Member Info for Lazada

There is so much I want to write about this but I do not want to get sued, but safe to say it stinks to high heaven.

Galloping hypocrisy, I love it!

Almost makes me want to buy a horse just so I can name it that :)

I suspect the ultimate irony is that they won't win contracts simply because they are unable to offer bribes and inducements while under investigation by the SFO.

If you want a similar story, and an example of the double standards employed by the SFO then read about the BAE Al-Yamamah arms deal in Saudi Arabia. The SFO were basically forced to back off because of pressure from the Saudi government.

This is a depressing article describing the turf war between SFO in UK and DOJ in USA.

It feels like Petrofac case won't get resolved until the Unaoil prosecution is finally settled and who knows when that will be?

https://www.spotlightcorruption.org/unaoil-a-very-complicated-win-for-the-serious-fraud-office/

Indeed Denby, and the SFO is currently being sued by two parties, one for failing in their fiduciary duties and one because they failed to investigate allegations of fraud.

Maybe this isn't a fair analogy, but if I was accused of wrongdoing and had to wait more than 4 years for them to make a case against me, I would feel like suing for loss of earnings. Hell, even my personal loss holding Petrofac shares makes me want to sue them.

There probably was wrongdoing at Petrofac, although having spent a few years in the Middle East it is standard practice to pay baqsheesh to the parties who have influence over purchasing decisions. Here, it is regarded as a crime but over there it is standard business practice and people are not ashamed about it. For sure other firms are doing it ALL the time.

Well all I can say is the SFO are really dumb. Why don't they take the American approach where they fine the company for any wrongdoing making it not worthwhile for the company to do it again in the future, while also not damaging the company too badly itself.

If they had announced a 500m fine, after say the first year then everybody could have gone on their way. Petrofac would have taken a hit but recovered quickly, the livelihoods of the innocent employees would not have been risked or damaged, and shareholder value would not have been destroyed.

If they levied a 500m fine now it is more than the market cap of the company and they would effectively push it in to bankruptcy, which seems extreme for a company that employs or used to employ 10,000 people who are the innocent victims of a few bad eggs.

End result is they probably won't get a bean, and maybe if they are lucky they get a single conviction. Wow, way to go, a really productive use of everybody's time.

So well done the SFO, they have damaged and risked the livelihoods of thousands of innocent employees. They have presided over the destruction of billions of pounds of shareholder value.

And when the smoke finally clears, and Petrofac limps out of the carnage in its vastly weakened state, it will simply be taken over, probably by a foreign company for pennies on the pound.

Yes, well done the SFO, I bet you're really proud of yourselves.

I agree the debate on this forum has become stale.

Yes we all know there is a very high chance that Intu goes broke, but if you think of it like an option on them somehow managing to find a way out of this almighty mess, then maybe a 3-4p strike price for an option with unlimited time value starts to look a little more interesting.

And if they do go broke, well it won't really be a surprise will it? Just another example of incompetent managers destroying a perfectly good business while enriching themselves. That more than anything is the shameful thing, not somebody taking a punt on a 4p option.

Exactly! A CVA is a last roll of the dice prior to bankruptcy.

However, if the company fails to comply with the terms of the CVA, then my understanding is the full debt becomes due and not the reduced rent agreed with the CVA.

Anyway, quite sure the British Government won't want any major bankruptcies announced during this crisis, and they have already said they will do whatever it takes to keep the economy going so it's not lights out just yet.

You don't just tear up CVA agreements, they are solemnly undertaken and legally binding.

Failure to adhere to the terms of the CVA could result in legal action.

Basically it's either pay up or declare bankruptcy immediately.

I think Sain just made an excellent investment case for Intu didn't he?

If the best they can achieve is BV -20% then very roughly that would give them net assets of 8bn - 20% or 6.4bn and net external debt of 4.7bn which would leave roughly 1.7bn of equity or a share price 9 times higher than it is today.