London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
If this product has been round since 1959, as one poster informed us, and this is the first case against it, It is hard to believe there is any merit in it. Also, knowing how stringent FDA approvals are, I can't imagine if a product had some known risks, it could be sold without those risks being documented on the product.
I'm guessing of course, but it just sounds very unlikely that the verdict is correct.
What I find fascinating is that an award of USD60b is made at all against a business which currently has a Market Cap of UKP37b = c USD47b. I know that initial award figures in the US could feature in a Monty Python show, but such an award could question the judge's mental ability. Theoretically, apart from a credible view that no baby is worth USD60b (I certainly wasn't !!), if the amount was to be paid, and I don't believe it will, then the whole business would have to be
liquidated first with the loss of thousands of jobs and GBPbillions to shareholders and IRS. Thus no one baby is worth that much !! So
I ask, why would damages at that level be awarded at all, why not a more reasonable amount that is deemed acceptable. A black guy was released from prison in the US recently and he had spent c 48
years in prison for a murder he had not done. He is to receive USD175,000 for wrongful imprisonment !!
Correction to my last post which stated a USD60b award which I read from an Alliance News bulletin. The correct figure is USD60m and after reading up on this case, there may be at least another 400 cases following this depending upon the Appeal presumably which increases the risk.
Shouldn't Reckitt have a warning on the tin that the formula can cause this NEC as they'd then be covered ? Or at least highly recommend a doctor's assessment before giving to a baby ? Can't understand some of these businesses and how their very highly paid "so-called competent" managers get to the top positions !!
Before posting a comment, get your facts right before wasting our time reading the $60bn.
If you had the screed on our message board you would have read that one certain site maybe two had posted incorrect numbers by 1000 times out.
REUTERS is the best site to use in my view.
The person writing that article needs a kick up the back side fir saying $60bn
We live in a messed up world ‘Clued ‘ just have to accept this sub standard quality of life.
Stockmarket indices are even out of sync, DOWJ & S&P at record highs when the world economy is the opposite in line with the VIX.
But do we want to hit that reset button, certainly no… we keep going .. it’s so fake the markets when we take a step back abd look at everything..
Then we have TRUMP v BIDEN debate .. it’s a joke if that’s the best USA can offer.
So, I’d take everything out of USA literally as like that!
Rant over
Glad I topped up at 4300p on Friday. Going back up to 5000p+ tomorrow.
Apparently it's being looked into why 60 billion instead of 60 million fine was reported. Bots exacerbated the drop. All a bit naughty, hedge funds at it?
Driftking27 "We live in a messed up world ‘Clued ‘ just have to accept this sub standard quality of life."
I certainly realise that the current World is messed up and have to accept things on one level, but I
don't find shoddy careless, even
negligent, mistakes like the
USD60b reported by Reuters
instead of USD60m acceptable. If someone erred like that working for me they'd have to have a very good explanation to keep their job. This error has probably crashed the price by multiples more than it should have and caused many stop losses to trigger thus causing exagerated financial losses. The more that these errors are simply "accepted" without negative consequences for those who make them, then the lower that standards fall as we see in society generally. Even Kate Midleton was caught posting a 'fraudulent' photo of herself and children, and I accept well intentioned and in itself not that important, but it has started a huge debate on what is fake and what is not after Reuters, who also made the mistake here !!!, asked for the Royal photo to be withdrawn !!
RKT has another 400+ cases behind the USD60m awards one so could be 400 x USD60m .... ???
Another GSK-type scenario ?
Your right so many companies listed many doing good but it’s a gambling stock that’s top share price that’s messed up this is a light hearted dig not meant to over serious but true
Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/e7945b3d-05df-43c0-86ab-2da360729d39
Barclays concluded a realistic worst-case scenario was a few thousand plaintiffs settling in “the high hundreds of thousands of dollars per case”. An extreme worst-case scenario they calculated would result in £2bn of damages.