GTP - Great Southern Plantations

[So_Cynical]

This is fast turning into another ABC learning, Babcock n Brown, Storm Financial, Timbercorp...etc thread.

Financial advisers are there to put money in there own pockets..not yours.

Blind Freddy could see that these schemes are about profiting from investors, not the asset.

 

[wooduk]

This is fast turning into another ABC learning, Babcock n Brown, Storm Financial, Timbercorp...etc thread.

Financial advisers are there to put money in there own pockets..not yours.

Blind Freddy could see that these schemes are about profiting from investors, not the asset.

hind sight is a wonderful thing it would be great if you could elaborate on a scenario as to where the shareholders are left and the hard heads that told GTP and GSM toget stuffed on their ponzy trainwreck deal



:headshake

 

[irenebrisbane]

Maybe so, but I also wouldn't mind the name of a good solicitor to take my financial adviser to task.

 

[oldblue]

Perhaps you could get Slater and Gordon interested on a "no win, no fee" basis?

Otherwise, I'd be very wary about throwing good money after bad, unless you have a very large amount at stake and very deep pockets.

 

[pist'n broke]

Otherwise, I'd be very wary about throwing good money after bad, unless you have a very large amount at stake and very deep pockets.

Exactly my sentiments. I consider my woodlot investments as down the crapper, lesson learnt, get over it, SOB!
I am neither willing nor able to waste more good money, not even Dennis & Co. Sacking the FA did not cost anything and felt good.
Legal procedures are heavily biased towards the deeper pockets.
No use in throwing the law at the Great Southern Cattle Rustlers. GTP will go t1ts up long before anything is decided.
Don't send in the clowns, this is a job for pest exterminators.

 

[irenebrisbane]

I don't know; is 100k a lot of money to lose? It gets up my nose that our f/a should get away without a scratch while we are out of pocket to that amount; poof, a puff of smoke; one day in our pocket, next gone. It doesn't relate solely to GTP

 

[drsmith]

I consider my woodlot investments as down the crapper, lesson learnt, get over it, SOB!

With Timbercorp in administration it will be interesting to see what their properties are sold for and to what extent those valuations impact on Great Southern's balance sheet.

If Great Southern goes belly up as well at least then they won't be able to chip away at the woodlot investers assets year after year and there's also the prospect the timber will still be worth something.

Now would be a good to review the woodlot PDS's to see what is in there regarding the responsible entity (GTP) going into administration and to consider the alternatives for management/harvest.

GTP going belly up does not necessarily equate to all value being lost for woodlot investors.

 

[wooduk]

With Timbercorp in administration it will be interesting to see what their properties are sold for and to what extent those valuations impact on Great Southern's balance sheet.

GTP going belly up does not necessarily equate to all value being lost for woodlot investors.

Agree Dr.Smith the trees will still be there,the land will still be there,the loans for the tree lots investment will still be there,CPI and inflation will still be there.
The key to all of this is how much bottle YOU have in determining on holding or accepting a deal?
Remembering this,that you invested for 10 years and in the 11th the trees are harvested
what was your expectation on returns after duration of time,5,10,15,20% per annum?,or double your money on what was invested originally?

Obviously a new entity will take us over and most probabaly overseas,as the economic crisis will keep local entrants out as our $A (Sth Pacific Peso)falls and with recession a distant memory by late next year at the most,realistic profitable returns will eventuate.

In the mean time let GTP sink and start a new page at keeping the new entity on their toes

Step 1/ liquidation of GTP

Step2/Gut GTP for what we can get

 

[Fatcat]

Oh how I miss Investor1 and his enjoyable, albeit twisted, takes on what a great job GTP management were doing. If you are out there PLEASE give us an update on how you see recent developments.

 

[Julia]

I don't know; is 100k a lot of money to lose? It gets up my nose that our f/a should get away without a scratch while we are out of pocket to that amount; poof, a puff of smoke; one day in our pocket, next gone. It doesn't relate solely to GTP

Irene, the reality is that the FA will almost certainly have given you some document which somewhere said that he could not be held responsible for decisions you make. i.e. he may have advised you that you would make vast amounts and be the most successful investor ever, but there would be a rider declining responsibility on his part.

How you're feeling is very understandable, but unless you have something clear in writing from him guaranteeing an outcome, it's hard to imagine you'd be doing anything other than wasting more money by pursuing it in legal avenues.

 

[irenebrisbane]

Thanks, Julia, you're probably right. I will go through the paperwork and see if there is anything that might hold him to task, but as you suggest, probably not. Damnation.

 

[wooduk]

Oh how I miss Investor1 and his enjoyable, albeit twisted, takes on what a great job GTP management were doing. If you are out there PLEASE give us an update on how you see recent developments.

Did not people wake up and realise that what investor 1 was,remember back statements asking investor 1 if at arm length of GTP and GSM,and remember the financial adviser from the that group of advisers that had the mail out paid by GTP.

He would surely be wetting himself,especially including investor1.LOL

At the end of the day,it seems to me that you are resigned to fate have it's way,


I remember a saying and very true it is quote--


Dare to struggle,dare to win,if you don't fight you lose!

 

[SDE]

Irene, the reality is that the FA will almost certainly have given you some document which somewhere said that he could not be held responsible for decisions you make. i.e. he may have advised you that you would make vast amounts and be the most successful investor ever, but there would be a rider declining responsibility on his part.

How you're feeling is very understandable, but unless you have something clear in writing from him guaranteeing an outcome, it's hard to imagine you'd be doing anything other than wasting more money by pursuing it in legal avenues.

Not entirely correct.

The FA has a duty of care to the client.

That includes adequately researching the products that are recommended to clients.

This research would go beyond looking at the glossy brochure and the 10-15% commission that the FA receives for directing clients to MIS produts that GS sells.

For instance, even the most basis research would have revealed that the assumption of 250 m3/hectare of woodchips was wrong. The 1994 project, harvested in 2004, achieved only 150 m3/ha. This harvest result was "salted" by GS from its own resources to 250 m3/ha. The most basis of enquiries by the FA would have revealed this.

The advice that FA's provided may well prove to be negligent and therefore actionable. No waiver can excuse negligent action by FA's (Look at the Storm Financial class action)

 

[dudmis]

A couple of phone calls re my MIS investment. Slater & Gordon not interested as "GTP has stench of death about it" (too small for them), but another promising response. If case is won (they're sure it will be) re misleading claims (including claim of 250/ha), it will trigger claims for other years. But as pressure mounts and more MIS investors become aware of situation the heat may trigger an "abandon ship" situation...Can the Directors be liable in this situation? Could their assets be seized? Bottom line.. it looks like my MIS money has gone down the drain with this crowd.

 

[SDE]

Thanks, Julia, you're probably right. I will go through the paperwork and see if there is anything that might hold him to task, but as you suggest, probably not. Damnation.

Irene

Thought you might find this interesting

Source http://www.tresscox.com.au/resources/resource.asp?id=379

What steps should be taken to avoid misleading and deceptive conduct?

Generally, there are six steps to the financial advice process. These are:

1. Establishing and defining the advice relationship;
2. Gathering client data (including goals);
3. Analysing and evaluating the client’s current financial status;
4. Developing and presenting recommendations and/or alternatives;
5. Implementing the recommendations; and
6. Monitoring the recommendations.

In addition to these six steps, there are other forms of financial advice engagement. For example, some clients may ask their advisor to provide recommendations, but then go to another financial services provider for implementation of those recommendations. Other clients may ask their advisor for implementation of specific investments or strategies. Another client may ask their advisor to review only one aspect of his or her financial situation, such as estate issues or insurance needs.

Regardless of the type of financial advice engagement that is established, in these difficult times a licensee must now ensure that a representative’s statements of fact or opinion are not motivated by a desire to maintain clients, increase trading volume or cause the value of a particular security to increase. Any failure to do so could result in a claim being made (ie being sued by the client) or trigger ASIC’s interest (misleading or deceptive conduct).

It is therefore paramount that a licensee has in place the necessary systems and procedures which ensure that any statements of fact or opinion, whether generated internally or externally, can be appropriately qualified according to the strength of the source.

As part of any internal controls, a licensee should therefore ensure that its programs are regularly reviewed so responsible officers and representatives meet the designated standards of competency and relevant educational qualifications and experience.

As far as external sources are concerned, controlling the release of false and misleading information is a little more difficult. It is well known that some companies can release or present information in an over-optimistic manner, in order to generate interest in the company’s securities in a volatile market. In some instances, this includes unrealistic, unsubstantiated or incorrect data, projections or evaluations.

When this type of ‘hype and dump’ demand is generated by false information, licensees must ensure that before any endorsement is made, it is carefully reviewed and assessed or, if this is not possible, the necessary reasonable qualifications are given. In line with this, there should also be in place a strong emphasis on dispute resolution processes (both internal and external) in order to promote consumer confidence in information from external sources.

http://www.tresscox.com.au/resources/resource.asp?id=379

No doubt your FA followed all the steps in the process and did independent research to confirm some of GS's more outlandish claims (eg 250 m3/ha). Negligence on the part of an FA is not excused by a waiver!

Hope this helps

 

[Fatcat]

Despite being burnt badly by the clowns/thieves at GTP, I'm still keen to look at agribusiness investments with a view to (legally) getting my tax obligation down. TFC look interesting. Anyone have any experience with them? From their website it doesn't appear the pay large Financial Adviser commissions, so my current FA my try to hide this mob from me.
Fatcat

 

[toff]

Hi,

New here, so forgive me if I go a bit off topic...

Despite being burnt badly by the clowns/thieves at GTP, I'm still keen to look at agribusiness investments with a view to (legally) getting my tax obligation down. TFC look interesting. Anyone have any experience with them? From their website it doesn't appear the pay large Financial Adviser commissions, so my current FA my try to hide this mob from me.
Fatcat

If you want to know about commissions, don't go to the website. I'd suggest you read the PDS. TFS pays standard industry commissions of 10%. There is also the possibility of expense re-imbursements for costs outlayed, such as running seminars, etc. This must be disclosed by the licencee's representative anyway. Most advisers will only have a few projects they can recommend, so it is unlikely your adviser is hiding it from you. The Licencee needs to approve any project before its advisers can recommend it. It's not cost effective for licencees to recommend more than a handfull of projects. Consequently, your adviser is probably not licenced to give an opinion on random projects that are not approved, so he/she will simply focus on those products which are approved, and are deemed appropriate for your needs.

Research I have seen gives the TFS project an acceptable rating, but not the best. The research states that it's perhaps slightly better than a middle of the road project in terms of quality, value and corporate governance. In my experience, the best projects are run by forestry companies, not by investment companies in Macquarie Street. I have been a fan of both Gunns and Willmott Forests projects in the past. Less impressed with the new Willmott Forests project which has been shortened to investors' detriment.

 

[wooduk]

Hi,

New here, so forgive me if I go a bit off topic...



Ifinvestment companies in Macquarie Street. I have been a fan of both Gunns and Willmott Forests projects in the past. Less impressed with the new Willmott Forests project which has been shortened to investors' detriment.

Welcome toff,Iam also a keen fan of foerestry projects except for pinus radiata,because chipmunks eat pine cones not koalas.The question I would be interested is there such a company in this bloody country that could grow Aussie native gums that at the very least do minimal damge to the enviroment and can be commercially viable with returns that would take punters away from having shares in cigarette companies,fast food,or fuel polluting companies.?


Though I know the controversy on gunns,this is a fairdinkum question I stronglybelieve that it is possible,and I am sick and tired of the agri-bussiness being the poor cousin in this country

 

[Belrose]

Welcome toff,Iam also a keen fan of foerestry projects except for pinus radiata,because chipmunks eat pine cones not koalas.The question I would be interested is there such a company in this bloody country that could grow Aussie native gums that at the very least do minimal damge to the enviroment and can be commercially viable with returns that would take punters away from having shares in cigarette companies,fast food,or fuel polluting companies.?


Though I know the controversy on gunns,this is a fairdinkum question I stronglybelieve that it is possible,and I am sick and tired of the agri-bussiness being the poor cousin in this country

Very well said Wooduk, I truly hope that such a company emerges. Planting native trees on overused farmland sounded like such a great idea ...

 

[bv2726]

GTP have just announced a trading halt for two days pending a release from the company.

Its either good news or bad. (Very profound statement from me here).

I wonder if they have sold their cattle assets they stole...