I think you’re overinterpreting a little, though I understand what you mean. Let’s break it down a bit more.
Indeed not, because it could have been interpreted as the disclosure of inside information.
Yes, the price reaction could have confirmed that Inderes was guilty of disclosing inside information, which could have resulted in a shitstorm.
True, it is not DIRECTLY inside information. So the situation is subject to interpretation, and with a more stable company in a different situation, it would be a minor matter without an expected price reaction, in which case it wouldn’t be inside information. In this case, Atte felt it was better to play it safe and didn’t write about it.
The only contradiction in Inderes’ communication, as I understand it, relates to that last sentence, if interpreted such that Atte was certain the information in question was not inside information. In my opinion, Atte’s message doesn’t convey such certainty; rather, they wanted to play it safe and treat the information as inside information.