"That's simply untrue. You can't reveal details covered by CDAs to shareholders."
Nor did I say they could.
What I am saying is that in the first place no responsible management even signs a CDA which precludes them from communicating important information to their owners, the shareholders. To do so would be not only an abrogation of their fiduciary duties, it would also be highly suspicious.
Why is it suspicious? Because there only a few circumstances in which a public company such as LLEG should sign a CDA which prevents them from letting their shareholders know at least some minimum level of detail about the deal they are proposing to do - not least because they supposed to be doing that deal in the interests of those very same shareholders.
If they have signed such a CDA, and then are using it as an excuse not to tell shareholders what they need to know, then that's a very bad sign indeed.
Let's face it, there is no good reason that they shouldn't reveal the details of this deal, and whether ordinary retail shareholders will benefit, and if so, how. In fact I suspect it's material information that needs to be disclosed by law.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
