It is a shame you don't like my TWO answers: one more complete if you care to follow the link, and the second, abbreviated just for you. I was also unaware you demand 'yes' or 'no' answers. Seems a bit simplistic to me. If my answers are not good enough for you, ponder the fact that I don't owe you anything.
It could be 'wise' for the BOD to give a timeline if they are sure enough about it and if the pros outweigh the cons. Remember a timeline doesn't have to contain every step. They MAYBE could simply announce when they intend to complete their application with the exchange, and not include when the response might come back. If there was a strategic gain to publishing that, it could be considered wise, but nor you, nor I can fully judge such a strategy because we're not privy to all the factors.
It could be unwise if they want to retain some flexibility because of various developing factors, and the longer post you probably missed, and may still have not read by the sound of things, expresses that this is my opinion. But again, neither you nor I have a command of all the factors, so trying to judge the wisdom of such a move is tricky. Can ants judge the wisdom of when and where you choose to park your car? In this analogy, you and I are ants, Incannex is the car owner, and you're the ant who thinks your fellow ant should give a 'yes' or 'no' answer about the wisdom of the car owner.
At this time, I believe Incannex has a solid strategic rationale for not releasing more information about the timing of US listing related events. I am willing to assume their strategy is WISE based upon what I know of their past actions. They will probably, at some point in the not-too-distant future, determine they DO wish to publish more about timing, and I am willing to assume that will ALSO BE WISE because at that juncture, they would have determined the risk/benefit ratio of publishing that information is in their favor. I might be wrong, and it may transpire that all of the BOD's publishing strategy surrounding their US listing turns out to be UNWISE... but I highly doubt it. I hope for your sake, that this answer is more satisfying than a 'yes' or 'no'.
Expand