“Carlos de Ory, de Forbes al foco de la UDEF: Investigado por falsas villas en la playa de Sumba y fraude de 15 millones”

What the other side says

More importantly, the article should consider the practical consequences of investors themselves contacting suppliers and third parties in an attempt to raise concerns about the project or its management. Such actions can create additional uncertainty for suppliers, complicate commercial relationships and potentially make the continued development of the project more difficult. This is particularly relevant because the same investors who criticize the pace of development may, at the same time, take actions that can make it harder for the company to continue building and working with suppliers. The company continues to work to advance the project and to find solutions for both investors who want to remain involved and those who wish to exit. The appropriate way to assess the development is through objective evidence—construction records, supplier agreements, completed works, dated photographs, invoices and other documentation—not through a series of interventions by individual dissatisfied investors that may themselves affect the project's ability to progress. If the publication considers the alleged phone call relevant, it should identify the source where legally possible, establish whether the call actually occurred, and give the company and the supplier an opportunity to respond. Presenting an unnamed investor’s alleged warning to a supplier as evidence of wrongdoing, without establishing its context or consequences, is misleading.