trading halt, page-30

For Icon to call for a TH it really must have some "serious" news. They didn't even call a TH when they ann'd the MOU, a $32 billion deal with China!!
Wouldn't you think that that would be pice sensitive and have a "material impact" on the SP as they have stated this time?

Until a couple of weeks ago, the SP has languished below 20 cents, for months, with NO value being placed on the MOU. Yet, suddenly, people are saying that IF they get the GSA then the SP is "materially under valued" and have pushed it up 33+% in that short time on solid volume. So, clearly, there is a lot of "anticipation" "punting" money in that price rise. Punting money, only people guessing what "might" happen. In fact, Icon got a speeding ticket and just said the usual that people are just reading things into what we have been announcing for the last 12 months. Sorry, if they want to read something positive in it that is the "punters" decision, not Icon's concern.

But, now for the company to come out with a TH, for an ann that could have a "material impact" on the SP, suggests to me that what Icon is going to ann is something that Icon is clearly responsible for. So, why would it not be a positive result with the GSA?
If they were to say that the MOU has failed, well they would not be concerned about the "material impact" on the SP, as that has been artificially pushed up with punting money and not their concern. So as far as they were concerned, the SP was quite static below 20 cents, where the market thought it should be "on the fundamentals" and it has only been speculators that have pushed it up from .20 to .30.
Why should a company call a TH to "warn" those speculators that they might do their dough cold and the SP drop to .20 again? NO, doesn't happen that way. Companies have NO obligation to keep those speculators informed and "warned" to be prepared for the SP to drop to .20 again.
Their obligation is to their shareholders and to call a TH indicates that they have something of great significance to report to them, which could have a "material impact" on the SP.

That's as "positive" and "realistic" as I can get, but, because of the enormity of this GSA, if it was to happen, I can only hope that part of the ann will include some very significant capital injection similar to the Stanwell deal. It is frankly nearly too big for a company of Icon's size and the market will still be sceptical unless there is some evidence that Icon has the financial and technical capacity to pull it off. That's why I was hoping that BPT might have been that partner, so, only hope that Icon can find an alternative. Should know VERY soon now. No more guesswork!!