Tuskys takes over Nakumatt

[Mathaais]

There’s some form of abuse taking place.
[ATTACH=full]126622[/ATTACH]

[panktcha]

Tuskys are getting themselves into Nakumatt’s dirty ways of tax evasion, money laundering and drug dealing!

This is a very bad deal for Tuskys.

[Kingfishere]

uchumi might be on the same track soon

[Kingfishere]

@Mathaais

There’s some form of abuse taking place.
[ATTACH=full]126622[/ATTACH]

ha ha ha

[vuja_de]

Uchumi wafanye merger na @Mathaais supermarket
[MEDIA=twitter]909690538244395008[/MEDIA]

[SnazzyKenyan]

Says I.

@Fondo Pendo

Sez who?

[Quadro_k4000]

@M2Random

1. Owners of Nakumatt have pledged their shares to Tuskys owners for 6 years.
2. Tuskys will fully manage Nakumatt during that period. This means new branch managers etc.
   My concerns:
3. What exactly does Tuskys aim to gain from this deal.
4. Atul & Co. are okay relinquishing the shell for six years (enough time for a turnaround) and then repossess the shares of a healthy Nakumatt. They have already looted the company to the core.
   In my opinion, Nakumatt owners want Tuskys to do the donkey work of cleaning its mess, and then getting a shiny new company after six years, for zero cost because they have only pledged their shares for six years. Meanwhile, Atul & Family will enjoy a six-year holiday in the Seychelles with their loot.
   Conclusion: With this arrangement, the only way Tuskys can gain from this deal is to turnaround Nakumatt very fast 1-1.5 years. Profit from it for 4 solid years. Finally, they loot it to the core in the sixth year and return the shell to Atul & Co. Expect the same problems with Nakumatt 6 years from when the deal is signed. What the Mhindi doesn’t know is that he will inherit the same shell 6 years from now.

:D:D:D:D, weeeeeuh :oops:

[Quadro_k4000]

@Energizer

Ayayayaya…kitunguu kimeungua kwangu kiasi…

Aje bro?

[Quadro_k4000]

@Okiya

pole. sio madharau. my new workstation is open plan office which makes it hard for me to ktalk like before.

Hiyo Story ya KQ itaenda aje?

[Quadro_k4000]

@vuja de

Uchumi wafanye merger na @Mathaais supermarket
[MEDIA=twitter]909690538244395008[/MEDIA]

Mulley’s ni kali sana

[system]

@Quadro k4000

Hiyo Story ya KQ itaenda aje?

Gani?

[Prono]

Villagers read and understand the statement from both parties, no one is taking anything from anyone so Nakumatt is still strong and will be there for a long time. Mergers and takeovers are two different things.

[Zee]

the tusk and the elephant

[system]

Sasa zile za diaspora zitapewa Jina mpya tena

[Energizer]

@Quadro k4000

Aje bro?

Nilikua nawasaidia kwa tax matters. With story ya mergers it means kuna chances sitapata hiyo kitunguu tena…Fingers crossed.

[M2Random]

THE BIG PICTURE: Upon a further analysis of this situation, I can confidently say that the acquisition is meant to shield Nakumatt directors from paying the $300 million they siphoned. Tuskys will not pay that debt either. This is how the plan works. Tuskys will use Nakumatts prime stores to push their products. However, the Shah family will still be in business under Tuskys because they will pump in that $300 million that they stole. Eventually, Nakumatt will be declared bankrupt and Tuskys will fully take over their stores. By the end of this process, Nakumatt directors will own shares in Tuskys worth $300 million as bankers and suppliers of Nakumatt actualize their losses. In this deal, only the creditors will lose their 30 billion

[system]

@M2Random

THE BIG PICTURE: Upon a further analysis of this situation, I can confidently say that the acquisition is meant to shield Nakumatt directors from paying the $300 million they siphoned. Tuskys will not pay that debt either. This is how the plan works. Tuskys will use Nakumatts prime stores to push their products. However, the Shah family will still be in business under Tuskys because they will pump in that $300 million that they stole. Eventually, Nakumatt will be declared bankrupt and Tuskys will fully take over their stores. By the end of this process, Nakumatt directors will own shares in Tuskys worth $300 million as bankers and suppliers of Nakumatt actualize their losses. In this deal, only the creditors will lose their 30 billion

I don’t think it will work because;

1. Before the suppliers agree to supply Nakumatt via Tuskys, they will have to enter into tripartite agreement such that they get assurance that in case Nakumatt doesn’t pay them, Tuskys will be obligated to pay.

2. If Nakumatt declares bankruptcy, then they won’t be obligated to pay anyone. But the moment Tuskys decide to take over Nakumatt stores, then Tuskys will be obligated to take over the debts too. Tuskys can’t take over Nakumatt assets but refuse to take the debts.

3. Some of those debts are bank loans. Am sure one of the collaterals is personal guarantees. They can’t escape. The banks will go after the 300M they will invest in Tuskys

[M2Random]

@Okiya

I don’t think it will work because;

1. Before the suppliers agree to supply Nakumatt via Tuskys, they will have to enter into tripartite agreement such that they get assurance that in case Nakumatt doesn’t pay them, Tuskys will be obligated to pay.

2. If Nakumatt declares bankruptcy, then they won’t be obligated to pay anyone. But the moment Tuskys decide to take over Nakumatt stores, then Tuskys will be obligated to take over the debts too. Tuskys can’t take over Nakumatt assets but refuse to take the debts.

3. Some of those debts are bank loans. Am sure one of the collaterals is personal guarantees. They can’t escape. The banks will go after the 300M they will invest in Tuskys

1. Tuskys will only demand more from current and new suppliers hence no need for tripatriate agreements. As stated, Nakumatt will “use” Tuskys supply chain to restock.
2. The stores are not Nakumatt’s assets. This arrangement is meant to prevent other retailers from taking up that space. If Nakumatt winds up, Tuskys will get priority to lease those premises.
3. Any decent lawyer will tell you that if Tuskys takes over Nakumatt as a wholy owned subsidiary, it is not liable for its debts. A shareholder is never personally liable for a company’s debts. That is the whole point of incorporation.
   The only way banks and suppliers are getting their $300 million back is if they ask a judge to “lift the veil of incorporation” which is still a very long shot. This acquisition has two objectives:

• To shield Nakumatt from paying the large debt.
• To retain prime locations through the back door.

[system]

@M2Random

1. Tuskys will only demand more from current and new suppliers hence no need for tripatriate agreements. As stated, Nakumatt will “use” Tuskys supply chain to restock.
2. The stores are not Nakumatt’s assets. This arrangement is meant to prevent other retailers from taking up that space. If Nakumatt winds up, Tuskys will get priority to lease those premises.
3. Any decent lawyer will tell you that if Tuskys takes over Nakumatt as a wholy owned subsidiary, it is not liable for its debts. A shareholder is never personally liable for a company’s debts. That is the whole point of incorporation.
   The only way banks and suppliers are getting their $300 million back is if they ask a judge to “lift the veil of incorporation” which is still a very long shot. This acquisition has two objectives:

• To shield Nakumatt from paying the large debt.
• To retain prime locations through the back door.

Your number 2 point is wrong. Check below what I was saying. The $30m debt will move to Tusky’s

[ATTACH=full]126846[/ATTACH]

[M2Random]

@Okiya

Your number 2 point is wrong. Check below what I was saying.

[ATTACH=full]126846[/ATTACH]

The big question is whether this is a merger or an acquisition. Until we have the fine print, we will be discussing without sufficient grounds.