![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In the old days, a five-star hotel was it, the height of luxury. But then three things happened. The first was brand dilution. Some hotels began to take the "five-star" branding without, to be honest, adding that personal touch which five-star is all about. The Hilton chain might have five-star hotels in terms of facilities, but that wasn't much help if the staff person you spoke to was from Latvia, who had only been with the comany for six months. There was a "personal" element to the fifth star that lost when corporatism took over.
The second factor was that our standards got fussier. Something that you would accept 20 years ago, you wouldn't accept now. A hotel, without getting any worse, might not really merit a fifth star today, even though it did three decades ago. We want more
The third factor was that standards got higher (this links in with the second point). New hotels could fairly claim that, if hotel A had five stars, then the facilities that they were offering were better, and so should have more stars.
This led to the "seven-star" new hotel in Dubai.
ANyhoo, the same thing has occurred in the land of political risk. Every year Aon publishes a "political risk" map. This used to have categories ranging from low risk to high risk. This year, however, Aon decided that seven countries -- Afghanistan, Somalia, North Korea, Iran and Iraq, Zimbabwe and Congo DRC, had upped the stakes so impressively that mere "high-risk" countries such as Ecuador and Columbia shouldn't be lumped in with them.
And so we have the "Six-Star" "very high risk" category being introduced, just for these seven countries. They must be darned pleased with themselves. "Oh yes, we were the riskiest, but then we got riskier".
+++++++++
A few weeks ago I put in a mild criticism of auditors and regulators, which, rather belatedly, generated a humourless response from an anonymous auditor. This sent me off on a diatribe against the profession in general and its habit of failing to mention that its "signing off" of accounts offers far less of a guarantee than it permits the general public to believe, only pointing out after the event that it does it offer a protection against deliberate deception.
Anyhoo, some of you may have read about the once AIM-listed company Langbar, formerly Crown Corporation, which managed to convince people that it was a £300m+ cash shell when its actual assets were probably closer to not very much at all. In this case I am plesed to commend Baker Tilly, which in 2005 flatly refused to sign off the accounts. Unfortunately, as tends to be the case in matters such as this, (1) Baker Tilly couldn't say outright that Langbar was as bent as a nine-bob note and (2) there's always an auditor to be found, somewhere, who will sign off the accounts. Langbar got Gironella Velasco, based in Barcelona, to put its signature at the bottom. A few months later the shares were suspended and a lot of money appeared to have vanished -- possibly never having existed in the first place.
In this particular case, it looks as if it's the legal profession that should have piped up but which, either through incompetence or willingness not to see, failed to blow the whistle on a most mysterious affair.
Langbar was launched by Mariusz Rybak and Jean-Pierre Regli. When it floated it said that its cash was on deposit at the Banco do Brasil. Within two months of the flotation, Proximal Consulting was investigating the veracity of this claim. In a report dated December 30 2003 it said that the document presented by Langbar was "not genine and is therefore worthless". (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article745421.ece). Also hired to investigate what the fuck was going on was Kroll, a pretty shit-hot US investigative bunch. The insolvency specialist in charge of Langbar and looking for what cash he could gind, said that "Kroll has reported to the board that it appears likely that the company has been subject to a serious fraud. Kroll has not been able to establish the existence, nor verify the company’s entitlement to, any of the relevant assets at any time in the company’s history."
After a lengthy Serious Farud Office investigation, the Spanish police have arrested six people, aged from 56 to 76, in Alicante, and Barcelona.
El Pais reported that the six men arrested were charged and released and that one of the suspects was a former Israeli Mossad agent - believed to be 6ft 7in tall, 300 lb Abraham “Avi” Arad.
In April Mariusz Rybak agreed to pay about £30m to settle a lawsuit brought by the company’s new directors. They alleged that Rybak falsified the company’s assets as part of a fraud, a charge Rybak denies. (http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/technology/story.html?id=d44d1bab-31ba-4740-9c7d-8075be9d3582)
In 2007 Nabarro Wells, the finance house that floated Langbar, was fined £250,000 by the LSE for failings related to the affair. (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=425482&in_page_id=3) (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article2696969.ece). Since April 2008 Nabarro Wells has been part of Ambrian Capital, an AIM listed specialist investment banking group (http://www.ambrian.com/News/Archive/Ambrian_Capital_to_Acquire_Nabarro_Wells/News.aspx?id=365).
Rybak is apparently Canadian with Polish forebears. Jean-Pierre Regli is a Swiss-Italian banker.
You might think that this classic convoluted tale couldn't get any more obscure, but it can. because Avi Arad looks to be the alter-ego of Abraham Hochman (let's face it, when you are that big, there aren't that many of you around to get confused with). Hochman seems to be up there with Chuck Barris (Confessions of a Dangerous Mind) and SAS faker Tom Carew/Philip Sessarego. Hochman seems to claim to be a former Mossad agent and a mathematical genius, although evidence for both is shaky at best. What is not shaky is Hochman/Arid's ability to crop up in the most unlikely places and involved in the oddest causes -- left-wing publications in Peru, counter-intelligence in Argentina, Germany, the US, Canada and, of course, the UK.
If this case ever comes to court it shuld be fascinating just to find out what the hell has been going on., Truth and fiction are often distorted these days, if only because lazy journalists are often only to willing to print something as a fact because they have read it in more than one place on the web.
Saying which, the Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langbar_International) looks fairly good.
The second factor was that our standards got fussier. Something that you would accept 20 years ago, you wouldn't accept now. A hotel, without getting any worse, might not really merit a fifth star today, even though it did three decades ago. We want more
The third factor was that standards got higher (this links in with the second point). New hotels could fairly claim that, if hotel A had five stars, then the facilities that they were offering were better, and so should have more stars.
This led to the "seven-star" new hotel in Dubai.
ANyhoo, the same thing has occurred in the land of political risk. Every year Aon publishes a "political risk" map. This used to have categories ranging from low risk to high risk. This year, however, Aon decided that seven countries -- Afghanistan, Somalia, North Korea, Iran and Iraq, Zimbabwe and Congo DRC, had upped the stakes so impressively that mere "high-risk" countries such as Ecuador and Columbia shouldn't be lumped in with them.
And so we have the "Six-Star" "very high risk" category being introduced, just for these seven countries. They must be darned pleased with themselves. "Oh yes, we were the riskiest, but then we got riskier".
+++++++++
A few weeks ago I put in a mild criticism of auditors and regulators, which, rather belatedly, generated a humourless response from an anonymous auditor. This sent me off on a diatribe against the profession in general and its habit of failing to mention that its "signing off" of accounts offers far less of a guarantee than it permits the general public to believe, only pointing out after the event that it does it offer a protection against deliberate deception.
Anyhoo, some of you may have read about the once AIM-listed company Langbar, formerly Crown Corporation, which managed to convince people that it was a £300m+ cash shell when its actual assets were probably closer to not very much at all. In this case I am plesed to commend Baker Tilly, which in 2005 flatly refused to sign off the accounts. Unfortunately, as tends to be the case in matters such as this, (1) Baker Tilly couldn't say outright that Langbar was as bent as a nine-bob note and (2) there's always an auditor to be found, somewhere, who will sign off the accounts. Langbar got Gironella Velasco, based in Barcelona, to put its signature at the bottom. A few months later the shares were suspended and a lot of money appeared to have vanished -- possibly never having existed in the first place.
In this particular case, it looks as if it's the legal profession that should have piped up but which, either through incompetence or willingness not to see, failed to blow the whistle on a most mysterious affair.
Langbar was launched by Mariusz Rybak and Jean-Pierre Regli. When it floated it said that its cash was on deposit at the Banco do Brasil. Within two months of the flotation, Proximal Consulting was investigating the veracity of this claim. In a report dated December 30 2003 it said that the document presented by Langbar was "not genine and is therefore worthless". (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article745421.ece). Also hired to investigate what the fuck was going on was Kroll, a pretty shit-hot US investigative bunch. The insolvency specialist in charge of Langbar and looking for what cash he could gind, said that "Kroll has reported to the board that it appears likely that the company has been subject to a serious fraud. Kroll has not been able to establish the existence, nor verify the company’s entitlement to, any of the relevant assets at any time in the company’s history."
After a lengthy Serious Farud Office investigation, the Spanish police have arrested six people, aged from 56 to 76, in Alicante, and Barcelona.
El Pais reported that the six men arrested were charged and released and that one of the suspects was a former Israeli Mossad agent - believed to be 6ft 7in tall, 300 lb Abraham “Avi” Arad.
In April Mariusz Rybak agreed to pay about £30m to settle a lawsuit brought by the company’s new directors. They alleged that Rybak falsified the company’s assets as part of a fraud, a charge Rybak denies. (http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/technology/story.html?id=d44d1bab-31ba-4740-9c7d-8075be9d3582)
In 2007 Nabarro Wells, the finance house that floated Langbar, was fined £250,000 by the LSE for failings related to the affair. (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=425482&in_page_id=3) (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article2696969.ece). Since April 2008 Nabarro Wells has been part of Ambrian Capital, an AIM listed specialist investment banking group (http://www.ambrian.com/News/Archive/Ambrian_Capital_to_Acquire_Nabarro_Wells/News.aspx?id=365).
Rybak is apparently Canadian with Polish forebears. Jean-Pierre Regli is a Swiss-Italian banker.
You might think that this classic convoluted tale couldn't get any more obscure, but it can. because Avi Arad looks to be the alter-ego of Abraham Hochman (let's face it, when you are that big, there aren't that many of you around to get confused with). Hochman seems to be up there with Chuck Barris (Confessions of a Dangerous Mind) and SAS faker Tom Carew/Philip Sessarego. Hochman seems to claim to be a former Mossad agent and a mathematical genius, although evidence for both is shaky at best. What is not shaky is Hochman/Arid's ability to crop up in the most unlikely places and involved in the oddest causes -- left-wing publications in Peru, counter-intelligence in Argentina, Germany, the US, Canada and, of course, the UK.
If this case ever comes to court it shuld be fascinating just to find out what the hell has been going on., Truth and fiction are often distorted these days, if only because lazy journalists are often only to willing to print something as a fact because they have read it in more than one place on the web.
Saying which, the Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langbar_International) looks fairly good.
