新證據(jù)：羅姆尼沒有參與管理貝恩資本
|
????《財富》雜志（Fortune）掌握的企業(yè)保密信息顯示，米特?羅姆尼離開貝恩資本、加入鹽湖城冬奧運組委會之后，確實沒有再參與管理貝恩資本的投資活動。上周早些時候，羅姆尼離開貝恩資本的具體時間成為媒體關(guān)注的焦點。當(dāng)天，《波士頓環(huán)球報》（The Boston Globe）還曾發(fā)表文章稱，羅姆尼積極參與貝恩資本管理的時間絕對不像他本人及其競選團隊聲稱的那么短。該報援引的資料大部分來自美國證監(jiān)會的文件。文件顯示，在2002年之前，或者說在羅姆尼正式離開貝恩資本、加入鹽湖城冬奧會組委會三年之后，羅姆尼仍是貝恩資本的CEO和單一股東。 ????這些說法與上周戴維?考恩在《瓊斯母親》雜志（Mother Jones）上的說法非常類似，當(dāng)時我們也提出了質(zhì)疑。 ????如今，《財富》雜志已經(jīng)掌握了支持羅姆尼說法的新證據(jù)。 ????2000年6月，貝恩資本公布了其第七只私募股權(quán)基金的發(fā)行文件。文件中包括對基金管理團隊的說明。這部分的開頭如下： ????以下為貝恩資本高級私募股權(quán)投資專家的個人履歷。同時列出負(fù)責(zé)七號基金關(guān)聯(lián)基金B(yǎng)rookside與Sankaty日常事務(wù)的投資專家信息。 ????之后，文件介紹了該私募股權(quán)基金的18位基金經(jīng)理。米特?羅姆尼不在此列。在一只關(guān)聯(lián)共同投資基金的文件中同樣沒有找到與羅姆尼相關(guān)的信息。該基金私人配售募股說明書的日期是2000年9月。 ????另外一條證據(jù)來自貝恩資本首次推出的風(fēng)險投資基金——貝恩資本風(fēng)險投資基金（Bain Capital Venture Fund），該基金的私人配售募股說明書日期為2001年1月。在“主要投資專家”或日常運營或投資委員會人員名單中都沒有羅姆尼的名字。 ????這些證據(jù)可能是奧巴馬競選團隊所不愿意看到的。當(dāng)天，奧巴馬的競選團隊一直對《環(huán)球報》的報道幸災(zāi)樂禍（甚至打算召開新聞發(fā)布會來討論這件事）。 ????據(jù)《環(huán)球報》報道，奧巴馬的發(fā)言人斯蒂芬妮?卡特稱：“之前羅姆尼競選州長以及這次競選總統(tǒng)的時候，他一直都信誓旦旦地表示，1999年2月，他離開貝恩資本加入了鹽湖城冬奧會組委會，因此，之后因貝恩投資活動造成的破產(chǎn)和裁員都與他無關(guān)。現(xiàn)在，我們終于知道了真相，他一直在撒謊。” ????而貝恩資本同一時期的資料顯示，羅姆尼自稱不再參與貝恩資本的經(jīng)營管理，確實是實情，但需要注意的是，這并不等同于他與公司不再有任何法律或財務(wù)關(guān)系。 ????正如《財富》雜志之前所說，羅姆尼在接到領(lǐng)導(dǎo)鹽湖城冬奧會組委會的邀請之后，便突然離開貝恩資本，他的這一舉動甚至都不在有組織的過渡計劃之內(nèi)；當(dāng)時的鹽湖城奧組委曾一度陷入混亂，甚至失控。此外，1999年2月的時候，羅姆尼到底是將永久離開貝恩資本，還是將在不久后回歸，當(dāng)時的情況并不明朗。1994年，他曾參加美國參議院議員競選，結(jié)果惜敗于泰德?肯尼迪，之后他便重新回到了貝恩。2002年，鹽湖城冬奧會成功舉辦，而羅姆尼決定再次參加競選。直到這時，他才正式放棄自己在公司的職務(wù)和對公司的所有權(quán)。在此之前，他一直在履行自己的法律義務(wù)，比如簽署某些文件等，但公司投資與管理事務(wù)的實際決策者卻另有其人。在獲悉貝恩資本公布的信息之后，奧巴馬的發(fā)言人本?拉波特通過電子郵件發(fā)表了下面這則聲明： ????“米特?羅姆尼要么是在誤導(dǎo)美國公眾，要么是向美國證監(jiān)會隱瞞了真相。羅姆尼曾聲稱，自從1999年以來，他沒有任何管理貝恩資本的權(quán)利或責(zé)任，結(jié)果證明他在撒謊。不論他是否是某項具體交易的管理委員會成員，他始終都是公司董事長、CEO和董事會主。，所以，對于貝恩資本所做的每一項投資和每一個決定，他都負(fù)有不可推卸的法律責(zé)任。” ????譯者：劉進龍/汪皓 |
????Mitt Romney did not manage Bain Capital's investments after leaving to run the Salt Lake City Olympic Games, according to confidential firm documents obtained by Fortune. ????The timing of Romney's departure from Bain became a lightning rod earlier today, when The Boston Globepublished an article suggesting that Romney remained actively involved with the firm longer than he and his campaign have claimed. The sourcing is largely SEC documents that list Romney as Bain Capital's CEO and sole shareholder through 2002 -- or three years after Romney officially left to run the Salt Lake City Olympic Games. ????These claims are very similar to ones made last week by David Corn in Mother Jones, which we disputed at the time. ????Now Fortune has obtained new evidence that supports Romney's version of events. ????Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins: ????Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII. ????It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000. ????Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee. ????All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it). ????"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth." ????But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm. ????As Fortune wrote earlier, Romney left Bain suddenly -- rather than as part of an organized transition plan -- after being asked to lead an Olympic organizing committee that had spiraled out of control. Moreover, it was unclear in February 1999 if Romney's leave of absence would be permanent, or if he would return (as he had in 1994, after losing a U.S.Senate race to Ted Kennedy). He didn't formally give up his title and firm ownership until 2002, once the Games had been successful and he was interested in other elective office. In the interim, he continued to fulfill legal obligations such as signing certain documents -- but actual investment and managerial decisions were being made by others. ????After being informed of the Bain Capital documents, Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt emailed over the following statement: ????"Mitt Romney either misled the American people or misrepresented himself to the SEC. Romney has said he had no authority or responsibility for managing Bain since 1999, but that has been proven false. Regardless of whether he was on the management committee for this particular deal, he remained President, CEO, and Chairman of the Board and he was legally responsible for every investment and decision made by Bain." |
最新文章