"Why would you worry about [this being like the other site that refunded everyone]?"
Where do you see a problem with that statement?
He doesn't. He wants others to see the problem that he is hinting at but which doesn't really exist. It's how he operates. He has no evidence so he has to rely on this kind of half-truth.
See also the constant "but that's nothing compared to what is coming in part 3" bullshit.