Verbruggens Millions

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Stuart Wallbridge said:
Fair enough, I shall cease and desist with my input. Just thought I could have helped the OP a little in working through the corp docs.
Your background is shared.

purcell said:
Why is it over the top?

He has basically been told to p up a rope. I thought his comments were good ones, I am in the same business he claims to be.

But, nope, the regulars here jump on someone saying anything different from the accepted line and tell him to jump. So he did.
I am neither a solicitor nor an accountant, but am likewise involved with these types of things on a regular basis.

The questions were good ones. A hunch suggests that the answers will be illuminating!

It is of no surprise that Hein has been getting Phat (sic).

It would have been a much greater thrill, for me at least, to have found that Hein was an owner of Tailwind. Alas, I know that he is not. But, can I hold out hope that Lance had shares in Cove?

If/when I can spring some time, I will try and work through the docs as well.

Dave.
 
Sep 13, 2013
1
0
0
Stuart Wallbridge said:
They were issued a share each but how many shares are in issue for the company? If say 1000, a threshold to determine beneficial interest in the world of finance would be somewhere in the region of 25% ownership (from a due diligence perspective at least)

Also be worth looking in the mem and arts to see if the company can issue bearer shares.
The answer to that is in the same document on page 9. The currency used is USD. 2 shares of IR£1 were issued and the value is rounded to USD3 in the accounts. Hein Verbruggen and Mrs Verbruggen were beneficially entitled to 1 share each according the note of Directors Interests. Ergo they owned all the issued shares of the company. Anyone actually working with company accounts should have seen this.

NB Can't be 100% about this but it looks as though the share capital was issued as paid up but the amount was not in fact paid (this is because the company has a non-trade debtor of i.e. is owed, USD3).
 
Jul 26, 2012
524
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
As can be seen from the above, the turnover for a company that stated its activities as 'consultants' are extraordinary.

The turnovers exceeded $40,000,000 and yielded a profit of over $5,000,000 in less than 6 years.
As you say, the $40 million turnover figure for a couple of anonymous businesses run out of an accountant's office in Dublin is truly extraordinary.

The declared profit figure is almost irrelevant. There are two key unknowns. Firstly what was the source of the turnover i.e who generated these sales and where was the money coming from? Second, what is the breakdown of the $35 million in costs i.e who received all the administration expenses? It certainly wouldn't have been the accountant in Dublin.

Typically these will be shell companies with no real business or purpose other than to act as a cover for receipt of cash commissions from other sources. The incoming "sales" payments are then distributed to other, unknown bank accounts with these payments being treated for accountancy purposes in the books as "administration" expenses.

The true profit of these two companies will be nearer $40,000 million rather than the $5 million disclosed by the books.

This highly lucrative business may provide the real reason why beneficiaries would wish to hang onto their cosy sinecures. Or, they might be clinging on to prevent others from finding out what they've been up to while holding the reins of power.
 
Sep 29, 2012
422
0
0
D-Queued said:
Your background is shared.



I am neither a solicitor nor an accountant, but am likewise involved with these types of things on a regular basis.

The questions were good ones. A hunch suggests that the answers will be illuminating!

It is of no surprise that Hein has been getting Phat (sic).

It would have been a much greater thrill, for me at least, to have found that Hein was an owner of Tailwind. Alas, I know that he is not. But, can I hold out hope that Lance had shares in Cove?

If/when I can spring some time, I will try and work through the docs as well.

Dave.
I am an accountant. This is the type of work I do. I am on the same side of the 49th as you are.
 
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Just to add the existence of two directors and two shareholders is pretty clearly a standard practice for the 'principal' to avoid the risks of a 'single member' company - personal liability included.
 
zebedee said:
This highly lucrative business may provide the real reason why beneficiaries would wish to hang onto their cosy sinecures. Or, they might be clinging on to prevent others from finding out what they've been up to while holding the reins of power.
Exactly. We know these guys are making money off the UCI's accounts BECAUSE they are UCI execs. Cycling pays! Just not the teams, riders, or UCI.

Some old-timers in the U.S. will remember the USAC CEO that was fired for doing his job objecting to management making consulting fees because they were running USAC, (ostensibly a non-profit) and reporting none of the income to USAC.

Hein's has/had(?) a stock trading account with Thom Wiesel in the U.S., a now documented Irish shell corporation, the UAE shell corporation mentioned in "the dossier" summary.

Perhaps another shell in some other part of the world that Makarov was told had to be paid to license the phrase "Tour of Russia." We now know the very likely reason UCI's race in Colorado is not called "The Tour of Colorado." It costs too much. And if you don't pay the secret rights holder, the UCI won't sanction the race. See how that works?

Hein is brilliant. I mean that as an honest compliment. He's lots of other not-nice things too.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Good to see Kimmage tweeting a link to this thread.
I stopped following the thread as soon as it became too technical.
To summarize the discussion: are we (that is, is dr. maserati) on to criminal business or is this Hein maximizing his profits withing the legal framework?
Good work at any rate, dr. m.
 
Jun 15, 2012
193
0
0
If Reincarnation is possible I want to come back as anykind of sports governing management, IOC, UCI, FIFA...these guys totally get away with mass corruption because it's "sport" and international law, nobody pays a damn bit of attention to it and nobody can pursue because of the difficulty of legal jurisdiction is so hazy.

With that said, does anybody do Investigative Journalism anymore? Holy hell all the information is right there. A guy on an internet msg board can piece together all this stuff yet all the top journalists seem to have a great big thumb up there ***. This makes me want to go back to school and get a journalism degree and make a career of exposing these frauds of which there are so many that one would never run out of work. It's depressing
 
DirtyWorks said:
Exactly. We know these guys are making money off the UCI's accounts BECAUSE they are UCI execs. Cycling pays! Just not the teams, riders, or UCI.
It won't be from cycling. The first document shows a turnover of $23m - that's considerably more than the UCI's annual turnover.

The IOC - that's a different matter.

PosterBill said:
With that said, does anybody do Investigative Journalism anymore? Holy hell all the information is right there. A guy on an internet msg board can piece together all this stuff yet all the top journalists seem to have a great big thumb up there ***.
Maybe they have investigated it and found it was a completely legit enterprise.
 
Feb 7, 2013
27
0
0
Just a quick look at Norse to 31 Dec 2001 - turnover $6,675,767 and profit only $974 with "admin expenses" of $6,674,793 which is primarily made up of commissions of $6,659,000 paid to a certain Hein Verbruggen. Nice work if you can get it. As already mentioned, you would need to understand exactly what the business consulting income relates to in order to judge whether this is legit. Obviously he was putting in a few hours overtime during this period. This of course may primarily be a tax driven exercise as why would you want this information to be in the public domain?
 
Parker said:
It won't be from cycling. The first document shows a turnover of $23m - that's considerably more than the UCI's annual turnover.

The IOC - that's a different matter.


Maybe they have investigated it and found it was a completely legit enterprise.
No investigations. That's not how the IOC works. Until recently bribes were perfectly normal part of being on the IOC's site selection committee.

Also remember Hein was an executive of the IOC's broadcasting company located in Spain.
 
Jul 26, 2012
524
0
0
You start with his contract of employment (if he had one) with the UCI. You then establish exactly where all this $40 million was coming from and where it went. Was the man constrained by a duty of care to the UCI or was he free to do his own thing? Even if he was, his duty of care to the UCI would probably outweigh his pursuit of lucre where such money-making would bring him into an obvious conflict of interest with the sport and its governing body, particularly where such a conflict was kept hidden and undeclared.

The sizeable scale of the amounts involved would suggest these companies were receiving cash receipts from large sponsors and/or media companies.
 
zebedee said:
You start with his contract of employment (if he had one) with the UCI. You then establish exactly where all this $40 million was coming from and where it went. Was the man constrained by a duty of care to the UCI or was he free to do his own thing? Even if he was, his duty of care to the UCI would probably outweigh his pursuit of lucre where such money-making would bring him into an obvious conflict of interest with the sport and its governing body, particularly where such a conflict was kept hidden and undeclared.

The sizeable scale of the amounts involved would suggest these companies were receiving cash receipts from large sponsors and/or media companies.
Duty of Care?

His title was Honorarium President.

Dave.
 
zebedee said:
...Was the man constrained by a duty of care to the UCI or was he free to do his own thing? Even if he was, his duty of care to the UCI would probably outweigh his pursuit of lucre where such money-making would bring him into an obvious conflict of interest with the sport and its governing body, particularly where such a conflict was kept hidden and undeclared.
ALWAYS, always, always assume that Hein was personally renumerated for influencing things somehow related to the UCI and the IOC. Hein was paid a consulting fee for getting/keeping the Keirin(sp?) in the Olympics. USA Cycling fired their CEO for demanding board members follow the ideal you mention.

Hein's role at Olympic Broadcasting Services is the Chairman of the Board of Directors: https://www.obs.es/structure_contact.php You don't think he wasn't getting kickbacks on the way to routing services through OBS? This is the IOC! It's what you do.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY