"You can throw stones at the management of Naftogaz or the Government for breaking corporate governance in the company back in April last year, but now the war and I personally would definitely not like to see a technical default of the largest state-owned company. So frankly, I don't understand the gloating about it.
What are the practical consequences in theory:
Naftogaz's rating will definitely go down. And now they will hardly be able to buy money on the foreign market. They directly talked about this "non-fulfillment of obligations deprived access to the international capital market". That is, without the state, the company will not find additional money.
- Even when our victory comes, the fact of technical default will haunt Naftogaz for a long time (about 15 years). And it will affect the value of its future debts. They will be able to borrow not at 10%, but at 20% of the discount rate. But they will definitely take it (it is the peculiarity of the company). And we will have to pay for it all again.
- Now we need from 3 to 5 billion cubic meters of gas to go through a normally heated season. Even minimally, it is approximately $5 billion. We had expected to borrow this money from international partners. Now this situation will definitely not be conducive to this.
- Unfortunately, due to the size of the company, one way or another, it will affect our other debt paper prices. And on the future debts of other state-owned companies and sovereign obligations.
- The way we've commented on this issue with investors and donors looks bad. They actually learned it from telegram feeds and insiders in the Cabinet, too.Will it affect the tariffs, the availability of gas and revenues to the Budget? In the short term, it depends on many factors. In the long term, yes, unequivocally.
I do not think that a default will have any catastrophic consequences, but it certainly does not help now and does not contribute to the confidence of our partners. Frankly, one of the heads of a very large international financial institution told me this directly on the phone this morning.
And now the main thing: this definitely would not have happened in this form if Naftogaz had had a Supervisory Board (which was broken). This is exactly why it is so important to have corporate governance. Because then it would have been frankly indifferent to the backroom wars between Shmygal and Vitrenko. And decisions would be made without the influence of politicians and politics.
That's why I often talk about the importance of corporate governance. Because politicians are very bad at running state enterprises. But they are very good at making money out of them. Always."
PigUA.info by t.me/yzheleznyak/2038