HYBE has announced their position on the refutation by SM Entertainment.
On February 17, HYBE officially announced that all the issues that SM has exposed and raised suspicions about are problems residing with SM’s governance structure and all of these things happened inside SM while stating that they have taken a positive outlook on SM and have solved the structural problems within SM one by one and suggested improvement measures after acquiring SM.
Related: SM Entertainment Employees Stand In Support Of The Current CEO Lee Sang Soo And Release A Statement Against HYBE Takeover Under A Newly Formed Employees Council
The following is the full statement of HYBE’s official position!
“Hello, We’re HYBE.
Here is HYBE’s position on today’s refutation by SM Entertainment. In a press release circulated on February 16, the company raised suspicions related to CT Planning by Lee Sung Soo, CEO of SM Entertainment Lee Sung Soo. At the time of signing a stock trading contract with former general manager Lee, the company did not receive any information that former general manager Lee owned a company called CTP or that CTP had a contract with SM. And in case there is a transactional relationship that we do not recognize, the former general manager Lee has signed a contract to resolve all of the unrecognized transactional relationships. That’s what was stated. If CTP is not directly contracted with SM like SM’s counter-arguments, it is natural that it is even more difficult for us to recognize it. However, according to the contract between our company and the former general manager Lee, it has already been agreed that we will not receive profits related to SM artists that are previously contracted by CTP even if it is not a direct contract with SM. In addition, SM’s questioning is meaningless because it will be transparent contract management through the board of directors so that it will not be a problem in the future. We are now making efforts to solve SM’s problems, and there is no reason to distort anything, and there is no reason for this effort to be a subject of suspicion. By the way, if SM sees that the contract with CTP cannot be resolved through a stock trading contract between us and former general manager Lee, I would like to ask what position SM has other than exposing this contract. Because contracts with these attributes are not highly visible outside of Enterprise, Enterprise executives must manage these contracts transparently and fairly for the company and its artists. There will be executives who have approved these contracts, and regardless of what executives have approved, we hope that the current executives have done enough about these contracts. All of the issues that SM has exposed raised suspicions about problems residing with SM’s governance structure, and unfortunately, all of these problems have occurred inside SM. Rather, we have taken a positive outlook on SM and we want to solve the structural problems of SM one by one, and we will continue to work hard to solve them. However, these changes can result when demonstrating real problem-solving efforts within the SM management. We don’t think it’s an approach that raises suspicions about the largest shareholder who is solving SM’s problem. To ensure that SM’s fans, members, artists, and shareholders are relieved, we ask SM executives to review whether they are responsible for anything they are currently revealing to the outside world and to make efforts to actually improve their governance structure.”
What do you think of this?