Chapter 3
From reputational attacks to business sabotage
Published on
While the community could observe the reputational attacks publicly, beyond P2P actions were also being taken with the apparent goal of affecting the company’s actual business operations.
Pressure on partners and counterparties
As the public attacks intensified, various partners, counterparties and individuals connected to Ventus Energy began receiving negative outreach regarding cooperation with the company.
According to information available to us, some of the materials and accusations circulating publicly were also distributed directly to industry participants and individuals connected to the Baltic energy sector, as well as to close friends of Ventus core team members.
At the same time, pressure on the company’s operational environment began to increase.
Interference with refinancing
Ventus Energy had openly communicated that refinancing part of existing obligations is one of the company’s strategic priorities for 2026, and active work towards this objective had already been underway for a considerable period of time.
We have information indicating that unidentified individuals approached financial institutions and banks with which Ventus Energy was actively engaged in refinancing discussions and selectively highlighted publicly circulating negative information regarding the company.
As a result, the company experienced increasing complications in continuing the refinancing processes and in cooperation with these financial institutions.
Targeting strategic processes
In parallel, attempts were also made to interfere with ongoing strategic processes connected to the company’s long-term growth.
According to information available to us, Karsten also contacted an M&A advisory company that Ventus Energy had been working with regarding the attraction of strategic investors, partners, and potential buyers for parts of the company’s portfolio.
What exactly was the purpose of these actions? Simply “informing” third parties? Or attempting to actively sabotage ongoing strategic processes?
Sabotaging the infrastructure projects
However, one of the most serious and disturbing developments emerged around the company’s energy infrastructure projects themselves.
A construction partner involved in the development of the Valga Solar & BESS park approached Ventus Energy with information that an unknown individual had contacted him and allegedly offered EUR 100,000 in exchange for sabotaging or delaying the construction process of the solar park.
According to the information shared with us, the construction partner was additionally asked to speak by telephone with an English-speaking individual calling from Thailand (+66 country code).
The individual reportedly showed active interest in obtaining any potentially damaging information regarding Ventus Energy — unpaid invoices, delays, tax-related issues or any other operational problems.
Fortunately for us, the construction partner is a trusted Ventus Energy partner and decided to immediately inform the company about these events.
The information and related materials have since been submitted as part of the already mentioned criminal proceedings.
Similarly, we have faced delays in Powerhouse Krustpils development as the start of ground works were constantly delayed by someone filing complaints to Construction authority and State Environmental Service about the project. Thankfully, these obstacles have been cleared and construction is underway.
These are only the incidents that became known to us and where we obtained convincing information regarding the underlying activities.
The question remains — how many similar activities may have taken place outside our field of view?
Direct financial consequences
At the same time, Ventus Energy also experienced direct financial consequences from the ongoing narrative campaign. Following the publication and active distribution of various allegations, the company received withdrawal requests and messages from lenders who explicitly referenced the public accusations and publications as the reason for their decisions.
Most importantly, these activities began directly threatening the company’s ability to efficiently develop energy infrastructure projects, maintain stable financing relationships and continue executing the long-term business model on which lender repayments depend.
By this stage, it was becoming increasingly clear that the situation had escalated far beyond reputational attacks and online narratives alone. However, this was not where the activities of the campaign’s organisers and participants stopped. The events that unfolded in parallel increasingly pointed towards direct intimidation, extortion attempts and potential criminal conduct.