Conley
09-18-2011, 09:46 AM
'Moving on' from the Deepwater Horizon environmental catastrophe, Tony Hayward is now set to make millions from a Kurdistan oil deal
What was to be his life thereafter? Hayward was 53 when he parted from the company he'd served for nearly 30 years, eventually on a salary of $6m.
The pension and severance package must have been generous. He could have reflected bitterly on the unfairness of his role as the lightning conductor for blame – as he said, Deepwater Horizon was a complex accident involving several companies – and then "moved on". He might have run a charity for tarred seabirds or, as a geologist, spent days with a hammer on the Dorset coast. Directorships could have supplemented his income. It would have been a quieter life – more time on the yacht – but by no means a poor one.
But Hayward did none of these things. Instead, he created an investment vehicle called Vallares with initial capital of £100m provided by Nat Rothschild, two other businessmen and himself. Stock market flotation raised £1.35bn, and this month Hayward, as Vallares's chief executive, announced that new shares worth a similar amount would be sold to finance a merger (technically, a reverse takeover) with a Turkish company, Genel Energy International, which holds rights to oil reserves in the Iraqi province of Kurdistan. Hayward will replace the Turkish entrepreneur Mehmet Sepil as Genel's CEO, clearing the way to a stock exchange listing that may have been problematic had Sepil, who was fined £1m last year for insider trading, remained in day-to-day charge rather than assuming his new role as president.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/16/bp-tony-hayward-deepwater-horizon
I don't think the BP thing was his fault. He just had a bad way of speaking about like many CEOs do. Kinda tough to compare it to the Titanic even though I'm sure the environmental issue is worse, the human deaths are not.
What was to be his life thereafter? Hayward was 53 when he parted from the company he'd served for nearly 30 years, eventually on a salary of $6m.
The pension and severance package must have been generous. He could have reflected bitterly on the unfairness of his role as the lightning conductor for blame – as he said, Deepwater Horizon was a complex accident involving several companies – and then "moved on". He might have run a charity for tarred seabirds or, as a geologist, spent days with a hammer on the Dorset coast. Directorships could have supplemented his income. It would have been a quieter life – more time on the yacht – but by no means a poor one.
But Hayward did none of these things. Instead, he created an investment vehicle called Vallares with initial capital of £100m provided by Nat Rothschild, two other businessmen and himself. Stock market flotation raised £1.35bn, and this month Hayward, as Vallares's chief executive, announced that new shares worth a similar amount would be sold to finance a merger (technically, a reverse takeover) with a Turkish company, Genel Energy International, which holds rights to oil reserves in the Iraqi province of Kurdistan. Hayward will replace the Turkish entrepreneur Mehmet Sepil as Genel's CEO, clearing the way to a stock exchange listing that may have been problematic had Sepil, who was fined £1m last year for insider trading, remained in day-to-day charge rather than assuming his new role as president.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/16/bp-tony-hayward-deepwater-horizon
I don't think the BP thing was his fault. He just had a bad way of speaking about like many CEOs do. Kinda tough to compare it to the Titanic even though I'm sure the environmental issue is worse, the human deaths are not.