Sign in with Facebook
Dipo Okuribido's Reviews > The Key Man: The True Story of How the Global Elite Was Duped by a Capitalist Fairy Tale
The Key Man: The True Story of How the Global Elite Was Duped by a Capitalist Fairy Tale
by
by
In a sense this is 2 books. As a summary of the details of what happened at Abraaj, this is clearly well researched. The story is also quite interesting and fascinating and the writers must be credited for bringing it out.
Beyond that though, the second book is the narrative that’s woven around it, which is just atrocious on so many levels. Almost all of the attempts to dip the details into a context fails. Even if he spoke about it a lot Naqvi is hardly the poster child for impact investing or the founder of shared value or any of those ideas. His troubles don’t really prove or justify drawing any conclusions about that. Would also have been interesting to unpack other parts of the story. How come there was so little control, how did auditors miss the corruption for so long? Valuation is rarely a science, we’re they forging accounts or applying strange multiples? As long as the story is, it’s filled with a lot of unnecessary details. Why do we need to know that the lawyer’s brother works at the same firm with the brother of David Cameron or that people who made a bid for Abraaj were associated with Obama? Interesting stories aren’t pursued while we are peppered with random details constantly. Every few pages a fee or an expense is compared to average incomes in developing countries. Only the writers know why that is necessary. At some point they insinuate that the Head of IFC goes against his team and approves a commitment to an Abraaj Fund but of course they don’t discuss the angle of corruption there. I think the worst part of the book is the epilogue where somehow a push for lower taxes in the US is linked with low tax revenues in Pakistan.
Overall an interesting insight into how Abraaj happened and worth reading for that.
Beyond that though, the second book is the narrative that’s woven around it, which is just atrocious on so many levels. Almost all of the attempts to dip the details into a context fails. Even if he spoke about it a lot Naqvi is hardly the poster child for impact investing or the founder of shared value or any of those ideas. His troubles don’t really prove or justify drawing any conclusions about that. Would also have been interesting to unpack other parts of the story. How come there was so little control, how did auditors miss the corruption for so long? Valuation is rarely a science, we’re they forging accounts or applying strange multiples? As long as the story is, it’s filled with a lot of unnecessary details. Why do we need to know that the lawyer’s brother works at the same firm with the brother of David Cameron or that people who made a bid for Abraaj were associated with Obama? Interesting stories aren’t pursued while we are peppered with random details constantly. Every few pages a fee or an expense is compared to average incomes in developing countries. Only the writers know why that is necessary. At some point they insinuate that the Head of IFC goes against his team and approves a commitment to an Abraaj Fund but of course they don’t discuss the angle of corruption there. I think the worst part of the book is the epilogue where somehow a push for lower taxes in the US is linked with low tax revenues in Pakistan.
Overall an interesting insight into how Abraaj happened and worth reading for that.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Key Man.
Sign In »
And while I understand that perhaps the book was largely incomplete based on the investors, auditors, regulatory bodies, etc. refusal to comment (as well as the fact that the trial is still pending), to me that signifies that while maybe not the fault of the authors, maybe this is a book they should have held off on writing. But then, there’s always that urgency to write the “first book”. Even if that’s important to authors, I’ve seen examples of much better books written later, when the information was more abundant, and more transparent. Breaking the story first in a news article is one thing, but building an entire book about it is quite another!
Thanks for this review! I’ve been taking some time to review this myself, uncertain exactly as to why I thought it went wrong in the ways I did. You helped provide more clarity on that, so it’s appreciated!