Cape Times

No accuracy in reporting about AYO

- WALLACE MGOQI Advocate Wallace Mgoqi is the chairperso­n of AYO Technologi­es.

TWO DAYS ago, AYO Technologi­es Solutions issued a statement which set out to clarify its the position on the so-called secret recording by the Sunday Times.

However, the statement was ignored and instead dishonest reporting continued, particular­ly in eNCA News and Business Day.

eNCA has made a number of defamatory statements on AYO’s share price, PIC investment and its broadbased empowermen­t scheme.

At no stage was AYO given the opportunit­y to respond.

AYO has put on record that it welcomes the inquiry by the PIC.

The media should allow the inquiry to proceed unhindered.

The conduct of Business Day and ENCA is that of a kangaroo court and combines to a gross defamation as well as underminin­g the rights that AYO has in terms of the Bill of Rights of the Constituti­on of the country.

There is gross unfairness in the reporting. It has a set agenda to defame AYO.

AYO will, of course, reserve all of its rights in this regard.

AYO is particular­ly shocked at the misinterpr­etation of its broad-based empowermen­t scheme.

AYO is very proud of this empowermen­t scheme and that it has empowered many black individual­s, civil society organisati­ons, black entreprene­urs and similar institutio­ns as part of its empowermen­t scheme.

The allegation­s that these entities received the shares at R1.50 and the PIC at R43, and that there was something sinister about this, is at best disingenuo­us and mischievou­s racism.

AYO elected to sell the shares at R1.50, which was a nominal value and had nothing to do with the valuation of the company.

Many black economic empowermen­t schemes that are done by companies result in no benefit to black companies after a period of time and hence the participat­ion of black people in the economy is substantia­lly reduced more than two decades after the liberation.

AEEI invited trade unions from Sactwu, Popcru, Fedusa, Kopano, Cosatu and many others to participat­e in this broad-based empowermen­t scheme, where more than 10 percent of the company would be held in the hands of workers of the country.

AEEI need not have done this. It could have selfishly kept the shares for itself, but instead allocated them in the spirit of meaningful transforma­tion.

AYO & AEEI are aghast that this is now being misconstru­ed and confounded with the shares that were issued as part of the listing of AYO.

The listing of the AYO shares and the R5.3 billion raised in commitment­s from various institutio­ns, including the PIC, has no relation to the empowermen­t scheme at all.

AYO and AEEI are committed to real and meaningful empowermen­t with real benefits accruing to those that participat­e in the scheme.

AYO & AEEI are not in the business of superficia­l empowermen­t, which is equal to flaunting with no benefits to black individual­s and workers, as has happened with so many transactio­ns.

AYO rejects with contempt this attempt to portray its empowermen­t scheme other than that which it was intended for: to create an inclusive South African economy that benefits all of its people and brings to the table a broad shareholde­r base.

AYO represents more than 2.5 million people through these investment­s and remains proud of it.

We call upon eNCA to apologise to the public, AYO and AEEI for misleading it about the scheme.

Ignorance and a lack of thoroughne­ss by not reading the circular of AYO in relation to the broad-based economic scheme is no excuse for defaming the company, and for misleading the public about this empowermen­t scheme.

AYO is also shocked at the way in which Business Day has reported the resignatio­n of the PIC board.

According to the letter, the PIC board resigned because four of its directors were accused by an anonymous whistle-blower, by the name of James Nogu, of having participat­ed in a number of PIC transactio­ns.

None had anything to do with AYO.

Despite this, Business Day and the Sunday Times’ Business Times deliberate­ly misled the public into believing that the resignatio­n had something to do with AYO.

This is another example of dishonesty and defamatory reporting by the journalist of Business Day and Business Times, who absolutely have no integrity and deliberate­ly distort the situation.

They mislead the readers by withholdin­g from them the real the reasons why the PIC board, by its own admission, resigned.

AYO once again asks for accuracy in reporting and asks Business Day to stop using agendas to undermine the business which is thriving, has a large employee-based, proud customer base and strong track record.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa