The fact that Jaime Gilinski’s Takeover Bid (OPA) for Grupo Argos shares was declared void last week keeps the stock market and investors on edge as to what the banker’s next move will be.
And it is that the crusade for the control of some of the companies of the so-called Grupo Empresarial Antioqueño (GEA), which began eight months ago with offers for Nutresa and Sura, has had a respite in the last week following the completion of seven OPAs, some of them simultaneous.
However, there are those who consider that the US$922.69 million that Gilinski had budgeted to buy up to 32.5% of the property of Grupo Argos are still in his wallet and he is not going to leave them alone. For each share of that company, it was proposed to pay US$4.08 in principle, but days later the offeror adjusted this value to US$4.28.
Jorge Restrepo, professor of Economics at the Javeriana University, does not rule out that through their investment vehicles, Nugil and JGDB Holding, the Gilinskis will soon return to the stock market by launching a takeover bid for Bancolombia or for one of the small listed GEA companies. in the bag.
“In terms of the market, the decision that the Gilinski family must make is whether to continue with the OPAs in cascade, and whether the Financial Superintendence is going to authorize them. This in very different financial market conditions, since it is different to launch leveraged takeover bids with financing at 2% interest rates than to launch them at 8% rates,” he explained.
the legal way
In the extraordinary shareholders’ meetings of Sura held in June, Gilinski’s representatives, who promoted a reform of the bylaws that did not prosper, suggested that the position of that company of not selling the shareholding in Grupo Argos (35.32%) would have been remained in the hands of a board of directors with “clear overtones of conflicts of interest”.
In addition, they pointed out that the blockages in the directories, derived from conflicts of interest, prevented the offers made by Nutresa from being accepted, with which, according to them, the GEA deprived Sura of the possibility of taking advantage of a business that would have represented some US$2.5 billion.
In those sessions, the lawyers of JGDB Holding assured that the conflicts of interest in the GEA companies will continue to be observed permanently, which will subject the company’s bodies to profound wear.
By that time, Sura’s shareholders had been summoned to six extraordinary meetings so far this year, and in less than 90 days the board of directors was reconfigured three times.
Likewise, they defended that the takeover bids launched by the Sura, Nutresa and Argos groups were carried out in accordance with the regulations, and that they had the approvals of the competent authorities.
In this context, Restrepo maintains that the dispute over the ownership of the GEA companies has had two “lanes”. One of them is the market and the other “the legal lane”.
In the professor’s opinion, Gilinski’s offers have always had the tone that if he does not achieve his goal through the market, he will do so by breaking corporate governance and in that there has been a ready legal strategy to point out possible conflicts of interest, disabilities.
“We will have to prepare for that for years, because that is the strategy of immobility, that is, trying to limit the actions of management and corporate governance,” Restrepo said.
Regarding the legal instances that might hear Gilinski’s proceedings once morest the GEA, the academic stated that “the number of courts that exist is the limit. And before the registry of titles registered by the companies in other jurisdictions, such as the United States, the courts of that country might reach the demands ”.
internal reaction
Given this situation, employees of the Argos and Sura groups have made their voices of commitment to these organizations and to the tasks they carry out for the well-being of society heard.
In a letter sent to the shareholders of Grupo Argos and to the stock market, the collaborators of the holding of infrastructure described as unfair that private interests seek to destroy a legacy, such as that of this company, which has been important during the fortunate moments for the country, but above all it has been fundamental in critical and difficult moments.
“This moment confirms to us that spirit, dignity and transparency do make a difference when doing business. Not everything goes to achieve goals, not everything goes to gain control of companies, not everything goes to gain popularity”, reads the letter (see To learn more).
The employees of Sura, in the extraordinary meeting held on June 29, posted a series of messages at the entrance of the company in which they expressed their support for the administration.
