This isn't about the support level of Facebook's share price. UBS claims that NASDAQ was de facto dysfunctional. Too many buy orders were triggered, cancellations not being fulfilled and so on.
True, but the implication was that a lot of their FB activity was executed by their traders on behalf of their (now unhappy) clients. It's my opinion that this lawsuit wouldn't be happening if FB's stock was at $50.
Ofcourse it wouldn't be happening then, nobody would have had taken any damage if the FB stock had stayed or risen.
UBS would just have sold off the excess of shares it had received, perhaps at a profit. Perhaps just warning NASDAQ of their reckless technical situation.
That doesn't mean that there for some reason this lawsuit isn't justified. NASDAQ made UBS take a risk they did not want to take.
Well, of course not. That doesn't necessarily make it invalid. If your bank took 10k from your account and didn't give it back, you would sue them. If they put an extra 10k in your account you clearly wouldn't!
>> this lawsuit wouldn't be happening if FB's stock was at $50
maybe not from UBS, but probably from somebody else. if you were putting in excess short sell orders at the open an FB had gone up, you'd be in the same position UBS is in right now.