Hubbry Logo
Anthony ParnesAnthony ParnesMain
Open search
Anthony Parnes
Community hub
Anthony Parnes
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Anthony Parnes
Anthony Parnes
Anthony Parnes
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Anthony Keith Parnes (born 1945) is an English ex-stockbroker, who was convicted and jailed with Ernest Saunders, Gerald Ronson, and Jack Lyons in the Guinness share-trading fraud of the 1980s; they collectively became known as "the Guinness Four". He was sentenced to two-and-a-half years on charges of false accounting and theft.

Key Information

The son of a London gown manufacturer, Parnes started his working life as an office boy with a stockbroker. Working in the Stock Exchange as a 'blue button' at A. J. Bekhore, he established a reputation for dealing with the big players of the fringe banking world. His colleagues nicknamed him "The Animal".[2][3]

Parnes built up the strategic shareholding in Debenhams for Ronson and Sir Philip Harris during Burton's fiercely contested bid for the department store group. That stake helped win the bid for Sir Ralph Halpern, Burton's chairman, in a cliffhanging finish. The vote went in favour of Burton after the bid had been extended from the 3 pm Friday deadline to the following Sunday in a special dispensation by the Takeover Panel. After working at stockbrokers A.J. Bekhor, Rowe Rudd and McNally, he became a "half commission" man (that is, an introducing broker) with Alexander Laing and Cruickshank.[4] As well as having dealt for various clients, Parnes' relations include the former chief executive of the major British jewellery company Ratners Group Gerald Ratner[5] and the restaurateur and club-owner Richard Caring.[6]

The Guinness Case

[edit]

Parnes and others had manipulated the Guinness share price to enable it to merge favourably with Distillers. Described as "flamboyant" by The Scotsman, he was sentenced to two-and-a-half years on charges of false accounting and theft, but had his sentence reduced to 21 months on appeal.[citation needed]

Parnes' case was that a reasonable man with experience in the City would not at the time have regarded what he did as dishonest. Guinness shares did not reach a price higher than he thought was justified. He did not accept he had any responsibility to make disclosure to the Stock Exchange. He claimed the payments he received were for lawful and valuable services. He also claimed he was not told that the arrangements he made for Guinness plc had not been sanctioned by its board of directors.[citation needed]

Appeals by the Guinness four in 1991 and 1995 resulted in their sentences being reduced. In 1995 Michael Heseltine, the then President of the Board of Trade, lifted a government "gagging order" preventing disclosure of evidence in the appeals of defendants in the Guinness case. While this procedure was unjust, the court felt that it did not outweigh the prosecution's arguments.[citation needed]

The now deceased Patrick Spens, 3rd Baron Spens, a defendant in the second, Guinness II, trial, who campaigned for compensation after the charges against him were dropped, said: "We have tried for years to get the certificate lifted." He said that the Guinness appeal would make "Matrix Churchill look amateurish. In Matrix Churchill three men did not go to prison; in Guinness I, they did." He insisted that there was nothing wrong with the Guinness deal and says the DTI inspectors did not understand the rules of the takeover "game". Lord Spens said that the difference between winning and losing a takeover bid could easily be an executive's job and he said: "Takeovers are not genteel affairs, as the inspectors would have it. They are very, very serious, life and death businesses. Little has changed in the last 10 years. They are just called different names, the practices that went on in the 1980s."

Personal life

[edit]

Parnes was married to Denise Ratner, sister of jewellery businessman Gerald Ratner.[7]

As a result of the Guinness case and his 17 months in prison, his marriage broke up, he was expelled from the London Stock Exchange, and left a large home in Hampstead for a small flat in central London.[8]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Anthony Parnes

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Anthony Keith Parnes (born June 1945) is a British former primarily known for his role in the 1986 Guinness share-trading during the takeover battle for . As one of the "Guinness Four," alongside , , and Jack Lyons, Parnes facilitated the acquisition and distribution of shares to supportive investors, contributing to an illegal scheme that artificially inflated the stock price to secure the £2.5 billion acquisition. In August 1990, he was convicted at of and false , receiving a 30-month sentence that was reduced to 21 months on appeal. Prior to the scandal, Parnes had built a career rising from an office boy to a millionaire broker, but the convictions led to his imprisonment and professional downfall, with ongoing associations limited to family business ties via records.

Early Life and Career

Background and Entry into Finance

Anthony Parnes, the son of a London gown manufacturer, entered the financial sector without formal higher education or family connections in . Parnes began his career at the bottom rung as an office boy, performing clerical tasks on the trading floor of the Stock Exchange, where such roles were colloquially known as 'blue buttons'. He joined the firm A. J. Bekhor, a stockbroking house, marking his initial exposure to market operations through hands-on errands and support duties typical of entry-level positions in the exchange during the mid-20th century. This apprenticeship-style entry allowed Parnes to gain practical knowledge of share trading amid the bustling, less regulated environment of the pre-Big Bang era markets.

Rise as a Stockbroker

Anthony Keith Parnes, born to a London gown manufacturer, entered the financial sector at the entry level as an office boy—commonly known as a "blue button" or messenger—in the . He began this role with the firm A.J. Bekhor, performing rudimentary tasks such as delivering messages and orders on the trading floor, a typical starting point for aspiring brokers in the mid-20th century City of . Parnes advanced through several stockbroking firms, gaining experience at Rowe Rudd and McNally after his initial stint at Bekhor. By the , he had established himself as a dealer, eventually joining Alexander Laing & Cruickshank as a "half-commission" man, or introducing broker, where he brought in clients and shared commissions on trades. This position allowed him greater autonomy, handling transactions for high-profile clients and accumulating over two decades of market expertise by the late 1980s. His ascent was marked by an aggressive, high-volume trading style that earned him the nickname "The Animal," reportedly due to his distinctive hairstyle and relentless deal-making approach. Parnes became a prominent figure in takeover battles, including the earlier Debenhams bid, positioning him as a go-to broker for substantial share dealings among the City's elite. By the mid-1980s, he had risen to millionaire status, acting for some of the largest names in share trading and solidifying his reputation as a self-made force in London's financial markets.

The Guinness Share-Trading Affair

Context of the Guinness-Distillers Bid

In late 1985, plc, a leading Scottish producer of and gin with key brands including , , and Gordon's, became the target of acquisition interest amid the era's aggressive corporate activity in the UK beverages sector. On 2 December 1985, Argyll Group plc, a diversified conglomerate with operations, launched a hostile bid for valued at approximately £2.3 billion, prompting concerns from Distillers' management over strategic fit and independence. Distillers' board rejected the offer and sought a friendly alternative to preserve its whisky-focused heritage. Guinness plc, an established brewer known for its and having recently expanded into Scotch via the June 1985 acquisition of Arthur Bell & Sons, positioned itself as a complementary "" suitor to counter Argyll's advances. On 20 January 1986, announced an initial offer of £2.5 billion, which ' board recommended to shareholders as superior in value and synergy for building a broader international spirits portfolio. The bid structure combined cash and shares—specifically, eight ordinary shares plus £6.50 in cash for every five shares—making the effective valuation sensitive to fluctuations in 's share price. The contest escalated through multiple revisions, with countering aggressively while leveraged its beverage expertise to appeal to stakeholders. By April , secured 50.74% of ' shares, clinching the deal at a final value of £2.7 billion (equivalent to about $4.1 billion), marking one of Britain's largest takeovers to date and forming the basis for future industry consolidation leading to entities like United Distillers. This outcome reflected broader trends in mergers, where share-backed bids incentivized tactics to stabilize bidder valuations amid market volatility.

Parnes's Role in Share Support Operations

Anthony Parnes, a stockbroker, coordinated key aspects of the illicit share support scheme during Guinness plc's January 1986 takeover bid for plc, valued at approximately £2.5 billion. As part of this operation, Parnes recruited investors and facilitated the purchase of substantial volumes of shares to artificially elevate the stock price, thereby making Guinness's paper offer more competitive against Group's rival cash bid. His efforts included enlisting participants such as Ephraim Margulies of S&W Beresford plc to acquire shares, with Guinness providing indemnities against potential losses to incentivize these buys. Parnes submitted multiple false invoices to , disguising payments for share purchases and related support activities as legitimate fees for "intelligence gathering" and advisory services. disbursed £3.35 million to Parnes under these pretexts, which prosecutors later established funded the scheme's mechanics, including reimbursements to buyers and success fees upon the bid's success. These transactions formed the basis of his convictions for four counts of false and two counts of theft, as the scheme violated laws against and fraudulent inducement of share trades. The support operations, in which Parnes actively participated alongside figures like and Jack Lyons, involved secret cross-border funding and purchases totaling hundreds of millions of pounds in stock, propping up the share price from around 150p to over 220p during the bid contest. Parnes's brokerage network enabled rapid execution of these trades, often through offshore entities to obscure origins, though investigations revealed the payments traced back to 's corporate funds without shareholder approval. This role underscored the scheme's reliance on insider coordination to circumvent regulations, with Parnes's compensation reflecting the high-risk, high-volume trading he orchestrated.

Charges and Trial

Anthony Parnes was formally charged on March 24, 1988, with and related to his role in the Guinness share support scheme during the 1986 Distillers takeover bid. The prosecution alleged that Parnes, through his company, dishonestly obtained approximately £3.35 million from by submitting invoices falsely claiming the funds were for "intelligence gathering" and advisory services, when they were actually compensation for orchestrating purchases of shares to artificially prop up the stock price amid the competitive bid. These charges specified two counts of and either four or five counts of , focusing on the of payments in 's financial records to conceal the illicit nature of the transactions. The trial against Parnes and his co-defendants—Ernest Saunders, Gerald Ronson, and Jack Lyons—began on February 13, 1990, at in , selected due to the case's scale requiring larger facilities than the could provide. Described by financial observers as the "City trial of the century," the proceedings spanned over six months and featured testimony from dozens of witnesses, including bankers, investors, and executives, alongside examination of thousands of documents detailing share transactions and offshore payments. Prosecutors contended that Parnes, a flamboyant nicknamed "," actively recruited overseas investors—such as institutions in and —to acquire more than 40 million shares, enabling the company to issue additional stock in its £2.7 billion offer for without diluting value excessively. Parnes's defense maintained that the payments were legitimate success fees for legitimate deal facilitation and market intelligence, denying any intent to deceive shareholders or regulators. Central to the trial evidence were records showing funds routed through Parnes's entities, including Triumph Investment Management, with payments approved by Saunders but not disclosed to Guinness's board or the Takeover Panel, violating stock market rules against share manipulation. The case highlighted tensions between aggressive tactics and duties, with prosecutors emphasizing how the scheme distorted market pricing and potentially misled rival bidders like Argyll Group. No prior convictions marred Parnes's record at the time, and the defense challenged the admissibility of certain overseas banking obtained via international cooperation.

Verdict and Sentencing

On August 27, 1990, Anthony Parnes was convicted at the in on four counts of false and two counts of related to his involvement in illicit share support schemes during plc's 1986 bid for . The jury delivered guilty verdicts following a lengthy trial that examined Parnes's role in coordinating undisclosed payments and trades to artificially inflate shares, including transfers exceeding £6 million to his accounts. The next day, August 28, 1990, Mr Justice Denis Henry sentenced Parnes to 30 months' , emphasizing the deliberate involved in the operations that distorted market integrity. Unlike co-defendants , who received a £5 million fine alongside his term, Parnes faced no additional financial penalty at sentencing, though he had been expelled from the earlier. Parnes collapsed in court shortly after the verdict due to the strain of overnight detention, resuming proceedings upon recovery.

Appeals and Controversies

UK Appeals and Sentence Reductions

Following his on August 22, 1990, for false accounting and theft in connection with the Guinness share-support operations, Anthony Parnes was sentenced to 30 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay £440,000 in costs. Parnes immediately appealed both the conviction and sentence to the . In a ruling that reduced the penalties without overturning the conviction, the court shortened the prison term to 21 months and the costs order to £250,000, citing mitigating factors in the sentencing while upholding the jury's verdict on the substantive charges. Parnes and his co-defendants, known as the "Guinness Four," pursued further domestic appeals in the late 1990s and early 2000s to challenge the convictions themselves, arguing procedural irregularities including the admissibility of Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) interview transcripts and claims of an unfair trial. On December 21, 2001, the Court of Appeal dismissed these contentions, rejecting arguments that the defendants had been denied a fair hearing and affirming the original trial's integrity. The appellants then sought leave to appeal to the , contending that the use of compelled statements violated principles of . On November 14, 2002, the dismissed the final UK appeal, maintaining the convictions and declining to grant relief despite acknowledging related concerns that were later addressed in European proceedings. These outcomes exhausted domestic remedies, with no further sentence reductions granted beyond the initial appellate adjustment.

European Human Rights Challenges and Scapegoating Claims

In 1996, Anthony Parnes, alongside and Jack Lyons, lodged an application with the (ECHR), contending that their 1990 trial for offenses related to the Guinness share-support scheme violated Article 6 of the , which mandates a fair hearing by an independent tribunal. The applicants argued that the prosecution's reliance on transcripts from compulsory interviews conducted by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)—interviews in which they were legally required to answer questions under threat of penalties—compromised their right against and led to unfair adverse inferences. On August 4, 1999, the ECHR's Chamber ruled unanimously that the use of such compelled evidence had indeed rendered the trial unfair, as it breached the privilege against protected under Article 6, though the Court awarded no damages beyond costs. The ECHR's finding prompted Parnes and his co-applicants to seek to reopen their cases in the UK Court of Appeal, invoking the then-forthcoming , which incorporated the Convention into domestic law effective October 2, 2000. They contended that the Act should apply retrospectively to quash convictions predating it, given the identified procedural flaws. However, in December 2001, the Court of Appeal dismissed their renewed appeals, holding that the did not permit retrospective invalidation of final convictions absent exceptional circumstances, and that the trial's overall fairness had not been impugned beyond the specific evidential issue already addressed by the ECHR. The upheld this in November 2002, rejecting further arguments for retroactivity and affirming that the ECHR ruling did not automatically entitle the applicants to acquittals, as domestic courts retained discretion over evidential admissibility at the time of trial. Parnes has consistently portrayed his conviction as unjust, aligning with broader claims by the so-called Four that they were to exemplify regulatory crackdowns on financial excesses amid public outrage over corporate greed. In 2015, , then a Labour peer, publicly advocated for a into the affair, asserting that Jewish businessmen including Parnes—described as targeted due to their heritage—were disproportionately prosecuted in what he called an anti-Semitic effort to find villains for the bid's irregularities, citing warnings from a minister about authorities "going after the ." These allegations, echoed in parliamentary debates, point to purported inconsistencies in enforcement, such as lighter treatment of non-Jewish participants and the subsequent dementia-related pardon of in 1996, but lack independent corroboration and have been dismissed by prosecutors as revisionist defenses unsubstantiated by evidence of . Parnes's legal team reiterated scapegoating themes in post-ECHR submissions, arguing amid the era's political pressure for high-profile convictions, though courts found no merit in claims of or evidential suppression. The , reviewing Parnes's case as recently as September 2024, declined referral to the Court of Appeal, citing insufficient new evidence or arguments to undermine the original verdict despite the dimension.

Personal Life and Later Years

Family and Relationships

Anthony Parnes was married to Denise Ratner, the sister of British jewelry businessman . The marriage, which occurred prior to the Guinness share-trading scandal, ended in divorce following Parnes's 1990 conviction and subsequent imprisonment. Parnes and Ratner had two children together: a son, Michael Parnes, who later entered the industry as a broker, and a daughter. No further marriages or long-term relationships for Parnes are documented in available records.

Post-Conviction Activities and Family Legacy

Following his release from Ford Open Prison in July 1992 after serving 11 months of a reduced 21-month sentence, Anthony Parnes adopted a low public profile, having been expelled from the Stock Exchange due to his conviction. He resided quietly in with his son, avoiding involvement in financial markets or public commentary on the scandal. Parnes's marriage to Denise Ratner, sister of jeweler and a wealthy heiress, ended in shortly after the Guinness affair and his imprisonment, which strained family relations. The couple had one son, Michael Parnes, born during their marriage. Michael Parnes pursued a career in stockbroking, entering the finance sector despite his father's notoriety. In May 2006, at age 25, he facilitated a significant deal linking Far East investors to property opportunities through his role at a brokerage firm, marking an early professional milestone. By 2010, Michael had established himself further, leveraging family connections in business networks. This continuation in finance represents a partial family legacy, though Anthony Parnes himself refrained from professional resurgence or mentorship in the field post-release.

References

  1. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/1iT6HDR0F0jQ6U-Suo-z0TeNLA4/appointments
  2. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/business-and-management/guinness-four-are-found-guilty-share-trading-fraud
  3. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/27/newsid_2536000/2536035.stm
  4. https://ccrc.gov.uk/decision/parnes-anthony/
  5. https://www.scotsman.com/news/life-and-high-flying-times-of-four-partners-in-crime-2468724
  6. https://www.afr.com/politics/creed-of-greed-19900914-k41zc
  7. https://www.afr.com/politics/guinness-case-will-test-corporate-morality-19900212-k3sdp
  8. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1987-01-28/debates/20bc533c-6f04-4f1e-8682-d25b91c91fe5/TheCityAndIndustry
  9. https://www.express.co.uk/expressyourself/102692/Guinness-crooks-who-framed-me
  10. https://whiskymag.com/articles/strong-foundations-the-history-of-diageo-precursor-distillers-company-limited/
  11. https://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/1989-13.pdf
  12. https://www.scotchwhisky.com/magazine/features/8984/the-guinness-distillers-saga-the-deal/
  13. https://www.the-independent.com/news/business/the-way-guinness-rigged-the-takeover-1474385.html
  14. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-01-21-fi-31276-story.html
  15. https://www.nytimes.com/1986/01/21/business/guinness-offers-to-buy-distillers-for-3.2-billion.html
  16. https://www.nytimes.com/1986/04/19/business/guinness-bests-argyll-to-acquire-distillers-co.html
  17. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-04-21-fi-861-story.html
  18. http://www.nytimes.com/1986/12/04/business/guinness-investigation-looks-at-stock-action.html
  19. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/the-way-guinness-rigged-the-takeover-1474385.html
  20. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1723136.stm
  21. https://www.unafei.or.jp/publications/pdf/RS_No66/No66_14VE_Kiernan3.pdf
  22. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1988/03/24/London-stockbroker-arrested-in-Guinness-case/4411575182800/
  23. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/dec/03/3
  24. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-08-27-fi-283-story.html
  25. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/11973694.guinness-city-trial-of-century-begins/
  26. https://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/13/business/trial-begins-in-guinness-stock-case.html
  27. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/dec/21/4
  28. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/sep/20/claredyer
  29. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1990/08/28/Ex-Guinness-chairman-imprisoned-for-5-years/8578651816000/
  30. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2473785.stm
  31. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-23303
  32. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/trial-of-guinness-defendants-breached-their-human-rights-says-european-court-698548.html
  33. https://www.theguardian.com/business/1999/aug/04/17
  34. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2001/dec/22/5
  35. https://www.thejc.com/news/call-for-inquiry-amid-claims-guinness-four-were-scapegoats-ld0xy025
  36. https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/lord-mandelson-calls-inquiry-into-guinness-scandal-amid-jewish-scapegoat-claims-1486626
  37. https://www.thejc.com/news/jews-were-scapegoats-in-guinness-scandal-claims-peer-tn1a9g9p
  38. https://www.the-independent.com/news/the-key-players-at-the-centre-of-the-guinness-case-and-how-they-have-fared-since-their-convictions-1578609.html
  39. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/citydiary/8320210/City-boy-Michael-Parnes-to-tie-the-knot-with-Tomb-Raider-Lucy-Clarkson.html
  40. https://citywire.com/new-model-adviser/news/twenty-years-after-guinness-parnes-junior-brokers-far-east-deal/a273409
  41. https://www.shutterstock.com/editorial/image-editorial/denise-parnes-wife-anthony-tony-daughter-millionaire-3817481a
  42. https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/adjusting-to-life-after-residence-at-the-savoy-mary-braid-reports-on-the-mixed-fortunes-of-the-four-lead-characters-in-the-guinness-sharerigging-case-since-they-were-convicted-1449887.html
  43. https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-1545793/How-they-live-now.html
  44. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/citydiary/7862040/Parnes-family-tree-shows-he-has-impressive-roots.html
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.