No, the point is that I believe that there is enough suspicion that needs clarification to warrant a trading halt. That is the whole point.
Yes that is what ISX said in the latest queries, but in the previous queries ISX also said:
and also
From those two explicit quotes then I think it can be safely concluded that ISX was the one who seek and paid for the licence (acquire) and then subsequently deploy the same licence into the cloud. From what I can gather they did it multiple times, once for each customer.
Weirdly enough on the latest queries, like you have quoted, ISX claimed to have never had a copy of the licence. To me that is highly contradictory. How is it possible that ISX paid for and then deployed the licence but claimed to have never had any copy of the licence????
Remittance advices is only a small part of the equation but it seems weird to me that a company that offer anti fraud, anti money laundering, KYC, etc services do not keep remittance advices.
