If you were an investor in Bain, or a Bain managed company between 1999 to 2002

[maxrandb]

and you made that investment, in part, because they advertised Willard Romney as the man in charge of your money...could you now sue Bain for deception?

[alcibiades_mystery]

1. It would seem that you'd at least want a reading of the Risk Factors

section in some of those documents, supposing they were (debt) offerings of any kind.

It would seem to be a significant risk factor, for example, if the CEO, Chairman, and Managing Director was on an extended leave and could not devote much attention to day-to-day operations. I think the average, reasonable investor would consider that material information relevant to an investment.

Ahem. Just sayin'...

[maxrandb]

5. I would think that if I invested money in the belief that a certain person was in-charge

I would EXPECT THAT PERSON TO BE IN-CHARGE

It would be like hiring "Bob the master carpenter" to design and build the addition to my house, and then finding out that "Bob" had retired and the design and construction was actually done by Joe "not the master carpenter".

That's the way I would understand it. I know that the Bain crap is probably more complex, but the Average American could understand buying one thing under one condition, and getting something else under a different condition.

You talk of Bain, and people's eyes glass over. Talk about "bait and switch" and they understand.

[KurtNYC]

2. As sole-shareholder that would be Romney vs. Romney

He made himself into a corporation -- Bain.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Bain still issued debt securities

[HopeHoops]

3. Yes.

[snot]

4. I think, to win, you'd have to prove the deception cost you money?

[MariaM83]

7. isn't it too late at this point?

You're talking about events from a decade or more ago. Do the statutes of limitations run that long for these kinds of things?