Originally Posted by Sil_liS
No, if Apple wouldn't have been able to make the extra smartphones, then they didn't lose as much revenue, so the value should have been less than the percentage that is accepted. For example if Apple would have been able to make only half of the devices, than the compensation should be 50% of 12% (if they take Samsung's figure), so only 6% of the revenues.
(I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. Forgive me if I've misunderstood.)
You're right that given the jury's statement that's what they should have done. But it seems clear to me from Hogan's interview that whether or not Apple had sufficient stock didn't figure in their final calculation.