That’s an absolute hatchet job of an article. It’s neither accurate nor fair. It takes facts and misrepresents them in order to push the line the writer wants.
Look at the Gewolb quote. He says that it’s not a good idea to borrow money to buy shares and such behaviour is beyond the pale. The writer of the article then uses this to accuse Monzo of going beyond the pale. The accusation is not there in the source, the connection is made by the writer.
Note also, emotive phrasing, where “Monzo emphasises” the share price rise, rather than “as part of helping people make an informed investment Monzo have provided the necessary information”, say. Also rather buries the fact that equity groups have already invested at that level, so it’s a fair rate.
Other example of emotive phrasing, saying Monzo is in a ‘scramble’ to offer banking services rather than a less emotive and more accurate phrase like ‘working on’, or something similar.
Cherry-picked quotes from the Monzo forum also. He could’ve just as easily quoted me or others advising people not to put themselves into debt to make an investment.
I’m not sure why Hosking has an axe to grind against Monzo, but that’s all he’s doing here. Fair and unbiased reporting it ain’t.