Wachtwoord vergeten?

SBM Offshore - on topic - december 2014

Klik hier om dit forumtopic te volgen en automatisch op de hoogte gehouden te worden bij nieuwe berichten.
2.587 Posts, Pagina: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 » | Laatste
Aantal posts per pagina:  20 50 100 | Omlaag ↓
mvliex 1
Het Braziliaanse blad Valor Econômico speelde mee een rol in de ontwikkelingen in het Petrobrasschandaal. Gisteren (23/12) publiceerde het een interview met Sietze Hepkema, hierna in een verbeterde Google-vertaling. Omwille van de lengte moet ik het stuk in twee keer plaatsen.

Opmerkelijk is het feit dat Hepkema voluit de kans krijgt om vanwege SBM de puntjes op de i te zetten betreffende wat is fout gelopen, wat de gevolgen ervan zijn, en hoe SBM de problematiek heeft aangepakt.

De originele tekst staat hier: (zie pdf in bijlage).

“The governance director of SBM Offshore, Sietze Hepkema, stressed in his first interview to a Brazilian newspaper, that it was the Dutch company itself that informed the Ministry Public of his country and the Department of Justice of the United States of the fact that it had initiated an internal investigation of the possibility of improper payments by its commercial agents.

In November, it made a leniency agreement with the public prosecutor from the Netherlands and it will pay $ 240 million in fines. The agent in Brazil was businessman Julio Faerman, whom it (SBM) does not accuse of irregularities but with whom it broke trade relations. Hepkema says that deposits made by Faerman companies abroad to "employees of the Brazilian government" were found by the Dutch tax authorities, not by SBM. He avoids mentioning names.

In Brazil, the SBM was under investigation by the Internal Revenue Service, Valor economico found out, and undergoes a process of accounting by the Comptroller General of the Union (CGU) that can render a million dollar fine. It is also out of the bidding with Petrobras, with whom it has US $ 27.67 billion in contracts.

In 2012 SBM stopped payment to its sales agents and took measures "to enforce strict anti-corruption policies." Among them was the decision to break with commercial agents in the main markets, including Brazil.

In addition to dealing with a thorny issue in nature, since it was a serious offense subject to heavy penalties of both European as American anti-corruption legislation, SBM had an additional difficulty. An official who participated in internal investigations copied confidential data and released them, after asking for € 3 million. Hepkema, who leaves the function in April and would go to the board of directors of SBM said to regret "immensely that past events today cause embarrassment or awkwardness to professionals who honor Petrobras and devote a whole lifetime of work to her."
The following is the interview with Valor by email.

Valor: What is the current share of SBM in the order book of Petrobras?

Sietze Hepkema: The SBM is the largest producer of FPSO platforms [floating production, storage and offloading] in the world and now accounts for about 4000 direct jobs in Brazil. Our work force directly contributes about 15% of oil production by Petrobras. SBM is one of the only two companies that already produce in the Brazilian pre-salt fields. Only in 2013, we invested approximately R$ 2 billion in Brazil. We have majority ownership in seven ships-platforms rented or ordered by Petrobras.

Valor: Can SBM inform us how the internal investigations were made?

Hepkema: Early 2012, SBM Offshore, on its own initiative, informed the Dutch Public Prosecution Service and the Department of Justice of the United States that it had initiated an internal investigation of the possibility of improper payments by its commercial agents. The internal investigation was conducted in the period between 2012 and 2014 and had as focus the period between 2007 and 2011. The extent of the internal research was determined after consulting with the public prosecutor of the Netherlands and the Fiod [Service of Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation], also in the Netherlands. The internal research was conducted by specialized law firms and forensic accountants, assisted by a SBM team led by me in my function. The team also included members of other departments of SBM: legal, compliance, finance/internal controls and internal audit. SBM Offshore has always given full access to the information to the Dutch public prosecutor and the Fiod. These authorities were kept informed of all progress of the internal investigation. The preliminary findings were also reported to both. The internal investigation was completed in early 2014.

Valor: Can SBM say what the legal situation of the company is in Brazil?

Hepkema: Right now, the SBM has maintained dialogue with the CGU [Comptroller General of the Union of Brazil] to provide full and any support to the investigations in the country and is, of course, available to collaborate with authorities and bodies of Justice in Brazil.

Valor: In what circumstances occurred the hiring of the P-57 platform? It is normal that blank contracts are signed, as reported by the press?

Hepkema: There was no contract signing in blank. At the signature of the P-57 contract, the value was expressed in the commercial proposal and in the price sheet, that are integral parts of the same contract. As already has been explained by Petrobras, there was an error corrected afterwards by the signing of an additive. But this additive only reproduced the value that always had been determined by the commercial proposal and the price sheet" (wordt vervolgd).

Valor: In what circumstances were identified US$ 102 million in payments made to Brazilians? Are these all from Petrobras or are there other people considered as governmental actors by the anti-fraud legislation and that have been identified? Of the total of US$ 139.1 million in commissions paid to the commercial agent (Julio Faerman), were US$ 37 million "legitimate"?

Hepkema: Between 2007 and 2011, SBM Offshore paid US$ 139.1 million in commissions to its commercial agents in Brazil. We are talking about commissions. It never hurts to reiterate that commissioning and bribes are entirely different things. Commissions are legitimate payments for work performed and provided for in the contract. We do not have it confirmed that part of this amount was used improperly. The internal investigation of SBM, which included Brazil, has obtained no evidence that confirms improper payments to Brazilian public officials by its sales representatives in the country, despite what the company described as "red flags". Only the investigation conducted by Fiod, under instruction by the public prosecutor in the Netherlands, has clearly established that payments were made from offshore entities of the Brazilian sales agent to Brazilian government officials. But, as confirmed by the Dutch authorities, these findings resulted from means of investigation inaccessible to SBM.

Valor: Can SBM confirm that the former employee who leaked information involving the company on Wikipedia, Jonathan Taylor, was a company lawyer?

Hepkema: Jonathan Taylor was a lawyer in one of the subsidiaries of SBM Offshore. He quit his job in June 2012. The internal investigation SBM was started while Taylor was an employee of the company. And until he left SBM, Taylor participated in this internal investigation. When leaving the group, as we learned much later, Taylor took with him a large amount of documents collected by him and other professionals in over six months of investigation. Subsequently, the SBM also was lade to know that he secretly recorded several conversations made in this period. After leaving the SBM, Taylor tried to extort the company of € 3 million in exchange for the return of the recordings and documents. The company obviously refused to accept extortion. Instead, SBM requested Taylor shared with the company any information considered relevant to the internal investigation, in order to have this analyzed by SBM and by the authorities. Taylor, however, never shared any information. Of course, the company sought legal action against Taylor, but at the moment we are not able to disclose the nature of the action. It is important to clarify that certain informations are exclusively in possession of the public prosecution in the Netherlands.

Valor: In what circumstances Mr. Taylor took possession of the documents that cast suspicions on several Petrobras officials including the current Director of Exploration and Production of Petrobras, José Formigli?

Hepkema: Any speculation whose source is one former employee who tried to extort the company - and who now is entangled in a litigation with it - will often result in reports based on false premises, that could unduly tarnish the honor of others. SBM would like to stress, in this sense, that it holds – and has held – dear the opportunity to keep in dialogue with executives at Petrobras whose moral conduct is unassailable, and it regrets greatly that past events today cause embarrassment or constraints to professionals who honor Petrobras and devote to it a lifetime of work.

Valor: Did SBM come to investigate the deposits made on behalf of third parties by companies for companies of the Faerman group, its sales representative?

Hepkema: Internal investigations of SBM were quite large but there are certain informations that the company prefers to keep shared only with the authorities for a better outcome of the investigation proceedings.

Valor: Has the company already received some fine? Will it defend the non-payment of an additional penalty as it already has made a leniency agreement with the authorities of the Netherlands?

Hepkema: SBM Offshore has accepted an offer from the Dutch public prosecutor of out of court agreement. This consists of the payment to the public prosecutor of the Netherlands of US$ 240 million in relation to the investigation in Guinea Equatorial, Angola and Brazil. We cannot comment on a possible agreement with the Brazilian authorities under penalty of harming the ongoing talks.

Valor: Since the US Department of Justice has closed its investigations, SBM was not fined?
Hepkema: The DoJ [Department of Justice] had knowledge of the facts and, after analysis, closed the case. There was no penalty.

Valor: What measures were taken after the allegations of improper payments in Brazil?

Hepkema: As soon as the complaints came, SBM interrupted payment to its sales agents. We also took stringent measures to strengthen the anti-corruption policies. This included the decision to end the relationship with commercial agents in our major markets - Brazil among them. Recently, a task force was created for compliance. It investigated commission payments to sales agents between 2007 and 2011. In addition, SBM Offshore established a Validation Committee consisting of the CEO, the head of governance and compliance, with members of the audit group and the sales director, in order to assess all sales agents. Now, all sales agents are subject to this procedure. In addition to the measures applied to sales agents, disciplinary actions have been taken against the officials who were involved or had knowledge of improper payments. Moreover, all employees in sensitive positions, about 2540 in the last four years, have attended anti-corruption training. They are kept updated annually by additional training modules. The new management of SBM deeply regrets that, in the past, the control mechanisms of the company regarding the performance of sales representatives have not been sufficient to prevent the occurrence of undesirable events. The measures put into practice the last two years - many of them now copied by other companies - will be responsible, however, for ensuring the highest possible levels of excellence in the relationship with our customers all over the world, in accordance with the highest standards of transparency and ethics.”

Kopermans schreef op 24 dec 2014 om 09:08:

En hierbij dan het interview in bijlage.

bedankt voor het plaatsen Kopermans,
ik zie 123 niets nieuws, maar als het helpt, prima!


Kopermans schreef op 24 dec 2014 om 09:05:

Het Braziliaanse blad Valor Econômico speelde mee een rol in de ontwikkelingen in het Petrobrasschandaal. Gisteren (23/12) publiceerde het een interview met Sietze Hepkema, hierna in een verbeterde Google-

Mooi helder stuk.
Hij blijft bij het punt dat alle betalingen via tussenpersoon zijn gegaan zonder dat SBMO hiervan 'wist'.
Zijn dus schijnbaar nog geen nieuwe belastende feiten boven tafel gekomen anders was hij dit niet vol blijven houden.
Hopelijk komt er enige duidelijkheid snel maar mogelijkheid dat het met een sisser gaat aflopen lijkt nog steeds aanwezig.
Globaal gaat het om informatie die voor ons niet nieuw is, maar de bevestiging van wat we wisten, bijv. over waar SBM in de fout ging (vooral een kwestie van controle op de zelfstandige handelsagent).

Interessant is wel de bevestiging dat de zaken in Nederland en de VS afgelopen zijn, en dat met de CGU de onderhandeling loopt. Interessant, gezien de vraag aan Hepkema of SBM de opgelopen boete zou inroepen om niet opnieuw gesanctioneerd te worden in Brazilië (zie tweede deel van de post). Herinner u onze discussies over het 'ne bis in idem'. Maar hierop ging Hepkema begrijpelijkerwijze niet in.

Het grote nieuws is naar mijn mening vooral dat een vooraanstaande Braziliaanse krant de kolommen ruimt om SBM de kans te geven duidelijk te maken hoe de vork aan de steel zit. Dat kan allereerst de indicatie ervan zijn dat men inziet dat dit verhaal niet 1 op 1 spoort met het veel grovere Lava Jato schandaal, waar SBM nooit mee te maken had.

Het feit dat de krant verder veel aandacht geeft aan de maatregelen die SBM heeft genomen tegen corruptie, en aan het feit dat SBM vanaf dag één (na het aantreden van het nieuw bestuur) zelf met informatie naar buiten is gestapt (dat dit ook naar Petrobras gebeurde, laat men wijselijk onbesproken), en dat SBM zich als een bekommerde en betrouwbare partner mag tonen, geeft aan - en dat is misschien nog belangrijker nieuws - dat het ijs gebroken is, en de dooi er zit aan te komen.

Een en ander gebeurt op het goede moment, nu Petrobras vroeg in 2015 de Jupiter FPSO wilt aanbesteden (zie artikel Upstreamonline van 17 oktober jl.):

"After months sitting on the sidelines, there is talk that SBM Offshore may be able to participate once the tender is launched. The Monaco-based contractor was suspended earlier this year from new Petrobras tenders following allegations of bribery involving some of the company’s contracts with the oil company. However, Petrobras later said it found no evidence of any wrongdoing in an investigation it launched into the matter.
“Petrobras cannot afford to leave SBM out of these FPSO tenders for too long,” said one source.
If SBM does make it back for the Jupiter race, the company will likely join forces with Queiroz Galvao Oil & Gas, its usual ally in Brazil."
Fascinerend hoe iemand met een computer en heen en weer geflits de indruk probeerd te wekken dat er wat te doen is.

ik ga straks eerst maar eens wat boodschappen halen, zal wel een stamppotje worden deze kerst; altijd lekket;-)

Independent trader
Bedankt voor artikel @Kopermans. Inderdaad fijn om te lezen dat in het tot op heden zo ongenuanceerde Braziliaanse geweld eindelijk het moment gekomen lijkt te zijn voor publieke nuancering door SBM. Goede vragen ook door Brazilaanse pers trouwens, meerderheid ervan had ik eerder al gesteld willen zien door NL media...

Met een goed gevoel de kerst in. Hele fijne dagen allemaal!
Lange termijn geen enkel probleem! Ik ben wel zeer benieuwd wanneer de shorters gaan afbouwen. Ik heb me tot nu toe niet gek laten maken en alleen in de neergaande lijn bijgekocht. Alle vertrouwen in SBM, vandaag weer gesteund door Hepkema.
Leuk trouwens om op dit forum te lezen dat ook particuliere shorters blij zijn met een stijging (met de motivatie dat het daarna meer kan zakken) ;-)
Fijne dagen allemaal.
OK, graag gedaan, het wordt nu tijd om ons een paar dagen te bezinnen. En om dan weer uit te kijken naar 2015!
Zalig Kerstmis aan allen, en voor het nieuwe jaar geluk, gezondheid en voorspoed (= SBM op 15 :-)
Onze Jos Versteeg, dat is toch de man die als koersdoel 20 euro al een tijdje heeft, heeft zichzelf blijkbaar uitstel gegeven ! gedateerd 24 december art. financiële paragraaf

Vooralsnog verwachten marktvorsers op korte termijn weinig verbetering in de situatie op de oliemarkt. "Het ziet er naar uit dat 2015 een nog moeilijker jaar zal worden voor Fugro dan 2014", zegt analist Dirk Verbiesen (KBC Securities). Ook SBM zal last hebben van de slechtere marktomstandigheden, denkt analist Jos Versteeg (Theodoor Gilissen), maar dat bedrijf is al begonnen met reorganiseren en heeft bovendien stabiele inkomsten uit leasecontracten.
een nare man die Jonathan Taylor

zou die nog de bak ingaan voor afpersing en diefstal
liefst in brazilie

sbm speelt open kaart,,,,,en het zou me zeer verbazen als ze in brazilie anders handelen als in de USA
240 m is betaalt en lijkt me echt wel voldoende in de tijden van dalende olie prijzen

als ze sbm een boete geven ,,,zou de boete op PBR een veelvoud moeten zijn............en dan kunnen ze het wel schudden met 170 m schuld

dus het beste is ..........doorgaan zonder boete,,,en zonder die corrupte handels agenten werken

succes in 2015
Kopermans bedankt voor deze maar ook andere bijdrages hier in het afgelopen jaar. Nuttig en zeer interessant om te lezen en op de hoogte te blijven van de hele discussie rondom SBM
Nieuw artikel in Oglobo bevestigt dat de nieuwe Anticorruptiewet slechts kan toegepast worden op feiten na 28 januari 2014 (, in het kader van de beslissing van het Braziliaanse openbaar ministerie (MPF) om te vervolgen in de Lava Jato-affaire. Ook nog eens bevestiging dat pas sinds deze wet bedrijven kunnen aangepakt worden.

Wash Jet: Contractors are being targeted by the Anti-Corruption Law
MPF gathers evidence to frame the companies based on new legislation
by Vinicius Sassine
26.12.2014 7:18 / Updated 12/26/2014 10:25

BRASILIA - Part of the contractors involved in the scandal Petrobras should be judged based on tougher rules of the new Anti-Corruption Law, which entered into force on 29 January this year. Invoices seized by the Federal Police show that Engevix construction continued to pay fees to the scheme operated by the money changer Alberto Youssef and Paulo Roberto Costa, former head of state in February 2014, when the Anti-Corruption Law was already in effect. Members of the Lava-jet operation task force must now fit other construction companies in the same situation.

Among the penalties under the Anti-Corruption Act are to the compulsory winding up of companies or the suspension of its activities, the loss of property and the application of millionaire fines, among other measures.

One of the seized invoices proves that Engevix Engineering, part of the Engevix group, made on 25 February this year a payment of £ 213,200 to GFD Investments, a company used by the money changer Alberto Youssef in the scheme that diverted resources from Petrobras . The note of the Municipal Finance of São Paulo discriminate as supposed service "advice or consulting of any kind."

Another document produced by PF after the seizure of papers Wash Jet Operation points out that on February 13, there was a transfer of $ 35,000 to the Global Costa. This consultancy was used by former Petrobras director Paulo Roberto Costa to move the schema money.

The Anti-Corruption Law, sanctioned by President Dilma Rousseff in August 2013, took effect 180 days later, on January 29 this year. The proposal was an initiative of the federal government and came to Congress in 2010, which met with fierce resistance and was very stop time, the lobby has otherwise done by contractors. The project came in the vote on the agenda within a kindness package offered by Congress before June 2013 megaprotestos.

The law was passed to punish legal persons based on bribery practice, both in the civil sphere as in administrative, not only the individuals responsible for acts of corruption, as they did before. One of the most severe penalties are a fine of 0.1% to 20% of gross sales of the company. If the billing criterion is not feasible to apply this penalty has a maximum value of £ 60 million.

Prosecutors that make up the task force set up by the Federal Public Ministry to monitor the Lava-jet operation have a common understanding: facts subsequent to the beginning of validity of the law can lead to penalties in the framework that came into existence. So far, among the large amount of evidence produced on the participation of contractors in the scheme, researchers have identified poor on the activities of the criminal organization after January. To the extent that such evidence arise, such as invoices GFD and Global Coast to Engevix, new shares in the civil area may be proposed to justice.

Administrative misconduct ACTIONS

According to prosecutors, the administrative accountability - in the context of the Comptroller General (CGU) - does not preclude the possibility of judicial accountability. For these prosecutors, the main merit of the law was to provide for the punishment of companies at the administrative level.

GLOBE consulted the CGU to whether evidence as invoices identified by the report can be used to frame the Anti-Corruption Law in Engevix. It said "any new fact may be included in the administrative process and lead to covered by the law." Facts prior to January this year are analyzed in the light of other legal framework, especially Litações Act.

The minister of the CGU, Jorge Hage, had declared earlier this month that this is a real possibility. The agency opened administrative proceedings against eight contractors involved in Lava-jet scheme, including Engevix.

The MPF task force prepares actions of improper conduct in parallel with the criminal charges already offered to justice, to frame contractors in sanctions that may lead to the prevention of new hires with the government. As the text of the Anti-Corruption Law, prosecution actions based on this law shall follow the same rites of class actions. These actions do not affect proceedings for misconduct or for bidding crime.

So far, the MPF denounced to justice (in criminal matters) the partner and vice president of Engevix, Gerson de Mello Almada; the technical directors of the contractor Carlos Eduardo Albero and Newton Prado Junior; and the engineer Luiz Roberto Pereira, who also worked for the company. Almada is being held in Curitiba. In the same complaint, were also included the money changer Youssef and former director Costa, and bribery scheme operators and money laundering, including two managers of GFD Investments: Enivaldo Square and Carlos Alberto Pereira da Costa.

The crimes named in the complaint are forming a criminal organization, corruption, money laundering, cartel behavior, fraud and bidding against the tax system. The last three will still be the subject of future reports. For now, there was no mention in the complaints to the Anti-Corruption Law, even as it is a criminal action - sanctions of the new law are in the civil and administrative level.


The MPF action goes on to quote the contract between Engevix and GFD Investments, valid until December 15 this year. Would be ten installments, totaling US $ 2.13 million, to "provide administrative support services for the development of the Consortium Rnest OC Building activities and contract administration," according to the complaint. The invoice identified in the report is number 49 and, as the MPF was provided by Enivaldo Square, at the request of Youssef.

Would still have been issuing a note on April 1, when he had been triggered the first stage of Lava-jet operation, with the arrest of Youssef and Costa. Contractors and executives were arrested only on November 14.

The contract with Global Costa, in turn, would reach the amount of R $ 700,000, of which R $ 385,000 were actually paid. "Everyone was fully aware that the purpose of the agreement was absolutely fictitious, since the Global Costa was used by Paulo Roberto Costa for receiving improper values directly, without any intermediation of Alberto Youssef," the MPF in complaint.

GLOBE failed to contact Engevix. The company, whenever requested, has a standard answer: "Engevix provide the necessary explanations to justice."
hoi kopermans,

ik kan er ook niets anders van maken dan wat we al meer dan een maand weten.
verbazingwekkend de opstelling van zoveel partijen die op basis van wat er speelde 11,6 % short zijn gegaan.

muntje moet toch een keer vallen zou je denken; en dan gaat de kassa rinkelen;-)

Ja je gaat denken dat als het bekend wordt dat ze geen boete hoeven te betalen in Brazilië en weer in mogen schrijven op tenders dat er dan een short squeeze gaat plaats vinden. Er moeten dan circa 22 miljoen aandelen gecovered worden en dat is 8-9 handelsdagen van gemiddelde omzet. Dat is niet niks. Maar mss weten die shorters iets wat wij niet weten.
2.587 Posts, Pagina: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 » | Laatste
Aantal posts per pagina:  20 50 100 | Omhoog ↑

Plaats een reactie

Meedoen aan de discussie?

Word nu gratis lid of log in met je emailadres en wachtwoord

Direct naar Forum

SBM Offshore Meer »

Koers 15,370   Verschil -0,07 (-0,45%)
Laag 15,285   Volume 809.078
Hoog 15,625   Gem. Volume 819.604
17-okt-19 17:37
label premium

SBM: corruptie-affaire afgesloten

Het laatste advies leest u als IEX Premium-lid

Inloggen Ontdek Premium