Semantics at play? If I wrote: "Ironically, Vince now on Twitter...

Semantics at play?

If I wrote:
"Ironically, Vince now on Twitter promotes an article saying the SP fall has been caused by investors being "spooked" by the high CapEx number"

Would it be more correct? Imo, by tweeting the article without comment, Vince is agreeing to the narrative. Imo, if Vince disagreed with the narrative he would have added his own comment or not tweeted at all.

Next in your role as Sir Galahad, defender of the AVL realm and the honour of her officers, care to have a stab at whether you think there will be a pump and dump for the underwriters? Do you see the 2 institutional investors who took 75m at 0.04 in April in the 2*T20 reports you posted? I do not. As such, they were hardly cornerstone investors.

The fact that a chunk of oppies are being underwritten, shows how important the funds are to the company at 0.02 less 6% u/w fees. AVL has announced they are fully funded based on oppies conversion. This adds weight to my argument of the PFS being delayed only to keep the oppies in the money long enough to have a greater chunk converted.