Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF
- Thread starter breaker1
- Start date
The SMH CBD coverage of the Sydney meeting certainly has more teeth to it than the Australian's tepid offering. What we need to find is a bright, resourceful and ambitious journalist who might investigate our problems in the hope that his/her efforts could be rewarded with a Walkley recognition. Unfortunately "Crikey" seems to have lost its early verve, but a new well-funded online Australian publication, "The Global Mail", will hit our screens early next year. Monica Attard, ex-ABC will be in charge.
- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 41
- Reactions
- 0
There were probably 200-250 people at the meeting today. Its difficult to say with so many bodyguards around.
She came across very well posing many of the questions in the presentation but answering her own questions to her advantage. Gave a detailed run down on the position of each investment and the forward strategy. The main point is that overall this is to wind up the fund and return what cash is left within 2 years but to continue managing beyond until all resolved.. She was very credible as she was 3 years ago.
Most of theaudience’sfollowing questions were alredy answered in her presentation and asked by those who either missed that, did not understand it or wanted further clarrification.
There was only one question/statement at the end about the fact that she had not delivered a single objcective from her statements to gain support to be RE 3 years ago. On being pressed she actually appologised for this.
She came across very well posing many of the questions in the presentation but answering her own questions to her advantage. Gave a detailed run down on the position of each investment and the forward strategy. The main point is that overall this is to wind up the fund and return what cash is left within 2 years but to continue managing beyond until all resolved.. She was very credible as she was 3 years ago.
Most of theaudience’sfollowing questions were alredy answered in her presentation and asked by those who either missed that, did not understand it or wanted further clarrification.
There was only one question/statement at the end about the fact that she had not delivered a single objcective from her statements to gain support to be RE 3 years ago. On being pressed she actually appologised for this.
- Joined
- 22 May 2008
- Posts
- 758
- Reactions
- 0
Something I've mentioned before is how WC quietly dropped the business plan it had spruiked until early this year. That plan was to return the fund to the benchmark asset allocation.
The plan is all now - return capital to unitholders. I.e. a liquidation. I.e. a winding down of the fund. Same sort of financial acrobatics (back flipping) WC has been doing in regard to capital raising.
Scott Rochford's article quotes Hutson "With 10,000 investors in the fund, we have the full spectrum of need and investment profile."
I ask: really? Prove it. I suspect you couldn't find a listed entity in Australia like PIF with 10K+ investors that has a more homogenous lot of investors. Hutson's response sounds like absolute BS actually.
Yeah, some of us may want the long term rebalancing of assets business plan. But very probably only because that's what WC lead us to believe could be achieved. In which case the only diversity amongst the investors is really those who have faith in WC and those who don't.
- Joined
- 12 July 2008
- Posts
- 416
- Reactions
- 0
From Andrew Main article in the Australian 5 September 2011:
Justice as dispensed by Justice Dowsett:
"possible irregularity on the register"???; not to be pursued by this judge.
Still dumbfounded.
Off to GC to hear what I already know from Sydney and Melbourne collegues.
Regards,
Justice as dispensed by Justice Dowsett:
"possible irregularity on the register"???; not to be pursued by this judge.
Still dumbfounded.
Off to GC to hear what I already know from Sydney and Melbourne collegues.
Regards,
- Joined
- 22 May 2008
- Posts
- 758
- Reactions
- 0
Exactly simgrund.
"Possible irregularity on the Register"
Hired actors/students supporting Hutson
Hutson choosing to address the rent a crowd.
Back flip on regular distributions
Back flip on buy back
Incorrect 2008 tax statement
WellCap web page error about the fund
Hutson's vested interest in Armstrong
Hutson's vested interest in Print Mail Logistics (?)
Incorrect decision to amend constitution
Incorrect information in Investor Update
Dilution of PIF units
Attempt to dilute PIF units even further
Flip flopping on capital raising.
Back flipping on the business plan.
Flip flopping on the Class Action
Flip flopping on holding a GM to vote on RE
Continuous losses year after year
etc?
All not illegal. What difference does that make. This is business. Business is about confidence.
IMLO:
Hutson's conduct is making PIF a laughing stock.
Hutson's conduct is painting ENTER WITH CAUTION all over the PIF units.
Hutson's conduct is turning PIF units toxic.
No wonder the unit price is at a massive discount to NTA (painting a huge TakeOver target on PIF).
What a joke. This isn't how a successful $200M+ enterprise is run is it? This is how I'd run a cult or a fan club. Or if I was running PIF to benefit someone else. Y'know like those 'sophisticated investors'. Whose units ended up in Craig Wallace' hands. In normal publicly listed enterprises the Head, the CEO, would be gone by now wouldn't it?
For those of us who still support WC in the face of WC's overwealming failure to lead and deliver: NO WONDER YOU'VE LOST SO MUCH MONEY. Enjoying the roadshow? Making you feel better about your decisions?
WC must resign.
If not then, 14c: here we come. If Hutson said in 2008 '14c now or 14c by 5 years' how would you have voted. Think about it WC supporters: if you only end up with 14c then what value has WC added. All you will have achieved is to reward WC's conduct.
Third loss in a row puts PIF on notice
- Anthony Marx
- From: The Courier-Mail
- September 08, 2011 12:00AM
" ... Critics have alleged Wellington attempted to stack an investor meeting in Sydney with up to 200 hired actors provided with free shares but Ms Hutson has denied any involvement in the aborted scheme. ..."
Um that's completely wrong. Hutson WAS INVOLVED with the attempt to stack the July meeting. Hutson chose to address them. That's involvement in my opinion.
- Joined
- 12 July 2008
- Posts
- 416
- Reactions
- 0
That's it Duped!
Herein lies PIF tragedy in that J Dowsett's job was to follow the thread of ...hired mob; predated registration; scrutiny of 2 Registers (to name 3 of the most obvious irregularities) and nail them in court.
He failed miserably in these public duties.
We should be screeming about this ad noseaum because if ever there was a case of "we wus robbed" this is it.
Bear with my repetition. But this judgement should be thrown out and Court's credibility restored by other Justices with true grasp of common sense.
So dumbfounded I remain, yet grateful for your pin-point clarity.
Cheers,
The G8-Cherie Hearts hearing is underway in Singapore.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1151702/1/.html
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1151702/1/.html
From the US "Audit Directory" - irrefularity and fraud.
http://www.auditing.uidaho.edu/default.aspx?pid=79191
http://www.auditing.uidaho.edu/default.aspx?pid=79191
- Joined
- 22 May 2008
- Posts
- 758
- Reactions
- 0
For a laugh have a look at Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
Put at the front of your mind ALP Branch Stacking, Craig Thomson and the Fitzgerald Inquiry and then have a look at the countries we rate ourselves above.
Just returned from the Gold Coast Meeting. Sounds like much the same as the other two. About 300 attendees and (surprisingly) JH seemed to have a lot of support. I don't think they were rent a crowd as the age bracket was mid 70s.
She gave her usual (if somewhat nervous) presentation, pre-empting most of the anticipated curly questions.
This was reflected when I was permitted to ask "that as it has just been announced that a further $31 million of our money has been lost in the last financial year, would she confirm that if and when we receive the third promised one cent a unit, due to this non performance Wellington will not be taking a fee as she (personally) promised at the meeting here prior to us appointing her in 2008?"
She quickly came back with the answer that what she had said was that if she was dismissed as RE for non-performance she would not take the 2% fee, and that still stood. However, she would start paying the .7% when the next 1 cent distribution took place. She received a round of applause for this response!! - have to grudgingly admit that she is good.
There was a couple of questions about Craig Wallace, and she responded in the same way as reported from Sydney. Most of the other questions did seem like ring-ins and were mainly re-affirming all the good she had done.
I left after the second break, as I really didn't think anything else constructive would be asked or responded to.
She gave her usual (if somewhat nervous) presentation, pre-empting most of the anticipated curly questions.
This was reflected when I was permitted to ask "that as it has just been announced that a further $31 million of our money has been lost in the last financial year, would she confirm that if and when we receive the third promised one cent a unit, due to this non performance Wellington will not be taking a fee as she (personally) promised at the meeting here prior to us appointing her in 2008?"
She quickly came back with the answer that what she had said was that if she was dismissed as RE for non-performance she would not take the 2% fee, and that still stood. However, she would start paying the .7% when the next 1 cent distribution took place. She received a round of applause for this response!! - have to grudgingly admit that she is good.
There was a couple of questions about Craig Wallace, and she responded in the same way as reported from Sydney. Most of the other questions did seem like ring-ins and were mainly re-affirming all the good she had done.
I left after the second break, as I really didn't think anything else constructive would be asked or responded to.
Have just returned from the Gold Coast meeting. Similar to Sydney and Melbourne, the Grey Army which is fast becoming the White Army were frisked with Metal Detectors on entering. My guess is they were looking for "weapons of mass destruction, nunchucks, knuckle dusters, flick knives etc." None of which were found!!
We had the same boring format and list of promises. Someone was called to order over the jovial reply to the Red Jacket shoulder charging incident in Sydney.
June 23 questions for Jenny Hutson seemed to invoke her darkest hour.
One question from the floor was about something on the lines of any remnants left could they be forwarded on in her will!!!! (chuckle chuckle)
I was not at the meeting three years ago, but talking to people today it seems to be a repeat of promises that were never fulfilled.
"Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me"
I had the foresight to not invest $10.00 in hearing the JH promises at the Gold Coast Convention Centre, I instead parked for free at the Casino carpark (Casino pokies are set for a better investment return!)
On a serious note, talking to people today, I wish more people knew about the Stock Forum. Obviously a lot of these people rely on their information from the newspapers.
We had the same boring format and list of promises. Someone was called to order over the jovial reply to the Red Jacket shoulder charging incident in Sydney.
June 23 questions for Jenny Hutson seemed to invoke her darkest hour.
One question from the floor was about something on the lines of any remnants left could they be forwarded on in her will!!!! (chuckle chuckle)
I was not at the meeting three years ago, but talking to people today it seems to be a repeat of promises that were never fulfilled.
"Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me"
I had the foresight to not invest $10.00 in hearing the JH promises at the Gold Coast Convention Centre, I instead parked for free at the Casino carpark (Casino pokies are set for a better investment return!)
On a serious note, talking to people today, I wish more people knew about the Stock Forum. Obviously a lot of these people rely on their information from the newspapers.
- Joined
- 22 May 2008
- Posts
- 758
- Reactions
- 0
Thanks JohnH.
I fear that a warm feeling is all that unitholders will probably ever gain from that commitment by Hutson IMLO.
Remember that Hutson disagrees with Justice Gordon's decision to dis-allow WC's amendment of the constitution. She's got form on legal interpretation
So isn't this how it could probably play out?
WC would keep enough $ in a PIF account to cover the 2% payout.
Hutson perpetually claims WC has performed well in the light of the mess it inherited and the GFC.
Hutson claims WC is entitled to the 2% payout.
The instant the results of the vote are announced, instructions are sent to transfer the 2% out of PIF's account into WC's account. (And then to who knows where?)
WC is still registered as RE with ASIC so is not prohibited by law to transact PIF's assets. (?)
Hence Perpetual is powerless to stop WC withdrawing the 2% payout from PIF's account. (?)
WC says: if you want the money back you'll need to convince a Judge that WC didn't perform so I guees I'll see you in court.
That's when the bucket of cold water hits investors in the face.
Fanciful?
Possession is nine tenths of the law; innit? I.e. If one wants to ask a Court to use its powers to issue orders to take property away from a person then the Judge is going to want to be jolly sure his/her Court is not going to use those powers to cause injustice.
E.g. Dowsett J ruled "I conclude that for the meeting to proceed would, or may cause injustice to unit holders which I could not remedy by any order". [emphasis added]
Meanwhile the holder of the asset can behave anyway they wish because they're not the one that has to convince the judge.
If the burden of proof is on unitholders. This is a huge disadvantage. Isn't that how it works? Anyone disagree?
Fighting over the burden of proof is high stakes. For good reason.
By coincidence the High Court found in favour of Momcilovic just today. Momcilovic challenged the interpretation of S 5 of the Drugs Act which said something along the lines of: if the drugs are in your house the prosecutor no longer needs to prove they are yours. You now have to prove they are not yours. The Attorney General of Victoria lost.
See http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/34.html
Just about every State Solicitor General got involved.
Most members of secretive cults are taught that adhering to certain disciplines will make them superior human beings. The aim is usually to aspire to a state of higher awareness. Many such groups would regard the average citizen walking in the street as being "asleep" (a zombie). That is, non-members of the cult are drifting through life with dulled mental faculties, dreaming away their valuable time. They are programed like obedient robots. Handy knowledge, if it's correct, to use at critical times.
I remember a book title by Barry Jones. It was called "Sleepers Awake!"
I remember a book title by Barry Jones. It was called "Sleepers Awake!"
Towbar,Have just returned from "briefing on Gold Coast,some 300plus unitholders were in attendence,mostlly "grey nomads".Jh performance was slick.She wore the same Red Jacket,some sarcastic remarks from the audience.Each asset & security was discussed at some length, as per presentation.NO MORE CAPITAL RAISING!!& ALL MONIES AS THEY CAME TO HAND would be returned to pre 2008 investors.She spoke at some length about the Sydney EGM,& THAT SHE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT THE 200 actors
At Question time some one wanted to know where the fund would be in 10years, her reply was"a very distant memory!! Anothere question was about the loss of 34.48 million in the last finanacial report, she didnt reply to it . Spoke to people around me, they knew nothing about the" Aussie Forum"They got all their info from the papers
At Question time some one wanted to know where the fund would be in 10years, her reply was"a very distant memory!! Anothere question was about the loss of 34.48 million in the last finanacial report, she didnt reply to it . Spoke to people around me, they knew nothing about the" Aussie Forum"They got all their info from the papers
Thanks Mae, John and Towbar
What comes across is that the great majority of investors simply do not understand
what has actually happened to our Fund.
The fact that people would actually applaud someone ,who was cynically prepared to devalue their assets by 30% to save her skin , and is now prepared to take a 2% fee after abysmal non-performance ,is very sad.
Of course, a wind up scenario was always going to be attractive to an investor group predominantly over the age of 73.
Unfortunately, it has taken three years and many millions of dollars in unnecessary expenses for Jenny H to finally come to this conclusion.
Jadel, we were shocked to see so many people clapping, this to us clearly meant that the people in the room were none the wiser of what has been happening.
Definition of APPLAUD
intransitive verb
: to express approval especially by clapping the hands
transitive verb
1
: to express approval of : praise <applaud her efforts>
2
: to show approval of especially by clapping the hands
Hi all. Have been reading all the threads. Can't help but write something, sorry to some in advance.
JH states that WC will not take their fee if removed as RE. The answer to nearly everyone of the posts is right there. The constant posting of the same points is (in my opinion ) is just a waste of time. Individually we cannot do anything and are quite powerless. JH knows this and wrongly or rightly uses this to her advantage. The PIFAG was set up for the collective gathering of us all to counteract some or all of the antics/tactic not too mention some committee that was set up back in 2008 that I've never heard from.
I know this will not go over to well but PIFAG has to take some responsibility albeit not for any financial losses we have had to accept. That clearly belongs to WC. But some of us did put our faith in PIFAG and I know they have worked hard and for no short term compensation but have clearly failed to date in removing WC as the RE. Now this could be from poor legal advice as it appears that most issues did not get judged in our favor but the processes and the potential tactics of the defendant were mostly known.
Based upon some of the recent posts it is unclear whether a large percentage of the 10k investors were on board as well although it probably depends on which register was used I guess.
Basically I would like to know what is actually being done by PIFAG in response to all of these meetings along with the continual reporting of the same issues that have always been in place and acted upon by WC. If there is nothing that can be done than let's move on and we'll just go down the WC road. As I mentioned, individually we can do nothing other than complain which is okay a couple of times but continually on the same topics for a lengthy period of time is just not healthy as much as that is hard to swallow. As I have stated a number of times both on this forum and in private messages I will help where in can although I certainly do not have the financial or techincal knowledge of most on this forum, I will help where I can. I have pretty much written off my 300k, but do know that ACTION can only be taken as a group.
With respect to all
JH states that WC will not take their fee if removed as RE. The answer to nearly everyone of the posts is right there. The constant posting of the same points is (in my opinion ) is just a waste of time. Individually we cannot do anything and are quite powerless. JH knows this and wrongly or rightly uses this to her advantage. The PIFAG was set up for the collective gathering of us all to counteract some or all of the antics/tactic not too mention some committee that was set up back in 2008 that I've never heard from.
I know this will not go over to well but PIFAG has to take some responsibility albeit not for any financial losses we have had to accept. That clearly belongs to WC. But some of us did put our faith in PIFAG and I know they have worked hard and for no short term compensation but have clearly failed to date in removing WC as the RE. Now this could be from poor legal advice as it appears that most issues did not get judged in our favor but the processes and the potential tactics of the defendant were mostly known.
Based upon some of the recent posts it is unclear whether a large percentage of the 10k investors were on board as well although it probably depends on which register was used I guess.
Basically I would like to know what is actually being done by PIFAG in response to all of these meetings along with the continual reporting of the same issues that have always been in place and acted upon by WC. If there is nothing that can be done than let's move on and we'll just go down the WC road. As I mentioned, individually we can do nothing other than complain which is okay a couple of times but continually on the same topics for a lengthy period of time is just not healthy as much as that is hard to swallow. As I have stated a number of times both on this forum and in private messages I will help where in can although I certainly do not have the financial or techincal knowledge of most on this forum, I will help where I can. I have pretty much written off my 300k, but do know that ACTION can only be taken as a group.
With respect to all
- Joined
- 12 July 2008
- Posts
- 416
- Reactions
- 0
Hi elizaman,
I am very saddened to read your post.
We are all disillusioned in different shades of justice not served.
PIFAG came closest to improve our situation with bringing up dates for crucial meetings.
PIFAG always clarified their position as not being legally qualified but acting in the role of facilitator to our combined concerns.
Let us be very clear here: it is the Australian Legal and Supervisory systems that failed us. You will hear this from hundreds of thousands of victims in other disasters brought upon them by deliberate negligence of supervisory roles and obligations.
Justice Dowsett's cop out of his obligations is the most recent example of this let down.
This is where the blame lies.
My hopes now lie with the class action.
And Justice at the end of this Rainbow?
We sincerely hope.
Regards,
We have suffered major setbcks recently. The PIFAG will, I hope, remain tenacious. There's always the (slim) chance that an ASIC officer will take his feet off the desk and do something useful. The Singapore finding-to-come will be interesting to hear.
