In early April 2024, Xu Xinyu, executive director of Ferretti Spa, noticed a SUV and two strange men prowling outside the elegant eighteenth century Palace that houses the offices of the Italian maker of luxury yachts in Milan. On other days, during visits to the Palazzo Parigi Hotel and the Eastern Mandarin, Xu again noticed the same individuals. In a short time, he was convinced that he was being followed, according to people familiar with the situation, who asked for anonymity to discuss confidential issues.
XU, who was also part of the board of directors of the majority shareholders of Ferretti – Chinese industrial conglomerate Weichai Group – hired a counter -espionage company. During the first scan on the night of April 3, the security company found a listening device and a signal amplifier hidden at the XU table. In the offices of the Secretary of the Board and the Sino-Italian translator of the company, other hidden devices were found in electrical outlets. Ferretti confirmed, in a statement sent to Bloomberg News, that surveillance devices were found in its facilities.
In the months preceding the discovery of the listening, the relationship between Ferretti executives – one of the leading yacht designers for billionaires in the world – and his largest shareholder had deteriorated because of an action repurchase program, according to those same people. The plan, which was removed, even caught the attention of the Italian government, which has the special “gold” veto power over businesses involving companies considered strategic.
Continues after advertising
When surveillance was discovered, some members of Ferretti’s board of board feared that someone inside the company could be behind it.
Investigations
The case of espionage resulted in two distinct criminal proceedings, currently under the analysis of the Public Prosecution Service of Milan. One of them was presented in May 2024 by XU, the Secretary of the Council and the translator, against “unknown persons”, alleging unauthorized access to the computer system and illegal violation of private life, according to sources with knowledge of the case. If proven, these crimes may result in civil and criminal penalties, including arrest in the most serious cases. In January 2025, Ferretti herself presented its process to the Public Prosecution Service, according to the company’s statement.
Investigations are still in preliminary internship and there is no guarantee that formal accusations will be made, depending on the prosecutor’s conclusion about whether or not the occurrence of crime.
Continues after advertising
None of the cases were still disclosed to investors. In Italy, companies listed on the scholarship are usually required to notify the market for security violations and criminal investigations, according to legal experts.
In its statement, Ferretti confirmed that he filed the complaints to the prosecutor. “Ferretti Spa is considered an impaired part, having been harmed by the illegal and improper installation of surveillance devices in its offices,” the company said. Ferretti denied that there is tension between management and its Chinese shareholder. “The shareholder and the company have a relationship based on mutual esteem and a full and constructive collaboration for over 10 years,” he said.
A press representative of Weichai Group did not respond to multiple Bloomberg News calls. Xu also did not respond to requests for commentary sent by email. The Public Prosecution Service of Milan also did not respond to the request for comment.
Continues after advertising
Golden power
Currently, Weichai has 37.5% of Ferretti. A supposed disagreement between Ferretti CEO Alberto Galassi and some board members began in February 2024, when they voted for a stock repurchase plan that would allow the company to readjust up to 10% of their own actions, according to sources close to internal discussions, which asked for anonymity because it is a confidential issue.
Galassi declined to comment.
The council, consisting of nine directors – six Chinese and three Italians – approved the plan, despite the initial opposition of the Chinese directors, who feared that it won the attention of the Italian government, the sources said.
Continues after advertising
A 2012 law grants to the Italian government the so -called “golden power” on companies considered of strategic importance, which means that authorities have broad powers to intervene in mergers, acquisitions, action recompricits and other transactions. Although the legislation was initially limited to sectors such as defense, energy and telecommunications, it was expanded to include a greater share of the economy, including agriculture and media.
The relationship in deterioration with China since 2019 has caused the Italian government to scrutinize the Chinese investments, using the golden power to intervene in various businesses.
Pirelli Spa tire manufacturer, whose largest shareholder is the Chinese industrial group Sinochem, was at the center of a technology transfer dispute. In April, Pirelli formally altered its governance to limit Sinochem’s control over the company, causing a conflict between management and the board.
“The current and wide application of the Golden Power Law can, in certain cases, serve as a tool for economic protectionism under the right -wing government of Italy,” said Luca Picotti, a lawyer specializing in foreign investment rules. According to him, this standard has already caused friction in Italian companies with non -European councils.
In addition to the luxury yachts, Ferretti also manufactures vessels for police forces and coastal guards. Although this segment represents less than half percent of total sales, it is sufficient to include the company in the business list considered strategic by the Italian government, alongside defense and multinational contractors. The company had already made formal communications to the government based on this legislation before: in 2019, when it canceled an IPO, and again in 2022 and 2023, when it listed actions in Hong Kong and Milan, respectively.
According to people close to the case, Galassi formally notified the Italian authorities about the repurchase plan in early March – before the Chinese directors expected. They would have interpreted the measure as an attempt by the CEO to approach the Italian government to marginalize them using golden power as a tool.
Ferretti denied that Galassi acted against the desires of the Council and stated that the notification of the golden power “was made with the formal and definitive approval of the Board of Directors.”
“The relationship between shareholders and the company is excellent, marked by continuous collaboration and mutual respect,” said the statement from Ferretti.
On Easter Sunday, March 31, 2024, the Council canceled the repurchase plan and withdrew the government notification, claiming the need for more time for legal and regulatory assessments in Italy and Hong Kong.
In mid -April, the private security company hired to investigate the alleged surveillance delivered its full report on the incident, according to sources. On May 13, Xu and his two colleagues filed a formal complaint to the prosecutor.
On May 31, according to people familiar with the case, who asked for anonymity, Xu reported Galassi about espionage in a conversation. A month later, he reiterated his e-mail concerns, suggesting that the investigation indicated that the violation could have departed from within the company. On both occasions, Galassi requested a copy of the security company report to open an internal investigation. At that moment, Xu refused to provide him, the sources said.
In the following months, some Ferretti directors discussed the possibility of replacing Galassi. The CEO preferred not to comment on the speculation about his position.
In August, the council was reformulated, with Weichai’s Jiang Kui, assuming as new president of Ferretti.
In a statement to Bloomberg News, Jiang stated: “The relationship between the Ferretti group, its management and the weichai has always been and remains very strong.”
Ferretti’s statement said that after a board meeting on October 23, the company began an internal investigation and, on January 20, filed its own complaint to the Public Prosecutor of Milan.
Experts heard by Bloomberg differ from whether a company dealing with espionage at the board level should have informed the market about criminal complaints.
“Although the company has confirmed that there has been corporate espionage, the contours of the case are still foggy: there are no suspects appointed so far, and the investigation of the Public Prosecutor of Milan – protected by legal confidentiality – is still underway,” said Domenico Colella, senior lawyer at the Milanese office Orsingher Ortu, specializing in cybersecurity and violation of data. “I believe, therefore, that the company acted correctly by maintaining discretion and adopting a cautious stance by not disclosing the information to the market, at least for now.”
Other legal experts told Bloomberg that listed companies should notify the market about any serious data violation or criminal complaint.
“When internal information, such as a criminal investigation related to a severe violation of privacy, become known within the company, it should disclose them as soon as possible,” said Claudia Imperatore, assistant professor at the Bocconi University Department of Accounting in Milan-without directly referring to the case of Ferretti. Such rules apply to any information with the potential to move the market, and espionage allegations at the board level may, in fact, fit this criterion, he added.
© 2025 Bloomberg L.P.
