786
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 79 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Again: The Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund still have active investments in Russia.

Where is the outrage for them?

According to this Norwegian publication in an article published January 31st 2023:

the Norwegian oil fund still holds hundreds of millions worth of shares in petroleum companies like Gazprom, Novatek, Bashneft and Lukoil

Even if the value of their investments lower, they still haven’t pulled out any from Russia. The investments could be worth very little, but they still have something invested in Russia.

Norwegian Government on February 28, 2022, ordered the Oil Fund to freeze all investments in Russia and prepare a plan for divesting with the goal of totally exiting the Russian stock market

What’s stopping them?

[-] Kes 38 points 1 year ago

The value of their investments is lower because they've been pulling out of Russia. The article you sent says they've slashed the value down by 90%, and they're still going. Liquidating hundreds of millions in stocks while getting a decent value out of them takes time, and so far they've done a pretty good job selling off 90% of their Russian holdings with just a few more millions to go

[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Let’s break down that January 31, 2023 article once more:

1: The investments in Moscow listed equities dropped from $2.7 billion to a mere $300 million.

It would be laughably naive to think this is purely because they've been 'pulling out' of Russia. By all means, review the article and let me know if it states the exact reason for the decrease in value.

2: By December 31, 2022, Norway still had shares in 51 Russian companies.

It's September 2023. If they were aggressively pulling out, wouldn't they have zero investments by now?

Nice try.

[-] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Timelines for individual retail investors are significantly shorter than timelines for multibillion dollar sovereign wealth funds with fiduciary obligations.

[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

And yet all the investments, their value, and what percentage of ownership the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund possess are all publicly available on their website.

If I filter by ‘Russia’, they still show 51 companies. Today. Let’s look at their top five, which you can also view by accessing their own data.

Highest Percentage of Ownership:

  1. Lenta International Co PJSC: 2.25%
  2. Rosseti Centre PJSC: 2.69%
  3. Ufaorgsintez OAO: 0.99%
  4. Segezha Group PJSC: 1.16%
  5. Bank St Petersburg PJSC: 1.76%

Highest Amounts of Investment in NOK:

  1. Gazprom PJSC: 731,368,780
  2. LUKOIL PJSC: 536,571,485
  3. Sberbank of Russia PJSC: 523,299,961
  4. Novatek PJSC: 118,267,597
  5. Surgutneftegas PJSC: 76,130,966

^ these alone = ~$185,140,710 USD.

What fiduciary obligations does a pension fund have that is somehow more complex, important, and forgivable vs obligations belonging to Pepsi Co?

[-] hypelightfly@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

What fiduciary obligations does a pension fund have that is somehow more complex, important, and forgivable vs obligations belonging to Pepsi Co?

I largely agree with what your saying but this part is ridiculous. The Finnish parliament has no obligations to serve/sell Pepsi. It's not an investment it was literally having the drink available. That's not at all comparable to the fiduciary duty of a pension fund.

[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Sure, but now tell me how the richest pension fund in the world, currently valued in the trillions, has such fiduciary obligation that it can’t divest ~$300 million of Russian investments.

Make it make sense.

[-] hypelightfly@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Did you miss the first few words I wrote?

I largely agree with what your saying

[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I did not. Happy to help!

My original comment (to which you responded) regarding the obligations of Pepsi Co were highlighting a critical comparison between a corporate drinks manufacturer and the pension fund. The Finnish Parliament can do what they like. If they’re doing it because Pepsi Co hasn’t fully pulled out of Russia, and thus Pepsi deserves to be shunned, what does Norway deserve?

If action is mandated for entities that don’t divest from Russia, then it must equally be applicable to all entities where this is true. Otherwise, hypocrisy.

[-] hypelightfly@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, you did. That's the part I largely agreed with. The part I don't agree with is fiduciary funds obligations not being more complex than serving drinks in your cafeteria/restaurant.

[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

You seem confused. Let me be clear:

  • I have no criticism for the Finnish Parliament or their choice of soft drink selection.

  • I have no belief that a government office cafeteria is equally as complex as a pension fund.

Now if you’ve made it this far, why are Finland choosing not to support Pepsi? Let’s look to the article:

The Finnish parliament will no longer carry Pepsi products as the American soft drink giant continues to support the Russian economy by continuing its operations in the aggressor country

So, from the article, the Finnish Parliament have taken a stand against Pepsi because Pepsi won’t cease operating in Russia. And Pepsi Co failing to stop their operations in Russia is bad. Right?

Still with me? Great.

Norway’s Sovereign Wealth Fund also isn’t ceasing their operations (by way of their investments) in Russia.

Again: where is the equivalent outrage? Why isn’t anyone taking a stand against Norway for not divesting? They said they would, but haven’t. The amount is pennies when compared to their other investments. So why are they hanging on to them? Why don’t they do what they said they would? And why isn’t anyone speaking out against them for failing to divest, especially while their former PM is leading NATO?

Hope that helps!

[-] speaker_hat@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Making rapid economical changes in this scale will collapse companies and economies.

[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Who would collapse?

[-] I_annoy_you@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

sugar drinks could be compramised over living in the freezing cold

[-] snipvoid@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

How would the richest sovereign wealth fund in the world pulling out their investments from Russia bring about living in the freezing cold?

It isn’t as if Norway’s fund haven’t already said they would divest. It’s just that they haven’t taken any concrete action on what they promised for more than a year.

Why?

this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
786 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39000 readers
2160 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS