Replies

Not so nothing. Say Romney testified that the Staples pre-IPO stock was worth 1.00, not unreasonable for pre-IPO valuation. Then say the divorce court gives her a million shares.

Then her lawyers get her to cash in the pre-IPO shares, for “legal expenses”. OK.

Then Staples goes public and the IPO share price is $20....ROMNEY RIPPED HER OFF to the tune of $20,000,000! I mean, that’s what the media angle is, or will be.

As for a law license, that does not seem to be a rule that Democrats need follow.

no one forced this turnip to sell her stock, she is an idiot...what fool would pay an atty 3 million for a lawsuit, the fool should have settled... She is after her X to keep him from serving in a Romney admin..

I think it was about 2.50 and it didn’t go public ‘til about 2 years later.

In a new business, 2 years is a lifetime. New companies rise and fall in such a period of time.

So, her problem wasn’t that she got 500,000 shares valued at 2.50. Her problem was that she sold low.

There was no law saying she had to sell. Had she waited out the 2 years, she would have had a lot more. It sounds to me like she didn’t “believe in” her former husband, so she dumped the stock. She gambled wrong.

Anyone who owns shares of a company about to go public and then sells them before the IPO is a fool. There are all kinds of consents and notifications of shareholders of private companies that have to be obtained before an IPO goes forward. It sounds like Romney discussed the value of the pre-IPO shares at length in the hearing, and I'm sure his opinions were not formed out of the blue but were based on an analysis of the company's financials by the company's accounting firm. His testimony is probably accompanied by exhibits of financial statements that lend credence to his claims. And I'm sure that the court didn't rely solely on Romney's testimony in making their awards. Furthermore, Romney didn't set the IPO stock price; investment bankers and accountants did. The woman's a nut, and her statements don't withstand any scrutiny.

Romney’s attorney said today that there were no objections to unsealing the records. Romney's attorneys no doubt have a copy of his testimony in their records and have reviewed it. There's not anything there.

This bitter ex has tried to redo her divorce and blown thru all her money years ago .
It’s an old story .
The media is so discredit and the Romney trash like this is now just noise .
People hear ugly divorce and bitter ex and tune it out .

But the desperation move tells me that Romney is way ahead now .

She received 500,000 shares ... however she sold them at say 2.00 just before the company went public and sold at 19.00.
This sounds like a problem with her financial adviser not Romney. At the time he testified the stock was not worth much and he didn’t believe they would ever be worth anything.
This is all ridiculous!!