It seems to me that following the necessary protocols isn't particularlydemanding of us. We should all take responsibility and follow the rules..
Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF
- Thread starter breaker1
- Start date
It seems to me that following the necessary protocols isn't particularlydemanding of us. We should all take responsibility and follow the rules..
Ian1328 please ensure I have your contact details by private message although I am sure we all respect the forum rules and will abide by them. Having access to this type of communication is a privledge, even though some of us are often tempted to test the boundaries of what is acceptable, myself included. Cheers, Seamisty
Interesting to see that G8 (GEM)education shares are hovering around a 12 month low, 56-59cents and larger than usual volumes are being traded. More interesting that after close of trade today, trading and market status of GEM is now stating 'enquiry'.HMNN, unusual. Will keep you posted. Seamisty
- Joined
- 12 May 2011
- Posts
- 10
- Reactions
- 0
Yep, I get it Seamisty - and thanks for the civilised discussion. I won't post here any more as there's simply too much hostility. I understand the anger & frustration but I choose not to provide myself as a venting mechanism for some here. I offer this brief reply only as courtesy to you.
Quite simply, we submitted an offer which many unitholders did not accept but which others did. Our bid was found to be invalid - mainly on a technicality of mailing addresses from a list controlled by others. Like you, we have now lost a lot (a lot!) of our own money and must consider whether or not to try again with a new bid, or to look to other opportunities.
WW
Thankyou
- Joined
- 22 May 2008
- Posts
- 758
- Reactions
- 0
http://www.nirmalsinghbhangoo.com/gold-coast/
"THE drawn-out haggling over the Sheraton Mirage has come to an end with Nirmal Singh Bhangoo’s company, Pearls Australasia, yesterday signing a bargain deal for the Gold Coast`s biggest beachfront resort. Apartment and shopping centre developer Pearls Infrastructure Projects is understood to have snared the trophy asset for less than $60 million from receivers to a Raptis Group subsidiary. ...."
"THE drawn-out haggling over the Sheraton Mirage has come to an end with Nirmal Singh Bhangoo’s company, Pearls Australasia, yesterday signing a bargain deal for the Gold Coast`s biggest beachfront resort. Apartment and shopping centre developer Pearls Infrastructure Projects is understood to have snared the trophy asset for less than $60 million from receivers to a Raptis Group subsidiary. ...."
- Joined
- 22 May 2008
- Posts
- 758
- Reactions
- 0
Thinking of defending the Reaction Group with e.g.: they were told it was a secret deal so how were they supposed to know it was public knowledge?
Well bung ALF and $46 into google and up pops a link to that publication of 4 April 2011. Number 3 on the list of results. Easy peasy. Takes less than a minute. Bung in "Australian Litigation Funders" (Big Jim's company) and $46 and again, up pops the link to the 4 April 2011 publication. This time it's number 6 on the list.
In fact this latter search shows that the statement published on 4 April about a deal with Jim Byrnes' Australian Litigation Funders worth up to an estimated $46m had previously already been published on 24 February 2011. See http://www.irw-press.com/en/news_11577.html
:topic but may be of interest to some::AACo accused over 'ghost cattle'SEAN SMITH, The West AustralianAugust 1, 2011, 6:59 am
The Federal Court is set to test allegations by a Perth businessman that Australian Agricultural Co inflated its accounts with "ghost cattle".
Don Fuller on Friday filed a three-pronged statement of claim against AACo, Elders and 23 current and former directors and executives from the companies seeking more than $30 million damages for alleged defamation and fraudulent accounting.
Mr Fuller says he filed a "multi-billion-dollar" proposal in 2008 to buy Futuris Corporation's 43 per cent stake in AACo but the plan foundered when he claimed that AACo's cattle numbers had been overstated by nearly 200,000 head.
AACo's then-directors, Stephen Toms, Charles Bright, Philip Toyne and Brett Heading, sued Mr Fuller for defamation over the allegations, though the action was later withdrawn
Full article:http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/a/-/national/9948503/aaco-accused-over-ghost-cattle/
The Federal Court is set to test allegations by a Perth businessman that Australian Agricultural Co inflated its accounts with "ghost cattle".
Don Fuller on Friday filed a three-pronged statement of claim against AACo, Elders and 23 current and former directors and executives from the companies seeking more than $30 million damages for alleged defamation and fraudulent accounting.
Mr Fuller says he filed a "multi-billion-dollar" proposal in 2008 to buy Futuris Corporation's 43 per cent stake in AACo but the plan foundered when he claimed that AACo's cattle numbers had been overstated by nearly 200,000 head.
AACo's then-directors, Stephen Toms, Charles Bright, Philip Toyne and Brett Heading, sued Mr Fuller for defamation over the allegations, though the action was later withdrawn
Full article:http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/a/-/national/9948503/aaco-accused-over-ghost-cattle/
Sale of 50% interest in Trust that owns the Chifley Wollongong Hotel
http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021724263.PDF
http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021724263.PDF
http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021724263.PDF
Wellington have provisionally sold a 50% interest in Chiffley Wollongong for $10.5M.
Can anybody recall what this property stood us in at??? John H.
"Snap" Seamisty............
Wellington have provisionally sold a 50% interest in Chiffley Wollongong for $10.5M.
Can anybody recall what this property stood us in at??? John H.
"Snap" Seamisty............
Owed the PIF $58million as at19/3/2007
and 50% sold for $10.5m .............. another $37M loss............ s'pose that's par for the course!!!
From todays NSX announcement"Sale of 50% interest in Trust that owns the Chifley Wollongong Hotel Wellington Capital Limited as responsible entity of the Premium Income Fund has completed negotiations in relation to the sale of half of its interest in the trust that owns the 168 room Chifley Wollongong Hotel. The sale is conditional upon the final valuation being to the satisfaction of the vendor and finance approval.
Settlement is scheduled to occur in October 2011. The net proceeds payable to the Premium Income Fund on sale will be a minimum of $10.5 million."
"In addition to its interest in the 168 room Chifley Wollongong, the Premium Income Fund continues to market the remaining 5 Chifley residence apartments which formed part of the original 84 apartments. 79 of these apartments have already been sold and settled."
From this media article::http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/...an-view-units-sell-like-hotcakes/1666089.aspx
Discounted ocean view units sell like hotcakes
BY ALEX ARNOLD
03 Nov, 2009 03:00 AM
A fire sale of apartments within the stalled Ocean View City Beach project in Harbour St has sparked a buyer frenzy not seen in Wollongong for some time.
In just four days more than $28 million worth of property has been snapped up with 47 of the 67 discounted apartments selling, including the building's five penthouse apartments which were priced from $981,000.
The top price achieved was $1.05 million":::
This means that approx $42million will be realised from apartment sales PIF 50% share = $22mill with 50% of the hotel still owned by PIf valued at $10.5mill. Total approx $43mill with only $10.5 mill outstanding IF the scheduled settlement goes ahead in Oct 2011
So what has happened to the other approx $22mill already settled in apartment sales???? Our 2 cents return of capital was paid from the sale of a number of PIF assetts!!!! From a boutique merchant bank the figures never seem to add up for me
Seamisty
Settlement is scheduled to occur in October 2011. The net proceeds payable to the Premium Income Fund on sale will be a minimum of $10.5 million."
"In addition to its interest in the 168 room Chifley Wollongong, the Premium Income Fund continues to market the remaining 5 Chifley residence apartments which formed part of the original 84 apartments. 79 of these apartments have already been sold and settled."
From this media article::http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/...an-view-units-sell-like-hotcakes/1666089.aspx
Discounted ocean view units sell like hotcakes
BY ALEX ARNOLD
03 Nov, 2009 03:00 AM
A fire sale of apartments within the stalled Ocean View City Beach project in Harbour St has sparked a buyer frenzy not seen in Wollongong for some time.
In just four days more than $28 million worth of property has been snapped up with 47 of the 67 discounted apartments selling, including the building's five penthouse apartments which were priced from $981,000.
The top price achieved was $1.05 million":::
This means that approx $42million will be realised from apartment sales PIF 50% share = $22mill with 50% of the hotel still owned by PIf valued at $10.5mill. Total approx $43mill with only $10.5 mill outstanding IF the scheduled settlement goes ahead in Oct 2011
So what has happened to the other approx $22mill already settled in apartment sales???? Our 2 cents return of capital was paid from the sale of a number of PIF assetts!!!! From a boutique merchant bank the figures never seem to add up for me
SeamistyFurther on the sale of assets...I've been keeping an eye on the Icon Apartments in Port Macquarie and the information we're being fed about them.
NSX Release 11 July 2011: "Icon Port Macquarie
Settlement has occurred in relation to one apartment in the Icon Port complex. Gross proceeds are $550,000. 15 apartments remain to be sold."
Investor Update July 2011: Page 1 under "Executive Summary"
"Contracts entered into for a number of assets held as security for defaulted loans. Upon settlement of these contracts, $40.7 million will be returned to the Fund."
Page 3 under "Contracts": "Wellington Capital is committed to returning the net cash from sales to Unitholders as security properties are sold whilst also ensuring that properties are well positioned for sale."
"Icon Port Macquarie, new South Wales: Settlement has occurred in relation to one apartment in the Icon Port complex. 15 apartments remain to be sold. Proceeds $0.55m".
Note the Proceeds of the list of contracts shown as $40.7 million. I'm assuming this is "gross proceeds" rather than the "net cash" referred to above, since the property sold was a townhouse with listed price of $550,000.
Page 24 of the July 2011 Investor Update shows "Port Macquarie, New South Wales, Security type: Residential aprtment complex
Status: The development of this property has been completed by the Fund.
15 of 26 apartments remain available for sale. Most recent sale of one apartment saw proceeds returned to Fund of $0.55 million." (I was told it was under contract fairly recently.)
Some things we know:
• I know (because I've talked with both agents) that all of level 3 was being leased and was not for sale a few weeks ago. At the time 1 remained to be leased and all were at least 6-month leases.
• We were told some time ago by JH that a "deal" was done with a developer to complete the project for a reasonable amount of the profits from sale of apartments, but we haven't been told anything about the deal. He did get his pick of apartments...the penthouse with the best views according to one of the listing real estate agents.
• The Real Estate agents of course get their commissions as well as other associated costs of selling a property.
• On the leases, the agents get fees for managing the rentals as well as maintenance costs and body corporate fees to come out of moneys collected.
What I want to know is what are the net proceeds to actually come into the PIF on sales of properties. The figures given in the July 2011 Investor Update are ambiguous at best and very misleading. They tell us nothing.
Below are ads from Port Macquarie Domain for 29 July and 5 August for the Icon Apartments. Last week the ad said "Icon - Only 2 On Offer" and today "Price Reduced by $100,000" with mention of "24 house size apartments". Obviously the sales strategy has changed to fire sale the apartments as quickly as possible.
JH, what is the actual return to the fund on all properties sold and under contract?
We're tired of being fed untruths and half truths. How much are we losing with all the "deals" you're doing in the best interests of investors? Aren't the deals actually done to get cash into the fund so you can take your ill-gotten payout when we replace you?
Note: Bold text is my emphasis.
Cookie1
NSX Release 11 July 2011: "Icon Port Macquarie
Settlement has occurred in relation to one apartment in the Icon Port complex. Gross proceeds are $550,000. 15 apartments remain to be sold."
Investor Update July 2011: Page 1 under "Executive Summary"
"Contracts entered into for a number of assets held as security for defaulted loans. Upon settlement of these contracts, $40.7 million will be returned to the Fund."
Page 3 under "Contracts": "Wellington Capital is committed to returning the net cash from sales to Unitholders as security properties are sold whilst also ensuring that properties are well positioned for sale."
"Icon Port Macquarie, new South Wales: Settlement has occurred in relation to one apartment in the Icon Port complex. 15 apartments remain to be sold. Proceeds $0.55m".
Note the Proceeds of the list of contracts shown as $40.7 million. I'm assuming this is "gross proceeds" rather than the "net cash" referred to above, since the property sold was a townhouse with listed price of $550,000.
Page 24 of the July 2011 Investor Update shows "Port Macquarie, New South Wales, Security type: Residential aprtment complex
Status: The development of this property has been completed by the Fund.
15 of 26 apartments remain available for sale. Most recent sale of one apartment saw proceeds returned to Fund of $0.55 million." (I was told it was under contract fairly recently.)
Some things we know:
• I know (because I've talked with both agents) that all of level 3 was being leased and was not for sale a few weeks ago. At the time 1 remained to be leased and all were at least 6-month leases.
• We were told some time ago by JH that a "deal" was done with a developer to complete the project for a reasonable amount of the profits from sale of apartments, but we haven't been told anything about the deal. He did get his pick of apartments...the penthouse with the best views according to one of the listing real estate agents.
• The Real Estate agents of course get their commissions as well as other associated costs of selling a property.
• On the leases, the agents get fees for managing the rentals as well as maintenance costs and body corporate fees to come out of moneys collected.
What I want to know is what are the net proceeds to actually come into the PIF on sales of properties. The figures given in the July 2011 Investor Update are ambiguous at best and very misleading. They tell us nothing.
Below are ads from Port Macquarie Domain for 29 July and 5 August for the Icon Apartments. Last week the ad said "Icon - Only 2 On Offer" and today "Price Reduced by $100,000" with mention of "24 house size apartments". Obviously the sales strategy has changed to fire sale the apartments as quickly as possible.
JH, what is the actual return to the fund on all properties sold and under contract?
We're tired of being fed untruths and half truths. How much are we losing with all the "deals" you're doing in the best interests of investors? Aren't the deals actually done to get cash into the fund so you can take your ill-gotten payout when we replace you?
Note: Bold text is my emphasis.
Cookie1
Is there any good or bad news about our future proceedings to kick out JH?
Wasn't there a promise that we would get an update not later than the 5th
of August?
I'm sorry to be so impatient but I really would like to see some activity from
our side and not only from JH. She is taking away a fortune.
Wasn't there a promise that we would get an update not later than the 5th
of August?
I'm sorry to be so impatient but I really would like to see some activity from
our side and not only from JH. She is taking away a fortune.
- Joined
- 12 July 2008
- Posts
- 416
- Reactions
- 0
Is there any good or bad news about our future proceedings to kick out JH?
Wasn't there a promise that we would get an update not later than the 5th
of August?
I'm sorry to be so impatient but I really would like to see some activity from
our side and not only from JH. She is taking away a fortune.
Hello Harald,
Hang in there mate.
This action is far from over.
There are behind the scenes manouvrerings going on and you understand that they can not be aired on the forum.
For my little part I have sent another urgent nudge to ASIC through my Federal MP.
Waiting for response now.
Every bit of pressure is being applied, however miniscule.
We are due for an upswing.
Regards, simgrund
- Joined
- 6 December 2009
- Posts
- 64
- Reactions
- 0
In the last 2 months we have seen SOMEONE or ('someones') 'buy' 2 registers (yeah right) and spend thousands smearing good people so JH/WC can keep plundering the fund & keeping their friends in the lifestyle they've become accustomed. It will be a VERY SIMPLE task for ASIC to ask WHO bought the registries. There's the first very simple investigation needed which should take a few minutes. If there is 'SOMEONE' JH/WC will name as a sacrificial lamb, let ASIC see their bank records paying for the printing & postage. (And advise which mail centres they used.) And in another few minutes, well spent, ASIC can ask the mail centres who paid the bill on that date. ASIC can then determine their relationship to JH/WC. Does anyone really believe there is going to be a neutral supportive investor (s) who LOVES her work and is wiling to shell out thousands to keep her in the job, but couldn't be bothered going to the meeting to vote?
And while ASIC's out door knocking, maybe they'll pop into the agency that employed the actors and take a couple of minutes to ask just 2 simple questions; namely WHO booked the actors and WHO paid? It must be of interest to ASIC WHO attempted to pervert the course of justice now it's been tabled in a court of law. They must be very curious who would go to that trouble & expense, even working with officials to sign them up as Unitholders BEFORE they even were Unitholders. And we know Jenny 'knows absolutely nothing about it' because that's what she swore under oath. So there's another mystery easily solved with a couple of questions. Bring it on. We know ASIC is 'taking an interest.'
JH/WC can hide the millions of dollars lost on all these shabby deals with a stroke of the pen, but the above 2 blatant contradictions to the law are out in public now and investigations can ONLY point to JH/WC's illegal breach of the Acts.
And while ASIC's out door knocking, maybe they'll pop into the agency that employed the actors and take a couple of minutes to ask just 2 simple questions; namely WHO booked the actors and WHO paid? It must be of interest to ASIC WHO attempted to pervert the course of justice now it's been tabled in a court of law. They must be very curious who would go to that trouble & expense, even working with officials to sign them up as Unitholders BEFORE they even were Unitholders. And we know Jenny 'knows absolutely nothing about it' because that's what she swore under oath. So there's another mystery easily solved with a couple of questions. Bring it on. We know ASIC is 'taking an interest.'
JH/WC can hide the millions of dollars lost on all these shabby deals with a stroke of the pen, but the above 2 blatant contradictions to the law are out in public now and investigations can ONLY point to JH/WC's illegal breach of the Acts.
Hi. Seamistry I have always read your posts as they are very informative and assist us that can't really add anything greatly. But I have to say based on previous posts and related media regarding the ALF PIF and the constant advice both from PIF AG and WC along with others on this forum surely you wouldn't expect them "ALF PIF" to jump in anytime during the last couple of months to help us whether it be refuting/denying or adding anything to help our cause. "Whats in it for me" theory first comes to mind. The PIF AG executive has to stand on it's own and build it's own credibility which I believe it has. In a nutshell most parties have told ALF PIF to p........ off and that there a bunch of c.....s in short with no real concern for unit holders or no substance to there offer. I would say that if we've learnt nothing in the last few months, we should at least take away the fact that most of these type of people care nothing about personal defamation, slander, misleaading or defamatory remarks, trick playing or delay tactics etc. It is strictly business with a bottom line. It's not personal so trying to plead or request them to assist with no potential gain will bear no results in my opinion. PIF AG may have made a similar error in the courts. It's not personal to WC/Judges/Barristers etc. To us it is of course as it affects us daily but not to them.
I did not support ALF PIF the first time around and possibly will not a second time however I want to make that decision for myself once I see what they are offering. WW does make a good point in that we should at least see what they are offering. It makes no sense to me that we would not review what they have to offer or anyone else for that matter. Information from CC and PIF AG is still forth coming so in light of hearing nothing at this time these offers will come albeit not formally. My suggestion would be not to respond at all unless it is presented formally. Other than that it's a free sounding board which is also a tactic of sorts.
I still look forward to your every post
with respect
