We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/13669b47-dd00-4b6e-9d66-f255bf1d8d84
He added that “a thorough investigation conducted by a reputable and, most importantly, independent firm would in Everest’s view go a long way to clear the waters and restore shareholder confidence”.
Peter Mallin-Jones, analyst at Peel Hunt, said Mr Lioustiger’s call for an investigation was an attempt to “muddy the waters” around Petropavlovsk and stir up investor concerns ahead of the upcoming general meeting
Petropavlovsk said the rationale behind the Temi deal had been well communicated to investors as an “accretive step” for securing a long-life asset and extending the life of its Albyn mine by a minimum of 19 years.
It added that Deloitte had been the external auditor for the company since 2009 and a process for a new auditor started in 2019. “In their resignation letter Deloitte did mention certain limitations in Company’s financial reporting due to heavy reliance on Excel. [The] previous Board has acknowledged that and as mentioned in the Audit Committee report has fully addressed that point,” it said
Separately, Bonum Capital, a private investment vehicle that declared a 3.5 per cent stake in Petropavlovsk last month, “called for strong and effective management”.
“[We] are against any corporate conflicts that can ruin the capitalisation of Petropavlovsk,” said Murat Aliev, owner of Bonum.
my view is simple, all this mess started when the shares were listed on that frigging Russian stock exchange... all done imho to get PIs to sell cheap and bail so the satan worshipping psychopaths fat cats can buy our shares cheap. shake the tree as hard as we can.
Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/13669b47-dd00-4b6e-9d66-f255bf1d8d84
A forensic examination of all deals and transactions involving Petropavlovsk over the past three years is needed to help end the stand-off that has rocked the Russia-focused gold miner, one of the company’s biggest shareholders has said.
Nikolai Lioustiger, a businessman who controls 12 per cent of the company through investment vehicles Slevin and Everest, said an independent investigation by one of the UK’s Big Four auditors would help “clear the waters” and “restore” shareholder confidence.
“Everest sincerely hopes that by raising its concerns it will motivate as many shareholders as possible to vote at the upcoming general meeting and exercise their right to hold management to account,” Mr Lioustiger said in his first comments on the shareholder dispute.
Petropavlovsk, which owns a state of the art processing plant in Russia, was one of the best-performing stocks in London over the past year.
Aided by a rising gold price, its shares have soared 190 per cent, giving it a market value of almost £1bn and a place in the FTSE 250 index.
However, it was plunged into corporate turmoil last month when its chief executive and co-founder Pavel Maslovskiy and six other directors were ousted by Mr Lioustiger and two other shareholders: UGC, a privately owned Russian gold miner, and Fortiana, an investment vehicle controlled by Russian businessman Vladislav Sviblov.
The company is aiming to hold a general meeting next month to appoint a new board.
Mr Lioustiger said he was concerned by Petropavlovsk’s refusal to explain the strategic rationale for the proposed buyout of its Temi subsidiary as well as Deloitte’s decision to stop auditing the company.
Deloitte chose not to seek reappointment as Petropavlovsk’s auditor because of its length of service and concerns about the “limitations” of the company’s “internal controls and systems for financial reporting”, according to a shareholder circular.
Mr Lioustiger, who has taken legal action to stop the appointment of four interim directors, said that while Deloitte’s decision was itself worrying, he was also puzzled by the company’s continued refusal to explain the details of the Temi transaction.
“If the transaction goes ahead, the company will pay tens of millions more to an unknown counterparty for an asset which does not appear to be worth anything like the amount being paid for it,” said Mr Lioustiger.
He added that “a thorough investigation conducted by a reputable and, most importantly, independent firm would in Everest’s view go a long
https://www.ft.com/content/13669b47-dd00-4b6e-9d66-f255bf1d8d84
interesting article just published in ft