Oh dear.Thanks for confirming your lack of comprehension, once...

Oh dear.

Thanks for confirming your lack of comprehension, once again.

I made several clear points about that topic.

Here are the key FACTS that I noted:

- ATL made a "strategic investment" of US$5M

- AGY stated that "ATL has agreed to place its shares into a 12-month standstill period"

- A formal escrow arrangement is NOT the ONLY way to structure such an agreement

- Lack of a formal escrow arrangement is not PROOF in itself that there was no restriction on ATL's holding.

- People who were claiming that "ATL can do whatever they want with their shares" were making a statement of fact that was NOT based on any proof; it was NOT a known fact, it was simply SPECULATION.



SIMPLE

Now, which of these clear facts due you refute?
Be specific.

...and you accuse me of being "ignorant"..?
LMAO!!


DYOR everyone; beware the gaslighting.