Begging your pardon, Pacard, but you say:

"If the market normalizes it undermines their claims."

How's that? Did PTSC not suffer a loss of liquidity? For how long? What other (investment) opportunities were lost due to this unavailability of capital?

It the market normalizes, DB should have the ability to repay, with interest. And there may still be monies due for damages as above.

And how is the stay a problem for us? We could potentially still get our entire original investment back, plus interest (at what was it? 12%?), plus possible damages (which theoretically increase with the passage of time and continued lack of liquidity).

Now, what is DB's counter argument? Haven't they made other investors "whole" in the recent past? Why them and not us? They obviously had the ability to pay someone, and a lot more than they "owe" us. It would appear that their only defense would be a bunch of lame excuses.

Perhaps all of the above is beyond you....

JMHOs,

SGE