My comment which I clearly stated is “what I think” as such I am speculating.

Timely disclosure of material information… https://www.tsx.com/resource/en/432

TSXV Policy 3.3 outlines reasons why material information can be withheld for short periods of time. It basically allows that material information can remain confidential if premature disclosure would be harmful to the issuer and the shareholders. The exchange is advised and the share price is monitored for abnormal trading activities to ensure that material information remains confidential.

Example: disclosure of information concerning the status of ongoing negotiations would prejudice the successful completion of those negotiations. It is unnecessary to make a series of announcements concerning the status of negotiations with another party concerning a particular transaction. If it seems that the situation is going to stabilize within a short period, public disclosure may be delayed until a definitive announcement can be made. Disclosure should be made once “concrete information” is available, such as a final decision to proceed with the transaction or, at a later point in time, finalization of the terms of the transaction.  

 There have been many opinions voiced on this forum about whether POET must or should post the status of both technical achievements and the status of the second tranche. Someone received a response from IR stating that a news release on the second tranche is not required. Why would the company not want to keep their shareholders updated? If there was bad news they would have to report it. I believe there is more to this story and so long as the share price remains stable the regulator can allow any undisclosed information that may place any potential deals that are in progress to be jeopardised.

We have been told that the sale of DL has closed and if there was any change to that status the shareholders would have to be advised. The only reason why the market would not be advised is if other negotiations are taking place that would ultimately be beneficial to shareholders and disclosure could derail those negotiations.

The only reason I can justify this line of thinking is because the stakes are enormous and we have both the east and the west as customers of this game changing technology. Once it has been proven to their satisfaction (which has probably happened) it is not hard to imagine that they will want to own it and control it.

These companies are in the loop and see each iteration of progress enough to make an educated decision on the ultimate viability. I think shareholders deserve to be in that loop as much as possible so it would be really great if the company could provide some kind of update while maintaining the level of confidentiality that is required. I think we deserve something. We really do.