Methodology

Redline Report exists to test corporate narratives against primary evidence. We focus on governance failure, disclosure distortion, and incentive misalignment—where the downside is real and the marketing is louder than the filings.

Evidence hierarchy

  • Tier 1: regulatory filings, court records, official registries, audited statements.
  • Tier 2: transcripts, contracts surfaced in proceedings, regulator letters, sworn testimony.
  • Tier 3: credible investigative reporting and corroborated third-party datasets.
  • Not evidence: PR, “adjusted” KPIs without reconciliation, selective screenshots without source trace.

How we operate

  • We separate facts from interpretation explicitly.
  • We cite sources so readers can independently verify.
  • We document material inconsistencies, not vibes.
  • We write for downside protection: fragility first.

What we examine

  • Governance design: control, related-party risk, board incentives.
  • Disclosure quality: omissions, reversals, “one-time” adjustments that repeat.
  • Unit economics vs. narrative: where numbers cannot support the story.
  • Capital structure: refinancing dependence, dilution risk, covenant stress.

What we do not do

  • No insider information or MNPI.
  • No personalized investment advice.
  • No promises of accuracy, completeness, or market outcomes.

Corrections and updates

If a material error is identified, we publish a correction with a visible change note. If you dispute a claim, bring primary evidence—not opinions.