Here is what I understand. After meeting with the management, Muddy Waters did some research on their own. They found a very small production facility with similar name. According to the registered record in China, owners of both onp and alleged facility has the same name. They came to a conclusion that onp was lying about their production capacity. However, Pearson went to China, inspected the facility that onp claims to produce the tonnage and came home happy. Who do you believe?
You didn't read - or understand even 20% of what you read - in the Muddy Waters report. It's difficult to even have a conversation with someone with such a profound misunderstanding.
Muddy Waters went to the same factory as thestreet.com, and thestreet.com video taped that factory. It was that factory that all of their calculations about trucks coming in and out of was done. No one at thestreet.com or the company is disputing that Muddy Waters and thestreet.com met with management at the *correct* factory.
The dispute is over legal paperwork of an operating subsidiary, and that has nothing to do with my post in the first place!