Bona Fides of Consortium – Although we respect the members of the consortium and welcome the significant value, both financially and operationally, that the consortium may be able to offer to CEDC stakeholders, CEDC must be satisfied that the consortium is sufficiently cohesive and aligned to endure any process of restructuring, including a lengthy pre-arranged Chapter 11 proceeding. We have on several occasions requested to review a form of consortium agreement or similar and have yet to receive any response on this point. This is an essential step to understand whether CEDC’s potential restructuring partner is capable of delivering on the many obligations it would need to commit to in effecting the proposal it has made, including being able to satisfy all applicable regulatory requirements such as relevant antirust and competition laws and regulations – particularly in Russia and Poland.

Opposition from Other Stakeholders – The current consortium proposal would only provide an economic recovery to holders of the 2016 Notes. Holders of the 2013 Notes and CEDC equity, as well as other stakeholders, including the RTL Secured Debt, would receive no recovery under the consortium’s proposal. This fact may itself expose a restructuring pursuant to the consortium’s proposal to significant opposition from other stakeholders which could delay, if not wholly frustrate, its implementation. CEDC could not afford the market and trade risk that would accompany such uncertainty and, as stated in our meetings, the CEDC Board of Directors is interested in pursuing a restructuring as

efficiently as possible to preserve as much value in CEDC’s business as possible. To that end, the consortium’s proposal must outline a method of treatment for the 2013 Notes and CEDC’s equity holders if it intends to compete with the RTL proposal, which already has an agreed plan support agreement in place with holders of the 2013 Notes and has proposed a treatment for CEDC’s equity holders.

Working Capital Impact of Consortium Proposal – As explained to members of the consortium, CEDC’s business depends on continued access to sources of financing for its operational working capital needs, primarily through local bank facilities, as well as bank guarantees. CEDC has therefore sought to create an efficient and orderly process of restructuring to preserve sufficient access to sources of financing, including from RTL and Russian Standard. However, the consortium’s proposal would jeopardize CEDC’s financing in place with RTL and Russian Standard, including the $15 million local revolving credit facility, without any meaningful proposal to replace this financing, other than following a court determination on the security supporting the $50 million RTL credit facility. In addition, by potentially prolonging the restructuring process, the consortium’s proposal may stress CEDC’s access to other sources of financing as well. As a result, the consortium must clearly outline its proposal to ensure CEDC’s access to sufficient operational financing during a restructuring, including the financing in place from RTL and Russian Standard, as well as other local working capital and bank guarantee requirements and how the additional costs of the process would be funded including the RTL break-up fee, the expenses of the consortium and the additional costs of an extended and potentially contested Chapter 11 process. Without these sources of financing being addressed in some other way, it is not feasible to deliver to the 2016 Notes the cash consideration the proposal contemplates as it would be required to fund the process. The consortium must also provide specific terms for the form of Debtor-in-Possession financing it has proposed, including its seniority with respect to the 2016 Notes and its treatment in any Chapter 11 process.

Conditionality of Consortium Proposal – Despite our repeated attempts to engage with the members of the consortium and numerous sessions by CEDC management to present CEDC’s business and answer questions, the consortium’s proposal remains subject to significant conditionality, including confirmatory due diligence, regulatory approval, definitive documentation and other customary conditions. In the interim, RTL has agreed a Securities Purchase Agreement with CEDC and plan support agreements with holders of the 2016 Notes and 2013 Notes and has made significant progress in preparing for and satisfying other conditions to its investment, including regulatory approvals. As a result, the consortium’s proposal presents significantly increased execution risk and would expose a CEDC restructuring to unnecessary potential uncertainty. The consortium must carefully consider this issue and outline a clear approach and achievable timeline to a completed restructuring in light of any conditions it may require if the CEDC Board of Directors is to assess this against the other options available to CEDC.

Continued Operational Performance – Although your proposal refers to the management capabilities of the consortium members, the CEDC Board of Directors will need to assess your concrete steps for ensuring both the continued operational integrity of CEDC’s business, particularly in light of the on-going support and involvement from Russian Standard that may no longer be available to CEDC, as well as those management changes or potential business synergies, for example in export operations, the consortium may hope to realize to improve CEDC’s operational performance going forward.