RE: Q&A4 Feb 2023 09:58
If it wasn't signed off on Friday, that implies the wording is so delicate it has been sent back for revision. If the info was 'safe' for investors [none Russian LSE based presumably] then the wording could much looser. There must be a big 'BUT' in the answers somewhere, something some investors are not going to like.
And/or, the board was proposing promises it might not be able to keep, especially with the shifting sands of the geopolitical situation.
They shouldn't worry though. Musk has been cleared of misleading investors implying he was about to buy back Tesla shares. PIs only lost a couple of billion.
Just think, if the anti-split lobby had not interfered and procrastinated the split proposed way back last March, it would have all been sorted months ago and these issues would not be of concern - we might even have had POLY K at over 400 by now. Instead many are saddled with a sp in the doldrums and facing all sorts of complications to maintaining a holding long enough to see any dividends. Well done anti-split lobby, another fine mess...