Yes, the betrayal of trust is my primary concern after today's CC. Why say one thing in a PR and then do something completely different. Especially when the shareholders will find out eventually anyway.

As I said in a previous post I'm still struggling to come up with some explanation, some confluence of events that caused NP to decide not to submit the EUA even though he claimed he had.

I'd much prefer the reality that NP was led to make a bad business decision (by not correcting the PR sooner) rather than the reality that NP is either incompetent or untrustworthy. But this is a difficult one to get my head around.