Bank Holiday Viewing - anyone speak French edition?

Comments

1. ---

   DUCK AND DIVE

   4 April 2015, 07:14

   Does this help?

   http://www.scoop.it/t/news-francais/p/4039238584/2015/03/16/documentaire-74-mn-areva-uramin-3-milliards-en-fumee-youtube-uranium-nucleaire-balkany-lauvergeon

   Juan Carlos Hernandez’s insight:
   #documentaire 74 min ▶ #Areva – #Uramin: 3 billion in smoke-uranium nuclear YouTube- # # #Balkany #Lauvergeon
   Added March 11, 2015
   Case Areva – Uramin 3 billion in smoke

   From Paris to Bangui, from London to Namibia, Pascal Henry led the investigation into one of the largest industrial fiascos in recent years.

   The scandal UraMin, which poisons the life Anne Lauvergeon since leaving the management of Areva in 2011, is just beginning. It is the certainty that we remove the survey entitled Areva Business: 3000000000 smoke Pascal Henry conducted in Bangui Paris and London to Namibia, in the footsteps of the protagonists of this dark matter.

   Some 3 billion euros of public money, since the state owns 87% of the nuclear giant: it is the sum of the purchase price in 2007 of this small Canadian mining company ($ 1.8 billion) and 1.25 billion invested in the development of the Namibian deposit … Before its leaders are warning a little later, in 2010, there was much less land than is promised uranium sellers of these resources concentrated on Trekkopje (Namibia ) and Bakouma (Central African Republic). And they fit huge writedowns in their accounts.

   UraMin is an industrial fiasco announced. From the start, the home experts were excluded, as evidenced by a former geologist Areva, arguing that the acquisition process UraMin was too engaged. When the Agency for State holdings has been taken to give the green light from the government, the management of Areva has provided an internal document which has been redacted the most unfavorable for operation. Including doubts about the supposed wealth Trekkopje, which was assessed by SKR, a company sponsored by UraMin. Now the low ore deposit placed its operations on the edge of breaking even, according to the boss of the nearby uranium mining giant Rio Tinto, interviewed in the documentary.

   Pretty financial somersault

   The two owners of the mining junior, James Mellon and discreet Stephen Dattels presented as true bounty hunters in the Old West mining, have done them a nice “somersault” Financial: bought 35 million euros in 2005, their alleged nuggets were sold to Areva 1.8 billion two years later, in the highest price of uranium.

   Pascal Henry throws a few corners of the veil. Areva and he has, he says, allocated free shares of the company operating a seawater desalination plant required to process uranium at near the Namibian president. Important shadows also appear in the Central part of the case, which appears Patrick Balkany.

   The mayor (UMP) of Levallois-Perret has indeed played the intermediaries between Areva and the President of the Central African Republic of the time, François Bozizé, who judged that his country had been robbed in the sale of Bakouma deposit in UraMin. Finally, Areva would have paid in Bangui $ 50 million, which are volatilized. In return for his mediation, Mr. Balkany would, in turn, hit $ 8 million, paid into an account in Singapore, according to several sources. That denies this close to Nicolas Sarkozy.

   Many players in this case refused to respond to the investigator. Anne Lauvergeon First, who has always vehemently denied any wrongdoing. Like her husband, Olivier Fric, who advised hiring Areva Daniel Wouters, a man who has made ​​possible the purchase of UraMin. The documentary ends with this lapidary statement: “The judicial investigations are just beginning.”

2. ---

   GOSBORNE

   4 April 2015, 14:32

   A very interesting documentary with a colourful cast of characters including “Atomic” Anne Lauvergeon, the ex-investment banker CEO of Areva at the time of that company’s acquisition of UraMin (she resigned from Areva in 2011). The title of the film is “Euro 3 billion up in smoke”, as it is claimed that French state-owned nuclear giant Areva was sold a massively overprice pup for a purchase price of Euro 1.8 billion and then spent a further Euro 1 billion on Uramin before mothballing the assets, some of which were said by Namibian neighbours Rio Tinto to be “very low grade”. A private investigator who has looked into this could not hide his admiration for the “brains behind the deal”, the “man without a face”, Uramin director Stephen Dattels, of whom no photograph appears to exist, although a glossy picture of a villa in Miami that he is rumoured to own made an appearance. Mr Dattels is described as an Isle of Man resident and genius with expert knowledge of offshore trusts. It is said that Mr Dattels has never been in trouble with the law, unlike, the ever-happy-to-be-photographed Jim Mellon, who, according to the film, boasts about having personally made $100 million from this deal and was the subject of an outstanding arrest warrant from South Korea at the time of this transaction. Who knew? One other point that might interest readers of this site is that although it was clear who the directors of Uramin were at the time of the deal, these investigators have been unable to get hold of a complete shareholder list and Uramin’s brokers JP Morgan Cazenove say that they cannot find one. Curiouser and curiouser,

3. ---

   AWS

   7 April 2015, 09:57

   I doubt that the Uramin Board have anything to fear from the facts developed in this film.
   1 The theme of the film was that Areva, a State majority owned Energy company had (a) bought Uramin for billions at an astonishing over value since one of its 3 mines was stated not to exist, one was stated to be the lowest grade mine available, and the third was stated to be subject to political dispute and therefore inoperable, and (b) then spent more billions on those assets. Without ever changing their nil valuation. There was therefore alleged to be a huge multi billion loss to the French State and culprits were being hunted.
   2 In context of French political life this was a film which, without actually expressing it, was asking whether French politicians during the Presidency of M Sarkozy were involved in corrupt practices. This has been an on going issue for years. It’s no doubt bubbling nicely now that there’s some suggestion that Sarkozy might re stand for the Presidency.
   3 In context of French geo-politics, if some Company listed on the London Stock Exchange was thought to have defrauded the French State, they would have had a right good go at it. Which they didn’t.
   4 If the accusation against the Uramin board is that they sold the Company for an over value, then so what? If the allegation against the Board was that they misrepresented the value of the Company (or misrepresented the geological data they had) then that allegation would have surfaced in the film. Instead the film concentrated on why it was that Areva had not done sufficient due dilgence on the glossy detailed brochure Uramin provided. The fact that it hadn’t done due diligence was developed at length.
   5 In context of ordinary commercial billion dollar transactions there is no way that a vendor could get away with preventing the purchaser from doing its due diligence. And if the Purchaser did feel prevented, then that would be such an unusual occurrence that the team leader (especially for a State owned Purchaser) would be bound to get express board approval for the omission when seeking mandate to complete the transaction. Which he didn’t.
   6 In any event it’s unlikely that any legal representations as to value were actually given by the Uramin Board in the takeover documentation. And again, if they had been, they’d have been mentioned in the film. Which they weren’t.
   7 The suggestion that Cazenove, or whoever was the London manager of the Takeover proceeds, “cannot find” the address list of the Uramin shareholders to whom the cash consideration for their shares was paid is ridiculous. Really? Cazenove cannot find a listed company shareholder list? Cazenove cannot say to whom it paid the proceeds of a listed Takeover? A weak point in the film was that it did not seem to know that Uramin was AIM listed and did not distinguish between its Board and its shareholders.
   8 Of course in context of libel laws any film dealing with the possibility of corruption in high places, is going to delight in a great deal of innuendo. And it did. Mostly about Belgian business men and French & African politicians. The innuendo in the film about Dattels arises from the opinions given that he’s some sort of maestro in offshore tax havens, and in manipulating his photographic images. The innuendo about Mellon is that he’s already got some sort of legal issue in Korea, and boasts of the millions he took from the deal. The innuendo about both is that they were involved on one side of a transaction in which other innuendo is developed about others on the other side.
   These people may indeed be whatever you want to think they are but this type of character assassination by innuendo does not make them crooks.