BCS - BrisConnections Unit Trusts

[sails]

If your right then his only option is his put option with Williams. My hat goes off to him, but now there is even more of a grim outlook for the retailers who still hold as their white knight has fled the army. Kind of feel guilty for transferring to Nick but if it wasnt me then it would have been someone else. Hope Maq can still create a deal for the retailers but now that there is any danger of the project failing....why would they??

But at this stage, he hasn't fled - looks like he's still in there...

Also, this story has been mysteriously quiet on the main media. I don't think it's ever been headline news on the TV despite it possibly being a journalists dream story. Have the media been told to keep it steady? Something we may never know. I expect the meeting today might trigger a bit more interest - only time will tell.

I imagine no-one will want the world watching if these Mums and Dads are wrenched from their homes. Wouldn't look good for any of the powers that be. Hopefully, the remaining retail holders will still find a way out. Why they haven't already jumped at the opportunities that have already been presented to divest themselves of their units is beyond me. But I also acknowledge that I obviously don't know all the facts and I am sure they have had their reasons.

 

[nathanblack]

he can always donate to charity?

i wonder how the charity faired? numbers acquired?what vote? deals made?

 

[sirius]

If you guys wish to see the latest in this sham check out the pdf. It was posted on the ASX today from Brisconnect. The statement is from ASI asking shareholders to vote for the resolutions at todays meeting IN CAPITAL LETTERS. There is mention of a date (7th April). ASI does the deal on the 8th April. Surely they new what was going on. If Bolton was so strong about the winding up and acting on his statements, how could he cave in so quickly??? Talk about this guy digging himself in deeper. He has just let the door open to major litigation from all sides. If you read page 2 (of the statement) it reaffirms he is full of BS and it makes it clear to me now that he does not understand the postion he has got himself into.

 

[Absolutely]

If you guys wish to see the latest in this sham check out the pdf. It was posted on the ASX today from Brisconnect. The statement is from ASI asking shareholders to vote for the resolutions at todays meeting IN CAPITAL LETTERS. There is mention of a date (7th April). ASI does the deal on the 8th April. Surely they new what was going on. If Bolton was so strong about the winding up and acting on his statements, how could he cave in so quickly??? Talk about this guy digging himself in deeper. He has just let the door open to major litigation from all sides. If you read page 2 (of the statement) it reaffirms he is full of BS and it makes it clear to me now that he does not understand the postion he has got himself into.

Yep this would be illegal and he will be exposed. But don't think he's that stupid. He's got lawyers who would be advising him through this. Still think there is more to this then we know about at the moment.

 

[Enzyme]

My interpretation is that LEI bought the units but would not have been registered in time to vote at the meeting, hence the proxy deal.
Ask yourself why would Bolton sell his proxy and be stuck with the financial liability when the proxy was used against him.
Occam's razor.

ice

I'm with you, ice. There isn't anything odd here. Bolton has sold the shares and both Leighton's and Brisconnections have filed a change in substantive shareholding notice with the ASX. The extra clauses in the form were just to ensure Leighton's got what they paid for as the transfer of shares couldn't be completed in time.

 

[drsmith]

Can voting rights to listed securities legally be sold in isolation to the underlying ownership of the shares ?

 

[matty2.0]

isn't nick bolton looking to wind this company up?

why don't unit holders join him and bring down macbank, since maintaining the company in its current form will result in unforseen liability payments?

 

[sails]

Bloomberg have posted a correction to their first article which further confirms that Bolton didn't sell his units:

(Corrects to say Leighton bought voting rights in headline, first and second paragraphs.)

April 14 (Bloomberg) -- Leighton Holdings Ltd. bought the voting rights on 19.8 percent of BrisConnections shares to ensure the company managing A$4.8 billion ($3.5 billion) of road projects survived a shareholder vote today to liquidate it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aNBZ2YifSHoY&refer=germany

I suppose he was paid well to vote as they wanted. It appears that TJH didn't want to own the units, just wanted to ensure the voting went according to plan - who knows...

 

[sails]

isn't nick bolton looking to wind this company up?

why don't unit holders join him and bring down macbank, since maintaining the company in its current form will result in unforseen liability payments?

Matty2 - a lot of water has passed under the bridge today - to get the whole story go back and read todays posts on this thread.

Bottom line (according to the media reports, etc) is that Bolton was paid $4.5m provided he voted against his own resolutions at the meeting today plus a few other conditions - which he apparently did. General consensus is that he still owns his units. What's next is anybody's guess...

 

[matty2.0]

Matty2 - a lot of water has passed under the bridge today - to get the whole story go back and read todays posts on this thread.

Bottom line (according to the media reports, etc) is that Bolton was paid $4.5m provided he voted against his own resolutions at the meeting today plus a few other conditions - which he apparently did. General consensus is that he still owns his units. What's next is anybody's guess...

Sorry.
Been at work all day.
Yea read the news;

Nicholas Bolton sells deciding share of BrisConnection fate for $4.5mFont Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print By Tony Grant-Taylor | April 14, 2009
Article from: The Courier-Mail
THE man behind a bid to wind up BrisConnections has voted against his own plan - then sold his voting rights for $4.5 million.


Too bad ... many people were looking up to Bolton ... sort of like David and Goliath ... woop back to reality ...

 

[MeToo]

Result of meeting of Brisconnections.

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20090414/pdf/31h1s1cy0j47tc.pdf

No resolution passed.

 

[drsmith]

As far as the 10am 14 April meeting is concerned: BCSCA transfers were required to be registered with the Link share registry service by close of business THU 9 April and Proxies were required to be faxed to BrisConnections or Link by 10am SUN 12 April.

So we are not of course now talking to new prospective BCSCA sellers about 14 April voting matters. All those instructions are set and I'm sorry that we will only be able to make them known through our actions at the meeting.

There will be a lot of press there -- and updates will stream pretty fast I'm sure -- as the aggregate votes become known.

14 April meeting, if it goes ahead at all following 9am Supreme Court of QLD ruling to be handed down by Justice Dutney -- well, if the meeting gets under way we are all facing extraordinary circumstances with highstakes for all.

So as everyone already can see it will not be a simple casting of votes like a general AGM where the financial accounts are adopted and there might be a symbolic protest vote over the remuneration committee's bonus package for the directers. And then off for a scone and a chat with management.

The stakes are so high that there will be Federal Politics type scrutiny of each and every proxy form and vote by teams of lawyers for all parties. Not wanting to be too facetious, but think 2004 US Predential Election -- crucial State of Florida.

What we expect is that the meeting will run at least all day 14 April as much of the time will be spent with lawyers scrutinising the proxies and challenging the authority to act of attendees.

+Meeting could well then be adjourned with unfinished business.

And this might even be a good idea to give stakeholders some more time to breathe -- however if the 29 April call is somehow deferred or adjourned or rescheduled it is not totally certain what this will mean for the $2.9m of syndicated funding to the project. We are sure that this cadre of mostly foreign bank commitments, if not wanting to exit the Brisbane Airport Toll altogether, would like terms to be re-struck to take into account the current economic environment -- so any wiggle room to declare the commitments void, such as a change in the 29 April 2009 $1 call, could bring the project down. Most would agree that this would be a bad outcome for Australia.


David C. Barrow, Trustee, The Julie Anne Barrow Charitable Trust

http://www.barrow.org.au/

David,

Was today's events as much of a suprise to you is it was to everybody else ?

 

[adman0001]

Ohh, I'm pretty sure he know's what he's doing, he's kept his cards close the whole way through,there's a lot to be played out yet, but he's currently just flown out of banger's down to phuket for a while....

 

[Knobby22]

What's going to happen with the charity now?

What a story this has turned out to be!

 

[investorpaul]

What's going to happen with the charity now?

What a story this has turned out to be!

How any charity can get into this is beyond me. Regardless of how big the potential returns could be unless you 100% know what your doing, have the legal team to back it up and are crazy (aka bolton) i cant see why you would touch it.

unless of course the charity is fulfilling its charter by buying units off mum and dads thus removing their liability for them

 

[dmagnus]

$50k for $4.5M, nice trade

 

[Macquack]

Anyway this should make him trader of the year.

More apt would be double-crossing scumbag of the year.

His company should be renamed "Un-Australian" Style Investments.

From Bolton's own website

ASI believes it to be in the best interest of all unit holders to wind up the Trusts now and distribute any net salvageable value, if any, of the assets of the Trusts (including work in progress) back to unit holders.

Lucky he did not go to the meeting, he may not have come out alive.

 

[steve999]

Lucky he did not go to the meeting, he may not have come out alive.

If you read his agreement, he wasn't allowed to attend the meeting.

He may or may not be a scumbag, but he didn't create the mess. Of course he is trying to profit from it. Macquarie/Brisconnections still came up with the mess in the first place.

 

[Macquack]

If you read his agreement, he wasn't allowed to attend the meeting.

He may or may not be a scumbag, but he didn't create the mess. Of course he is trying to profit from it. Macquarie/Brisconnections still came up with the mess in the first place.

As if, he was going to attend the meeting?

Macquarie/Brisconnections did create the mess in the first place, BUT Bolton made an undertaking to vote for the wind up of the company/trust. He asked all unit holders to vote for the wind up and then did the opposite himself. This is a very low act.

 

[Absolutely]

As if, he was going to attend the meeting?

Macquarie/Brisconnections did create the mess in the first place, BUT Bolton made an undertaking to vote for the wind up of the company/trust. He asked all unit holders to vote for the wind up and then did the opposite himself. This is a very low act.

Yes and one would question the legality of it. It's akin to market manipulation in my view.