Identifier | Created | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|
09MOSCOW2629 | 2009-10-22 11:16:00 | CONFIDENTIAL | Embassy Moscow |
VZCZCXRO6985 RR RUEHAG RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHNP RUEHROV RUEHSL RUEHSR DE RUEHMO #2629/01 2951116 ZNY CCCCC ZZH R 221116Z OCT 09 FM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5176 INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE RUEHXD/MOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC |
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 MOSCOW 002629 |
1. (C) On October 5, Norwegian government-owned Telenor and Russian-controlled Altimo announced the creation of a new mobile operator, potentially ending a half-decade feud over control of their current joint venture, Vimpelcom. Telenor's Corporate Affairs Director in Russia called this a positive outcome for both parties. The two companies would create a new venture and suspend all their ongoing legal proceedings. While the foundation has now been laid for settling this dispute, the Norwegian Embassy will wait for a decision in the related lawsuit in Omsk, expected in March 2010, before declaring the conflict settled. Other potential sticking points in the proposed new venture include the necessity of receiving Russian government permission for the new firm to operate in a strategic sector and an agreement between the parties on a management team acceptable to both sides. End summary. Setting the Scene -------------------------- 2. (C) Starting in the late 1990s, Telenor (majority owned by the Norwegian government) and Altimo (controlled by Russian oligarch Mikhail Fridman) made a series of investments in Russian telecom companies, including in leading Russian mobile operator Vimpelcom. Telenor also invested in Kyivstar, a Ukrainian mobile services provider. A battle between the two investors began in 2005, when Vimpelcom attempted to expand its own presence in the Ukrainian market through the purchase of the Ukrainian mobile provider Ukrainian Radio Systems (URS). Fridman accused Telenor of obstructing Vimpelcom's expansion into the Ukrainian market by blocking Vimpelcom's purchase of URS, while Telenor insisted that the proposed URS purchase was simply a bad deal for Vimpelcom. Despite Telenor's objections, the URS purchase eventually proceeded. URS has been loss-making for VimpelCom through 2008. 3. (C) In March 2009, the two companies began a legal battle. Farimex, an obscure minority shareholder in Vimplecom with alleged ties to Altimo owner Fridman, filed suit against Telenor in Omsk, Siberia. The Omsk court initially ordered the Norwegian firm to pay compensation of $1.7 billion to Farimex. When Telenor refused to pay and, instead, appealed the verdict to a higher court, the Omsk court ordered the sale of almost all of Telenor's 30% share in Vimplecom. These actions put Telenor at risk of losing its stake in the joint venture (Reftels A, B). Telenor, for its part, filed suit against Fridman in New York, using the terms laid out in the original investment agreement and has won several preliminary judgments in that forum. Terms of the Current Deal -------------------------- 4. (C) On October 5, Telenor and Altimo announced the creation of a new telecom company, which could end the half-decade feud over control of Vimpelcom. The companies announced the deal, reportedly after talks between Prime Minister Putin and Telenor's executives. Natalia Schneider, Telenor's Corporate Affairs Director in Russia, told econoff that, under the agreement, Altimo and Telenor would suspend all their on-going legal proceedings and create a new venture, Vimpelcom Ltd. The new company would be registered in Bermuda, headquartered in the Netherlands, and listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The firm would incorporate Telenor's and Altimo's stakes in both VimpelCom and Kyivstar. 5. (C) According to Schneider, this agreement results in a positive outcome for both parties. The deal, expected to be finalized by summer 2010, is contingent upon both parties ending all current outstanding litigation (Ref A). Asked specifically about the Farimex lawsuit, Schneider noted that MOSCOW 00002629 002 OF 003 this case was not part of the formal agreement, but both parties understood that "somehow, the lawsuit in the Omsk court would dissolve; or else there will be no deal." In the future, the partners would settle their disputes in London under New York law. 6. (C) Other key elements of the deal include an agreement that key senior management for the new venture, slated to be announced by January 2010, would be agreeable to both sides. The new management plans to begin joint expansion into markets such as the CIS countries, Ukraine, Georgia, Vietman, Cambodia, Laos, with potential future work in other parts of Asia and Africa. 7. (C) Ownership and control of the new joint venture appears fairly evenly divided between Telenor and Altimo. Under current conditions, the proposed exchange of shares would result in Altimo holding slightly more voting shares (43% to 35% for Telenor), but Telenor would still control a blocking share and be able to influence major corporate decisions. Waiting for the Judgment -------------------------- 8. (C) Norwegian political officer Baard Vandvik confirmed that Telenor and the Norwegian Embassy are pleased that the dispute has been resolved. However, Vandvik stated that a positive outcome in the Siberian court case is not guaranteed. The Norwegian parties are anxiously awaiting the decision, expected in March 2010. He concluded that, notwithstanding the uncertainties, this is a major step forward in the long-running feud between the two companies. In addition to the resolution of the lawsuits, the parties must also agree on a management team for the deal to take effect. Such agreement on management has proven difficult in other instances (e.g., TNK-BP, where Fridman was also a player). 9. (C) Finally, the deal requires governmental approval in several different countries. Under the terms of the agreement, Telenor will surpass the 25% threshold for foreign ownership in a company identified by Russian law as "strategic." Thus, the proposed company will require Russian government approval of its ownership structure in order to operate in Russia. While most analysts speculate that the Russian government will grant approval for the deal -- given GOR interest in achieving resolution to this dispute -- the committee charged with processing these requests has not always acted in a transparent manner. A few market watchers have highlighted this as a potential remaining area of risk. The newly created company also will need to obtain permission to operate from other countries in the region, including from Ukrainian authorities where the proposed new company is expected to have a sizeable market share. Is the Deal Fair? -------------------------- 10. (C) Various industry analysts voiced the opinion that the deal is beneficial for both parties. Martin Hoff, a Norwegian telecom analyst, stated that the pressure from Altimo and Farimex did not result in Telenor having to accept poor terms on the deal, which provided a good value for the Ukrainian assets. Konstantin Belov, a telecom analyst at UralSib, agreed that the deal was fair, while Troika Dialogue's Yevgeny Golosnoi contended that the main accomplishment is ending the conflict. Yet, Olga Pleshanova, a Kommersant journalist who previously reported on this case, told econoff that she is waiting to see the outcome of the Omsk hearing. While still retaining some skepticism, she noted that both companies were pressed to resolve the conflict by the reciprocal court actions. Comment -------------------------- 11. (C) Faced with potentially losing its multi-billion dollar asset in Russia, Telenor was eager to negotiate a settlement despite reports Fridman was reluctant to cooperate (Reftel A). The conflict might have dragged on to the MOSCOW 00002629 003 OF 003 detriment of both the Russian and Ukrainian telecom consumers. Norwegian government actions, combined with Putin's intervention and uncertainty on the outcome of the reciprocal lawsuits in New York and Omsk, ultimately put sufficient pressure on the two parties to settle their differences. While the deal holds the potential to create a strong market player internationally, the parties must still overcome several hurdles, including agreeing on a joint management team and obtaining needed governmental permissions. Even with this potentially positive outcome, the whole affair reinforces concerns about the business climate for foreign firms investing in Russia. Even with a positive Omsk court ruling next spring, the generally dismal performance of Russian courts and unpredictability of dealing with Russian partners remains a cloud on the business environment. End Comment Beyrle |