Listen to the audio version of the article
A decision was expected but instead for the former Blutec factory in Termini Imerese everything needs to be redone, or almost everything. At least this is what can be seen from the email that the extraordinary commissioners (Giuseppe Glorioso, Fabrizio Grasso and Andrea Bucarelli) sent last night to the parties involved and in particular to the groups that have already submitted an expression of interest in the sale of the Palermo business unit. It is the second time this has happened in the space of three months or so, net of a postponement of the deadline also decided by the commissioners. And it almost seems like a joke. But no.
The text of the Blutec commissioners’ email
There is an email of just a few lines that speaks clearly: «Dear Sirs, considering that none of the offers received were found to be suitable, the publication, through the same channels already used, of a further call for tenders in terms that will allow you to integrate and/or modify your offer, filing the documents in paper form no later than 1pm on 28 February 2024″. An email, which arrived yesterday evening, Friday 2 February, which greatly surprised the administrators of the groups who had already submitted the offers and then responded to the first referral made by the Blutec commissioners on the basis of a decision, they wrote at the time in the communication of the «Ministry for Business and Made in Italy». Also because this remission in terms, like the previous time, opens up the possibility of new investors and therefore new offers for the Termitano plant. One thing is certain: times are getting longer. And it seems inexplicable.
Schifani and Urso’s announcement
A couple of weeks ago, at the end of the meeting between the President of the Sicilian Region Renato Schifani and the Minister of Enterprise and Made in Italy Adolfo Urso, a press release stated that answers would be received by the end of January. And everyone expected the three Blutec commissioners to close the investigation by January 31st. And instead this new communication arrived which opens up new scenarios in the absence of other answers and many suspicions about a race already decided on the table as seemed to emerge from the article published by the newspaper La Sicilia in mid-December which took the assignment of the ex Fiat area to the Italian-Australian group of Ross Pelligra, the entrepreneur president of Catania Calcio already involved in other entrepreneurial and sporting initiatives in Italy. The Pelligra Group is one of the three admitted at the end of the first extension. The other group is that of the so-called Southern Consortium, acronym for Smart City Group, in partnership with the English company Sciara Holding and a third of the Termita-based company Artemar but only for a portion. Recently, during a public meeting which took place in Termini Imerese and organized by the Association of Accountants of Palermo, it was learned that there were other interests for at least one of the smaller establishments which are part of the large area which belongs to the former Blutec but the name is not known.
The doubts of the participating companies
The first to be surprised by the communication of “remission in terms” made by the commissioners is Fabio Bertolotti, CEO of the Sciara Holding group: «We cannot understand what the interest is at stake – he says -. We can only say that with the first postponement the possibility of an investment of 50 million, that of the Ukrainian entrepreneur, was lost. At this point we risk losing an investment of 500 million, ours, along the way.” Sciara Holding, while waiting for the Termini Imerese affair to be concluded, has already begun to verify the possibility of establishing itself in other areas of the country: discussions have been initiated to start a reindustrialization project in Calabria. The CEO of Sciara Holding does not hide all his doubts about this matter. Perplexities expressed, among other things, in a long email sent to the commissioners on 25 January which summarizes in 11 points a series of issues which, according to Bertolotti, remain unclear “also because we have not received, as in other cases, any response”. Two in particular concern transparency: «on the basis of which laws and/or regulations was the tender opening report carried out (article 13 of the specifications) – he asks –. And on the basis of which laws and/or regulations no communication was made regarding the content of the offers or the possible lack of essential documents under penalty of inadmissibility following the opening minutes of the offers”.
These are «questions – says Bertolotti – asked regardless of the conclusion
of the preliminary phase and the outcome of the tender, because they also serve to resolve any actions by third parties, both against us and against you, following a possible assignment that should or could prove even partially flawed. Allow me a joke: we are practically witnessing the “Schrödinger announcement”, that is, all the participants are there, but at the same time they are not there and the same goes for the projects or for the commissioners’ end-of-investigation report”.