Storm Financial Group

[bunyip]

Excellent point Mr gg - why would you even say ANYTHING positive about Storm at all on the SICAG site?

I wonder if anyone thinks that SICAG is just a front, setting the stage so to speak for the next chapter in Manny's adventures. Are the genuine wood ducks being set up to be, what is known in scamspeak, "reloaded"?

And Mash, I find it hilarious that you come on here and say without SICAG this thread wouldnt exist. I dont think you and a few others here who act as apologists are the wood ducks at all.

Yeh well, poor Mash is out of touch with reality - again. She comes on this forum, full of fire and arrogance and bad manners, but has a tendency towards slinking away with her tail between her legs whenever confronting questions are put to her.
She forgets that GG started this thread back in October 2008, long before SICAG was even thought of. It's been going strong ever since, and would continue going strong even if SICAG was disbanded tomorrow.

I have no doubt that Manny will be back in the financial advisory business in one form or another. And I have no doubt that some of his new clients will be former Storm clients. It's clear that some Stormers still regard him as the Messiah and would follow him to hell and back. Some people just never learn.

As for SICAG being a front to set the stage for the next chapter of Manny adventures - that's an interesting thought.
Their behaviour does raise the question - is there an agenda of deflecting the heat away from certain people who were part of the Storm organization?

I see Manny is sticking to his claim that it was all someone else's fault. I wouldn't be surprised if people referred to him as 'un-Manny', as there's nothing manly about someone who continues to shirk all responsibility for a disaster in which he was a central player.
It must be extremely vexing for the more clear-thinking Stormers to continue hearing Manny repeating the same old lines about how the market slump and economic meltdown were unprecedented, and how the banks are to blame.

For anyone who believes the rot that this market slump was unprecedented, here's a brief synopsis of the 2008/09 crash and also the 1987 crash.
2008/09 crash....All Ords down 56% in 16 months.
1987 crash...All Ords down 25% in one day, and 50% in 7 weeks.

It's clear that the 2008/09 slump was a relatively sedate affair compared with the brutal market plunge of 1987.
Manny and Noel O'Brien, please take note - remember this next time you're tempted to dish out inaccurate claims about how the current market crash was unprecedented.

Question for EC...How do you think your brilliant Storm model would have fared in 1987?
Answer...It would have fared no better than it fared in 2008.....there would have been the same margin calls, the same foreclosures, the same disaster that played out this time around.

Given the inept performance of Storm Financial in protecting their clients from a completely avoidable disaster, it must be particularly galling to thinking Storm victims to see Storm portrayed as a competent organisation with a conservative investment model, all above board and squeaky clean and smelling like roses .
I use the term 'thinking Storm victims' in reference to those who are no longer swallowing the lies and deception. Unfortunately there are still some Stormers who can't see the reality of how and why they ended up in their present situation.

For anyone who is still inclined to believe that the 2008/09 slump had no precedent, the charts below present compelling pictorial evidence.
Click on the chart to enlarge it.

 

[Ironhalo]

Bunyip, dead on.

I have no doubt that from a social perspective, SICAG have done a world of good for the Storm investors who rallied to their flag and trumpet calls. I will never take away from the fact that I am sure there are a number of Stormers who have taken solace in the group. If that saves them from doing something rash, then it has served its purpose.

What I would love to know, is why SICAG REFUSES to implicate Manny/Julie. It is a war they should be fighting on two fronts, the banks on one hand, the personal destruction of Manny and an admittance of guilt on his behalf.

But they won't. As I said earlier, evidence that my brother had showing that Storm KNEW week to week on whom was in Margin Call with the banks was sat on for months by Storm and the advisors. And when he rang SICAG to tell them this (thinking it would help them) he was told in no uncertain terms that 'that won't help our cause' by a very flustered and obviously panicked chairperson doing his best to backpedal.

When I look back on my involvement with Storm, I wanted an 'invest and forget' scheme that pandered to the fact that I was away on warships for half the year, and couldn't manage an investment in detail in the middle of the Arafura Sea/Pacific Ocean! Lesson learned. I have made more money on investing by myself this year then I ever made with Storm now that I am again based on land.

Storm was a pack of cards waiting to fall down, albeit with a backup plan that was never instigated due to 1. spiraling greed for more and more investment percentages from clients for Manny and the banks, and 2. incompetance.

Both these two need to be addressed.

 

[Big Max]

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.

Iron Halo, you are right on the money. the ASIC and Joint Parliamentary Inquiries will answer all these and many more questions. Bring it on!

 

[Big Max]

Yeh well, poor Mash is out of touch with reality - again. She comes on this forum, full of fire and arrogance and bad manners, but has a tendency towards slinking away with her tail between her legs whenever confronting questions are put to her.
She forgets that GG started this thread back in October 2008, long before SICAG was even thought of. It's been going strong ever since, and would continue going strong even if SICAG was disbanded tomorrow.

I have no doubt that Manny will be back in the financial advisory business in one form or another. And I have no doubt that some of his new clients will be former Storm clients. It's clear that some Stormers still regard him as the Messiah and would follow him to hell and back. Some people just never learn.

As for SICAG being a front to set the stage for the next chapter of Manny adventures - that's an interesting thought.
Their behaviour does raise the question - is there an agenda of deflecting the heat away from certain people who were part of the Storm organization?

I see Manny is sticking to his claim that it was all someone else's fault. I wouldn't be surprised if people referred to him as 'un-Manny', as there's nothing manly about someone who continues to shirk all responsibility for a disaster in which he was a central player.
It must be extremely vexing for the more clear-thinking Stormers to continue hearing Manny repeating the same old lines about how the market slump and economic meltdown were unprecedented, and how the banks are to blame.

For anyone who believes the rot that this market slump was unprecedented, here's a brief synopsis of the 2008/09 crash and also the 1987 crash.
2008/09 crash....All Ords down 56% in 16 months.
1987 crash...All Ords down 25% in one day, and 50% in 7 weeks.

It's clear that the 2008/09 slump was a relatively sedate affair compared with the brutal market plunge of 1987.
Manny and Noel O'Brien, please take note - remember this next time you're tempted to dish out inaccurate claims about how the current market crash was unprecedented.

Question for EC...How do you think your brilliant Storm model would have fared in 1987?
Answer...It would have fared no better than it fared in 2008.....there would have been the same margin calls, the same foreclosures, the same disaster that played out this time around.

Given the inept performance of Storm Financial in protecting their clients from a completely avoidable disaster, it must be particularly galling to thinking Storm victims to see Storm portrayed as a competent organisation with a conservative investment model, all above board and squeaky clean and smelling like roses .
I use the term 'thinking Storm victims' in reference to those who are no longer swallowing the lies and deception. Unfortunately there are still some Stormers who can't see the reality of how and why they ended up in their present situation.

For anyone who is still inclined to believe that the 2008/09 slump had no precedent, the charts below present compelling pictorial evidence.
Click on the chart to enlarge it.

Bunyip, when are you going to smell the coffee. SICAG has done a power of work - much of it behind the scenes - for its 1500+ members. To suggest that it is some sort of front to EC/JC has got to be a joke. Please tell me you are smoking something illegal. Better still, come to one of SICAG's meetings. I'll come and pick you up personally.

 

[Big Max]

Bunyip, dead on.

I have no doubt that from a social perspective, SICAG have done a world of good for the Storm investors who rallied to their flag and trumpet calls. I will never take away from the fact that I am sure there are a number of Stormers who have taken solace in the group. If that saves them from doing something rash, then it has served its purpose.

What I would love to know, is why SICAG REFUSES to implicate Manny/Julie. It is a war they should be fighting on two fronts, the banks on one hand, the personal destruction of Manny and an admittance of guilt on his behalf.

But they won't. As I said earlier, evidence that my brother had showing that Storm KNEW week to week on whom was in Margin Call with the banks was sat on for months by Storm and the advisors. And when he rang SICAG to tell them this (thinking it would help them) he was told in no uncertain terms that 'that won't help our cause' by a very flustered and obviously panicked chairperson doing his best to backpedal.

When I look back on my involvement with Storm, I wanted an 'invest and forget' scheme that pandered to the fact that I was away on warships for half the year, and couldn't manage an investment in detail in the middle of the Arafura Sea/Pacific Ocean! Lesson learned. I have made more money on investing by myself this year then I ever made with Storm now that I am again based on land.

Storm was a pack of cards waiting to fall down, albeit with a backup plan that was never instigated due to 1. spiraling greed for more and more investment percentages from clients for Manny and the banks, and 2. incompetance.

Both these two need to be addressed.

I agree with most of your comments, Iron Halo. You ask why SICAG hasn't condemned EC/JC on its website or its public utterings. Good question. I think the best way to answer it is to point out - as an earlier commentator suggested - EC still has a strong almost Messiah-like following. We have a lot of SICAG members who still look at the sun rising in the east each morning and see it as a signal that Manny has just climbed out of bed. True. Whenever a negative comment is made about EC or the Storm model, SICAG gets a (diminishing) number of calls (mostly from the Burdekin) from members telling us to stop rubbishing Manny and/or Storm. So, in view of the disparate views of the SICAG membership on these issues (it's probably 90%-10%) SICAG has elected to leave it to the courts, the ASIC and Joint Parliamentary Inquiries make the decision. Compromises, I know, never provide a satisfactory outcome and sometimes send the wrong signal - hence the conspiracy line in your posting.

 

[Big Max]

Perhaps Maccka, you can explain the following from the SICAG site.

It is advice on the left lower border of the site which reasonably advises victims of the Cassimates and the Banks to avoid predatory financial advisers. Then it gets interesting.


The last sentence advises people not to pay for advice but rather to pay as they go for financial products, as they did with Storm. I've emboldened the relevant advice. It seems like a vote of confidence in the Storm model.

I believe the industry is totally against this, as the fees charged induce the planners to rope in more mugs into products the advisers profit from.



gg

I'm on Macka's side with all this. He/she seems to be a welcome voice of reason and objectivity in the online discussions. The bold passage referred to by GG on the SICAG website is fact, is it not? Does GG think it's a free plug?

 

[Big Max]

I am the Media Director for SICAG (Storm Investors Consumer Action Group). I was not a Storm client. The following comments are offered in that capacity and not on behalf of the SICAG committee. There's no secret about Luke Vogel, Ron Jelich or Noel O'Brien's direct and indirect connections to the failed Storm investment advisory firm. Luke and Noel are now committee members of SICAG (Storm Investors Consumer Action Group). SICAG, in association with John McLennan (bank consumer advocate and SICAG consultant) has worked tirelessly for its 1500 members and has played a significant role in forcing the CBA to the negotiating table. That must and should be publicly acknowledged. SICAG has made no secret of its connections with Ron Jelich and Andrew O'Brien (Noel's son) - they are "friends of SICAG" and are doing their best to redress the insufferable damage done to their former clients. Ron is on the public record as standing ready to accept whatever blame and penalties are sheeted home to him as a key member of the Storm Financial group. Andrew and Ron have willingly shared their inside knowledge of the Storm organisation with SICAG, ASIC, the Joint Parliamentary Inquiry and have also offered their services to Slater & Gordon to help effect a just outcome for their former clients. SICAG is an open book and welcomes any scrutiny of its committee, its consultants and its motives. Any attempts to divert it from its core raison d'etre have been resisted. SICAG has a notice on its home page - www.wsicag.info - distancing the organisation from Emmanuel Cassimatis. He can fight his own battles. The organisation was established six months ago to seek redress for its members, implement a professional media campaign to highlight the plight of members that's my role), create an information forum for former Storm clients and to provide psychological, financial and legal support for its members. SICAG Co-chairman Mark Weir and his fellow committeemen may not be perfect but I can assure forum watchers these are men of honour who have committed thousands of voluntary man-hours fighting for their members. History will be kind to them.

 

[maccka]

I am the Media Director for SICAG (Storm Investors Consumer Action Group).

SICAG Co-chairman Mark Weir and his fellow committeemen may not be perfect but I can assure forum watchers these are men of honour who have committed thousands of voluntary man-hours fighting for their members. History will be kind to them.

Hear Hear! Well said Big Max!

I second your comments. All of them! :iagree:

cheers
Maccka

 

[bunyip]

Bunyip, when are you going to smell the coffee. SICAG has done a power of work - much of it behind the scenes - for its 1500+ members. To suggest that it is some sort of front to EC/JC has got to be a joke. Please tell me you are smoking something illegal. Better still, come to one of SICAG's meetings. I'll come and pick you up personally.

Max

It wasn't me who suggested that SICAG was a front for EC/JC.....I merely commented that it's an interesting thought......which it is.
You really can't blame people for wondering - I mean, there's been a Storm logo on the SICAG website until recently, and there's been no criticism of Storm or even a suggestion that they bear some of the responsibility for what happened. On the contrary, as GG has pointed out, some of the wording on the website appears to be an endorsement of Storm's practices.
Further, you really can't blame people for wondering if SICAG is being careful not to direct any heat towards family members and close friends who were part of the Storm organisation.

Personally I think SICAG is a great idea and I'd certainly be a member myself if I was a Storm casualty. Even without being a Stormer, I'd go to a meeting if I lived anywhere near one of the venues.
I don't doubt you for a moment when you say SICAG has done a power of work behind the scenes for its members. Not only that, but it must be of immense value in providing moral support and a social network for a group of people who are clearly under a lot of emotional and financial stress.
But what SICAG needs to do to enhance its credibility is firstly, stop appearing to be so one-sided as to blame the banks, while letting the Storm organisation off the hook without even a hint of criticism.
Secondly, they need to stop making misleading claims such as the financial crisis and stock market crash have no precedent, and nobody saw them coming.
That's just complete rubbish - the SCIAG people who are saying it are well aware that's it's not correct, as is Manny Cassamatis.

 

[stung]

I am the Media Director for SICAG (Storm Investors Consumer Action Group). I was not a Storm client. The following comments are offered in that capacity and not on behalf of the SICAG committee. There's no secret about Luke Vogel, Ron Jelich or Noel O'Brien's direct and indirect connections to the failed Storm investment advisory firm. Luke and Noel are now committee members of SICAG (Storm Investors Consumer Action Group). SICAG, in association with John McLennan (bank consumer advocate and SICAG consultant) has worked tirelessly for its 1500 members and has played a significant role in forcing the CBA to the negotiating table. That must and should be publicly acknowledged. SICAG has made no secret of its connections with Ron Jelich and Andrew O'Brien (Noel's son) - they are "friends of SICAG" and are doing their best to redress the insufferable damage done to their former clients. Ron is on the public record as standing ready to accept whatever blame and penalties are sheeted home to him as a key member of the Storm Financial group. Andrew and Ron have willingly shared their inside knowledge of the Storm organisation with SICAG, ASIC, the Joint Parliamentary Inquiry and have also offered their services to Slater & Gordon to help effect a just outcome for their former clients. SICAG is an open book and welcomes any scrutiny of its committee, its consultants and its motives. Any attempts to divert it from its core raison d'etre have been resisted. SICAG has a notice on its home page - www.wsicag.info - distancing the organisation from Emmanuel Cassimatis. He can fight his own battles. The organisation was established six months ago to seek redress for its members, implement a professional media campaign to highlight the plight of members that's my role), create an information forum for former Storm clients and to provide psychological, financial and legal support for its members. SICAG Co-chairman Mark Weir and his fellow committeemen may not be perfect but I can assure forum watchers these are men of honour who have committed thousands of voluntary man-hours fighting for their members. History will be kind to them.

The friends of SICAG (ex advisors) "doing their best to redress the insufferable damage done to their ex-clients"- what a crock!!!!

Why did they allow this damage to happen in the first place. Many advisors knew the utter financial devastation that was upon us a long time before we did. How about an apology for ruining lives?

Don't forget boys there may be a number of ex-clients providing info to the same organisations about how some advisors provided deceitful advice and information.

I hope some of them are investigated by ASIC and never permitted to give financial advice again.

 

[Pindibog]

I will join that picket line!!

With all the judgments and moralising it is good to read Steve Borden's balanced assessment.

RE SICAG, it has kept the issue of Storm alive, there is not contact and there has been no financing of it by EC and JC (I sought reassurances before I joined and I do believe Mark and Noel - they are perhaps naive at times but well meaning and they have a focus on justice for the stormified). And as Steve has explained, more eloquently than I can at the moment, there are many layers to this whole debacle and relationships are complex.

I do not believe EC will arise from the ashes of storm and if he does, myself and my friends will make sure he is picketed, shamed in the media and kept under our spotlight.

 

[stung]

What's a wood duck?
Do I classify as one?

 

[Solly]

What's a wood duck?
Do I classify as one?

stung, a "wood duck" is a colloquial term used for an "easy target".
Like a "wood duck" floating on a pond.

Are you one ?....Only if you let yourself be one.

 

[stung]

stung, a "wood duck" is a colloquial term used for an "easy target".
Like a "wood duck" floating on a pond.

Are you one ?....Only if you let yourself be one.

Well, I think I was more of a bleeding albatross. They saw me coming.

 

[bunyip]

The friends of SICAG (ex advisors) "doing their best to redress the insufferable damage done to their ex-clients"- what a crock!!!!

Why did they allow this damage to happen in the first place. Many advisors knew the utter financial devastation that was upon us a long time before we did. How about an apology for ruining lives?

Don't forget boys there may be a number of ex-clients providing info to the same organisations about how some advisors provided deceitful advice and information.

I hope some of them are investigated by ASIC and never permitted to give financial advice again.

I think Stung has a point....there appears to be a conflict of interest when former Storm advisers are now on the committee of SICAG, supposedly to fight for justice for Storm victims. That justice should include coming down hard on those in Storm who gave shonky advice and deceived clients by keeping them in the dark about their true position.
Realistically, is any former Storm adviser going to do anything to turn up the heat on himself, thereby possibly leaving him open to legal action? I'd say it's highly unlikely.

 

[darkside]

The friends of SICAG (ex advisors) "doing their best to redress the insufferable damage done to their ex-clients"- what a crock!!!!

Why did they allow this damage to happen in the first place. Many advisors knew the utter financial devastation that was upon us a long time before we did. How about an apology for ruining lives?

Don't forget boys there may be a number of ex-clients providing info to the same organisations about how some advisors provided deceitful advice and information.

I hope some of them are investigated by ASIC and never permitted to give financial advice again.

Stung , well said, i was trying to put it into words but thought i would just ride your "coat tails" .

The way Ron was in the paper blaming all and sundry about the downfall of his clients and how he was the victim was disgracefull , so yes he should put his hand up and say , " I let you people down ,and even stood by and watched it collapse because i didn't have the guts to stand up for my beliefs and back my own judgement". They should not even be allowed to give financial advice in a Monopoly Game , let alone real life......!!!!

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I think Stung has a point....there appears to be a conflict of interest when former Storm advisers are now on the committee of SICAG, supposedly to fight for justice for Storm victims. That justice should include coming down hard on those in Storm who gave shonky advice and deceived clients by keeping them in the dark about their true position.
Realistically, is any former Storm adviser going to do anything to turn up the heat on himself, thereby possibly leaving him open to legal action? I'd say it's highly unlikely.

Blind Freddie would see the sense behind that statement.
Good on you bunyip.

Lets hope the poor Stormers don't get done over twice.

The Silence of the Lambs silamb.info would be a better moniker for sicag.info given their refusal to publish any of the hundreds of thousands of negative comments about Emmanuel Cassimatis and Co. made in the mainstream media by the likes of Michael West from the AFR and others.

I still can't believe that a former Storm Advisor is inside the sicag tent pissing out.

Poor poor Storm bastards.

gg

 

[Julia]

Bunyip, when are you going to smell the coffee. SICAG has done a power of work - much of it behind the scenes - for its 1500+ members. To suggest that it is some sort of front to EC/JC has got to be a joke..

Originally Posted by Ironhalo
Bunyip, dead on.

I agree with most of your comments, Iron Halo.

Um, Big Max, first you suggest to Bunyip that he needs to get with it or something, then you suggest you agree with Ironhalo who has strongly supported what Bunyip said!

Either you don't know what you want to say or you're trying to have a foot in both camps.

 

[Ironhalo]

(EC) He can fight his own battles. The organisation was established six months ago to seek redress for its members, implement a professional media campaign to highlight the plight of members that's my role), create an information forum for former Storm clients and to provide psychological, financial and legal support for its members. SICAG Co-chairman Mark Weir and his fellow committeemen may not be perfect but I can assure forum watchers these are men of honour who have committed thousands of voluntary man-hours fighting for their members. History will be kind to them.

History will be kind to them? Well it has been very kind to their family members/friends who were all too keen to go on the Storm overseas holidays (as EC was quoted, 'paid in part by the banks'...and yes I realise that these trips were often self-funded, but my advisor told me they were very much subsidised by Storm), and were high-fiving each other in Aug last year when they were raking in huge commissions and riding in the company jet.

I'm all for moral support for victims, but what about justice for victims? Banks are an easy target, you don't need much to set the mob off on a lynching when it comes to those institutions. So tell me, why aren't SICAG organising pickets outside of Belmont?

I'll put it as blunt as I can. There are people obviously waiting for Manny to re-emerge as a pheonix from the flames, and when he does, family members/friends in SICAG will be well positioned and well rewarded for their efforts in deflecting liability away from the Cassimatis couple.

The fact that Stormers may benefit in the interim from the banks is a nice aside, and helps heal middle class guilt.

Maybe I am being harsh, but my intuition has serve me well over 12 years as a Naval Officer....not going to ignore it now. As GG and a few others said, I don't feel comfortable knowing that the previous exponents and beneficiaries of all things Storm are now baying for blood and carrying the SICAG standard into battle.

 

[Glen48]

If you are going to try and get money from the Banks get in quick before they go under.. I reckon another 18 mths or less and we will have our own Sub prime and CDS's as well to worry about.