Secondly, Dotcom's main claim was the hostile takeover, his family shares were just a part of that. It could be true that they were frozen but un-true about the rest of his claims.
So yes, it's a denial of his full claims, but maybe (or maybe not) a confirmation of one part of his claims that you pulled out.
That said it's obviously a bunch of PR speak that means nothing. For example this line:
> "More than 75 percent of shareholders have supported recent equity issues, so there has not been any 'hostile takeover',
You could plot a hostile takeover in which the end, winning, result is that you own 75% of the shares, that is the takeover. So having shareholder support when the claim against you is "they took over the company by sneakily getting shareholder control" is irrelevant.
All in all, it's a denial, but not one with any evidence in either direction.
