Ann: Completion of NTA Review by independent expert, page-35

I assume you're referring to the disclaimers from Leadenhall on the final page (not really fineprint - they're in a regular font size...), particularly under indemnities and professional standards? There's nothing surprising there, so why would you assume that just because we haven't posted commentary on them that we haven't read them?

But if you want some commentary around the fact that Leadenhall's "scope has been to review the analysis undertaken by HML [...]" and that they "do not express an opinion of value in respect of these investments", I would just say that I think this has been made pretty clear and that it's not inconsistent with what they've been engaged to do here.

They say they've engaged with the auditors and HML and that the NTA calculations are "not unreasonable", but with particular caveats and disclaimers, particularly around the complexity and early-stage nature of the various parts of JBFG. They make it clear that they themselves have not made a valuation determination. Simple. Or am I missing some actual fine print here?