Hunterbrook Media has published an investigation casting doubt on key disclosures made by Czechoslovak Group (AMS:CSG) during and around the company’s January initial public offering, which raised 3.8 billion euros and was described at the time as Europe’s largest military IPO.
The inquiry focuses on two main themes: whether CSG’s ammunition manufacturing capacity matches the figures in its IPO prospectus, and whether certain shareholder arrangements and corporate transfers were adequately disclosed to investors.
Production capacity and factory output
CSG’s prospectus stated the group had an annual capacity of roughly 630,000 large-caliber rounds, of which 80% were projected to be 155 millimeter ammunition. Hunterbrook asked CSG to confirm whether the firm produced roughly 500,000 rounds of 155 millimeter ammunition per year. The company declined to provide a breakdown by ammunition type, saying such detail was standard industry practice to withhold.
Hunterbrook’s review of CSG’s facilities identified only one site - the Dubnica plant - that appears capable of final assembly for 155 millimeter rounds. The investigation estimated Dubnica’s output last year at between 100,000 and 280,000 rounds. By contrast, four subsidiaries within CSG that produce ammunition reported combined estimated revenue of 524 million euros in 2024, while CSG reported 2.5 billion euros in medium and large-caliber ammunition sales for the same period.
Questions around the Slovak framework and procurement ties
Hunterbrook also revisited reporting that a 58 billion euro Slovak ammunition framework agreement — a key point emphasized during the IPO process — had not been formally joined by any of the eight countries Slovakia had been said to have lined up. CSG responded that the framework figure represents the maximum potential value of the agreement and is not a roster of committed orders.
Related procurement concerns emerged in March when reporting indicated that NATO’s procurement agency had suspended CSG’s Spanish ammunition factory over alleged sanctionable practices. CSG described that suspension as temporary and procedural, tying it to an internal investigation into one of the agency’s officials.
Shareholder actions, transfers and outstanding receivables
Hunterbrook flagged a dispute involving a minority shareholder, Petr Kratochvíl, who was reported to have exercised a put option days before the IPO and to be seeking 1.4 billion euros for his stake. Kratochvíl reportedly holds 10% of CSG Land Systems and blocking rights on key corporate decisions. CSG said outside counsel concluded Kratochvíl did not effectively exercise that right prior to the IPO.
The investigation noted that, before the IPO, CSG transferred between 20 and 30 subsidiaries to a vehicle owned by founder Michal Strnad. The deals left 275 million euros in receivables from those transfers outstanding and uncollected. While the IPO documentation described the disposal of subsidiaries, it did not identify Strnad as the recipient. CSG said the receivables will be fully settled in cash.
Government program, pricing and investor backing
Hunterbrook’s reporting also covered political and commercial angles. It noted that the Czech ammunition procurement initiative, which purchases ammunition through intermediaries including CSG, may be losing political support after Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš halted the country’s funding for the program. One document referenced in reporting showed CSG selling ammunition to the Czech government at a 28% markup relative to similar shells offered by a Turkish supplier.
CSG’s IPO was anchored by major institutional investors, including BlackRock and Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund. Founder Michal Strnad reportedly realized 2.55 billion euros from the offering.
Company response and market positioning
CSG has denied any wrongdoing across the various areas examined by Hunterbrook and emphasized that the IPO process involved leading financial institutions and law firms. Hunterbrook Capital disclosed its position publicly: it is short CSG and long a basket of comparable securities.
Because the investigation raises multiple questions that touch on production claims, contractual frameworks and shareholder arrangements, market participants and procurement officials may continue to scrutinize CSG’s disclosures and operational footprint. CSG’s denials and the involvement of prominent institutional investors leave several material issues unresolved in the public record.