Mate, I upvoted you because I agree, pump & dumps and market manipulations do happen, and because everyone is entitled to their own views (especially when you're sitting on a big loss!).
I personally think that, yes, there definitely was a lot of trader activities involved in the run. This massively inflated the volumes and volatility of the price, but that's not a "pump and dump", it's just traders getting attracted to the action. I mean, no one was ramping the stock, then all of a sudden it just started running. It was dead quiet here, in social media, company website.... nothing was happening. So that rules out the "classic" pump and dump where you have someone flogging the stock hard, then dumping it.
OK, you might think that the initial high volume buying was the pump... ie. high volume P & D; buy at high volumes into a normally low volume stock to attract attention, then dump it for a profit. However, that again doesn't make sense because there were huge volume spikes all the way from 2.4c, right up to 6.6c, before it crashed to where we are now. In fact, the day it closed at 6.6c was the second highest volume day in the run, only beaten by the volume of the crash the next day. All those high-volume spikes happened with zero news, zero flogging from anyone (not even PG was flogging it... he was merely trying to justify why it was happening!). It can only mean that whoever was manipulating this stock in a high-volume P&D, must have been responsible for all those spikes leading to the crash, which means that their average position on the stock must be around 4.5c - 5.5c. Now look at the "dumping pattern" of the crash, the prices where the highest volumes were being dumped at. If their plan was to make money out of all this, they have failed miserably. You just have to take the VWAP of the up-trend, and put it against the VWAP of the crash period. There was no money made there.
Expand
(20min delay)