Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Jump to new
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Burnt said:
And yes, once a distribution is paid (if ever), WC will receive ongoing fees, which by the way are based on a 45c/unit valuation, while we get nothing.
Click to expand...

Maybe for this period but mayby not therafter. NSX listing requires a half yearly report, (see http://www.nsxa.com.au/documents/listing_rules/NSXLR2004.pdf) which requires reporting on "Net tangible assets per security with the comparative figure for the previous corresponding period."

The 45c valuation was in June 08 (from memory) so it falls outside the current 6 month period. So there should be another valuation soon. Right?

Cheers.
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

ian1328 said:
I spoke to WC a short time ago and again it was confirmed that a 3c distribution will happen before xmas with the 1st one probably in the week of Nov...SNIP
Click to expand...

Do WC realise that there are 4 weeks in November?

ian1328 said:
SNIP….Very few people have the knowledge, credentials and experience of Jenny H. She deserves some respect...SNIP
Click to expand...

ian1328, could you elaborate on the knowledge, credentials and experience of JH and WC for that matter? How many years have they been in the funds management business? WC purchased Rimcorp February 2008 and the existing managers are continuing to manage it for at least 6 months. WC then acquired the PIF in May. It would be more accurate to say that JH is gaining knowledge, credentials and experience by experimenting on our fund!

-----
"It's too late for me, but there are alot of little cable boys and girls out there who STILL have a chance! Don't you understand?"
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Duped said:
Maybe for this period but mayby not therafter. NSX listing requires a half yearly report, (see http://www.nsxa.com.au/documents/listing_rules/NSXLR2004.pdf) which requires reporting on "Net tangible assets per security with the comparative figure for the previous corresponding period."

The 45c valuation was in June 08 (from memory) so it falls outside the current 6 month period. So there should be another valuation soon. Right?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Clause 23 of the new Constitution :

The RE is entitled to a fee equal to 0.7% p.a. of the value of the total funds under management as determined with reference to the preceding month and the most recent audited accounts. This fee will be calculated and payable monthly in advance. This remuneration accrues from day to day.

My assumption is that the number of units on issue would be determined by looking at the preceding month and their value would be determined by looking at the value as per the last audited accounts.

The next audited accounts will be done for the half year ended 31st Dec.2008 and will probably be finalised end of March going by past accounts. Therefore, WC will be paid a fee based on 45c/unit at least until end of April 2009 and it wouldn't surprise me if they backdate their fee to June 2008 when they took over - they're technically entitled to it.

Personally, I much preferred the old Constitution and the old fee structure. No profits - No distributions - No fees !
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I've just re-read Newwtrader's (yesterday) post 3203. Everything he says makes sense. A week ago a post on this thread asserted that information from WC indicated that there would be no distributions. This activated a flurry of activity with many questions being asked. But WC continued to say that payments would be made. Why? I don't swallow this "last minute" negotiation breakdown stuff. Credibility is everything and you have to earn it by example.
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

breaker1 said:
Sugar,

That's a great thought! I actually had another valued PIF AG member bring this up via a phone call today.

The thought put to me was, have we seen the 10-15c value on the NSX consistently enough to ask JH to advise Centrelink (C/L) of this new value over the 45 cent C/L value recorded now?

To the best of my knowledge, WC valued our units at 45c according to the value of assets still in the fund, so those on the assets test get valued at that 45% of former capital assets amount and those who fall into the income test get deemed interest on that 45c amount.

So, who wins out for C/L - what JH values our fund at or what the market values our fund at?

The other question I would ask is, is it really JH's responsibility to advise C/L on behalf of PIF investors receiving a part pension OR is it acceptable for each investor to advise C/L themselves? I ask this question because when my dad had shares before, all he had to do was ring and advise C/L from time to time when the value changed significantly on the ASX, like once every 6 mths and that was enough. All C/L did was to check the current value themselves to verify and they would change his capital amount to be assessed.

Remembering that when JH gave this valuation to C/L, the PIF had not yet been listed on the NSX.

WC will endeavour to pay us 1.5c in the full $ - not 1.5c of 45% of the $. So our 45c (45%) asset remaining amount passed onto C/L does not seem to have any bearing on the how the WC pays distributions.

If the only way we can presently get our money out of the PIF is via the NSX, would not that NSX price then be the funds real value in the eyes of C/L ?

To balance this thought train off, would WC not advise C/L that our assessed amount needs to go up, if our NSX value had increased to say, 60c per unit - you can't have it both ways if this be true

It might boil down to a legal point of how assets are valued for C/L in funds such as ours, but it's certainly worth following up with WC..

But wouldn't it be good if investors could get the 1.5c per qtr. distribution and only get deemed or asseted @ 10-15c based capital, thus receiving more from C/L?
Click to expand...
CenterLink told me over the phone that they value shares on the NSX in the same way they value shares on the ASX. This means:
CenterLink do a bulk update two times a year on 20 March and 20 Sept. They get the market data from 2 weeks prior to that date and update everyone’s details. I was told we are able to call CenterLink as many times as we like during the year and ask for a reassessment of our shares (from market data which would be 2 weeks old). The system will only update if doing this is to your benefit. So if the price on the NSX has gone up compared to the price already on file, the update will not take place.

I don't know if CenterLink are aware yet if the PIF is listed as the person I was speaking to couldn't find any info on it but those that might benefit from this info should call CenterLink and find out. There was a trade today at 15 cents on the NSX so a reassement in two weeks might be worth while.
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

They must be able to pay something /Say half a cent Just to put food on the table on Xmas day / Dane ///
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

sugar3157 said:
well well well
finally I can say good bye to all my money...
WC JH what a load of #@$% they told us...
promises promises...mmmm
very very depressed.....
Click to expand...
i wouldnt be to worried about it sugar3157,(thats wrong you have every right to be worried about your money) because if the worst happens, the lady in red will end up beside her cronies from Mfs and oct, hopefully in the same cell, Dora is right, there is no way JH was not privy to information which has removed our ability to recieve a distribution in October, and im sure if proven we have the avenue to call a vote of no confidence in our so called RE, using the corporate bodies NSX and ASIC to demand this person and her group be called to task over these outlandish excuses (personally i hope there are enough of us left with a few bob to go after these crooks when the light at the end of the tunnel goes out)Flatback
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Burnt said:
Clause 23 of the new Constitution :

The RE is entitled to a fee equal to 0.7% p.a. of the value of the total funds under management as determined with reference to the preceding month and the most recent audited accounts. This fee will be calculated and payable monthly in advance. This remuneration accrues from day to day.

My assumption is that the number of units on issue would be determined by looking at the preceding month and their value would be determined by looking at the value as per the last audited accounts.

The next audited accounts will be done for the half year ended 31st Dec.2008 and will probably be finalised end of March going by past accounts. Therefore, WC will be paid a fee based on 45c/unit at least until end of April 2009 and it wouldn't surprise me if they backdate their fee to June 2008 when they took over - they're technically entitled to it.

Personally, I much preferred the old Constitution and the old fee structure. No profits - No distributions - No fees !
Click to expand...

Too true. NSX rules allow 75 days for the 6-month report. You got 3 months on me.
How did you justify backdating to Jun08? New fee structure came into effect on 15 Oct didn't it (or only after distributinons commence)? Or is there a back dating clause I missed?
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Hi Duped,

You're quite right about the back dating of fees. There is no specific clause to that effect, so fees should only be back dated to the time the Constitution comes into effect. WC has given an undertaking that they will not be paid these fees until cash payments are made to unit holders.
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

seamisty said:
Premium Income Fund
Tax Statement Clarification – 27 October 2008 Wellington Capital Limited has engaged KPMG as taxation advisers in relation to the Premium Income Fund.
To assist individual investors in completing their 2008 income tax returns,
Click to expand...

So, finally WC have released some clarification to all investors regarding the “unusual variance” in the latest tax statements – it would have saved a lot of trouble if this explanation had accompanied the statements in the first place.

The best quote from that update is “During the year the Premium Income Fund made a significant number of impairment decisions on its assets.” I couldn’t have said it better!!

Unfortunately, these "are not able to be claimed as deductions” so if you’ve got an accountant ask them to calculate how many extra tax$ you have lost (this, obviously, depends on the number of units & your tax bracket).

Milk = spilt …. am I crying?.... aren’t we all?
 
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

If it is in the new Constitution that penalty rates of interest on defaulting mortgages go to WC instead of PIF why would they pursue these payments vigorously?

I guess we may have to wait a little longer for our Xmas handout!

G.H
 

Similar threads

System
MA1 - MA Credit Income Trust
Replies
3
Views
473
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
System
DGT - DigiCo Infrastructure REIT
Replies
8
Views
986
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
Garpal Gumnut
Coolabah Capital
Replies
5
Views
1K
divs4ever
divs4ever
Sean K
VBTC - VanEck Bitcoin ETF
2 3
Replies
40
Views
4K
Garpal Gumnut
Garpal Gumnut
ducati916
November 2024 DDD
2 3
Replies
53
Views
5K
ducati916
ducati916
Top