# Did a huge mistake - bring me your lights please



## benhua (24 October 2008)

Hi everybody,

first of all, I apologize for my typo, I’m French, so my English is still perfectible.

I leave a message here because I probably did a huge mistake in doing a trade.
Today, I bought 175000 share of BCSCA - BritConnections - at 0.003$, so not even a cent (my trading floor is at 500$). I wasn’t aware of this sentence first (well, of the exact meaning):

“STAPLED SECURITY PAID TO $1.00$2.00 UNPAID”

I feel now really uncomfortable when I read few things about that. 
Can someone tell me exactly what I will have to pay with this? What are the risks? 

Thank a lot for you help.
Benoit


----------



## Rainmaker2000 (24 October 2008)

Gees, mate seriously, you got to get sharp especially to trade and make a profit in this market....

Brisconnections is effectively worth -----minus because it is a partly paid share with a $2 instalment to be paid, I'm not sure when....so effectively you have assumed a $2 liability for each and chances are it is not worth $2

Not sure how they will pursue it though cause what happens in these situations, lots of people won't pay and they actually 'auction' the remaining security to 'investors.'....but I'm not sure what happens when people won't pay.


----------



## benhua (24 October 2008)

Thank you for your answer Rainmaker.

Actually i was confused by the number of trade > to 100 000 share (volume). So, unfortunately, i wasn't very sharp on this trade, and i realize that after.

The first paiement is due for 29 of April next year, and the last one for the year after. So, does that mean I owe them 175,000$ for next April, and 175,000$ for the year after?  Does anybody know a similar situation with another company in the past?


----------



## skc (24 October 2008)

benhua said:


> Does anybody know a similar situation with another company in the past?




Check out RCY which had a similar structure of 2x $1 installments. It's second installment was due about 12 months ago. A search there may tell you what happens if you don't pay the next installment. Yet the really simple solution is sell your shares asap. 

The code 'CA' at the end of the company code usually means Installments (I think), not fully paid ordinary shares. Examples include Telstra (TLSCA) and RCYCA as above.


----------



## Calliope (24 October 2008)

Benhua

There was an article in the Financial Review today about the BrisConnections troubles. I didn't read it carefully but it said that Macquarie, who helped sell the float, was prepared to sue  holders to get the  $1 installments. See if you can dig up a copy.

These shares started off at $0.001 at opening  this morning and had reached $0.003 by the time you bought. At close there are buyers at $0.003 and sellers at $0.004. I can't advise you what to do, but I know what I would do. They  will probably open tomorrow at $0.003


----------



## Calliope (24 October 2008)

I just remembered another thing in the Fin Review article. Apparently BrisConnect are  committed to paying a dividend in March. People may be buying just to get the dividend. If so they may find it hard to unload them before the installment is due. 

Let us know what you do.


----------



## benhua (24 October 2008)

Thanks Calliope and skc. I didn't see the financial rev, but at least I know what I will do anyway, selling at any price (good price if possible).
I will let you know asap what's going on.


----------



## benhua (24 October 2008)

Hopefully, everything will end off in a good way. At least, that's a very good lesson for my trading experience!!


----------



## benhua (27 October 2008)

Ok, everything is done. I sold with loss, but i feel much better now.
That's a good lesson! (and expensive lesson!!!)


----------



## skc (27 October 2008)

It is always good to correct trading mistakes asap... just look at your fellow country man at BNP Paribas and see what could happen!!


----------



## deadset (27 October 2008)

I thought the whole point of the sharemarket was that you weren't ever liable for more than the price of the shares ?  Guess I've learnt something new here too.  Is this a case of a float or IPO, or is this the shareholder being liable for an additional $2 ?  I don't know this company.


----------



## Sir Osisofliver (28 October 2008)

deadset,

With many of these style of infrastructure investments they are stapled for a very specific reason.

They don't need all the money right away.  It's as simple as that. They need a bit of money to start the project, a bit to do the middle and a bit to finish it off and have enough cash reserves to last until the toll road hits target traffic (hopefully). What generally makes them attractive is that the yield they pay is standardised across the build period. So you get the full yield (or the value of the yield in shares - because they mostly prefer that to paying out money) during the period that only half or a third of the equity has been paid. (these things also get beneficial taxation treatments).  

Where a lot of these investments have fallen over is the very high gearing ratio's. That's what makes these things worthwhile to the developer - using leverage to increase their level of return. But trying to refinance these things is getting much harder to accomplish and many of them are questionable as to whether they will be *able* to refinance.  No refinance - project falls over. In this market as well the additional burden of new funds required for the project when there is little liquidity around makes everyone scared.

Personally I don't bother with stapled securities....it adds an element of risk that can be ignored in other securities.

Regards

Sir O


----------



## skc (28 October 2008)

Sir Osisofliver said:


> What generally makes them attractive is that the yield they pay is standardised across the build period. So you get the full yield (or the value of the yield in shares - because they mostly prefer that to paying out money) during the period that only half or a third of the equity has been paid.




I always believed such practice of paying dividend out of capital is total rubbish. And anyone attracted to such manufactured yields are just stupid. Give me $1 now so I can pay you back 6c in the first year (aha, a 6% yield). The tunnel hasn't even been built yet, where did people think the money comes from?

Why not just ask for 94c in the first place?! I guess the investment banker's underwriting fees were based on $1 rather than 94c.


----------



## Sir Osisofliver (29 October 2008)

So SKC,

Would YOU buy a stock knowing it wouldn't pay a dividend for six or seven years until the road was finished and have no guarantee that it would even make a profit at that time?

Imagine YOU were trying to sell that deal.  Think you'd have any luck?

Of course if that sounds attractive to you feel free to give me all your money and I'll agree to maybe pay you 7% pa in six years time. 

You game?

Sir O


----------



## skc (29 October 2008)

Sir Osisofliver said:


> So SKC,
> 
> Would YOU buy a stock knowing it wouldn't pay a dividend for six or seven years until the road was finished and have no guarantee that it would even make a profit at that time?
> 
> ...




You missed my point.. You are comparing two $1 shares, one pays you 6% yield (albeit your own money) while the other doesn't, then of course it is 
relatively nicer to have something back. 

But my point was that if you compare the alternative of paying 94c (and keeping 6c yourself for other purpose) vs paying the full $1 upfront and get your own 6c back later, the rational investor should be indifferent. In fact, the investor should prefer the 94c deal because there are less transaction costs.

I agree with you, however, that the dividend-from-capital makes the deal easier to sell. I am sure that's also the reason they are structured that way. But I also believe one is fooling themselves thinking they are investing in a stable high yield company.

Also, there is no need to capitalise YOU


----------



## BigJohnny (29 October 2008)

In terms of playing this stock for the Dec08 diviend 5.95c has a pitfall. As the stock would need to adjust EX-div for the amount on 19Dec08. So you need to be aware possibly no bids appear but plenty of offers on that day, and going forward until Apr09 instalment payment. So buying for 0.003c now, may in affect make you liable for the $1 in Apr09, unless somebody bids 0.001c and you can get out collecting the dividend.

Concerning the possibility of defaulting on the Apr08 instalment, the prospectus states that your shares would be sold on-market, and any difference they would pursue after you, including any expenses incurred on their pursuit. 

People should take not that Macquarie one of the main underwriters of the float, had a total holding of approx. 60 million shs, but in the last month has sold down their stake to just 28 million shs. 

Cheers
BigJohnny


----------



## BigJohnny (29 October 2008)

BigJohnny said:


> In terms of playing this stock for the Dec08 diviend 5.95c has a pitfall. As the stock would need to adjust EX-div for the amount on 19Dec08. So you need to be aware possibly no bids appear but plenty of offers on that day, and going forward until Apr09 instalment payment. So buying for 0.003c now, may in affect make you liable for the $1 in Apr09, unless somebody bids 0.001c and you can get out collecting the dividend.
> 
> Concerning the possibility of defaulting on the Apr08 instalment, the prospectus states that your shares would be sold on-market, and any difference they would pursue after you, including any expenses incurred on their pursuit.
> 
> ...





Oh !! also, if you do not inform the share registry that you want cash div. They will DRP you into new BCSCA shs as well.


----------



## benhua (30 October 2008)

Thanks anyway for these information.
I would have prefer to read this before lol, but it's good to know that now at least.


----------



## ronnieling (30 October 2008)

Did you catch the announcement this morning?

The 5.95c distribution has been cut to 0.05 of a cent and postponed until after the second installment is due. 

Any takers for my ~50 000 odd securities?


----------



## Reealjrd (30 October 2008)

Hello Friends,

I have some news related to commodities. As the market it still unexpected and i hope the market is again going to some downfall. 


 LME metals edge lower after enormous overnight gain
 Shanghai copper and zinc edge up after LME rally
 Tin bounces approximately 50 percent in less than a week
 Markets may have bottomed, risk opening to favour longs
Oct 30 - Shanghai copper and zinc open at their 4 pct upside limits on Thursday, chasing a huge rally in London that axiom copper jump almost 13 pct after sheer losses in the precedent two weeks.
However, London futures edge lower, snapping their best ever string of gains seeing as mid-September on profit taking, in spite of an increase in the EUR.
The greenback posted its major one-day fall in 23 years on Wednesday, as the Fed delivered an predictable 50 point rate cut and China's central bank also cut rates, raising hope that order would not sluggish as much as feared.
"Today's cascades are not enormously significant. The marketplace was vault to rise as it was extremely oversold, it was presently the timing that was in uncertainty," a metals merchant said in Singapore.
"Direction will be single-minded by equities, the dollar and all the customary economic marketplace factors that have been lashing this. However, the risk at present seems to favour being long rather than short. However we are not putting on at all big directional position."
LME copper for release in three months chop down 1.2 pct, or $55, to $4,600 a tone by 0355 GMT, bountiful up a few of Wednesday's $525 increase.
Prices have risen around 20 percent so far this week and if the market can maintain those gains, copper is set for its biggest weekly rise since September 1979. Despite that, for the month prices are down 28 percent, which would be their biggest fall in at least three decades.
"The down shift has to foot out at some point. We have seen a few real lows veteran our foot for copper is in the region of $3,500 to $4, 000," Said by Edward Meir MF Global analyst.
On Monday, price dished to $3,590, their weakest additional than three years.
"The turn down may have broken and we are set for a phase of sideways trade in 2009, much as we axiom at the beginning of the century," Edward Meir said.
Copper futures in Shanghai rose by their 4 pct threshold to 33,100 yuan ($4,838) and zinc top out at its edge, at 9,515 yuan in early on trade after London zinc jump approximately 10 pct.
LME tin cut down $25, or 0.2 pct, to $15,200. Tin price are up approximately 50 pct since plummeting to a 21-month low of $10,300 on Oct. 24.
"Tin is doing very well. Stocks are dropping, and the market is very dependent on a single producer, Indonesia, which has said it will cut production when prices fall below $15,000," Meir said.
In contrast to most other metals, tin stocks have fallen steadily during 2008. LME inventories of the metal, which is seeing rising demand as a replacement for lead in electrical solder, have dropped 75 percent to 3,815 tonnes since August last year.
By contract, copper stocks have risen 78 percent in the same period. Metals prices are 0355 GMT.
 Metal Last Change Pct Move End 2007 Pct chg 08
 LME Cu 4600.00 -55.00 -1.15 6670.00 -31.00 
SHFE Cu* 33100.00 1280.00 +4.02 56880.00 -41.81 
LME Alum 2125.00 -26.00 -1.21 2403.00 -11.57 
COMEX Cu** 207.15 0.00 +0.00 304.10 -31.88 LME Zinc 1210.00 -50.00 -3.97 2370.00 -48.95 
SHFE Zinc 9490.00 265.00 +2.87 18950.00 -49.92 
LME Nickel 13250.00 -390.00 -2.86 26350.00 -49.72 
LME Lead 1530.00 -50.00 -3.16 2550.00 -40.00 
LME Tin 15200.00 -25.00 -0.16 16400.00 -7.32
 LME/Shanghai arb^ 3454 Dollar/yuan 6.8365 \ 6.8368 **
1st contract month for COMEX copper 
3rd contact month for SHFE aluminium, copper and zinc
LME 3-m copper in yuan, including 17 pct VAT, minus SHFE third month 

If any mistake please bear. 

Happy trading.


----------



## benhua (30 October 2008)

ronnieling said:


> Did you catch the announcement this morning?
> 
> The 5.95c distribution has been cut to 0.05 of a cent and postponed until after the second installment is due.
> 
> Any takers for my ~50 000 odd securities?




Wooo 

Glad to have been on time for selling all this ****. I don't know where management want to go, but if they don't change their mind at some stage, that will be a real nightmare!! 

Good luck my friend. You still have time to sell, if someone is as naive as we were.


----------



## skc (10 November 2008)

This person may have done a greater mistake than yours...

From the Sydney Morning Herald

How will Mrs He find the $65m?
    * Scott Rochfort
    * November 10, 2008


A $32,300 investment made by a Melbourne housewife threatens to create a headache for the toll road group Brisconnections and the underwriters of its next two $408 million security instalments, Macquarie Group and Deutsche Bank.

Brisconnections remained unclear over the weekend whether its newest substantial shareholder, Mrs Fang He, would be able to cough up $65 million to fund the toll-road's next two $1 security instalments.

The company was caught off guard on Friday by a shareholder notice which showed Mrs He had snapped up 32.3 million securities, or a 8.26 per cent stake in the company, at 0.1c each.

The stake cost $32,300, or one-thousandth of the July listing price of Brisconnections' first instalment. But for the next two instalments, Mrs He is obliged to pay the initial listing price of $1.

When contacted by the Herald, Mrs He was unable to say if she could fund the instalments.

"I am only a housewife. My husband is running this business in my name," said Mrs He, who jointly owns the business Wang & He Investment with her spouse. Her husband did not return calls.

The investment makes Mrs He the toll road's second-largest shareholder behind the Queensland Investment Corporation.

The purchase means Mrs He is obliged to buy 32.3 million of the next two $1 instalments. Mrs He, who has registered her shareholding from the address of an aluminium window business in the Melbourne suburb of Springvale, will need to pay $32.3 million when the second instalment is payable on April 29, then $32.3 million when the final instalment lists in early 2010.

In all, Brisconnections plans to raise an extra $817 million from the next two instalments to help fund the $4.8 billion toll road project in Brisbane.

"All shareholders who have bought into the stock would be fully aware of their obligations in respect to the second and third instalments," a Brisconnections spokesman told the Herald.

The spokesman said the company had "no reason to believe at this stage" that any of its shareholders could not fund the next two instalments.

If the instalments cannot be fully funded by securityholders, Macquarie Group and Deutsche Bank, as the underwriters, will have to make up any shortfall.

Construction of the toll road project started last week.


http://business.smh.com.au/business/how-will-mrs-he-find-the-65m-20081109-5kvl.html


----------



## benhua (10 November 2008)

My Goodness!!! 
Do they know what they are doing???
Hopefully yes!! Otherwise good luck!! 

Benhua... feeling so comfortable in his chair now...


----------



## cuttlefish (10 November 2008)

This is either being misreported, or ASIC and the ASX are getting extremely sloppy imo.

How can the act of purchasing a listed asx stock incur a binding liability on the new holder without any sort of product disclosure statement or other documentation?

Given the hoops that have to be jumped through to be able to trade derivatives like CFD's, options, futures etc. it seems ludicrous that someone can find themselves in a legally binding liability of such magnitude just through the act of purchasing listed stock.


----------



## cuttlefish (10 November 2008)

Well from my reading of the product disclosure statement there is a legally binding liability to holders of the units as of the time of the installment payments and they will pursue the holders that don't pay for the outstanding amounts.   So the article isn't misreporting it.

imo it is highly irresponsible of the ASX to allow this instrument to be listed in this form.   Does anyone know of any other asx listed securities that have a binding liability attached to them like this?   If it was an optional installment and the instrument forfeited if the payment not made that would be another matter but this does not appear to be the case here - it appears the holder at the time of the installment payment falling due has full liability.


----------



## Sir Osisofliver (11 November 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> imo it is highly irresponsible of the ASX to allow this instrument to be listed in this form.   Does anyone know of any other asx listed securities that have a binding liability attached to them like this?   If it was an optional installment and the instrument forfeited if the payment not made that would be another matter but this does not appear to be the case here - it appears the holder at the time of the installment payment falling due has full liability.




Cuttlefish,

There are HEAPS of companies that use a stapled structure. Anything that has a 5 code as opposed to a 3 code is a stapled security. (Mind you this isn't a hard and fast rule as most of the debt hybrids also use 5 codes)

      5 code     3 code
EG  TLSCA  vs TLS

With these types of stapled plays, they ALL require the holder at the time of instalment to pay the moola. Connecteast, transurban, maquarie airport, rivercity etc etc etc

The only stapled I ever went for was the TLSCA (T3's).Why?

Because I could get double the yield on the same investment. Hello 15% grossed up yield.


Sir O


----------



## cuttlefish (11 November 2008)

Cheers Sir O - you are correct - I never realised that there was not just an option to pay the installment but a binding obligation.

There's actually another thread on this topic as well which I've been posting in ... here:

"So what happens when you buy an installment warrant"
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13297


Maybe the mods could close this one as the other one is probably titled more appropriately and then we'll only have one thread.


----------



## arco (1 December 2008)

*Pay thousands and owe millions*


    * Scott Rochfort
    * December 1, 2008
    *

BRISCONNECTIONS has rejected pleas for it and its underwriters to provide a reprieve to retail investors who have unknowingly exposed themselves to millions of dollars in liabilities after snapping up securities in the listed toll road.

After the plunge in the first instalment in the company from $1 to 0.1 cent since its July listing, retail investors have been able to buy large slabs of the company for small amounts of change.

The only problem is that for every security purchased for 0.1 cent, security holders still have to fund the next two $1 instalments in the company.

Apart from the appearance of two retail shareholders with a collective 20 per cent stake worth about $80,000 with a further $160 million of obligations, BrisConnections has found itself with several highly distressed security holders on its register.

"This is of a magnitude that I can't possibly deal with," one security holder who asked not to be named told the Herald.

"I feel lost. I don't know what I should do at the moment," she said, after discovering only after she made her $1000 investment in the company that she had also purchased a $2 million liability.

The investor conceded the investment was a "stupid mistake" and said she was given no warnings of her obligations when she made the purchase online.

It appears she is not alone.

"We've been contacted by a number of BrisConnections security holders who are beside themselves because of the amount of debt they have taken on board," said Stuart Wilson, the chief executive of the Australian Shareholders Association.

Mr Wilson said urgent action needed to be taken to ensure online brokers such as Commonwealth Securities and E"additional safeguards" that let would-be BrisConnections investors know of their obligations.

Given the growing base of retail shareholders in BrisConnections, there is speculation the underwriters - Macquarie Group and Deutsche Bank - of its next two instalments, worth $817 million, might have no choice but to buy out the toll road with the remaining institutional shareholders.

The instalments are due next April and in early 2010. But at the weekend, BrisConnections continued to hang tough.

"We're not going to start being an apologist for people who don't do their research on this," said a BrisConnections spokesman.

The spokesman said investors who purchased BrisConnections stock without seeking advice were "playing Russian roulette". "It has been the unspoken law of investing since day one," he said.

It appears that BrisConnections security holders would have difficulty selling their shares. There were no trades in the stock on Friday and it is believed Evestors from buying the company's shares.

CommSec said it made no apologies for not warning investors of their obligations.

"While we are concerned about the purchaser's position, the decision to acquire the stock was made by purchaser," said a CommSec spokeswoman in an email to the Herald.

"BrisConnections' ASX Code - BCSCA - indicates that it is a contributing share, it has only been partly paid for and that the shareholder is required to pay the balance outstanding," she said.

http://business.smh.com.au/business/pay-thousands-and-owe-millions-20081130-6nqp.html


----------



## brty (1 December 2008)

The real problem with this one BCSCA is not that it is an instalment warrant, but there are no buyers for it.

In market depth this morning there are 95,000,000 for sale at an ask of .001, and no buyers. The people who bought this thinking they could trade out of the position are effectively stuck with the position.

brty


----------



## Prospector (1 December 2008)

Wow, I have just shown this thread to my son who is 23 and just getting into shares.  I see today that Mrs He has sold her shares, but the notice doesn't say who bought them.  Given that she is the second largest holder, that seems strange.

The buy side is blank, the sell side is full!  I am curious, when you try to buy these instalments through online trading, does a 'warning notice' tell you about the future liabilities?  I dare not explore just in case my touch pad buys some!


Benhua, you really got out of jail; I think you owe these posters a good bottle of red!


----------



## cuttlefish (1 December 2008)

The problems is because there is an obligation to pay the additional installment, especially at current prices this instrument effectively behaves more like a futures contract, rather than like an option or an equity.   

Before people are allowed to trade futures, which are considered to be a more complex product, they are usually required to jump through a few hoops (fill in questionaires, sign statements saying they understand the risks etc.).
They are also required to lodge a margin, and their position size is typically limited in some way by the broker.   None of these protections applied to the people that took positions in this instrument.

To me its unrealistic for the ASX or ASIC to expect that your average garden variety retail investor is going to read the fine print of the PDS on every single thing they purchase.   I definitely feel sorry for those that have ended up in the situation of holding this instrument.  In my view, to prevent this situation happening again, ASX should implement procedures that require margin to be lodged on instruments that have an additional binding obligation attached to them, and brokers should ideally limit the amount of liability a retail investor can take on via purchase of an instrument like this.


----------



## Julia (1 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> To me its unrealistic for the ASX or ASIC to expect that your average garden variety retail investor is going to read the fine print of the PDS on every single thing they purchase.   I definitely feel sorry for those that have ended up in the situation of holding this instrument.  In my view, to prevent this situation happening again, ASX should implement procedures that require margin to be lodged on instruments that have an additional binding obligation attached to them, and brokers should ideally limit the amount of liability a retail investor can take on via purchase of an instrument like this.




I have some sympathy for these people too, but just to see what info is offered before buying I did a unsigned placement of a Buy order.  The fact that it's a stapled security is quite clearly stated on the order:



> BRISCONNECTION TRUST STAPLED SECURITY PAID TO $1.00, $2.00 UNPAID
> Last Price Today's Change Bid Offer Day High Day Low Volume Type
> $0.001  $0.000 (0.00%)  $0.000  $0.001  $0.001  $0.001  0  REAL TIME PRICES
> as at 01 Dec 2008, 11:39:33 AM




That's on E-trade, where if you click on "Recommendations" Huntleys make a very clear recommendation not to buy this.

Seems the broker has fulfilled all their obligations.


----------



## hotbmw (1 December 2008)

Guys, i read this a few days ago, a 26 year old is in a big mess of 94 million now.....

Another BrisConnections bolt from the blue
    * Mark Hawthorne
    * November 26, 2008

IN YET another potential disaster for listed toll roads operator BrisConnections, a 26-year-old Melbourne man who runs an IT company from a block of flats in St Kilda has become the company's latest substantial shareholder.

Nicholas Bolton, who is the owner of Australian Style Investments, bought 47,643,166 BrisConnections unit trusts, which have two $1 part payments still to be made on them. That means that Bolton's company will soon owe BrisConnections in excess of $94 million.

It's fair to say that Bolton doesn't have the $94 million to pay for the shares. He apparently used his $10 million margin lending facility with Commonwealth Bank to buy the shares. That margin lending account was opened in March this year.

Full Disclosure contacted Bolton last night to ask if he had the $94 million that BrisConnections will soon be chasing. The man who now owns 12.21% of the company, for an outlay of $47,600, sounded shell-shocked.

"I have no comment to make at this stage, but I will talk at a later date," Bolton said. He also confirmed that he bought the shares in an on-market transaction, and had not yet been in contact with BrisConnections.

BrisConnections started building a $4.8 billion Brisbane toll road to the city's airport this month. Investors paid an initial $1 for shares in June, and must pay shell out another $2 in the next 18 months to keep them. The shares are now worth just 0.1 ¢.

Last month, Melbourne housewife Fang He turned a $32,300 investment into a $65 million nightmare after snapping up 32.3 million shares of BrisConnections, or 8.26% of the company, at 0.1 ¢ each. BrisConnections company secretary last week told Full Disclosure that Ms Fang had sold her shares, and that a substantial shareholder notice was "imminent".

Bolton's shareholder notice was released to the market after the close of business last night. BrisConnections' company secretary did not return phone calls.


----------



## kam75 (1 December 2008)

benhua said:


> Hi everybody,
> 
> first of all, I apologize for my typo, I’m French, so my English is still perfectible.
> 
> ...




Buying cheap stocks is like buying other things that are cheap - they're rubbish.  When you trade in stocks worth a fraction of a cent, you are basically a fraction of a cent from broke.  These stocks attract the least of experienced day traders who hope to make a quick buck.  The questions you should be asking yourself before buying such stocks is:
1. what is my risk for the trade?
2. where is my breakeven level for the trade?
2. where will I get out?
3. what is my timeframe for the trade?
4. what is the risk worth the potential reward? - (it usually won't be)

The key to all successful trading is consistency.  Repetition.  If you can repeatedly pull money out from such markets, you've found your edge.  
best regards


----------



## Prospector (1 December 2008)

kam75 said:


> Buying cheap stocks is like buying other things that are cheap - they're rubbish.




Guess that means I am an idiot for buying PDN at 11 cents then!


----------



## cuttlefish (1 December 2008)

Julia said:
			
		

> I have some sympathy for these people too, but just to see what info is offered before buying I did a unsigned placement of a Buy order. The fact that it's a stapled security is quite clearly stated on the order:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I'm not game to do the same in case I have a concentration lapse and inadvertantly buy some! 

I agree that the brokers have fulfilled their obligations and I certainly wouldn't be putting the cause of the situation down to the brokers - I think its more an issue for the ASX. My view is that these instruments are risky and should be put into a different category.  But in the interim anything that the brokers can do to try to protect clients is a good thing.

I don't know about others but although I've never traded warrants my impression of them has always been that they behave in a similar fashion to options - but with different conversion ratio's and other caveats that are detailed in the PDS's.  

I've never thought of them as a product that carries a binding obligation. Even the title 'call warrant' to me implies similar behaviour to a call option.  So I can see how people may not have realised that there is a binding obligation to pay the unpaid amounts.

The other thing that I question is what value is there for Brisconnection trust in having warrant holders that aren't able to pay?  How is it going to benefit them or Macquarie, bankrupting a bunch of naive retail investors? Its not going to give either of them anywhere near the money they are hoping to get from the installment payments, and it is likely going to put individuals and there families through the misery of losing their homes and court hearings etc.

Wouldn't it be more productive for them to try to find a purchaser for the warrants that is actually willing to front up some money.  Clearly nobody is willing to front up $1 or $2 for them but they might be able to find someone willing to take them up for 10c, 25c or 50c for example, which would probably give them 100 times (or even thousands of times) more money than they'll get from the retail investors that are currently holding them after purchasing them for fractions of a cent.


----------



## Prospector (1 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> I'm not game to do the same in case I have a concentration lapse and inadvertantly buy some! .




Me too - I didnt want to go anywhere near the buy page - very brave Julia! :

I do feel very sorry for these people, I know they should have done their research but wow, what a penalty.  A life changing event from three simple clicks!


----------



## jackson8 (1 December 2008)

Prospector said:


> Me too - I didn't want to go anywhere near the buy page - very brave Julia! :
> 
> I do feel very sorry for these people, I know they should have done their research but wow, what a penalty.  A life changing event from three simple clicks!




with the ease of modern trading over the INTERNET and the ability for basically anyone with limited trading experience let alone the business knowledge to understand the future liability of purchasing these so called shares i think that as stated by cuttlefish that they should be listed in a similar manner to warrants and as such there should be some accountability shouldered by the institutions

people make mistakes the current openness to be able to buy shares without any real experience shouldn't leave you open to having your entire future fed into a meat grinder

i think there needs to be more control over these kind of instruments 
i couldn't take on the liability of trading options without extensive applications to be able to do so and in like manner this type of instrument should be regulated more ....... imo.


----------



## Julia (1 December 2008)

What's the role of the underwriters here?


----------



## cuttlefish (1 December 2008)

Julia said:
			
		

> What's the role of the underwriters here?




Good point Julia.  As I understand it Macquarie as the underwriters are obliged to meet the shortfall in any due installments.  So I guess this means Brisconnection gets the money either way.  Macquarie as I understand it will then pursue the holders of the warrants that haven't met their commitments.

So if there's any deal making to be done I guess Macquarie is the one with the motivation - though there's probably nothing to stop them doing a deal anyway and still pursuing outstanding holders.  They're probably not thrilled about being stuck as the underwriters, but thats the swings and roundabouts of investment banking I guess.


----------



## joeyr46 (1 December 2008)

earlier in the thread some one said they had reuced the dividend to be paid march /April from 5.95cent to .05 cents seems they have changed the contract or is it allowed because your the bigger player you can do what you like


----------



## rocket12 (10 December 2008)

Julia said:


> I have some sympathy for these people too, but just to see what info is offered before buying I did a unsigned placement of a Buy order.  The fact that it's a stapled security is quite clearly stated on the order:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




If that info was on the buy page then Etrade have done it well.  Some peeps may still be silly enough to buy them but I doubt many would.  The only info on Commsec notifiying buyers is hidden deep in the announcements page.  The first mention of it being a contributing share is the moment you hit the buy button and the contract note is generated.

When you buy a share there should be a need to research the stock, look at the chart, the depth, look at the company info etc etc.  I did all that and realized Brisconnection wasn't BHP but was prepared to take the risk.  While I was bottom fishing I also bought 18 other similar dud stocks with the same amount of research.  If I lost money on the lot of them you would here nothing from me I couldn't care less.

But what you shouldn't be required to do when buying a share is to be forced to investigate every purchase, looking for that hidden sting in the tail that you are buying a life ending debt.

I was thrilled to read at the start of this thread that a few of you were able to get out of your situation by offloading them, what a relief that must have been after realizing what deep doodoo you were in...

I am in the queue trying to sell them at .001 but hope no unsuspecting investor buys them off me, I hope and hope that Macquarie bank come along and buy my shares!!! Hell they can have them for nothing....


----------



## Hoots (6 January 2009)

New to this, so please bear with me...In considering the original post....Does that therefore mean you are always better off buying something that is an "FPO"...does Fully Paid Ordinary, mean exactly that "Fully Paid".....i assume it does....

Also....

Someone else brought up the point about people trying to make a "Fast " buck by buying cheap shares.
Surely SOME, cheapies might be worth having in a portfolio....No.?
Provided you are prepared to lose them....

ie : A Share that was once $1.00 and now .05c....surely a $500 plunge would be worth the risk....
Anyone..?


----------



## prawn_86 (6 January 2009)

Hoots said:


> ie : NUP, once 80-90c now .05c....surely a $500 plunge would be worth the risk....
> Anyone..?




Question you need to ask is WHY did it go from 90c to 5c, there must be some reasons. And what will make it turn around?

If you want to gamble why not just go to a casino?


----------



## Naked shorts (7 January 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> Question you need to ask is WHY did it go from 90c to 5c, there must be some reasons. And what will make it turn around?
> 
> If you want to gamble why not just go to a casino?




Its called speculation prawn, I'm sure you have done some in your life


----------



## prawn_86 (7 January 2009)

Naked shorts said:


> Its called speculation prawn, I'm sure you have done some in your life




Not based purely on a price that has fallen 80%. All of my speculation involves more in depth analysis then saying "well it used to be that price, so it might get back there" without looking at a chart or fundamentals


----------



## outback (7 January 2009)

I ask: Why was it 90c in the first place?


----------



## noirua (22 October 2022)

Travel on the investment road hoping a microcap will becomes outstandingly good.  It happened twice for me and failed umpteen times but but but it is about to come good very very shortly - hunt ASF to find it, clue 'R.d .o.k R..ou.ces on L.E. Mind you, thou can never be sure to be sure.
As the thread's last post was in 2009 it's all a bit late to see the lights - never mind aye.
Did a huge mistake - bring me your lights please​


----------



## divs4ever (23 October 2022)

noirua said:


> View attachment 148368
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 maybe for the folks that were posting in 2008 and 2009

 but partly paid shares are fairly rare currently  .. maybe they are a trap waiting to get sprung again  on another offering 

 maybe a flash-back to the past will save someone less experienced in the future


----------

