By NEIL HARTNELL
Tribune Business Editor
nhartnell@tribunemedia.net
Hannes Babak yesterday said he owed the late Sir Jack Hayward a duty to “get the best possible price” for his family’s 50 per cent Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA) stake, otherwise he would not have opposed its purchase by the world’s largest asset manager.
The former GBPA co-chair told Tribune Business that he “would never not promote” an offer by BlackRock, the global private equity firm, but the price had to fairly value Freeport’s quasi-governmental authority and its Port Group Ltd affiliate.
Contacted by Tribune Business after the latest rift in the Hayward family erupted into open warfare, Mr Babak said it was “completely wrong” for the late Sir Jack’s children and grandchildren to allege that his interests and theirs - in relation to the GBPA’s potential sale - were not aligned.
The Austrian businessman added that, in his capacity as an adviser to the Sir Jack Hayward Discretionary Settlement 1993, he had acted “in the best interests” of all beneficiaries by engineering the removal of its two individual trustees.
Mr Babak said he had simply explained to Keith Griffiths, the Settlement’s protector, that its main asset - the GBPA/Port Group Ltd equity stake - was “at risk” because the individual trustees, Richard DeVries and Ian Barry, wanted to agree a “very poor deal” with BlackRock.
And he also denied the Hayward family’s claims that Mr Griffiths’ deteriorating health meant he did not know what he was doing when he signed documents ‘authorising’ the two trustees’ removal.
Emphasising that he was speaking reluctantly, and only to provide his ‘side of the story’, Mr Babak confirmed that he and Freeport-based attorney, Andre Feldman, visited Mr Griffiths in the UK on May 17, 2015, to explain why it was necessary for Messrs DeVries and Barry to be removed.
“I can tell you that Keith Griffiths was in perfect mental health,” Mr Babak told Tribune Business. “Physically he was not in the best condition, but that had nothing to do with his mind.
“His mind was well, and he was giving clear conversation. He asked about Freeport, projects in Freeport. He gave me no sign that he was not in perfect mental health.”
Mr Babak’s assessment differs markedly from the of the Hayward family, who have alleged in court papers that Mr Griffiths was “so mentally and physically frail” that he spoke of getting a friend “to DRIVE him from Freeport to Miami”.
Mr Babak, meanwhile, also confirmed that the purpose of his and Mr Feldman’s visit was their concern that Messrs DeVries and Barry were about to agree a deal with BlackRock that was not in the interest of the Settlement and its beneficiaries.
“We went to see him [Mr Griffiths] to explain that the assets, the main assets of the trust, were at risk because it looks a very poor deal,” he confirmed to Tribune Business.
“The individual trustees want to sign a very poor deal for the trust... If it’s not in the best interests of the Settlement, Jack would expect me to raise it.”
Court documents obtained by Tribune Business have claimed that two of the three trustees for the Sir Jack Hayward Discretionary Settlement 1993 were removed by Mr Babak because his interests in a sale of the GBPA and its Port Group Ltd affiliate “may well not coincide” with those of the Hayward family.
The Hayward family attorneys, in their arguments, alleged: “It appears from the evidence of Rupert Hayward that Mr Babak arranged for the removal of the individual trustees because they wished to deal with a purchaser of the Settlement’s interest in the GBPA who was not introduced by him, and which proposed a partial sale of assets of the Settlement and deferral of consideration [purchase price].
“That proposal was not in Mr Babak’s interests because he claims to be entitled to $20 million upon the sale of the GBPA.
“Rupert Hayward formed the impression that Mr Babak was opposed to the proposal because under it the St George family would continue their involvement in running of the GBPA, and because the purchase price depended on the future performance of the relevant companies. These were terms which might not have suited Mr Babak.”
The former GBPA chairman, though, implied to Tribune Business yesterday that he would have recommended the BlackRock deal had it been in the Hayward estate’s interests.
While his comments indicated there was an issue with the purchase price offered by the private equity firm, Mr Babak declined to reveal details of the BlackRock offer, citing commercial confidentiality.
“I think BlackRock is a fantastic success story and amazing company,” he told Tribune Business. “I would never not promote a deal with BlackRock as long as it could be recommended and was in the Settlement’s best interests.
“BlackRock is the largest money manager in the world, and it would be wonderful if they purchased the GBPA and Port Group Ltd.
“It would be great to finally get a long-term investor with deep pockets that wants to develop Freeport to its potential. I would personally be totally happy if the Port Authority gets sold.”
Mr Babak added that the $20 million due to him once a sale was consummated would not influence the purchase price, nor how it was structured.
“I just hope it gets sold for the right price,” he said. “It’s the duty of the trustees, and anybody advising the trust and trustees, to get the best price possible. You have the duty to do it.
“I have lived for 35 years in Freeport. I have invested in property in Freeport. I would wish, and love, to see Freeport developed for what it could be.
“Everyone says the GBPA has to be sold, and I believe it should be sold. What cannot be aligned with me?”
Mr Babak also denied the Hayward children and grandchildren’s claims that “he appears able to influence the decisions” made by Prometheus Services Ltd, the corporate entity that was left as the sole trustee for the Settlement prior to the appointment of the Supreme Court’s Judicial Trustees.
“Since I’m not a director it’s not my role,” Mr Babak said. “I have no right.”
He confirmed, though, that he was friends with two of Prometheus’s three directors, Felix Stubbs and Tony Adderley. And he acknowledged that the third, Robert Anglade, was a friend of Mr Feldman.
“The key is that you want to find somebody as trustee, and in the case of a corporate trustee, that has unquestioned integrity and understands a trust, and how to handle the day-to-day operations,” Mr Babak said.
Comments
The_Oracle 9 years ago
I do not think Sir Jack only had Money in mind as a "great deal" he did sell The Wolverhampton football team for what, 10 pounds? “Everyone says the GBPA has to be sold, and I believe it should be sold. What cannot be aligned with me?” Arrogance personified.
Economist 9 years ago
His duty to get the best price.
He is the one who has driven the price down with all his divisive tactics over the last 9 years. He means the best price for him. Once he has ruined the company he will get some group together to buy it for very little.
realfreethinker 9 years ago
Has babak paid those people in freeport from the home center and freeport concrete? nothing more than a crook. now I see why Mr Ingraham didn't allow him to become chairman of the gbpa.
The_Oracle 9 years ago
True, sell shares then quietly kill the company but retain personal ownership of all the equipment, Set up a new company with the old equipment. I think the Economist may be right however, run it into the ground and buy cheap. Always manipulating people and "deals" is no way to live long and prosper.
DEDDIE 9 years ago
You have to give him credit, he weasels himself and his companies into every business deal that impacts Freeport. His construction company is involve in building the bridge and other projects in Freeport.This one amazes me, how do you get to keep 20 million from the sale of the Port. In addition, you get to say who purchase it.
BMW 9 years ago
"20 million due babak would not influence the purchase price or structure" Really??????? This weasel and all of his cohorts are bad news PERIOD!!!!!!!!! He needs to be run out of the country.
BMW 9 years ago
Babak and his attorney friend wanted Griffith and Devries off the board because they knew what this worm was capable of.
Economist 9 years ago
What does the Minister of Foreign Affairs have to say?
He was quick to talk about Izmirlin who had invested nearly a billion dollars but nothing about Babak how has got his investment back from the Bahamian people.
Maybe Babak has followed methods used by Nygard when dealing with the Christie Government. No worries about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for Babak.
Government needs to apply to put Babak's investments into Liquidation.
Baha10 9 years ago
I thought Babak had been kicked out of the Country and was persona non grata. Clearly he is more powerful than our own Government, as not only is he still here, but continues to manipulate a major facet of our Economy for his own personal benefit. The idea that he is looking out for anyone, but Babak, is farcical and demonstrates a clear lack of knowledge of the man.
freeloader 8 years, 11 months ago
I now realize why you will never see this "man" at any social/public events on island, he owes too many people money. Those that have lost are the people of Freeport of whom have been so poorly treated. Like the failed west end project, ex investor Bobby Ginn, they have bumper stickers in Hilton Head, they say "Honk" if Bobby owes you money, we need to to get some for Freeport, "Honk" if Hannis owes you money! How sad, but true.
Sign in to comment
OpenID