RE:Whether Panasonic requested, solicited, or 'ordered', is a rainorshine59 wrote: true fact.
The quantity of said material is immaterial.
Panasonic has also stated that they have an SJL offtake agreement signed by PO.
Fact.
That they want to change some of the terms, or change it to a purchase order, down the road, is also a known fact...now.
I believe that was stated by PO in the origoinal NR. ....'negotiating'.
Not a done deal. That was clear.
It is also true that what is 'material information' in Panasonic's realm, does not hold true for a junior like SJL.
PO was obligated to inform shareholders of 'material events', which is obviously the case here.
The fact that a bunch of newbies fell over themselves to get stock at any price is NOT the fault of the company management.
The 'clarifications' in the subsequent NR's were nothing more that the companies attempts to RE-ITERATE that there was an 'in progress' situation with a named maor battery manufacturer that may lead to a positive outcome for the company's shareholders, IF, the test of the initial smallish order (sample size / test size - just semantics) that was required, was succesful.
The clarifications were issued because apparently a bunch of newbies with more spare cash than mental accuity, got a severe case of buyer's remorse beacause the price didn't go up and up and up after THEY got in.
Tough teat!
That's on them for not being able to read the original NR.
Having the ASC on speed dial is not a cure for stupidity
The ASC is obligated to look into investor complaints.
They are NOT obligated to cure stock buyers impulsivity/stupidity, especially those that can't read.
Straight to the point, very good post and info!