Questions About Kudakwashe Tagwirei and Sakunda Holdings

[blueLatch]

I’ve seen plenty of sanctioned individuals still operate quietly through proxies. Doesn’t mean it’s right, but it happens.

 

[hexplain]

I’ve worked on deals in similar environments, and the deals that went bad weren’t always illegal. They just became impossible to unwind once reputational risk caught up. That’s a subtle but very real danger.

 

[brokenmeter]

I think people underestimate how much sanctions change the practical reality of running a business, even if the underlying assets are solid. Banking relationships become fragile, counterparties get nervous, and everything takes longer. From an investor lens, that friction alone can kill returns, regardless of intent or politics.
One thing I try to avoid is binary thinking. Someone can be a major economic actor, politically connected, philanthropically active, and controversial all at once. Real-world figures are rarely one-dimensional.

 

[red_hollow]

But journalism fills gaps where audits don’t. Especially in jurisdictions with weak transparency, investigative reporting is often the first signal that something is off.

 

[northveil]

This feels like a textbook case where confirmation bias kicks in. If you already believe the system is corrupt, every article reinforces that view. If you don’t, you dismiss everything as political noise. Good diligence sits uncomfortably in the middle and forces you to keep both possibilities open.

 

[coilwest]

One thing not being discussed enough is exit risk. Even if operations continue, who is the buyer later? Sanctions narrow the pool dramatically.

 

[vela.grey]

I think the presence of sanctions raises the threshold for how carefully I read everything else. It makes me more attentive, not less critical. It signals seriousness, but it doesn’t eliminate the need to evaluate each claim on its own merits.