Può essere interessante la linea di opposizione pubblicata dal noto consulente finanziario olandese
Pieter Lakeman, che tutela due investitori in Olanda
Dal suo sito
Pieter Lakeman advies en financieel onderzoek – SOBI – Stichting Onderzoek Bedrijfs Informatie | Pleidooi Pieter Lakeman inzake SNS Reaal
Tradotto in inglese con google
ADVOCATES NOTES
Pieter Lakeman,
against the Decision of 1 February 2013 of the Minister of Finance on the expropriation of securities and assets SNS REAAL NV and SNS Bank NV
In the appeal filed by me are four statements included:
1) The expropriation of the shares is carried out too late.
2) The expropriation of the claims of shareholders of SNS is against the law and expropriation of individual liability is at all possible.
3) Through expropriation of shareholders and creditor claims are disadvantaged and expropriation must be destroyed.
4) There was no need for expropriation of claims against real-SNS.
For explanation of Theorem 2, I refer to Mr. argument. And Mr. Wolters. Van den Berg Höcker lawyers. The other propositions I will explain myself.
This is a battle of 700 small parties against two very large forces: DNB and the Minister of Finance, which also had a large information gap and timing, major procedural advantages. The 700 are in the same boat and are economically a kind of collective. They are with a pen stretch of their joint assets cured. For this reason I would ask you all to today's arguments can be seen as speaking on behalf of all those whose position could be strengthened by those arguments.
Why chose expropriation?
Nout Wellink said once that a bank fails of passage. He put his theory into practice because neatly under his eyes open DSB bankrupt and has put the ax in SNS.
The stability of the financial system under conditions indeed maintained by the bankruptcy of a bank. The bankruptcy of DSB Bank (which I previously have organized a bank run), the stability of the financial system is not compromised.
Under the deposit guarantee scheme, the banks in the bankruptcy of DSB only € 600 million loss, which could be easily collected. For customers of DSB Bank was bankrupt a blessing. Scheringa offered € 26 million compensation but trustees have already pledged € 500 million.
SNS is more than 10 times the size of DSB Bank. According to the DNB, the deposit guarantee scheme participating banks (mainly Rabobank, ING and ABN Amro) a failure of SNS € 35 billion must make available, then 30 billion at SNS can recover and € 5.3 billion loss. That is, given their solvency, irresponsible. DNB and the minister have overlooked that banks € 30 billion after a number of years from the bankruptcy estate can get back and definitely another € 5 billion loss of interest would suffer. The participating banks would in bankruptcy of SNS in total some € 10 billion loss. (They have now 1 billion contributed and are thus the biggest profiteers of this expropriation).
The core argument of the Minister, that the bankruptcy of SNS the stability of the financial system would jeopardize, is therefore entirely correct, although this is largely caused by the operation of the deposit guarantee scheme. Until this system in its current form will Rabobank, ING and ABN Amro never go bankrupt. Indeed, when one of the three bankrupt, go into the other two.
Expropriation is not necessary
The main argument of the Minister for the expropriation of assets and liabilities separate proceeding, the stability of the financial system. This stability is in principle not served with expropriation of rotten parts of the system. On the contrary, by expropriation can be relaxed atmosphere created in the boardrooms of financial players. By expropriation is also the gut feeling of the investing public (that bankers only collect profits and losses for taxpayers leave) facilitated. The social consequences of expropriation in themselves a threat to the stability of the financial system.
The stability of the system or, indirectly, threatened by the power shortage in SNS. This power deficit is however not smaller by expropriation but only by the capital injections after the expropriation. However, there is no motive, nor put forward, to the capital injection after expropriation to do.
The Minister may well give injections without expropriation, by subscribing to a share issue. The classic argument against it is that such emission yields nothing because nobody wants to enroll. That would under these circumstances is precisely the state desired result: they would only register (which also follows logically from its position that the current shares are worth nothing) and so may be it capital shortfall at SNS elegantly solve ie without existing shareholders to dispose of their total assets.
No motive for expropriation of claims
Expropriation may only benefit from the stability of the financial system.
Expropriation of claims is not aimed at maintaining the stability of the financial system but on increasing gains by the state for subsequent sale of the shares SNS and therefore in conflict with the law.
The minister has only one motive invoked to no equity issue: to make existing shareholders could benefit from the company's recovery. This is clearly not intended by the Minister. Shareholders have any chance of recovering from their property taken away and therefore their claims against the company expropriated. The rationale behind this desire is darkness and will therefore be of a political nature. Especially since the shareholders already amply punished by Nout Wellink them since time immemorial with ineffectual management has saddled. Shareholders should obviously be punished twice and incompetent management should be rewarded with a form of indirect liability for indemnification.
Minister shows incorrect understanding of the value of shares
With regard to the valuation of shares stores the Minister the shelf completely wrong. He looks apparently only visible to the intrinsic value of shares that would be negative (that is according to the latest audited financial statements incidentally still positive). The visible intrinsic value is only a part of the value. There is no listed company, the value of which is equal to the apparent intrinsic value.
Expropriation late
The letter of DNB from 2 October 2012 shows that the solvency of SNS was already inadequate. The Minister then had to intervene directly, either with a public share issue, either by expropriation. The minister, however, has waited four months before, without his making any motive for it. He just did not feel like he has informed the House. After early October, hundreds of thousands of shares purchased by shareholders who had confidence in the financial system, in DNB and the Minister (also Old Middendorp and Stege). That trust has been betrayed and that shareholders have damage count as direct result of the procrastination of the Minister. This dawdling also has a bad influence on the stability of the financial system.
I request your college with your opinion on the validity of the actual expropriation of the claims by shareholders against SNS also take account of the reprehensible manner in which the Minister since October 2, 2012 has acted, but obviously with the total lack of valid reasoning and due to conflict with the law.
Pieter Lakeman
