Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Am I wrong, Has the IAC members who maybe unit holders, received information that is not available to the public from the RE. Firstly ar we not all unit holders and for all intents and purposes separate from members of the public, therefore how can it be that certain unit holders are privileged to this alleged information to the detriment of other unit holders. Are we not all equal? In any case I gave up on the IAC a long time ago as far as I am concerned they are a waste of space on any documentation coming from the RE. If I had of been elected, I wasn't because I did not nominate, RESIGN.

Well I did nominate Charles, and to be perfectly honest with you, I always suspected the IAC voting results had been manipulated in some way hence the reluctance of Wellington Capital to relaese the voting results. In saying that what a relief not to have my name associated with such an embarrassing report as to their roles and duties!!! I too would of had to resign, being part of another blatant waste of PIF investors funds involved in paying for this mockery of an Investor Advisory Committee would be nothing more than an insult to other investors!!!


I also dread to think where unit values will end once Jenny Hutson draws management fees if it declined in value of a minimum of six cents per unit while she was not collecting fees!! As one investor emailed to me this morning regarding his view of the update::"WHAT A TOTAL CROCK OF SH1TE!!!!" Seamisty

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Seamisty - The PIF website is really uninviting to use.
.
Is it any wonder that the PIF Helpline(?) is overloaded with anxious callers seeking information? Investors not linked to this forum are, sadly, left absolutely in the dark. If there is no update issued on Monday next, surely the authorities must step in.

Odd isn't it. Why would you have a menu item for 'Premium Income Fund' when the whole site is dedicated to the ... Premium Income Fund.

Put together with the menu item 'Wellington Capital' it's not hard to get confused about what you're looking at: the newpif site or wellcap site. I use my 80+ year old father as a benchmark and I can tell you it can be pretty low. Not that WC seem to be acutely aware of what's going on in the world I live in.

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Just finished reading the absolutely pathetic excuse for transparency and disclosure called PIF Business Update. Well if you thought the update was a bit "cut and pasty" with all the hallmarks of something that was slabbed together at the last minute ...your right!

If you click on the properties tab in Acrobat reader look what you find - Author: C Snow (Yes if you have a look the boss doesn't write any of them!) With the boss reduced to nothing more than a photo (yes this years portrait features the refreshingly appropriate black attire) and a digital signature anything is possible! But then look at the Date created and Modified: Caroline was in the office on Sunday slaving away, and just managed to get it on the NSX in time to stop the punters tearing down the front door looking for any morsel of hard information!

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Just finished reading the absolutely pathetic excuse for transparency and disclosure called PIF Business Update. Well if you thought the update was a bit "cut and pasty" with all the hallmarks of something that was slabbed together at the last minute ...your right!

If you click on the properties tab in Acrobat reader look what you find - Author: C Snow (Yes if you have a look the boss doesn't write any of them!) With the boss reduced to nothing more than a photo (yes this years portrait features the refreshingly appropriate black attire) and a digital signature anything is possible! But then look at the Date created and Modified: Caroline was in the office on Sunday slaving away, and just managed to get it on the NSX in time to stop the punters tearing down the front door looking for any morsel of hard information!

LOL Marcom, just because we are treated like idiots does not mean we are!!!! When I fowarded the update on to my regular AG members I have contact with my comment was::: ". I think the reason it took so long was because it appears most of the content has been cut and pasted from other articles!" More evidence of lax Wellington Capital management and disdain for PIF investors! So much for it being mailed to investors in Jan! Dare I actually say I was 'LIED' to? (again)Something else to add to my 'dossier'!!! Seamisty

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

RE Investor Update: 31 December 2009

No show: No mention of the Sheraton Mirage Gold Coast transactioon.

Cash Payments:No mention of the form of the 3c 'cash payment'. Answer me this WC: how am I going to get tax advice as recommended by YOU in the Explanatory Memorandum?

Reducing Costs/Expenses/Outgoings/Fees/etc/et/etc: No mention about any efforts by WC to reduce the costs of operating the fund. Big issue don't you all think. I mean, the Annual Report listed expenses of around $3 Million to lawyers and $1 Million to Perpetual. Am I the only one who thinks that's a HUGE expense. Is WC comfortable with that? I think WC may need a (in management mumbo jumo speak) paradigm shift.

Instead we get this one sentence under 'Asset realisations' on page 2 "These sales ... allowed the Fund to implement its strategy to secure strong operational deals which will maximise the longer term value of other parts of the Fund's portfolio." I.e. the fund is cannibalising itself.

Business Plan Ahhh! There it is on page 2 under 'Cash Payments': "After that payment is made, the Fund will focus on the rebuilding of unit value. This will be achieved by a combination of further development of selected existing assets, selected realisations and with measured new investments aimed at rebalancing the asset class allocations of the Fund."

First 2 sound like more of the same self cannibilising. Where's the transparency on how well this is managed? Or do we just have to trust WC?

As for the 3rd: rebalancing to what? To that on the webpage: http://www.newpif.com.au/pifoverview.html Anyone know where that benchmark came from? How old is it? WC have used every Investor Update to remind us of the great changes that have occured through the GFC. So is that benchmark as out date as the net asset backing of 45c at the top of that webpage? And who would decide on new benchmark? We entrust it to WC.

Just a thought but wouldn't it be a great 'investment' for PIF to engage a measured buy back of its own units? I mean, if the fund value really is above 30c per unit then isn't 9c a unit an absolute bargain? Of the 4.75million units traded on the NSX so far more than 10% (510 thousand) have exchanged hands at or below 9c. More than 20% exchanged at or below 10c. According to WC's last asset valuation of PIF, buyers face huge potential gains at those prices. And that's without the potential cash flow into the fund from the ASIC action. Or would a share buyback be morally wrong? At those prices, why isn't the RE seriously considering it? Is there any downside to such a policy?

"Rebuilding Unit Value" and "Regular Distributions": Who are WC rebuilding unit value for? Us unit holders or to maximise the $ value of WC's 0.7% fee?

What's that noise Skippy? Sounds like the screeming of a shot-up propellor plane heading straight for the dirt. No, its our share price after the WC update that "It remains unlikely that the Fund will be able to return to a situation where regular distributions are a feature of the Fund". Another failed-to-deliver for WC. Who's going to buy units in a fund that only benefits the RE? There's no more commitment to distributions. And market confidence in the fund was already poor with the NSX trades at a small fraction of the net asset backing and never at a respectable volume.

No returns, no way out and an RE that is inherently motivated to maximise their profit by increasing the 'value' of the fund as much as possible? You can check out at any time you like but you can never leave. This is the investment equivalent of serfdom. My capital can buy its freedom but at a very high cost. In the meantime it's put to work indefinitely for the benefit of WC and it's house filled with lawyers, Perpetual etc; with no other rights to being freed. All the power is with WC to free my capital whenever or if ever it chooses to. Again, all we have is trust that WC will be a fair and true master.

Maybe I'm seeing this wrong. With NSX trading at rock bottom WC have seen that it can't get any worse and chosen to use the opportunity to clear the decks of undeliverable commitments. Either way, I'll be sure to pray for our capital with the rest my family tonight. Pray that our capital's new master is a good master. For without it, certainty of a comfortable retirement is less certain. Let's pray the crops don't fail, for such will bring on a vengeful master.

 

[mellifuous]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

"It remains unlikely that the Fund will be able to return to a situation where regular distributions are a feature of the Fund". Another failed-to-deliver for WC.

So much for the formula D (distribution amount) = I (income - provisions for the operation of the fund) + C (capital) [W.C.'s "Q & A"]

It was always going to equal zero, so looks like the manager has backed away from D = zero + C, and so it should.

I still reckon the words should have been "the fund will never pay distributions".

It's not a "failed to deliver", it was a "never going to happen". I just never understand how ASIC allows any manager of funds such as the PFMF and the PIF to even mention distributions, it's scandalous. The thought of having to add a return of what is left of one's capital to one's assessible income is just madness.

Now, all that remains to be seen is what happens when capital is paid to members (if it is).

..

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Overall the content of the PIF update reflected the usual lack of transparency and true state of our PIF and the time frame of which it was thrown together! Just where is our illustrious leader? Just as much disturbing was the obvious lack of knowledge by the IAC reps regarding the pathetic deal Jenny Hutson accepted regarding one of our potentially prize assets, the Wollongong Hotel Resort. It is quite obvious the IAC reps did not do their homework on this particular property or they would not consider that it is progressing well. They would have had a completely different opinion had they researched this particular asset with more thoroughness, all the relevant information having been posted on this thread. Please contact me for the full account if you are remotely interested in the details surrounding the auction etc. Yes a payment would be welcomed if it was to have been achieved when it was originally promised with quarterly distributions to follow, through good management and smart business decisions, not approx 18 months later from a return of capital after firesaling assets with WC absorbing most the proceeds along the way. The only ones prospering from our sad situation appears to be McCullough Robertsons lawyers. The current situation is totally unacceptable and nothing remotely like what we voted for, it just adds fuel to the fire. I hope ASIC is inundated with complaints as a result from this last insult. Seamisty

 

[JohnH]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Just finished reading the absolutely pathetic excuse for transparency and disclosure called PIF Business Update. Well if you thought the update was a bit "cut and pasty" with all the hallmarks of something that was slabbed together at the last minute ...your right!

If you click on the properties tab in Acrobat reader look what you find - Author: C Snow (Yes if you have a look the boss doesn't write any of them!) With the boss reduced to nothing more than a photo (yes this years portrait features the refreshingly appropriate black attire) and a digital signature anything is possible! But then look at the Date created and Modified: Caroline was in the office on Sunday slaving away, and just managed to get it on the NSX in time to stop the punters tearing down the front door looking for any morsel of hard information!

Just a quick word of warning before drawing conclusions about the production time for this pathetic document - the time in "properties" would be when it was converted to a PDF rather than when it was created.

 

[Duped]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Correction to my last post. #5064

The sentence "There's no more commitment to distributions" should have been "There's no more commitment to regular distributions". The paragraph reads:

What's that noise Skippy? Sounds like the screeming of a shot-up propellor plane heading straight for the dirt. No, its our share price after the WC update that "It remains unlikely that the Fund will be able to return to a situation where regular distributions are a feature of the Fund". Another failed-to-deliver for WC. Who's going to buy units in a fund that only benefits the RE? There's no more commitment to regular distributions. And market confidence in the fund was already poor with the NSX trades at a small fraction of the net asset backing and never at a respectable volume.

Yours in serfditude, Duped. Let us pray.

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Just a quick word of warning before drawing conclusions about the production time for this pathetic document - the time in "properties" would be when it was converted to a PDF rather than when it was created.

Thanks JohnH, Regardless of when the update was created, I cannot for the life of me see any content/up to date earth shattering revelations that necessitated withholding it from investors until the absolute death knock apart from sheer inadequacy or spite??? If this is another example of Wellington Capital's business expertise and their own extolled virtues then I would be surprised to see this merchant bank succeed long term, but, thats just my opinion,which I am entitled to. Seamisty

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I would not be opposed to the following article if PIF was to receive more than another bill for legal representation! Seamisty

Financiers in court war over sale of Sheraton
Nick Nichols, business editor | February 2nd, 2010


THE contract on the Sheraton Mirage has the wobbles, as Jenny Hutson's Premium Income Fund dukes it out in court with mortgagee St George Bank for a piece of the $60 million sale price.

The Premium Income Fund (PIF) and LJK Nominees -- second and third mortgagees to the Sheraton respectively -- have refused to relinquish their mortgages on the Sheraton Mirage as the sale to Indian property group Pearls Infrastructure Projects offers no return for either of them.

St George Bank agreed to the $60 million deal last November, after an earlier contract for about $70 million to Indonesia's Rajawali Group fell through.

LJK Nominees, a private company controlled by Sydney anaesthetist Joe Ross and the last in the queue for a return on the property, is understood to have opposed both deals.

Rajawali has since splashed out $75 million for the Surfers Paradise Marriott Resort.

However, this time both PIF and LJK Nominees have railed against the Pearls contract which leaves the two of them empty handed.

Both have been negotiating with St George to secure a partial payout from the deal on the table.

St George is owed $60 million plus costs on the Sheraton.

PIF is owed $20 million, while LJK's debt is unknown.

St George originally planned a Supreme Court challenge to PIF and LJK on January 15 seeking a court ruling to allow clear title for the Pearls contract to settle as early as last week.

That hearing was postponed and is scheduled for February 12.

Ms Hutson yesterday confirmed to The Gold Coast Bulletin that PIF did not support the Pearls deal.

"Our job is to look after the fund and, at the current price, there is no return to the Premium Income Fund," she said.

"The law, in my opinion, doesn't require us to release the charge.

"We haven't been able to reach an agreed outcome that sees a return to the Premium Income Fund, so the right thing in our opinion was not to consent."

Raptis Group, which paid $82 million for the 3.4ha beachfront hotel resort in 2005, lost control of the trophy property to receivers in March last year.

First mortgagee St George agreed to the Pearls contract after a fruitless eight-month campaign to find a buyer.

Apartment and shopping centre developer Pearls Infrastructure Projects emerged as the bank's white knight in November, marking the company's first foray outside of India.

It is understood the developer has laid plans for a $20 million refurbishment of the property which has effectively remained in a 'time warp' since it was completed in 1987 by disgraced property tycoon Christopher Skase.

Pearls could not be contacted for comment yesterday.

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2010/02/02/184081_gold-coast-business.html




Pay day coming for troubled funds
Nick Nichols, business editor | February 2nd, 2010


BOTH Premium Income Fund investors and Wellington Capital are closer to a pay day some time this year, but the exact date still remains in the air.

Wellington head Jenny Hutson, in her latest update to 11,000 fund investors, said the 3c payout promised for the end of 2008 will be paid in 2010 after apartments in a Wollongong development, City Beach, have been sold.

PIF secured a $38 million contract for the Wollongong project in November and, under that agreement, will be paid that amount from the first phase of construction of 75 apartments.

Ms Hutson yesterday said 55 of the 75 apartments had been pre-sold.

"We're excited about that," she said.

But she could not give a clearer indication of when the 3c payment will be made.

Once unitholders are paid, Wellington also will begin receiving an annual 0.7 per cent management fee from the fund.

Wellington has yet to be paid for running the fund since taking over from stricken financial services group MFS (now Octaviar) in 2008.

Ms Hutson said following the 3c capital payment, the fund would concentrate on 'rebuilding' value, which once stood at $755 million and is now internally valued at $295 million.

"It remains unlikely that the fund will be able to return to a situation where regular distributions are a feature of the fund," she said.

 

[mellifuous]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

"We haven't been able to reach an agreed outcome that sees a return to the Premium Income Fund, so the right thing in our opinion was not to consent."

I would have thought that if the bank had complied with its obligations to get the best price in the circumstances, then the 'right' thing would have been for the PIF to accept the outcome.

As I understand it, the bank has no obligation to guarantee a return to the PIF (as second mortgage holder) providing it sells at a reasonable price in the circumstances.

Does W.C. mean "oppose" when it says "not to consent"? It seems to me that W.C. is opposing the bank's application.

Could it be that good money is going after bad here? It could be that W.C. is like a monkey trying to climb a greasy rope (so to speak) and the only way is down.

 

[charles36]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I like Nick Nichols quote, "pay day for troubled funds" getting our own money back is hardly pay day. The only one going to get a pay day out of our troubled fund will be the RE, .7%, something in the order of $2.3 million . Not bad considering the fund has been docked for all expenses incurred and milions of dollars in legal expenses. PPPPPPP (p...poor preparation produces p...poor performance.

 

[Cookie1]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Wellington doesn't deserve to be paid for running the fund down! According to our very late investor update it is only once they start collecting management fees will they start trying to get value back in the fund via some unknown strategy (at least unknown to PIF unitholders)! I thought they were supposed to be working to increase the value of the fund from day 1 of the takeover???? Apparently not so!

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Wellington doesn't deserve to be paid for running the fund down! According to our very late investor update it is only once they start collecting management fees will they start trying to get value back in the fund via some unknown strategy (at least unknown to PIF unitholders)! I thought they were supposed to be working to increase the value of the fund from day 1 of the takeover???? Apparently not so!

Well the strategy was (as of April last year),Cookie '' Wellington has undertaken an analysis of all assets with respect to identifying those that are suitable for immediate disposal, those that should be held as is pending market recovery, and those that can be developed and in time will deliver a premium to the fund." "all decisions have been made with a frugal eye to preserving value in the fund. There has been no fire sale and no asset has been sold for less than market value."




Only problem is, what assets of any value are left to maximise? My complaint is already on its way to ASIC!! Seamisty

 

[simgrund]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Well the strategy was (as of April last year),Cookie '' Wellington has undertaken an analysis of all assets with respect to identifying those that are suitable for immediate disposal, those that should be held as is pending market recovery, and those that can be developed and in time will deliver a premium to the fund." "all decisions have been made with a frugal eye to preserving value in the fund. There has been no fire sale and no asset has been sold for less than market value."

Only problem is, what assets of any value are left to maximise? My complaint is already on its way to ASIC!! Seamisty

Seamisty,
As I recall, the last full listing of PIF assets and mortgages were on pages 22/23 of the Explanatory Memorandum of 18/09/08.
Perhaps it may be possible to "deduct" known and pending sales to arrive at reasonable estimate.
Alarmingly, already at that date (31 May 2008), realisable value estimated by 333 Capital Pty Ltd; the WC's corporate and real estate team, dwindled all our assets to $413,747.

 

[Cookie1]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/...-business.html

Quote excerpt from the Gold Coast Bulletin today:

"Ms Hutson said following the 3c capital payment, the fund would concentrate on 'rebuilding' value, which once stood at $755 million and is now internally valued at $295 million."


According to Nick Nichols' article in the Gold Coast Bulletin the asset value (internal valuation) is only $295 million. Where has the money/value gone?

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Seamisty,
As I recall, the last full listing of PIF assets and mortgages were on pages 22/23 of the Explanatory Memorandum of 18/09/08.
Perhaps it may be possible to "deduct" known and pending sales to arrive at reasonable estimate.
Alarmingly, already at that date (31 May 2008), realisable value estimated by 333 Capital Pty Ltd; the WC's corporate and real estate team, dwindled all our assets to $413,747.

There was another update in the Dec 2008 PIF investor update which listed current assets and said the net assets were $332.127 mill, then in the 2009 annual financial reportnet assets wer worth $296.351 mill.The fund was said to have been stabilised at June 2008 however it incurred impairment charges of $36.4M in the financial year 09.

In the Aug 2009 PIF update it said that the Chatswood asset (listed as owing us $4,608,231) had been sold and WC had entered into contracts to sell a Mackay construction site.The funds from these assets were used to meet the Funds expenses and to provide operating capital.


What have we got left? Seamisty

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

As per usual we read about it in the paper before it is announced on the NSX!!! ( and the day after an overdue PIF update has just been released minus the same PIF related information!!)Seamisty

Raptis Group Loan http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021722441.PDF
The Premium Income Fund holds a second ranking mortgage over the assets known as the Sheraton Mirage
located on the Gold Coast, Queensland.
In addition, the Premium Income Fund holds a second ranking fixed and floating charge over the assets of
the owner of the Sheraton Mirage, SP Hotels Pty Ltd. SP Hotels Pty Ltd is a member of the Raptis group of
companies.
St George Bank Limited holds a first ranking mortgage over the Sheraton Mirage and a first ranking fixed
and floating charge over the assets of SP Hotels Pty Ltd.
St George Bank Limited in its capacity as mortgagee in possession over the Sheraton Mirage has
commenced legal proceedings seeking orders which would enable St George Bank Limited to sell the
Sheraton Mirage on an unencumbered basis. The Premium Income Fund is defending these proceedings as is
the third mortgagee LJK Nominees Pty Ltd.
The matter is set down for hearing in the Supreme Court of Queensland on 12 February 2010.
Further updates will be provided as the matter progresses.