Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

[Juan Mortyme]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

No it's 3c per unit by 24 dec then a quarterly payment of a targeted rate of 1.5c per quarter and I have that in writing.

Definition of "target" = a desired goal. That's hardly binding even if it is in writing.

"There was a lot of discussion over what “and quarterly thereafter” meant. The judge agreed that the EM could be interpreted by the average unit holder to expect a 3 cent per unit distribution quarterly. When asked, WCIM said they are planning on giving a 1.5 cent per unit distribution quarterly however when questioned more deeply admitted that no actual amount was legally guaranteed."

It seems that the judge wasn't fooled.

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

"There was a lot of discussion over what “and quarterly thereafter” meant. The judge agreed that the EM could be interpreted by the average unit holder to expect a 3 cent per unit distribution quarterly. When asked, WCIM said they are planning on giving a 1.5 cent per unit distribution quarterly however when questioned more deeply admitted that no actual amount was legally guaranteed."

It seems that the judge wasn't fooled.

Perhaps WC should have used the wording 'Target Rate of Return' as per the MFS RATE SHEET dated 7 January 2008 (Target rates of return are target rates only and are subject to change from time to time. MFSIM does not guarantee any particular rate of return) Back to the drawing board. Seamisty

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Supreme Court jeopardises Wellington's PIF rescue:::::Nick Nichols

September 18th, 2008

THE corporate watchdog yesterday effectively put the brakes on Wellington Capital's way forward for embattled Premium Income Fund investors, jeopardising a planned payment of distributions next month.

The Queensland Supreme Court has slapped an injunction on Wellington from putting three resolutions to a vote by investors at the Gold Coast Convention Centre this morning.

But the planned meeting would proceed, said Wellington founder Jenny Hutson last night after emerging from a prolonged court hearing in Brisbane.

The injunction comes despite the court rejecting all grounds on which the Australian Securities and Investments Commission had based its challenge.

Instead, the court had one concern over the material put to investors by Wellington.

It found there could be confusion around a proposed payment of 3c per unit to unit-holders by Christmas.

The payment, proposed by Wellington, would consist of an unspecified October payment, the first distribution for unit-holders since January, and a further payment in December.

The judge found that investors could be expected to believe they would be receiving 3c per quarter once Wellington Investment Management was appointed as responsible entity.

He has ordered that Wellington clarify this issue before allowing the vote to proceed. Ms Hutson last night said she was 'disappointed' by the ruling.

Unit-holders will be asked this morning to adjourn the vote for up to 28 days during which Wellington will issue supplementary information on the payout to investors.

"We were on the cusp of a way forward, and now it's going to be deferred," said Ms Hutson.

"To have it derailed, even if only for a month, is disappointing."

Ms Hutson also said the delay would put at risk Wellington's planned distribution next month.

"We've done the work, and we've put the fund in a good position. We have worked day and night for the benefit of 10,387 others and I think a very small group has run a campaign that has had an outcome which is disappointing."

Ms Hutson was referring to a group of investors known as the PIF Initiative which has been agitating against Wellington taking over the fund and calling for an independent assessment of its assets.

The PIF Initiative, however, this week rejected claims that it had approached ASIC to investigate.

Ms Hutson said she would remain at this morning's meeting to answer all questions from investors regarding yesterday's court action.

 

[Rance]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Dear Jenny

After the WOFTAM of yesterday, don't spit the dummy! If you're reading this and need any assistance in preparing your new "Explanatory Memorandum for Dummies" contact me off line. I'm happy to assist. The trick to writing material for dummies, is to remember you are writing for the lowest common denominator, ie. people with low IQ scores. There is nothing wrong with having a low IQ. We can't all be Einsteins. Use the KISS principle: Keep It Simple for Stupids. Have yesterday's Judge read your finished product before publishing. If he understands it, the material will have passed the "dummy" test.

Rance

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Now I know I do not belong to the minority group of super intellectual beings with the enhanced brain capacity that post on here, but seriously, was anyone expecting an anticipated 12cents per unit annual distribution? Not even the confused elderly investors would have possibly expected a substantially greater return from a Fund which assets were worth less than half the amount from when it was a going concern. Seamisty

 

[selciper]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Wasn't there discussion and confusion on this very forum about what the actual rate of distributions was to be - 1.5c or 3c? WC should have picked up the concerns - and I bet there were plenty of questions on the topic via the WC hotline. (I recall asking about it myself.) Yes, why they didn't state "the target rate of distributions will be etc..." is a mystery. Certainly it's an expensive error and means even more delay and misery for cash-starved investors. And why did ASIC leave it to such an incredibly late stage to intervene? Both sides come out of this shambles looking less than shiny.

 

[simgrund]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

ASIC’s case was in relation to whether the information contained within the EM would give the average unitholder the correct understanding of WCIM’s intentions for the fund along with WCIMs ability to meet those commitments.................................

The calculation for the .7% management fee is currently based on funds under management of $691M carrying value! This equates to $4.837M per annum.

Now for the moment you’ve all been waiting for, the verdict…

The judge ruled against all 3 resolutions and that the affirmative vote has been unintentionally mislead by WCIM. The average unit holder may have voted expecting a 3 cent per unit quarerly distribution. It would not be apparent to the average unit holder that the 2% removal fee was a part of resolution 1. The meeting tomorrow cannot be to decide the vote.

-----
"This concludes our broadcast day. Click."

LETS NIP IT IN THE BUD.
THE 0.7 COMMISSION BASED ON $691 MIL, YET OUR NTA OF $0.45 IS BASED ON $431 MIL CLAIMED TO BE CURRENT FUND ASSETS.
ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS DISCREPANCE???

 

[Rance]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I just received this quote off line and thought I'd share it with you all:

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, but I'm not sure about the former."

-- Albert Einstein

Rance

 

[Mary Lynch]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Jenny has done NOTHING to deserve this mistrust. That woman has been doing it hard for us, right from the word "go".

ASIC passed the 80 page booklet???!!!...then why aren't they being charged for the meeting and court costs?

What I am finding hard to believe now,is the amount of good money going after bad. It seems as though there is an intention WITHIN THE PIF UNITHOLDERS to make sure that we are destroyed.

Could it be that some of the people who KNOW that they will have to sell up on the NSX are plotting to make sure that we all go with them....receiving peanuts for our units? Can't think of any other reason why people constantly want to jeopardise and sabotage the forward movement of our fund!

Could it be the need for SENSATIONALISM?

Now that I have a broken leg and can't work; have a monster of a mortgage (as we had just signed a contract on an house when all hell broke loose) and $500.000 (due 2 days after freeze) suddenly wasn't there to pay for the house...having done with mortgages 20 years ago, this was a ghastly burden after working all our lives to get here.

Also have a frozen $500,000 with City Pacific....no interest, of late there either.....and because they have $$$ with CP $200,000 of our dough with Wright,Patton & Shakespeare is frozen too.

I don't have ANY cash to my name now, except the interest that I may or may not get...from one month to the next.....AND selfish idiots are constantly sabotaging me getting it.

I truely can't believe this is happening!!!!! STOP IT!! WHOEVER YOU ARE!!! and let the people who know what they are doing GET ON WITH THEIR JOB of getting our money back.

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

ASIC's action has nothing to do with the letter that was sent to investors.

The ASIC case officer I spoke to recently was certainly aware of the PIFI letter - see my post 2666.

 

[Rance]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

LETS NIP IT IN THE BUD.
THE 0.7 COMMISSION BASED ON $691 MIL, YET OUR NTA OF $0.45 IS BASED ON $431 MIL CLAIMED TO BE CURRENT FUND ASSETS.
ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS DISCREPANCE???

"Carrying value" is the book value of your assets; "realisable value" is the amount you will actually receive when you sell them, which can be higher or (in our case at the moment) lower than their "carrying value". Fees for managing assets are always based on the book or "carrying value". Our book would probably include loans we have made and an expectation of their repayment plus interest.

Our PIF's CA and RA are based on valuations taken at the time WC took over, ie. 31 May 08. Obviously, we would need to revalue these to take account of depreciation, interest, rates and taxes, and other costs etc associated with owning land and buildings, repaying loans from banks etc, etc. Quite a complicated exercise. I'd leave it to the accountants and auditors! Why didn't I choose those professions 55 years ago???

Rance

 

[Rance]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

The ASIC case officer I spoke to recently was certainly aware of the PIFI letter - see my post 2666.

Indeed! And included in the PIFI's objectives is this little gem:
Quote: advocating members' positions with the responsible entity, the media, government organisations (such as ASIC); Unquote.

Rance

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Indeed! And included in the PIFI's objectives is this little gem:
Quote: advocating members' positions with the responsible entity, the media, government organisations (such as ASIC); Unquote.

Rance

Speaking of PIFI, they seem conspicuous by their absence today. I guess they are all at the WC meeting. I hope they are all wearing large, clearly identifiable PIFI name tags so other unitholders may see who is responsible for this and be able to thank them all in person.(alternatively, they will be easily identified from the distinct shape of their heads,somewhat distorted in shape as a result of having to house a larger than normal size brain, notably associated with beings of super intelligence) Seamisty

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

OK all, Maverick2802 kindly just rang me from the WC investor meeting to update everyone with what has happened so far. He said investors have nothing to worry about!!! Great news everyone.In a room of approx 700+ people a show of hands was called for in relation to the adjournment of the WC proposals we have all just voted on. SIX people voted in favour to adjourn the meeting!!!!! Everyone was overwhelmingly in favour of JH to take control and move ahead. Why am I not suprised? Investors will have the opportunity to re vote if they are not happy with the outcome from todays meeting after being provided with additional information regarding the proposed on going quarterly distribution, otherwise your previuos proxy will stand and you do not have to do anything. The results for the resolutions were 1. 95% For 2. 92% For and 3. 80%+For(to be confirmed)Maverick then spoke directly with JH and her solicitor, and they said providing everything goes ahead as planned, the proposed OCT 1.5cent distribution WILL GO AHEAD.(I guess that means no more unexpected intervention) Maverick said JH was very committed to the PIF and had massive support from those in attendance. I have to run, I have colour on my mums hair and if I stuff that up the forum will be minus a poster!!! Thanks Maverick2802 for keeping us updated) Seamisty

 

[Rance]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I have to run, I have colour on my mums hair and if I stuff that up the forum will be minus a poster!!! Thanks Maverick2802 for keeping us updated) Seamisty

And a big thank you to you, SeaMisty and Maverick2802 for bringing us up-to-date on today's meeting. I'll now concentrate on my business matters for the rest of the day.

Rance

 

[ian1328]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Nice to have some good news. Lets go forward now and not sideways.

 

[selciper]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Thanks for relaying the news, Seamisty. What with Wall St etc I'll be more relaxed when I draw some money from the ATM this afternoon.

 

[JohnH]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Speaking of PIFI, they seem conspicuous by their absence today. I guess they are all at the WC meeting. - all 6 of them
Just got back from the meeting, and I see that Seamisty via Maverick have reported already.

It was quite emotional after the vote, with JH making a tearful commitment to unit holders, and many of her staff as well as the audience in tears.

Also note that the PIFI were allowed to put membership application forms at the exits!!!!

 

[breaker1]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

OK all, Maverick2802 kindly just rang me from the WC investor meeting to update everyone with what has happened so far. He said investors have nothing to worry about!!! Great news everyone.In a room of approx 700+ people a show of hands was called for in relation to the adjournment of the WC proposals we have all just voted on. SIX people voted in favour to adjourn the meeting!!!!! Everyone was overwhelmingly in favour of JH to take control and move ahead. Why am I not suprised? Investors will have the opportunity to re vote if they are not happy with the outcome from todays meeting after being provided with additional information regarding the proposed on going quarterly distribution, otherwise your previuos proxy will stand and you do not have to do anything. The results for the resolutions were 1. 95% For 2. 92% For and 3. 80%+For(to be confirmed)Maverick then spoke directly with JH and her solicitor, and they said providing everything goes ahead as planned, the proposed OCT 1.5cent distribution WILL GO AHEAD.(I guess that means no more unexpected intervention) Maverick said JH was very committed to the PIF and had massive support from those in attendance. I have to run, I have colour on my mums hair and if I stuff that up the forum will be minus a poster!!! Thanks Maverick2802 for keeping us updated) Seamisty

Thanks Seamisty and Maverick for your hard work and commitment - its a major sacrifice of your precious time.

I am sure all are looking forward to a payment in October of 1.5c / unit. Great news!

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Thank you very much seamisty and maverick - you are legends!!!!! Thanks also for the tireless work in researching the many questions thrown at you and for fielding the brickbats from the dark side.

THE FORCE IS WITH YOU.