For me, 23-F will always be linked with the birthday of a novieta that never came to be, I was very young.
The most famous 23-F, no doubt, was the attempted Tejero Coup in Congress in 1981. But two years later, the same day, the Socialist government (with Boyer's Minister of Economy, at the time) decided to expropriate Rumasa, that empire with feet of clay built from populism by businessman Jose Maria Jerez Ruiz-Mateos, indeed, Catholic ultramontane. It appears that the Government was detected in the Rumasa a box B with a hole in the order of 111,000 million pesetas (ie about 667 million euros). You can see more details here .
 |
| José María Ruiz-Mateos, head of New Rumasa (EFE; Source: ABC.es ) |
For two or three years, there was talk in the media of New Rumasa. Came to the fore, especially with the issuance of promissory notes to be sold to investors, the minimum amount of 50,000 Euros at an annual rate of 8% (about twice what was available at the time of a regular bank deposit). I must admit that I came to explore the possibility of investing something in that New Rumasa, but a couple of events threw me back. On the one hand, the minimum amount that was beyond my means. And, moreover, the darkness and opacity which presented the investment, regardless of all regulatory circuits, especially those of the CNMV.
The CNMV limited by law not to intervene otherwise, warned investors on these notes, making it clear that remained outside the normal regulations of the stock market. Up to seven notices of this kind came to the CNMV on New Rumasa offerings to investors.
 |
| (Source: informacioneconomia ) |
New Rumasa has never been a holding company that integrates business and, therefore, be subject to the usual regulations that basically involve transparency and publication of reports Finance and others. Today, no more than a conglomerate of, apparently, up to 117 independent companies. Each must submit (or not) separate accounts and it is very difficult to track their secrets.
In recent times, with a guarantee (implied) of any of the companies of the group, came to offer investment return of 10% a year, or up to 12% annual investment 24 months. In some ways, the manifestation of the difficulties of the group to get funding for roads usual.
The first offering of notes, which I discussed at the time in some detail, was issued with the (alleged, again) a guarantee of the assets they claimed at the bottom of some of the wineries. Assets valued very imaginatively, of which evidence has never been reliable.
now appears that the new conglomerate collapsed again. Ten of the group companies pass preconcursal situation, three months, according to law, to negotiate the refinancing of debt, estimated at 700 million Euros, or fall into bankruptcy. Although New Rumasa (and Ruiz-Mateos in particular) has always been extremely reserved about it, could have a total of 5,000 investors who have contributed to 140 million euros to the group. Of course, as the whole theme is developed with a low maximum transparency and opacity, quite possibly a large proportion of these funds can also come from environments opaque, and tax havens seem to have much to do with the group as a whole.
Frankly, I feel no sorrow for investors. Were attracted by the greed of a guaranteed return overly high, and as everything has developed outside regulatory agencies, that security just when the house of cards collapses. High yield means high risk. Let each arree with what he touches.
 |
| CLESA, one of the business (along with Dhul, The Hamlet, Garvey ,...) (Source: lavozdeasturias ) |
Yes I stir the 10,000 employees who may have currently total group companies. Without any responsibility for the outcome of the adventure, you can see if everything unemployment when the cluster is just coming down. I guess in the fruit basket companies will be more healthy than others, which could be purchased by third parties and make them viable.
The background of this story is that the mode of doing business Ruiz-Mateos is out of place in the economy of the late twentieth century and this century. His attempt to build a giant family business, far beyond its natural limits, keeping the paternalistic, not going nowhere but to disaster.
We liked more or less, but all regulatory agencies that has been enacted in the market, provide large dose of transparency and require all publicly traded company (for example) the highest corporate social responsibility towards customers, suppliers, financial institutions, investors and to society in general. I recommend, if you have time, that you conectéis to CNMV website, where you can see all the data submitted by all companies listed on the market, all financial institutions, including the (sometimes) reviled SICAV, etc. Through Relevant, companies must inform the CNMV (and therefore the market, all investors and any interested citizen) of any events which affect the running of enterprises, any corporate move to buy or sell, any dividend distribution decision, any debt or any extension of social capital, etc. etc.
 |
| another institution concerned. (Source: felipeandlurds ) |
guess the question would be why Ruiz-Mateos insisted, again, to build a giant mat and outside of all these mechanisms are those that provide transparency and order to the market, and those who can convey confidence. Rule out, by the deep religiosity that boasts that after this decision was the intention to defraud. Ought to build a listed holding company, to expand social capital by issuing shares, transmit to the CNMV, and therefore the market, all information and reports that were necessary, and raising a thriving entrepreneurship. Of course, if he did so, and apparently seen, perhaps these opaque funds had not come to claim, and the listing of its shares and all the Group in general, would have collapsed much earlier.
Though sometimes it hurts so to speak, in economics is needed less romantic and more effective and transparent.
JMBA
0 comments:
Post a Comment