3 ms·
I'm not sure exactly how to read this. Selling a business once worth $325M for $1 could either be interpreted as that the business has become worthless, or that
by eatonphil 3y ago
I'm not sure exactly how to read this. Selling a business once worth $325M for $1 could either be interpreted as that the business has become worthless, or that the seller gave a gigantic gift to the buyer.
- borissk 3y agoNot if the contract says that in the next 5 years the seller can buy back the business from the buyer for say $5M.
- soligern 3y agoEither way the buyer wins.
- dubcanada 3y agoThat's the point. It's how tons of Russians made a lot of money.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago> It's how tons of Russians made a lot of money Selling public/state assets and infrastructure on the cheap, far below objective market value, in the hands of well connected "private investors", is how many wealthy people got even richer in the west as well, it's not something Russian oligarchs invented. Ask the Brits how the privatization of their national railways went, or the Germans how much better their telecom infrastructure is after privatization, or you probably know other examples closer to your home wherever you live.
- local_issues 3y ago[dead]
- andrewxdiamond 3y agoThe buyer is providing a service
- dym_sh 3y agoit's a tax avoidance scheme along with ownership transfer to a local shell-company
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y agoIn this case it's both. It's essentially appropriation sponsored by the Russian government. The business is worthless to anyone who isn't a friend of the politicians.
- cvoss 3y agoThird option (not mutually exclusive of the other two) is that they want to avoid any possibility of a narrative of having profited off of a war, especially one they object to.