is sort of like unjust enrichment. You sold those, they belong to me, I get your profits. As opposed to, you sold those, my profits were harmed by this amount, you must make me whole by repaying that harm.

Ref drop in SM tactical boxes, dont forget the new starter set at the time would also have had some degree of an impact. I bought all my tactical marines of eBay from then on and picked up a few bits here and there.

The move to June 3. Judge seems a bit fed up.

lol:
"The parties are advised that the trial date will not be continued again, and that
they are expected to make appropriate arrangements to try the case starting on that date
irrespective of what contingencies may occur between now and then."

 judgedoug wrote:
lol:
"The parties are advised that the trial date will not be continued again, and that
they are expected to make appropriate arrangements to try the case starting on that date
irrespective of what contingencies may occur between now and then."

Translation: "You're crapping up my docket with your toy-soldier argument and I want to spend more time on cases that matter."

To be fair, it is GW's fault it has taken so long to get the case to a state that it can be tried.

There are a lot of documents filed that haven't made it up to recap (354 is what we are up to now and only 333 on recap). Whoever was recapping in addition to the files I was downloading has stopped it seems.

This most recent delay was because one of GW's studio staff had "family reasons" that made them incapable of appearing. Someone that was asserted as being critical to GWs position.

It's a bit disappointing to hear it's been shifted again. I was very interested and eager to see what happens in trial. Especially after how long it's taken to get this far. Oh well, two more months isn't that much longer I guess. Ce la vie.

Hmmm. Maybe they didn't want folks from AdeptiCon stopping by

Ah well. Sounds like that will be the LAST move. And I'll be in Alaska that week, so won't be able to stress out about it. Probably for the best!

czakk wrote:
There are a lot of documents filed that haven't made it up to recap (354 is what we are up to now and only 333 on recap). Whoever was recapping in addition to the files I was downloading has stopped it seems.

I think you can access them here

 RiTides wrote:
Hmmm. Maybe they didn't want folks from AdeptiCon stopping by

Think we can do a Dakka get-together in the courtroom of this trial?

Alan Merrett's mother had terminal complications. It is detailed...very explicitly in Plaintif'f's letter to the court, which was filed publicly.

While I do not doubt the situation, and certainly do not make light of Mr. Merrett's situation, which is saddening; such a request was likely the only reason the Judge would have moved the date, and I have seen several dying mother extension requests on the eve of trial.

Condolences to Mr. Merrett, but the timing of the notification and extension request (this past Monday, 7 days before jury selection) could have been strategic. As noted in Plaintiff's letter, 7 days out from trial is about where out of pocket expenses begin to pile up. Folks make flights, make hotel reservations, reserve space for war rooms, etc. etc. Plaintiff counsel even offered to pay for such expenses incurred by the Defendant, in the letter itself.

In any case, this is not the first time something like this has happened a week out from a trial date, and it will not be the last time. According to the Court, it will be the last time in this case.

Reading 353...It's basically calling GW a liar.

'GW: You didn't say why this was privelleged conversation

CH: Yes we did at this time with this reason. '

It seems a lot of CH's responses do that.

There is also a lot of:

CHS: GW has listed the following as exhibits / evidence for the trial, we object to it for x,y,z.

GW: Judge! Judge! We already told CHS we weren't really going to use those exhibits, those meanies are wasting your time by filing this letter. God, we try so hard to be reasonable and they just throw it back in our face. I can't believe they don't take us at our word.




A whole bunch of this penny ante bs could have been handled the same way Mr. Merrett's unfortunate situation was - with professionalism and courtesy from both sides. Sort of the non-monetary consequence of getting caught misleading / lying to opposing counsel. Instead of being able to resolve stuff like this between lawyers, no one takes you at your word and everything has to go in front of the judge. All of which runs up your client's costs and annoys the judge.

Man I wish I could be there for the trial. Would love to see this guy go judge Judy all over GW.

...if you read any of the transcripts you would see that he doesn't do that.

 wowsmash wrote:
Man I wish I could be there for the trial. Would love to see this guy go judge Judy all over GW.

... If you have ever been to a real trial then you would know that Judge Judy is a horrific abomination of the judicial process.

 G. Whitenbeard wrote:

 wowsmash wrote:
Man I wish I could be there for the trial. Would love to see this guy go judge Judy all over GW.

... If you have ever been to a real trial then you would know that Judge Judy is a horrific abomination of the judicial process.

I agree. Real court is boring as hell. Court is a lot like sports: there are a few bits worth watching throughout, but most of it is boring with little ground gained, and the only good action is the last 5 minutes(unless it's American football, in which 5 minutes lasts an hour with 13 commercial breaks).

Alas, I don't suspect we'll see much movement on this case until next month as court draws closer. I really hope that the judge meant it when he said there would not be another delay in trial.

so with all the "if GW uses something enough its theirs",

what happens with this then?

https://www.teefury.com/