Historical walk through Leipzig Part 19: Galvanotechnik Leipzig (GTL) 1990 to 1993 - a true story of change

German reunification went down in history as one of the most defining events of 1990, after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 had effectively sealed the end of the Cold War. The declaration of independence by some member states of the Soviet Union also signaled the end of the Cold War, which actually happened in 1991. This 19th installment concludes the series of articles entitled "Historical walk through Leipzig - the cradle of electroplating in Germany".

The monetary union, the privatization of the state-owned companies on 1 July 1990 and the actions of the Treuhandanstalt, also for GTL, were particularly drastic, as we will see in the course of this article.

What followed were extraordinarily turbulent and eventful years, which were not without drastic consequences for GTL and resulted in the founding of new companies. It was a really wild time, in which events came thick and fast and one concept followed the next. There were also good ideas that could not be realized due to the prevailing conditions.

The fear of unemployment, a phenomenon unknown to the citizens of the GDR, was rampant and slowed down the spirit of optimism. In 1990, there were 113,400 people employed in industry in Leipzig. In 1993 there were still 8,000 and in 2017 the number rose again to around 25,000 (depending on the source, these figures fluctuate by more than 20 %). So the fear was justified.

This part of the historical walk only deals with the main events at GTL. You can read more detailed information, from the liquidation of the company sales office to the closure of the company holiday home, the activities of the individual departments such as production and sales, research and development and much more in "Leipzig - the cradle of electroplating in Germany" Volume IV (see below). It also describes the development of the GTL site after 1993.

Corporate philosophy for the future Galvanotechnik Leipzig GmbH

In the period from April 30 to May 2, 1990, senior employees of the company underwent management training in the field of market economy management at the company holiday home in Hallbach in the Ore Mountains under the guidance of a West German business consultant. This was a typical measure that took place in a similar form in many companies at the time. The following corporate philosophy of the future GTL GmbH was developed under the motto

"Quality through tradition and performance" = GTL

was developed, quote heavily abridged:

• "We are a company rich in tradition - nationally and internationally recognized - in the fields of electroplating technology as well as power tools - based in Leipzig, a world-renowned trade fair and trading center.
• We develop, design and install electroplating equipment with a high degree of completion. The company also manufactures GTL power tools, bench grinders and ancillary equipment.

The market

• As the largest equipment manufacturer in Europe, we are the market leader in the USSR and an important market partner worldwide.
• The main objective is to secure and expand our market leadership. For reasons of risk distribution, further target markets are to be developed: GDR, Eastern Europe as a whole, EU, South America and the Far East.
• The marketing of power tools is expanded from existing markets to new market segments with high quality standards and appropriate sales promotion.

Performance standards

• The company's performance profile is characterized by offering complete, customer-oriented service packages with consistent, high quality standards.

Company structure

• As the GTL holding company, GTL unites four independently operating and profit-responsible companies.

- GTL Anlagentechnik: conventional equipment and electroplating systems through to fully automated production lines.

- GTL Surface Technology: chemical-technical products and process technologies for the entire field of electroplating.

- GTL service: consulting, know-how, licenses

- GTL power tools: high-quality bench grinders and accessories for DIY use.

• Each division works largely independently, profit-oriented - according to coordinated market strategies. The holding company encompasses the functions required for overall management as well as functions that can be centralized in a commercially sensible manner, provided that their own responsibility is not jeopardized.
• The forthcoming cooperation with a West German specialist company supports the economic organization of the company in terms of service content, innovation and investment.
• The product range is expanded primarily through product differentiation.
• Research and development are future-oriented and market-oriented.
• The proportion of in-house services is consistently based on cost-benefit considerations.

Commitments

• As a medium-sized company, we make our contribution to the development of the region.
• Our top social priority is a high degree of long-term job security for our employees.
• Necessary personnel adjustment measures are carried out according to the following principles:

1. Utilization of every opportunity for redeployment and retraining
2. Staff reduction primarily through natural departures
3. Development of in-house further education and training
4. Consideration of social selection for redundancies
5. Filling new positions via internal job advertisements and giving preference to our own employees.

• We meet the ecological requirements by offering

- waste water technology

- recycling

- exhaust air purification,

which guarantee the high environmental compatibility of our plants and processes.

• We strive to achieve an appropriate return on capital employed through medium-term profit-oriented planning and the division of labor in our work processes.

From today's perspective, much of this corporate philosophy was well thought out but still a dream and far removed from reality. With a better management consultant, the situation might have been assessed more realistically, but nothing would have changed in the future of GTL.

As a result of this management training, the following working group leaders were appointed by Director F. Tätzner on May 4, 1990:

- Holding working group

F. Tätzner, Director of the company

- Plant engineering working group

M. Kiefer, Director of Production

- Surface technology working group

Dr. U. Vieweger, Research Assistant Laboratory

- Power Tools Working Group

P. Getzke, Director of Technology

- Service Working Group

U. Spielvogel, Head of Sales Department

The heads of the working groups, who will ultimately also be the provisional managing directors confirmed by the Treuhand, are responsible for submitting a structural plan for their area with personnel support by May 20, 1990.

Foundation of Galvanotechnik Leipzig GmbH under construction

On June 23, 1990, the provisional managing directors and the Treuhandanstalt, represented by E. Schulz, register GTL for conversion into a GmbH i. A. at the state notary's office in Berlin.

The following documents were submitted, including some interesting details:

1. declaration of conversion and list of land and property
The declaration is signed by the five provisional managing directors, F. Tätzner, M. Kiefer, Dr. U. Vieweger, P. Getzke and U. Spielvogel.

2. shareholders' agreement

• The share capital amounts to M 33 million GDR
• The bodies of the company are the managing directors, the shareholders' meeting and the Supervisory Board
• The articles of association are amended as follows:

Reduction of the share capital on the basis of the DM opening balance sheet to DM 3 million

The financial year is set at 18 months.

3. opinion of the company's representative body

In a vote of confidence, only three of the five provisional managing directors receive the approval of the workforce, but this has no influence on their appointment.

4 Opinion of the economic management bodies

The K-LEW Hennigsdorf combine agrees to the conversion.

5. declaration of legal consequences

Upon its formation, the GmbH assumes all rights and obligations, including all claims and liabilities of VEB GTL.

6. receivables and liabilities as at 30.4.1990

As of April 30, 1990, receivables amounted to DM 18,541 thousand and liabilities to DM 76,427 thousand

7. agreement with the credit bank

There are loans amounting to DM 63,315 thousand.

8. closing balance sheet as of April 30, 1990

9. opening balance sheet as of May 1, 1990

10. balance sheet bridge to 8. and 9.

11. report on the course of business in 1990

The competitiveness of the products is assessed:

- Plant engineering:

Thanks to the measures already initiated to complete our systems with externally sourced assemblies, increased flexibility in our own production and shorter production times, we are on a par with the competition.

- Chemical-technical products:

On the basis of existing documentation from competitors, it can be estimated that the majority of products correspond to the quality level of comparable FRG products.

- Power tools:

The quality of the power tools is considered to be very good in line with international standards.

12. closing balance sheet as at 31.12.1989

13. opening balance sheet as at 1.1.1990

14. balance sheet bridge to 12. and 13.

15. financial status

16. formation report

A critical examination of the documents submitted, in particular the sales development, liabilities and credit volume, makes it clear that GTL will not be able to survive without financial assistance.

The aforementioned provisional managing directors are appointed by the Treuhandanstalt. After signing the relevant documents and appointing the provisional managing directors, VEB Galvanotechnik Leipzig becomes a limited liability company under construction on June 23, 1990. The company was officially entered in the commercial register on July 30, 1990 as "GmbH im Aufbau" (Fig. 295).

Fig. 295: Extract from the commercial register

On August 23, all the previous specialist directors are relieved of their duties by Managing Director F. Tätzner in connection with the formation of the GmbH. This was probably his last official act, as he left the company on the same day. M. Kiefer becomes the new Managing Director.

The dismissal of the specialist directors naturally had far-reaching consequences for the organization and structure of the company, which had to be adapted to the new conditions by the new managing directors, with the exception of accounting and economics.

Securing the viability of the company

On October 12, 1990, the USSR terminated all contracts with GTL. This meant that approx. 80 % of the plant engineering turnover was lost, which corresponded to a loss of turnover of approx. 80 million M. But the remaining plant business in the socialist countries abroad and at home also collapsed. This prompted Managing Director M. Kiefer, who was also responsible for plant engineering, to send a letter to the director of the Treuhandanstalt in Leipzig (see Fig. 296). This letter was also sent to the future Minister President of Saxony, Kurt Biedenkopf. He has not yet replied.

The Treuhand did at least issue an invitation to a meeting, but without any result. A summary of the meeting is shown in the file note in Fig. 297.

Fig. 297: Memo

According to this, help from outside was not to be expected, and certainly not from the Treuhandanstalt. It was not the task of the Treuhand to provide funds to support trade problems. This basically sealed GTL's fate.

Reorganization concept

GTL GmbH i. A. drew up a restructuring plan, which was audited for correctness by the auditing company Karl Berg GmbH and confirmed on October 31, 1990.

It states the following about the market situation:

• many East German electroplating plants were closing due to restructuring, outdated equipment and environmental problems
• many companies in Germany and in socialist countries abroad are insolvent and
• competition from the old federal states is gaining large market shares in East Germany due to the introduction of the DM.

The following comments are made on the production structure at GTL

• too high vertical integration
• too high fixed costs
• excess inventories due to the planned economy and
• outdated equipment that causes high repair costs.

GTL GmbH i. A. should initiate structural changes and create powerful units that are free of unnecessary ballast and can operate progressively on the market. In this concept, only the three GmbHs Anlagentechnik, Chemie und Consulting and Elektrowerkzeuge are proposed. The Chemicals and Plant Engineering units are to be founded as GmbH & Co.

A key point here is the reduction of costs at all levels. In addition, according to the Treuhandanstalt, the managers of the GmbHs are to be provided by West German partners.

In summary, it is determined that GTL GmbH i.A. is a company capable of being restructured and that 300 employees can be secured if the realistically estimated turnover of DM 55 million is achieved.

The employee planning provided for 867 employees on January 1, 1991 and 300 employees from January 1, 1992. On July 1, 1990 there were still 1445 employees.

It will soon become apparent that the so-called realistic estimate of sales and the number of employees will prove to be an illusion. Moreover, Karl Berg's auditors could and should have known even then that a turnover of DM 55 million did not justify 300 employees in our industry. The conclusion that GTL was a company capable of being restructured in the form envisaged was therefore already a misjudgement at the time.

In 1990, a works council was formed alongside the Supervisory Board and the New Forum was also established in the company.

Supervisory Board

The Supervisory Board, which was elected with little participation (less than 35%), was constituted on 24.8.1990. Dr. Wolfgang Knop, member of the Board of LPW-AG Neuss, became Chairman and Klaus Ansorge, from the Office for Structural Adjustment in the Ministry of Economics on behalf of the Treuhandanstalt, became his deputy. There are also six members, eight employee representatives and one independent member. After initial resistance, the Supervisory Board is reduced to the six members required by the Treuhand. The Supervisory Board holds regular meetings, focusing in particular on the situation of the company and the status of privatization.

In July 1991, Chairman Dr. W. Knop resigns from the Supervisory Board at his own request. Klaus Ansorge becomes the new Chairman.

The minutes of the 10th Supervisory Board meeting on July 22, 1991 record the following:

• A further review of the company's ability to be restructured is carried out by the Treuhand
• LPW-AG will not conduct any further negotiations with the Treuhandanstalt regarding the takeover of GTL
• It is planned to carry out the privatization in the form of the MBO in coordination with the Treuhandanstalt
• Since June 4, 1991, the Oertzen company has been the owner of Plant III
• Amendment of the GTL articles of association in the section on corporate purpose:

- Deletion of the company purpose Development and supply of bench grinding machines and auxiliary equipment

- Inclusion of the disposal of chemical-technical products.

Change to the Supervisory Board:

In future, it will consist of only three members: the Chairman Klaus Ansorge, the Deputy Chairman Kurt Bause and the employee representative Dr. Klaus Richter.

The minutes of the 13th Supervisory Board meeting on September 10, 1991 show that

• Dr. K. Richter is appointed as Deputy Chairman of the Supervisory Board
• The managing directors P. Getzke and U. Spielvogel are dismissed due to changes that have occurred
• The Supervisory Board confirms the activities to form a joint sales company with Blasberg Anlagentechnik GmbH.

Works Council

In a survey, 71.8% of employees voted in favor of a works council. On May 30 and 31, 1990, elections were held for the Works Council, to which 15 employees belonged. Three of them, Klaus Rühle as Chairman, Horst Karbaum as Deputy Chairman and Hans-Jürgen Matysch, are full-time employees.

Some selected information from the numerous communications and resolutions of the Works Council:

• All changes and new appointments to management positions (from head of department or foreman) are to be re-advertised
• Handover of the structural and name lists of the GmbHs by 11.7.1990
• An economic committee is to be appointed
• The works council imposes a hiring freeze
• The management is requested to submit the personnel list of the so-called A-list (being on the A-list meant not being dismissed for the time being)
• The Works Council agrees to the sale of the property in Freest (children's holiday camp)
• New regulation of working hours
• Conclusion of a social plan
• Company agreement on the introduction of short-time working

The cooperation between the works council and management can be described as good and constructive.

The situation at GTL GmbH i. A. in January 1991

- It is a bitter realization that the estimate of turnover for the coming years, as drawn up in July 1990, was wrong in its magnitude

• The current liquidity situation of the company, which requires short-time working to a large extent, is not only due to insufficient sales, but also to the poor payment behavior of customers. In January 1991, receivables of DM 18.8 million were offset by liabilities of DM 8.9 million
• The aim of the privatization of GTL was not the sale of GTL as a whole, but the spin-off of GmbHs, which in principle start from scratch and leave all ballast behind in a GTL-GmbH i. A.. This GmbH is then to be wound up by a liquidator
• The CC-GmbH (Chemicals and Consulting) and AT-GmbH (Plant Technology) to be founded are to be relocated to Plant II as quickly as possible.

The situation of GTL GmbH in mid-1991

From a memo dated June 28, 1991 about a visit to the Treuhandanstalt in Leipzig, the unfortunate situation of GTL GmbH i. A. in June 1991 can be well understood.

Since the DM opening balance sheet was not confirmed by the Treuhandanstalt and will not be confirmed until June 30, 1991, the final result according to § 22 of the Treuhandgesetz is that GTL is not a GmbH under construction but a GmbH in dissolution or in liquidation. However, the liquidation was not initiated by the Treuhandanstalt until six months later in February 1992. The Treuhandanstalt's tactic of playing for time therefore worked.

As the Treuhand made no progress and LPW-AG ceased negotiations with the Treuhand in July 1991, the managing directors decided to implement the privatization via an MBO. To this end, the managing directors M. Kiefer and Dr. U. Vieweger present an MBO concept on 29.7.1991.

Plant engineering, chemicals and the disposal of electroplating plants are listed as business areas. In contrast to previous concepts, which envisaged relocating all activities to Plant II, Plant I was now favored. A workforce of around 100 was planned for all areas.

This MBO concept is pursued further and updated on August 2, 1991 and October 1, 1991. Based on the experience gained to date, the turnover and number of employees are realistic. In the end, the Treuhandanstalt does not give its approval.

Fig. 298: Development of GTL after 1990

The situation of GTL GmbH i. A. in December 1991

In a speech to the workforce in December 1991, which was the last staff meeting at GTL, Managing Director Dr. U. Vieweger, standing in for Managing Director M. Kiefer, provided the following information on the status of privatization:

• The planned commercial settlement in Plant I and Plant II was not confirmed by the Treuhandanstalt. Instead, Plant II and parts of Plant I were put out to tender on August 10, 1991. There are a number of interested parties, but nothing has yet been sold.
• The current situation for GTL is as follows:

- The plant engineering division is in negotiations with the company T3S from France and, if successful, will take up residence in buildings 1, 21, 22 and 23 in Plant I with 60 employees.

- The company Blasberg-GTL Vertriebs- und Service GmbH will establish itself in building 22 and take over 15 employees.

- Negotiations are underway with an investor from the old federal states, Vopelius Chemie GmbH, for chemical production. The company will take over 10 employees.

- GTL-Umwelt-Service GmbH was spun off on November 27, 1991 with 5 GTL employees.

- There are other serious interested parties for further areas and buildings in Plant I.

Although these were sensible solutions and these companies all wanted to commence operations at the end of 1991, beginning of 1992, the Treuhandanstalt had not yet given the green light by mid-December. In addition, there were considerable differences between the remaining managing directors, M. Kiefer and Dr. U. Vieweger, which made implementation even more difficult.

Finally, at the end of 1991 and beginning of 1992, various companies were spun off with the blessing of the Treuhand, as shown in the chart on the following page (Fig. 298) on developments after 1990. The companies marked in red have already been liquidated.

This meant that concepts such as an MBO were off the table, but the basis was laid for a possible business park in Plant I, which would one day provide space for up to 10 companies. The following companies settled in Plant I as early as 1992:

- Blasberg-GTL Vertriebs und Service GmbH (BGVS)

- Galvanotechnik Anlagenbau Leipzig GmbH (GTAL)

- Galvanochemie Leipzig GmbH (GCL)

- GTL-Umweltservice GmbH

- Busse Anlagenkennzeichnung

- TCH Energieerzeugung

- Company for information processing.

Around 100 specialists from the former GTL were employed in these companies, some of which were spun off, and the majority of the managing directors and senior staff also came from GTL. Other interested parties were in negotiations with the Treuhandanstalt. For various reasons, however, there was also a certain fluctuation in the companies located here and new ones were added over the years. Only GCL, which merged with Vopelius Chemie AG in 2002, remained at the Torgauer Strasse site from the early days. Three new companies have settled on the site in recent years through restitution claims or the purchase of land.

What was remarkable about this new start was the determination of some employees to build something new and continue working at the old site, even if it was not always successful in the end.

Liquidation of GTL GmbH i. A.

On February 28, 1992, the Treuhandanstalt Leipzig, as the sole shareholder, initiated the liquidation of GTL GmbH i. A.. On October 1, 1992, a liquidation group consisting of approx. 10 former employees of GTL GmbH i. L. was formed, which was based in Plant II.

One of the tasks of this winding-up group was to

- The unbundling of media such as water, energy, telephone and waste water for the new companies. The heating was to be taken over by TCH Energieerzeugung, but this failed due to the individual companies supplying themselves.

- Sale of the equipment, machinery and technical documents of GTL GmbH that were no longer required

- Archiving of all documents

- Organization of the restitution of the Stamford heirs' community

- Conclusion of rental agreements

- Managing the properties and looking after the tenants

- Planning and supervision of the clearance of all buildings using ABM workers

- Collection of chemicals from Plant I and Plant II that could no longer be used. A total of 650 tons of chemicals, some of them toxic, were disposed of by a disposal company. That was a whole freight train. This included small quantities of chemicals from the LPW period. The Bild newspaper ran the headline "Death leaves the city".

On December 31, 1995, the liquidation was completed and the management of the unsold plots was handed over to Montan Wohnungsbaugesellschaft. The latter was a subsidiary of Treuhand-Liegenschaftsgesellschaft, which was then entered in the land register by law as the owner of the unsold plots.

There is a record of this handover by the head of the liquidation group dated December 13, 1995, in which all the documents handed over are listed. Unfortunately, the documents handed over no longer exist or are in unknown archives.

Why did GTL GmbH i. A. have to go into liquidation?

As a reminder:

- Galvanotechnik Leipzig was the largest specialist company in Europe with around 1450 employees

• Exports to over 36 countries worldwide amounted to around 80 million M in 1989. Over the years, GTL supplied more than 1000 machines to the former Soviet Union alone
• Total sales in 1989 amounted to approx. 210 million M with a net profit of approx. 27 million M. Even if these figures are difficult to interpret, a decent profit was nevertheless achieved
• GTL was probably one of the few companies in which vending machines were basically produced on an assembly line
• GTL had a very well-trained workforce, which became an object of desire for West German competitors after reunification.

The vast majority of employees in research and development and project planning, as well as specialists from production, were able to find work in electroplating companies or electroplating plants if they wanted to.

In theory, these would have been good conditions for the survival of GTL. However, there were a number of factors that prevented this, as described below.

The introduction of the DM on 1.7.1990

• With the introduction of the DM, as already described, all orders from the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries were canceled. Of the approx. 210 million M turnover that GTL still had in 1989, approx. 80 million M was accounted for by exports to the Soviet Union alone, which now ceased.
• With the DM, numerous West German competitors also entered the Eastern market with branches or even just representatives, who naturally profited from the bonus from the West and at the same time poached skilled workers. For example, GTL's sales of chemical products fell from around DM 40 million in 1989 to around DM 4 million in 1991.

The representatives of the West German companies never tired of explaining that what GTL had to offer was worth nothing or that GTL no longer even existed. One customer changed the nickel electrolyte twice in one week because he was promised the blue sky, which was not there, only to end up reintroducing the GTL electrolyte he was familiar with. There was probably only one company in Saxony that did not switch completely or at least partially to West German products. There are many more stories to tell from this period.

The introduction of the DM was certainly the most important factor in the demise of GTL.

GTL's customers

• Naturally, customers flocked to the western competition in droves, for which they could not be blamed. At the Trabant plant in Zwickau, we were asked why we should buy anything from GTL, as the supply of chemicals had been very slow in the past. They had forgotten that, conversely, we had to wait 15 years for a Trabant.
• An interesting phenomenon was that the warehouses of many customers were filled to the top with chemicals. They had hoarded and made provisions, as was usual in the GDR's economy of scarcity. Degreasing chemicals in particular were not for sale for the next few months. Some customers offered to buy these chemicals back from GTL in order to relieve their stocks and use West German products, although these were no more effective.
• There was a major problem with GTL's outstanding receivables. Many customers did not pay their invoices because they were no longer in a position to do so. In order to realize at least some of the outstanding receivables, a great deal of personnel effort was expended.
• Many East German electroplating plants were closed due to restructuring, outdated equipment and environmental problems. The conversion of in-house electroplating plants into contract electroplating plants, which took decades in West Germany, took place in East Germany in just a few years.

Whereas in 1989 there were around 1400 almost exclusively in-house electroplating plants, in 1992 there were still around 150 and most of these were already contract electroplating plants.

• The takeover of some large electroplating plants in East Germany by West German investors, who brought their chemical suppliers with them, also contributed to the loss of sales at GTL.

The situation at GTL

• The economic situation of GTL GmbH i. A. is very difficult to assess. It must be assumed that the company was already overindebted at the beginning of 1991.
• The employees of GTL GmbH i. A. first had to learn how to deal with the new situation, especially with the competition. Until then, the company had been the monopolist in East Germany.
• Due to the uncertain situation, short-time working and the pending redundancies, there was a lack of motivation among the employees.
• Naturally, the workforce also had doubts about the suitability of the new managers.
• GTL's product range was only partially competitive. The materials required for modern development were lacking in the GDR. The deficits could not be made up in the short time available.
• The vertical range of manufacture was too high, fixed costs were too high, there were excess inventories due to the planned economy, and outdated equipment caused high repair costs.
• There was a lack of the necessary prerequisites (sales, cars, advertising and customer service, accounting, production, IT).
• From today's perspective, the cooperation between the appointed managing directors could also have been improved. However, they were too preoccupied with the issues of the day to carry out a thorough analysis of the situation in which GTL found itself.
• The question of what role the LEW Hennigsdorf combine played remains unanswered.

The auditors and consultants

As already mentioned, the auditing company Karl Berg GmbH incorrectly assessed the restructuring concept of GTL GmbH in general and nevertheless confirmed it in October 1990. GTL also relied on consulting firms from West Germany, as was certainly common practice for many companies at the time. The Senior Expert Service was also used, which was supposed to provide disinterested support to East German companies. We certainly learned from them in terms of market economy, but neither the paid nor the unpaid consultants were really able to help with the problems facing the rather unknown industry.

The Treuhandanstalt

Fig. 299: "Tribüne" of 19.7.1991Itwasessentialthat the Treuhandanstalt took the view that there should be no "shipyard syndrome" in the field of electroplating, as can be seen from a conversation with the spokesman of the Treuhandanstalt, Jürgen Weiß, published in the "Tribüne" of 19.7.1991(Fig. 299). This conversation was a reaction to a letter from the works council to the Treuhand.

Weiß was of the opinion that the West German electroplating market was densely occupied and did not need or tolerate any further competition. One might ask how Weiß knew the situation of a rather unknown field so well and then misjudged it. A comparison with the shipyards is out of the question. Were lobbyists at work here?

That his assessment was wrong is proven by a number of newly founded specialist companies in East Germany shortly after reunification, some of which still exist today. There were also new companies founded in our sector in West Germany after 1991.

It must be assumed that this general view of GTL on the part of the Treuhand existed for a long time, which had to result in the liquidation of the company. On the other hand, it would have been correct on the part of the Treuhandanstalt, as the sole shareholder of GTL, to file for insolvency for GTL after the Soviet Union and other customers terminated their contracts in the fall of 1990 or in the spring of 1991 at the latest. However, it delayed this and only initiated it in February 1992. Among other things, it would have meant that over 1,000 employees would have been out on the street in one fell swoop, which would have been a political disaster and certainly not wanted in those times.

The Treuhandanstalt could be credited with this delay in filing for insolvency, as some employees were able to reorient themselves in 1991 and some things developed for the better. In 1991/1992, for example, several companies were spun off from GTL, as already described, one of which, Vopelius Chemie AG, is still active today at the site in Torgauer Str. in Leipzig.

The question remains as to whether this delay in filing for insolvency was deliberate. However, this is not the only question that remains unanswered.

There were too many factors that made it impossible for GTL as a whole to survive. Nevertheless, there were a few bright spots, as the graph on the development after 1990 shows.

The Chemistry and Consulting division, which comprised the process engineering development, production and sale of chemical-technical products, fared best. With the spin-off of Blasberg-GTL Vertriebs und Service GmbH, Galvanochemie Leipzig GmbH and GTL-Umweltservice GmbH, which filed for bankruptcy in 1997, around 50 of the 100 former employees in this division were taken over.

The plant engineering division, which started with around 40 employees, seemed to be on the right track with the investor T3S from Evry near Paris, which, however, went bankrupt in 1993 and thus also ended the plant engineering activities. The bench grinding machine division Plant III was taken over by the company Oertzen, which also went bankrupt in 1994.

The closure of the Enthone GmbH service center site by MacDermid Enthone in August 2020 marked the end of the great tradition of electroplating specialist companies in Leipzig, which provided significant impetus for electroplating technology for decades and were the largest companies in this field in Europe, if not the world, from the merger of Pfanhauser from Vienna and Langbein from Leipzig in 1907 until 1989.