ICO investigates BrewDog founder Watt over investor data use

James Watt is facing complaints to the UK’s data watchdog after using contact details of former BrewDog investors to launch a surprise bid to buy the brewer back. The move has raised serious questions about how personal information is managed when a heavily crowdfunded company collapses and is carved up.

In March, Watt sold BrewDog’s brand, intellectual property, UK breweries and 11 bars to US firm Tilray for £33m. The transaction rendered the shares of more than 200,000 “equity punks” worthless. On Wednesday, Watt announced a plan to seize back control through a new venture called Second Best, backed by 43,000 of those former investors.

To rally support, Watt emailed thousands of former shareholders offering them a free stake in Second Best matching their previous holding. The outreach left many recipients baffled as to how he obtained their contact details, prompting formal complaints to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) over potential breaches of the general data protection regulation (GDPR).

Watt has denied any wrongdoing. “A communication was sent to my fellow shareholders in BrewDog following legal advice, using lawfully obtained data, and in connection with their legitimate interests as shareholders,” he said, without explaining the source of the data. The ICO, which can levy fines or enforce operational changes, is now considering the complaints.

The situation highlights the murky data ownership structures left behind when companies enter administration. Tilray and AlixPartners, the administrator handling the remainder of BrewDog, did not provide the contact lists. Tilray confirmed it did not acquire the Equity for Punks shareholder data during the purchase, adding that the records system remains under the control of BrewDog plc in administration.

For Europe’s growing retail investment market, the case is a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities inherent in crowdsourced equity models. Ravi Naik, a legal director at data protection specialist AWO, noted that while a definitive breach is not yet proven, the circumstances demand regulatory scrutiny. “I can understand why the individuals have complained to the ICO,” he said. “There seem to be questions to answer and the ICO should explain if they plan to take action on these complaints. Key questions are how the people who received the email were selected and whether the email campaign was compliant with the law.”

Former investor Marc Knox captured the mood of many shareholders who felt their privacy was compromised. “I got the email last Sunday and I kind of laughed. I wasn’t thinking about complaining but I talked to a friend, looked online and saw there were lots of people saying the same thing: ‘How has this joker got my details?’” As regulators assess the complaints, the episode underscores the ongoing governance fallout from BrewDog’s turbulent restructuring.