The Co-operative Bank of Kenya Limited ('the Bank') is incorporated in Kenya under the Company's Act and is also licensed
to do the business of banking under the Banking Act.
The Bank was initially registered under the Co-operative Societies Act at the point of founding in 1965.
This status was retained up to and until June 27th 2008 when the Bank's Special General Meeting resolved to incorporate
under the Companies Act with a view to complying with the requirements for listing on the Nairobi Stock Exchange (NSE).
The Bank went public and was listed on December 22 2008.
Shares previously held by the 3,805 co-operatives societies and unions were ring-fenced under CoopHoldings Co-operative
Society Limited which became the strategic investor in the Bank with a 64.56% stake. *( that is where it rained ) : rink website

The question is How did Cooperatives come to cede 36 % and to whom?

What value did they get in return ?

Did some Kamlesh Pattnis Emerge overnight with a clever scheme and become Billionaires thro the IPO

Investors in the NSE, SACCOs and the Kenyan public are owed an explanation of what exactly went down and if people stole or enriched themselves ilegally by abusing trust , they ought to be named and shamed and that syolen money should be returned to the 'rightful owners ' the SACCOs that painstackingly created COOP Bank

lastly what % of COOP shares are actively traded currently ? will there be a deluge or dilution at one point? simple innocent questions tu

Our pretense gets worse with time. All this sit was known at the time of the IPO if you had closely followed the story. Undoubtedly like 99% of Kenyans would do, Muriuki et al ate in this process, but the other side of the coin is that the old boy has made Co-op what it is today having pulled it out of the icu.

A crime has been committed, but there are many worse moneycrimes that have been done in this nation and if this is where we'll start do something about it, then maybe we need our noggins to be examined. If we were to start with that asole Moi, we can discuss

Muriuki was given that for his "IDEA" An Idea in business is worth it. Segman, Naikuni, Family bank Managing Director, Equity Director, all and sundry are given free shares as an effort to turn around those companies they were or are in.

@muchr and @realty come here

you guys remind me of Kimunya's infamous retort " the NSE is not a fish market " but this Coopbank thingy stinks like rotten mbuta. a pig is a pig whatever clothes you put on it.hata upake marashi. this kind of thievery and complacency of authorities give some communities and gaarment a bad name

on a serious note therein lies an opportunity for a Doctoral thesis on overnight millionairing the case of Coopbank KE

read here some irefutable fact and revisit your posts above. wakulima and poor ignorant Kenyans were ripped off in Kirauti' language people did ninio to njikus and SACCOS who were oo willing. And here in Wazua peoples are beating drum for this monkey business without querying foondamendos

...
CBK has a total of 3,492,369,900 issued shares, and a total of 116,068 shareholders. That averages at 30,088 shares per shareholder, regardless of category. More importantly, Kenyan individual shareholders own 939,112,300 shares, and there are 112,774 of them. This averages at only 8,327 shares per Kenyan individual shareholder. Alas, among CBK'S seventeen Directors (who own a total of 138,995,700 shares), the average is a staggering 8,176,217 shares (that's more thank 981 times the number owned by the average Kenyan investor).

In fact, if you compute the average for Kenyan individual investors without including the shares held by the Directors: the total number of shares held by Kenyan individuals (non-directors) drops to 800,116,600 shares, and the average among the 112,757 of them drops to 7,095 shares per individual (which is 1,152 times less than the average for the Directors).

We can look at the directors' allocations to themselves in even starker light, as follows:
1. The Managing Director owned, as at the end of December 2008, a total of 68,121,000 shares.
2. The Chairman of the Board owned 8,000,000 shares
3.The Vice Chairman owned 7,700,000 shares
4. The Company Secretary owned 5,090,000 shares
5. The Commissioner of Cooperatives owned 2,750,000 shares
6. Five other Directors also owned just over 5 million shares each
7. Three other Directors owned exactly 5,000,000 shares each
8. One Director owned 2,750,000 shares
9. One Director owned 2,310,000 shares, and another owned 2,300,000 shares
10. The "poorest Director", representing the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Finance, owned what you may call a "token" of 1,000,000 shares! [Currently each share sells at around KES 6.50, or US$0.083]

The circumstances under which these stupendous amounts were allocated and paid for require a forensic investigation. The Directors should step aside while this happens, for, clearly, there has been no transparency here. Previous annual reports of the company may suggest where these shares came from over the years. For at least a couple of years after the bomb blast, annual reports showed significant amounts of issued shares, without explanation as to who was receiving them. The public has reason to need to know now. At the SACCOs, and at the bank's registry, officials did not seem to ever know that additional shares were being made available each year for purchase by members. What Suntra did over the counter, as far as one knew, was to match retail buyers and retail sellers who had owned their shares for some time, perhaps even since before the bomb blast, which nearly reduced the bank to a rubble, in August 1998.

The shares previously held by individual cooperative societies, amounting to 64.56% of the total, were (wisely in my view) grouped together, just before the IPO, under a corporate entity called Co-opholdings Co-operative Society Ltd. This ensured, and still does, control of the bank by the country's cooperative movement. However, the then acting Minister for Finance, John Michuki, issued a strange edict prior to the IPO which keeps secret for some five years or so the identities of the societies (and perhaps other "entities") brought together under that corporate entity. Let us hope that there are not even more rats under cover there. Five years may be too long to find out the truth!..."

let your fingers do the walking look for the rink and read

The last paragraph should inform why this debate is relevant today!

bring out your IPO prospectus and show where and how this monkey business was explained. read published accounts pre and post IPO


stop gliating sirkali ina mkono murefu if we really wanted to go for you guys mungefinywa fundamendois muimbe proper

you are licky Raia did not become PORK

The truth of the matter is that the MD, Directors and senior staff borrowed from the bank and bought shares BEFORE the IPO. It is a against the law to lend money for purchase of your own shares.

1.The fact is they bought shares before the IPO, before the share split and at different price than the IPO price. The fact that they did this knowing that the bank would be doing an IPO is what is called insider trading.

2. The rest of the staff bought during the IPO. This what you would call ESOP.

If you are a member of a co-op that is a shareholder of the bank, just know that you are the one who was played games otherwise who owns coops? It is you and me.

Ask yourself how came the rest of the staff did not make hundreds of millions yet they were also made to borrow and buy the shares.
The trick was with the share split. Anyone who had one share, was given 100.

This is how it was done

1. Before the IPO allocate each of yourself lots of shares. MD gets say 680,000 shares. OTC price was between shs60 and 80. So he borrows says 50m from the bank and buys the shares. Pls note that the share were acquired before the IPO. They never bought them during the IPO.

2. Carry a share split of 1:100. So he ends up with 68,000,000 shares.

3. AT the IPO with a price of 9.50. The man is already worth 646,000,000.00. At the current price of 18 the man is worth 1.2b.

4. The rest of the staff are made to buy the shares at IPO. So say a staff buys same number of shares as the MD. 680,000 shares. IPO price 9.50. Therefore 680,000*9.50=6.4m. At the current price, the follow is worth 680,000*18=12.2m. I hope the clever guys here can see the connection between the 12.2m and the 1.2b. IT IS THE SHARE SPLIT BEFORE THE IPO.


The same game was played at CIC. Just check their financials and see how many shares the Co-op MD and CIC MD. That is why Co-op Bank has heavily invested in CIC more than other co-ops because of this monkey business.

As for the coffee written-off thing, the evidence is there. IT will come out one day.

The thing about the media not covering the story out of compromise; The former MDs PA knows how he was able to achieve this all along.

And in a clearly choreographed move; Ruto's wife is give 5 million by the bank the other day for her foundation. Basically continue buying protection. And nothing will happen to you. Let people make noise.

@Bachuma Gate ..... I am not defending anyone but please explain to me whats illegal about an MD taking a loan of say 50M to buy shares of the company before IPO?
I also bought CIC shares before listing & on listing at the NSE I made about 5 times what I had borrowed.

Let me first declare my interest in this matter. I made a tidy sum from the listing of coop shares. I also made a tidy sum with equity listing in 2006, ditto CIC in 2010.

It works in a very straightforward manner. A private company's AGM authorises the mgt to pursue listing at the nse. For both equity and coop we went to the villages and offered a premium from the existing individual shareholders. For coop we were offering between 300 to 500 Bob per share. Majority of the shareholders were holding 50 shares of class B shares only. For equity, I have a friend whose life was transformed instantly.

For CIC, the public was invited to participate in the private placement. Many bought because it had been stated clearly that the company would be listed at a future date.

Now @siringi and others are using very strong words to refer to people who made their money during the coop IPO.

The public knew the bank would be listed. The bank's shareholders authorised the creation of additional shares to be allotted to the top mgt as an ESOP. ALL THIS INFO WAS IN THE IM. Nobody is even mentioning that the IM had clearly indicated that these shares would be locked for at least two years after the IPO.

@siringi et.all, I don't think its right to hide under the web to besmirch people's characters.

My question is " Did they buy the shares during the IPO or before?" Second was any other member of public able to buy similar number of shares freely before the IPO if he wanted. Third what was the need for the IPO if people could buy shares before the IPO. Finally Where did the over 70m shares originate from before IPO.? There was no private placement at Coop.

About CBK rule you can google.

The point is that if this was allowed; A company that needed to raise capital would simply borrow from itself other than go to the public.

In the case of Mobitelea, Kenyans did not lose a single cent! It was not a scandal!

Mobitelea did not own any shares in SCOM! It was a partner with Vodafone PLC in Vodafone Kenya. Vodafone Kenya owns a part of SCOM. When the IPO was done, the Vodafone Kenya shares did NOT come into the equation at all!!

If anyone was justified to complain about Mobitelea, it would have been Vodafone PLC, but as it was, they weren't! To me, it was a case of "pilipili usio ila, yakuwashiani?"

Another propaganda battle between politicians!