"The way COMVEX ended up under Dan Drăgoi's control is the blueprint of a scam" (II)

Radu Soviani: Was he still an active general?

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes, as far as I know, yes. He was always active. If someone wants to understand who Dan Drăgoi is, he's like a lobbyist, I would say he's one of the best lobbyists in Romania. He's capable of arranging things. He once told me: "This guy needs something, the other guy needs something that the other guy has. I bring them to the same table."

Radu Soviani: So more like an intermediary than a lobbyist.

Raymond de Rubeis: I'll be very blunt - when I met him in 1996, he was the head of a company with operations in Romania, but he wasn't an investor, he wasn't a CEO, he wasn't running the business. The management was in London. He was just an employee, and all the salaries were paid from London.

Radu Soviani: So he was just an administrative staff.

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes, just administrative staff. And then he builds a big house, wears the watches he wears. He's very materialistic. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. But that's his nature.

Radu Soviani: So in 2014-2015 something changed...

Raymond de Rubeis: In 2014-2015 something changed. He became much more aggressive, much more threatening, by 2016 all this was already happening. In 2017, he threatened me that my salary would be reduced by 50%.

Radu Soviani: He targeted you personally. 2014-2015 coincides with pushing Bogdan Drăgoi into the capital market, at SIF1. Do you think it's part of the same change in attitude?

Raymond de Rubeis: It can't not be.

Radu Soviani: What's Bogdan Drăgoi like? Do you know him too?

Raymond de Rubeis: Bogdan was an extraordinary guy. One of my best friends.

Radu Soviani: Extraordinary in the sense that you'd take him to parties, or extraordinary in general?

Raymond de Rubeis: Extraordinary in general. We used to go on vacations together, me with my wife, him with his girlfriends. We were good friends. So good that when he moved to London to work, he stayed in my apartment. I'm older than him, had a different lifestyle, traveling a lot for the company I worked for, so he stayed for three months and then moved to another apartment with some young people he met, which is normal because otherwise he would have been alone in my apartment since I traveled a lot. We were involved in the acquisition of a large company in Germany; Bogdan came with us to Germany with my company from the UK, he was there, gaining experience. We were friends. Coming back to Romania, we would see each other, we were good friends until, in 2014-2015, something happened in the relationship between me and Bogdan Drăgoi. He changed a lot.

Radu Soviani: Do you think he lives in his father's shadow?

Raymond de Rubeis: Dan Drăgoi micromanages Bogdan Drăgoi. He always has. He became a secretary of state in a government, then became finance minister, then became a presidential advisor to Băsescu, and then became CEO at SIF. I always wanted Bogdan to go to international markets. To bump into them, to sharpen his teeth on them. But the Bogdan Drăgoi I knew then is not the Bogdan Drăgoi now.

Radu Soviani: Do you think Dan Drăgoi still micromanages Bogdan Drăgoi, as CEO at SIF?

Raymond de Rubeis: Oh, yes. Dan Drăgoi's biggest problem with me, now and from my point of view, is that he's so mad at me for not accepting what he did. I don't have a Balkan mentality, as people say. People have told me, several: what was expected of you was to shut up, to accept. You still own 50% of the shares and you still keep your full salary, you have a car from COMVEX, you have a good lifestyle. Like a person who only thinks about money. I have four children, but I have a path in mind for them: to go to international colleges. My father gave me the privilege to go to private schools and then to a good college. I want to extend this privilege to my children. My father was a truck driver. I wasn't born rich, I have simple tastes. I like nice things, but there's a limit. He would have wanted me to accept that, even though he stole 50% of my shares, I would still have a nice lifestyle. People say other people would have accepted. I couldn't accept because it would degrade my dignity, and I would have to look my children in the eye one day and tell them: yes, I accepted that someone stole from me, and I didn't oppose it in any way. So something I worked for and should have been yours, someone else took it, and I did nothing about it. In the long run, I think it would have affected me a lot. So I fought. And I continue to fight. I lost. And I lost again. And I lost again. And I have no support. ANAF, ASF, the Senate Commission, the courts... In those days it was just a total emotional disaster: to have the rights and then be kicked out? I went to court, I lost.

Radu Soviani: But Dan Drăgoi should have known you very well. He could have anticipated that you would fight for what's yours.

Raymond de Rubeis: I don't think he understood. I think he didn't really know me.

Radu Soviani: Or he didn't care, because he had relationships, connections?

Raymond de Rubeis: Or he didn't care. He has a lot of power. Now he has even more power. He doesn't care.

Radu Soviani: And is it fair to assume now that Dan Drăgoi, who stole your company - you mentioned that he might sell it, and I'll get back to that - micromanages many more companies through SIFs, having his son there?

Raymond de Rubeis: The same thing will happen. I think they've already accumulated 30% of the SIFs.

Radu Soviani: Through SIF1, they control two other SIFs (SIF4 and SIF5).

Raymond de Rubeis: They will reach a point - and don't forget they also control 15% of the Stock Exchange - they will reach a point where that block of shares will be sold. They'll be in control, they'll sell the package, which will be bought by someone, and they pocket the money. For a huge profit. That's what I think is the endgame. The same with COMVEX. The endgame is not to be a port operator. They don't want to own this company. He's 70 years old. Bogdan Drăgoi won't run COMVEX, he doesn't care, he has the SIFs. So the exit strategy is to sell to a big company, which is interested. The price we're talking about now - around 300 million euros. They own 35% of that. Not bad, it's a good profit.

Radu Soviani: So the business with the SIFs could be the next level, bigger than the one they "trained" at COMVEX?

Raymond de Rubeis: Look at the similarities. COMVEX didn't distribute any dividends until April 2022, when they decided to pay the first dividends. SIF1, after seven years, on the same date, decided to pay dividends.

Bogdan Drăgoi was present on December 15-16, 2016. He was there. My friend was there when they were stealing my shares, my friend, and he never told me anything. I was sitting the other day and calculating: my son was born in October 2013. We had a party when he turned three, I checked with my wife. He was at my house in October 2016, with his son and wife and other friends, for lunch. He was there. When he was in my house, he knew what they were doing. He knew and never told me.

Radu Soviani: Can you estimate how much the Drăgoi family, through Dan Drăgoi, through others, through his wife, has stolen from you?

Raymond de Rubeis: Let's say I have 10% of the company. It's worth 35 million euros, if you sell the company for 350 million euros. 35 million euros is my share. They took half from me. Now I have 4.9%, indirect ownership in COMVEX, so they took half.

Radu Soviani: It's not like they didn't have money, to steal because they didn't have a living...

Raymond de Rubeis: I think Dan is obsessed with money. We were in a restaurant in London, for example, at Scalini. We went with our wives, to eat. And he would yell: look at that woman! She's all dressed in Loro Piana, all in Chanel. See? And I'd tell him: Dan, eat your portion, who cares? But Dan cared a lot.

Radu Soviani: You've been to many places together. Which European capital was he most familiar with?

Raymond de Rubeis: Vienna. He knows it by heart. He took me to places there that I had no idea existed.

Radu Soviani: I want to go back to what you said earlier - that there are rumors he wants to sell COMVEX to some companies with Russian connections...

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes. I don't think he'll sell anything to a Russian company now, with all the sanctions. But yes, he was in talks with Russian companies.

Radu Soviani: Before the war in Ukraine?

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes. I don't know, so it's just speculation. I don't know, and I can't ask anyone, for obvious reasons: they won't talk to me. If we think that Dan Drăgoi is now 70 years old, when he was 25-30 years old and was part of the Romanian Securitate under Ceauşescu's regime... who trained him?

Radu Soviani: But why do you think that now, in Romania, a strategic partner of the USA, Dan Drăgoi can still be in a position to do what he does?

Raymond de Rubeis: Because these people are in positions of power everywhere. They have accumulated fabulous fortunes. And they have formed the oligarchs of Romania.

Radu Soviani: So Dan Drăgoi seems to you to be an oligarch?

Raymond de Rubeis: He doesn't have yachts, but he has a lot of money and is very discreet. You won't see him spending that money in Bucharest. You'll see him spending it abroad.

Radu Soviani: But do these guys have a life beyond staring at Louis Vuitton, Chanel, etc.?

Raymond de Rubeis: It depends on each one individually. It depends on each one's culture. I didn't live in communism, so I have a different mentality about things.

Radu Soviani: You didn't get to become Balkanic.

Raymond de Rubeis: It's completely different. I don't wear expensive watches, although I have to admit I did. Dan convinced me, but I gave up. When I was a student, a colleague once told me: a monkey dressed in silk remains a monkey. It doesn't matter what watch you wear, it doesn't matter what suit you wear, it depends on you. On your quality. Dan doesn't have such qualities. For him, money is very important. Very important. Let's be honest and look at the facts. I have a case in court right now. I filed the lawsuit in 2019. I'm on the third judge. The first one retired after four months. The second judge came and there was a huge "battle" in court from Dan Drăgoi's side. I sued Dan Drăgoi, Viorel Panait, Anca Drăgoi, Ruxandra Nicola, and COMVEX. I filed the lawsuit in Bucharest, but the court in Bucharest sent me to Constanţa. And I don't have a problem with that, as long as everything is done fairly. Now, the first judge was a very competent judge. I realized that because he mastered the debates, didn't "swallow" nonsense from the others, and had read the file. He had read the file. And I don't know how long it took, because from 2019 until now, so many years have passed. Then he made a decision. Because they were trying to declare the file inadmissible. And it was a different process from the one I opened against the general meeting of shareholders. This process was against the way the capital increase subscription was made. And it's about insider trading - transactions based on confidential information. The judge ordered the trial to continue. Big nervousness. Anyway, we got to court and they filed a motion to recuse.

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes. The Drăgoi group.

Radu Soviani: Drăgoi and the others. What's happening is that the motion for recusal goes to another panel of judges, who independently evaluate whether there are grounds for recusal or not. The panel decides that there are no grounds for recusal. We go back to court and find out that the judge herself filed a motion for recusal. I have the recusal motion. In it, she says, "They filed a complaint against me with the CSM," the judges' court. "This is a personal attack on me. How could I judge this case, being under attack?" On the one hand, I think she's right, on the other hand, I think she should have stayed to judge, but it was her decision. It's valid, she withdrew. Another judge comes in. About this, one day before the hearing, we find out that she, too, filed a recusal motion. The reason for recusal is that, in the case of one of the defendants' lawyers, she knows her husband. She didn't want any issues. The independent judge says: there are no grounds for recusal, proceed, judge the case! And he remains to judge our case. For a whole year, Drăgoi's defense and the others tried to convince the new judge to overturn the former judge's decision, namely that the complaint was admissible. The judge tells them he can't do that. You can appeal the decision, but the case moves forward. They made a new motion for recusal. Now things are getting worse. In this recusal motion, they wrote: "We filed a criminal complaint against you." From my point of view, this is intimidation, and I don't understand how the judicial system allows this. Definitely not appropriate. The recusal court says again, there is no reason to recuse the judge. Judge the case. And now we know that there is a criminal complaint against the judge from these people. It's irrelevant whether there are grounds; what's relevant is that this is a form of intimidation. So it goes to court in April 2022, we have six witnesses. In court, the trial was just about to start, we waited three hours for our turn, the judge checks attendance, everyone was present. Suddenly, a lawyer comes in screaming: "aaa....aaaaaa." He hands out documents to everyone. The judge sits at the bench, looks, and smiles. My lawyer tells him, "Hey, you see, you got the wrong file!" And he comes with these documents, representing a client of COMVEX, an operator who decides to file a request, in Romanian, it's called an intervention, to become a party to the case. I initiated the file in 2019, why did it come only in 2022? The judge, smiling, their lawyers laughing in front of my lawyer, the judge has no choice, he has to consider the request. So another two months' delay, because this request needs to be discussed. So we are continuously delayed.

Radu Soviani: Is this method a way to weaken you, or is it something else?

Raymond de Rubeis: No. I'm afraid of something else. There is something else going on, but I don't know what it is.

Radu Soviani: From your exceptional experience, which you have reported on, what is your message to the shareholders of the SIFs regarding the management of the SIFs by the Drăgoi family and the supervision that the ASF provides to the SIFs?

Raymond de Rubeis: In my case, there was no supervision from ASF, and I believe, in fact, it was either complicity or incompetence, indifference. ASF supports Drăgoi. I know that now because I have been following what's happening, being directly interested. I saw that ASF was asked to respond regarding what the SIFs did. And they didn't respond. They refused. That's actually the response. That's the response. You don't need to look any further.

What I want to tell the shareholders of the SIFs? Wake up! And Romania should wake up. These companies are worth billions of euros, someone controls a good part of your system, your economy. Today, the stock is trading at a 60% discount to the real value. And these guys give themselves shares. Without doing anything!

You can't do that anywhere in the world. As CEO of a fund, if you don't perform, you're fired. If, as CEO of a fund, you address someone as an "Iranian with dirty money," you're sanctioned. You're thrown out of the company. That doesn't happen here.

I filed a complaint with ASF because, out of the five board members, one of them, Panait Ivănescu, died a few years ago, and COMVEX refused to appoint a new board member. I had to complain to ASF, and I did it in the newspaper, and then ASF made a 6-page report, which ended with a fine of 3,800 lei. The cost of making that report was higher than 3,800 lei. That's the penalty you give? To Bogdan Drăgoi, for the xenophobic comment he made against one of the major shareholders (note: from SIF1, Ben Madadi), he was fined how much? 10,000 lei? 2,500 euros?

ASF... Look at City Insurance - they played around! All these reports: Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, all these companies. Really? What have they done? Nothing. Now, from what I understand, in the ASF report made in response to ESMA, where Mircea Ursache makes a comment about the "specialty department," the guy who led the specialty department now works for Bogdan Drăgoi (note: currently, Ciprian Copariu, ex-ASF, works for SIF5). And Mircea Ursache's son, from what I've been told, worked or works for Bogdan Drăgoi. So my advice to the SIF shareholders... It's hard for them because they can't sell; they would lose money. Now nobody would invest in them because it's obvious there's no performance. Only the managers benefit from the current situation because they give themselves many shares as bonuses, for doing nothing.

Radu Soviani: Not being Romanian but knowing Romania very well, how do you explain that, 32 years after the revolution, Romania still simulates supervision, corporate management, transparency, and no one answers? Even justice is simulated.

Raymond de Rubeis: I believe that justice has changed. I can see that in my case because if it had happened in 2017, I would have been thrown down the courthouse steps. I think there's a change in the judiciary system. I believe a lot of what was wrong has been pulled back, people who didn't care, I'm not saying they were corrupt. They weren't interested. I believe in justice. And I want to say something else: I believe in SRI and I believe in SIE and I believe in STS. These are vital institutions for a country. For the protection of institutions, citizens. I believe in these institutions. My problem isn't with these institutions, it's these people who have used their credentials for their own gain. These are the problematic individuals. Many of them have withdrawn now, but unfortunately, they are still in positions of power, they put people in positions of power, and now they're putting their children in positions of power. It's obvious what's happening. I'm a foreigner. All I have to do is open my eyes. And I see. I don't know why people don't do anything about it. Whether it's contemplation, control, or just because something hasn't happened yet in Romania. I believe that something is happening now, which will spark something. I believe an important issue will be defense, the fact that there is much interest from external to internal. All these will start to generate a lot of cleaning up, and unfortunately, Romania is not the only one, you have a weak government. Everything is in a shell. I love Romania, I love Romanians, Romania has tremendous potential, but I see this potential being choked. Restricted, because some people don't want everyone to grow. They want only certain people to grow. And that's the problem.

Radu Soviani: Some people from within, from here...

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes, from here. I would like to add something else... When we met, on December 20th, I remember that on December 19th, 2016, I had a meeting with Captain Idu, in Constanţa. We discussed things. In fact, Captain Idu had prepared with the lawyers the documents for removing Dan Drăgoi from the leadership of Solid Met. They signed them. I still have those documents.

When we met on December 20th, I shook hands with Dan Drăgoi, saying that he would redistribute 50% of the shares to me, and I was supposed to pay him 500,000 euros. It was fair. He paid 1.1 million euros, and I was supposed to pay him 500-600,000 euros. I didn't expect to get them for free. We decided that the shares would be redistributed.

The next day, on December 21st, 2016, we all met in the Solidmet office, on Armindenului Street. And Viorel (Panait) came with all these documents to be signed. We all signed them because we agreed that we would move forward and he would redistribute them to us. Again, nothing. Even though we did that, we shook hands in the presence of Captain Idu that there would be a redistribution, there was none. We had meetings with Captain Idu and with Dan Drăgoi in the office. Captain Idu and Dan Drăgoi went for a walk outside to have a discussion, and then Captain Idu came back and said: I'm tired of all this, let's go directly to the lawyers. We went straight to the lawyers, action was supposed to be taken.

We arranged a meeting abroad; I wanted to meet with a lawyer, with an investment banker, with a businessman. These were people I knew personally, good friends. When I came back, I met with Captain Idu, it was April 25th (2017), because it was the ex-ante date. We met in his office, went outside to talk, took a walk, and he said to me: Ray, I can't. I can't do it. I'm sorry, I can't explain it to you, but I can't do it. And he gave me the papers from the lawyers, do it yourself. I said "Ok, I'll do it!".

Blackmail? Or an arrangement. Blackmail might be too harsh a word. Some kind of influence? Or an arrangement. Be careful, Captain Idu put in 12 million euros, from his own money. It was his money he used to buy COMVEX. Dan Drăgoi didn't put in any money. Viorel Panait didn't put in anything, I didn't put in anything. It was Captain Idu's money.

For him to be diluted by 50%, and keep in mind that Idu was a proud man and a businessman. He ran businesses. He made money. I never saw Dan Drăgoi run any business, be a CEO or anything. Nothing...

But for Captain Idu to tell me that after he was "diluted" he couldn't do anything? There was something there!

I couldn't ask him, he wouldn't have answered anyway, but he gave me the documents. I stayed in touch. He gave me the documents, and I moved forward. I remember it like it was yesterday. I remember his face. Something happened, but I don't know what the answer is.

Radu Soviani: So, the man who put in his money couldn't protect his own interest in front of Dan Drăgoi.

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes. Very interesting. And I haven't told you yet one of the most important things. As time goes by, we see, understand, and investigate certain things. Remember I told you that Anca Drăgoi and Ruxandra Nicola bought COMVEX shares on December 16th (2016). Anca Drăgoi bought 40 shares on December 9th.

We were in court. We filed a request for evidence management. One of the things requested: the audio recordings that suggest the purchase of shares because that purchase was made through Raiffeisen Bank. We asked if there were recordings. We didn't expect much. But, surprisingly, in November 2021, Raiffeisen brought a CD. And on that CD are the recordings of Ruxandra Nicola buying 40 shares first, and then Anca Drăgoi. Raiffeisen provided these recordings. The Drăgoi group invoked confidentiality, private data, everything in front of the court. As a footnote, in April 2017, I wrote to Raiffeisen Bank when I didn't know anything about what was happening. I received no response.

This CD has been filed with the court's case file since November 2021. DIICOT issues an ordinance in November 2021, on November 27th I believe, in which the prosecutor closes the case saying there is no evidence and citing the ASF report. So, the ASF report is the basis for the closure.

In that ordinance, the prosecutor says they have statements from Ruxandra Nicola. She says - paraphrasing, it's not exactly accurate, but that's the gist - "I'm an expert in the capital market from 2006-2007, and my job was to look at the capital market, and I saw the notification at BVB that there was a capital increase at COMVEX, and therefore, I decided to buy 40 shares through my representative. So, I bought 40 shares at COMVEX through Raiffeisen Bank representative".

Anca Drăgoi says: "My son works in the capital market, and he told me to buy shares in COMVEX. Ok. In the DIICOT report, Viorel Panait says that we claimed that Viorel Panait sold his shares to his wife, for her to become a shareholder, we found some documents. In a newspaper article, he says: how can Mr. Raymond de Rubeis say this? It's an algorithm, one party cannot sell directly to someone else to buy because it's a market, so it's not possible. How can Raymond de Rubeis say that I sold shares to my wife and that there is criminal complicity here? He says this everywhere: in court, in the DIICOT file, in the newspaper where he was quoted, through a paid article.

We get the CD. After six years, the CD of Ruxandra Nicola buying 40 shares, the voice on the phone is Viorel Panait's. Viorel Panait calls his broker at Raiffeisen and says: "I want to sell 40 COMVEX shares to my wife." The broker says: "You can't do that because, at the moment, there are shares for sale in the market. What you can do is sell 13 shares to your wife at this price, and your wife can buy the difference at this price, differently."

"Ahhh, okay, very good, what a good idea!" And then he says, right at the end: "By the way, I'll call you on Monday to solve something else." So this is the recording from September 16th, 2016, when Ruxandra Nicola, according to the DIICOT Ordinance, says she bought the shares through a representative. We thought the representative was the broker. No, in fact, Viorel Panait made the transaction. He sold and bought for her.

The recording shows the broker saying: "Mrs. Drăgoi, I just spoke with you (followed by something cut off) and you opened an account to buy Comvex shares. I'll call you back at 6 minus 1 minute." And she says: "Yes, I want to buy 40 COMVEX shares." That's the recording.

The first part was edited, and the second part was edited. We only have: "yes, I want to buy 40 shares". What we wanted to know was the reason, who told her this, why didn't you record that too? We wanted these recordings, but that's what we have, which is okay for now.

So DIICOT closes the case without even asking/listening to the recordings. What investigation did they do? When DIICOT summoned me to be heard, I was there for two hours, the judicial police officer said he had a headache, we started writing documents, he said it was the wrong form, he left, he came back.

He asked for my name, address, if I understand the capital market, if I want to make any further statements. I said yes, I want to talk to the prosecutor, I want to provide evidence. That was it.

Radu Soviani: Simulated.

Raymond de Rubeis: Yes, very staged. My complaint to the DNA, which dates back to 2018, was also closed on February 8, 2022. In that closing ordinance, the DNA says that these four people, husband-wife, living together, it's normal for them to discuss things, it's natural. The insider information, for the DNA, is legal! It makes you burst out laughing. And my lawyers too. Those abroad would laugh too.

DIICOT, in its investigation... what investigation did they do besides looking at statements? Again, it's all staged. So I appeal to the decision of DIICOT, I appeal to the decision of DNA. I don't know where I'll end up with these people, it will be the same all the time. There are many things in the file, many pieces of evidence, but their power pushes everyone aside. I want to fight for my rights, I believe in justice, I hope things will change. My case will last at least another three years, I hope for a change now, things are changing, and I believe that, given the new things happening in Romania, things will change, and maybe I'll get some justice.

And one more thing - I signed all the documents on December 20th. Now they say these documents were signed long before.

COMVEX never had a Board of Directors meeting. We didn't meet physically. They didn't convene it. There's no convocation. Viorel Panait and I exchanged 17 emails within a ten-month period. Was the capital increase happening then? Were the loan negotiations happening then? I don't have a copy of the loan agreement. And, by the way, the judge decided to administer the loan contact as evidence. We still don't have it. It hasn't been submitted to the file. And why didn't Raiffeisen Bank provide these recordings for six years? Why?

Radu Soviani: Probably they didn't care, they wanted to protect, they knew they did something wrong? If you allow me one more question, because I haven't asked you about Mr. Drăgoi's relationship, or your personal relationship, with Gheorghe "Bebe" Ionescu. How is that relationship?

Raymond de Rubeis: They've been friends for many years. I like Bebe Ionescu, he's a general, I like his family. When all this happened... yes, I can speak very openly, I had an apartment by the sea, which I bought from Bogdan Drăgoi/Dan Drăgoi, that's another story, another trick. But Bebe Ionescu had an apartment in the same building, and we used to see each other on the beach. When I saw Bebe Ionescu, after all this story, Bebe said to me: "Look, Ray, I'm sorry. I'm really sorry, I agree with you, but Dan is my friend." And I said to Bebe - I understand you, I choose my friends carefully, I understand you. The relationship between Bebe and Dan is of very, very many years. I remember. I think Bebe Ionescu introduced Videanu to Dan Drăgoi. Dan and Videanu knew each other, I remember when we were in the marble business, many years before, and then I remember Dan's birthday, which he organized at the Aquarium. Videanu was the mayor of Bucharest at the time, and he showed up. He stayed for an hour or two, but he came, and Dan was very happy. And I think Bebe Ionescu was the contact. And about Mr. and Mrs. Videanu, I can't say anything, they are very nice, they treated me fairly. Just like the others around Dan. That's it.

Radu Soviani: Thank you!