This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

BCS - BrisConnections Unit Trusts

Jump to new

I personally think hes a genius, but I think there would be alot of mum and dad investors who had got there hopes up about Boltons resolutions being passed and thus being absolved of the future liabilities.

Those mum and dad have had their bubble bust and once again could face financial ruin. They are the ones who would be angry because whether they should have or not many viewed him as a white knight, which he isnt (nor did he have any responsibility to be)
 
he simply played the game of brinkmanship a lot better than BCS or any of the affiliated/associated entities could

BECAUSE

he had SOOOOOOOOO much less to lose.

They simply couldn't run the risk of him derailing a multibillion dollar project.

In the end paying him off, because this is simply what has happened, was the safest option. And really, when you look at the overall picture, $4.5million is cheap. A large profit for him, but p1ss change for the guys he was up against
 

I think alot of the Mum and Dads will feel used by him, he clearly let the media run with the heartache stories of battlers facing financial ruin, this would've definitely benefited his cause
 

Ahh... thx... Any reason they didnt sell to him when they had the chance?

And leightons could be graceful and offer to buy other relatively small parcels for .01. If Bolton is making a profit, he is seling at more than .01. Leightons should offer other investors the chance to sell at .01 but life often isn't that fair.
 
Just found this article titled "Nicholas Bolton strikes $4.5m deal to skip vote to wind up BrisConnections" and in there it states:

Mr Rowe said "it appears" from the ASX documents that Thiess John Holland, the main contractor for the project, had purchased Mr Bolton's votes for $4.5 million but would not become a unitholder.
Click to expand...

... so Thiess John Holland does not become a unit holder - they simply purchased votes from Bolton
So is Bolton still a unit holder???

Source: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25332806-643,00.html
 
There is absolutely no doubt that he knew of the liability before he purchased the shares.

That was in the findings from the court case from Victorian Supreme Court - look for the link posted a week or so ago. Bolton had two ways of buying shares for ASI: A broker and his comsec account. The court heard that Bolton instructed his broker to buy the $47k worth of BCSCA, but the broker refused because of the liability. So he then went out and brought them anyway through his comsec account.
 
sails said:
... so Thiess John Holland does not become a unit holder - they simply purchased votes from Bolton
So is Bolton still a unit holder???
]
Click to expand...
Now that's weird. i've always thought initial substantial holder notice means just that, you have to be a holder.
 

I think probably Leighton are the holder. Thiess John Holland are probably their proxy. Very confusing but I don't think Bolton holds anymore.
 
Where's Sunder?

Further proof that you can't really hold the sellers liable for the actions of the buyer. I'm sure Bolton didn't tell them what he planned to do prior to purchase.
 
It was Leighton holdings who hit the panic button.

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20090414/pdf/31h1plj89s590c.pdf

 
So Nick still holds the securities and is liable for the installment payments (assuming the status quo remains).

I guess he's going to exercise his put option on the securities so he doesn't have to pay the $154m.

Wasn't there an expiry date to his put option? Anyone remember that date?
 
Obviously Bolton sees no problem with offloading his shareholding via an off-market transfer. Tigerboi's comments are very pertinent here, as he intimated that the eastlink tunnel, at around 10 km, cost around 800 million in 2001. This might mean that there were some extremely lucrative contracts to protect.
 


Keeerrrreeect. This is what i have heard...the vote was bought but not the units. there is a lot of misrepresentation in the press at the moment. I have this from as close to the source as you can get
 

No. He will not own the shares after today. READ the bloody attachment to this post. He has done a smart piece of greenmail with LEI.
 

Attachments

  • 31h1pbc1s8clyp.pdf
    397.4 KB · Views: 43
i am sure mr bolton would have known what he was doing right from the start
he must have known that a project of that size with the amount of money spent on it that someone would come in with an offer to stop it from being wound up

no wonder he did not turn up at the meeting

would be wanting to dissappear for awhile as i am sure there are a lot of other sp holders feeling a bit jilted at him selling them out.
 
Judd said:
No. He will not own the shares after today. READ the bloody attachment to this post. He has done a smart piece of greenmail with LEI.
Click to expand...

Where do you read that?

The deed clearly states that "ASI remains the registered and beneficial holder of all the units". Nick sold the proxies, not the units. There is no debate about that.

Nick still needs to off load his liability somehow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

May 2024 DDD
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
7K
qldfrog
TTZ - Total Telcom Inc.
Replies
2
Views
2K
TacoTed
Superhero - Afterpay/Zip backers fund Robinhood-style trading platform
Replies
13
Views
5K
Dona Ferentes
PGOL - Patriot Gold Corp (Royalty Company)
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
TacoTed
R
Scale Economies
Replies
3
Views
1K
RickyY
R
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...