Not to be a hater, but this is Ben Thomspon's style. Dial up the word count until people think your analysis is comprehensive, to disguise the fact that you're not saying anything substantive.
I think you're being unfair: try steelmanning. Assume that he is genuinely giving his best and most comprehensive analysis of the situation. It might be a flawed analysis, but at least give credit that it's a genuine effort.
The main flaw of the analysis I can see is that he is seeing patterns that aren't there - being used to analyzing complex international economics, and then being confronted with something as simple as this pump and dump scheme.
