Who Owned/Owns/Will Own Nova?
October 4, 2007
By Ken Worsley
Another part of the ongoing saga with Japan’s largest English language school operator:
This information was included in September 25th’s JASDAQ filings:
Company Name: Nova Corp.
Ticker Code: 4655 JP
Report obligation incurred: Sept. 14
Shareholder: *Nozomu Saruhashi
Shares Owned: 48,323,600
Percentage of Outstanding Shares: 71.59%
Previous Percentage Owned: 71.59%
Social Bookmarks:
Related Posts:
Friday the 14th: Will NOVA Pay?
And then there was one: Two more potential Nova buyers say no
The Nova Situation: Japan Economy News in the Japan Times and on Radio New Zealand
NOVA’s 1Q 2008 Results: Red Ink or Blood?
Japan Times: NOVA to close hundreds of schools?
Comments
12 Responses to “Who Owned/Owns/Will Own Nova?”
Got something to say?
Social Media
On Twitter: JapaneconomynewMost Popular Categories
1. Real Estate2. Economics
3. Economic Reports
4. Business
5. Import/Export
Last Month's Top 5 Stories
1. Japan must shake off US-style globalization2. Public pension fund lost a record 10.17 trillion yen in fiscal 2008
3. NTT and McDonald’s release results
4. GDP up on Government Spending
5. Economy Watchers Survey up for seventh straight month in July
Upcoming Economic Reports
15 SeptemberAugust Machine Tool Orders
Jobs in Japan
From the Blogosphere
Japanese Wages Fall Again In June at Japan Economy Watch
Members of a Nation State at Neojaponisme
More Comments on Wai-Wai at Let's Japan
Will the real Ozawa please stand up? at Observing Japan
Posts on Recent Economic Reports
April 14March corporate goods price index down 2.2%
March 31
Japan household spending down 3.5% in February
March 25
Restaurant sales fall for third straight month in February
March 17
New condo offerings in Tokyo and Osaka down in February
March 10
Tokyo vacancy rates up for seventh straight month in February
View more economic reports »
Our Links
- Asia Business Intelligence
- Bank of Japan Statictics
- Cabinet Office English Homepage
- Center for Strategic and International Studies: Audio, Video & Transcripts
- China Business Daily
- Claus Vistesen’s Blog
- Columbia University Center on Japanese Economy and Business
- Council on Economic and Fiscal Policy
- Economic and Social Research Institute
- From the inside, looking in
- Global Talk 21
- Japan Business Federation - Nippon Keidanren
- Japan Considered
- Japan Economy Watch
- Japan Forum on International Relations
- Japan Inc
- Japan Labour Force Survey
- Japan Law Blog
- Japan Marketing News
- Japan News Review
- Japan Productivity Center
- JETRO - Japan External Trade Organization
- Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry - Online Statistics
- Ministry of Finance
- Ministry of Finance - Policy Research Institute
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs - Economic Affairs Page
- Mortgage News
- Nikkei Real Estate Market Report
- NYU - Center for Japan-US Business and Economic Studies
- Observing Japan
- OECD - Japan Page
- Prime Minister and his Cabinet
- Seeking Alpha
- Small and Medium Enterprise Agency
- Steven Towns’ Blog
- Tokyo Stock Exchange
- Trans-Pacific Radio
- What Japan Thinks
- World Federation of Exchanges
Archives
- February 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006



Is this a rhetorical question? Are you suggesting or, more clearly, is this suggesting that Saruhashi sold his entire stake in Nova Corp.? Could you explain this to they lay?
is this suggesting that Saruhashi sold his entire stake in Nova Corp.?
He bought it back that day. He must have sold it before. Perhaps to Roots, they had been buying up Nova shares and held about 32% at one point.
Wow. Thanks. Who would buy Nova, particularly in its current shape, and what would their intentions be? Massive restructuring; an exportable model, even if the infastructure is essentialy crumbling? Who would want to deal with all the debt, the current and, no doubt, future lawsuits, resurrecting the brand name? Who would buy Nova and then decleare bankruptcy? I guess tomorrow’s statement may answer a few questions. Any Ideas?
Roots Co. is the ‘management consultancy’ that has been talked about here and there by the media but never named for some reason. I don’t think they were buying it as an investment at all, more of an agreed upon transaction that allowed them to manage Nova’s shares. At some point it went wrong and 8 million shares went missing.
Anyone buying more than 5% of the company would have had to report the purchase. There has been no such announcement that I know of yet.
Bankruptcy and delisting are not the same thing…
If he sold at 40 yen then he didn’t make out too badly
1,932,944,000 yen (16.663 million U.S dollars) Although
I don’t know the exchange rate or share price on that day though.
Did he sell them to himself.
Yeah jeremey, that’s what’s odd. He owned 71.59% and bought 71.59%. That’s a really big company!
There’s an explanation for this strange report:
It’s based on a significant shareholdings report submitted to the Kinki Finance Bureau.
Saruhashi and Nova jointly submitted the report to note that they had put up a signifigant amount
of their shares up as collateral for a loan provided from some shady-sounding investment companies (”Forest Investment Ltd)
The shares did not actually change hands and Nova/Saruhashi have always had a controlling stake
These reports (which can be found in Japanese on EDINET) are definitely important to see who is taking stakes in the company, but any company who actually wants to buy Nova will have to make a public bid I believe
If they are delisted (which could happen if their price falls too low for an extended period) then the company will lose a major source of credit and fund generating ability.
But of course the real killer of Nova was the government’s suspension of its business.
I wonder if what Nova was doing was really worth this kind of treatment which is resulting in a lot fo pain for everyone involved, not just the unscrupulous businesspeople. METI got some headlines as some kind of warrior out to protect consumers but this makes Japan look like a really dangerous place to do business.
Roots apparently reported this transaction but has not said why they borrowed the shres.
It looks like they used NOVA’s desperate need for cash to get some cheap bleak looking stocks to play with
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/atmoney/mnews/20070920mh04.htm
NOVA 800万 コンサル会社保有
英会話学 最大手、NOVAの 式の11・85%(800万 )を、経営コンサルタント会社のルーツ(東京)が8月10日時点で、借り として保有していたことが19日、ルーツが関東財務局に提出した大量保有 告書でわかった。
NOVAは今月11日、同社の猿橋望社長らがルーツに けたNOVA のうち「800万 が返却されていない」と発表している。現在の保有状況は不明 が、8月10日時点で、ルーツがNOVA 800万 を借りていたことは裏付けられた。
ルーツは、 を取得した詳しい経緯などを明らかにしていない。NOVA側も「ルーツからの接触はなく、詳細は不明」と説明している。
(2007年9月20日 読売新聞)
I wonder if what Nova was doing was really worth this kind of treatment which is resulting in a lot fo pain for everyone involved, not just the unscrupulous businesspeople. METI got some headlines as some kind of warrior out to protect consumers but this makes Japan look like a really dangerous place to do business.
When the bad guys do bad things, do you think the cops should let them get away lest people think crime actually happens in Japan?
I told ya so! If the loan is significant enough the company
might make it to the end of December somehow, although I wouldn’t
count on it.
At the heart of it, it just bugs me that it is totally at METI’s discretion when and how to enforce the law, and then to substantially control the reporting on their handling of matters.
Not that I have a better solution, but it just seems inappropriate that they had to completely kill the business and not just make it stop the wrongdoing.
A report from FACTA notes that the consumer affairs center had been requesting METI to do something about NOVA for years (6,000 complaints in the past 5 years) but the ministry had been caving to political pressure from Saruhashi’s buddies in the LDP. They hint that METI came down so hard now so that no one could accuse them of looking like they were soft on the problem when it became too much to ignore.
It’s a big what if, but had METI acted sooner and more prudently I bet there’d be a lot fewer homeless eikaiwa teachers today.
Adamu, I agree with you that METI has dealt with this issue (or any other problems with consumer rights) very well, but blame for homeless eikaiwa teachers lies 100% with Nova’s management.