This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Storm Financial Group

Jump to new

Julia you are wasting bandwidth.

Our little mate Mash would not answer this.

gg
 
The accounts Onlooker and twiceshy have been permanently suspended as they have been identified as being operated by the same individual.
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
Julia you are wasting bandwidth.

Our little mate Mash would not answer this.

gg
Click to expand...
Wouldn't she, gg? You disappoint me.
I thought it fair to allow her the opportunity to make her position clear and perhaps even display some objectivity. Let's hope she will rise to the challenge.
 
That's the thing. It makes me sad to think that there are actually Stormers out there (myself being an ex-Stormer) who seriously believe that Manny/Julie had no part in this, and that 'effectively double mortgaging' the house was a safe and perfectly valid strategy.

In THEORY the Storm model was fine (like communism I guess!), but it should have been scaled back. There is nothing wrong with unlocking a safe amount of your home equity to invest, but the WHOLE thing + hundreds of thousands of dollars more? Insanity! I think it all started falling apart at the seams around Sep 08 when I noticed a lot more people getting phoned up (friends included) and told 'Hey guess what? We just found an extra lot of equity in your house! Let's borrow a crapload more oh, and look at that, we will be taking 6.6% out of that extra money you borrowed too...' Thank god none of my friends/close ones ever went through with that madness. Most of them are in a LOT better positions for not doing so.

What angers me, is that their blind belief in Cassimatis still to this day won't allow them to move on and take the life that is rightfully theirs. Manny is still washing his luxury car behind the gates of his mansion in Brisbane, and the fact his ego was deluded to such an extent that he started a website and hired a PR rep to try and make his image squeaky clean was enough for me to vomit.

Here's one for you valiant Stormers/SICAG zealots:

1. Why did EC/Julie let a company with billions on it's books have no adequate indemnity insurance?

2. Why was it reported (by Ron Jelich) that the cash holdings of the company were above $20 million yet a month later all of this had magically disappeared and the company was insolvent with a paltry $2 million in the bank? I'll hazard a guess and tell you where most of that went.....Geneva.

3. Why did Manny/Julie give themselves a multimillion dollar payment while their company was struggling in its death throes? Why did they sign one of Julie's rellies as a Director of the company to legally ensure that this was payment was made as quickly as possible in accordance with the law that states such a payment cannot be authorised unless there are more than 3 directors voting on it in the company? At that stage the only two directors of Storm were EC and Julie, everyone else had jumped ship or was pushed.

Yes, the banks stuffed up. But EC/Julie stuffed up harder. They were paid a LOT of money for their services.....it appears their greed got out of control, and the lifestyle they were funding spiralled out of control as well.

I am sure Manny started out with good intentions, but in the end it was all about how much they could take. Manny knew the end was coming sooner or later, but by then his greed was too far gone.

It should be his gates SICAG is smashing down, not putting your faith in two men who have obviously intrinsic/ulterior reasons to remain in Manny's good books.
 
Julia said:
That seems a rather arrogant assumption, Mash. The debacle that is Storm is ongoing news. We usually discuss newsworthy events of a financial nature.
Click to expand...

I think perhaps what Mash is suggesting here is that many of the events that have occurred over the last couple of weeks have only come about because of an absolutely dogged and relentless determination by the SICAG team.

If SICAG had not been formed then it is likely that there would now be a very unorganized group of investors who could not have the collective power that they have now with an action group to work on the behalf of its members.

It is also likely that there would have been a lot more forced house sales and deaths.

Without this incredibly dedicated group of people a lot of the explosive evidence that will be revealed in the coming months would not have been uncovered and banks such as the CBA would not have made the statements they made last week.

There is an argument that many of the newsworthy events of a financial nature have for the most part come about as a result of the work of SICAG.

The parliamentary inquiry that is occurring is a DIRECT result of the good work of SICAG. It is a simple thing to look back at the posts to this forum and see how many in recent weeks have come about as a result of people reading the submissions to this inquiry.

Many of the reputable financial newspapers and journals are basing their articles on the research and work done by SICAG. Why? This group has made it their business to uncover answers related to this financial event. They have nothing to gain by not investigating every possible lead. Whether individuals on this forum (or other fora) believe it or not is irrelevant - SICAG is a reputable organisation with credibility in the places that it counts - with its members as well in the nation's parliamentary, legal and financial systems. Yes - even with the banks who are becoming increasingly nervous about SICAG.


I believe that over time many ex-Storm clients (and I am in contact with many many of them on a regular basis) are coming to the realization that things were not as they believed/expected in the Storm camp. But most of the ones I talk to believe that Storm and the banks were in it together and that had the banks (particularly the CBA and its affiliates) not behaved as badly as they did most of the Storm clients would now be starting to come out of this situation.

Cheers
Maccka
 
Well said Maccka. I can't knock SICAG's efforts in keeping Stormers sane and giving them some comfort and relief, I think they have a great thing going in terms of moral support.

I just can't fathom why they won't speak badly against Manny and Storm in general.
 

Mash speaks the truth. The critters are ants not spiders. They are there for the benefit of SICAG members not necessarily for other people.

As Mash suggested, it came about when SICAG members were at a bbq together and one was bitten by a fierce ant. Thinking nothing of it he squashed it only to have it let off a pheromone in its death throws that caused hundreds of ants to swarm out of the nest and set to biting the big boy that squashed their fellow ant. It did not take long before the annoyance of the mass of ants moved the SICAG members from their comfortable positions to somewhere else that the ants were much happier with.

They are one of a number of metaphors the SICAG members use to remember that the "little guys" can beat the "big guys".

Another metaphor is one of rust. Rust is something that starts off very small but if left unattended to can sink a ship.

cheers
Maccka
 
Ironhalo said:
I just can't fathom why they won't speak badly against Manny and Storm in general.
Click to expand...

Garpal Gumnut said:
However I would ask you to consider the following points.

1. SICAG never publishes any adverse press about Manny..never.

2. SICAG publish anything vaguely negative about the banks and their relationship with Storm.
Click to expand...

I think this particular issue is one that will need time before it is resolved. The SICAG committee is a committee of very clever and strategic thinkers. You can bet they have a fantastic poker hand and have the cards close to their chest waiting for the perfect time to lay them down and expose critical information at a critical point.

I don't claim to know the answer to this but you may find that it works to their advantage not to say anything until they have indisputable evidence. Also, please remember that no-one is helped if they make claims about people that turn out to be libelous.

Given the savvy nature of the SICAG committee I believe you will find that they are yet to have made an announcement about any person, business or organisation (website or otherwise) that is untrue. You will also find that specific allegations can all be backed with evidence.

Garpal Gumnut said:
4. The mainstream media have slagged off on Manny without causing a dint in his relationship with Stormers including many in SICAG.
Click to expand...

GG - I think that this is not right. I think that EC and JC's cred has taken a serious dint. If serious research was done, I think you would find that there are very few ex-storm clients (including SICAG members) who will publicly (and even privately) speak in favour of them.

Garpal Gumnut said:
5. The mainstream media thus far have not followed up on the relationship between some in SICAG and Manny, even though SICAG to their credit admit that relationship at the bottom of their site, where the money spider never goes!
Click to expand...

Could you be a bit more specific about this please? What sort of relationship do you believe exists between SICAG and EC/JC?

I look at the disclaimer and I think it is pretty clear that the committee don't have a relationship with them. Also, I think it is important to remember that "some members of SICAG may still have relationships with the Cassimatis' ..." does not equate to all members, most members or even many of the members. It may mean only 1 or 2 members who have been vocal.

Garpal Gumnut said:
5. Many Stormers not involved in SICAG or not higherups in SICAG, suffer a deep and intense shame over their losses and would not front the Inquiry.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand this comment. Are you suggesting that all of the submissions to the inquiry from ex-Storm clients are from SICAG members? Are you saying that people who submit to the inquiry are/have not felt deep and intense shame over the losses? Are you saying that people should not be fronting the inquiry? Are you saying that people might submit something in writing but then not show up in person if asked?

Garpal Gumnut said:
7. The inbuilt biases and relationships of the members of the Inquiry are a bit of a wildcard.
Click to expand...

Sorry GG. I don't really understand this either (must be having a really bad night!) Which biases and relationships are you referring to? And shouldn't an inquiry go into any situation with a range of people who can look at the issues representing a range of views? If one member of the inquiry is anti-banks wouldn't it be good to have another who was pro-banks? Surely, there is no point going into an inquiry knowing what the outcome will be is there? Otherwise the whole exercise is a terrible waste of time and money and emotional energy.




What's to say that the dinners have been comfortable and pleasant affairs for the C family? Maybe they were an information gathering exercise? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. Sometimes you don't know the significance of some pieces of information until every player in a situation has been spoken to.

I am yet to see any evidence that suggests that EC/JC are good friends with any of the SICAG committee or the great majority of SICAG members that I come into contact with.

cheers
Maccka
 

They are there for the benefit of SICAG members not necessarily for other people.

Maccka

Do you think it would benefit them if the were made aware of the fact that they were taken for a ride by Storm?
Without this realization (which many of them clearly don't have) isn't it possible that some of them may get duped again by another slick and dodgy salesman a bit further down the track?

Do you think it would benefit Stormers if they were made aware of the enormous risks they took by heavily gearing into such a risky investment vehicle as the stock market? (clearly some of them still haven't caught on to this fact, and some of the younger ones with years of saving and investing in front of them may therefore be destined to repeat their mistakes).

I'm all in favour of a support group - I'd definitely join it myself if I was a Stormer. But gee, I'd expect my group to tell me the full story and to go after all the people who are in the wrong, rather than to avoid any criticism of the organisation that was primarily responsible.
 
bunyip said:
Maccka

Do you think it would benefit them if the were made aware of the fact that they were taken for a ride by Storm?
Click to expand...

Hi Bunyip,

I am not an ex-Storm client although I have a large number of family and friends who were and am a member of SICAG. Having said that... Yes - I do and I expect that when the time is right, if the evidence can prove it to the satisfaction of a court then I would like see it said publicly by SICAG.

bunyip said:
Without this realization (which many of them clearly don't have) isn't it possible that some of them may get duped again by another slick and dodgy salesman a bit further down the track?
Click to expand...

Yes - it is possible. Not as likely as it was before this debacle but still possible. Many people have learnt a lot of strong lessons through all of this. I believe most ex-Storm clients and the people that know them (such as family - ppl like me) will be asking a lot more questions of the "experts" they engage with particularly in the financial/banking arena.


Yes - I do. I think this whole mess is so very confusing for the individuals involved (and some of it well hidden by the institutions involved) that some people still don't know exactly happened to their portfolios. I think time is teaching most people about the risks that they took.

I personally believe the majority of the ex-Storm people I come into contact with understood that there were risks in their investment vehicles but believed that there were multiple layers of protection that would allow time to protect against the losses of their investment. I also believe, that the great majority of people believed that their houses were not at risk due to the layers of protection.

I also believe that there are a small number of people that had no understanding of any of the risks.


Yes - quite a reasonable request. As a SICAG member I do expect the SICAG committee to tell me the full story and go after all the people who are in the wrong when the time is right. I expect the SICAG team to put their considerable intellect to work and use any legal means possible to uncover and expose the truth. If this means they have to be a little bit silent at times (while they are working intensely in the background) and hold information back from a public (including with SICAG membership) arena for strategic reasons then I am prepared to wait as I know the results will be better for my family and friends if they act in a logical, strategically planned manner than a rushed and emotional one.

They haven't publicly criticized EC/JC or even some of the advisers. I am not privy to knowing exactly why this is but you can bet there is a very good reason.

Cheers
Maccka
 

Maccka

Yes, there will be reasons why SICAG haven't criticised anyone from the Storm organisation.
I just hope those reasons are legitimate and all above board, and don't involve protecting mates and/or family who worked for Storm.

Thanks for your comments.

Bunyip
 


I hope your faith in SICAG will be rewarded for your family and friends' sakes Maccka.
I thought the reason they havent criticised "some" of the advisers is because those advisers are actually part of SICAG.
Here is a few gems I have located: the first one is called "Operation Willowbank" it is a cached page from the now defunct Storm website:

".....That's exactly what George Cassimatis and Redcliffe's Andrew O'Brien had to do in order to get the ever-busy Storm CEO Emmanuel Cassimatis out to the Jelich Jones Race Day at Willowbank Raceway this month.
The highly covert Operation Willowbank consisted of many lies and much deception with George and Andrew convincing Emmanuel that the reason they had him out of bed at 4.30am was to attend an important client breakfast at Redcliffe.
Unfortunately for George & Andrew, as soon as they started travelling south the motor-mad Emmanuel knew something was up.
The boys were forced to turn up the tales and only when they arrived at Willowbank did Emmanuel realise, much to his delight, the full extent of their trickery.
The morning consisted of six laps around the track at speeds reaching 170 km/h followed by a mind blowing hot lap behind the wheel of a V8 Super Car - under the guidance of a professional racing car driver of course!
On behalf of Storm Financial & Jelich Jones we would like to say a big thanks to Rod Dawson and the Rad Speed team for taking care of the crew."

aw how sweet, isnt Andrew the son of Noel O'Brien?

here is another one, found on a webpage of the Redcliffe Hospital Foundation:
"Today we were joined on the walk by Mark Weir a longtime client and friend of Ron's. Without any training [that we know of] Mark put in a courageous performance walking every step of the 30kms. That is a rare feat by any standards."

To some non Stormers such as myself, it certainly appears that some members of SICAG seem to be part of a trail that lead to Manny. Their disclaimer is a red flag in my opinion.

It's heartening to see that Carey Ramm who posts here appears to play a major part in the Storm victims fight for justice.

http://www.aecgroupltd.com/aecascent28/perspective.asp
 
"BoQ told to get its act together"

"The head of a parliamentary inquiry ......
Bernie Ripoll called on the chief executive, David Liddy, to "do the right thing" and said he would meet Mr Liddy soon to discuss the need for a genuine offer of help to all 319 Bank of Queensland customers affected by the Storm fallout."

More by Stuart Washington in the SMH here;

http://business.smh.com.au/business/boq-told-to-get-its-act-together-20090629-d2ie.html
 

One can only hope that after Madeoffs come-uppance last night, maybe some Cassimatis' might sleep a tad less easily until their own ju$tice is dealt?
 
In relation to the above few posts, one Stormer that I have spoken with has decided not to join SICAG. I didn't question why but I believe that they didn't wish to advertise the fact that they were impacted by the collapse and couldn't see any value for themselves in joining the action group.

But after some very rough, tough and emotionally debilitating times after their margin call, total investment loss and being thrown into quite large negative equity, they have picked themselves up and vowed to do "whatever it takes" to dig themselves out. Faced with the loss of their life's work, savings and cherished family home they have a fire in their belly to continue on with life and this "never say die" belief that they will recover.

They are now very distrusting of many things, including the banks, financial advisers and do gooders. They realise they made the decision to go with Storm but regardless of who is to blame for the collapse, their only focus now is to get themselves back to a position where they are happy with their lives and financially secure. They are approaching an age where they should be looking towards a comfortable retirement. I know they have sort legal advice and are exploring that avenue as well.

I can't predict what their final outcome will be but after seeing them come from a position of total inaction and devastation, to a position of exploring all avenues to improve their lot with unstoppable momentum, I will be surprised if the don't achieve some type of positive result. They are focusing on how to get themselves out of their position and are a great example of someone giving their all to overcome the adversity that they are facing.

I hope they read this forum and post their own version of events of what happened to them when their life was "Stormified"....
 


It's not too hard to work out why Noel O'Brien has stuck so doggedly to the Cassamatis line that the banks are to blame, and the economic meltdown and stock market crash were unprecedented events that nobody saw coming.
 
bunyip said:
It's not too hard to work out why Noel O'Brien has stuck so doggedly to the Cassamatis line that the banks are to blame, and the economic meltdown and stock market crash were unprecedented events that nobody saw coming.
Click to expand...

It seems that everyone is aware of the O'Brien relationship with Storm and what could happen to junior if findings are made against him. Any expectation of impartiality is laughable.

Of course Luke Vogel the IT guy from SICAG is a former Storm staff member.

Some other little known items of interest that I have gleaned from those who I understand are in the know:

1. EC was fundamental in the formation of SICAG and contributed funding to its formation;

2. Ron Jelich assisted in the funding of SICAG trips;

3. The Slater & Gordon/SICAG relationship is not as close as it is purported to be given SICAG were feeding information back info to EC;

4. SICAG members are openly stating that Manny is going to own the CBA when this is all finished; and

5. SICAG members are happy to recommend the services of a former Storm advisor who has been adversely mentioned.

SICAG have done some good work but its focus on the Banks to the exclusion of EC, JC and the other advisers is obvious for all to see.

For those former clients of Storm unfortunately it is not the White Knight but merely a front for the interests of EC & JC.
 
Explosive stuff mate.

4. SICAG members in Townsville are openly stating that Manny is going to own the CBA when this is all finished.

I am curious as to what sort of 'ownage' he is talking about....ownerage in terms of the branches up North, or 'ownage' as per the videos on Youtube that depict people getting hurt in somewhat humourous ways ala Funniest Home Videos?
 

Its a bit like Alice in Wonderland.

The http://sicag.info site now has a Storm Financial logo in the top right hand corner where the money spiders live.

Weirder and weirder.

Manny is looking for a good outcome from the Inquiry and he may actually get one, so him taking over a large financial institution is not out of the question if he has the backing of SICAG.

He would be entitled to a large payout for his losses and impugned character.

Maybe SICAG are not as silly as it seems, aligning with Manny may get their money back.

gg
 
"CGI admitted systems were 'inaccurate': submission"

"A client of a Securitor financial planner has used a submission to a parliamentary inquiry to allege Colonial Geared Investments (CGI) has admitted information it provided regarding its clients’ margin loan was “inaccurate” for a period of weeks during the share market meltdown last year."

More by Lucinda Beaman in Money Management here;

http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/article/CGI-admitted-systems-were-inaccurate-submission/488499.aspx


And here is the submission;

http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/corporations_ctte/fps/submissions/sub109.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The dynamics of money and TIME: crimping cashflow for a period
Replies
3
Views
862
TiminOz
The planning of a portfolio
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Value Collector
Ozempic: Magic Pill or Devils Bargain?
Replies
10
Views
2K
sptrawler
February 2025
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
5K
ducati916
Mayfair 101/Mayfair Platinum
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Dona Ferentes
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...