{"id":54910,"date":"2023-07-18T11:12:52","date_gmt":"2023-07-18T10:12:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/valuesque.com\/en\/?p=54910"},"modified":"2025-06-01T21:11:37","modified_gmt":"2025-06-01T20:11:37","slug":"grenke-more-thoughts-on-related-parties-cash-and-the-brink-problem","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/valuesque.com\/en\/blog\/2023\/07\/18\/grenke-more-thoughts-on-related-parties-cash-and-the-brink-problem\/","title":{"rendered":"Grenke: More thoughts on Related Parties, Cash and the \u201cBrink\u201d-Problem"},"content":{"rendered":"

In our most recent blog post we have already given some first comments on the Viceroy-Grenke-case HERE<\/a>.<\/strong> We think some more points are worth commenting, in particular to remind everybody that \u2013 despite the fact that we see most of the accusations as highly overdone \u2013 this short-seller attack is not something to take lightly.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Related Parties<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The question of whether the franchise businesses fall under the scope of IAS 24 Related Party Disclosure was already discussed in our former blog post. Due to new information from a press release yesterday (\u201cWolfgang Grenke comments on the franchise system of GRENKE AG<\/a><\/strong>\u201d, 17 September 2020) we have to revisit this issue.<\/p>\n

    In the press release, Grenke explained again that Mr. Grenke did not have ownership or control of CTP Handels- und Beteiligungs GmbH, the investment vehicle that took equity stakes during the foundation phase of the franchise companies. This supports the non-related-party assumption. However, it is also written in the release that since 2014 Garuna AG also took minority stakes in franchise firms and that \u201cThe shares in Garuna AG are held by a personal confidant of Mr. Grenke, Ms. Corina Stingaciu, as the beneficial owner.\u201d We do not know exactly who Ms. Stingaciu is (memyselfandi007<\/em> speculates \u2013 really only speculates \u2013 that she could be the girlfriend of Mr. Grenke HERE<\/strong><\/a>) , but being a \u2018personal confidant\u2019 of the CEO is a tricky thing in terms of related parties, anyway. Again, according to IAS 24.9, related party is \u201cA person or a close member of that person’s family is related to a reporting entity if that person: (i) has control or joint control over the reporting entity; (ii) has significant influence over the reporting entity; or (iii) is a member of the key management personnel of the reporting entity or of a parent of the reporting entity.\u201d By the words, it seems that Ms. Stingaciu does not fulfil the requirements of IAS 24.9 \u2013 even \u2018significant influence\u2019 is presumably not relevant here. But with personal relationships things are never really clear. This one remains very tricky. Perhaps disclosure on related party transactions might have been mandatory here.<\/p>\n

    Anyway, regarding this whole construct we think the questions raised by memyselfandi007<\/em> to be addressed to the management. We have rewritten them here below (Source: Grenke \u2013 Quick take on the first statement from W. Grenke, LINK<\/strong><\/a>):<\/p>\n