Landgard comments on the article published today on Spiegel-Online about the producers’ cooperative.
–
–
–
“Big company cars, horrendous consultant fees, excessive expense bills: one of the largest German producer groups has lived beyond its means for years,” writes Spielgel author Nils Klawitter via the producer cooperative Landgard. It goes on to say: “There is growing displeasure among the comrades about the self-importance of their bosses and their lax supervisors.”
Landgard added to the article published online today Position and write down Request from the GABOT editorial team: “This actual situation differs significantly from an online article published today in the Spiegel, in which the impression is given that Landgard currently has economic problems and must seek additional loans. Landgard is actually currently negotiating one Follow-up financing for existing loans. The Indebtedness of the cooperative has increased by 57.6% from 2011 to decreased and will be further reduced.
Landgard is after one Renovation phase in the years 2011 to 2017 economically today healthy. After a loss of 61.5 million euros in the crisis year 2011, Landgard returned to profitability through restructuring successes in 2015 and posted a profit before taxes of 25.3 million euros in 2019. These positive development is additionally fueled by the successful expansion of strategic customer relationships and the continuous acquisition of large new customers from various areas of the trade.
In 2015, the cooperative members supported the renovation of Landgard by providing additional equity. Against this background, it is particularly important for the members of the cooperative that the economic equity has grown by 82% from 2015 to the present day to EUR 77.6 million. For the eight-year renovation, Landgard was obliged by the financing banks to hire restructuring consultants. The price for external consultants are included less than 2% of sales in this time, so quite low considering the size of Landgard.
Spiegel’s allegations go back as far as fifteen years. Landgard reacted to misconduct with personnel consequences and healed any damage caused.
The Spiegel editor unfortunately did in his reporting unilaterally reported, although he knew about Landgard’s economic recovery and the consequences of violating compliance. The reporting was preceded by several weeks of research by the Spiegel editor, in which Landgard looked for all allegations transparently set out the facts Has. These facts were not included in his report – presumably because they would have destroyed ‘history’. ”
– .
