However, the simple facts are that, under French law, there is no basis for the Minister of Foreign Affairs to order a company to break a valid and binding agreement, and that LVMH`s unilateral discussions with the French government, without notification or consultation with Tiffany and its lawyer, constituted a further breach of LVMH`s obligations under the merger agreement. Moreover, this alleged official French attempt to take revenge against the United States for new tariffs has never been announced or publicly debated; So how could this be an attempt to put pressure on the United States? cancel tariffs? In addition, as we do not know of any other French company that receives such a request, it is all the clearer that LVMH has impure hands. These and other forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future results and are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions that may cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements, including as a result of factors, risks and uncertainties over which we have no influence. The inclusion of such statements should not be construed as an assurance that any plans, estimates or expectations will be met. You shouldn`t rely too much on such statements….