exwannabe,
Linda had good news she could have disclosed in 2015 regarding the screening hold which, obviously for fiduciary and strategic reasons she chose not to. At that time she said bad actors turned “good news” into “bad news” and that happened because the “good news” was never disclosed to anyone publicly and those privately aware, time has shown us, were obviously not allowed to trade based on this information. This is the logical fit to explain why Mr. Woodford had to be replaced as fiduciary and why insiders with this information never traded shares. The only ones technically able to get around this legally if they came into publicly undisclosed information are the market makers because of their assigned role but even they can’t legally do anything more than provide adequate liquidity which, apart from their greed motivated price setting schemes, now likely is being looked into as much as possible through discovery. Contrary to your claim, lack of public disclosure of “good news” is permitted by healthcare and other regulators, including the SEC, for strategic business reasons as long as there is no financial advantage created and taken by selective disclosure which is the primary determining factor regarding need for material disclosure. The regulations are clear about this and your explanation does not take the fuller picture into account…me thinks on purpose. Best wishes.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
