They were putting a brave face on it, but there can be no doubt the al Gosaibi family has been shaken by the events in the High Court in London last week.
Their attempt to disown US$250 million (Dh918.2m) of liabilities was, their own advisers concede, a difficult proposition from the start; when contradictory evidence began turning up late in the day, overlooked then found in a cupboard in Al Khobar in Saudi Arabia, the location of the family company's home and business headquarters, it was the final straw for the judge.
Their advisers say the London decision will enable them to devote more resources to the three other big actions in progress. These all involve Maan al Sanea, whom they still accuse of fraud, theft and forgery, which he denies.
But al Gosaibis have some awkward immediate problems before they can get around to considering those.
The first is the repayment of the $250m now acknowledged as a valid liability. The al Gosaibis' lawyer last week told the court it was very unlikely they would repay this in full. They are worth that much, for sure, but to repay to the six banks that brought the London action would open up the floodgates.
Ahmad Hamad Al Gosaibi and Brothers, the partnership that controls the family businesses, owes 118 banks a total of $9.2 billion, and already some are clamouring to use the London decision against the company. BNP of France and the European Islamic Investment Bank both applied to the court for default judgments last week.
The al Gosaibis have until next Friday to come up with proposals for the repayment of the $250m. If they do not, the judge says he will seek an asset affidavit from them.
In layman's terms, he would want to know how much they do have, and how much they can afford to pay.
There is a delicate game of poker going on here. If the al Gosaibis show their hand too early over the $250m, it will leave them exposed to the $9.2bn.
The banks are now armed with the evidence from London and have already done their own assessments of the value of the family's business and personal assets in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
A general asset grab is the last thing the al Gosaibis would want, and would probably result in bankruptcy.
Although it is, in legal terms, unconnected to events in London, the situation in Saudi Arabia is now becoming critical. That $9.2bn is split almost equally between Saudi Arabian, other Middle Eastern, and international banks.
Now that one of the foreign actions (always frowned upon by the Saudi authorities) has failed, the pressure will be on the family to settle with their Saudi creditors as a matter of priority, as Mr al Sanea has already done.
Their lawyers said after the reversal that they would seek to pursue the other foreign cases more aggressively. The problem is that they are in the hands of the legal systems of both the US and the Cayman Islands, and their fate in those courts is outside their control.
It is difficult to see how they can be more aggressive when judges are already sitting in deliberation of their fate.
In New York, they are appealing against a decision in a case originally brought by Mashreq bank of the UAE. A judge decided that the Middle East was the best place to hear that action, and the al Gosaibis are waiting to hear if the court will change its mind.
In the Caymans, things have gone against them in recent months. In an apparent volte-face, Grant Thornton, the liquidator there to the assets of Mr al Sanea, filed its own counterclaim for $8bn against the family. The court is waiting for the al Gosaibis' response to this, expected by the end of this month.
In Los Angeles, they have filed a claim against Glenn Stewart, the former chief executive of The International Banking Corporation, one of the banks that sparked the whole affair when it went bust in May 2009.
They want $9bn from Mr Stewart; he is unlikely to be able to pay up, and anyway says he is fighting the claim.
Also pending is a legal case in Bahrain, where a criminal court is considering charges against Mr al Sanea and Mr Stewart, among others.
So the al Gosaibis still have plenty of legal battles to fight. We will see over the coming months just how serious a setback the London verdict proves to be.