Of course, like other investors, especially the most speculative ones, Parvus could bet primarily up any increases in the offer that could take place in theattractive match of the risiko banking that is being played between Bergamo, Brescia and Milan. But the Messina mantra repeated since February is that the money put on the table does not change. “No improvement of the Ops”The banker was always categorical.
Now after the indiscretion of this morning revealed by Messenger that after Consob, even the Milan prosecutor would have turned on a beacon on Mercadante’s funds for understand the reasons why the English company did not accept the invitation from theauthority of Paolo Savona to make transparency about its shareholder base, suspicions get stronger. Among the various question marks surrounding this asset manager which could be the balance needle of merger between the first and fourth Italian banks, there is also what does not mention the existence of Parvus in the Ubi shareholders’ book in the preliminary findings of the Antitrust, which is currently considering the operation.
The point is that, as the Sole 24 Ore, the 7.9% stake in question is held by Mercadante as indirect non-discretionary savings management: in practice, despite having the shares in the portfolio the last word on the decisions to be taken lies with the actual subscribers of those securities. Activism “for third parties” which causes the mysterious asset manager checked, with all the necessary shielding, in place offshore move with a logic from family office: buys or sells that is on mandate. And whose?
Those who are following the game closely point out that the group of historical shareholders opposed to the climb of Intesa and which controls 26% of the share capital (the Reference shareholder committee, the various foundations, the Union of shareholders of Brescia less the spill Giuseppe Lucchini and the Covenant of the Thousand), thanks to Parvus’ contribution, would arrive at constitute precisely that blocking minority (almost 34%) such as condition the resolutions in the extraordinary session of the meeting and therefore the merger.
And that’s exactly where the shadow of the concert hovers that, if proven by the same shareholders, would trigger the mandatory takeover bid on all Ubi’s capital. It is no coincidence that Consob called for transparency, but everything is silent from London. Who knows if something will change with the Prosecutor.