Really appreciate this post even though I even called you suspicious on the Simgate asset and jl777hodl having majority of them.
Water under the digital bridge.
The evidence is clearly from the fact that cross asset holds in cases exceeds 50% which should be suspicious in itself but I guess we on BCT are so blind with "reputation only" that it requires empirical evidence from me and not from jl777. It is at best a "surmised" explanation.
Let me be more precise - this time briefly.
All you have at this point is evidence that there's cross-ownership. In and of itself, all you've shown is that James' assets are indistinguishable from a collection that in part serves as a set of holding companies. Holding companies are 100% legitimate in the outside world, and have been so for ~ a century if not more.Sorry, but to someone who uses Occam's Razor in my admittedly pro-James way you've only demonstrated that James has a liking for a complex cross-ownership structure whose assets are a hybrid between operating and holding. In my opinion, that's all you have. As for anything that would demonstrate shenanigans with respect to valuations, I saw nothing. Hence my admittedly strict use of the word "surmise."
But before I go, I did compose that "unreasonable" part as a disguised warning to you. There are some people around here that are demanding, and you might find yourself feeling obliged to work a lot for free without quite knowing why. "Know When To Draw The Line."