WAG, your analysis is perfectly logical. It’s also in line with...

WAG, your analysis is perfectly logical. It’s also in line with one of my views on this matter (yes, I have no fixed view on this matter, as I simply don’t know).

But what I can’t reconcile with this “no deal” scenario is Dr Treagus’ comment in his recent interview with Tim Boreham.

“They’ve really been going through the socks and undies draw,” Dr Treagus says of Acadia’s evidently thorough due diligence of the company’s ‘smalls’.

We are at the very end of proceedings, so Dr Treagus, by now, should have a fair idea if no deal is forthcoming or is unlikely to be forthcoming.

Why, then, would he volunteer to make this comment? Surely it would be an absolute folly to make such a comment if it was known/anticipated that Acadia would be declining to proceed with ROW rights at this point. What interpretation and reaction would Dr Treagus expect if he has just highlighted to the market that ACADIA has declined to exercise its option after completing further forensic due diligence of NEU ?