One can take sides without losing money. In any case, the evidence presented still does not sustain the conclusion. There are also technical mis-statements. I still believe the more likely explanation is a well-meaning but naïve individual researching a colleague's issue, coming to a faulty but understandable conclusion, and then getting ignored by those who could have pointed out potential leaps in the logic.
>The classic pump and dump involves acquiring a position in an illiquid stock, spreading false information to get investors to bid up its price…
This happened. The company paid exorbitant fees for PR and news services to hype the stock with announcements that were't real in the build up period.
>This line set off alarms because I've experienced, first hand, how difficult it is to get information about a Cayman holding company or trust in person, let alone remotely, let alone before 2008.
I didn't interface with any of the Cayman organizations directly. What made it difficult? Just paper trails, continual mailed notices etc?
>If this is true, the class action settlement is illegal - you are not allowed to take payouts from a fraudulent scheme.
Not a lawyer, however the company shut down just before the SEC investigation was complete, investors settled the lawsuit before fraud was proven, and evidence dismissed before it could show up in public records…it is very possible.
As a high frequency trader I’m sure you’re very familiar and aware of how plausible and possible these things are.
