Singapore police issued an arrest warrant for Thomas Zilliacus. Now Zilliacus tells HS his own version of the events.
What I should do? This is the question asked by a Finnish entrepreneur Thomas Zilliacus has thought about closely over the past few years.
The reflection gained new momentum on Wednesday, when it was revealed that the international police organization Interpol has issued a so-called red notice for Zilliacus. The background is an arrest warrant issued for Zilliacus in Singapore.
Why the hell is the Singaporean police chasing a Finnish businessman? The reason can be found in a late company called Yuuzoo.
Yuuzoo was a social media and commerce platform company. It was listed on the Singapore stock exchange in 2014. At the time of listing, the company’s market value was around 300 million Singapore dollars, or around 200 million euros. At that time, the value of Zilliacus’ share pot was about one hundred million Singapore dollars, or about 70 million euros.
Everything went smoothly.
The goal was to create Yuuzoo into a global platform economy company similar to the Chinese company Tencent or Alibaba, whose value could reach tens if not hundreds of billions.
The company sought to expand by selling operating licenses to different Asian countries in the same way that, for example, McDonald’s sells franchise agreements to different entrepreneurs.
“63 licenses had been sold to 25 countries,” says Zilliacus on the phone.
Licenses were initially sold in cash, but then Yuuzoo’s CFO at the time figured out that the purchase price could be tied to shares. Then the partners would also be able to benefit from the increase in the company’s value.
“We asked KPMG if the shares can be recorded in the income statement and balance sheet, and we asked Deloitte to make an assessment of the correct price level,” says Zilliacus.
Large auditing companies were used precisely so that the financing arrangement would be as reliable as possible.
Licenses eventually became the center of Yuuzou’s problems. The crux of the whole dispute is whether the valuation of the shares paid for operating licenses was correct.
The series of problems began in 2018, when the Singapore Stock Exchange unexpectedly suspended trading in the company’s stock.
The reason was the claim of an employee who was fired from Yuuzoo about the incorrect revenue recognition of license income. He claimed that the monetization violates the local securities market law.
The Singapore Stock Exchange started an investigation into the matter. In the end, Yuuzoo’s operation was suspended until the funding ran out in 2019.
Yuuzoo’s listing was strongly driven by a Swede who was the CEO of the Singapore Stock Exchange Magnus Books. Böcker’s goal was to get more international companies listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange.
When Böcker was allowed to leave, Yuuzoo’s troubles began.
According to Zilliacus, the catalyst was a man who worked in Yuuzoo’s financial administration, whose harassment five female employees had reported.
After getting fired, the man had called Yuuzoo’s CEO and demanded $50,000 in his accounts by midnight, according to Zilliacus.
“He said that otherwise he would start defaming the company by all means. I told the CEO that, of course, such a thing would not be agreed to. That would be illegal.”
Sack the claims of the man who received it led to the fact that Yuuzoo hired an auditing giant that then operated under the name of Ernst & Young (now EY) to investigate the claims made against the company.
In the final phase of the settlement, the Singapore Stock Exchange requested that five more settlement items be added to the settlement list.
“‘We replied that of course it would work. When the report came, 75 percent of it focused on the issues requested by the stock exchange. The whole report was suggestive in tone, and there were also many clearly false claims.”
According to Zilliacus, Yuuzoo identified more than 70 incorrect claims from the report.
“They admitted to us their mistakes and promised to fix them, but never did.”
of Zilliacus according to the exchange and EY, after many negotiations and difficulties, a joint meeting was finally agreed upon, but it was canceled a day earlier.
The stock exchange had referred the matter to the police for investigation, because according to EY, Yuuzoo had concealed documents from its investigators.
In connection with the process, Yuuzoo was moved aside from trading on the stock exchange list.
In summer The first phase of the 2018 investigation was over. Yuuzoo’s management thought the stock would return to trading, but it turned out otherwise.
“We were promised that trading wall [kaupankäyntiesto] will be removed when the investigation is over, but that didn’t happen.”
The stock exchange’s decision made Zilliacus feel angry. He wrote a letter to the Prime Minister of Singapore. In the letter, he asked if the matter could not be agreed upon now that it had already been well taken care of at the stock exchange.
The answer was an invitation to be interviewed by the police.
Following the letter, Zilliacus’ previously set bail of S$150,000 was increased to S$400,000. One Singapore dollar is equivalent to approximately 0.70 euros. Thanks to the payment, he got his passport back during the police investigation and was allowed to travel.
“It was given to understand that the prime minister should not be bothered with such things.”
The Yuuzoo Controversy is already more than five years old.
On Wednesday, the dispute took a new turn when the information about Zilliacus’ wanted notice became public.
Zilliacus is particularly offended by claims that he himself gave misleading information about the company’s finances.
In his opinion, as chairman of the board, Zilliacus could not even have given misleading information about the company, because the decisions were made together with the members of the board.
On Thursday, he said that he had taken legal action himself.
“If the authorities had not done anything, it would have ended there, but we have to answer now,” says Zilliacus on the phone.
Yuuzoo and Zilliacus have sued EC in three countries.
“The main basis is that they have knowingly published misleading and false information, knowing that it will go on the stock exchange,” Zilliacus tells HS.
“We feel that the action has caused damage both to me personally and to the company.”