I respectfully disagree with you on your stance. Yes, government officials and CEOs of companies have a right to keep there constituents and shareholders informed. When they are allowed, and what they are allowed to say are two very different things. The details of ongoing deals can be guarded for a period of time before being disclosed to the public. Do you honestly think any company is going to answer a random caller's questions? Do you really think that DR government officials are going to tell you all about details of a track proposal, because you are invested in a company involved in the proposal? We are taking about a country known for having extreme corruption within its ranks.
My point is it is extremely foolish to think you can call random people up, ask about dealings with the DR government and CGAQ, and expect to get an answer that has any added value. That is like asking the cashier at McDonalds where the company plans to open the next franchise.
I work for the US government. That doesn't mean I 'know' everything going on all over the place. Plus, if I am working with a proposal between the DoD and a private company I would never disclose information about it to a random caller unless I felt like getting fired and/or going to jail. It is ridiculous to think it would work any different.
Swank has a responsibility to represent the best interest' of investors. It does NOT mean that he has to submit to every demand. The DR government does NOT have to do anything for an investor, or Swank for that matter.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
