YPF: US Court accelerated next scandal by the list of creditors

The decision of the New York judge will not be immediate and will depend on the pressure exerted (or not) by the Argentine Government when referring the case to the courts of first instance in New York.

The extent of this requirement will depend on Preska's own decision, which could be influenced by the vehemence that one of the parties may claim. For example, Argentina could ask the magistrate for a broad request to exercise his right to know who, with his name and surname, should be paid in the event of a final negative decision. At that time, it will be up to Preska to reduce the demand for information.

You can claim that the list is limited to the holders of shares at the time of execution of the eventual liquidation. This option would allow shareholders with a complex identity to get rid of their position this year as quickly as possible and not be included in the final list. Thus, his name would not be known, but they would not reach the end of the case with the maximum profit that Preska would end up condemning. Similarly, profitability would be extraordinary in dollars. However, another possibility would be that Preska decides to conduct a more in-depth investigation and starts requesting data from the time YPF was privatized in the early 1990s. It could also start cutting here in time, starting from the renationalisation of 2012 and the way in which it was decided to leave aside in the negotiations the shareholders who were left out of the payments settled by the government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. That's all except Repsol, which held 51% of the shares. If Preska's decision is the last one, it does not matter if the complicated holders are eager to get rid of their holdings in the case, as they would also be exposed to listing. The definition will depend on the judge, but the lawyers who represent Argentina could possibly submit briefs in order to claim the identity of the people to whom they would pay to the American justice system.

The same thing happened with the lawsuit against vulture funds that ended in April 2016 under the government of Mauricio Macri. At the request of the then Minister of Finance and Finance, Alfonso Prat Gay, Griesa, who had agreed, was asked to draw up a complete and detailed list of the parties to whom the country would liquidate its badets. for the trial opened after the default of 2012.

The cause comes from the emergence of Burford Capital Fund, a firm specializing in cheap buying, which has potential for international litigation. This fund has acquired for the Spanish justice part of the treatment of the bankruptcy that the companies Petersen Energía Inversora and Petersen Energía, two companies that the Eskenazy family created in this country but which, at the time of the reestablishment, had already left and whose the property had been floated in the Spanish courts. Then, once the package was bought at auction, he transferred his interests to New York. It is precisely the same court in which Argentina has pleaded against vulture funds: that of Thomas Griesa. Burford knew that the US judge would make room for the complaint, given the widespread mood that Griesa had in 2013 against the country because of the battle that Kirchnerism was leading in court for the lawsuit against vulture funds.

The case is based on Burford's claim regarding the manner in which the government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner nationalized the oil company without making a public offer (OPA), as it appeared in the law defined in 1993 at the time of the privatization promoted by Carlos Menem The country is committed to Wall Street, where the offer of ADR of the oil company was launched, so any subsequent acquisition of part of the Argentine oil company would make a similar offer or higher for the remaining shares. . During the renationalisation, the government of Cristina de Kirchner did not give importance to this point. Neither Congress, which approved the purchase of only 51% of the shares.

Burford is not really an investment fund or directly a vulture fund like Elliott or Dart, but a sophisticated law firm based in London and listed on the Stock Exchange of that city. He devotes himself to buying judgments with great chances of success, but with a long delay in his resolution. The bottom line for the company lies in the fact that the acquisition of a cause is not done with equity, but with investors who trust their experience and bring a handful of capital in a lawsuit determined and in any market of the world. In addition to its headquarters in London and branches in several countries such as the United States and Singapore. Over time, shareholders who accompany a cause may in turn sell these papers or purchase a larger portion. They can also be listed as partners, initial owners of damaged actions and simply sell part of the global cause. Burford then manages the sale and purchase of these shares.

In the case of YPF, it is known that its members have had several movements during all these years. Even Burford sold in June 2017 15% of the cause to $ 440 million, after buying the full package for less than $ 30 million to the Spanish justice. Who can be this third actor who has acquired this percentage? The only one who knows is Burford. It could be an Argentine or foreign investor. It could be any vulture fund, or any person or subcontractor who claimed the country at the "lawsuit of the century" closed in 2016. Or I could even be a current or former shareholder of the company. Or even a particular person. This is something usual at Burford, a fund that is not specialized in financial investments (much less in the energy or oil sectors), but its experts are the megajurings for the millionaire trials, in general, for bankrupt companies or companies In case of bankruptcy, they have previous applications without definition and they need money to deal with their closure or their challenge. There are always shareholders in the cause who have capitalized and can choose to sell and capitalize. And, of course, others want to enter. To bring the parties together, Burford badumes the task of merchant and administrator and guarantees the secrecy of the participants. Secret that could end if Preska decided to thoroughly apply the process of "Discovery".