IVZ Share Price, page-26030

You're not wrong Gharp — this kind of strategic opacity is pretty common in small-cap O&G, especially pre-revenue juniors like IVZ.

And yes, if SM had fully laid his cards on the table in April, the share price probably would’ve been gutted and any future raise crippled. But that’s exactly the problem.If the only way to keep the lights on is by misleading through omission, then we’re already on shaky ground.

Investors might tolerate a bit of “PR spin” — it’s part of the game — but there’s a line between managing sentiment and actively avoiding transparency to preserve the ability to raise. That becomes a Ponzi-style loop, where new money props up old promises until it breaks down.

Ultimately, the short-term prop on the share price might keep the cap raise window open, but it corrodes long-term credibility — both for the company and for SM himself. And the next time he actually needs support, he’ll find far fewer hands raised.

People aren’t asking for every risk and delay to be broadcast like a press release — they’re asking for a minimum standard of honesty. If delays are happening, if things aren’t locked in, just say it clearly and early. Most of us can wear delays — it’s being treated like fools that gets people selling.So yes, I get it — the market would’ve punished full honesty. But what’s worse: a short-term price dip… or losing shareholder trust permanently?