BCS - BrisConnections Unit Trusts

[Prospector]

Boys and girls, ladies and Gentleman
I leave you guys alone for five minutes and there are more conspiracy theories …

Hey Jim, we have been doing 60+ pages of conspiracy stuff until you and David stumbled upon us! :

Why all the stuff about the accuracy of Brisbane's growing population?

Because it is stated as fact in the PDS and it isn't?

Surely one of the most questionable aspects of the PDS is the traffic report? This report seems to indicate that there will be about 70 million trips per year. How Brisconnection's tollway could carry several times the traffic volume of the Eastern Distributor and match the revenue of City Link leaves me totally dumbfounded.

That may well be the case but it is difficult to prove as it is based on assumptions and not a published statistic.

 

[jim Byrnes]

Why all the stuff about the accuracy of Brisbane's growing population? Surely one of the most questionable aspects of the PDS is the traffic report? This report seems to indicate that there will be about 70 million trips per year. Last year, the Eastern Distributor had 17.4 million trips to raise $73.7 million (source:http://www.transurban.com.au/transurban_online/tu_nav_black.nsf/obj/SHR+08/$file/040.htm). Without considering inflation, were Brisconnection's tollway to have the same traffic volumes as Transurban's CityLink tollway (http://www.citylink.com.au/261.jsp), a tollway more than three times the length running through Melbourne, they could pay off the project's debt over the term of its concession, as well as provide unit holders with a little under 10cents in annual dividends. How Brisconnection's tollway could carry several times the traffic volume of the Eastern Distributor and match the revenue of City Link leaves me totally dumbfounded.

ok all you i have enclosed the link to the brisconnections PDS
http://www.brisconnections.com.au/Portals/0/docs/investors/Final_PDS_NoApplication 24 June 2008.PDF

or just go to brisconnections web site and follow your nose to PDS
have a look and i am very keen for the good readers and bloggers to provide me info re PDS mistakes . The lawyers and i have found 42 mistakes in the PDS

 

[doctorj]

way to go MeToo - it must be a relief to have them off your hands. It sounds like you're lucky to have Jim and his backers around and then also there is David/JAB_Charity also willing to take a risk to help people out of the situation.

Is anyone else concerned that all is not as it seems? There’s always a pay off and nothing is for free, especially now given money isn’t as easy as it once was. I’d encourage everyone with a material exposure to this to seek their own independent legal opinion, rather than relying on the altruism of some chap on a forum.

 

[jackson8]

Is anyone else concerned that all is not as it seems? There’s always a pay off and nothing is for free, especially now given money isn’t as easy as it once was. I’d encourage everyone with a material exposure to this to seek their own independent legal opinion, rather than relying on the altruism of some chap on a forum.

all smoke and mirrors
just look at one of the early instigators mr bolton, the knight in shining armour coming to the rescue of the illinformed.
there is no altruism when it come to business and finance imo.

 

[jim Byrnes]

Is anyone else concerned that all is not as it seems? There’s always a pay off and nothing is for free, especially now given money isn’t as easy as it once was. I’d encourage everyone with a material exposure to this to seek their own independent legal opinion, rather than relying on the altruism of some chap on a forum.

is not the purpose of the forum for people to come together , share thoughts and information . some serous and some a bit light hearted .

what i have said i will do i have done . that is evident by the fact that i arranged for 60 million unit to go from people who wanted out to someone who has a plan .
as for altruism , lets not mince words.
there are always comercial risks in all forms of commerce .
this is no different .

but BSC has been so negligent in there PDS someone has to do something .
we are , again i shall be judged by my actions not my words .

i simply ask for those who have a view on errors in the PDS and or those who may have important information to share same with me .

 

[jim Byrnes]

all smoke and mirrors
just look at one of the early instigators mr bolton, the knight in shining armour coming to the rescue of the illinformed.
there is no altruism when it come to business and finance imo.

There will be two forms of pay of for me and my client .
Money of course we have built up a big stake , we have formulated a plan of attack . we have prepared a class action ,we have arranged to fund same .
the funder makes a tidy fee (about 33% ) of the total settlement some .
the agrieved get 66% ...
until now they where geting shafted , zero , zip zilch ..nothing .

whats better a 100% of nothing or 66% of something .

second payoff is very personal to me and it comes in two forms .

mac Bank have been a little unkind to me in the past and this is a little payback . also having had an interesting and not always smoth sailing corporate life , does anyone understand what sought of personal satisfaction one derives my not only getting paid to do a service but helping close to 1000 people who have been badly efected by there dealings in BSC .
saving many from what would be finacial ruin. It is soul satisfying and also good for ones own karma

 

[doctorj]

is not the purpose of the forum for people to come together , share thoughts and information . some serous and some a bit light hearted .

Everything has its time and place. When the livelihoods and homes of so many families are on the line, this is probably not the place for it.

there are always comercial risks in all forms of commerce .

this is no different .

Exactly why people should seek their own independent legal opinion, rather than relying on the altruism of some chap on a forum.

 

[lesm]

There will be two forms of pay of for me and my client .
Money of course we have built up a big stake , we have formulated a plan of attack . we have prepared a class action ,we have arranged to fund same .
the funder makes a tidy fee (about 33% ) of the total settlement some .
the agrieved get 66% ...
until now they where geting shafted , zero , zip zilch ..nothing .

whats better a 100% of nothing or 66% of something .

second payoff is very personal to me and it comes in two forms .

mac Bank have been a little unkind to me in the past and this is a little payback . also having had an interesting and not always smoth sailing corporate life , does anyone understand what sought of personal satisfaction one derives my not only getting paid to do a service but helping close to 1000 people who have been badly efected by there dealings in BSC .
saving many from what would be finacial ruin. It is soul satisfying and also good for ones own karma

Agree with Doc.

You still have to win the case, so at this point in time what do they have 66% of, besides promises or hopes yet to be fulfilled. You have been paid by a number of these shareholders to take their shares, which will assist in funding your case. Since when has it really cost $1,000 to conduct a share transfer.

It remains to be seen whether you guys are really benevolent benefactors or just a smarter form of 'Bolton', with deep pockets, under another guise.

For the little guys affected by this, the former would be preferrable, but only time will tell. Alternatively, have the little guys been played as pawns in a larger game.

 

[doctorj]

Alternatively, have the little guys been played as pawns in a larger game.

This is usually the case in these sort of games.

 

[cuttlefish]

Jim, not sure if its relevant, but when I was having a look through all of the BCS announcements after listing I noticed there appeared to be a fair bit of inconsistency in the way the various institutions (including Macquarie from memory) reported substantial shareholdings - several of the substantial shareholder notices refer to the stock as ordinary fully paid if my memory serves me right - particularly the earlier ones - any investor that was referring to BCS related ASX releases could have been mislead by the units being referred to in these notices in this way (all just my opinion - I'm no accountant, lawyer or stock expert of course).

Also from memory the clarifying paragraphs about the units that appear at the bottom of a lot of BCS's more recent ASX releases from memory don't appear at the bottom of all of their earlier releases.

If you hunt through the BCS related ASX releases there are quite a few releases (from memory) that refer to the units as 'ordinary fully paid' - particularly earlier releases. (I posted some other things that appeared a bit inconsistent in the various asx releases earlier in this thread but its a bit of a trawl back to find them - but its worth having a look through the timing of some of the substantial shareholder change announcements vs for example the announcement that the dividend was to be suspended etc.).


disclosure: have never held BCS units

 

[TMackey]

You have to be joking don't you Jim? 33%.

And you reckon that you've found 42 material errors in the PDS, but just looking for some help from others?

By the looks of things, it doesn't look like the old litigation funding business is going well, so i suspect you'll end up with 0.
http://m.theaustralian.com.au/business/BusinessNews/fi30533.htm

If it was so straightforward, wouldn't the other litigation funders be involved.

Afterall if something appears too good to be true, it usually is

 

[brty]

Jim,

Here is one point we believe is unable to be 100% proved correct.
The PDS

In Big letters says Brisbane is the fastest growing capital city in Australia …suffering from critical transport and capacity constraints (page 7)

Thereafter they say forecast population growth 2004 2031
Brisbane is the fastest growing capital city in Australia
Source Bureau of statistics.

I believe they may have sourced their information from the following document, about "Population Projections 2004-2101"

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/B1E6E31CD9A3EA61CA2570C7007296DD/$File/32220_2004%20to%202101.pdf

The Brisbane projections were probably drawn from the info between pg 89 and pg 141.

Of particular interest to you may be the 'Explanatory Notes' on page 142, specifically point 6, where it mentions........

"The projections are not intended as predictions or forecasts,........."

brty

 

[sails]

... saving many from what would be finacial ruin. It is soul satisfying and also good for ones own karma

I agree, it certainly is soul satisfying to make a positive difference. I sincerely hope these little guys haven't been played as pawns as they have already paid heavily in terms of emotional distress.

Between the three Bs (Humphrey excluded!), they have relieved many mums and dads of their toxic units. IMO, for this they should be applauded. What strategies are played out from here will hopefully remain between the big guys and the mums and dads they rescued can now get on with their lives.

 

[Prospector]

Between the three Bs (Humphrey excluded!), they have relieved many mums and dads of their toxic units. IMO, for this they should be applauded. What strategies are played out from here will hopefully remain between the big guys and the mums and dads they rescued can now get on with their lives.

Absolutely! All they wanted to do was remove that horrendous liability. And whatever the motives of the big players are, the liability was all that mattered to the mums and dads. Who cares if the big players then go on to make a profit from it? I certainly wouldnt have given a toss!

 

[jumala]

Absolutely! All they wanted to do was remove that horrendous liability. And whatever the motives of the big players are, the liability was all that mattered to the mums and dads. Who cares if the big players then go on to make a profit from it? I certainly wouldnt have given a toss!

dont you people get it ?? as previously posted. jim and jab now have your unit transfer forms signed by you. jim and jab lodge forms after the 22nd. you are still liable for the $1 call. jim and jab have untill jan 2010 to cash in on your units, which you signed over. imo. by the way jim your alter ego " metoo" is too obvious.

 

[stoxclimber]

Jim, out of interest, why are you banned from being a company director? Don't have to answer if you don't want, just saw it brought up in some of the media reports.

 

[poguemahone]

jim your alter ego " metoo" is too obvious.

In the interests of clarity and shovelling of bullsh*t can the Admin's clear this up one way or another.. Ip's,emails,ISP's,Retina Eye Scans..

 

[Enzyme]

ok all you i have enclosed the link to the brisconnections PDS
http://www.brisconnections.com.au/Portals/0/docs/investors/Final_PDS_NoApplication 24 June 2008.PDF

or just go to brisconnections web site and follow your nose to PDS
have a look and i am very keen for the good readers and bloggers to provide me info re PDS mistakes . The lawyers and i have found 42 mistakes in the PDS

I don't know how helpful this one is - from an article highly critical of the BCS traffic forecasts: link

BRISCONNECTIONS: A CASE STUDY

One of the key risks identified in the BrisConnections Airport Link Project Product Disclosure Statement is that of traffic volumes (see section 6.2.1, page 60). The PDS states that:

The impact of a significant and sustained increase in fuel prices on traffic volumes is a risk that should also be considered. Increased fuel prices may lead to a reduction in car ownership, car utilisation and a shift in modal share to public transport, walking, cycling or motorbikes and scooters. (p. 60)

The traffic forecast model for the project was developed by Arup. Arup’s Traffic forecasts for the Airport Link Project (pp 110 – 124 of the PDS) predict that the average increase in traffic volume across the three tollable sections will be 47% from 2012 to 2031. This is in comparison to a potential shortfall in Australia’s oil supply of 64% to 80% by 2025.

The PDS risk chapter refers to the potential impact of fuel prices on traffic volumes six times. However nowhere in Arup’s traffic forecast is there any mention of the impact of fuel prices or fuel availability. This raises the question of why was the impact of the future availability and cost of fuel not mentioned during the traffic forecasting process. For an issue of such vital signifance to the viability of the entire project this appears to be negligent at best and is something that warrants further investigation.

Edit: To add to that, the ARUP traffic forecasts have since been widely question. Briscon came out with a public statement clarifying their forcasts and defending them. That clarification made no mention of fuel prices as a variable on the projected traffic volumes. link There is a possible argument that they've acknowledged it as a risk in preparing their PDS but then completely ignored it in preparing their critical traffic forecasts.

I know there were more substantial criticisms of those forecasts - I'm just trying to find that link again...

 

[Enzyme]

I'm getting things a little out of order here.

A link from my previous post was Brisconnections' response to criticism's of the arup traffic forecasts. Now here are those criticisms. From that article:

Questions submitted to Arup

1. Queensland Transport Facts 2008 was published in May 2008. Why is it not being made available to the public like previous versions? (edit - the forecasts were based on 2006 data)

2. The IPO occurred at the end of July 2008. Why did the PDS ignore this data from May? Was this misleading?

3. The assumptions in the PDS are now "materially incorrect". Why is BrisCon not disclosing this to their investors?

 

[Enzyme]

Someone really should show the Brisconnections management how to use Google. In their response to the criticism that the traffic forecasts were based on out of data they said:

BrisConnections is not aware if the 2008 Transport Facts report has been distributed publicly, but we note that it is not on the Queensland Transport website.

With Google it took me less than two minutes to find that you can order the 2008 data from the author here with pricing details here.

Arup were paid $4.5 million for their forecast, and Brisconnections based a 4.8 billion dollar project and staked $1.2 billion of shareholder funds on it. You'd think they could do better than just a quick check of a Government website for the current data.

I emphasised the word publicly available in the Briscon statement. Having now seen the pricing detail for that report - $60,000 for government or a large company - I wonder if that might mean they could have known about the updated report but bauked at paying for it.

The other thing briscon said in their response was:

We also note that in relation to the 2006 report, Queensland Transport has the following disclaimer on its website:

''The report is not a formally endorsed Queensland Government statement on transport trends but is an independent assessment prepared using both public and private sector data sources, with quality controls overseen by supporting agencies.''

WTF is that supposed to mean? Not only did we fail to use the most up to date data available , but the out of date data we did use isn't endorsed by the Queensland Government either! WTF.