Uh, Zac it would appear that the FDI basically sold out their position.

They won the SLAPP motion, got attorney fees, and USANA was left some bs cause of action.

FDI was paid money, probably large amounts of money, to go away and shut up.

That is the business decision.

No way the material comes off the website otherwise.

And of course there is a gag order so Minkow cannot talk about the settlement - in order not encourage other pikers to take a run at them.

Zac, you forgot to mention that small issue of the SEC investigation into Usana that was closed without a finding. The investigation response pretty much refuting Minkow's claims. You also failed to report that convicted felon Barry Minkow was funded by convicted felon Sam Antar in this attack. Both convictions involved securities fraud.

Unknown writes: "the SEC investigation into Usana that was closed without a finding. The investigation response pretty much refuting Minkow's claims."

Uh, your first sentence contradicts your second.

Minkow's claims regarding the business model were not thought by the SEC to constitute material misrepresentation to the buying public.

That has nothing to do with whether the business model is a pyramid or not.

As for Barry and Sam, I would put more faith in their claims because they back it up with evidence and not slander.

My view is midway between Zac's and Michael Webster's. In a couple of important ways, Minkow is not simply the victim in this, but I don't see how one can conclude that he was paid off to go away.

First, as to Minkow's actions: he's no babe in the woods. He had to know that he was stirring up a hornet's nest, and possibly a lawsuit. Anyone in that position needs clean hands. So what does he do? He shorts USANA stock. This gives him a profit motive to bash USANA, and USANA - completely predictably - jumped all over it. Lest we forget, had Minkow not shorted USANA, Judge Campbell's order of March 3 (http://www.box.net/shared/static/khhybjxwcc.pdf for anyone who wished to read it) would have ended the case in his favor. She granted summary judgment on every cause of action except the stock manipulation, all but holding that Minkow had the negative stuff right. That would have made a nice ending, no?

Moreover, when Zac writes that the suit amounted to "a war of legal fees that Minkow could not win" - well, Zac, he did win them. As Michael points out, Campbell awarded him costs and attorneys' fees under the California anti-SLAPP statute - see opinion at http://www.box.net/shared/static/6lir1yzcws.pdf . It was again the hubristic move of shorting USANA that sank him.

Minkow agreed to a sealed settlement - order http://www.box.net/shared/static/0a1sshs4ks.pdf - and confidentiality, so we will never know the details. That's bad. It allows the scammers and their shills to crow victory, which is already happening. But, Michael, we equally don't know that Minkow was paid a dime. It is possible - as he says - that he had no money to continue litigating. In that sense, Zac, you're right, free exchange of information is the loser. But tell me, Zac, even without knowing whether he was paid to drop the suit, how much did Minkow make by the short? Before the recent attempts to take USANA private, its stock had dropped like a rock.

We'll never know, will we? Few things are black and white.

I don't understand why Barry Minkow was trading Usana stock if he was trying to make allegations about the company?

With a little common sense, Barry Minkow's intent seems obvious. The fact that this article defends him shows some very evident bias.

Well, not being a lawyer but merely a potential distributor for Usana, I found this to be interesting. My main question hasn't been answered, the claims of Mr. Minkow that the product, nutrimeals, exceeds by 1,000 times, the CA prop 65 legal limit. Are his lab reports accurate? Where is the FDA on this issue? Whatever happened to the consumer at larger? Who cares about a few millionaires trading money?

Doug

I don't get it.

Why do people want to defend a convicted felon, funded by another, especially when both convictions involved securities fraud?

Consider the sources.

Terri Hamel.usana.com

Terri,

Consider that nothing was ever proven against Barry. Face the facts kiddo they paid him off.

Everything they brought against him was thrown out. They had the right to move forward and try to prosecute on their final issue and they..... did nothing.

Think about it Terri! If Minkow had been spreading lies all this time why isn't he behind bars? Because he was right and USANA paid him off.

Barry gets a nice chunk of change and USANA gets him to agree to pulling down his posts. Everyone wins! Except for the distributors of course. They're SOL.