Deletion of Fluix

Comment: 5 out of 17 references are press releases that are the only confirming sources of information about the historical details of the company in 2021. Meanwhile the main milestones are supported with materials of Wikipedia and other trusted sources. I confirm that I'm aware of  and previously contributed some details and facts about :Readdle, but I'm not a paid editor or an advertiser, this company is popular and well known in Ukraine. Considering that being familiar with the founders of the company, the area of  may raise suspicion here, thus in this article I avoided personal assessments and conclusions, avoided marketing speak and included confirmation of the stated facts in external sources. Among these facts there is one that declares that Fluix is actually not just a rebranded product of Readdle, but the standalone company registered in Ireland, based in several countries, meanwhile PDF Expert (software)|PDF Expert is still one of the products of :Readdle. I respect the rules of the community and the project, therefore I would like to ask you to consider this article solely as historical materials about the company and general information about its activities, and remove any content you consider questionable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (:WP:COI||:WP:COI)

Comment: If this article is to be kept, it needs to be completely rewritten to meet . As it stands, it looks like a PR piece. Most of the refs discuss Readdle, not Fluix. At best, this should be a stub. I'm having a hard time checking on some of the refs, so that's why I'm not voting for keep or delete
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: This is one of several articles on the :Readdle company and its products. The article author was https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANikosx4&type=revision&diff=772977038&oldid=772975524 previous warned about  in respect of Readdle articles. The present article is about a rebranding of the enterprise version of their :PDF Expert (software), though much of this article is about the prior history of the company and that earlier product. Leaving aside the press releases and routine announcements, the product reviews and inclusions in industry sector lists do not look sufficient to demonstrate that specific notability has been attained. A basic merge (just noting the tool and its target market) and redirect to either :PDF Expert (software) or :Readdle could be an option
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (:WP:COI)

Comment:  requires multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with |in-depth information *on the company* (not their products) and (this bit is important!) containing |"Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include ''original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject''. That means, nothing that relies on company information or announcements or interviews, etc. Nor "product reviews" that don't provide Independent Content *on the company*. None of the references in the article meet the criteria. They are either PR/Announcements, comments/reviews of product (some don't even mention the company!), standard business listings or the product's inclusions in lists. Topic fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:NCORP)