Returning to the questions, there was not missing another one related to “Changes in the board of directors of Telemundi España SA, after the signing of its contract with the state company EXPO 92”. I noted to what extent “in the opinion of the General Sub-Directorate of Enterprises” such a contract appeared “ … unnecessary to manage income from various commercial sources, inexpedient because signed in haste, with limited attendance and four years before the dates of receipt of almost all of the expected income – and excessively expensive in terms of percentages to be received by the agent”, which ended up reaching, according to the State Corporation itself, 31% of gross income. There was also, with imaginable success, a question about the “contracting volume brought by Telemundi at EXPO 92”.
Another of the modifications makes “Mr. Juan Bautista Calatayud Montiel member of the Board of Directors of Telemundi España SA, without knowing the reason – certainly no less important than that already mentioned – of his presence, nor the function that he begins to fulfill in said Company the day after the signing of such a substantial contract.” We know of the person concerned “his status as CEO of ‘Viajes Ceres’, a company which bought months after the signing of this contract – and his presence in companies in which FILESA holds a stake”. “Given this accumulation of fortuitous coincidences, and their possible symptomatic character of the double management hierarchy imposed on the Expo 92 State Company, and its unforeseeable consequences”, the government is questioned about the meaning of this inscription “made in parallel with the incorporation into the aforementioned board of directors of the general director of the said State Company”.
The protests over the refusal to provide Telemundi data would eventually go down in congressional presidential history. When I pressed this point on Mr. Pellón, who was hesitant to broach the subject, during one of his obligatory appearances, he ended up admitting to me: “I recognize that it was not my responsibility. They gave me this topic”; “If you have any suspicions about Telemundi, this contract predates my incorporation.”
In the tight historiography of Expo-92, the special relationships between the Aldeasa and Ecarsa companies also stand out, breaking records by provoking a written question, which included twelve interrogative sections. Aldeasa’s experience and prestige in operating stores are well known, which makes it striking, first of all, that in order to operate some of them it was obliged to accept – one would have to think that for its own benefit… – to participate in another newly created company (Ecarsa); especially when the question of what the majority partners actually contributed to said business project has become a mystery. ECARSA was in fact created on December 19, 1990, in which Aldeasa (45%) and Advent participated. Perhaps to avoid headaches, its headquarters ended up being the same as Aldeasa’s.
Given the management difficulties that have arisen, Aldeasa will end up assuming, through the expansion of its participation in Ecarsa, a notable acquisition of goods and fixed assets, apparently the result of missed commitments by the second company. Aldeasa, minority partner, contributes the money, while the majority partners assume management and control – in accordance with the twenty-third clause of the contract – because “the professionalism, qualifications, reputation and experience of the concessionaire have been taken into account”. It’s still striking, given that the company had only been created a month earlier. Finally, a third agreement will be signed by which Aldeasa undertakes to sell Quinto Centenario equipment in its airport stores, being obliged once again to assume the negative aspects of the management of Ecarsa, in which it apparently does not participate to manage, but rather to right the wrongs. Before ending the Expo, the general director of Ecarsa resigns…
About The Author
