What constitutes "sufficient disclosure" by boards?

Gentrack's share price has taken a hit in recent days, following a profit warning. The announcement surprised many, because it came so soon after the company went public in June. Last week, the company announced that a project had been delayed, and today news emerged that the company knew of the delay before it completed its initial public offering. However, this extra piece of information was not declared at the time because "we didn't think it would have a revenue impact on us".  Gosh, this is a big call. Does this mean that the company had been hiding something that should have been disclosed during the IPO process? 

This brief case raises interesting questions of disclosure:

• If a board has knowledge of a potentially material event (that could affect its share price), should an announcement be made? 
• What latitude should board have in terms of what must be disclosed and what may be disclosed?
  

I sense a fine line here, between transparency (so that investors and prospective investors are informed), and commercial sensitivity (to shield information from competitors). Given the company went public just a few weeks ago, I think I'd be erring on the side of transparency. There's no joy in getting off-side with the market when you are just starting out on a rather public journey towards wealth creation.