Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Parliamentary Committee Report - Inquiry into financial products and services‏
'The Chairman of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services, Mr Bernie Ripoll MP, tonight tabled the Committee's report Inquiry into financial products and services in Australia.

The Committee's report is available online and can be accessed via the following link: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/corporations_ctte/fps/report/report.pdf

It is now a matter for Government to respond to the Committee's report and the recommendations it contains. The Government's response will be linked to the inquiry web page when it becomes available'

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

seamisty Quote: '"WC announced on the 9th of May 2008 that it had entered into a call option deed which is exercisible by WC up to and including 31 August 2008. Does anyone know exactly when that option deed was exercised by WC?"

During the period 25 March to 30 April 2008 WC provided corporate advisory services to OCV.

On 2 May 2008 Ms Hutson and two other directors of Wellington Capital became directors of WIM and the existing directors resigned. This was prior to the execution of the call option deed in relation to the shares in WIM.

On 8 May 2008 Octaviar Property granted a call option to Wellington Capital to purchase the shares in WIM. On 9 June 2008 Wellington Capital exercised that option and on 13 June 2008, a share sale agreement was signed in the terms for which the option had provided. The shares in WIM were then transferred to Wellington Capital

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

seamisty Quote: '"WC announced on the 9th of May 2008 that it had entered into a call option deed which is exercisible by WC up to and including 31 August 2008. Does anyone know exactly when that option deed was exercised by WC?"

During the period 25 March to 30 April 2008 WC provided corporate advisory services to OCV.

On 2 May 2008 Ms Hutson and two other directors of Wellington Capital became directors of WIM and the existing directors resigned. This was prior to the execution of the call option deed in relation to the shares in WIM.

On 8 May 2008 Octaviar Property granted a call option to Wellington Capital to purchase the shares in WIM. On 9 June 2008 Wellington Capital exercised that option and on 13 June 2008, a share sale agreement was signed in the terms for which the option had provided. The shares in WIM were then transferred to Wellington Capital

Thanks Marcom, So had JH accepted the Wollongong Hotel sale at auction on 7th May 2009 it would have occured inside the 12 month period of when the purchase price of the PIF would have been calculated. Had the offer of $40.5million passed in on the day been accepted we would have received our 3 cent return of capital thus triggering WC right to management fees = profit. Interesting. Seamisty

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Have had a scan through the Parliamentary Joint Committee's report.

Julie Matheson's submission ruffled a few feathers. She appears to be pro Independent advisors.

http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/corporations_ctte/fps/submissions/sub262.pdf

The spectacular exchange of correspondence including a threat of charges for interfering with witnesses is on pages 233 to 246. I'm not surprised though, when there's money involved the pressure groups jump out of the shadows.

http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/corporations_ctte/fps/report/report.pdf

Couldn't find a single mention of PIF. Not such a bad thing if we wish to avoid prejudicing the public on ASICs action. I think the Committee had their hands full with Storm and Opes Prime.

 

[simgrund]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Simgrund I suggest you contact Nick Nichols business editor of the Gold Coast Bulletin personally nicholsn@gcb.newsltd.com.au)
Regards, Seamisty

Done; will there be some professional courtesy in response, or will it go the way of an appeal for contact with Investor Advisory Committee,
Regards, simgrund

Mr. Nick NICHOLS
Editor,
Business Gold Coast

Dear Mr. Nichols,

My name is S................ and I am a retiree deprived of my retirement funds by the many adverse factors not of my making.
In an article written by you for Business section of the Gold Coast newspaper titled "Escape Plan for Frozen Funds" and dated November 21st, 2009, you inform the readers that : "FROZEN mortgage funds have been given a new option to release unitholders from their troubled investments without the need to pay them out."
You further inform the readers "The Premium Income Fund, now controlled by Jenny Hutson's Wellington Capital, has a full listing on the NSX." adding that "Its units have languished just above 10c each for most of the past year at a fraction of the most recent valuation of 39c".
It would have been helpful to inform the readers of the original purchase price of $1. Hardly an endorsement of the saviour plan, where such diminution (90%) of capital occurs.
And then further on, you inform the readers that: "Legal firm McCullough Robertson has praised the plan."
Again, the helpful addition for the readers would be a disclosure, that the firm is closely related to the Responsible Entity for the PIF; Wellington Capital.
Another example of the destructive factor of the "related party", which ruined the PIF in the first place.
So the truthful reading of this news should be: "Opportunity to sell your life savings for pennies".
While the intention may have been to inform of the "option" available to unitholders; this must be seen for what it is; a blatant attempt to deodorise a putrid corporate vice grip on "distressed" unitholders whose personal financial situations drove them to that desperation. This is an inconvenient truth.
And your readers would appreciate your unbiased and transparent presentation of such important details as I have pointed above.
Instead Mr. Nichols, the subject of the article would, sadly, be mistaken for the endorsement of a "liferaft" thrown to miserable unfortunates who got caught in the games played by the "Big Boys", that went awry.
You are aware of the Rippoll Report. It has been tabled recently. (http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committ...ort/report.pdf)
Should some or all of the proposed amendments be incorporated into a new corporate landscape, the lot of many would improve.
And the Big Boys will be forced to pledge allegiances to the "unstressed" clientele.
Many of the proposals came from "distressed" unitholders and who may not benefit in time for their possible implementation.
Please Mr. Nichols; help us to bring these brighter horizons a little bit closer by putting the hopes of the contributors to the Rippoll Report into the pages of your reports.
Repeating Mr.Kristian Butler's comments on NSX initiative (obvious and blatant self interest) as "innovative solution for property managers" is not a step in that direction. Rather a continuation of the carnivorous mindset. I personally am putting my faith in the ASIC action against the "Big Boys" of ex MFS and PIF class action against auditors KPMG.

Respectfully,

S....................
EM address

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

'Done; will there be some professional courtesy in response, or will it go the way of an appeal for contact with Investor Advisory Committee,'
Regards, simgrund

Actually Simgrund the IAG (being the only PIF investor JH promise upheld that went through the motions of actually being implemented) deserves further mention. If PIF investor questions sent to info@wellcap.com.au; investorrelations@newpif.com.au; Caroline Snow (csnow@wellcap.com.au)

take from 2-3weeks to be responded to, and I reiterate 'responded', not necessarily answered, I see little value in investors sending their concerns to WC for them to then on send to the IAG reps for them to re submit to WC. A lot of pissing around to ultimately achieve the end result of calling the hotline originally that if they can't give a satisfactory answer they will either get back to you, or, not.

We can monitor the efficiency of my latest email sent to WC on the thread to guage the WC committment to PIF related issues;;;;;;sent to info@wellcap.com.au; investorrelations@newpif.com.au; Caroline Snow (csnow@wellcap.com.au) on the forum::
Subject: Wollongong Hotel
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:14:01 +0800



Dear Caroline,

I have had several enquiries this morning from PIF investors regarding todays PIN announcement and the Wollongong Hotel.

1. Will the PIF be receiving interest on the deferred sale?
2. Will the PIF receive further upside in the $38million or will that be the total amount amount recovered ?
3. Is the PIF now an unsecured creditor of the property?
4.Has the $20M difference already been written off (impaired) in the current 39.2c valuation per unit? If not what is the current value of PIF units?
5. Was the property passed in at auction for $40million earlier this year?
6. How much money was needed to bring the property to completion and why weren't interested PIF investors given the opportunity to participate in a JV to complete the project

Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2009 2:22:01 PM
To: info@wellcap.com.au; investorrelations@newpif.com.au; Caroline Snow (csnow@wellcap.com.au)

In addition I have received confirmation that the PIF asset 60-62 Harbour St Wollongong
property was passed in at $40,500,000 on Thursday 7 May, 2009 and there were ongoing negotiations with interested parties. I am completely astounded with the final outcome negotiated by WC and reported in the press before the NSX was informed, on a property that PIF investors regarded as one of the only decent assests left remaining in the PIF.
I was also told that approx 20 completed units in the complex were sold prior to the auction. What was the total amount achieved through the sale of these units.

I will keep investors informed of ::
1. The time frame from when inquiry was sent to WC as to response received.
2. The response received or lack of.
3. The amount of times the original enquiry had to be submitted before receiving a response.
4. Who actually responds to initial enquiry.

It certainly appears investor enquiries are not a high priority, as is the transparency promised but not delivered and we won't even go into distributions, coz if we can't even get a 3cent per unit return of capital 12 months after they were promised , regardless of the loss of several fund assets, our overwhelmingly elected RE and her band of assorted dedicated professionals aren't quite what we thought we were getting. Certainly not as competent and as professional as I personally thought I had elected. I can also see why JH received this award (which is conspicuous by its absence on the WC website of glowing achievements)

'J' is for genius
Reflux's modest press release award for this week goes to Jenny Hutson, the former chairwoman of travel agent S8.
According to a statement put out by "her own" merchant bank, Wellington Capital, Hutson is apparently "a born leader" who is often compared to Richard Branson "when it comes to business tactics".
Jenny Hutson, however, does not have a Bransonesque beard.
Nor has she, as has Branson, trotted out countless authorised biographies glorifying her genius (only press releases at this stage).
A mother of two, Hutson has supposedly "forged a reputation as one of Australia's emerging entrepreneurial corporate stars". Her story is "inspirational".
She apparently led a rowing team to victory twice and she has had a "phenomenal career". Hutson, who won the Queensland Businesswoman of the Year award this week, according to the press release "is just getting started".http://www.smh.com.au/news/business...the-love/2007/03/23/1174597886058.html?page=2


Cheers and thanks Simgrund for drawing media attention to what is left of our fund, Seamisty

 

[mellifuous]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

AN ANNUAL (OR BI-ANNUAL) GENERAL MEETING
FOR MANAGING FUNDS (LISTED/UNLISTED)

A very astute unit holder has come up with a very good idea - an annual general meeting for managed funds.

Companies have them - managed funds don't.

Write to the Hon Chris Bowen MP and request that the Corporations Act be amended to incorporate annual (or bi-annual) general meetings for managed funds.

A great idea.

http://www.chrisbowen.net/contact-chris-bowen/home.do

 

[mellifuous]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

AN ANNUAL (OR BI-ANNUAL) GENERAL MEETING
FOR MANAGING FUNDS (LISTED/UNLISTED)

A very astute unit holder has come up with a very good idea - an annual general meeting for managed funds.

Companies have them - managed funds don't.

Write to the Hon Chris Bowen MP and request that the Corporations Act be amended to incorporate annual (or bi-annual) general meetings for managed funds.

A great idea.

http://www.chrisbowen.net/contact-chris-bowen/home.do

**** CORRECTION ****

The heading should have been:-

AN ANNUAL (OR BI-ANNUAL) GENERAL MEETING
FOR MANAGED FUNDS (LISTED/UNLISTED)

My email has been sent to Mr. Bowen's office.

Thanks.

 

[selciper]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

It would seem that any RE wishing to remain remote from its investors can take advantage of there being no obligation to hold AGMs. It's an annomoly that should be cleared up.

 

[simgrund]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

AN ANNUAL (OR BI-ANNUAL) GENERAL MEETING
FOR MANAGING FUNDS (LISTED/UNLISTED)
A very astute unit holder has come up with a very good idea - an annual general meeting for managed funds.
Companies have them - managed funds don't.
Write to the Hon Chris Bowen MP and request that the Corporations Act be amended to incorporate annual (or bi-annual) general meetings for managed funds.
A great idea.
http://www.chrisbowen.net/contact-chris-bowen/home.do

Good day Mellifuous,

No, no; that would be just another JUNKET in the old tradition.
Have a look at Recommendation 9, @6.160 p141 of the Rippoll Reprt. If such a meeting is forthcoming, it has to be for the sole purpose of restating to the cadres the "reform principles" to ensure, they did not forget them during the course of the year just passed.
Regards, simgrund

 

[mellifuous]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Good day Mellifuous,

No, no; that would be just another JUNKET in the old tradition.
Have a look at Recommendation 9, @6.160 p141 of the Rippoll Reprt. If such a meeting is forthcoming, it has to be for the sole purpose of restating to the cadres the "reform principles" to ensure, they did not forget them during the course of the year just passed.
Regards, simgrund

hahah.. no, that's not what I meant - I meant like a shareholder meeting, except it would be called a 'unit holders meeting'.

I didn't mean a meeting of managers -

nothing to do with the rippoff report.

(opps, my speeling is not so good)

"... It would seem that any RE wishing to remain remote from its investors can take advantage of there being no obligation to hold AGMs. It's an annomoly that should be cleared up. ..." per selciper

Yes, is does need to be cleared up - thanks.

My email:-

The Hon Chris Bowen MP
Federal Member for Prospect - Minister for Human Services
Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate L

Re: Annual General Meeting for Managed Funds.

Dear Sir,

I am an investor in what was once known as the City Pacific First Mortgage Fund, now the Pacific First
Mortgage Fund ("PFMF").

I have previously sent correspondence to your office (via. Senator Tanner's office) regarding my concerns
about the plight of investors in a numbers of non-liquid, badly impaired, debt ridden managed property
funds (listed and unlisted).

The focus of my concerns relate to the fact that parliament could not have envisaged the calamity that
has befallen investors in these funds. The greatest shame is that while we flounder, our investments dwindle,
and the benefits seem to be flowing to mostly foreign investors.

Now, my concerns are not directed to foreign entities taking advantage, rather, my concerns
are about where we find ourselves and the law's inability to resolve the situation in a practical and
fair way.

The Corporations Act in its present state cannot resolve the tension between a manager's desire to continue
on dragging these badly impaired funds along to make their commissions on the one hand, and investors'
needs to see a return of what remains of, what is in many cases, their lives' savings on the other hand.

As you would be aware, there is no facility in the Corporations Act to cause a managed fund to hold an annual
(or bi-annual) general meeting. Public companies hold them, but managed funds do not.

One of the greatest concerns unit holders have is that managers simply fail to disclose even simple things. By way of example, I have written two emails to the manager of the PFMF (Balmain Trilogy (B/T)) asking whether the B/T is charging borrowers from the fund any direct fees (that is, fees the borrowers pay managers directly - no part of such fees go to the unit holders in the fund) and have received no answer from B/T.

There is really very little information flowing from a manager to investors. Furthermore an investor
has no means to challenge the manager on any issue in any public forum.

Consequently, investors wait with bated breath until a morsel of information is drip-fed to them
by the manager, or until they find out their units are worth less, or until such time as they
find out that the fund has been engaged in another catastrophic event.

If such a mechanism of an annual general meeting is so necessary for the proper functioning of
a public company, then so should it be for a listed/unlisted managed (property or otherwise) fund.

Right now these funds are in great need of a lot of legislative support from your department.

I sincerely hope that you will give this matter serous consideration.

Thank you.



Yours faithfully,

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

'Done; will there be some professional courtesy in response, or will it go the way of an appeal for contact with Investor Advisory Committee,'
Regards, simgrund

Actually Simgrund the IAG (being the only PIF investor JH promise upheld that went through the motions of actually being implemented) deserves further mention. If PIF investor questions sent to info@wellcap.com.au; investorrelations@newpif.com.au; Caroline Snow (csnow@wellcap.com.au)

take from 2-3weeks to be responded to, and I reiterate 'responded', not necessarily answered, I see little value in investors sending their concerns to WC for them to then on send to the IAG reps for them to re submit to WC. A lot of pissing around to ultimately achieve the end result of calling the hotline originally that if they can't give a satisfactory answer they will either get back to you, or, not.

We can monitor the efficiency of my latest email sent to WC on the thread to guage the WC committment to PIF related issues;;;;;;sent to info@wellcap.com.au; investorrelations@newpif.com.au; Caroline Snow (csnow@wellcap.com.au) on the forum::
Subject: Wollongong Hotel
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:14:01 +0800



Dear Caroline,

I have had several enquiries this morning from PIF investors regarding todays PIN announcement and the Wollongong Hotel.

1. Will the PIF be receiving interest on the deferred sale?
2. Will the PIF receive further upside in the $38million or will that be the total amount amount recovered ?
3. Is the PIF now an unsecured creditor of the property?
4.Has the $20M difference already been written off (impaired) in the current 39.2c valuation per unit? If not what is the current value of PIF units?
5. Was the property passed in at auction for $40million earlier this year?
6. How much money was needed to bring the property to completion and why weren't interested PIF investors given the opportunity to participate in a JV to complete the project

Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2009 2:22:01 PM
To: info@wellcap.com.au; investorrelations@newpif.com.au; Caroline Snow (csnow@wellcap.com.au)

In addition I have received confirmation that the PIF asset 60-62 Harbour St Wollongong
property was passed in at $40,500,000 on Thursday 7 May, 2009 and there were ongoing negotiations with interested parties. I am completely astounded with the final outcome negotiated by WC and reported in the press before the NSX was informed, on a property that PIF investors regarded as one of the only decent assests left remaining in the PIF.
I was also told that approx 20 completed units in the complex were sold prior to the auction. What was the total amount achieved through the sale of these units.

I will keep investors informed of ::
1. The time frame from when inquiry was sent to WC as to response received.
2. The response received or lack of.
3. The amount of times the original enquiry had to be submitted before receiving a response.
4. Who actually responds to initial enquiry.




Cheers and thanks Simgrund for drawing media attention to what is left of our fund, Seamisty

Hi all, I resubmitted my enquiries to WC this morning and received acknowledgement from C Snow and was told a reply to my enquiries will be sent shortly. Our next PIF investor update is not due until end of Dec and was told Investor Updates are provided for the periods ended April, August and December'. I was sure we were promised quarterly updates? Isn't that 4 a year, not 3?


http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021721385.PDF
How do we communicate?
Advisers and investors assisted with by the Wellington Hotline:
1300 854 885
Adviser email: adviserservices@newpif.com.au
Regular NSX releases
Quarterly investor update mail out directly to investors

Will keep you posted on response to enquiries. Seamisty

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Offers at 20c went from 3 offering 192,000 to 4 offering 1,072,000

Someone is bailing out of 980,000 units at 20c? Our biggest departure? Just before it looks like we might get some return of capital.

What's up? Just booking a capital loss to offset against gains on real shares? Or do they know something about the true value of the fund?

Lets see if any buyers will put some real money up for our units.

Total sales to date has only just topped $500K. Average price per trade is $4543. There's been only 4 trades over $20K. Biggest trade to date was $52K at the lofty price of 12c.

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

CORRECTION: My last post should have read 880,000 rather than 980,000

BTW nobody has got back to me about WC's business plan for PIF.
Are we just in a Boston Finance type moratorium?

 

[mellifuous]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

For those interested:-

City Pacific in serious breach..

FMF compliance report 2009
(from B/T's site)

http://www.balmaintrilogy.com.au/pdf/Compliance%20Plan%20Audit%20Report-PFMF%20%28Year%20End%20June%202009%29.pdf

 

[simgrund]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Offers at 20c went from 3 offering 192,000 to 4 offering 1,072,000
Someone is bailing out of 980,000 units at 20c? Our biggest departure? Just before it looks like we might get some return of capital.
What's up? Just booking a capital loss to offset against gains on real shares? Or do they know something about the true value of the fund?
Lets see if any buyers will put some real money up for our units.
Total sales to date has only just topped $500K. Average price per trade is $4543. There's been only 4 trades over $20K. Biggest trade to date was $52K at the lofty price of 12c.

What a treadmill, Duped.
Remember Dexter's offers of 30 cents just before voting in WC as RE and with it the NSX deadweght?
As to bailing out, my understanding is that if the u-holder has registered for class action, they will still benefit from any recovery; perhaps minus sale proceeds. Please correct me, if that's an error.
Regards, simon

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I have had a response today to my enquiries below from Ms Snow.

Dear Caroline,

I have had several enquiries this morning from PIF investors regarding todays PIN announcement and the Wollongong Hotel.

1. Will the PIF be receiving interest on the deferred sale?
2. Will the PIF receive further upside in the $38million or will that be the total amount amount recovered ?
3. Is the PIF now an unsecured creditor of the property?
4.Has the $20M difference already been written off (impaired) in the current 39.2c valuation per unit? If not what is the current value of PIF units?
5. Was the property passed in at auction for $40million earlier this year?
6. How much money was needed to bring the property to completion and why weren't interested PIF investors given the opportunity to participate in a JV to complete the project

Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2009 2:22:01 PM
To: info@wellcap.com.au; investorrelations@newpif.com.au; Caroline Snow (csnow@wellcap.com.au)

In addition I have received confirmation that the PIF asset 60-62 Harbour St Wollongong
property was passed in at $40,500,000 on Thursday 7 May, 2009 and there were ongoing negotiations with interested parties. I am completely astounded with the final outcome negotiated by WC and reported in the press before the NSX was informed, on a property that PIF investors regarded as one of the only decent assests left remaining in the PIF.
I was also told that approx 20 completed units in the complex were sold prior to the auction. What was the total amount achieved through the sale of these units.

Response received today pm:::

PREMITJM INCOME FT]ND - WOLLONGONG TRANSACTION
Thank you for your emails of 18 and 19 November 2009 in relation to the Premium lncome Fund. I respond
as follows:
1.
2.
I trust this assists. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact the Wellington Hotline
on 1300 854 885 orby email to investorrelations@newpif.com.au.
Kind regards
Caroline Snow
Associate Director
Wellington Capital Limited
as Responsible Entity for Premium Income Fund
ACN 114248 458 AFSL291562
Phone 1300 854 885
Fax 1300 854 893
Email
#25856
Level22 307 Queen Street Brisbane Qld 4000 GPO Box 694 Brisbane Qld 4001
T 1300854885 F 1300854893 E enquiries@newpif.com.au Wwww.newpif.com.au
You have asked whether the Fund will be receiving interest on the deferred sale. This is not the case,
as there is no debt involved.
You have asked whether the Fund will receive further upside in the $38 million or whether that will
be the total amount recovered. The sale price under the contract is $38 million (plus GST).
PIF is not an unsecured creditor ofthe property.
The market release of 18 November 2009 states that the property has been sold at carrying value.
This sale has not caused impairment in the curent 39.2 cent valuation per unit.
The property was passed in at auction on Thursday , 7 May 2009 at a price of $40.5 million. There
were ongoing negotiations with interested parties which saw a contract signed with that party. One
of the conditions of the contract was that it was subject to a due diligence period of one week. At the
end of that week, the potential purchaser withdrew from the contract.
The apartments are not complete. There were no contracts capable of being settled at the time of the
action.
The cost to complete the Wollongong project is approximately $16 million. The property was taken
to a public marketing campaign and all interested parties were spoken to in relation to the project.
There was no discrimination as to whether those parties were investors or not investors in the
Premium Income Fund.



I was told that there was a line of approx 20 apartments that were complete and were sold individually prior to the auction by an employee in the Wollongong real estate industry. I was also told on Dec 3rd 2008 from WC Hotline staff that WC was targeting retail investors for the sale of individual completed units which was providing money to WC for PIF operating expenses and overheads. (which I found a tad confusing as I was told on AUG 4th 2008 that 'the fund was holding its own and was self sustaining and incoming revenue was matching outgoing expenses?) Would I be wrong in assuming it was completed units in the Wollongong investment that were being sold piece meal or did the PIF have other completed units that were being sold? It is my understanding that the Wollongong hotel and apartments were 75% complete so if the carrying value for that 75% completed is $38million, $16million to complete the remaining 25% appears expensive??
I am still not happy with the deal and many WC quotes come to mind, 'value adding', 'duty of care to do the right thing', 'long term outlook very positive', 'JH mentally focussed on new ideas', 'cap raising at some point to increase future growth', 'strong asset base that can be built on' etc etc.

Regards, Seamisty

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Thanks for all your work seamisty.

I like the quotes at the end. To which I'm predictably going to ask WC:

All very nice sentiments/objectives but ..... what's the business plan?

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

What a treadmill, Duped.
Remember Dexter's offers of 30 cents just before voting in WC as RE and with it the NSX deadweght?
As to bailing out, my understanding is that if the u-holder has registered for class action, they will still benefit from any recovery; perhaps minus sale proceeds. Please correct me, if that's an error.
Regards, simon

That's my understanding too. But the seller would miss out on any proceeds from ASIC's action - if there are any.

My point is more that someone is going to take a massive loss and at a sniff over merely HALF of Jenny's valuation. Is it a huge vote of no confidence or is the seller just restructuring their financial affairs? Money speaks louder than words.

Forgot about Dexter. Where is he? Like all others of his ilk - vanished as soon as it looks like they will be held to their word.

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Thanks for all your work seamisty.

I like the quotes at the end. To which I'm predictably going to ask WC:

All very nice sentiments/objectives but ..... what's the business plan?

Duped, I used to ask regularly what the strategy was to take the PIF forward, hence all the quotes notated in my diary. I stopped asking when in my veiw, it was becoming increasingly obvious that those promises were made on the strength of recovering a lump sum of $44.5million from OCV to pay a 3 cent return of capital to investors, open the coffers for management fees and have some money left to finish a couple of projects like Wollongong, Aston Hill etc. Everything changed when that cash payment from OCV DOCA was not forthcoming and the PTQ put a spanner in the works IMO.
Quote page 43, explanatory memorandum https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=513937
'Wellington Capital’s directors and senior management team have a wide variety of skills and
experience in areas critical to the successful acquisition, management and sale of the assets of the
Fund including property acquisition, valuation, financial analysis, funds and asset management,
accounting and management. These skills and experience will assist in maximising performance':::::


Well all I can say is where would our fund be without all these highly qualified individuals at the helm, responsible for securing finance at 25% to pay down debt and accepting $38million in a deal that is appears nowhere as good as an offer of $40.5 million passed in at auction 6 months previously (not received after the auction as reported to have been said by Jenny Hutson in the media article
Hutson defends PIF Gong sale http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/...-business.html).
Not forgetting also::: 'Wellington Capital is differentiated by its innovative style and access to capital, which enables it to be faster and more creative in designing suitable solutions. Wellington Capital's experienced team focuses exclusively on finance and property based transactions, and offers clients proven expertise in de-risking opportunities and innovatively structuring transactions.

Our areas of expertise range from property based funds management to organising long term finance for our clients, advising on mergers and takeovers, project financing and management, all with an emphasis on finance property'::::

I can honestly say that to date all these skills do not appear to have benefitted PIF investors, quite the contrary IMO. I am interested to see a list of the remaining PIF assets, their current book value and a STRATEGY of how our unit values will be restored to full value in 3-5years because IMO it is not going to happen if there are not changes made to the'current strategy' that is being implemented, but I am just an average person, what would I know? Seamisty