Maybe I'm missing something but after years in discussions with companies, Kim could have said this much.
If the NDA says Kim is not to mention the name of a company, nor its products, nor in anyway identify them as a party of interest.....as soon as Kim says "tennis shoes," he has mentioned an product that jeopardizes an agreement. Words mean things. So either an agreements has meaning or it doesn't. I have difficulty when people think they know better than Kim, what he should say and do....when they haven't a clue of what the agreement says that he signed. Not that it matters anyway. He is the CEO, and he is honoring what he signed. That needs to be the end of it.....yeah right. Not when his methods conflict with a shareholders sentiment of where the share price should be.....