Vedanta has so many red flags, it will take people some time to digest: Viceroy’s Perring
Vedanta rejected the allegations.
Perring and Viceroy Research, a German payment processor and financial services provider in one of the largest financial scandals in Germany after war, Wirecard, the German payment processor and the financial services provider was taken seriously because of his roles in the financial world.
ORGANIZED quotes:
Mint: Did Viceroy have a short position about Vedanta Ltd or Vedanta Resources Ltd or Hindustan zinc? Equality or bond?
We personally took a short position (Vedanta Resources Ltd or VRL). We opened short positions about VRL’s bonds about three to four months ago. I can’t remember exactly.
Mint: Can you share the size of these short positions?
We never explain our shortness, but this is a highly convicted short.
Mint: Is it in the UK, in the United States or in Southeast Asia?
Prime Minister through intermediaries. I don’t know where the other party is.
Mint: Do you have some investors you share before explaining the reports to the public? What is Viceroy’s business model?
Not necessarily, we share reports, but when we have a high reliable idea that we can publish or publish, and we take a position we are short in bonds.
Mint: How big is your team in Viceroy?
The three key founding partners are usually ideas -oriented, and then we make a contract with people with a better skill set in certain areas, because it will be misleading to say that we all know everything.
Mint: What makes you look at the first Indian company Vedanta, the first Indian company you have researched from 30 companies that you have published in the last nine years?
We are conducting a comprehensive research by examining what Vedanta said in the last few months. Therefore, in terms of timing, the process of pregnancy or thought behind Vedanta was about nine months, give or take it from memory. It was September or October last year. Yes. What attracted our attention was to report key events in local newspapers.
Nevertheless, the company did not accept it even if it did not perform either operational or poor performance, as proved by court cases or increasing the value of assets. He asked us to examine Vedanta’s projects and some allegations about their commitment to them. We found that most of the promises of Vedanta have never been fulfilled, such as the announcements of entering semiconductor and nuclear industries. All this never happened. The only thing he does is to finance the debt or to pay dividends. Crazy.
Mint: Why do you think companies do this? Is it to increase stock prices?
To collect cash for Vedanta itself, to encourage the price price and to enrich majority shareholders at the expense of minority shareholders. The question should really be, how to continue in places where real investors’ investments are in danger by a financial management system where they will continue.
Mint: Tell us about the team of people working for nine to ten months in this report.
Double -digit. Maybe 15 or 20 people. We focus on people with skill sets to almost try and refute our thesis, because from the perspective of research, it is better to prove and prove yourself as a short seller, because your part will be more solid. But at the same time you test the facts more instead of assuming that you are right.
Mint: What kind of skill sets worked in this report? Journalists?
No journalists. Predominantly judicial accountants, commodities or people in the infrastructure sector, things like this, to take their opinions… To test whether what we believe is correct or whether we are wrong.
Mint: Have you been surprised by the way markets react to this report? This report was published in Sunday hours and the stock was ultimately 3% lower. Are you surprised? Are investors miss something?
We wouldn’t expect a strong starter reaction. In fact, it will take some time to intimidate people. There are so many red flags in this report that if I can, I don’t think people will be appreciated until they enter the bottom.
Mint: You have listed a lot of over -inflated assets in their books. Is this analysis based on the ground reports caused by visiting assets such as mines in Africa, or is it just an analysis of news reports and the supervised financial situation of these assets?
Depending on how the transparent farewell wants to be, as you will see in our follow -up, a combination of all three. Obviously, we don’t give everything at the same time. There is more future.
Mint: Can you make sense of what’s going on to us?
We will share some jokes, but we don’t want to break this surprise. In this report, we spent a significant amount of time, which has made it one of the few people we plan to produce in depth scope of the company that requires transparency. Obviously, the company should be allowed to fully respond rather than a childish response. And if this changes, we will publish more details.
There will be a series of reports.
Mint: Short sellers have been closing in the last two years and even the organizers frowned.
I haven’t yet found where the last regulator makes things difficult. We were intensively involved during the Wirecard section in Germany. There are short enough sellers outside, and where they are still doing good work, and especially for two and a half years, our experience of organizers, if I were really honest, quite positive… We helped investigations about fraudulent companies on three continents. Yes, they do not appreciate what we do to the level they need to do, but they are also very respectful. They clearly embraced the reports and you can see it from the charges of the business.
Mint: How do you respond to Vedanta’s reaction to Indian stock markets?
According to today’s statement, all the information we publish is known. This is poppy. This is what companies trust as a defense, because they don’t want to explain how bad it is. We have seen that there is a complete denial all over the world. Malicious. We make a profit from being short.
But in reality, they have been profitable for years, they represent the risks completely inadequate, and they misunderstand the performance of assets, they appreciate the value of beings, they misrepresent projects, and this is depreciation of a great fine that is a complete contrary to the accounting rules. There are no compelling or malicious events surrounding the time of our report. It was just without considering our timing, and was ready for the time when the company was ready. So let’s ignore the timing. There’s nothing to see there. Why don’t they fully answer the point?
Mint: What is Viceroy’s ultimate goal?
Ultimately, the ultimate goal is that minority shareholders protect themselves. Apart from those who apply this strategy, stakeholders have been misled and should be in turmoil. Because if this continues, the parasite is just a financial extraction, as we mentioned.
Mint: As short sellers, you’ve ever felt that you are trying to take over the big companies, but nothing changes?
If we believe we can’t. What we do is to emphasize transparency. We published it in Wirecard. This is related to transparency that is not behind the scenes, not behind the scenes, but they are very willing to emphasize the positives and ignore what is happening. And accountability is the key, but more importantly, we advocate more transparency from companies that constantly rotate prosperity plates against the reality of their basic performance.
In the case of Nate (the founder of Hindenburg Nathan Anderson), he tried to bring transparency to the shareholders (Adani). I’m sure Corporate Governance is either better in Adani, now it is better managed, or at least people believe it is. Let’s say it developed, Jerusalem. The truth is that the conviction in Adani Enterprises is 30% less than when Hindenburg published a report. It depends on what investors want to believe. We have kept some shorts for two years.
Mint: Your report released the day before Vedanta’s AGM. Will your representatives attend this meeting and ask questions at the annual general meeting?
As your head, we welcome this if you want an invitation. We will enter. Yes. More than asking questions to everyone who invites.
