Scuttles in the Yanson 3 plan – 2

By Modesto P. Sa-onoy

 

Yesterday I raised the question of motivation that prompted Olivia to initiate actions that created the seemingly unsolvable conflict in the family. But what of the two – Leo Rey and Ginnette? What reasons have they to ally with their mother in this apparent dismantling of what their father had built through the years – a flourishing business and a prestigious name? Are they not heirs enough that they want to supplant their father? Is this their own kind of “wokeism”?

As it stands there is nothing more to be said – the die is cast, the plan executed and moving on to its desired end.

“Aye, there’s the rub”, to quote Hamlet again. There is no plan that is perfect. History teaches us that great plans have always a flaw, a defect that scuttles the best of them. Thus there are contingencies in every plan, there is always Plan “B” and “Plan “C”. No matter a perfect plan can still fail because of the unexpected.

Every investigator of a crime or puzzles of history consider three things to reach the truth or an approximation of truth: motive, capacity and opportunity. From the facts on the Yanson family dispute that had been published, collected, shared and collated all the elements are available to build a credible answer to these three imponderables. Admittedly, there will be twists and turns and additions along the way but the signs are clear.

From every angle of information that we have received or uncovered, there is, to reiterate, a sinister plan to dismantle VTI with the consequence of consigning VTI and its founder, Ricardo B. Yanson to oblivion. There is nothing unique in the Y3 plan or mentality. Kings and people of wealth have in the past done the same thing, like  Chinese emperor Qin Shi Huang who ordered the burning and burying of scholars to destroy all histories so that all histories thereafter begins with his reign. European dynasties did the same, killing even their own family and blood line so only his own would persist and inherit the throne. Is the Y3 seeking the same disgusting objective?

In the Yanson feud there is no such bloody purges but the effort leads to the same conclusion – the exclusion of the others. This seems to be too much drama or cinematography but the reality is in fact drama.

It is usual that when a plot is uncovered the plotters would either abandon it or shift to an alternative. But that is not possible in the Yanson case because it would be like the pilot shutting off the engine in mid-air or turning back. Will the Y3 do either? They can surely put an end to this dispute by reaching out for a reconciliation and charge this experience to a bad dream. But the stakes are too high, perhaps they would rather that their plot will proceed until stopped on their tracks.

I think though that the Y3 would prefer the continued freezing of the court cases, particularly the abrogation of the extra-judicial agreement which is the cornerstone of the Y3 claim to majority ownership. From the information we received the freezing may continue. It will buy time for the Y3.

Meantime, the other parts of the plan are pursued mainly in preparation for the moment the courts renders whatever decision.

But some things can derail the plans.

We continue tomorrow.