Legal and economic analysis of the privatization of Nova Ljubljanska banka

Nova Ljubljanska banka, d.d. je bila od svoje ustanovitve do danes privatizirana dvakratprvič leta 2002 in drugič leta 2018. Naloga obravnava nekatera splošna pomembna vprašanja, ki se pojavljajo pri prodaji državne banke in predstavlja prvo in drugo privatizacijo Nove Ljubljanske banke, d.d. ter ju primerja z vidika doseganja kupnine in poslovanja banke. Podrobneje prikazuje motiv za privatizacijo, ciljno strukturo lastništva, metodo prodaje in ključne cilje pri prvi in drugi privatizaciji. Podrobneje analizira dejavnike in okoliščine, ki so vplivali na zasledovanje doseganja čimvišje kupnine in potencialne ter dejanske poslovne učinke prve in druge privatizacije. Izpostavi tudi vprašanje morebitne neskladnosti prepovedi koncentracije lastništva zasebnih lastnikov s pravili Evropske Unije o prostem pretoku kapitala in odziv banke na finančno krizo. Banka je bila obakrat privatizirana delno, saj država ne želi predati kontrole nad banko. Verjamem, da bi država morala prodati svoj celotni lastniški delež v banki strateškemu vlagatelju, upoštevaje ekonomske interese in poslovni model banke. S popolnim umikom države iz lastniške strukture banke, bi se odpravila možnost političnega vplivanja na poslovne odločitve banke in dosegla višja kupnina v postopku prodaje.Since its establishment, Nova Ljubljanska banka (NLB) has been privatised two times: in 2002 and in 2018. The thesis discusses some important issues that arise in selling a state-owned bank, presents the first and the second privatisation of NLB and compares them in terms of reaching the purchase price and the bank\u27s operations. It presents in more detail the motive for privatisation, the target shareholder structure, the selling method and the key goals of the first and the second privatisation. The thesis analyses factors and circumstances that had an impact on pursuing the highest purchase price possible and also potential and actual effects produced by the first and the second privatisation. It also highlights the issue concerning the possible incompatibility of prohibition of private ownership concentration to the EU regulations on free movement of capital and the bank\u27s response to financial crisis. On both occasions, the bank was partially privatised as the state refused to give up control over the bank. I believe the state should have sold its entire equity to the strategic investor, taking into account economic interests and the business model of the bank. If the state had fully withdrawn from the bank\u27s ownership structure, the bank\u27s business decisions would not have been affected by political interference and a higher purchase price would have been achieved in the sale process