Thats interesting Jonathon. Who contacted you? Was it the thieves at GS, or the banks directly? What GS scheme/smam were you "invested" in?
GTP - Great Southern Plantations
- Thread starter Rafa
- Start date
Thats interesting Jonathon. Who contacted you? Was it the thieves at GS, or the banks directly? What GS scheme/smam were you "invested" in?
my thoughts are that adel bank paid gtp 38 cents in the dollar for the debt
why dont you offer adel bank to pay off the balance at a final payment of38cents in the dollar which gtp and adel bank presumably thought was fair value.
if they dont accept, there is something shonky going on somewhere.
why dont you offer adel bank to pay off the balance at a final payment of38cents in the dollar which gtp and adel bank presumably thought was fair value.
if they dont accept, there is something shonky going on somewhere.
pascoe is completely wrong in directors were over-pricing of mis tree etc. investments
if overpriced should be something left for gtp share and debt holders.
that is unless (surely not ) there is a scam of the directors and executives in accessing the wealth of debt holders (gtpgb and gtpga) in addition to the wealth of the mis tax punters and all the other australian taxpayers.
and the shareholders in gtp voted for these directors to look after their hard-earned investment interests.
where was the auditor.
what is probability of issuance (when due) of true and fair accounts ( with auditors stamp) for the 6 month period ended 31/3/2009, which is due very shortly under asx listing rules. ditto for tim (6 months end 31/3/2009).
i have not yet seen any announcement of the gtp directors requesting suspension of gtp by the asx for the reason that the directors expect or have been told that the auditor will not sign off on 6 month accounts as presented by the gtp directors.
was the reason given by the gtp directors to the asx for the gtp suspension request the whole truth and nothing but the truth..
i could be wrong, the gtp directors (and their advisors) may possibly just be simply unqualified to be directors and are just incompetent.
holding gtpga , gtpgb - no other interest
if overpriced should be something left for gtp share and debt holders.
that is unless (surely not ) there is a scam of the directors and executives in accessing the wealth of debt holders (gtpgb and gtpga) in addition to the wealth of the mis tax punters and all the other australian taxpayers.
and the shareholders in gtp voted for these directors to look after their hard-earned investment interests.
where was the auditor.
what is probability of issuance (when due) of true and fair accounts ( with auditors stamp) for the 6 month period ended 31/3/2009, which is due very shortly under asx listing rules. ditto for tim (6 months end 31/3/2009).
i have not yet seen any announcement of the gtp directors requesting suspension of gtp by the asx for the reason that the directors expect or have been told that the auditor will not sign off on 6 month accounts as presented by the gtp directors.
was the reason given by the gtp directors to the asx for the gtp suspension request the whole truth and nothing but the truth..
i could be wrong, the gtp directors (and their advisors) may possibly just be simply unqualified to be directors and are just incompetent.
holding gtpga , gtpgb - no other interest
doctorj
Hatchet Moderator
- Joined
- 3 January 2005
- Posts
- 3,271
- Reactions
- 8
Some comments
1) I don't think you can make a strong argument that directors weren't qualified. I've met most of them on several occasions and they seem as competent as any directors i've met (and certainly considerably more so than a fair portion I've had the occasion to meet lately).
2) I don't think it was a scam (in a fraud sense), but rather a flawed business model that was exposed by a combination of falling land prices and reduced tree yield. The first and foremost thing to realise about Great Southern is they are actually a rural property company that had the goal of using cash flows from schemes to fund land purchases. Eventually the land bank would be sufficient to allow rotations of land to meet demand for the new schemes and then ultimately all the land would be debt free. When land prices started falling (reducing their ability to monetise the portfolio and increasing the strain on solvency) and demand for new schemes did not continue to grow (meaning they didn’t have the liquidity to cover it all over) the problems came to the fore.
3) It's not uncommon at all to have companies release reports at COB on ASX deadline day. ASX will suspend them automatically if the deadline isn't met if its not lodged by start of trading the following business day.
4) As for the auditors - they provided a qualified opinion when it became clear that their ability to continue as a going concern for the next 12 months was in doubt. Before then - auditors are not fortune tellers (any more than you are by the looks of it given your exposure) and only assess if the company is a going concern and if the accounts are materially correct.
Obviously your angry and stand to lose a chunk of money, but I think the issue is with the business model rather than anything untoward.
appreciate the comments.
paid est 15 cents in the dollar for gtpgb and may not lose on investment cost, unless account figures for assets as at 30 sept 2008 have the outcome of a shortfall of in excess of est. $500 million from the directors view of 30 sept 2008 values when assets realised. - that was my portfolio punt, i blame myself if lose. My fault that i left it too late (by about 2 weeks) to find out about and do something about hedgeing the gtpgb investment by short selling cfd in gtp.
investors in gtp mis have not lost significantly more than would have lost in other public share investments on asx (est. 40%) or they could have invested in gpt, bnb, mfs, allco ( after allowing for the tax deduction they have received). Unfortunate for them if they borrowed most of funds and have outstanding debt, but that is a matter for mis investors and their advisors - i expect that gtp offered to lend - gtp never forced any investor to borrow.
re the comments on yields (tonnages) , expect that this will not make a really significant difference to the final return ( and in agriculture 25% in yield variations/disappointments is not unusual at all and gtp could yet still defer the harvest or make a voluntary offer of extra timber from other sources as it has previously i believe and it would be in gtp's interests to do so, if it expected to sell future mis). This timber would be from gtp sources, not a ponzi scheme of "borrowed" undisclosed timber from other mis investors trees. Expect the returns are more sensitive to the prices received for the timber - i dont believe that any warranties were given by gtp on prices.
my thoughts are that the mis cattle investors who were compulsorily acquired for scrip ( not the mis acceptors (tree and cattle) of project transform who accepted willingly or advisedly after consulting their financial advisors) really copped it unfairly in the neck. Some still seem to have expected 100% of cost rather than 50% of cost which most other asx investors are presently experiencing from other investments.
given the uncertainties, 30 sept 2008 valuation procedures and assumptions used by the directors were aggressive and inappropriate given the auditors view as at that time. - ( an offence requiring sacking by shareholder vote or resignation - not hanging)
however full retribution should be expected if directors permitted costly related party transactions and nest feathering of directors, executives and associates which have cost shareholders and debt holders, particularly if after such time that it was obvious that asset values in accounts disclosed as at 30 sept 2008, were significantly different from reality and the business model was broken, or the directors have kept gtp going when it was obvious that all the equity had vanished and the directors themselves were in effect punting with debt funds (gtpga,gtpgb).
The directors dawdled in selling (non loan receivable) assets, or making any scrip issues.
The selling of loans receivable at 38 cents in the dollar by the directors was outrageous.
Investors in gtp after 30 sept 2008 accounts and audit report was released, when they looked at gtpga and gtpgb prices on asx, should have realised that they were in effect buying options in gtp , not shares.
hold gtpga,gtpgb
paid est 15 cents in the dollar for gtpgb and may not lose on investment cost, unless account figures for assets as at 30 sept 2008 have the outcome of a shortfall of in excess of est. $500 million from the directors view of 30 sept 2008 values when assets realised. - that was my portfolio punt, i blame myself if lose. My fault that i left it too late (by about 2 weeks) to find out about and do something about hedgeing the gtpgb investment by short selling cfd in gtp.
investors in gtp mis have not lost significantly more than would have lost in other public share investments on asx (est. 40%) or they could have invested in gpt, bnb, mfs, allco ( after allowing for the tax deduction they have received). Unfortunate for them if they borrowed most of funds and have outstanding debt, but that is a matter for mis investors and their advisors - i expect that gtp offered to lend - gtp never forced any investor to borrow.
re the comments on yields (tonnages) , expect that this will not make a really significant difference to the final return ( and in agriculture 25% in yield variations/disappointments is not unusual at all and gtp could yet still defer the harvest or make a voluntary offer of extra timber from other sources as it has previously i believe and it would be in gtp's interests to do so, if it expected to sell future mis). This timber would be from gtp sources, not a ponzi scheme of "borrowed" undisclosed timber from other mis investors trees. Expect the returns are more sensitive to the prices received for the timber - i dont believe that any warranties were given by gtp on prices.
my thoughts are that the mis cattle investors who were compulsorily acquired for scrip ( not the mis acceptors (tree and cattle) of project transform who accepted willingly or advisedly after consulting their financial advisors) really copped it unfairly in the neck. Some still seem to have expected 100% of cost rather than 50% of cost which most other asx investors are presently experiencing from other investments.
given the uncertainties, 30 sept 2008 valuation procedures and assumptions used by the directors were aggressive and inappropriate given the auditors view as at that time. - ( an offence requiring sacking by shareholder vote or resignation - not hanging)
however full retribution should be expected if directors permitted costly related party transactions and nest feathering of directors, executives and associates which have cost shareholders and debt holders, particularly if after such time that it was obvious that asset values in accounts disclosed as at 30 sept 2008, were significantly different from reality and the business model was broken, or the directors have kept gtp going when it was obvious that all the equity had vanished and the directors themselves were in effect punting with debt funds (gtpga,gtpgb).
The directors dawdled in selling (non loan receivable) assets, or making any scrip issues.
The selling of loans receivable at 38 cents in the dollar by the directors was outrageous.
Investors in gtp after 30 sept 2008 accounts and audit report was released, when they looked at gtpga and gtpgb prices on asx, should have realised that they were in effect buying options in gtp , not shares.
hold gtpga,gtpgb
- Joined
- 13 May 2009
- Posts
- 24
- Reactions
- 0
Initially GSP then Adelaide
Have spoken with the lawyers and they are looking at class actions (hinted at on GSP website)
Should be a fun ride
DoctorJ is partially right, however, as all MIS schemes are not market based and are skewed by a subsidy, in this case tax minimisation, and therefore not constrained by normal market forces GTP (and other MIS operators) bought land which without the subsidy and arguably even with the subsidy, was unsuited to bluegums in terms of soil type, rainfall and location (ie, distance from a mill). While GTP is not technically a Ponzi scheme, it did rely upon the influx of capital for new projects to to sustain the business model, at least until well into the second rotation. Further, when GTP extended its operations into horticulture and cattle it was almost a garuantee the govt (or any govt worth its salt for that matter), would implement measures to lessen the tax loss (I understand it is currently running at about $700m per annum). Think, you could have invested in hydrophonic strawberries in Qld.
doctorj
Hatchet Moderator
- Joined
- 3 January 2005
- Posts
- 3,271
- Reactions
- 8
I wasn't going to say it, but that's pretty much my thinking too and has been for quite some time.
As for your comments concerning the suitability of land, I'm not a botanist (or whatever it is that knows about trees), but I'd say the method of forecasting probably wasn't very sophisticated. Sure they could estimate mean rainfall for an area over the life of a tree and they knew that land in certain areas was generally decent for growing trees, but I doubt they had a sufficient data to model how that would translate into tree growth.
But really, that's an issue for scheme investors. For holders of debt / equity, the issue was a flawed business model and in an environment of higher risk premiums and falling land prices, I don't see how that's going to change.
The voluntary suspension is expected to end before trading opens on Monday (18th). The request said that the company expects to "make an announcment before the suspension is lifted".
Today is Friday...15th....
That implies today there should be some sort of announcment.
Waiting...waiting....
Today is Friday...15th....
That implies today there should be some sort of announcment.
Waiting...waiting....
After the debacle on previous tree investments and the intervention of govt. legislation prior to the previous govt cleaning or supposedly cleaning the industry up,it is obvious that it was not done let alone policed by the ATO.
As an investor you can only work on the due diligence of the information that is stated and remember the scathing report that Paton and Associates that was posted on ASF in relation to a34 page report to the then Treasurer Peter Costello and this happened AFTER I had invested in several of GTP's MIS investments.
Excuses of GFC and the taxation case that GTP won by the way,are NO excuses for the way this group went about its bussiness especially in project TRansformation
To make allowances for Aus stock and KMPG to state what they had said and the fact that one of the independent auditors blew GTP out of the water,about their returns and valuations was the crystalisation of the beginning of the end and the continual porky pies emanating from GTP,GSM
For any person to infer that investors were dullards in this scheme then that means that big bussiness CEO's,advisers,lawyers,doctors and non pro's like me can where GTP's demise.
The incentive fromGTP
Tax effective,--250m3 return on lots for woodchips
re-invest in coppings
later carbon credits,until penny wong another political dullard stopped it
A big market that can not get enough dunny paper
value adding with Lignor
Bio fuels
And you know what it is there,you bloody idiots at GTP and GSM had it and now you twits are going to lose it
Mis growers hold the ground tell the liquidator to piss off and need be make unhoy alliances to keep the vultures from your trees
WHY?---these are good investments and at the end of 11or even 12 years I will be happy
Wrong on several counts Doctor J
1 The principal assets of the company, the land holding, are valued, and carried in the books, on an UNEMCUMBERED basis. There are long term leases registered against most of the land which significantly lower its current sale value. This is an example of Enronomics (I am sure you would agree that Enron was a significant scam)
2 By GTP’s own admission, the continuing maintenance, and ultimate return from existing MIS projects require ongoing sales of new MIS projects. That is, older investors need newer investors to invest to get a return. This is what defines a Ponzi scheme. I am sure, Doc J, you would agree that Ponzi scheme investments are a scam.
3. Project Transform was a scam on several levels:
i MIS investors received unanimous recommendations from company directors to exchange their project interests for GTP scrip at a 400% premium. How this was in the interests of MIS investors is beyond belief. A majority of MIS investors rejected the offer.
ii A shortfall was engineered in the cattle projects by with-holding 60% of available cattle from sale. The threat of a shortfall drove many cattle project MIS investors to accept the scrip deal. The cattle are now 100% GTP owned and the MIS investors have received essentially worthless shares.
iii The “independent expert’s reports” were basically flawed in terms of ASIC’s Regulatory Guide 111 in that they were NEVER fair. A fair offer requires that MIS investors swap assets for shares at identical value. A swap at a 400% premium is intrinsically UNFAIR.
4 The directors may be well qualified, but they are certainly not appropriately qualified to run this sort of company. They are, in effect, accountants and financiers trying to run an agricultural company. It has been their own conduct (similarly at TIM) in paying substantially over the odds for land that has driven land prices up. Now that they don’t have any money, land prices will return to reality.
If GTP directors are “as competent as any directors i've met (and certainly considerably more so than a fair portion I've had the occasion to meet lately)”, it would appear that you are either mixing with the wrong crowd, or Corporate Australia is in very serious trouble.
1 The principal assets of the company, the land holding, are valued, and carried in the books, on an UNEMCUMBERED basis. There are long term leases registered against most of the land which significantly lower its current sale value. This is an example of Enronomics (I am sure you would agree that Enron was a significant scam)
2 By GTP’s own admission, the continuing maintenance, and ultimate return from existing MIS projects require ongoing sales of new MIS projects. That is, older investors need newer investors to invest to get a return. This is what defines a Ponzi scheme. I am sure, Doc J, you would agree that Ponzi scheme investments are a scam.
3. Project Transform was a scam on several levels:
i MIS investors received unanimous recommendations from company directors to exchange their project interests for GTP scrip at a 400% premium. How this was in the interests of MIS investors is beyond belief. A majority of MIS investors rejected the offer.
ii A shortfall was engineered in the cattle projects by with-holding 60% of available cattle from sale. The threat of a shortfall drove many cattle project MIS investors to accept the scrip deal. The cattle are now 100% GTP owned and the MIS investors have received essentially worthless shares.
iii The “independent expert’s reports” were basically flawed in terms of ASIC’s Regulatory Guide 111 in that they were NEVER fair. A fair offer requires that MIS investors swap assets for shares at identical value. A swap at a 400% premium is intrinsically UNFAIR.
4 The directors may be well qualified, but they are certainly not appropriately qualified to run this sort of company. They are, in effect, accountants and financiers trying to run an agricultural company. It has been their own conduct (similarly at TIM) in paying substantially over the odds for land that has driven land prices up. Now that they don’t have any money, land prices will return to reality.
If GTP directors are “as competent as any directors i've met (and certainly considerably more so than a fair portion I've had the occasion to meet lately)”, it would appear that you are either mixing with the wrong crowd, or Corporate Australia is in very serious trouble.
Wait on, I'm pretty sure my prospectus says that the money required to manage the plantation until harvest was from monies already paid by investors and was to be put into a fund and held for that purpose.
Are you saying that didn't happen and that money isn't there? If so then does anyone know where it went?
I am quite sure they've never put your money into a separate fund.
What they might do at best was to delay part of your application fee to the 2nd or 3rd year as a "deferred income" in their income account, while spent the cash whenever they got it.
So it is a Ponzi scheme - whenever stops selling the "products" (prospectuses) it collapses.
In fact I reckon all the MIS projects are Ponzi-like schemes and they will all die soon.
Yes, unfortunately, Forenth, its all gone.
Where to: Your FA pocketed a 10% commission, the greedy GTP execs who trousered over 1 million a year, to the bloated GTP staff structure, to the owners of the land who were paid well over the odds for their land, to the lawyers, the merchant bankers, the accountants, the experts.................
IT IS UNOFFICIAL,,, NOT CONFIRMED
But as of 10 pm Saturday 16/05/09 approxiamately GTP went into voluntary receivership.
But I stress it is un-official.
Some of the contributors here will be better informed than I am.
Please confirm if this is so ASAP
I need to be able to tell Bendigo Adelaide to jam their loans
not even worth this now if it factual
But as of 10 pm Saturday 16/05/09 approxiamately GTP went into voluntary receivership.
But I stress it is un-official.
Some of the contributors here will be better informed than I am.
Please confirm if this is so ASAP
I need to be able to tell Bendigo Adelaide to jam their loans
not even worth this now if it factual- Joined
- 26 September 2008
- Posts
- 15
- Reactions
- 0
Have heard the same thing.
This ought to teach a big lesson to those fools who voted 'Yes' to sell their Cattle for worthless shares, and to those who accepted Individual Offers to switch their investments for shares in the company.
This ought to teach a big lesson to those fools who voted 'Yes' to sell their Cattle for worthless shares, and to those who accepted Individual Offers to switch their investments for shares in the company.
And now the hyenas approach---read on it starts just like timbercorp,they made a mistake in the company name it was timbercorp,gunn's wilmont,the department of sustainability,anything, but not my precious GTP
Great Southern another to take MIS hit Barry Fitzgerald
May 17, 2009
THE collapse of investor interest in managed investment schemes has claimed its biggest victim, the debt-ridden timber plantation group Great Southern.
Ferrier Hodgson has been appointed voluntary administrator of the failed agribusiness specialist, which manages 45 schemes on behalf of 43,000 investors from which it has raised $1.8 billion in the last five years.
Great Southern shares were suspended from trade on May 11. It had a last sale price of 12 ¢ a share ”” a fraction of the $5-a-share the stock commanded in March 2005. It holds interest-bearing debt of $785 million, of which $105 million had to refinanced by October.
Apart from the collapse of investor interest in MIS in the wake of the global financial crisis and high debt levels, Great Southern has been hit by drought and uncertainty about tax changes related to the sector.
It was the same combination of factors that recently brought down fellow agribusiness Timbercorp, which recently went into voluntary administration with liabilities to secured lenders of $661 million.
Ferrier Hodgson partner Martin Jones said last night his first job at Great Southern would be to review the group's financial position and communicate with key stakeholders.
"Great Southern has a complex structure with numerous managed investment schemes and significant agricultural assets," Mr Jones said.
The company has been scrambling to keep its lenders at bay by raising funds from asset sales. It was reported last week that it was poised to sell dozens of tree farms at Casino in NSW and Miriam Vale near Gladstone in Queensland.
The sale was expected to raise $50 million. Great Southern has also put cattle and pastoral property on the market.
Along with the sale of additional forestry assets, it was hoped they could generate a further $300 million.
But the fear is that, like Timbercorp before it, Great Southern has had trouble securing deals at prices anywhere near the asking price, even in a fire sale environment.
Source: The Age
Great Southern another to take MIS hit Barry Fitzgerald
May 17, 2009
THE collapse of investor interest in managed investment schemes has claimed its biggest victim, the debt-ridden timber plantation group Great Southern.
Ferrier Hodgson has been appointed voluntary administrator of the failed agribusiness specialist, which manages 45 schemes on behalf of 43,000 investors from which it has raised $1.8 billion in the last five years.
Great Southern shares were suspended from trade on May 11. It had a last sale price of 12 ¢ a share ”” a fraction of the $5-a-share the stock commanded in March 2005. It holds interest-bearing debt of $785 million, of which $105 million had to refinanced by October.
Apart from the collapse of investor interest in MIS in the wake of the global financial crisis and high debt levels, Great Southern has been hit by drought and uncertainty about tax changes related to the sector.
It was the same combination of factors that recently brought down fellow agribusiness Timbercorp, which recently went into voluntary administration with liabilities to secured lenders of $661 million.
Ferrier Hodgson partner Martin Jones said last night his first job at Great Southern would be to review the group's financial position and communicate with key stakeholders.
"Great Southern has a complex structure with numerous managed investment schemes and significant agricultural assets," Mr Jones said.
The company has been scrambling to keep its lenders at bay by raising funds from asset sales. It was reported last week that it was poised to sell dozens of tree farms at Casino in NSW and Miriam Vale near Gladstone in Queensland.
The sale was expected to raise $50 million. Great Southern has also put cattle and pastoral property on the market.
Along with the sale of additional forestry assets, it was hoped they could generate a further $300 million.
But the fear is that, like Timbercorp before it, Great Southern has had trouble securing deals at prices anywhere near the asking price, even in a fire sale environment.
Source: The Age
Yes, all the ones that voted yes and forced people like me to have their cattle stolen and given shares (despite me voting no).
I am happy I sold two weeks ago...after reading numerous posts on this thread about how much debt GTP had...there was no way they could pay it back.
- Joined
- 13 August 2008
- Posts
- 404
- Reactions
- 41
sad to see another company go down, yet so glad about a year ago
i got out of these guys, something just didnt smell right ....
jc
i got out of these guys, something just didnt smell right ....
jc
