Target Global

A summary of what happened?

Target Global is a venture capital firm founded in 2015, known for investing in European technology companies such as Revolut, Auto1, and Delivery Hero. The firm manages assets exceeding €1 billion and maintains a portfolio of over 100 companies.

Allegations and Concerns:

1. Concealment of Russian Connections:
   • A lawsuit filed in July 2023 alleges that Target Global concealed the Russian citizenship of directors associated with a company it invested in, particularly during the imposition of Western sanctions against Russian entities. The case involves the acquisition of Finadvant, a London-based cross-border payments company, by Finom, a Dutch firm also backed by Target Global. The plaintiff, Ukrainian entrepreneur Iryna Gordiy, claims that the founder of Finadvant, with Target Global’s knowledge, delayed reporting the change in ownership to the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), thereby bypassing enhanced checks required for Russian nationals.
2. Association with Sanctioned Russian Oligarchs:
   • Target Global was co-founded by the son of Alexander Frolov Sr., a Russian oligarch under sanctions. The firm confirmed that another sanctioned oligarch, Alexander Abramov, was historically a limited partner (LP) but is no longer associated with the firm.
3. Discrepancies in Director Nationalities:
   • Mikhail Lobanov, a co-founder of Target Global, is listed as a supervisory director of PNL Fintech/Finom. A March 2022 SEC filing described Lobanov as a Russian citizen, while Target Global later stated he is a citizen of Kyrgyzstan, raising questions about transparency regarding the nationalities of key personnel.

Legal Proceedings:

• In November 2023, the Commercial Court declined to proceed with the case, stating it had not been properly served and that the claimant did not have an arguable case against Target Global or Jekaterina Dorofejeva.

Target Global’s Response:

• The firm asserts that it has implemented controls to ensure compliance with sanctions and that none of its directors are Russian citizens. Target Global also emphasized that it was never party to an agreement with the claimant, Iryna Gordiy, and that none of its employees had ever met her.

Target Global has faced allegations of concealing Russian affiliations and associations with sanctioned individuals. While the firm denies these claims and the lawsuit was dismissed, the situation underscores the importance of transparency and compliance with international sanctions in the venture capital industry.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Target Global trying to hide?

Target Global‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Target Global in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Target Global may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: Target Global and Allegations of Concealed Russian Ties

Introduction

Target Global, a prominent venture capital firm headquartered in Europe, has earned recognition for its investments in high-profile startups such as Revolut, Auto1, and Delivery Hero. Founded in 2015, the firm manages assets exceeding €1 billion and has invested in over 100 companies. However, despite its success, Target Global has faced significant allegations concerning undisclosed Russian affiliations, ties to sanctioned oligarchs, and lapses in compliance with international sanctions. This report explores these claims in detail, providing a comprehensive overview of the controversies surrounding the firm.

Key Allegations and Concerns

1. Concealment of Russian Connections

One of the most serious accusations against Target Global involves alleged concealment of Russian affiliations in its investments:

• Lawsuit by Iryna Gordiy:
  • Ukrainian entrepreneur Iryna Gordiy filed a lawsuit in July 2023, accusing Target Global of hiding the Russian citizenship of directors associated with PNL Fintech/Finom, a Dutch-based company in which Target Global invested.
  • Gordiy claimed that the founder of Finadvant, a London-based payments firm acquired by Finom, delayed notifying the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) about the ownership change. This allegedly allowed the parties to bypass enhanced due diligence required for Russian nationals under Western sanctions.
• Target Global’s Role:
  • While Target Global has denied involvement, the lawsuit alleges that the firm knowingly facilitated this concealment, casting doubt on its compliance practices.

2. Ties to Sanctioned Russian Oligarchs

Target Global’s founders and investors have been linked to individuals under Western sanctions:

• Alexander Frolov Sr.:
  • The firm’s co-founder is the son of Alexander Frolov Sr., a Russian oligarch sanctioned for his association with the Kremlin. Frolov Sr. is known for his ownership of significant stakes in Russian industrial giants.
• Alexander Abramov:
  • Target Global confirmed that Abramov, another sanctioned oligarch, was previously a limited partner (LP) in the firm’s funds. While the firm claims Abramov is no longer associated, the historical connection has raised concerns about its investor vetting process.

3. Inconsistent Disclosures About Director Nationalities

The nationality of Target Global’s key personnel has been a point of contention:

• Mikhail Lobanov:
  • Lobanov, a co-founder of Target Global, was listed in a March 2022 SEC filing as a Russian citizen. However, the firm later stated that Lobanov is a citizen of Kyrgyzstan. This discrepancy has fueled suspicions about a lack of transparency and the potential for misrepresentation.

Legal Developments

In November 2023, the Commercial Court in the UK dismissed Iryna Gordiy’s lawsuit against Target Global:

• Reason for Dismissal:
  • The court ruled that the case had not been properly served and that Gordiy’s claims lacked sufficient grounds for further litigation.
• Implications:
  • While the dismissal absolved Target Global from immediate legal consequences, it did not resolve public concerns about the firm’s alleged lapses in due diligence and transparency.

Target Global’s Defense

The firm has issued several statements denying any wrongdoing:

• Compliance with Sanctions:
  • Target Global insists that it has robust compliance measures in place to ensure adherence to international sanctions.
• Denial of Claims:
  • The firm emphasized that it had no contractual relationship with Gordiy and that none of its employees had ever met her.
• Clarification on Oligarch Ties:
  • Target Global acknowledged Abramov’s past involvement but stressed that he no longer has any connection to the firm.

Analysis and Implications

1. Reputational Damage

The allegations and subsequent lawsuit have cast a shadow over Target Global’s reputation:

• Investor Trust:
  • Questions about transparency and compliance could deter future investors, especially in a geopolitical climate wary of Russian connections.
• Portfolio Companies:
  • Startups associated with Target Global may face scrutiny, particularly from regulators in jurisdictions enforcing stringent sanctions.

2. Importance of Transparency

The controversy highlights the need for greater transparency in the venture capital industry:

• Enhanced Disclosure:
  • Firms must provide clear and accurate information about their directors, investors, and affiliated entities.
• Due Diligence:
  • Robust processes are essential to vet investors and partners, especially in high-stakes geopolitical contexts.

Conclusion

Target Global’s success as a venture capital firm has been overshadowed by allegations of concealed Russian affiliations and ties to sanctioned individuals. While the firm has denied wrongdoing and the lawsuit against it was dismissed, the case underscores the critical importance of transparency and compliance in the investment world. For Target Global, rebuilding trust will require proactive efforts to address these concerns and demonstrate its commitment to ethical practices.

Recommendations

1. For Target Global:
   • Implement stricter due diligence processes to vet investors and partners.
   • Increase transparency about ownership structures and affiliations.
2. For Regulators:
   • Strengthen oversight of venture capital firms to ensure compliance with sanctions.
   • Require detailed disclosures about the nationality and affiliations of directors and key investors.
3. For Investors:
   • Conduct independent research into the background and affiliations of investment firms to mitigate risk.
   • Avoid partnerships with entities linked to sanctioned individuals or opaque practices.

This report underscores the challenges and responsibilities of operating within a globalized financial system, where transparency and accountability are essential to maintaining trust and integrity.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Target Global (or actors working on behalf of Target Global), we will inform Target Global of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Target Global may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Target Global, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Target Global to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Target Global made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Target Global is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Target Global

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Target Global Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Target Global used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Target Global could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Target Global have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Target Global is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Target Global creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Target Global either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Target Global, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Target Global is in great company ….

What else is Target Global hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Target Global] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Target Global that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.