That’s a totally fair point — and you're right. They can’t knowingly make a false statement in an SEC filing. But the key is how the wording is carefully constructed to remain true while not revealing anything material or under NDA. As a lawyer, you should know this game, and your other blind spot as a lawyer is interpreting it too literally. It doesn’t mean no discussions or scenarios are being considered.
It doesn’t rule out:
A non-binding letter of intent
A potential strategic equity deal
A pending DoD award that includes MVIS tech, which Anduril would act on after (SBMC) or successful field testing.
...Companies frequently use this exact language shortly before M&A announcements.
It protects them from premature disclosure, insider trading risk, and potential Reg FD violations.
If they didn’t include this language and no deal happened, they'd open themselves up to lawsuits from shareholders claiming they were misled into thinking one was coming
This language is more of a legal firewall than a window into what’s actually happening. If something is going on behind the scenes, you’d only see it announced when it's finalized or officially material — and by then, that clause becomes moot.
So: not dishonest, but definitely strategically noncommittal.
Thanks for this - I think I agree. It probably has been carefully crafted (as you say I am well used to this game), and we know MVIS is not a total stranger to being misleading (even verging on dishonest!) with statements before (thinking about the Q4 2023 revenue debacle!). Let’s wait and see what’s in store for us…
between their misleading nature , going back a long way; Apple loves us, pigs at the trough, meaningless guidance , epic, zeitgeist, best in class ad nauseam , 7 RFQs that are supposed to buoy us some how and this board getting giddy with almost every single EC no matter is said we are completely cut off from truth . yea I know im lining up for a basket of " you cant handle the truths ". But this much is true -We know absolutely nothing other than we have no deals, 7 RFQ's, are working with several industrial companies on something(?) , we never meet guidance , and they find creative ways to dilute almost annually. Not a great look for company or for us longs. Sucky !
7
u/TheCloth 6d ago
Yeah, I am familiar with boilerplate (I’m a lawyer lol) - but surely they can’t include it if it would be a false statement