GTP - Great Southern Plantations
- Thread starter Rafa
- Start date
In normal day today cirumstances possibly yes giving the benefit of the doubt.
BUT the management have a duty of care to properly inform voters and now do people who voted yes on this are they aware of this on this date 13th January 2009 ,thats six days to vote.
I do not argue about other peoples assets and we are not debating or speculating .If the ATO is basing the ruling on 50 cents,i assume managemt had plenty of time prior to this date to inform people voting.
If it were $0.17 or the VWAP ($0.2845), then there wouldn't be a risk in the IE's opinion.
The fact that the IE has qualified its report suggests that there is a risk, and that that risk is that the ATO will consider the issue price to be $0.50
GSMAL directors rely on the integrity of the IE's report to support their advice to MIS holders.
The IE's updated reports have been published by GS (MIS investors informed, duty of care performed). It's up to the individual MIS investor to read and interpret (or get independent advice)
- Joined
- 3 January 2009
- Posts
- 12
- Reactions
- 0
'“We note the adoption of the notional issue price (ie VWAP of 28.45 cents) as the basis for setting the value of the consideration received for taxation purposes has NOT been confirmed by the Australian Tax Office (ATO) and therefore there remains a risk that the ATO will seek to adopt an alternative amount for its purposes”.
Translated this means that the ATO could consider the issue price of GS shares to be 50 cents/share; tax at 46.5% in this scenario would be 23.25 cents/share.' SDE QUOTE.
Extraordinary !!
In other words,should your tax rate be at the top end of the scale, then you MAY be assessed at 23.25c even though you only received 17c (at today's price) .You will actually PAY 6.25C more than you received to give up your timber or trees!! And we have the IE and the Independent Directors saying that this is fair and reasonable for all schemes bar one. You would think that this critical point would need to be clarified before a vote as it is very significant.
Surely this alone for legal action against the IDs. We know ASIC will do nothing.
Maybe Investor 1 can provide the companies response.
Translated this means that the ATO could consider the issue price of GS shares to be 50 cents/share; tax at 46.5% in this scenario would be 23.25 cents/share.' SDE QUOTE.
Extraordinary !!
In other words,should your tax rate be at the top end of the scale, then you MAY be assessed at 23.25c even though you only received 17c (at today's price) .You will actually PAY 6.25C more than you received to give up your timber or trees!! And we have the IE and the Independent Directors saying that this is fair and reasonable for all schemes bar one. You would think that this critical point would need to be clarified before a vote as it is very significant.
Surely this alone for legal action against the IDs. We know ASIC will do nothing.
Maybe Investor 1 can provide the companies response.
- Joined
- 3 January 2009
- Posts
- 12
- Reactions
- 0
It is clear from reading the original Independent Taxation Opinion from KPMG that tax is assessed at the VWAP.So ,probably, tax will be assessed on the 28.45c .So we could be paying 13.23c in tax for our 17c share.
My original figure was not correct.
My original figure was not correct.
- Joined
- 15 November 2008
- Posts
- 31
- Reactions
- 0
From the look of things, this will only be an issue if there is a landslide of voting this week in favour of the proposal. My interpretation is that the GTP Board seem to think this is unlikely.
Reading back through the prospectus, it would appear that even those who voted yes to individual offers, can still write to GTP 10 calendar days after the shareholder meeting and instruct GTP to withdraw their acceptances.
I assume whatever you are assessed on will be the cost base for the shares for tax purposes. But you better consult your accountant or tax adviser.
So in the future or even this year, should the shares be sold for less than that amount, the amount of any loss may possibly be utilised to reduce the tax payable on either CGT gains or revenue gains subject to your specific circumstances.
Consult your accountant or tax adviser. Possibly, for some of you, should a loss occur, maybe the sale of the shares could generate a tax deduction rather than a CGT loss.
So in the future or even this year, should the shares be sold for less than that amount, the amount of any loss may possibly be utilised to reduce the tax payable on either CGT gains or revenue gains subject to your specific circumstances.
Consult your accountant or tax adviser. Possibly, for some of you, should a loss occur, maybe the sale of the shares could generate a tax deduction rather than a CGT loss.
I wasn't suggesting that your figure was incorrect. I am pointing to advice from KPMG contained in its updated 12 Jan 09 IE report.
I also note that the original taxation opinion from KPMG contained this qualification (page 3)
"It is open to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) to take an alternative view in relation to the determination of the market value of Investors’ interests in the Project, however we consider that the better view is that the market value of the interests in the Project will be equal to the
Consideration".
Of course the usual, "no responsibility" disclaimer is provided (page 9)
"We are, of course, unable to give any guarantee that our interpretation will ultimately be sustained in the event of challenge by the Australian Commissioner of Taxation".
Which leads to the following question:
Is the consideration 50 cents/share (GSL's position), the VWAP (28.45 cents/share) or current market price (17 cents/share)?
Investors have already had their 100% write off on this investment. A second bite at the cherry Investor1?
Well...it seems i can't read fast enough to keep up with the posts but felt it was important enough to point out one little thing. Investor1 is entitled to have an opinion that is not in keeping with the general consensus of this forum.
We're all trying to work out what is right for us, and whilst Investor1 has strong opinions to vote yes, i think it is rather rash for any of us to assume that he is an employee/director of Great Southern, or any other assumption about his position as an investor we might make. Likewise for Investor1 to assume that GrumpyOlMan has some sort of secret knowledge...
At the end of the day, for him to vote yes is his choice. Whether we agree or not agree. And in some ways it is good to see another opinion, even if we don't like it. Who knows something he says may twig another thought that leads us all down the right path to understanding what is happening.
As for me, I own '06 Cattle. I can't comment on the trees at all, but am really worried about my investment in '07 trees after all of this. For me, it looks like my poor cows are going to be taken from me, whether i like it or not, and then sold off down the track to boost the company profit line. This appears to be happening whether i vote no or not. At least some of you have a bit more choice with more people choosing to vote no.
My gut feel is that with the more recent investors, the investments were made in a time of boom, and out of need to reduce tax debts. Having received the tax incentives then the offer comes out just under even. For some people this may have got them out of a sticky situation a couple of years ago, and hey...what's a few dollars now that the situation has changed. I'm currently kissing my retirement plans goodbye as i watch all this unfold, as I'm assuming many other interested parties are. Beware though, it will be the investors that are not that far up the retirement tree that will cop a loss and be happy to take a loss this year, only to make it up in another year.
For the sake of this forum let's not forget that we're all trying to look after our own bottom lines, and for each of us that is a different scenario. In my humble opinion it would take a really silly person to sell shares straight after receiving them without giving the shares time to appreciate, if that is in any way possible. I do agree that there could potentially be a flood of shares onto the market within the next six months to cover tax debts etc. Being forced to take shares, I'm planning to at least ride out for a while to assess the market and see if there is a small glimmer that i may come out better off than it looks like i'll be by the end of Jan.
If only I could go and collect my cows and take them home...
We're all trying to work out what is right for us, and whilst Investor1 has strong opinions to vote yes, i think it is rather rash for any of us to assume that he is an employee/director of Great Southern, or any other assumption about his position as an investor we might make. Likewise for Investor1 to assume that GrumpyOlMan has some sort of secret knowledge...
At the end of the day, for him to vote yes is his choice. Whether we agree or not agree. And in some ways it is good to see another opinion, even if we don't like it. Who knows something he says may twig another thought that leads us all down the right path to understanding what is happening.
As for me, I own '06 Cattle. I can't comment on the trees at all, but am really worried about my investment in '07 trees after all of this. For me, it looks like my poor cows are going to be taken from me, whether i like it or not, and then sold off down the track to boost the company profit line. This appears to be happening whether i vote no or not. At least some of you have a bit more choice with more people choosing to vote no.
My gut feel is that with the more recent investors, the investments were made in a time of boom, and out of need to reduce tax debts. Having received the tax incentives then the offer comes out just under even. For some people this may have got them out of a sticky situation a couple of years ago, and hey...what's a few dollars now that the situation has changed. I'm currently kissing my retirement plans goodbye as i watch all this unfold, as I'm assuming many other interested parties are. Beware though, it will be the investors that are not that far up the retirement tree that will cop a loss and be happy to take a loss this year, only to make it up in another year.
For the sake of this forum let's not forget that we're all trying to look after our own bottom lines, and for each of us that is a different scenario. In my humble opinion it would take a really silly person to sell shares straight after receiving them without giving the shares time to appreciate, if that is in any way possible. I do agree that there could potentially be a flood of shares onto the market within the next six months to cover tax debts etc. Being forced to take shares, I'm planning to at least ride out for a while to assess the market and see if there is a small glimmer that i may come out better off than it looks like i'll be by the end of Jan.
If only I could go and collect my cows and take them home...
- Joined
- 28 October 2008
- Posts
- 8,609
- Reactions
- 39
Investor1 has stated that he/she is a shareholder in GTP.
If Invostor1 feels the need to lobby MIS investors to vote yes then the best advice I can offer is to sell his/her holding in GTP and invest the proceeds in something in which he/she has greater confidence.
If Invostor1 feels the need to lobby MIS investors to vote yes then the best advice I can offer is to sell his/her holding in GTP and invest the proceeds in something in which he/she has greater confidence.
I am sure you all read the announcement today. They don't have 75% in any projects and it is highly unlikely that this position is going to change significantly between now and vote date. That means the proposal is dead!!! no more debate on the yes v no vote, it is dead, dead, dead. Because the offer was crap, crap, crap. Simple.
Would Great Southern have been better off if the offer was successful? Read the financial report the company is a certified basket case of course it would have been better off.
Would scheme holder have been better off if the offer was successful? Not with the offer that was proposed. The numbers just don't added up, get out your calculators and do your own sums, the offer was ludicrous.
Would a combined company become a strong diversifed agribusiness company? Any company that is managed as badly as Great Southern is never going to be classified as strong. Eventually all the profits would be sucked out via the executive salaries.
What should be the next move? Growers should get together and get their schemes as far away from Great Southern and the GS corporate structure as they possibly can. This will help, to some degree, insulate them from the impending liquidation process. I think setting up a new RE would be a very simple process.
Would Great Southern have been better off if the offer was successful? Read the financial report the company is a certified basket case of course it would have been better off.
Would scheme holder have been better off if the offer was successful? Not with the offer that was proposed. The numbers just don't added up, get out your calculators and do your own sums, the offer was ludicrous.
Would a combined company become a strong diversifed agribusiness company? Any company that is managed as badly as Great Southern is never going to be classified as strong. Eventually all the profits would be sucked out via the executive salaries.
What should be the next move? Growers should get together and get their schemes as far away from Great Southern and the GS corporate structure as they possibly can. This will help, to some degree, insulate them from the impending liquidation process. I think setting up a new RE would be a very simple process.
- Joined
- 14 November 2008
- Posts
- 128
- Reactions
- 0
anther announcement?!?!?!.....GTP, do not ask for whom the bell tolls.... it tolls for thee 
hehehehehe
gtp is doomed... doomed i tell ya. a "chicken little moment" is coming for the directors. and the shareholders.
i own the trees. i am fine. when GTP goes under, my woolots will be sold to another management company that will have to work in our best interests. there are plenty around and this will be organised by the liquidators. liquidators who will be paid by the sale of GTP assets.
lucky i dont own GTP. those liquidators will be exensive.
i own the trees and i bet if i sold them as firewood id get more moeny then GTP is offering. noone can take our trees, management rights will be given to the best offer so i am confident we will get a good return on the trees. especially considering that in 2 years time the economy will be booming.
as for GTP, well they have sooooo much debt and it will sink them. they will never sell any MIS again so its "hasta la adios" for them.
looks liek "investor1" finished the GTP training course in the enlgish language.... the ability to turn a word into a paragraph and yet avoid sayign anything. bringing up non issues and turnign them into arguments for voting yes.
guys if anyone hoenstly thought the share offer was good, they would take the shares and keep hush hush to avoid everyone getting shares. you dont talk up shears before you buy them do you????
so he clearly has more shares then MIS. and i extend my condolences to him.
worst case scenario..... noone offeres to manage the trees..... i will open a management company to manage the trees. mate they are trees..... you just insure them and watch them grow... its not your mothers tomato garden where oyu have to talk to them to see them grow
its like making jack daniels whiskey on thise adds, you just sit there and play chess for 5 years. management companies that have grand plans and do too much go bankrupt very quickly. as we are seeing right now.
our land is leased till harvest so its no problem.
as for negotiating a price and contracts.... lol... people we are highly educated investors and citizens of the 1st world. we have organieed functioning government, our cities have infrastructure and enough food to eat. one of the richest countries on the planet. i am sure we can organise the sale of timber to someone in japan or china or europe.
we arent sheep to be led around by some crook who tells us stories of gloom and offeres us peanuts for a very valuable investment. the same investment he will sell to get out of his won debt hole!!
i have more faith in any of you here today to deal with my trees then GTP. lets be optimistic about a post GTP future.
hehehehehegtp is doomed... doomed i tell ya. a "chicken little moment" is coming for the directors. and the shareholders.
i own the trees. i am fine. when GTP goes under, my woolots will be sold to another management company that will have to work in our best interests. there are plenty around and this will be organised by the liquidators. liquidators who will be paid by the sale of GTP assets.
lucky i dont own GTP. those liquidators will be exensive.
i own the trees and i bet if i sold them as firewood id get more moeny then GTP is offering. noone can take our trees, management rights will be given to the best offer so i am confident we will get a good return on the trees. especially considering that in 2 years time the economy will be booming.
as for GTP, well they have sooooo much debt and it will sink them. they will never sell any MIS again so its "hasta la adios" for them.
looks liek "investor1" finished the GTP training course in the enlgish language.... the ability to turn a word into a paragraph and yet avoid sayign anything. bringing up non issues and turnign them into arguments for voting yes.
guys if anyone hoenstly thought the share offer was good, they would take the shares and keep hush hush to avoid everyone getting shares. you dont talk up shears before you buy them do you????
so he clearly has more shares then MIS. and i extend my condolences to him.
worst case scenario..... noone offeres to manage the trees..... i will open a management company to manage the trees. mate they are trees..... you just insure them and watch them grow... its not your mothers tomato garden where oyu have to talk to them to see them grow
its like making jack daniels whiskey on thise adds, you just sit there and play chess for 5 years. management companies that have grand plans and do too much go bankrupt very quickly. as we are seeing right now.
our land is leased till harvest so its no problem.
as for negotiating a price and contracts.... lol... people we are highly educated investors and citizens of the 1st world. we have organieed functioning government, our cities have infrastructure and enough food to eat. one of the richest countries on the planet. i am sure we can organise the sale of timber to someone in japan or china or europe.
we arent sheep to be led around by some crook who tells us stories of gloom and offeres us peanuts for a very valuable investment. the same investment he will sell to get out of his won debt hole!!
i have more faith in any of you here today to deal with my trees then GTP. lets be optimistic about a post GTP future.
There was an earlier post, which I can't find at the moment, referring to a 5 or 10% yes vote from investors to change RE for a project. So if it was required then we get a list of investors and write to ask them. eg. John Woodruff has a list of 17000 of the 42000 investors in the 2000 project and wrote to them.
Changing RE may not be that difficult. It would just have to be explained to investors clearly before the vote. Something GSL seem unable to do. Their 191 and 60 page explanations only made me wonder why if its a good deal why does it take more than 3 or 4 pages to explain. Of course the fine print on page 135 or so tells you why its not.
Also, in all those pages it does say that only projects up to 2003 were chosen due to the ATO requiring growers to have MIS investments for 4 years to keep their initial tax deduction. I read that as meaning the 2004 and successive projects will be targeted in future years. So if you're in them keep your eyes open!
Changing RE may not be that difficult. It would just have to be explained to investors clearly before the vote. Something GSL seem unable to do. Their 191 and 60 page explanations only made me wonder why if its a good deal why does it take more than 3 or 4 pages to explain. Of course the fine print on page 135 or so tells you why its not.
Also, in all those pages it does say that only projects up to 2003 were chosen due to the ATO requiring growers to have MIS investments for 4 years to keep their initial tax deduction. I read that as meaning the 2004 and successive projects will be targeted in future years. So if you're in them keep your eyes open!
Hi All,
I am so pleased that you as an MIS investor group have started thinking about what you should do next.
The issue you have is still fundamentally with the management. (I.e. discussions to replace the responsible entity). You can always replace the management if you get control of 50% of the shares.
I am not sure which MIS manager is in that much a better financial position than Great Southern. Maybe not Timbercorp?
Regarding some views you can do a better job than Great Southern in managing your trees, I can accept that statement provided you are happy with your decision to invest in the first place with Great Southern rather than an alternative manager. Consistently good decisions are required from now on.
Based upon individual acceptances, the MIS investors will be getting a significant shareholding in GTP. Maybe they can arrange a change of management if that is required.
I think it is important for you to form a group of MIS representatives and begin to explore your options.
Maybe, taking control of Great Southern is an option?
Is Great Southern really insolvent?
Another question I have, how many of you have actually read the Scheme Constitution, Management Agreement or Lease Agreement, etc?
I am so pleased that you as an MIS investor group have started thinking about what you should do next.
The issue you have is still fundamentally with the management. (I.e. discussions to replace the responsible entity). You can always replace the management if you get control of 50% of the shares.
I am not sure which MIS manager is in that much a better financial position than Great Southern. Maybe not Timbercorp?
Regarding some views you can do a better job than Great Southern in managing your trees, I can accept that statement provided you are happy with your decision to invest in the first place with Great Southern rather than an alternative manager. Consistently good decisions are required from now on.
Based upon individual acceptances, the MIS investors will be getting a significant shareholding in GTP. Maybe they can arrange a change of management if that is required.
I think it is important for you to form a group of MIS representatives and begin to explore your options.
Maybe, taking control of Great Southern is an option?
Is Great Southern really insolvent?
Another question I have, how many of you have actually read the Scheme Constitution, Management Agreement or Lease Agreement, etc?
- Joined
- 3 January 2009
- Posts
- 12
- Reactions
- 0
I recommend a read of the GTP 2008 Annual Report that was released on 29th December (funny that)
An appalling result with a loss of $63.8m (2007 Profit $71.5m).Dividends cut but remuneration packages increase.Financing costs up to $71m.A worthy read for those punters (like me,sadly) that are likely to end up with shares in a company that does not look likely to survive. But I may be wrong again.
An appalling result with a loss of $63.8m (2007 Profit $71.5m).Dividends cut but remuneration packages increase.Financing costs up to $71m.A worthy read for those punters (like me,sadly) that are likely to end up with shares in a company that does not look likely to survive. But I may be wrong again.
