it is difficult to know what their intention is for lodging this notice:
1. they published an article late last year stating that they had been reducing exposure to Neuren as they felt the chance of PMS phase 2 success was low. At this point, they did not issue a notice when ceasing to be the substantial holder which is fine as Neuren is NZ incorporated and the notice is not mandatory 2. based on today's notice, they were above the significant shareholding threshold prior to 17th July meaning they bought back more NEU shares post PMS result. but they chose not to issue the notice when becoming the substantial shareholder again. 3. today they chose to issue the notice for ceasing to be the substantial holder but for what purpose?
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)