Datapulse’s “clarification” of non-disclosure of regulatory action

Published December 25, 2017

On December 24 at 9.53 pm, Datapulse Technology issued a “clarification announcement” regarding the wrong answer provided to the question on past regulatory actions in the announcement appointment template for Mr Low Beng Tin, the new Chairman.

Earlier that evening, I had posted an article “Did Datapulse Technology disclose inaccurate information in its director appointment announcement”, which I updated at 10.55 pm that same evening. I had discovered the inaccurate disclosure of the regulatory action relating to Mr Low Beng Tin on December 21. I later discovered what appears to be a second inaccurate disclosure regarding a winding-up petition relating to a company where Mr Low was a director. This was also discussed in my article. Datapulse has not issued any “clarification” with regards to this second item.

According to the Cambridge Dictionary, clarification means “an explanation or more details that makes something clear or easier to understand.” The original answer in the appointment announcement template posted by Datapulse was extremely clear and easy to understand. It said “No” to the question as to whether there has been any regulatory action. There is no ambiguity to a “No” answer. Therefore, the original announcement was wrong. The additional details now provided give information on the regulatory action which I had alluded to in my article. Unfortunately, it has become common practice for companies to call a spade a shovel…or a hoe.

However, it is not much of a clarification either because there is no explanation as to how the incorrect disclosure was made in the first place. Did he provide the answer in the original announcement? Did he validate the answers before the template was posted?

Did Mr Low disclose the regulatory action to the Board when they were considering his suitability for appointment? If he did not, does the Board still believe that he is suitable for appointment? If he did, did the Board review or ensure that the announcement was reviewed for accuracy?

The company took 13 days to issue the clarification announcement – which was far longer than it took for it to buy a company.

Mak Yuen Teen

Comments are closed.