BCS - BrisConnections Unit Trusts

[jim Byrnes]

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;



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:

i am very thank full for this . we have the fuel risk info that was resently put out but your info was spot on . we had not got to the 2006 as opposed to 2008 dats .many thanks

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:



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?

i am very thank full for this . we have the fuel risk info that was resently put out but your info was spot on . we had not got to the 2006 as opposed to 2008 dats .many thanks

 

[drsmith]

Jim,

I refer to your proposed unitholder meeting.

You are in control of approximately 15% and JAB_Charity may have 5% (yet to be confirmed). With Bolton/Williams (~20% holding) you are beating the drums of war (publically at least).

You obviously need their support so how do you hope to get your resolutions up at any such meeting ?

 

[jim Byrnes]

Jim,

I refer to your proposed unitholder meeting.

You are in control of approximately 15% and JAB_Charity may have 5% (yet to be confirmed). With Bolton/Williams (~20% holding) you are beating the drums of war (publically at least).

You obviously need their support so how do you hope to get your resolutions up at any such meeting ?

sun su
art of war

it will all become clear soon

i am gaged by my lawyers .
i am however able to say the three musketers moto prevails

 

[nathanblack]

3 muskateers?

you really believe if bolton/williams was offered money again by leighton or other to secure a vote of positive outcome for the project they wouldnt accept?

certainly meet with them and discuss strategy but never rely on anyone but yourself.

SORRY: i got the registered address of the hedge fund incorrect...damn journalists. Also i must admit that you have done everything you have promised, and if you have delivered thus far who am i to doubt the success of your legal battle. your obviously well informed and resourced.

goodluck. you already got some mum and dads off the hook now lets hope u can get them some compensation.

 

[drsmith]

It will be interesting to see if that motto becomes every man for himself when/if the next bag of money drops.

That I imagine is what Leighton/Macquarie will be hoping for as they will want to divide the major rebel unitholders to minimise potential damage. Part of their battle strategy I suspect will remain divide and conquer. It's worked once allready.

For JAD/Jim/(NB & JHW) it's about them all being actually convinced that their best prospect for riches is a united strategy.

 

[Macquack]

goodluck. you already got some mum and dads off the hook now lets hope u can get them some compensation.

I started off feeling sorry for the "mum and dad" investors who unknowingly bought in at 0.1 cents and with an investment of just $500 incurred a debt of $1 million.

Now, if this group of "mum and Dad" investors have escaped possible bankruptcy by off loading their shares to Bolton, Barrow or Byrnes, then good luck to them.

However, I dont see how this group should be rewarded for their incompetance by way of a compensation payout.

 

[Prospector]

I started off feeling sorry for the "mum and dad" investors who unknowingly bought in at 0.1 cents and with an investment of just $500 incurred a debt of $1 million.

Now, if this class of "mum and Dad" investors have escaped possible bankruptcy by off loading their shares to Bolton, Barrow or Byrnes, then good luck to them.

However, I dont see how this group should be rewarded for their incompetance by way of a compensation payout.

What exactly would they receive compensation for though? I agree, no compensation is warranted.

 

[Macquack]

What exactly would they receive compensation for though? I agree, no compensation is warranted.

There was a lot of "pain and suffering" involved initially when they realised what they had done.

 

[Prospector]

There was a lot of "pain and suffering" involved initially when they realised what they had done.

Ah, but you dont get compensated for pain and suffering. Just for actual loss or potential loss. You dont suppose they could get it because they had to give away their shares?

 

[Enzyme]

i am very thank full for this . we have the fuel risk info that was resently put out but your info was spot on . we had not got to the 2006 as opposed to 2008 dats .many thanks

I've re-read the links I posted, and think I need to clarify. Firtsy, I might have quoted Briscon out of context. Secondly, I can't absolutely prove from the PDS or the Briscon response to the criticisms that they used the 2006 Transport facts report instead of the 2008 report.

To recap, the criticism of the forecast is here, and the brisconnections response is here.

The first criticism is that "1. Queensland Transport Facts 2008 was published in May 2008. Why is it not being made available to the public like previous versions?"

Well, I know the answer to that now. That report is subject to copyright, and is available for a fee. Brisconnections can't make it public. Only the author can.

So if Brisconnections were responding to that specific criticism, then their response of "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." might be reasonable. It is not well worded, as they should have said it is up to the author to make it public, but their response could be reasonable.

That said, the Brisconnections response to the other criticisms seems evasive. There is a specific criticism that they used the 2006 Transport Facts report. Their response mentions both the 2006 and the 2008 reports, but it specifically doesn't say what they used.

There is a specific criticism that Arup used a 2004 baseline for Vehicle Kilometers Travelled (VKT), which ignored an 8% decline in that figure over the next three years. That criticism is not responded to by Brisconnections.

That 2004 baseline could have been based on the 2004/2005 transport facts report - the out of date report I referred to - but I can't tell for sure from the PDS.

Have a close look at the article containing the criticisms of the traffic forcasts. See what you can verify. It could be worth checking with the Journalist who wrote the story. It also mentioned "Sydney University's Dr John Goldberg" as a critic of the traffic forcasts. It could be worth talking to him as he should know a lot more about traffic forecasts than you or I, and he could be the origin of the criticisms in that article. He might be able to expand on those for you.

 

[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.

I too am curious about the above.

David seems to have disappeared. However, Jim, you have posted since the above entries so presumably have read requests from drsmith and myself.

Could you kindly answer, please?
Thank you.

 

[sails]

....mum and dads have been relieved of the burden of debt and jim/BTRL/New Hampton will now TRY to make a profit. ....

Julia, I understood Jim answered with this snippet above from one of his recent posts. Click on the blue arrow to read his whole post. If I've misunderstood, I'm sure Jim will correct...

 

[Enzyme]

Actually Jim, you really should try to have a chat with that Dr John Goldberg. From my five minutes Googling him I think it could really be worth your while to catch up with him, and I think he might really like to talk to you.

It seems as though he has been a long time critic of the Macquarie model for toll roads, and was questioning their viability on the 7:30 report back in 2005. It seems Macquarie didn't like that much and brought in some big guns to pressure his University into publicly disassociating him from the University: link.

Then I saw this comment from him (or at least someone on the internet using his name - you can never be sure) link:

I gave reasons why the IPO document for Brisconnections was misleading back in February 9, 2009 (AFR). This I consider is of major significance and I am pleased that ASIC now intends to investigate the financial model.

It sounds to me like he is no friend of either Macquarie or Brisconnections, but knows a thing or two about financial forecasting for toll roads. You really should catch up with him for a coffee and exchange some stories. I'd suggest trying to contact him through Sydney University.

 

[Julia]

Julia, I understood Jim answered with this snippet above from one of his recent posts. Click on the blue arrow to read his whole post. If I've misunderstood, I'm sure Jim will correct...

Perhaps I'm unreasonably influenced by the machiavellian twists and turns in this whole situation, but I don't find the post you refer to unequivocal.

How hard is it to just post a few words in clear answer to the question?

 

[stoxclimber]

New article on Jim and another director of BTRL in the Herald today. For a bunch of white knights, their background seems suprisingly black.


By the way, does BTRL have FIRB approval for a >15% stake? The Herald puts the stake at 15.2%.

 

[Sean K]

BrisConn $1.3bn claim reaches court
Scott Rochfort
April 27, 2009

THE BrisConnections debacle will make its Sydney courthouse debut this morning, where the banned company director Jim Byrnes will launch his $1.3 billion claim against the toll-road project and its adviser Macquarie Group.

 

[brty]

Let's see, playing devil's advocate here.

Sydney court case, judge decides case can proceed, Jim's mob asks for a stay of immediate $1 installment, judge agrees with ruling.

Macquarie/briscon/leighton need the next installment immediately or funding from other sources falls over.

Macq have no choice but to kill off court case by settling, ie buying out "Jim's mob".

This saga has lots of legs still, good to be only an observer from outside.

brty

 

[Macquack]

BrisConnections share deadline passes
Wednesday April 29, 2009, 5:16 pm
http://au.biz.yahoo.com/090429/31/260h7.html

Does anyone know why Jim Byrnes's claim for interlocutory relief to defer payment of the second installment was not pursued?

 

[drsmith]

Instalment defaults from the top 10 unitholders are expected to be $180m.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=awWiw5LJiiBw&refer=australia

Team ?? Williams(Bolton)/BTRL(Brynes) would comprise about $136m of that.

David,
If you are still following this thread, how many did you get into the charity in the end ?

 

[itsonlymoney]

Darn it....i knew I forgot to pay that bill today! Brisconn sent me a nice little reminder with a handy bpay option highlighted! As if I am going to bpay $670000 dollars by close of business.....I wonder do they take layby!!!