> Are they talking about hiding money from creditors? Or just finding other ways of making money now that their previous money-maker (perdue pharma) is going un

> Are they talking about hiding money from creditors? Or just finding other ways of making money now that their previous money-maker (perdue pharma) is going under? The investment banker's advice was "the one thing you don’t want to do is to become poor". Purdue Pharma going under wouldn't make them poor. So it couldn't mean the latter. Sackler referred to the Virginia courtroom where Purdue Pharma's parent company admitted to fraud and agreed to pay $600 million. And "all of these courtrooms". Not to operating losses or any such thing. > Is the state going to convince the jury of that better than the defense? There's 1 way to find out.