Treemail informs, translates and fully disclaims following excerpts:

The Financial Daily, March 5, 1996:

Caption: OHRA attempts to cry up Teakwood image

For years Teakwood plantations talk big with an approval by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Apart from the fact that this organization does not certify individual projects, but only approves certification institutions, more proved to be wrong. It appeared that the institition that had given its seal of approval to Teakwood, the US Rainforest Alliance, was not at all recognised by the FSC. This happened only two weeks ago, announced OHRA at a press conference yesterday.

The crucial conflict for the investors, the expected timber yields, remains shrouded in mystery. OHRA, Flor y Fauna and WWF hold on to their original projections. These estimates are still looked at with great disbelief by the forestry professionals.

Professor Centeno sees no reason to change his points of view formulated in his report of 2.5 years ago. "I shall be the first to change my opinion if they present real evidence, that is scientifically sound. But the present expectations still lack of any sense of realism."

Investors Interests, Number 10, March 8, 1996:

But apart from that, KPMG has not dared to judge the investment aspect, and that would have been interesting. Answers to questions if the projections on growth, costs of the project and sales projections are halfway realistic in the opinion of the sober accountants, thus remain unanswered.
"Perhaps we then made the wrong choice of Professor," according to WWF-NL.

De Gelderlander, March 6, 1996:

WWF-NL's director Woldhek regrets that Centeno did not first verify the data before passing on his critisisms. "He now used the wrong assumptions."

Huesmann [president of OHRA board, translator's note]: "The Professor has received all our reports for further study."