Sorry Charlie, must respectfully disagree with several posts.
1. Definition of noise: Since I used the term, my definition illustrates the context within which it was used.
Noise means providing a lot of language, verbage, wording that Is generic and not responsive to the questions asked. Such as providing a lot of regulatory language when the questions were how many shares have been tendered, how many have been commited to ge, how far they are towads 90%, what will they do if they don't get it, etc, etc. Generic legalese is noise to those questions.
2. In response to my point that we don't know how far ge Is towards the 90%, you statement that you do was wrong.
Neither you nor any lay peson knows how far ge is towards its goal nor how many shares it has/contols. With the regulatory filings you admit there is a 3 day lag period at least. Moreover, you have no idea how many shares are being tendered as they are not reported as the tender is revocable nor do you have any idea how many shares may have been informally committed to GE on a handshake. I am sure some have been and we won't know till the expiration nor need they be reported as such commitment is informal. So at any gven moment you do not know how many shaes GE can claim.
3. Ellliot: The exact name of entities holding GE shares is not important. I suspect by the expiation date Eilliot will control at least 10% as that is their MO and even if different entities may own part of the 10% shares that is moot What is releant is that GE won't get the 90% needed to force sale and how GE will react. will they accept less than 90%, I suspect yes, how much less and how will the inteactins play out. Will arcam be worth investing in. That, not the exact names of a filing instrument should be your focus IMHO.
4. You may nitpick the exact quote or language but you essentially said that GE would accept the status quo, 14% ownership and I disagreed. That is not noise, but relevant and specific to the point made.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
