wizard, Well, IMO it's all in the word slickery. Notice that PR is a quote from the VP but she says that the distributor "estimates" 12,000 gallons. They didn't say there was a 12,000 gallon order, nor PO, nor did they say how large the order was. According to what we saw yesterday, it was only 15 gallons.
Now, we can assume that this was on purpose. Tactical: don't say that the order was small, and don't say that more will follow. But reference in a 3rd-hand manner that the distributor thinks it's a 12,000 gallon project.
That's called getting more press for your dollar. Creative truthfulness, IMO.
As investors, we can buy stock on such misleading PRs. So to us, it's fraudulent and misleading. But as far as being legally actionable, I doubt it. But who knows. There have definitely been some other PRs which were more "material" and definitive in nature, but some of those they eventually retracted in a roundabout way ("on hold" or delayed, or whatever).
It's quite disgusting IMO. What about those PRs in 2Q of 2009 that said revenues were up compared to 2008? Hmmmm.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
