Title: Czech Government’s Acquisition of Gas Pipelines Raises Concerns Over Debt and Strategic Asset Management
Subtitle: Experts question the decision to purchase a debt-ridden company, Net4Gas, for 5 billion CZK
Date: [Insert Date]
The recent acquisition of gas pipelines by the Czech government from Net4Gas for 5 billion CZK has raised eyebrows among experts. The government purchased a heavily indebted company that even Daniel Kretinsky, known for his astute investments, lost interest in. Did Minister Skela and his team make a mistake?
While some may argue that the government made a mistake, others see this as a significant opportunity to rectify past errors. The current energy crisis, which has had far-reaching effects and has spilled over into an economic crisis, presents a favorable environment for asset acquisitions. It is worth noting that Borealis and Allianz funds sold this lucrative asset despite generating around 6 billion CZK annually. Therefore, it is unlikely that the government made a mistake in seizing this opportunity.
However, it is essential to understand the background of this acquisition. In 2013, the gas pipelines were purchased from RWE for 1.6 billion CZK. Shortly after, the new owner, Net4Gas, reduced the company’s capital. They paid off most of the purchase price in advance, issued bonds, and took out bank loans.
This situation draws parallels to the privatization of OKD under Zdenek Bakala. In that case, the company took out loans against its substantial undistributed profits. It was widely publicized as a violation of property rights and more. In the current scenario, a strategic asset of the Czech Republic is being transferred, and the new owner is behaving in a purely self-interested manner.
Pavel Janecek, an expert in the field, believes that the government did not make a mistake. He argues that the government seized the opportunity to acquire a strategic asset. However, he acknowledges that the terms of the acquisition could have been more favorable. He suggests that the government could have negotiated for the return of some of the funds paid upfront, such as the 2.9 billion CZK dividend, and sought debt relief. Creating pressure, even through media coverage in Borealis and Allianz’s home countries, Canada and Germany, could have been beneficial. This is how acquisitions are made.
The gas pipelines deal is expected to have a continuation. Without it, Czech Republic would not have access to liquefied gas from the terminal in Eemshaven, the Netherlands. Net4Gas consists of thousands of kilometers of pipelines, not just a single gas line from Slovakia to Germany. In this context, Janecek believes that the Energy Regulatory Office (ER) failed in regulating price levels. It allowed funds to be withdrawn from a strategic asset.
Another issue raised is the high prices at which US companies sell liquefied gas to Europe compared to other buyers. The gas price ratio between the US and Europe is seven times higher in favor of the US. This is a failure of the European Union, which has become dependent on countries that prioritize their own interests and exploit Europe’s inability to secure resources at favorable prices. The monopoly situation is detrimental. Furthermore, Europe has not reduced its dependence on Russian gas. It still purchases 40 million cubic meters of gas through the Ukrainian pipeline system. Additionally, Europe imports liquefied natural gas from Russia, with a significant increase in recent years. While there is an abundance of gas globally, the existing infrastructure is limited. The Czech Republic will remain dependent on Russian gas for several more years.
Wasn’t this a case of failure on the part of European authorities and regulators? Shouldn’t they have negotiated better prices for the market?
Recently, a joint gas purchase auction for European countries yielded no results. We live in a competitive environment, and there is no such thing as a unified energy market in Europe. Look at the price differences for electricity in France, Germany, and the Iberian Peninsula. The market is not unified, and prices for end consumers and industries vary in each country. Germany’s unprecedented efforts to subsidize energy prices for its companies are creating a 10 euro per megawatt-hour difference in energy prices, and this gap will continue to widen. The government could and should take action to protect Czech industry instead of favoring energy oligarchs.
What actions should the government take?
First and foremost, the government should stop relying on the Green Deal and investigate who approved it. It is time to stop participating in emissions trading and open a discussion within the EU about its effectiveness. Currently, only 50% of the revenue from emissions trading is used for its intended purpose, while the remaining 50% goes to financial speculators. The government should stop playing into the solidarity of individual countries and prioritize the interests of Czech citizens and businesses. The government should also stop talking about the misguided payments from the EU’s Modernization Fund, as it is merely a redistribution of funds from other countries.
In conclusion, the Czech government’s acquisition of gas pipelines presents an opportunity to rectify past mistakes. While concerns have been raised about the debt and strategic asset management, experts argue that the government made the right decision. However, they also emphasize the need for better negotiation terms and assert that the government should prioritize the interests of its citizens and businesses in the energy sector.Vlda nedávno koupila plynovody od Net4Gas za 5 miliard korun. Koupila ale zadluženou společnost, o kterou nakonec ztratil zájem i Daniel Křetínský. Ten zpravidla nakupuje velice rozumně a s budoucím zhodnocením. Udělal ministr Sklenka a jeho tým chybu?
Vůbec bych neřekl, že udělali chybu. Toto je zásadní příležitost napravit chyby minulosti. Současná krize v energetice, která je poměrně rozsáhlá a přelila se do latentní krize ekonomické. V takové době je možné kupovat aktiva. Mimochodem, umíte si představit, že by Borealis a Allianz fondy prodávaly takto výnosné aktivum v době, kdy jim generovalo kolem šesti miliard korun ročně? Já tedy rozhodně ne. Oni se rozhodli to aktivum prodat, protože si peníze z něj už vyplatili.
Rozumím, ale zase bylo dobré vydělávat, ne?
Uvědomte si, co se skutečně stalo. V roce 2013 došlo k nákupu těchto plynovodů od společnosti RWE. Tehdejší cenovka byla 1,6 miliardy korun. Okamžitě poté došlo k snížení základního jmění novým nabyvatelem, tedy Net4Gas. Ten si tím vyplatil většinu kupní ceny dopředu. Zároveň vydal dluhopisy a vzal si bankovní úvěr.
Takhle se privatizovalo OKD za Zdeka Bakalu, ne?
To je paralela, kterou není možné nevidět. V OKD byl velký nerozdělený zisk, na to si společnost pana Bakaly vzala úvěr a vyplatila si peníze. To bylo medializováno jako porušení práv při správě cizího majetku a nejen. Tady je to ještě horší. Tady se přesouvá strategické aktivum na zem České republiky a konečný majitel se chová zcela kořistnický.
Pavel Janeček
V letech 1986 a 1991 absolvoval elektrotechnickou fakultu VUT Praha. Po skončení studia pracoval jako obchodní a marketingový manažer ve společnosti Cheming Pardubice. V letech 1997 a 2013 pracoval pro společnost Explorer Capital Investment, New York, společnost byla ultimativním majitelem společnosti Karma a. s., kde působil od roku 1998 do roku 2013 jako ředitel společnosti. Od června 1998 do roku 2011 působil také ve společnosti Fg ZRt., Maďarsko, jako Management Advisor. Dále v letech 2004 a 2005 pracoval pro společnost Pergo (Trelleborg, Švédsko). V červnu 2014 byl pověřen řízením sekce vedení společnosti Pražská Plynárenská, a. s.. Ve funkci skončil v lednu 2021. Nyní se zabývá výrobou krbových kamen, plynových spotřebičů.
Takže udělala vláda chybu?
Neudělala. Jak jsem uvedl výše, vláda využila šance koupit tak strategické aktivum. To, že to mohlo být realizováno za lepších podmínek, je druhá věc. Navíc nikde není psáno, že musí sto procent firmy zůstat v rukou státu. Já si dokážu představit, že kdybych tu akvizici dělal já, chtěl bych po někdejších majitelích ty peníze zpět. Minimálně bych třeba šel vyjednávat o vrácení zložky na dividendu – to je 2,9 miliardy, plus bych chtěl stěžejní hradbu dluhu. Dovedu si představit, že vytvořit tlak, i mediální v mateřských zemích Borealis a Allianz, tedy v Kanadě a Německu, vůbec nemusí být kontraproduktivní. Takhle se akvizice dělají.
Takže deal, který může mít pokračování. Bez něj bychom vlastně nedostali ke koncovým uživatelům ani zkapalněný plyn z terminálu v nizozemském Eemshavenu, kde máme Česko podíl, že?
Přesně. Net4Gas jsou tři tisíce kilometrů trubek. To není jedna roura na plyn ze Slovenska do Německa. Dovolím si dodat jednu věc, ER selhal.
Jak?
No v řešení regulace cenových rovnováh. Dovolil vyplácet peníze ze strategického aktiva.
Když jsme u zkapalněného plynu. Co říkáte na to, že firmy z USA ho do Evropy prodávají s maržemi, které jsou násobně vyšší, než u jiných odběratelů?
Uvědomte si to, že poměr ceny plynu pro uživatele USA a Evropy je sedmkrát ve prospěch těch amerických. To je selhání Evropské unie. Ze závislosti na Rusku jsme se stali závislými na zemích, které bezostyšně hájí své zájmy a využívají neschopnosti Evropy si zajistit suroviny za příznivé ceny. Když je někde monopol, je to prostě špatně. Navíc, my jsme se od ruského plynu neodzřízli. Stále nakupujeme 40 milionů kubíků plynu potrubním systémem přes Ukrajinu. Dále nakupujeme zkapalněný zemní plyn z Ruska, tam je dokonce 50procentní meziroční nárůst. Plynu je na planetě mnoho, ale stávající infrastruktura je omezená. Bez ruského plynu nejsme a ještě několik let nebudeme schopni pokrýt.
Nebyl tohle přesně ten případ, kdy Evropská rada a regulátoři selhali? Neměli vyjednat lepší cenu pro jeden trh?
Nedávno proběhla již třetí aukce společ
– What impact does the high price of liquefied gas from US companies have on Europe’s energy security
Czech Government’s Decision to Acquire Gas Pipelines Sparks Concerns about Debt and Strategic Asset Management
Subtitle: Analysts question the Czech Government’s purchase of Net4Gas, a debt-ridden company, for 5 billion CZK
Date: [Insert Date]
The Czech government’s recent acquisition of gas pipelines from Net4Gas for 5 billion CZK has raised concerns among experts. The decision to purchase a heavily indebted company, which even renowned investor Daniel Kretinsky lost interest in, has led to questions about the judgment of Minister Skela and his team.
While some argue that it was a mistake, others view this as an opportunity to rectify past errors. The ongoing energy crisis, which has had widespread economic repercussions, presents a favorable environment for asset acquisitions. It is worth noting that despite generating around 6 billion CZK annually, Borealis and Allianz funds decided to sell this lucrative asset. Therefore, it is unlikely that the government made an error in seizing this opportunity.
However, it is crucial to understand the background of this acquisition. In 2013, the gas pipelines were purchased from RWE for 1.6 billion CZK. Shortly after, the new owner, Net4Gas, reduced the company’s capital, paid off most of the purchase price in advance, issued bonds, and took out bank loans.
This situation reminiscent of the privatization of OKD under Zdenek Bakala, where loans were secured against significant undistributed profits, has raised concerns about property rights violations. In the current scenario, a strategic asset of the Czech Republic is being transferred, and the new owner is acting in a self-interested manner.
Pavel Janecek, an industry expert, believes that the government did not make a mistake in acquiring this strategic asset. However, he suggests that the terms of the acquisition could have been more favorable. Janecek proposes that the government could have negotiated for the return of upfront funds, such as the 2.9 billion CZK dividend, as well as sought debt relief. He also suggests that applying pressure, including media coverage in Borealis and Allianz’s home countries of Canada and Germany, could have been advantageous. Such tactics are commonly employed in acquisitions.
The gas pipelines deal is expected to continue, as it is crucial for the Czech Republic to access liquefied gas from the terminal in Eemshaven, the Netherlands. Net4Gas comprises thousands of kilometers of pipelines, not just a single gas line from Slovakia to Germany. Janecek argues that the Energy Regulatory Office (ER) failed in regulating price levels and allowed funds to be withdrawn from this strategic asset.
Moreover, concerns have been raised about the high prices at which US companies sell liquefied gas to Europe compared to other buyers. The gas price ratio between the US and Europe significantly favors the US, highlighting a failure of the European Union. Europe has become dependent on countries that prioritize their own interests and exploit Europe’s inability to secure resources at favorable prices. The monopolistic situation is detrimental. Additionally, Europe continues to heavily rely on Russian gas, with 40 million cubic meters of gas being purchased through the Ukrainian pipeline system. Europe also imports liquefied natural gas from Russia, with a significant increase in recent years. Despite the global abundance of gas, the existing infrastructure remains limited. As a result, the Czech Republic will remain reliant on Russian gas for several more years.
Wasn’t this a failure on the part of European authorities and regulators? Shouldn’t they have negotiated better prices to ensure energy security and affordability?
