Thoughts: Overall, this does not do anything to dispel the weasely impression this company projects. "Ten is a good number"? Ugh.

I can appreciate that the company is trying to be smart when allocating litigation dollars, and I really appreciate their reluctance to get into protracted court battles with its customer base--those are both smart business decisions. And that's the problem--what the heck is wrong with coming out and saying, "We settle about 20% of our cases based on smart business decisions"?

Not as sexy as "TASER doesn't settle," but it does have the added bonus of being true. I'll take true over sexy.

This is the kind of smarminess that makes me want to sell; I probably will hang on to my shares, because I think the company has so much potential, but why couldn't such a great product get leadership to match?

Mike - JudasTouch | Date: 8/2/2007 9:21:13 AM | Number: 3215

Litigation settlements for a company, any company, are always a "sticky wicket". The very nature of the settlements almost always involves a mutual "non-disclosure agreement" over the terms of the settlement or often even over the actual fact that there was a settlement.

From a Public Relations standpoint this is a clear no-win situation and there is just no way for the company to ever look good. If an investor buys shares of Taser Corporation, this is just one factor that must go into the decision to own or not to own shares of the company's stock.

Kahuna, CFA