LLEN: True Representation of Majority Owners as Presented by GEO?
Why GEO stresses that they contacted both Mr. Hu Shiwei and Mr. Zhang Baoguo, who collectively control 70% of the Ping Yi Mine?
Not only GEO said that both Hu & Zhang "are enraged by the fraudulent activities of LLEN and that they never transferred their interests of Ping Yi Mine to LLEN and/or its affiliated identities," but it also mentioned both of them have provided the firm the notarization documents and video. Any yet there is no sight of Zhang in the video or him signing any kind documents (for notarization) that GEO claimed he has expressed.
That fact that GEO fails to get Zhang to go to the notary public office together with Hu leads us to believe the reliability of the GEO report is of question and I have strong reservation and doubts that Hu represents Zhang's view as attempted and presented by GEO.
Furthermore, even though we can hardly understand why GEO OTGDD team did not accompany Hu to the notary office, we thought GEO would make reasonable efforts to verify the materials (i.e. the notarization documents and video) provided by Hu to ensure the least DD work is in place. However, I can tell GEO for some unknown reasons (as disclosed below) has chosen not to do anything.
Up to now, the only viable theory (or answer if you like) I can think of is GEO knew all along the whole thing was a scam, so instead of poking around for truth, it tactfully chose to let readers know the only thing it did was the contact with Hu & Zhang while playing NO part in the visit to notary office, the notarization and video taking.
Why GEO allegedly makes such appearance and false representation to mislead readers and viewers? It is suspected that GEO intends to create a picture that Mr. Hu (the single largest owner of the mine) consents to and represents the opinion and conclusion of majority owner of the mine so that it can go on with the unfound accusation of LLEN fraud and further substantiate such claim through notarization.
Reliable Video without Verification?
GEO's report states that the video and notarization documents were provided by the true owners of Ping Yi Mine. Seems to me that GEO is attempting to tell us these gentlemen are the reliable source of verification. Yet I do have the following queries.
It is difficult to understand why in the video Mr. Hu,
- never mentions the place and date of the Video taken.
- never other than the legal representative, mentions that he is authorized to represent Zhang and or any other partners of Ping Yi mine to declare what is stated in the declaration.
- never shows us how he enters into the Fuyuan County Notary Office from outside all the way to the room where he made his presentation.
- never shows us the notarization documents but only copies of business license and mining permit of Ping Yi mine.
- invites viewers to have direct contact but never leaves his direct contact details, such as phone number as the sales agent Mr. Wu did. Didn’t he said he wanted to sell?
I think the video would have been much more reliable and less questionable if Mr. Hu also,
- shows us to the Ping Yi mine and the office to demonstrate he is in control or part of the management there.
- has other partners of Ping Yi mine appeared in the video to show support of his declaration and condemnation.
Even more interesting, I do not see any proof from GEO confirming Zhang has any knowledge of the video and notarization documents. And so far I still do not know why the Ping Yi owners have not instituted any legal proceedings against LLEN to protect their interest. Maybe GEO can share its insight with us.
