$15 billion scam, Hermès' largest individual shareholder now can only be described as a senior citizen relying on cheap air travel to get around, having "fallen rapidly" from a hidden billionaire recluse.

1⃣️ As one of France’s most successful family businesses, Hermès’ ownership structure is extremely tight-knit: over 200 heirs are spread across three family branches—Gérard, Dumas, and Puèche.

Nicolas Puèche is the most special member of the Puèche branch: low-profile personality, uninterested in managing, without marriage or children, yet holding Hermès’ most valuable capital.

The reason Puèche became Hermès’ largest individual shareholder lies in inheritance. After Hermès went public in 1993, the family still tightly controlled 74% of the shares. Three years later, his mother passed away, and he inherited about 5% of the shares, becoming one of the most important individual shareholders. Later, his sister died, and he acquired about 1% more, ending up with around 6%. Living comfortably in the Swiss countryside on dividends and interest—

2⃣️ Due to having no partner or children, Puèche decided to establish the “Isocrates Foundation” in 2017, appointing Swiss citizen Nicolas Borsinger as CEO, hoping to use billions of dollars of inheritance for public good in the future. The foundation’s name is derived from the ancient Greek orator Isocrates, symbolizing rationality and rhetoric to address social issues. Borsinger previously worked at the International Red Cross, a steady and reliable professional manager.

But everything took a sharp turn in 2023. Puèche suddenly sent a letter to the foundation titled “Cancel Inheritance Agreement,” opening with: “You cannot protect my assets.” “We were all shocked,” Borsinger recalled. “At first, we all thought it was impossible, and even now, I sometimes still find it hard to believe.”

Meanwhile, Puèche’s relationship with Frémond was also very close. The two were peers, meeting in the 1980s. Back then, Frémond married a woman from one of Geneva’s most prestigious banking families and had longstanding contacts with Hermès family members, so Puèche trusted him highly. When relocating to Switzerland, he even entrusted all settlement work to Frémond.

3⃣️ Over the following decades, Frémond was responsible not only for transferring Puèche’s Hermès shares from France to Switzerland but also for managing his investments and daily affairs. His wealth management firm almost became Puèche’s “external secretariat,” handling letter opening, calls, bill payments, and scheduling—freeing him from worrying about any details.

As Puèche’s relationship with his family broke down, this dependence deepened. After the 2010 secret increase in LVMH shares, the family suspected Puèche had “sold stocks to Arnault.” But he always denied it, and Frémond supported him, constantly warning him “not to answer family calls,” “they want to track you and seize your shares.”

For years, the two were almost inseparable. Puèche’s wealth and life revolved around Frémond, laying the groundwork for the subsequent dramatic collapse.

The first sign of crisis was a “disappeared million Swiss francs.” One day in 2022, Puèche, out of habit, asked Frémond to transfer 1 million Swiss francs to Buttrac. For someone with $15 billion in wealth, this was just “a small sum,” and he had previously made large donations. But weeks later, Buttrac did not mention or thank him. Puèche asked about it, but Frémond explained: “He’s a shy person, he’s too embarrassed to say.”

But in the next room, Buttrac’s wife overheard the conversation. She knew the money never arrived, so she quietly told Puèche: “He’s lying; we didn’t receive any money.”

This hit Puèche hard. He thought for the first time: “If he’s lying about this, how many other lies has he told me?” Then Puèche told a French former ambassador friend, who advised: “You need to do a full audit.”

The audit results shocked everyone. Puèche and his legal team examined bank communications, asset structure documents, transfer histories, custodial chains, and finally discovered that most of his Hermès shares had been quietly sold around 2008, during the period when LVMH was secretly building its position.

4⃣️ LVMH is the world’s largest luxury group, often called the “cashmere wolf” and “fashion pope.” Bernard Arnault, who absorbed the influence of American capitalism when he moved to New York in the 1980s, began acquiring some family brands. Between 2001 and 2010, he attempted to secretly build a significant stake in Hermès.

Because Hermès is strictly controlled by the family, Arnault couldn’t buy openly and had to secretly accumulate shares from family heirs one by one. According to Frémond’s later account, he himself was approached and assisted by insiders within LVMH. He said he spent years helping Arnault covertly increase his Hermès holdings on the market.

This operation was extremely sensitive. Once leaked, Hermès would inevitably retaliate. Therefore, LVMH concealed its stake increase through very discreet methods (trusts, structured products, anonymous stock transfers), raising its shareholding to 14%. It wasn’t until 2010 that LVMH disclosed its holdings, causing chaos within the Hermès family.

5⃣️ By 2025, the case had spiraled out of control. French investigators initially charged Frémond with forging documents and breach of trust, and continued questioning. Although Switzerland does not extradite, Frémond chose to voluntarily go to Paris for three days of questioning.

His testimony was contradictory from start to finish: denying selling shares at first, then admitting to it; claiming he and Puèche were “lovers,” and the money was “a gift from the lover”; asserting Puèche’s life was rich and he was “not controlled”; and accusing the gardener couple of “manipulating the old man.”

The French judge found numerous inconsistencies in his statements and immediately launched an investigation. After the questioning, Frémond told his lawyer he was “completely exhausted.” A week and a half later, on a summer morning, he left his cabin near Gstaad, Switzerland, rode his e-bike to the railway tracks, and ended his life as a train approached.

The police classified it as a suicide. Frémond’s death took away a large amount of key intelligence, transaction passwords, command chains, and oral agreements. Puèche publicly expressed condolences to his family, but clearly, this storm was far from over.

Having finished this report from 36R and the Morning Post, I feel deeply: in Europe, especially among old money, there’s usually a familiar old steward—someone with a contract spirit, generally opposed to new money and new orders. If these assets are on-chain, in Web3, each transfer is transparent, requiring oneself or a delegate to authorize on-chain—might the story be different?

Over-trusting can lead to “signature loss risks.” Many family members are unfamiliar with financial and legal procedures.

Relying on a single manager for twenty years makes any signed document potentially an “unreversible authorization.”

The more complex the ultra-high-net-worth asset structure, the harder it is to confirm true ownership. That’s also the significance of the blockchain revolution!