You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to visit our Mobile web app instead?
 Registered users can save articles to their personal articles list. Login here or sign up here

CIPC notice to PIC will set precedent – Iraj Abedian

CIPC says PIC did not act in good faith when it made the investment.

The Public Investment Corporation (PIC) says it has appointed a legal team to assist in recovering the R4.3 billion it invested in Ayo Technology Solutions. The state asset manager confirmed on Tuesday that it was issued a compliance notice by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) on February 21, which requires it to recover the investment that it made within 15 business days. 

Dr Iraj Abedian, economist at Pan-African Investment and Research Services, says the CIPC’s compliance notice is a significant development and that if any wrongdoing was done the money should be recovered. 

Get access to Moneyweb's financial intelligence and support quality journalism for only
R63/month or R630/year.
Sign up here, cancel at any time.


To comment, you must be registered and logged in.


Don't have an account?
Sign up for FREE

Silence from…the JSE…deathly silence! Why?

The JSE is too busy to reply. They are struggling to figure out how to reverse an IPO. By the way, AYO is not the first ponzi scheme to list on the JSE. Do you remember BK One and the fish farm in Lesotho? The listing requirements are so stringent these days, they only manage to list ponzi schemes….

This is fantastic news and it does leave Survey sweating.Surely a viable trading entity with sound underlying businesses and good profit history is a minimum requirement of a listing unless Newton King was also on the take as 4,2 billion stretches a long way.There can be no other option but to get these funds back as quickly as possible other it will disappear into a big black hole.I wonder how much some of the seemingly corrupt previous management at the PIC was paid to force this deal through.Small blessings for Sagarmatha not listing as well.

Why the silence regarding PIC’s investment into Steinhoff, via Lancaster 101?

Hopefully they’ll get the money back otherwise the taxpayer will be bailing out PIC

I don’t understand how CIPC can issue a compliance notice to the PIC’s directors to recover the funds invested into Ayo? The PIC was not investing its own money, it was acting as an asset manager for the GEPF. The PIC is a registered FSP – where is the FSCA in all of the this? Why doesn’t the PIC lose its FSP licence? Why are Dan Matjila and Fidelis Madavo still listed as Key Individuals of the PIC on the FSCA’s website?

Load All 6 Comments
End of comments.





Follow us:

Search Articles:Advanced Search
Click a Company: