Replies to post #59451 on China Growth Stocks

[ratobranco]

ONP - a lot of people seem to be positive on ONP, but I'm not so confident. I want to see the audit results, and I want to see how each of the MW claims are addressed. There were a lot of compelling claims. It would be very weird if ONP were fully clean, though possible. For those that disagree and have a position in the stock, I recommend you freshen up on the arguments, noting each of them point by point, so that you can be ready to go in terms of assessing the audit results. MW just recently reopened its site with links to all the prior reports.

All this talk about ONP being "positive" in PR's on the results is nonsense IMO--the company doesn't know what the results are yet, and there is no way that L&L or especially Deloitte would breach the integrity of the process and reveal them prematurely. The board gets briefed first, and they were supposed to be briefed on Nov. 15, or thereabouts. We haven't heard anything, and to be honest, I don't think we will for awhile. Even if the company is clean in principle, you can't go through an audit like that and not have small restatements and so forth that need to be handled.

[Michael Anderson]

RINO - Just from their lack of response and pretty much doing nothing, indicated something. As Rato stated in a previous post in regards to having an indication based on the response of a company. I think most can agree that ONP has responded completey different from how RINO and even some other companies have responded. Nothing has come back after 4 months and have to be restated, nothing halted, no delay in responses from management, effort in trying to clear their innocence. With ONP, even if something does come back, it is no way in the form of what Muddy Waters has stated as most of what they have stated has been cleared. Is it still possible that something is wrong, sure, but if anything does come up, it will not be anything close to what MW stated. I do not know too much about RINO, but I also doubt everything MW stated in regards to RINO is true. So, it is one thing to actually do actual research and present it to show a company to be a fraud, but to present information that is untrue to serve a short position and completely fabricate and add info that is not there, should not be applauded. Again, in regards to RINO, I do not know if this is case, but with ONP I know it is completely the case and in my opinion their piece on ONP is 100% fabricated.