BCS - BrisConnections Unit Trusts

[Prospector]

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.

Is that true? You are calling them liars?

 

[prawn_86]

by the way jim your alter ego " metoo" is too obvious.

Be assured that ASF has very good multi-nic detection programs in place. However if you feel that soemthing has slipped passed, please report it to mods or admin, rather than possibly slandering an innocent user.

 

[jumala]

Is that true? You are calling them liars?

just more conspiracy stuff. jim transferred 9,981,509 has 15.2%. no statement from jab, hope he proves the theory wrong as well

 

[Prospector]

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.

So does that mean we did actually get it and metoo is not Jim's alter ego? Did I hear an apology happening here?

 

[jumala]

So does that mean we did actually get it and metoo is not Jim's alter ego? Did I hear an apology happening here?

btrl request for general meeting, appears that jim is serious hence an unreserved apology to jim. hope he has succes in his fight for unit holders

 

[Macquack]

BrisCon and Macquarie Group face $1 billion class action by BTRL
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,25380244-14334,00.html

BTRL, owned by US-based New Hampton Distressed Asset Fund, holds a 15.2 per cent stake in the troubled BrisConnections trust and filed the action with the federal court in Sydney today, representative Jim Byrnes told AAP.

Just to reinterate, 15.2% x 390 million units x $.0001 per unit consideration paid = a total investment of $592.80 by BTRL.

Jimbo Byrnes's BTRL pro rata claim for damages in the class action should be no more than $592.80 plus costs.

 

[nathanblack]

hi mac, that figure you mention is only a very rough calculation. as stated by jim share parcels under 500,000 would not be paid for, and owners must contribute to the class action fund $1000.

so of the 50mil odd shares some may have been purchased for zero consideration. in addition the class action is partially funded by theses smaller share holders.

 

[Absolutely]

hi mac, that figure you mention is only a very rough calculation. as stated by jim share parcels under 500,000 would not be paid for, and owners must contribute to the class action fund $1000.

so of the 50mil odd shares some may have been purchased for zero consideration. in addition the class action is partially funded by theses smaller share holders.

Think what Mac is saying is what damages has BTRL directly incurred without knowing it? Answer is zero. (Or all of $500 or so). They knowingly paid not much for shares which have a high liability attached to them which they are not prepared to pay.

The argument in court I guess is that BTRL (and others) relied on information contained in the PDS at time of purchase. That information is now going to be alleged to be deficient or wrong.

Still, if it is proven correct I'm not sure how you get a payout of a lot more then you originally contributed (with interest) plus the costs of the court action???? What else do they need to be compensated for?

Thinking through this, I guess if they can get all of the initial contribution back and they have got a lot of share holders on board with the class action they are asking for 33% of the total payout. Shareholders will get 66% of the original contribution back. So that makes sense provided they have got a lot of share holders signed up to the class action. Complicated. And they have got to win of course.

Good luck Jim. I'm cheering for you.

 

[Macquack]

Good luck Jim. I'm cheering for you.

Jim is no angel.

From Wikipedia

Jim Byrnes is an Australian businessman and convicted criminal, based in Sydney and specialising in property development and mortgage finance.

Byrnes served 18 months in jail starting in 1986 for malicious wounding and the supply of heroin. In 1992 he went bankrupt, owing A$8 million. In 1994 he assisted businessman Alan Bond in Bond's bankruptcy proceedings.

In 1998 Byrnes was disqualified by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) from the management of corporations in Australia, but he has continued to engage in business activities and allegedly accumulate unpaid debts.

Speculation continues over a fire at a house owned by Byrnes in the Sydney suburb of Woollahra in 1997. Two men, apparently employed by Byrnes at the time, were charged with arson. One, Max Gibson, died from a heroin overdose in 2001, and the other, Tony Vincent Jr, faced a trial which resulted in a hung jury. When Byrnes was disqualified by ASIC, Gibson had replaced him as director of his companies but was himself disqualified in 1999 due to a criminal record. In 2005 an inquest into Gibson's death heard allegations that Gibson had been murdered by underworld figures. In April 2006 Byrnes appeared at the inquest.

In recent times, Byrnes has attempted to act as a funder of commercial litigation. These attempts do not appear to have had much success as is evident by at least one judgment of the Supreme Court of NSW (see Bauhaus Pyrmont Pty Limited (in liq) [2006] NSWSC 543 per Mr Justice Austin). Indeed in that judgment, the Court notes that Mr Byrnes made demands for monetary payment by raising suggestions that involved threats of physical harm (judgment paragraph 78).

In September 2006, it was reported that Byrnes' Sydney auction business "Cromwells" located in Pyrmont was placed in administration

Also, what is "New Hampton Distressed Asset Fund"? A hedge fund? Try googleing it, no results except in relation to Brisconnections.

 

[Enzyme]

I'm still responding to Jim's request for comment on flaws in the PDS. I just didn't quite summarise where I was going with that line of argument in my previous posts. Trying to bring that together:

1. Briscon acknowledge in the PDS that traffic volume is a key risk of the project;

2. Briscon acknowledge (five times) in the PDS that fuel prices can affect traffic volume, including stating;

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. Any developments that reduce traffic volumes or inhibit the growth in traffic volumes on Airport Link could have a material adverse effect on BrisConnections’ financial condition and results of operations.

3. When preparing the critical traffic forecasts, Briscon (through Arup) used data from 2005/2006 when data for 2007/2008 was readily available. It wasn't free, but anyone could get it. This failure to use the up to date data is highly significant because:

a. Fuel prices had increased dramatically over the period of time covered by the new data. Though it was raised as a significant risk in the PDS and up to date data was available, the effect of higher fuel prices was ignored in the vital traffic forecasts and financial statements provided in the PDS;

b. Any change to the underlying assumptions can have significant material effect on Brisconnections financial condition. This information should be provided to shareholders.

Actually, on a close read you can see a complete disconnect between the PDS and Arup on fuel prices generally. It is obvious that the person(s) who wrote the Arup report (available in Section 10 of the PDS) never read Section 6 (Risks), and vice versa. Section 6 freely talks of the risks of higher fuel prices, but the Arup report in Section 10 shows that fuel prices played absolutely no part in the development of the traffic forecast. Brisconnections acknowledge fuel prices as a risk, but didn't even consider it in preparing their forecasts.

It could be worth getting your lawyers to have a close look at section 10 - the Arup report:

3 Key assumptions

In preparing traffic forecasts it is necessary to make a number of assumptions. This section sets out some of the key assumptions used in the APL Traffic Model. The assumptions adopted are considered reasonable given the data currently available at the time of the preparation of the traffic forecasts.

Given that we know they used data more than two years old when current data was available, that could be a bit of a fly in the ointment for them.

Another thing about the availability of the 2008 data: While it could cost up to $60k for a large company, the cost for a consulting firm like Arup would be a fraction of that. Google has also told me that anyone can access the report for free in the National Library in Canberra. It would only have cost a couple of hundred dollars in airfares to send someone to Canberra for the day to get what they needed. I haven't even bothered to check the various state libraries.

So Jim - how about some feeback. Had your lawyers found these issues?

 

[nathanblack]

Jim is no angel.

From Wikipedia



Also, what is "New Hampton Distressed Asset Fund"? A hedge fund? Try googleing it, no results except in relation to Brisconnections.

its a US owned hedge fund with a registered address which is same address as Jim Byrnes. Macquarie are questioning if it really exists. Bit irelevant anyway isnt it? anyone can raise $500 to purcharse 15% stake. and anyone can file for bankruptcy if the $1 call is enforced.

mum and dads have been relieved of the burden of debt and jim/BTRL/New Hampton will now TRY to make a profit. There option is hush money in the style Bolton recieved, or litigation which has begun.

The litigation path will be costly and possibly too late to avoid the $1 call. IF the litigation wins, BTRL will be entitled to very little as they lost very little due to negligence or not. I guess the real payout is in the 33% commission the will take on any payout IF they win. It is partially funded by shareholder contibutions to the litigation fund of $1000, so i guess little at risk for a potentially large reward.

I wish everyone luck in the litigation. 66% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Hopefully some of the claimants are original holders or i cant see a win legally.

if all else fails we can organise a baseball game.

 

[Julia]

Jim and David:

Can you unequivocally and categorically assure all the people from whom you have accepted/bought BCSCA shares that under no circumstances will they still be liable for either of the two $1 payments owing?

With thanks.

 

[Macquack]

if all else fails we can organise a baseball game.

Does Jimbo still have his trusty old baseball bat or was it confiscated by the police?

Bolton would make for a good "switch-hitter".

 

[yttrium]

Enzyme

I have been looking at the project on a comparative basis with other projects, considering parameters like construction cost per km, traffic volume, and annual revenue. For Brisconnections, you are looking at over $700 million per kilometre, compared with $100 million per kilometre for Melbourne's city link (completed 1999), and about $95 million per kilometre for Sydney's Eastern Distributor (completed 2000). Allowing for 4% inflation and assuming costs at 2012 prices, I find it hard to cost the Brisconnections project at more than $1.2 billion, or about 25% of its cost. Yet Brisconnections management are claiming that the project will deliver long term value to unit holders: Are they for real?

Yes, I'm jeering from the sidelines, but quite frankly I cannot see how this project wont collapse into a black hole of debt.

 

[nathanblack]

Enzyme

For Brisconnections, you are looking at over $700 million per kilometre, compared with $100 million per kilometre for Melbourne's city link (completed 1999), and about $95 million per kilometre for Sydney's Eastern Distributor (completed 2000).

Yes, I'm jeering from the sidelines, but quite frankly I cannot see how this project wont collapse into a black hole of debt.

is it funded by debt or shareholder equity? or a combination? even if some holders default isnt macquary and duetch liable as underwriters to make up the shortfall? they can then chase defaulters through court to get back whatever they can if thety deem worthwhile(cost and image).

also has there been a cost blowout or were investors aware of the cost in the PDS? i thought its running on cost and ahead of schedule? maybe $700mil/km has factored in cost over runs. i dont see them going broke.

 

[yttrium]

NathanBlack

My concern is twofold. One is that I wonder how many would have subscribed for units had a per kilometre cost comparison with other toll road projects been included in the PDS? Management are very enthusiastic, yet the project seems very expensive by this comparison. My other concern is the question of why Brisconnections believes that the project will raise enough revenue to pay off its debt? The only toll road in Australia generating the revenue that Brisconnections would require for this is the City Link toll road in Melbourne. This toll road is three times the size as Brisconnection's toll road, and services a population over twice the size.

Maybe there are parameters that would change my opinion, but from what I am looking at I cannot hold a favourable one.

 

[drsmith]

Jim and David:

Can you unequivocally and categorically assure all the people from whom you have accepted/bought BCSCA shares that under no circumstances will they still be liable for either of the two $1 payments owing?

With thanks.

I too am curious about the above.

 

[jim Byrnes]

Does Jimbo still have his trusty old baseball bat or was it confiscated by the police?

Bolton would make for a good "switch-hitter".

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


Macquack , clearly the name fits who your a spin doctor for .

Have been silent as i have been so dam busy.

Was a little disappointed that a few doubters have said UN kind things

So lets get the record straight.

I said BTRL would buy units
I said BTRL would transfer units

Look at the ASX announcement.

We have about 60m registered

So let's see who is full of it.

Said there would be a class action filed and lodged

Check the news, I did what I said.

Ok, some smarty thinks we did it to get a few bucks for the transfers

The legal bills for getting the transfers done so far where 5 times what we got paid.

So wake up to your self

Next, do you think that the class action is cheap?

Try, we have provisioned 1mil in legals for the next 90 days.

Please don’t second guess.

If you want to see the first claim filed and served send me an email and I will send it to you

People don’t sign up to be in the class action, wrong they are all in it ...that's the law in the federal court.

If they don’t want to be in it they apply to be released.

What does it cost them?

We don’t ask for or want 1c

The funder pays every penny needed

The funder gets his pound of flesh but lets be clear 66% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

And well ASIC are still sitting on the fence, no one else stepped up.

I did, and I am proud to say I have done everything I said I would

I asked for people's opinions and any information people had.

Well someone came forward and confirmed how they where pressured by Mac Bank day one.
They have an existing complaint to a regulatory which is going nowhere.

That’s what I want, more people coming forward.

I invite all present and past unit holders to attend the federal court in Sydney Tuesday .show your support and let the judge see that there is a support group. So far I have a large number of people willing to attend.

I even had a guy who wanted to arrange a rally and march on Anna Bligh and Macquarie Bank .

Well thanks for the support

Send me your email contacts if you want to receive up dates

Jim Byrnes

j.byrnes@alfpl.com

 

[drsmith]

is it funded by debt or shareholder equity? or a combination? even if some holders default isnt macquary and duetch liable as underwriters to make up the shortfall? they can then chase defaulters through court to get back whatever they can if thety deem worthwhile(cost and image).

also has there been a cost blowout or were investors aware of the cost in the PDS? i thought its running on cost and ahead of schedule? maybe $700mil/km has factored in cost over runs. i dont see them going broke.

I have not looked at the PDS in great detail but my understanding is roughly as follows,

Debt financing: ~3bn bank syndicate funding with payment of upcoming instalment from unitholders/underwriters.
Equity financing: ~1.2bn equity financing from initial float/subsequent unitholder instalments + equity finance from Leighton in exchange for units around the completion of the project (not sure exactly how much).

So, returns for unitholders are somewhat leveraged.

 

[jim Byrnes]

its a US owned hedge fund with a registered address which is same address as Jim Byrnes. Macquarie are questioning if it really exists. Bit irelevant anyway isnt it? anyone can raise $500 to purcharse 15% stake. and anyone can file for bankruptcy if the $1 call is enforced.

mum and dads have been relieved of the burden of debt and jim/BTRL/New Hampton will now TRY to make a profit. There option is hush money in the style Bolton recieved, or litigation which has begun.

The litigation path will be costly and possibly too late to avoid the $1 call. IF the litigation wins, BTRL will be entitled to very little as they lost very little due to negligence or not. I guess the real payout is in the 33% commission the will take on any payout IF they win. It is partially funded by shareholder contibutions to the litigation fund of $1000, so i guess little at risk for a potentially large reward.



Mate Sorry , just because a reporter got it wrong does not mean you should .

The Us company address is in New Hampshire
I am there Australian representitive , and yes there wholly owned company has a registered address and its not mine . do an asic search