Dear Sirs,
Acting as the Board of Directors of Aforti Holding S.A. (hereinafter also as the “Company”), we feel obliged to take a position in the context of the article published today in Gazeta Wyborcza. At this point we emphatically deny the information presented there suggesting that Aforti Holding used unfair practices towards its customers, including the creation of a pyramid-like structure. The information presented therein is deceitful, it is a conglomeration of loosely connected untruths under a preconceived thesis, and the entire article could serve as a model example of journalistic dishonesty or an action calculated to arouse sensationalism in order to increase revenues through the purchase of paid access. In view of our disagreement with the above-mentioned actions,
which harm the good name of the entire AFORTI Group of Companies, as well as cause concern among our contractors, we would like to inform you that in the coming days the Company will take the necessary legal steps to protect its personal rights. Notwithstanding the above, we would like to clarify just a few points that constitute obvious manipulation.
First of all, we consider scandalous the thesis presented in the title, indicating that the Aforti Capital Group constitutes another financial pyramid after Amber Gold and GetBack. Moreover, the Company firmly denies that the structure of its activities in any way resembles the functioning of financial pyramids, so it is all the more unfair to juxtapose the Company’s activities in the article with scandals involving Amber Gold or GetBack. From the very beginning, the fundamental principle of the Aforti Group has been full transparency to its customers. In addition, Aforti has always placed particular importance on informing potential investors about the risks of investing in the investment products offered, which is not only not a very common practice, but above all already in itself contradicts the functioning of financial pyramids. It must be emphasized that the allegations presented in the article in question are so much lip service, as they are not followed by any argumentation supported by concrete facts, the characteristic feature is to put forward a certain thesis and encase it with untrue and unverified information, as indicated by the following circumstances:
First, contrary to the claims made in the article, the Company did not have any opportunity to address the allegations being made. Claims that journalists were deprived of the opportunity to talk to Aforti representatives are untrue to the extent that these journalists never contacted the Company directly to talk about the material being prepared. The fact is that the journalists showed up at the office building where the Aforti Group of Companies has an office, however, it is no longer true that representatives of the Company refused to meet. On the contrary, although the journalists were initially not allowed into the Company’s office by the building’s reception, Aforti’s representative appeared in the lobby of the building to explain the reasons for the visit, but there was no one downstairs in the office building. This was the first and only attempt at contact by the journalists, who also did not leave any contact, name or at least the name of the editorial office they represented, nor did they contact the Company in any other way. The above actions unequivocally indicate that the Company did not have any opportunity to respond to the assertions made, which unequivocally demonstrates the unreliability of journalists and the lack of desire to present an objective position of the Company.
Secondly, the alleged “attorney” Michał Jędrzejek, speaking in the article, is not qualified as a legal advisor or attorney-at-law (no entry in the list), while the law firm he runs is not a law firm, but a debt collection company,
whose main business is not the provision of legal services, but “activities provided by collection agencies and credit bureaus,” as is clear from the entry published in the CEIDG. Thus, it is difficult not to get the impression that in this case Lex Legis law firm used the press as free advertising of its services. At the same time, the Company points out that the aforementioned law firm has not contacted it on any matter and has no knowledge of any cases of the Company’s clients being handled by it. Since this is the case, it is impossible to make any
factual reference to the assertions made therein, as none of the Group’s companies received even a single letter from the above-mentioned law firm. This type of activity unequivocally indicates a classic act of unfair competition by an entity providing competitive services to Group entities.
Third, extreme journalistic unreliability is also evidenced by the fact that the information presented by Mr. Michal Jedrzejek has not been verified in any way by the journalist, despite public access to it. At issue in this case is the alleged loss of PLN 99 million (sic!). It is impossible to even guess how this amount was determined, as it does not appear from any financial documents published by both the Company and the Aforti Group. In this context, the claim that the amount of Aforti Capital Group’s liabilities exceeds PLN 500 million is even more
absurd. Such statements only confirm that the person making them does not have an elementary knowledge of finance and reading financial statements. However, in the interest of full transparency, we would like to point
out that the total amount of short-term liabilities (up to 12 months) of all Aforti Capital Group companies to individual investors according to the Q1 2023 Report published on May 15 is PLN 30, 9 million, and this amount also includes unmatured liabilities.
Fourth, contrary to the general and false tone of the article, the Company would like to emphasize that currently both the FSA and the OCCP are not conducting any proceedings against companies in the Aforti Group, including, most importantly, none of the companies in the Group are on the FSA’s and OCCP’s public warning list. The claim that Aforti Securities was part of the Aforti Group is an untrue assertion, as Aforti Holding had only a 9.9% stake in the entity’s share capital and the company was not consolidated into the Group.
Fifth, it is impossible to even address the claim that more than 3,000 customers invested in the Company’s financial products, for this figure is simply made up. Never in its history, the Capital Group has had so many individual investors. Giving such a large number of alleged clients is only intended to give the reader a false impression of the scale of the venture, which is clear evidence of extreme journalistic unreliability.
Sixth, the Company denies that it has not published its financial statements to date in order to hide its results. Presenting this information in this light is also intended to cause concern to the reader and the Company’s contractors. The reason why the Company has not published its annual financial statements to date is that the Aforti Group’s auditor has not completed its audit, and the claim of suspension by the Exchange is due to the provisions of the ATS Rules, and not, as the author of the article implicitly suggests, by the Exchange’s finding of irregularities in the Group.
Seventh, the alleged failure to pay former or current employees of the Company their salaries is a complete lie.
Eighth, it is not true that in 2019, the Company has switched to riskier operations. As the Company’s Board of Directors, we explain that from the very beginning, it has consistently pursued its business objectives, one element of which is to take acceptable and well-considered risks adapted to the object of the business.
Ultimately, we would like to emphasize that both the Company and the entire Aforti Capital Group are operating normally, carrying out their duties as a public company on an ongoing basis, including staying in constant contact with their customers. What’s more, the entire Aforti Capital Group is undertaking a number of investments and projects that are expected to lead to a more dynamic pace of its growth in the coming quarters. We would also like to clarify that Aforti Holding S.A. has, from the beginning of its operations, pursued its financing based on individual investors and conducted its financing transparently, never hiding this form and structure of financing. Subsidiaries of Aforti Holding S.A. carry out their business tasks according to their plans, as we have repeatedly reported. We also point out that currently some of the companies in the Aforti Group, including Aforti Collections S.A., which achieved operating profitability in the first quarter of this year, and For-Net S.A. are operationally profitable, and we are aiming for this to be the case for all subsidiaries at the end of the year. In this context, the Board of Directors of Aforti Holding S.A. does not see any threat to the continuation of operations of the Aforti Group companies. We are directed to provide the best possible service to customers and achieve the best possible financial results. The Company will not leave unanswered the negative information campaign conducted against the Company and the Aforti group. To this end, the Company will take all possible legal steps to protect the interests of the Aforti group and its good name.
The Company is planning a meeting of the Supervisory Board for next Monday (3.07.2023), at which the situation will be discussed and the direction of further legal steps will be agreed.
Sincerely,
Klaudiusz Sytek – Chairman of the Board
Paweł Opoka – Member of the Board