For some reason I can't respond to the following captainblood post directly:
"
explain to me what wouldn't sit well with ev1. this is what anteotech said
...." (please see above for full post)
I really have no idea, none of us will know until the Ann is released. I freely admit, I could be way off the mark but feel very nervous after numerous failures over the years and the wording doesn't leave me feeling overly confident "concerning the counterparty"
I maintain, I think the likelihood of it being deal related it's close to 0% (but would love to be proven wrong).
With regards to if there have been misrepresentations, it could be absolutely anything, the devil is in the detail. The one thing I do know through working for large corporatations is that the legal and compliance teams like to argue over every single statement that is made public. Words and statements which often seem nondescript are often picked up and deemed problematic for various reasons.
If I was to pick the below comment for
illustrative purposes only (not suggesting there is a problem with it):
1. EV1 is seeking step change in silicon content for their next generation EV batteries
EV1 may not like the specific wording used here for various reasons, eg. Do they like the word step change being disclosed - does this align to their disclosed strategy? Are they also exploring other technologies which contradicts this statement? etc etc
Time will tell and I hope I am wrong.
(20min delay)