TNK-BP Limited)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

TNK-BP Limited) ROSNEFT INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LIMITED INTERIM CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED 30 JUNE 2013 (UNAUDITED) ROSNEFT INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LIMITED Interim Condensed Consolidated Income Statement and Statement of Comprehensive Income (Unaudited) (expressed in millions of USD) Three months Six months Three months ended Six months ended ended 30 June 2012 ended 30 June 2012 30 June 2013 (reclassified) Note 30 June 2013 (reclassified) 14,164 14,255 Gross Proceeds 5 28,380 30,344 (4,311) (4,679) Less: export duties (8,016) (9,311) 9,853 9,576 Sales and other operating revenues 5 20,364 21,033 (3) (103) (Loss)/earnings from equity-accounted investments 9 (15) 104 7 - Gain on disposals of businesses 7 - (2,912) (3,065) Taxes other than income tax 15 (6,069) (6,289) (1,350) (1,152) Operating expenses (2,491) (2,297) (1,166) (1,329) Purchases of oil, oil products and other products (2,323) (2,956) (1,398) (1,253) Transportation expenses (2,777) (2,600) (703) (552) Depreciation, depletion and amortisation 10 (1,351) (1,123) (207) (354) Selling, distribution and administrative expenses (571) (694) (643) (22) Loss on disposals and impairment of assets 4 (711) (323) (55) (56) Exploration expenses (115) (101) 1,423 1,690 Operating profit 3,948 4,754 404 69 Exchange gain/(loss), net 606 (2) (49) (54) Finance cost (124) (124) 16 23 Interest income and net other financial income 2 1 (26) - Other expenses 18 (102) - 1,768 1,728 Profit before income taxes 4,330 4,629 (434) (781) Income tax benefit/(expense) 13 318 (1,256) 1,334 947 Profit for the period 4,648 3,373 (185) (139) Less: profit attributable to noncontrolling interest (396) (389) 1,149 808 Profit attributable to Group shareholders 4,252 2,984 Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income (unaudited) Three months Six months Three months ended Six months ended ended 30 June 2012 ended 30 June 2012 30 June 2013 (reclassified) Note 30 June 2013 (reclassified) 1,334 947 Profit for the period 4,648 3,373 Other comprehensive loss: Items that may be reclassified subsequently to profit or loss: Currency translation differences in relation to (1,576) (237) Group subsidiaries (2,329) (35) Currency translation differences in relation to (150) (280) equity-accounted investments 9 (203) (50) (1,726) (517) Other comprehensive loss (2,532) (85) Other comprehensive loss income attributable to 151 12 noncontrolling interest 204 1 Other comprehensive loss attributable to Group (1,575) (505) shareholders (2,328) (84) (392) 430 Total comprehensive income 2,116 3,288 Less: total comprehensive income attributable to (34) (127) noncontrolling interest (192) (388) Total comprehensive income attributable to Group (426) 303 shareholders 1,924 2,900 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these interim condensed consolidated financial statements 2 ROSNEFT INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LIMITED Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity (Unaudited) (expressed in millions of USD) Equity attributable to Group shareholders Ordinary Additional Cumulative Non- share paid-in Retained currency controlling Total capital capital earnings translation Total interest equity adjustment At 1 January 2012 - 2,978 14,816 (231) 17,563 1,714 19,277 Total comprehensive income/(loss) - - 2,984 (84) 2,900 388 3,288 Dividends - - (1,380) - (1,380) (257) (1,637) At 30 June 2012 - 2,978 16,420 (315) 19,083 1,845 20,928 At 1 January 2013 - 2,850 19,602 25 22,477 2,121 24,598 Total comprehensive income/(loss) - - 4,252 (2,328) 1,924 192 2,116 At 30 June 2013 - 2,850 23,854 (2,303) 24,401 2,313 26,714 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these interim condensed consolidated financial statements 4 ROSNEFT INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LIMITED Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows (Unaudited) (expressed in millions of USD) Six months ended Six months ended Note 30 June 2013 30 June 2012 Operating activities Profit before income taxes 4,330 4,629 Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation, depletion and amortisation 1,351 1,123 Finance cost 124 124 Interest income (37) (24) Loss on disposals and impairment of assets 711 323 Gain on disposal of businesses (7) - Earnings from equity-accounted investments 9 15 (104) Dry hole expenses 26 26 Exchange loss from investing and financing activities (156) 29 Net change in environmental provision (1) 34 Tax and other provisions 18 176 - Other non-cash adjustments, net 53 53 Changes in operational working capital, excluding cash and cash equivalents: Restricted cash (8) 44 Trade and other receivables (1,164) 1,588 Inventories (169) (20) Accounts payable and accrued liabilities (577) (64) Taxes payable 98 (29) Other (14) 54 Dividends received from equity-accounted investments 8 Interest received 27 2 Income taxes paid (858) (1,072) Net cash provided by operating activities 3,920 6,724 Investing activities Capital expenditures (2,196) (2,661) Interest capitalised paid (52) (113) Grants used for capital expenditures (23) (91) Grants received 23 91 Purchase of intangible assets (27) (25) Acquisitions of subsidiaries, net of cash acquired 4 (8) - Acquisition of jointly controlled assets 4 - (157) Settlement of deferred consideration for joint operations 4 (200) (200) Cash flows from sales of subsidiaries, net of cash disposed 4 - 15 Net change in bank deposits with maturity more than 3 months - (400) Loans issued 9 (2,758) (47) Loans collected 7 2 Net cash used for investing activities (5,234) (3,586) Financing activities Repayment of long-term debt 11 (885) (840) Net change in short-term debt (190) - Interest paid net of the amounts capitalised (145) (137) Dividends paid to noncontrolling interest shareholders (150) - Dividends paid to Group shareholders 16 - (1,380) Net cash used for financing activities (1,370) (2,357) Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents (32) (17) Net change in cash and cash equivalents (2,716) 764 Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of period 6 4,632 1,164 Effect of translation to presentation currency (188) - Cash and cash equivalents at the end of period 6 1,728 1,928 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these interim condensed consolidated financial statements 5 ROSNEFT INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LIMITED Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) (expressed in USD, tabular amounts in millions) Note 1. Organisation Rosneft International Holdings Limited (prior to 6 June 2013 - TNK-BP International Limited), or the “Company”, and its subsidiaries (jointly referred to as “the Group”) conduct exploration and development activities and produce oil and gas, operate petroleum refineries and market oil and petroleum products in the Russian Federation and a number of other countries including Brazil, Venezuela, Vietnam and Ukraine. Rosneft International Holdings Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Rosneft Limited (prior to 29 May 2013 - TNK-BP Limited). On 21 March 2013 OAO “NK “Rosneft” (Rosneft) completed the acquisition of BP and AAR interests in TNK-BP and obtained control of the Company. TNK-BP International Limited was renamed to TNK International Limited on 6 June 2013 and further renamed to Rosneft International Holdings Limited on 28 June 2013. TNK-BP Limited was renamed to TNK Limited on 29 May 2013 and further renamed to Rosneft Limited on 3 July 2013. Rosneft International Holdings Limited is a limited liability company registered and domiciled in the British Virgin Islands. The address of its registered office was Craigmuir Chambers, P.O. Box 71, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. Note 2. Basis of Presentation These interim condensed consolidated financial statements for the three and six months ended 30 June 2013 have been prepared in accordance with the International Accounting Standard (“IAS”) 34, “Interim financial reporting”. These interim condensed consolidated financial statements do not include all the disclosures required by International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) for a complete set of financial statements. The interim condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the annual financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2012, which have been prepared in accordance with IFRSs. These interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a historical cost basis, except for derivative financial instruments that have been measured at fair value. The Group’s subsidiaries registered in the Russian Federation maintain their accounting records in accordance with the Regulations on Accounting and Reporting in the Russian Federation. Subsidiaries outside the Russian Federation maintain their accounting records in accordance with local regulations. The accompanying interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared from these accounting records and adjusted as necessary in order to comply with International Financial Reporting Standards. The interim condensed consolidated financial statements are presented in United States dollars (“US dollars” or “USD”) and all values are rounded to the nearest million (USD million) except when otherwise indicated. Changes in presentation In order to present its financial statements in consistency with the accounting policies applied by the Company’s new shareholder - Rosneft, management elected to make several reclassifications in the Group’s financial statements. These reclassifications amended the presentation
Recommended publications
  • BP Code of Conduct – English
    Our Code Our responsibility Code of Conduct Guiding you to make the right decisions Our values and behaviours are the foundation of our Code What we value Safety Safety is good business. Everything we do relies upon the safety of our workforce and the communities around us. We care about the safe management of the environment. We are committed to safely delivering energy to the world. Respect We respect the world in which we operate. It begins with compliance with laws and regulations. We hold ourselves to the highest ethical standards and behave in ways that earn the trust of others. We depend on the relationships we have and respect each other and those we work with. We value diversity of people and thought. We care about the consequences of our decisions, large and small, on those around us. Excellence We are in a hazardous business and are committed to excellence through the systematic and disciplined management of our operations. We follow and uphold the rules and standards we set for our company. We commit to quality outcomes, have a thirst to learn and to improve. If something is not right, we correct it. Courage What we do is rarely easy. Achieving the best outcomes often requires the courage to face difficulty, to speak up and stand by what we believe. We always strive to do the right thing. We explore new ways of thinking and are unafraid to ask for help. We are honest with ourselves and actively seek feedback from others. We aim for an enduring legacy, despite the short-term priorities of our world.
    [Show full text]
  • 19-1189 BP PLC V. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
    (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus BP P. L. C. ET AL. v. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19–1189. Argued January 19, 2021—Decided May 17, 2021 Baltimore’s Mayor and City Council (collectively City) sued various en- ergy companies in Maryland state court alleging that the companies concealed the environmental impacts of the fossil fuels they promoted. The defendant companies removed the case to federal court invoking a number of grounds for federal jurisdiction, including the federal officer removal statute, 28 U. S. C. §1442. The City argued that none of the defendants’ various grounds for removal justified retaining federal ju- risdiction, and the district court agreed, issuing an order remanding the case back to state court. Although an order remanding a case to state court is ordinarily unreviewable on appeal, Congress has deter- mined that appellate review is available for those orders “remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed pursuant to section 1442 or 1443 of [Title 28].” §1447(d). The Fourth Circuit read this provision to authorize appellate review only for the part of a remand order deciding the §1442 or §1443 removal ground.
    [Show full text]
  • BP Plc Vs Royal Dutch Shell
    FEBRUARY 2021 BP plc Vs Royal Dutch Shell 01872 229 000 www.atlanticmarkets.co.uk www.atlanticmarkets.co.uk BP Plc A Brief History BP is a British multinational oil and gas company headquartered in London. It is one of the world’s oil and gas supermajors. · 1908. The founding of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, established as a subsidiary of Burmah Oil Company to take advantage of oil discoveries in Iran. · 1935. It became the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company · 1954. Adopted the name British Petroleum. · 1959. The company expanded beyond the Middle East to Alaska and it was one of the first companies to strike oil in the North Sea. · 1978. British Petroleum acquired majority control of Standard Oil of Ohio. Formerly majority state-owned. · 1979–1987. The British government privatised the company in stages between. · 1998. British Petroleum merged with Amoco, becoming BP Amoco plc, · 2000-2001. Acquired ARCO and Burmah Castrol, becoming BP plc. · 2003–2013. BP was a partner in the TNK-BP joint venture in Russia. Positioning BP is a “vertically integrated” company, meaning it’s involved in the whole supply chain – from discovering oil, producing it, refining it, shipping it, trading it and selling it at the petrol pump. BP has operations in nearly 80 countries worldwide and has around 18,700 service stations worldwide. Its largest division is BP America. In Russia, BP also own a 19.75% stake in Rosneft, the world’s largest publicly traded oil and gas company by hydrocarbon reserves and production. BP has a primary listing on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 100 Index.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia and Saudi Arabia: Old Disenchantments, New Challenges by John W
    STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES 35 Russia and Saudi Arabia: Old Disenchantments, New Challenges by John W. Parker and Thomas F. Lynch III Center for Strategic Research Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University The Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) is National Defense University’s (NDU’s) dedicated research arm. INSS includes the Center for Strategic Research, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs, and Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The military and civilian analysts and staff who comprise INSS and its subcomponents execute their mission by conducting research and analysis, publishing, and participating in conferences, policy support, and outreach. The mission of INSS is to conduct strategic studies for the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the unified combatant commands in support of the academic programs at NDU and to perform outreach to other U.S. Government agencies and the broader national security community. Cover: Vladimir Putin presented an artifact made of mammoth tusk to Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud in Riyadh, October 14–15, 2019 (President of Russia Web site) Russia and Saudi Arabia Russia and Saudia Arabia: Old Disenchantments, New Challenges By John W. Parker and Thomas F. Lynch III Institute for National Strategic Studies Strategic Perspectives, No. 35 Series Editor: Denise Natali National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. June 2021 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Expansion of Russian Multinationals After the Crisis: Results of 2011
    Global Expansion of Russian Multinationals after the Crisis: Results of 2011 Report dated April 16, 2013 Moscow and New York, April 16, 2013 The Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, and the Vale Columbia Center on Sustainable International Investment (VCC), a joint center of Columbia Law School and the Earth Institute at Columbia University in New York, are releasing the results of their third survey of Russian multinationals today.1 The survey, conducted from November 2012 to February 2013, is part of a long-term study of the global expansion of emerging market non-financial multinational enterprises (MNEs).2 The present report covers the period 2009-2011. Highlights Russia is one of the leading emerging markets in terms of outward foreign direct investments (FDI). Such a position is supported not by several multinational giants but by dozens of Russian MNEs in various industries. Foreign assets of the top 20 Russian non-financial MNEs grew every year covered by this report and reached US$ 111 billion at the end of 2011 (Table 1). Large Russian exporters usually use FDI in support of their foreign activities. As a result, oil and gas and steel companies with considerable exports are among the leading Russian MNEs. However, representatives of other industries also have significant foreign assets. Many companies remained “regional” MNEs. As a result, more than 66% of the ranked companies’ foreign assets were in Europe and Central Asia, with 28% in former republics of the Soviet Union (Annex table 2). Due to the popularity of off-shore jurisdictions to Russian MNEs, some Caribbean islands and Cyprus attracted many Russian subsidiaries with low levels of foreign assets.
    [Show full text]
  • Alfa Annual Report
    ALFA GROUP CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORT OF THE AUDITORS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2001 STATEMENT OF MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE SHAREHOLDERS OF ALFA GROUP . International convention requires that Management prepare consolidated financial statements which give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of Alfa Group (“the Group”) at the end of each financial period and of the results, cash flows and changes in shareholders’ equity for each period. Management are responsible for ensuring that the Group keeps accounting records which disclose, with reasonable accuracy, the financial position of each entity and which enable it to ensure that the consoli- dated financial statements comply with International Accounting Standards and that their statutory accounting reports comply with the applicable country’s laws and regulations. Furthermore, appropriate adjustments were made to such statutory accounts to present the accompanying consolidated financial statements in accordance with International Accounting Standards. Management also have a general responsibility for taking such steps as are reasonably possible to safeguard the assets of the Group and to prevent and detect fraud and other irregularities. Management considers that, in preparing the consolidated financial statements set out on pages to , the Group has used appropriate and consistently applied accounting policies, which are supported by reasonable and prudent judgments and estimates and that appropriate International Accounting Standards have been followed. For and on behalf of Management Nigel J. Robinson October ZAO PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit Kosmodamianskaya Nab. 52, Bld. 5 115054 Moscow Russia Telephone +7 (095) 967 6000 Facsimile +7 (095) 967 6001 REPORT OF THE AUDITORS TO THE SHAREHOLDERS OF ALFA GROUP .
    [Show full text]
  • FTSE Factsheet
    FTSE COMPANY REPORT Share price analysis relative to sector and index performance Argos Resources ARG Oil Gas and Coal — GBP 0.03 at close 16 April 2021 Absolute Relative to FTSE UK All-Share Sector Relative to FTSE UK All-Share Index PERFORMANCE 21-Apr-2015 1D WTD MTD YTD Absolute - - - - Rel.Sector - - - - Rel.Market - - - - VALUATION Data unavailable Trailing PE -ve EV/EBITDA -ve PB 0.2 PCF +ve Div Yield 0.0 Price/Sales - Net Debt/Equity -ve Div Payout 0.0 ROE -ve DESCRIPTION Data unavailable The principal activity of the Group is that of oil and gas exploration. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please see the final page for important legal disclosures. 1 of 4 FTSE COMPANY REPORT: Argos Resources 16 April 2021 Valuation Metrics Price to Earnings (PE) EV to EBITDA Price to Book (PB) 31-Mar-2021 31-Mar-2021 31-Mar-2021 100 ‖ ‖ 1 0.8 0.9 0.7 80 0.8 +1SD 0.7 0.6 60 0.6 0.5 +1SD 0.5 40 Avg 0.4 0.4 Avg 0.3 0.3 20 0.2 0.2 -1SD 0.1 -1SD 0 ‖ ‖ ‖ ‖ 0 ‖ ‖ ‖ ‖ 0.1 Apr-2016 Apr-2017 Apr-2018 Apr-2019 Apr-2020 Apr-2016 Apr-2017 Apr-2018 Apr-2019 Apr-2020 Apr-2016 Apr-2017 Apr-2018 Apr-2019 Apr-2020 Petrofac 5.8 Energean 73.2 Energean 2.0 Harbour Energy PLC -0.2 BP 45.5 Lamprell 1.3 EnQuest -0.6 Hunting 31.5 Diversified Gas & Oil 1.2 Tullow Oil -0.7 Diversified Gas & Oil 11.3 BP 1.1 Lamprell -1.4 Oil Gas and Coal 9.5 Oil Gas and Coal 1.1 Oil Gas and Coal -5.2 Tullow Oil 7.9 Cairn Energy 1.0 Cairn Energy -9.4 Harbour Energy PLC 2.8 Pharos Energy 0.3 Wood Group (John) -10.4 Pharos Energy 1.5 Argos Resources 0.2 Argos Resources -17.2
    [Show full text]
  • William R. Spiegelberger the Foreign Policy Research Institute Thanks the Carnegie Corporation for Its Support of the Russia Political Economy Project
    Russia Political Economy Project William R. Spiegelberger The Foreign Policy Research Institute thanks the Carnegie Corporation for its support of the Russia Political Economy Project. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Author: William R. Spiegelberger Eurasia Program Leadership Director: Chris Miller Deputy Director: Maia Otarashvili Edited by: Thomas J. Shattuck Designed by: Natalia Kopytnik © 2019 by the Foreign Policy Research Institute April 2019 COVER: Designed by Natalia Kopytnik. Photography: Oleg Deripaska (World Economic Forum); St. Basil’s Cathedral (Adob Stock); Ruble (Adobe Stock); Vladimir Putin (kremlin.ru); Rusal logo (rusal.ru); United States Capitol (Adobe Stock; Viktor Vekselberg (Aleshru/Wikimedia Commons); Alumnium rolls (Adobe Stock); Trade War (Adobe Stock). Our Mission The Foreign Policy Research Institute is dedicated to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the foreign policy and national security challenges facing the United States. It seeks to educate the public, teach teachers, train students, and offer ideas to advance U.S. national interests based on a nonpartisan, geopolitical perspective that illuminates contemporary international affairs through the lens of history, geography, and culture. Offering Ideas In an increasingly polarized world, we pride ourselves on our tradition of nonpartisan scholarship. We count among our ranks over 100 affiliated scholars located throughout the nation and the world who appear regularly in national and international media, testify on Capitol Hill, and are consulted by U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • EXXONMOBIL DEVELOPMENT § COMPANY; and EXXONMOBIL § OIL CORPORATION, § § Plaintiffs, § § V
    Case 3:17-cv-01930-B Document 110 Filed 12/31/19 Page 1 of 35 PageID <pageID> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION; § EXXONMOBIL DEVELOPMENT § COMPANY; and EXXONMOBIL § OIL CORPORATION, § § Plaintiffs, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-1930-B § STEVEN MNUCHIN, in his official § capacity as Secretary of the U.S. § Department of the Treasury; § ANDREA M. GACKI, in her official § capacity as the Director of the U.S. § Department of the Treasury’s Office § of Foreign Assets Control; and the U.S. § DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY’S § OFFICE OF FOREIGN ASSETS § CONTROL, § § Defendants. § MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiffs Exxon Mobil Corporation, ExxonMobil Development Company, and ExxonMobil Oil Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 92), as well as Defendants Steven Mnuchin, Andrea Gacki, and the Office of Foreign Assets Control’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 95). The parties dispute whether the Office of Foreign Assets Control’s imposition of a two-million-dollar fine upon Plaintiffs for alleged violations of Ukraine-related sanctions regulations was lawful. Because the Court concludes that Plaintiffs lacked fair notice that their conduct was prohibited, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion (Doc. 92) and DENIES Defendants’ cross-motion (Doc. 95). Further, the Court VACATES the Office of Foreign Asset - 1 - Case 3:17-cv-01930-B Document 110 Filed 12/31/19 Page 2 of 35 PageID <pageID> Control’s Penalty Notice. I. BACKGROUND1 This is an administrative case prompting the Court to determine which party receives the benefit of having its cake and eating it, too—the regulating agency that failed to clarify, or the regulated party that failed to ask.
    [Show full text]
  • Deal Drivers Russia
    February 2010 Deal Drivers Russia A survey and review of Russian corporate finance activity Contents Introduction 1 01 M&A Review 2 Overall deal trends 3 Domestic M&A trends 6 Cross-border M&A trends 8 Private equity 11 Acquisition finance 13 Valuations 14 02 Industries 15 Automotive 16 Energy 18 Financial Services 20 Consumer & Retail 22 Industrial Markets 24 Life Sciences 26 Mining 28 Technology, Media & Telecommunications 30 03 Survey Analysis 32 Introduction Prediction may be fast going out of fashion. At the end of 2008, CMS commissioned mergermarket to interview 100 Russian M&A and corporate decision makers to find out what they thought about the situation at the time and what their views on the future were. Falling commodity prices were viewed as the biggest threat, the Financial Services sector was expected to deliver the greatest growth for M&A activity and the bulk of inward investment was expected from Asia. The research revealed that two thirds of the respondents expected the overall level of M&A activity to increase over the course of 2009, with only one third predicting a fall. That third of respondents was right and, in general, the majority got it wrong or very wrong. The survey did get some things right – the predominance of Who knows? What’s the point? We consider the point to be the domestic players, the increase of non-money deals, the in the detail. Our survey looks at the market in 2009 sector number of transactions against a restructuring background, by sector – what was ‘in’ and what was ‘out’.
    [Show full text]
  • CONGRESSIONAL PROGRAM U.S.-Russia Relations: Policy Challenges in a New Era
    CONGRESSIONAL PROGRAM U.S.-Russia Relations: Policy Challenges in a New Era May 29 – June 3, 2018 Helsinki, Finland and Tallinn, Estonia Copyright @ 2018 by The Aspen Institute The Aspen Institute 2300 N Street Northwest Washington, DC 20037 Published in the United States of America in 2018 by The Aspen Institute All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America U.S.-Russia Relations: Policy Challenges in a New Era May 29 – June 3, 2018 The Aspen Institute Congressional Program Table of Contents Rapporteur’s Summary Matthew Rojansky ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Russia 2018: Postponing the Start of the Post-Putin Era .............................................................................. 9 John Beyrle U.S.-Russian Relations: The Price of Cold War ........................................................................................ 15 Robert Legvold Managing the U.S.-Russian Confrontation Requires Realism .................................................................... 21 Dmitri Trenin Apple of Discord or a Key to Big Deal: Ukraine in U.S.-Russia Relations ................................................ 25 Vasyl Filipchuk What Does Russia Want? ............................................................................................................................ 39 Kadri Liik Russia and the West: Narratives and Prospects .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transparency and Disclosure by Russian State-Owned Enterprises
    Transparency And Disclosure By Russian State-Owned Enterprises Standard & Poor’s Governance Services Prepared for the Roundtable on Corporate Governance organized by the OECD in Moscow on June 3, 2005 Julia Kochetygova Nick Popivshchy Oleg Shvyrkov Vladimir Todres Christine Liadskaya June 2005 Transparency & Disclosure by Russian State-Owned Enterprises Transparency and Disclosure by Russian State-Owned Enterprises Executive Summary This survey of transparency and disclosure (T&D) by Russian state-owned companies by Standard & Poor’s Governance Services was prepared at the request of the OECD Roundtable on Corporate Governance. According to the OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance of SOEs, “the state should act as an informed and active owner and establish a clear and consistent ownership policy, ensuring that the governance of state-owned enterprises is carried out in a transparent and accountable manner” (Chapter III). Further, “large or listed SOEs should disclose financial and non financial information according to international best practices” (Chapter V). In stark contrast with these principles, the study revealed consistent differences in disclosure standards between the state-controlled and similarly sized public Russian companies. This is in line with the notion that transparency of state-controlled enterprises is hampered by the tendency of the Russian government and individual officials to use their influence on such companies to promote political or individual goals that often diverge from commercial motives and investor interests. High standards of transparency and disclosure, on the other hand, are a cornerstone in the foundation of good governance. They provide legitimate stakeholders--whether creditors, minority shareholders, taxpayers, or the general public--with the information they need to be able to begin to hold government decision-makers accountable for their actions.
    [Show full text]