Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Jump to new
JohnH said:
Where's the Kleenex............. what a pathetic response from the "advisory committee"!

Surely the members of this Group who stood for election must in law be entitile to be made aware of the results. - Can one of our more learned contributors confirm this?
Click to expand...
Yes JohnH, the IAC report must have taxed a few investors mentality because I had several calls in relation to 'the complete waste of time and expense' that went into the IAC ELECTION CAMPAIGN. Some PIF unit holders have questioned if the votes were considered at all and if Wellington Capital did not in fact select their own reps!!!! I sincerely hope that PIF investors are not picking up the tab to fly B Andrejic down from Cairns to inform us that they 'have been watching with interest the media reports
surrounding the public examinations of the MFS
employees in Sydney during the past weeks, especially
in relation to the PIF loan facility'.
Also I have specifically requested (more than once) that the IAC reps interact with the AG. In view of the fact that our membership represents approx 10% of PIF investors and it was their desire to represent us to the best of their ability, I find it rather staggering and dissapointing that they continue to decline to make contact with the AG.
If the IAC continues to be unable to provide unitholders with any assistance I seriously question the whole concept of having a IAC:confused:


Well we know how to get the old elusive overdue updates to make a snappy appearance, trot out another interested party, and they are out there, just not prepared to put their hands in their pockets!!

One decent/fair offer and I'm outa here!!!

Seamisty
 
Good Evening , I have taken the time to read all the blog listings . There are a lot of people who are unit holders and have sought information about the bid . Ok first an offer document having been prepared by specialist lawyers and accountants is given to the exchange (NSX) the RE and ASIC.
ASIC as I understand it act as corporate regulator and will seek amendments and clarifications to the bid . Only AFTER an offer is approved for release by ASIC does it become a live bid .
JH will then have to put on a competent statement as to why the bid should either be rejected or accepted .
I rang JH today and got through in under 1 minute . She was cordial and polite . She would not be drawn into conversations about current court cases that the RE is running and the massive damages claims by aggrieved borrowers .
JH was advised that Mr Pakula , his team of lawyers and myself would be more than happy to track our way to her door step for a discussion.
That is an open offer and I understand the bidder is more than happy to clarify all questions the market , the unit holders , ASIC and Mrs Jenny H may have .
I understand there was an issue with the phone number , it’s now resolved .
What is requested is that people who are genuinely interested leave there details via the web site so they can be sent weekly updates.

Finally I don’t want to see the thread shut down , but I will try to answer sensible questions so long as in doing so I will not be drawn into controversy. ...( well any more than usual)
 
Well while posters on the forum remain an endangered species it is good to see that interest to PIF issues are still being closely monitored. In excess of 1,000 hits to this thread in approx 12 hours is very 'encouraging'.
I am hoping the takeover bid might stir up some PIF media coverage. There are certain issues which remain ignored from an investors point of view. In some cases the developers themselves have news worthy information that would make interesting reading.

Seamisty
 
lol , you’re not wrong , the Financial review , The herald , the Australian , several investment newsletters so far have contacted me ....... i am waiting to see what JH does .
Look i would love to hear what investors are most upset with .
look i am not JH , i am happy to spend time talking to people .
i understand that once ASIC go through the bid , ALF PIF has suggested running a road show to investors , explaining why they feel the bid is in investors best interest . Let’s be clear , investors should consider their options and get advice . only problem is look if it were BHP or CBA you could get good advice , why not get an independent analyst to go through the company and see if JH is getting the best results or if a better solutions is the bid
 
jim Byrnes said:
lol , you’re not wrong , the Financial review , The herald , the Australian , several investment newsletters so far have contacted me ....... i am waiting to see what JH does .
Look i would love to hear what investors are most upset with .
look i am not JH , i am happy to spend time talking to people .
i understand that once ASIC go through the bid , ALF PIF has suggested running a road show to investors , explaining why they feel the bid is in investors best interest . Let’s be clear , investors should consider their options and get advice . only problem is look if it were BHP or CBA you could get good advice , why not get an independent analyst to go through the company and see if JH is getting the best results or if a better solutions is the bid
Click to expand...
Hi Jim, I for one will never vote for an alternative RE that proposes to take the majority of voting power from the unit holders!! ALF want to give PIF unit holders an ALF share which has a maximum value of .15 cents to be paid at their discretion, if at all. Voting rights would be diminished as the entire PIF unit holders would only represent 19% of ordinary ALF shares.

Also Variation of Rights - Subject to the Corp Act and the Listing Rules, all or any of the rights and privileges attached to the ALF Redeemable Preference Shares Units may be varied or cancelled by a special resolution passed at a meeting of the holders of the ALF Shareholders.” (Special resolution is 75%) ALF Founding shareholders will represent 80.91% of shares on issue which leaves investors with no say.
Just because PIF investors appear to have been 'shafted twice' does not mean we are a bunch of desperate old farts willing to line up for a 'trifecta'! In fact we are so conscious and suspicious now of anyone remotely involved with the management of our dwindling assets that I truly believe this current bid will not be accepted by the majority of unit holders desperate as they are for a better offer/solution to our current predicament and dissatisfaction with our current RE.

I do respect your honesty in posting under your own name.

Seamisty
 
seamisty said:
Hi Jim, I for one will never vote for an alternative RE that proposes to take the majority of voting power from the unit holders!! ALF want to give PIF unit holders an ALF share which has a maximum value of .15 cents to be paid at their discretion, if at all. Voting rights would be diminished as the entire PIF unit holders would only represent 19% of ordinary ALF shares.

Also Variation of Rights - Subject to the Corp Act and the Listing Rules, all or any of the rights and privileges attached to the ALF Redeemable Preference Shares Units may be varied or cancelled by a special resolution passed at a meeting of the holders of the ALF Shareholders.” (Special resolution is 75%) ALF Founding shareholders will represent 80.91% of shares on issue which leaves investors with no say.
Just because PIF investors appear to have been 'shafted twice' does not mean we are a bunch of desperate old farts willing to line up for a 'trifecta'! In fact we are so conscious and suspicious now of anyone remotely involved with the management of our dwindling assets that I truly believe this current bid will not be accepted by the majority of unit holders desperate as they are for a better offer/solution to our current predicament and dissatisfaction with our current RE.

I do respect your honesty in posting under your own name.

Seamisty
Click to expand...

Thank You ; Please let me address issues that i am able to . Please note for legal reasons i may have to differ on some hot topics for a period .

The Voting rights issue is a very valid point , the pref share has a value of an amount equal to -15c , that is double the current price . ALF Pif ordinary shareholders can’t get a cent until current pif shareholders who accept get 15c , double the market price .
The issue is that pref Shares have a voting right until fully redeemed .

As to the variation of redeemable shareholders rights , i accept your concern , that is something that i am sure ALF PIF will clarify and ASIC will want and get agreements with the three main ALF PIF shareholders .

Let me make it perfectly clear , what ALF PIF want to do is equal the playing field and restore some value ,,,for which they will make money as well.

I understand that ALF PIF would welcome as a condition of acceptance 3 more independent directors , from the existing shareholders pool . Clearly they will need some proper understanding of directors role and responsibility .

Look as i see it , PIF has a rubbery figure of 260m in assets , but they are all very distressed assets , there are numerous court cases and millions may be being spent on lawyers rather than on builders finishing the unfinished properties.
Example , Wollongong , PIF sing the praises of their deal . well here is news , i attended a meeting with the builder who i know well ( Tony Touma Parkview) Anthony Stanton and a couple of investors i brought to buy the building outright ....cash 30 days .
The offer accepted took 1 plus years longer , it cost hundreds of thousands in external cost more ,it results in 3million more .
The project should deliver the JV partner tens of millions in profit ......why didn’t wellington borrow against the property the 15m to finish 1 year ago , they would have achieved 15m-20m better bottom line.
ALF PIF want to settle all the claims and stop paying lawyers with your money , they want to systematically work through the projects and finish them and maximise the return .
 
Myself personally Jim cannot see how ALF, an alleged $1600 company propose to find the millions of $ needed to finish projects and restore PIF asset value at this point considering WC have already seemingly sacrificed any PIF commercial projects which could have generated growth for example Wollongong Hotel Harbour St which you are familiar with. This project is a well known example of Wellington Capital failure to deliver a best investor out come. I personally have a copy of the bidders statement of the auction. WC tried to inform PIF investors differently of the outcome, another reason investors have no faith in the current RE. $42+million accepted at the auction would have seen PIF investors being paid their 3 cent return of capital after the auction. I have often wondered if WC did not accept this offer because it may have settled in the time frame that WC had agreed to pay for the RE rights to the PIF?

The Forest Resort Hotel VIC is another blatant example of WC waste of PIF investor funds!! Why on earth were labourers flown from QLD to complete work at the Forest Resort when local employees were more than qualified for the necessary work? Not sure if this is meant to be a well kept WC secret, but after having been flown to VIC from QLD, the said employees organised by WC were then delivered on site by a bloody limousine!!! Sorry fellow investors I was keeping this snippet for future ammo, BUT if we do at last have interest from the media, bring it on!! Plenty more of interest I am sure!! So Jim, there is a far bigger picture here than has been previously revealed and hopefully you will recognise why PIF investors are distrustfull and extremely wary of offers. Add to this we know we have already been robbed and will not expose ourselves to any situation which may prove further anguish and depletion of the remaining pittance of our original investment.
Seamisty
 
seamisty said:
Myself personally Jim cannot see how ALF, an alleged $1600 company propose to find the millions of $ needed to finish projects and restore PIF asset value at this point considering WC have already seemingly sacrificed any PIF commercial projects which could have generated growth for example Wollongong Hotel Harbour St which you are familiar with. This project is a well known example of Wellington Capital failure to deliver a best investor out come. I personally have a copy of the bidders statement of the auction. WC tried to inform PIF investors differently of the outcome, another reason investors have no faith in the current RE. $42+million accepted at the auction would have seen PIF investors being paid their 3 cent return of capital after the auction. I have often wondered if WC did not accept this offer because it may have settled in the time frame that WC had agreed to pay for the RE rights to the PIF?

The Forest Resort Hotel VIC is another blatant example of WC waste of PIF investor funds!! Why on earth were labourers flown from QLD to complete work at the Forest Resort when local employees were more than qualified for the necessary work? Not sure if this is meant to be a well kept WC secret, but after having been flown to VIC from QLD, the said employees organised by WC were then delivered on site by a bloody limousine!!! Sorry fellow investors I was keeping this snippet for future ammo, BUT if we do at last have interest from the media, bring it on!! Plenty more of interest I am sure!! So Jim, there is a far bigger picture here than has been previously revealed and hopefully you will recognise why PIF investors are distrustfull and extremely wary of offers. Add to this we know we have already been robbed and will not expose ourselves to any situation which may prove further anguish and depletion of the remaining pittance of our original investment.
Seamisty
Click to expand...


ALF group Pty ltd , which owns 80% of ALF PIF generated over 8 million EBIT in the last six months , the audited figures were announced on the ALF Group Holdings Frankfurt announcements in April . The forecast EBIT for a full 12 months is 14m EBIT ( i think it will be a good bit higher)
ALF Group Pty Ltd has an undrawn $20m facility and could assist . But what is underway , ALF Group Holdings AG the Publicly listed company got approval to do a capital raising in the interim ( about 10-15m AUD ) and has an EGM next month and will get approval to issue shares to undertake a 50m Euro capital raising in Germany , that’s about $70mAUD . i can tell you that part of these funds are earmarked for the benefit of lending ALF PIF funds as may be required to complete properties that are ready to get finished . In my view it’s a three year cycle . Some property is really out there and needs to be held until the next boom , that’s just the way it is . Selling it now would be a mistake . but finished stock is always a long way ahead of unfinished projects.
On Wollongong, the end value on completion even in a distressed market was around 100m....needed 20m to finish apartments and hotel
 
Forgot to add Jim, your statement 'ALF PIF would welcome as a condition of acceptance 3 more independent directors , from the existing shareholders pool . Clearly they will need some proper understanding of directors role and responsibility .'


Directors credentials in my past experience are as much use as t1ts on a boar pig no matter what their previous experience is and how many letters they can notch up against their names if they are not prepared to act honestly and represent investors best interests!! Classic example now being exposed in the Bentley public examinations . These so called highly qualified individuals have alegedly robbed us blind!! Did it matter to them what their responsibilities to investors were? It is quite obvious that who paid the piper called the tune!! Sorry, who gives a rats bum how highly qualified someone is meant to be if that individual acts in a dishonest manner. I honestly believe that the majority of individual investors in this fund have no faith in current management or any similar offers. These type of investment products are so badly tainted no one who is remotely informed will invest in them and those who are currently invested can't wait to exit them. at a reasonible price or knowing that they will be adequately compensated from moneys recovered on their behalf.

Seamisty
 
jim Byrnes said:
lol , you’re not wrong , the Financial review , The herald , the Australian , several investment newsletters so far have contacted me ....... i am waiting to see what JH does .
Look i would love to hear what investors are most upset with .
look i am not JH , i am happy to spend time talking to people .
i understand that once ASIC go through the bid , ALF PIF has suggested running a road show to investors , explaining why they feel the bid is in investors best interest . Let’s be clear , investors should consider their options and get advice . only problem is look if it were BHP or CBA you could get good advice , why not get an independent analyst to go through the company and see if JH is getting the best results or if a better solutions is the bid
Click to expand...
Also Jim, sorry to cash in on your headlines, but I would really appreciate it if you would inform any of the interested journos that I am more than happy to comment on this offer as well as discuss concerns PIF investors have with the curent Responsible Entity, Wellington Capital. I can be contacted on this thread openly or by private message. Thankyou. Seamisty
 
seamisty said:
Forgot to add Jim, your statement 'ALF PIF would welcome as a condition of acceptance 3 more independent directors , from the existing shareholders pool . Clearly they will need some proper understanding of directors role and responsibility .'


Directors credentials in my past experience are as much use as t1ts on a boar pig no matter what their previous experience is and how many letters they can notch up against their names if they are not prepared to act honestly and represent investors best interests!! Classic example now being exposed in the Bentley public examinations . These so called highly qualified individuals have alegedly robbed us blind!! Did it matter to them what their responsibilities to investors were? It is quite obvious that who paid the piper called the tune!! Sorry, who gives a rats bum how highly qualified someone is meant to be if that individual acts in a dishonest manner. I honestly believe that the majority of individual investors in this fund have no faith in current management or any similar offers. These type of investment products are so badly tainted no one who is remotely informed will invest in them and those who are currently invested can't wait to exit them. at a reasonible price or knowing that they will be adequately compensated from moneys recovered on their behalf.

Seamisty
Click to expand...


I could not agree more .
i did chuckle when i read JH response .
ALF PIF would be an illiquid stock ...oh please . PIF NTA ??? they say 260m ....market cap 50 odd mil
its turn over for good knows how long is 1.6m
if every shareholder wanted to sell 10% of the units on current turnover it would take 5years .
its a dog fund
its a work out
not a managed fund
a work out fund
i may be a tough businessman , but i will be working hard on every deal to maximise return .
remember if the deal proceeds we are all in the same boat

she says ALF PIF are opertunistic ....what the hell is she ...its not like she paid 10m for the loan book ....Jenny People in Glass houses shouldnt throw stones .
ALF PIF founding shareholders dont get a bean until over $100,000,000 is paid out to pref shareholders .....thats twice current market cap .

Next laugh
Jenny says ALF PIF walk away with 100m day one .
you can buy the whole thing based on current market cap for a little over 50m
 
i am happy to talk to all investors
my email is j.byrnes@alfpl.com
i am happy to give my mobile to serous people who email me .
please remeber i cant talk to 10,000 but i will be at the roadshows and will get a chance to address the crowd
 
jim Byrnes said:
i am happy to talk to all investors
my email is j.byrnes@alfpl.com
i am happy to give my mobile to serous people who email me .
please remeber i cant talk to 10,000 but i will be at the roadshows and will get a chance to address the crowd
Click to expand...
Roadshows Jim? Don't waste your money. A substantial amount of PIF investors have been there and done that and rue the day they were sucked in by Jenny Hutson and her broken promises (and tears). Please do not waste time, money and effort on a replica of a sideshow that many are regretting the outcome of. Most of us look forward to the day that legal intervention (ASIC is not high on the agenda) will deliver compensation and justice. We are not prepared to prolong this nightmare and take further risks.

Seamisty
 
Byrnes-related bid for PIF COLIN KRUGER
May 19, 2010

Aside from the promised payout to PIF investors, which will be made via the redemption of the preference stock they are to receive, they will be issued 19 per cent of ALF PIF's ordinary shares.

This means 81 per cent of any further return for the fund will be delivered to ALF PIF's current shareholders.

ALF PIF's largest current shareholder, with 80 per cent of its issued stock, is ALF Group Pty Ltd.

It lists Jim Byrnes as the contact person for documents lodged in January this year.

The documents announced the appointment of Mr Byrnes's wife, Catherine, as a director.

Mr Byrnes, whose career has included stints as a second-hand car salesman and debt collector, was jailed for supplying drugs and is currently banned from acting as a company director.

Wellington Capital wooed PIF unitholders away from MFS/Octaviar to become the fund's responsible entity, and told investors to reject the offer it described as ''grossly inadequate'' and ''opportunistic''


Full article here:http://www.smh.com.au/business/byrnesrelated-bid-for-pif-20100518-vc8a.html
 
Big Jim's new venture is more alluring SCOTT ROCHFORT
May 19, 2010

http://www.smh.com.au/business/big-jims-new-venture-is-more-alluring-20100518-vc5z.html
The banned company director Jim Byrnes appears to have moved on from his brief flirtation with the toll road sector.

In a sign Big Jim has bounced back from last year's failed class action against the Macquarie-listed BrisConnections, he is now working behind the scenes with the shell of a former lingerie company in its takeover bid for the former MFS satellite and Newcastle Stock Exchange-listed Premium Income Fund.

The German-listed company ALF Group, formerly known as Can Can Lingerie, is the 80 per cent shareholder in the company behind the bid, ALF PIF Pty Ltd.

Among the bidder's directors are the former owner of Can Can, the Sydney businessman and rag trader Michael Pakula, who retains a stake in the listed entity.

The lingerie company has a 50 per cent stake in a Singaporean company that owns a range of Australian businesses, including Big Jim's Australian Litigation Funders and a carbon trading business.

Yesterday the income fund, now managed by Brisbane businesswoman Jenny Hutson's Wellington Capital, urged the fund's long-suffering unitholders to reject the bid. ''The offer is grossly inadequate,'' said Hutson in a statement. The fund reported a $35 million loss for the six months to December 31 and has now written down its assets to about $270 million.

This compares with its almost $900 million valuation on assets before the implosion of its former manager, MFS
 

Similar threads

System
MA1 - MA Credit Income Trust
Replies
3
Views
480
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
System
DGT - DigiCo Infrastructure REIT
Replies
8
Views
995
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