EMAIL DETAILS

Dear Vadym

I have worked with Dan Nardello before while at Morgan Stanley where he
helped us with a sensitive situation in Russia, Heather is correct in her
analysis, Dan's firm is in a different league than Kroll. I was very
pleased with Dan's work. I leave the decision to the shareholder of
course, but I can endorse Nardello as best in class.

Thanks,
Alan


On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Vadim Pozharskyi <
v.pozharskyi.ukraine@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Heather,
> fully realize the importance of hiring the Nardello company. I am
> traveling next 2 days and on Wednesday morning European time will have
> meeting with Shareholder to discuss inter alias this issue. Will get back
> to you on this on Wednesday. Due to the fact that last days he was not in
> the country we did not have chance to discuss such sensitive issue in
> proper way face to face.
> best regards, Vadym
>
> Отправлено с iPad
>
> 25 мая 2014, в 21:19, Heather King <hking@BSFLLP.com> написал(а):
>
> Vadim – I am writing to once again urge Burisma to approve the hiring of
> the research company I recommended: Nardello. Their work will be critical
> to everything else we want to do to help you – legal, PR and lobbying – and
> should begin immediately. I have listed below some of the reasons I think
> Nardello is the right choice and why, in particular, Kroll is not the right
> choice for this work:
>
>
>
> 1. This case would be personally managed by Dan Nardello. He is a
> reputable former federal prosecutor in the U.S. and is an expert on
> corruption issues. He and other members of his team, who would work on
> this matter, have superior anti-corruption credentials and all of their
> research would be informed by that. This expertise will help us gather the
> right information to make our case that the Ukrainian government is abusing
> the law if they do something like try to take Burisma’s licenses or
> prosecute your executives. In addition, it will help to tell the U.S.
> government that a company with Nardello’s reputation, and no pre-existing
> relationship with Burisma, examined Burisma.
>
> 2. I do not believe Kroll can offer us the personal attention of
> senior professionals with such anti-corruption expertise. Kroll is much
> more of a formal corporate structure where you are relegated to local
> offices and don’t get access to the same level of judgment and expertise.
>
> 3. Kroll has a reputation for white-washing and are not as trusted
> for due diligence work in the U.S. right now. For example, Kroll was hired
> to conduct due diligence related to a man named Allen Stanford. They did
> not do thorough research and they understated very significant issues, to
> great consequence. (If you Google Allen Stanford and Kroll you will see
> many reports of this and here is one:
> http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20090717/NEWS01/907179986#)
>
> 4. Nardello has done a lot of work in Ukraine and in the region as
> a whole. We will benefit greatly from their familiarity with the politics
> in the region, their past research, and their network within Ukraine.
>
> 5. Nardello has an acute legal understanding of what needs to be
> examined and reported on, due to the former prosecutors that lead their
> work.
>
> 6. I have heard reports of Kroll’s lack of professionalism and
> quality control generally (they are known for going over budget, missing
> deadlines, and having junior people do most of the work).
>
>
>
> *Heather King, Esq.*
>
> *Partner*
>
>
> *BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP **5301 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W.*
> *Washington, D.C. 20015*
>
> *202-274-1129 <202-274-1129> (Phone) 202-237-6131 <202-237-6131> (Fax)*
>
> hking@bsfllp.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> IRS Circular 230 disclosure:
> To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, unless we
> expressly state otherwise, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding
> penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or
> recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
>
> ------------------------------
> The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
> information intended only for the use of the named recipient(s) and may
> contain information that, among other protections, is the subject of
> attorney-client privilege, attorney work product or exempt from disclosure
> under applicable law. If the reader of this electronic message is not the
> named recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
> named recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution, copying or other use of this communication is strictly
> prohibited and no privilege is waived. If you have received this
> communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to
> this electronic message and then deleting this electronic message from your
> computer. [v.1]
>