Reports & Predictions
Predictions you can count on.
Verdict for Investors has predicted the outcomes of litigation and other legal events for its subscribers for 15 years. Verdict believes that over two-thirds of its predictions have been correct. The fact that 70% of our subscribers have remained customers for more than 5 years demonstrates the quality of our work.
Verdict Research Reports are:
- Clear, jargon-free predictions for institutional investors.
- Rapidly prepared research: occasionally within 24 hours.
- Scope of research is unlimited and tailored to Subscribers.
Hedge fund managers, portfolio managers and buy-side equity and bond analysts frequently select research topics for Verdict to investigate. Once Verdict’s report is published, there are often follow-up questions and points of discussion. Regular communication between the subscriber and Verdict is normal, encouraged and helpful. Because Verdict limits the number of its subscribers, easy access is always possible.
Subscribers who select research topics are referred to as sponsoring subscribers. Sponsoring subscribers receive a 10-day period to study Verdict’s reports exclusively: no other subscriber has access to the Research Report. Verdict selects some topics when it deems them particularly relevant.
Verdict researches lawsuits, appeals, mergers, mass torts, securities, class actions, governmental investigations and regulations that affect stock or bond prices. Verdict has also conducted major research projects on specific industries or issues: mass tort cases, asbestos risk rankings by company and patent infringement trials are examples. In addition, Verdict monitors specific hearings and complete trials for subscribers.
To monitor hearings or trials, Verdict frequently engages trial lawyers with specific, subject-matter expertise to ensure coverage that is as thorough as possible. What sets Verdict apart from sell-side firms is Verdict’s extensive legal training and experience: many sell-side firms use analysts who have neither legal training nor experience.
Verdict’s purpose is to obtain the most authoritative trial summaries and convert these summaries into objectiveTrial Reports. Verdict discusses each day’s trial proceedings immediately after court adjourns with its lawyer; and then prepares Trial Reports that are emailed to the sponsoring subscriber before the market opens the next day. These debriefings with Verdict’s lawyer frequently reveal insights and conclusions that one person would miss. Using an experienced trial lawyer to sit in the court room and to summarize the trial proceedings while Verdict’s Publisher prepares the Trial Report was designed to encourage objectivity.
Verdict’s lawyer offers candid opinions of witnesses, the judge, the testimony, the lawyers and the jury. These off-the-record comments provide critical insights. Invariably, any lawyer sitting through a trial becomes an advocate of one litigant just like the lawyers representing the parties. Because Verdict’s Publisher is not in the courtroom, Verdict’s perspective more closely imitates the objectivity of most judges. Our predictions of trial outcomes would never have been consistently correct without using this approach.
The scope of Verdict’s research is unlimited because it can hire legal experts across a wide range of fee structures. Verdict does not identify its subscribers to its lawyers, nor do its lawyers know the identities of subscribers. This “double-blind” arrangement means Verdict lawyers have no malpractice exposure to subscribers. As a result, Verdict obtains information from its lawyers that is not normally available to institutional investors. Verdict lawyers and technical experts also provide:
- Specialized expertise in patents, damage evaluations, and chemistry;
- Evaluations of judges and other local situations; and,
- Faster responses so some answers can be provided within 24 hours.
Verdict rarely knows how its subscribers use the research in their investment decisions so it is impossible for Verdict to measure its precise value. Because different subscribers use the same research reports to buy or short stocks, there is normally little utility for Verdict to know its subscriber’s investment intentions. Verdict usually prefers not to know because it could unconsciously bias Verdict’s conclusions.
Verdict has no contract because its business is based on trust. The term for Verdict’s annual retainer commences from the date the subscriber joins. Annual retainers often rise when subscribers frequently sponsor research. subscribers also pay higher annual retainers in years when the value received from the research in one year justifies a higher retainer in the next. These are subscriber decisions, and are never imposed by Verdict.
Sponsoring Subscribers reimburse Verdict for third-party legal expenses, if any, without surcharge. Verdict provides subscribers with copies of legal invoices upon request, with the firm and partner names omitted. Verdict estimates third-party costs in advance, but legal fees can exceed estimates. Occasionally two subscribers interested in the same trial will share third-party costs.
Verdict’s prediction methodology focuses on outcome determinative events without regard to unimportant details:
- Trial judge’s bias;
- Relative skill of the plaintiffs’ lawyers;
- Coordinated efforts by several plaintiffs’ firms in similar suits
- Critically vivid pictorial evidence;
- Well known history of injury in the jurisdiction;
- Legal theories that defy common sense when misapplied:
- Using lawyers with specialized expertise at hearings and trials; and,
- Verdict’s instinct developed after 15 years of experience.
When subscribers agree that enough time has passed so the reports have no meaningful investment value, Verdict will post Research Reports with date of publication on its website under Recent Articles under the “About” Tab.