What are you talking about?  I said the PR was released in June and the retraction was made in October.  I'm not sure when the Executive Summary was leaked.  That is beside the point.

The point is that the PR was glowing about the report.  And then a retraction was made after the Executive Summary was leaked.

I doubt a retraction would have been made without that leak.

What could possibly have been learned in one quarter that would make them have to post a retraction?  What did they not know when they issued the glowing PR?

No.  They knew they set up ideal conditions for SAIC.  They knew that they could not live up to those ideal conditions in the real world.

I have little doubt they knew it when they issued the PR.  They had done plenty of testing with less than ideal conditions before that SAIC report was issued.