The eight NATO warships that have docked at Thessaloniki port in the last 24 hours highlight the importance of this infrastructure for the geopolitical balance in Eastern Europe and the Balkans.
It hardly surprising that an increasing number of economic and diplomatic observers are expressing concern about the fact that the main shareholder of the Thessaloniki Port Authority (ThPA), Ivan Savvidis, has both a Greek and a Russian passport, has served as a member of the Russian Duma, and resides in Russia for long periods of time.
Therefore, for a large part of the market, this is likely to be the main reason the Dreyfus family is now claiming a seat on the board through a public offer to the minority shareholders of the listed company – and, in the long run, perhaps even control of the port. Recent international press reports are full of statements by former NATO officials – no longer bound by confidentiality – who express this very concern.
However, there is also the economic dimension. It will soon be seven years since March 2018, when a consortium by Savvidis, French shipping company CMA-CGM and a German fund acquired control of 67% of ThPA for 231.92 million euros: a price that corresponds to €34.34 per share and is far from both the €27 offered by Dreyfus and the €29 to which Savvidis’ side has raised the price on the board.
“If the Dreyfus family want to sit at the table with Savvidis, they will have to significantly improve their offer,” a consultant involved in the case explains to Kathimerini. Asked whether Savvidis would be willing to sell, he replied that “everything is sold at the right price.”
The state also participates in the share capital, through the Growthfund, with a 7.27% stake. What is its position and, more importantly, the government’s? For the time being, there is no official or unofficial position.
So are the latest developments an informal haggling over the price of the port? The answer may come after February 20, when the public offer period ends. Until then, however, even if the Dreyfus family do not collect even 5% of shares – compared to the 21% they claim – having spent millions on share purchases and on high-profile legal, financial and other advisers, they have shown they are determined to succeed, says a senior government official.