I don't understand the perspective of those who think "the social contract was not fulfilled". In my opinion, that outlook is a result of overly rigid thinking. A social contract shouldn't be like computer code or a math formula. It's not an if then else statement.
It was used to attract investors. It wasn't legal obligation. However III pointed it while marketing AGS/PTS . They didn't put enough effort to warn the investors of the fact that they might not honor it fully. It is a mistake that could enrage a lot of investors. AND induce doubt on their ability to fully fulfill any future promise.
What if honoring the social contract "fully", would probably result in BTSX eventually being worth nothing? The greater good was honored.
The biggest social contact is to succeed for investors. That takes precedent over all others. What good is your "social contact" if your investment goes to zero and btsx/pts/ags are sitting in the dust bin of history?
Come on guys let's not argue based on fear mongering tactics using "what if" statements. You don't know that this merger won't result in everything I3 has done result in being worthless seeing how they are putting all their eggs in one basket now.
Even BM accurately stated that this move was what he thought was the right decision but that he could be wrong.
If your argument is that no statements or contracts or agreements should ever be binding for BM and I3 because you implicitly trust them to make the right decisions, then that is a perfectly fine argument to make with no need to invoke impossible to prove "what if" scenarios.