AAR's chief executive, Stan Polovets, said in a statement that the two sides knew they had to change the ownership structure: "AAR and BP both realise that a fundamental realignment in the ownership of TNK-BP is necessary in order to allow each of the shareholders to achieve its strategic objectives and eliminate the internal contradictions that are preventing further development of TNK-BP.
AAR - Alfa Access Renova - had until the end of this week to express its interest in buying BP's stake and has 90 days in which to carry out "good faith" talks. BP has already said it has received expressions of interest from others interested in taking over its stake, although it has not named these. AAR said it had not been asked by BP for permission to allow a third party to view financial information, something BP is obliged to do before it can reveal details of the business.
Born in Ukraine, his first foray into business was to set up a student co-operative of window cleaners. The crisis is a heavy blow to BP chief executive Tony Hayward, who is still working to assert his authority after he succeeded Browne a year ago. More importantly, in a world where it is becoming difficult to find new oil, the venture also provides about a third of BP's total reserves. BP is expected to report record second-quarter profits this week on the back of soaring oil prices.
But the dispute in Russia will dominate proceedings. AAR complains that BP is running the venture as its own subsidiary, rather than for the benefit of all shareholders. AAR also complains that the share prices of rival Russian oil companies have increased by a much larger amount.
They also want a full stock market listing, most likely in London, to make it easier for the venture to buy other companies using its shares. These positions seem diametrically opposed and, so far, neither side has shown any sign of giving way. But why is AAR now portraying itself as the downtrodden shareholder in a venture it was perfectly happy to sign up to back in ?
It is unlikely to be a coincidence that the 'lock-in period' which AAR signed to prevent it selling its stake in the venture expired at the end of last year. This may yet happen, but the dispute is more complicated than that. Alexander Burgansky, analyst from Renaissance Capital, says that since the joint-venture was formed, the AAR shareholders have become more ambitious and are looking to expand internationally all their businesses, including TNK-BP. Another reason, he says, is that AAR knows that in Russia, priority will always be given to state-owned companies such as Gazprom or Rosneft, meaning that for the company to grow, it must look overseas.
But the spat has become much more than a conventional dispute between two shareholder groups. As is so often the case in Russia, the rule of law has been wielded by one group against the other. Technically, AAR is right when it says that Dudley's work contract has expired; a law passed last year requires all directors to have their contracts renewed each year. But the reason it has expired is because AAR has refused to renew it. Because the Russian legal system has so many rules, so much bureaucracy and, often, corruption, the law becomes a useful proxy weapon.
It has drawn criticism from some analysts and managers of non-state enterprises, who said it would hinder competition and production growth. The acquisition closed three months ahead of its June 30 deadline, as predicted in an exclusive Reuters story of February MI , which have already signed up to work in the Arctic on some of Rosnefts 41 offshore licenses, although both he and Dudley pointed out that BP would benefit anyway as a one-fifth Rosneft shareholder.
0コメント