Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range of investment products and financial services for alien expatriates and residents in Hong Kong, Moscow, Shanghai and Bangkok. The aforesaid person had
range of investment products and financial services for alien expatriates and residents in Hong Kong, Moscow, Shanghai and Bangkok. The aforesaid person had not been licensed to operate securities
make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range of
PFS to make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range
to make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range of
but with permission to provide services only to institutional investors. Its public solicitation was therefore considered unlicensed derivatives business. This case is under consideration of the public
Financial (NZ) Ltd. had been registered with the SEC as derivatives dealer but with permission to provide services only to institutional investors. Its public solicitation was therefore considered unlicensed
the notification of the SEC for 4 days. In this regard, BO did not keep the assets in its cold wallets, digital wallets connected to the internet when conducting transactions only, in the proportion