So, if it was a carefully crafted statement, in what way was the statement given (and the subsequent non-communication) better than 'we do not have anything to say on this matter at this time' for DVD?
It did lead to several articles proclaiming that Poly2 at PVB is a done deal and probably quite a few people purchasing resale contracts in the expectation to be able to use them for the tower. I fail to see how this benefits DVD.
If it was a carefully crafted statement (and not an accident), this question should be answerable.
It gets them to have people continue to talk and work behind the scenes to get it going the way they want. What better way to test the market? What better way to get the potential resale price up without using ROFR? They know how many resale contracts have been sold since then…maybe they wanted to see how the resale market would react if it would be part of PVB?
I am still not convinced with this trust in place that it couldn’t end up part of PVB and sold differently.
Likely? Probably not and I agree a better answer would have been “ no set decision”
The point is that they do things based on what they want to do. If the statement was premature and there were legal ramifications, it would have been quickly corrected
It was not which means the reason for not also confirming was nothing to do with a legal reason but more to do with them wanting time to put the pieces together based on lots of factors.
Heck, look at the trust piece. It’s out there because people found the documents not because DVc announced that CFW would be sold completely different.
Look at restrictions for VDH…never announced…showed up in documents.
Every move DVD does benefits them and the thing is, none of us are ever going to know why.
I think there are lots of ways it was a benefit of them to keep the language questionable and continue to not have publicly come out with a statement and let the non offical DVc sources be the ones to run with it.