Reason for lanquid response...Look no further than the current form of the deal: a non-binding letter of intent. An LOI is the lowest form of "legal contract" that either party could back out of with no negative consequences. Even an MOU (memorandum of understanding) has more of a "legally binding" nature than a LOI. No consideration (i.e., money) has been exchanged and the terms in the final "definitive" agreement could be vastly different than what was previously published if the deal does finally close. With a non-binding LOI, intentions could change and the deal just dissolves... sort of like what happened internally with the originally-planned Graph spin-off and 1:20 share issuance. Poof, up in smoke.
This GBC deal will be good for the SP when a definitive agreement is signed and the parties become legally bound to close the transaction. The reason this has value is because one could potentially sue the other if they try to back out. Until then, either party can walk away from the table no questions asked... thus the tepid market response.