Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

GTP - Great Southern Plantations

Jump to new
Forenth said:
After 3 days I got a reply, but from my own mail server:

"Unable to deliver message to the following recipients, due to being unable to connect successfully to the destination mail server."

Maybe they don't want any questions. So where's the offer, their website is still blank about it.
Click to expand...

I contacted PPPL via their web site on Monday, got an answer within hours.

Correspondence copied here:

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, 17 August 2009 9:46 AM
To: Pulpwood Plantations Web Form
Subject: [Pulpwood Plantations] Message from the website
Type: Grower
Are you guys serious?
I see Mr. Butlin is on your board. From that I can only conclude this is
another attempted grower rip-off in the grand style of 'Project Transform'.
He and his GS mates should be in jail.
Bloody NO in all counts from me (Gxxxxx) and my wife (Gyyyyy) while any
former GS executive is involved in any way.
Regards


------Answer from PPPT:-------
Thank you for your email below. We respect your position in relation to the
involvement of Mr Butlin, however, it is important to point out that without
the knowledge and experience provided by Mr Butlin to Pulpwood Plantations,
Mr Gordon Martin (Chairman) has said that he would not have got to the
position of being able to put forward the proposal to growers. Due to the
extreme complexities in the structure of these schemes, it is critical for
any potential replacement Responsible Entity and Manager to have specific
knowledge on the MIS structures, forestry management and the history and
structure of these specific projects, hence the appointment of Mr Butlin.
In our opinion it is unlikely that any offers to growers will be made
without the involvement of some of the previous Great Southern executives
for the reasons outlined above. Nevertheless, this is purely an offer that
each and every grower has the right to accept or reject, should a meeting be
convened to formally put the proposal forward. Under the Corporations Law
the required percentages must be achieved at those meetings to allow the
proposal to be implemented.
Naturally, you will form your own conclusions in relation to the proposal,
but we would like to highlight that this is a genuine offer that will see
these projects through to harvest. Gordon Martin is a well respected
businessman who has had no previous involvement in Great Southern and is
funding the majority of the capital requirements necessary to fulfil this
proposal. Pulpwood Plantations is not currently considering purchasing the
land on which the trees sit and so there is no other reason for Pulpwood
Plantations to put this proposal to growers, other than to ensure they
continue to harvest, being the only time that Pulpwood Plantations receives
revenue (as a share of net harvest proceeds) from its capital investment.
Should we be able to assist you with any further information or
clarification, please do not hesitate to reply to this email.
Kind regards
Pulpwood Plantations Pty Ltd
 
Well done pist'n broke.

This is another Project transform in the making.

What scares my to hell is that if they are relying on Mr Butlins experience then this is doomed and I for one will not be part of it. As I did with Project Transform and voted against it and will vote against this offer as well.

By the way Mr Butlin has already recruited some of his Great Southern stooges to work with him on this proposal. I know this because they have been in contact with my adviser trying to win over his support. He told then in no uncertain terms that they can take a long walk off a short pier!!

I strongly urge all GS Tree investors to resist this pathetic attempt to steal your trees and that you should send a message to PPPL that whilst Mr Bultin is involved they can forget it.
 
An excerpt from Gunns announcement today:

"Gunns is well positioned to leverage its forestry management expertise.

- Actively working on proposals to play a role in the ongoing operation of forestry assets presently managed by Timbercorp and Great Southern Plantations.

Gunns primary objective is to manage assets and woodflow, rather than deploy significant capital to acquire land or other capital assets.

- Gunns is exploring a number of avenues to achieve this, including working with other parties to advance proposals."
 
I got an answer from PPPL today:

"Thank you for your enquiry below. In answer to your questions, I can confirm that the PPPL proposal will replace any dollar funding potentially applied by the Receivers from the date on which PPPL assumes the management responsibility. Naturally, any funding applied by the Receivers between the period of the 18th May 2009 (their appointment date) and the date on which PPPL assumes responsibility could potentially be recouped by the Receivers on harvest, if it complies with the court ruling in regards to the lien.

PPPL's fee in relation to the 2000 Plantation Project will be an additional 15% of NET harvest proceeds (ie of the amount to be distributed to growers). The existing 5.5% inherent in the project will still be payable to GSMAL.

Harvesting schedules are determined by a combination of factors including the seasons, seasonal conditions, work scheduling with contractors and chipping, stock pile and vessel scheduling at the port, therefore we are notable to give you an exact date as yet with regards to the harvesting of the 2000 plantations, but due to its very large size, we would imagine that it would take place over a couple of years commencing sometime year, with interim distributions made to growers over this period."

So, PPPL envisage that the 2000 project won't be harvested completely for a number of years, and total fees will be 20.5% of what's left after costs. Perhaps it will be the best offer but I wonder what/if Gunns and others will come up with?
 
This is another wrought concocted by Mr Butlin and his GS cronies. He has sold this to PPPL and the GS Investors will pay again if this goes ahead.

Remember that previous GS harvests have incurred Harvesting costs totalling upto 60% of the Gross Harvest Proceeds. Now add the 20.5% that PPPL will be taking and there wont be much left for the Growers!!!!

Lets hope like hell that there is other deals to be put to the growers cause this deal in its current form does little to help the growers....but alot to help Butlin & Co.
 
The Shadow said:
Remember that previous GS harvests have incurred Harvesting costs totalling upto 60% of the Gross Harvest Proceeds. Now add the 20.5% that PPPL will be taking and there wont be much left for the Growers!!!!
Click to expand...

I cring at any extra fees but with regard to harvesting costs I recall they were always estimated to be around 50% of gross proceeds. GSL gave a breakdown in actual dollar figures for each process and if processing costs are still around 50% then nothing has changed.

BUT, I think the 2000 project has a gross value of around $200 million (I think, could be wrong), so 15% of half of that is a good return on the $20 million PPPL plan to put in. After all, that was for all 6 projects not just 2000. Even if PPPL put $7 million into just 2000 they're making over 100%.

What will Gunns & others offer? We now have a top of the market so they would have to offer less to win the contract, lol. I think PPPL are looking to be first to call a meeting and so prevent anyone else getting a bid in.

I better write to Gunns and tell them to hurry up, lol.
 
Hi All,
"Just Puzzled " is about how I am feeling about this whole Great Southern thing. I have been reading what you guys have been saying and... I'm still puzzeld. If you have a moment could you tell me what is going on with this crazy investment. I invested in 2008 ( yep.. a newy ) and I don't really understand what is happening...lots of stuff I've read is very concerning about the people in charge of different areas, including some solicitors!!! I'm a single mum, who was advised that this was the way to go and now the agent who set me up no longer works for the company and I can't seem to find anyone who will spell it out in "normal terms". If you can help I would be very grateful as I am at a loss as to what to do or think. Thanks :)
 
Mr Martin of Coogee Chemicals is recorded as saying "a group of business men has contributed $20M...to PPPL" I wonder if one of the contributors is a Mr John Young....
 
Jiml

What happened. You killed this thread. thought there was some good info here, not mine but some of the other posters.
Any way we are not dead yet.
 
You are not wrong - I enterered the name John Young and the thread withered on the vine. Buggered if I know. Anyway, it seems if woodlot holders will get (most) of their money back, unlike shareholders...
 
jiml said:
Anyway, it seems if woodlot holders will get (most) of their money back, unlike shareholders...
Click to expand...

Not if the woodlots are growing on leased land. I read the circular closely - in the 2004 and 2005 project circular, a percentage of the trees was on "leased land". The receivers cant pay the rent, or wont, so the landlords can take the land back...and the trees become theirs. One of my lots is located on leased land (unknown to me at the time). So, looks like I have blown that money...

(The receivers said that each individual investor can obtain their own legal advice...)
 
I'm sure that when I invested in 2000 they said the money included GTP buying the land for the trees, but in the investor portal at their website it has quite a few allotments of the 2000 project listed as being on leased land. That's something I was told they weren't going to do, at least in 2000.

I am relieved that my allotments are not on the list, but returns were always going to be averaged across investors so I guess any losses due to leased land will be suffered by all.

This forum also seems to be more active on another site.
 
Interesting announcement from AYT at 9.29am. Sorry cant seem to copy it here. They have essentially increase the write down of loan values to do with Great Southern
 
I have been a keen observer of everyones valued input on this thread and so this is my first post. Thank you all for your posts and advice.
I also am part of the 2000 scheme and was wondering if my trees are on leased land or not. How do I find this out? I went on the Great Southern site but could not find it.
Also, has everyone received the latest paperwork and offers from pulpwood? Is it best to just sit back and wait to see if any other offers come about at this stage?
 
A few questions for the group:


  1. If you have finance with Adelaide Bank are you still making payments.
    If yes why?
    If No Why?

    My investment is in 2004 and on Leased Land!! :mad:Does that mean I have done my dough and should just go home or as the returns are averaged does it mean we have all done a little bit of my dough?:rolleyes:

Finally as McGrath Nicol seem to suggest they havent paid the rent and landlords are reclaiming the land does that mean the ATO is standing by with a large hammer to reclaim its deductions.

Sorry for all the questions

Thanks
 
petesake said:
I also am part of the 2000 scheme and was wondering if my trees are on leased land or not. How do I find this out? I went on the Great Southern site but could not find it.
Click to expand...

You need to register as an investor on the great southern website (www.great-southern.com.au) and then you get access to information specific to your holdings. For the 2004 and 2005 plantations it has a list stating which grower numbers and plantation lots are on leased land.

You need to have your grower number and some other details to register..it can all be done online.
 
Johnathon123 said:
A few questions for the group:

Finally as McGrath Nicol seem to suggest they havent paid the rent and landlords are reclaiming the land does that mean the ATO is standing by with a large hammer to reclaim its deductions.
Click to expand...

On the great southern website today, they have posted three new draft rulings from the ATO about this topic. I have tried to read them...haven't understood it all yet. Time to read it again.
 
bv2726 said:
On the great southern website today, they have posted three new draft rulings from the ATO about this topic. I have tried to read them...haven't understood it all yet. Time to read it again.
Click to expand...

Thanks

Had a read

With the exception of 2009/D9 they all seem to relate to "Non Forestry" MIS and therefore would not relate to me with a tree investment. Is that right??

Having said that I would assume (based on nothing) that Forestry and Non Forestry are treated the same by the ATO??

Any further thoughts?:banghead:
 

Similar threads

System
SPD - Southern Palladium
Replies
5
Views
2K
mullokintyre
mullokintyre
K
Bank Makes a Mockery of ASIC Enforceable Undertaking
Replies
1
Views
3K
mjim
M
J
Great Southern loan deal to Javelin
Replies
14
Views
6K
JMT781000
J
exberliner1
LIT - Livium Ltd
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
27K
frugal.rock
frugal.rock
tech/a
Volume/Range/High Low and Close--reading and application
2 3
Replies
49
Views
29K
tech/a
tech/a
Top