R stands for ‘roadblock’

REMEMBER the power struggle between this bank treasurer, whom we labelled “R1,” and his rival within the same midsized universal bank, “R2”? Of course, we remember that R1 chose to leave the Ayala Ave.-headquartered bank after he realized that management was on the side of the less flashy, less flambouyant—but apparently more influential—R2.

Well, here’s the latest on R1. Biz Buzz was told that he recently approached another universal bank, also situated along Ayala Ave. (its far end) whose name also starts with “R.” More specifically, Mr. R1 approached the bank’s treasury boss—whose name also starts with “R”—and asked if they needed an extra hand in the treasury department.

But since R1 is widely known in banking circles for his aggressive style of doing business in the financial markets, the treasury boss “R” of bank “R” (which has a rather conservative and quiet business personality) decided that R1 would not be a good fit. Thus, he was turned down.

Thus, R1 goes on shopping for another job and realizes that his former treasury boss from a few jobs back—someone whose surname starts with “R”—may have a need for an expert like himself now. After all, Mr. Former Boss “R” is now the treasury boss at another big bank, this time headquartered in the Ortigas business district.

So R1 sends signals to Former Boss R, but unexpectedly receives a signal back that, no, his services are not needed at this time.

A couple of sources told Biz Buzz that R1 might have already forgotten that he started speaking against Former Boss R when the latter left their former common employer a few years ago. But Former Boss R heard about what R1 was saying about him after he left, and apparently never forgot about it.

Since R1 can’t seem to catch a break these days, we’re told he has decided to let the heat die down first before trying to reenter the job market. So what does a person do when faced with too many roadblocks starting with the letter R? Why, go on extended R&R, of course.

Daxim L. Lucas

Taxed and disappointed

ROYAL Dutch Shell Plc, which leads the Malampaya consortium through operating company Shell Philippines Exploration B.V. (SPEx), is disappointed with the turn of events—specifically over tax issues—on the $2-billion Malampaya natural gas development project.

“Our company has made a contribution to the energy needs of the Philippines for over a century. The investments in the upgrading of the Tabangao refinery, the Northern Mindanao import facility and the Malampaya Phases 2 and 3 are recent examples of our commitment to your country,” was the opening statement of Shell CFO

Simon Henry in a letter to President Aquino.

Saying he hopes a “positive outcome” may be reached, Henry said he would follow this matter personally to ensure that his team worked closely with the Department of Energy (DOE) “to explore a solution that respects the intent of the parties to Service Contract No. 38 (SC38).”

The drama started to unfold earlier this year when the Commission on Audit ordered the DOE to collect $2.9 billion from the Malampaya consortium allegedly for unpaid taxes. The Malampaya consortium has “served notice” that it initiated international arbitration on the issue. An arbitration panel is now being assembled for the proceedings that will take place in Singapore.

DOE has stood by its implementation of SC38, wherein the arrangement was that the Malampaya consortium would pay income tax and then deduct this amount from the 60-percent government share of proceeds from the natural gas platform’s operation.

Our sources said that various parties were still exerting effort to resolve the issue off-court, but whether the outcome would be disappointing for Shell and its partners remains to be seen.

Riza T. Olchondra

Star value

WE LIKE talking to company CFOs for investment tips—if someone can be responsible for an entire corporation’s finances, surely it must be the same for personal wealth, right? Okay, maybe not always.

Good thing for ABS-CBN Corp. and its shareholders, it’s a case of the former with its group CFO Rolando Valdueza.

Valdueza’s official day job is watching and growing the money of the Lopez family’s media conglomerate, but he has, on his own, been nurturing a separate passion for property investments. While many of these are high-end projects developed by the Lopezes, he has also been buying properties abroad in locations like the United States and Europe, where he said one could still earn a good yield.

Lately, Valdueza said it made good sense—for the wellheeled, of course—to snap up properties in New Jersey. He said this was in preparation for retirement, which is still several years away. Miguel R. Camus

Thwarted

A MUCH-BALLYHOOED homeowners’ referendum on whether or not to open more gates at the upscale Ayala Alabang Village did not materialize yesterday as originally targeted by the village association (AAVA). But it had nothing to do with the nomination and elections committee’s (Nomelec) disavowal of the exercise.

The AAVA board had actually decided to overrule the Nomelec and was all set to proceed with the referendum as scheduled, noting in a village advisory that the Nomelec participation was “not necessary” and that the Parish Council for Responsible Voting and the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) had instead been invited as “independent observers to ensure the integrity of the referendum process.”

What thwarted the referendum was a ruling issued by HLURB arbiter Joselito Melchor last Friday afternoon declaring a cease-and-desist order (CDO) and preliminary mandatory injunction enjoining AAVA from holding the referendum. Furthermore, the government agency ordered that complainants (anti-gate opening advocates) be given free and equal space in the AAVA News for the publication of their views on the referendum, pending the resolution of the main issue.

The HLURB’s ruling found merit in the complaint filed by a group of homeowners (most of whom reside near the proposed gateway) who argued that the referendum was “premature, without factual basis and useless” because the opening of gates was beyond the power of the residents to authorize nor of the respondents (AAVA) to implement. Property developer Ayala Land Inc. has required written approval from 75 percent of affected homeowners as one key condition to the opening of the gate and not just consent from majority of village homeowners.

For their part, AAVA and board members had principally argued that the holding of a referendum did not violate any right on the part of the complainants; that free and equal media space in the village publication was not mandated by any law, and that complainants failed to specify the details of their requests. But given the HLURB’s CDO and injunction ruling, AAVA had no choice but to comply.

On Saturday, AAVA had distributed fliers through the village guards announcing that voting would cease until further notice. Doris Dumlao-Abadilla

Finding strength in numbers

AYALA Alabang residents advocating the opening of more gates under the informal group Resident’s Initiative for New Gates (RING) lamented the HLURB ruling, noting that in the days leading to the referendum date, an overwhelming number of residents had come to participate. To consult one’s constituents is the most basic duty of our leaders, the group said. “To attempt to stop this expression is something we can- not understand. To thwart knowing the results means that the results themselves are something to be feared,” RING said.

The results of the referendum would have allowed AAVA and the barangay to determine the pulse of the residents on this matter and allow the community to decide its own fate. “If it is determined that most would not want a gate opened, these wishes will be respected and our village remains as is. If the results show that most residents feel it is imperative to open new exits, then the board and barangay will be guided to the next steps to take,” RING said.

The group pointed out that HLURB itself had already advised in a public consultation that AAVA could actually open the gates without a referendum. Having the referendum, it said, was already the best sign that AAVA would like to respect the choice of the residents. “As all property in AAV has been fully sold by Ayala Land for over a decade, under HLURB guidelines, this issue is purely a community decision,” RING said.

“Despite this temporary interruption, we trust that this village referendum, or some form of organized consultation, will eventually proceed, will clearly establish the decision of the majority and provide a legal mandate. Under our prevailing laws, and based on HLURB guidelines, it is for an entire community to vote and decide its own fate—not for four (referring to the complainants at HLURB) residents out of 5,300,” RING said. Doris Dum

lao-Abadilla