The unfolding JSE Manipulation saga involving Mantengu Mining has rapidly grown from a routine shareholder update into one of the most unsettling market stories in recent years. In a detailed disclosure supported by an unfiltered YouTube video, CEO Mike Miller presents evidence that suggests coordinated share-price attacks, hidden ownership structures and intimidation tactics targeting junior firms on the JSE. Mantengu’s investigation began after its own stock collapsed dramatically in 2024 despite strong financial performance. What followed were hours of authenticated recordings, pages of transcripts and a digital trail that paints a picture of strategic market interference. This case has forced investors, regulators and analysts to confront the possibility of structured abuse operating beneath South Africa’s capital markets.
JSE Manipulation, according to Mantengu’s report, started with a sudden and suspicious drop in the company’s share price. Mantengu had announced a profitable half-year, posting roughly R2.96 million in earnings. It also secured a R500 million funding facility that signalled long-term stability. Yet, despite these positive fundamentals, the share price plunged from around R1.20 to 8 cents within days.
To Miller, this collapse did not resemble natural volatility or investor uncertainty. The timing aligned too neatly with the company’s progress toward acquiring the Blue Ridge platinum operation, a potentially transformative asset. Instead of reacting to negative news, the market seemed to be responding to concentrated selling pressure and abnormal trade patterns. This discrepancy is what drew Mantengu into questioning whether the event was organic or engineered. In the company’s view, the collapse formed the first visible marker of a larger operation.
JSE Manipulation, as described by Mantengu, is not random behaviour but a staged sequence designed to dismantle companies quietly. The alleged syndicate begins by creating downward pressure on the stock through coordinated short-selling. This aggressive selling overwhelms normal trading and triggers fear-based selling from smaller shareholders.
The second phase involves masking control of the targeted stock. This is done through nominee accounts, offshore vehicles and round-tripping, where shares are bought and sold among controlled entities. These movements create the appearance of natural market activity while ensuring the same group retains influence. Importantly, this tactic keeps ownership below the 35% threshold that would force disclosure under JSE rules.
The third phase places the company under sustained pressure. Once confidence evaporates, lenders, partners and shareholders become nervous, increasing the risk of business rescue or delisting. In the final phase, the syndicate allegedly acquires assets at distressed valuations, recapitalises them and profits on recovery. Mantengu argues that this blueprint has been repeated across several junior-listed companies.
JSE Manipulation allegations are supported by more than five hours of recordings gathered during Mantengu’s internal investigation. These recordings, authenticated and timestamped, capture individuals discussing strategies to avoid regulatory detection, coordinate trading movements and influence corporate outcomes.
In multiple segments, voices allegedly describe past operations in which they moved stock between controlled entities, depressed prices and later benefited from asset purchases after delistings. Some speakers reportedly brag about the speed at which they can destabilise a company, using phrases like “we can own it by Friday.”
The recordings became a core component of Mantengu’s evidence file. They provide a rare glimpse into conversations that appear to outline not only intent but method. To Mantengu, these admissions demonstrate that the events surrounding its stock were not isolated misfortunes but part of a structured approach.
JSE Manipulation claims gained further weight through the creation of detailed transcripts, supported by sworn affidavits confirming accuracy. These transcripts summarise discussions that depict systematic share-price interference and asset targeting.
The documents outline tactics involving nominee structures, concealed ownership chains and coordinated trading designed to mislead market observers. They also reveal conversations about prior targets, describing how share prices were quietly dismantled before assets were acquired.
Mantengu argues that these transcripts illustrate consistency in behaviour across different companies, suggesting a pattern rather than an isolated incident. The transcripts also play a critical role in explaining the psychological and financial pressure placed on executives, shareholders and potential whistleblowers. They offer a window into how such a network sustains influence long enough to reposition assets under its control.
JSE Manipulation, according to Mantengu’s dossier, also left a digital trail scattered across WhatsApp messages, email threads and internal coordination notes. Screenshots included in the investigative file appear to show instructions relayed between individuals about trading sequences, timing and pricing.
Emails reportedly describe how stock should be cycled between multiple accounts, creating the illusion of diverse market participation. These orchestrated movements disguise the fact that beneficial ownership remains concentrated. Mantengu’s team also identified patterns where trades were executed in rapid succession between related accounts, consistent with classic round-tripping.
Digital records form the crucial link between what was said and what occurred in the market. They bridge the gap between verbal strategy and real-time execution, helping Mantengu build a technical and evidentiary foundation for its allegations.
JSE Manipulation allegations reached a disturbing level when an ex-CEO of a delisted firm provided testimony about his own experience. According to Mantengu, this former executive admitted that he was threatened into participating in the destruction of his company’s share price.
Faced with intimidation and physical threats, the executive allegedly cooperated with the syndicate’s strategy, enabling the company to enter distress. As a result, its assets were later acquired cheaply by entities connected to the group. In return for his forced cooperation, he reportedly received a luxury vehicle.
This confession reveals how market manipulation may intersect with personal danger, coercion and fear. It demonstrates how pressure can be applied not just through financial instruments but through direct threats. Such examples raise serious concerns about the broader safety of corporate leaders who resist these tactics.
JSE Manipulation allegations also draw support from Mantengu’s analysis of market data. During the price collapse, trading volumes surged in a manner inconsistent with regular investor behaviour. Large blocks of shares moved repeatedly between accounts, often returning to the same cluster of holders.
The sequencing of trades suggested coordinated selling designed to trigger panic among retail investors. These moves took advantage of the low liquidity characteristic of junior counters, where even modest selling pressure can produce outsized declines.
For Mantengu, this pattern served as quantitative proof that the price collapse was not organic. Instead, it appeared to reflect a planned campaign to undermine investor confidence, frustrate funding arrangements and derail the Blue Ridge acquisition. When combined with recordings and digital messages, the volume data reinforced the narrative of systematic interference.
JSE Manipulation is not just a company-specific threat. It poses a systemic risk to investors and the credibility of South Africa’s financial markets. If coordinated groups can manipulate share prices without triggering regulatory alarms, the fairness and transparency expected of a public exchange come into question.
Companies may hesitate to list if they fear becoming targets. Investors, especially retail investors, may lose confidence in the integrity of price formation. This negative sentiment can increase the cost of capital and undermine long-term economic growth.
Mantengu’s choice to publicly disclose its findings reflects a belief that the issue extends beyond its own balance sheet. The company sees itself as a case study in a broader pattern of vulnerability. For regulators, the dossier presents a crucial opportunity to evaluate oversight mechanisms and restore trust.
JSE Manipulation allegations have led to renewed calls for regulatory reform. Analysts and legal experts argue that beneficial ownership rules need modernisation, particularly regarding nominee accounts and offshore vehicles. Others emphasise the need for real-time surveillance tools capable of identifying coordinated trading anomalies in junior counters.
There are also questions about the role of whistleblowers and the need for stronger protections. Mantengu’s case shows how individuals who expose wrongdoing may face significant personal risk. The use of digital platforms for coordination highlights gaps in monitoring tools used by regulators and law enforcement.
Ultimately, this case invites a broader conversation about how to safeguard smaller listed companies from complex, multi-layered interference. Mantengu’s dossier will likely influence future policy debates, enforcement priorities and investor-protection strategies.
Q1: What does JSE Manipulation mean in the Mantengu case?
It refers to coordinated trading, concealed ownership and pressure tactics used to drive Mantengu’s share price down and target its assets.
Q2: What evidence supports the JSE Manipulation claims?
Recordings, transcripts, WhatsApp logs and trading data form the core evidence supporting Mantengu’s allegations of JSE Manipulation.
Q3: Why does JSE Manipulation matter to investors?
It matters because proven JSE Manipulation undermines market fairness and exposes shareholders to hidden risks in small-cap counters.
The JSE Manipulation allegations surrounding Mantengu Mining have expanded into a profound challenge for South Africa’s capital markets. What began as a single company’s inexplicable price collapse has become a detailed narrative involving recordings, digital trails and allegations of coercion. Regardless of the eventual legal outcomes, the case highlights structural vulnerabilities that affect investors, regulators and listed companies. It is a reminder that confidence in the JSE depends on transparency, accountability and strong safeguards against organised interference.
