Subject: Re: Train consotrium
From: "David C. Wittig" <[email-masked]>
To: "Paris Kokorotsikos" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Ed McKechnie" <[email-masked]>, "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Jim Slattery" <[email-masked]>, "Vassilis Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>, "Davis C. Wittig" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:32:40 +0300

Ok. We will have to discuss further. The Qatari's are interested as well. I am with them tomorrow in Doha. 
David

Sent from my iPhone

> On 16 Δεκ 2014, at 21:05, Paris Kokorotsikos <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> It is evident that only WATCO complies ( i presume from its size !) with the criteria.
> The rest US partners , if not coming through a fund , should have a back to back agreement with WATCO for sharing the percentages at a later stage,  as well as for undertaking the respective responsibilities and . during the privatization process
> The protocol of intention of cooperation for the privatization of TRENOSE should be between GFR and WATCO. That could be the official to be shown to HRDAF ( privatization agency).
> The rest are internal agreements.
> We ll finalize the steps and time schedule before the telco of Thursday
> Paris 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On 16 Δεκ 2014, at 18:03, "David C. Wittig" <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> 
>> See below. Paris needs to tell us his thoughts on how we identify the consortium. 
>> I will meet with the lawyer and banker for the railroad on Thursday to get their thoughts. 
>> David
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: Davis Wittig <[email-masked]>
>>> Date: 16 Δεκεμβρίου 2014 - 18:55:09 GMT+3
>>> To: david wittig <[email-masked]>
>>> Subject: Fwd: FW: Train consotrium
>>> 
>>> This is the criteria for the consortium. Let me know how you wish to proceed. The real question is do we ask for this information now without the agreements from each party, or do we wait until we have our consortium agreed on and then ask. There are pros and cons to both sides. 
>>> 
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Vassilis Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
>>> Date: Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 9:30 AM
>>> Subject: FW: Train consotrium
>>> To: "Davis C. Wittig" <[email-masked]>
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> From: Vassilis Sotiropoulos [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 4:01 PM
>>> To: David C. Wittig ([email-masked]); ΠΑΡΙΣ ΚΟΚΟΡΟΤΣΙΚΟΣ ([email-masked])
>>> Subject: Train consotrium
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> These are some restrictions set forth by the HRADF:
>>> 
>>> 1.       The Leader should be a party that was included in the first stage and that holds at least 34% of the consortium
>>> 
>>> 2.       Any new consortium member should (among others):
>>> 
>>> a.       Identify all ultimate beneficial owners/ shareholders  that hold over 5%
>>> 
>>> b.      Identify all BoD members (if a fund BoD or invest com or advisory com of the investment manager and general partner)
>>> 
>>> c.       Have 3-year-average annual consolidated, audited equity of over EUR 100mil (if a fund active and un-invested / uncommitted funds over EUR 200mil) on a pro-rata basis according to consortium stakes
>>> 
>>> d.      The member, its authorized representatives the parent company and its representatives shouldn’t have committed criminal offences like embezzlement, extortion, forgery, perjury, fraudulent bankruptcy, participation in a criminal organization, bribery, fraud, money laundering
>>> 
>>> e.      The member should not have any bankruptcy procedures
>>> 
>>> f.        The member should have fulfilled obligations as regards to taxes, duties and social security
>>> 
>>> 3.       Until the Lock-In date, new members can enter if promptly notified to the HRADF; Also exits and change of Leader are acceptable
>>> 
>>> 4.       After the Lock-In date only exits and change of stakes are acceptable
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Regarding the above, can we have a full copy of all documents submitted to the advisor during the Expression of Interest?
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Vassili