@NotLambChop

Firstly thanks for the response,
I did misinterpret your statement.

I must admit I personally have an issue with the idea of an IPO in an already running fund and the way it went down.  

The abbreviation IPO seems to be used without any sense of meaning on havelock so the idea of 'sound investments' is gone from the moment you start picking up shares over there anyhow.  They were able to buy shares, set a new price and lock out all the others (who made it happen from day one) in the meanwhile.    In my opinion that is what market regulation does on the normal market, regulating those types of excesses ...
Yes we all have made bad decisions based on emotions (or at least I did buy stock of companies that I shouldn't have), but a normal firm is never able to do this type of manipulation (or not so visibly anyhow).  I would understand that they would create some risk based derivative as in an option plan for themselves, but these are also publicly published in a normal market situation.  Now the market deregulation is so clearly visible that staying in the market seems illogical all together.

Giving I already received feedback that portrayed me as being a cryptx fanatic of some kind I would like to restate I have never made 'investment advice' regarding them, rather I posed questions and made statements regarding likelihood of them being scammers giving their personal exposure.

I do appreciate your feedback, link to previous cases and your critical view overall, sharing these is what forums are ment for in my opinion !

So thanks for enlightening me regarding the Brewster story.