Will be interesting to see if Cereberus takes the same line when he/she reveals his/her knowledge of the inner workings of this mess that has been created.
Will be interesting to see if Cereberus takes the same line when he/she reveals his/her knowledge of the inner workings of this mess that has been created.The SICAG site never seem to have a bad word to say about Manny Cassimatis.
Maybe they know something that the AFR, Australian and most Investment sites don't know.
gg
but there are important changes needed in the financial advising systems and lending practices.
Having talked to and counselled many - ex-storm clients, 'greedy' is the last label I would use . . . possibly trusting and naive in ways; but not avaricious.
Humans are not motivated by one thing and while most wanted to improve their funds at retirement and some even planned to leave their children/grandchildren a small nest egg, I have not found ex-clients with the past urge to just hoard or accumulate for the sake of being rich . . . except maybe this is where we could talk about Manny.
It is no use to tell some of you to lay off as anyone can post on a forum like this and I know that people get off on being hoiler than thou and looking down on others - you are demonstrating it over and over again.
I have found ex-clients to be taking responsibility for their actions, knowing they trusted the wrong people and acknowledging they have learned lessons.
They don't want to be bailed out - not suggested in any of the submissions; but there are important changes needed in the financial advising systems and lending practices.
Had it been round 2 years ago we would not have the destruction from Storm.
It is cold comfort to the Storm Investors but at least there are some positives emerging from the mess and the government is certainly responding to the issue - Now!!!
Link to the press release
Carey, your suggestion above promotes the myth that people do not need to take responsibility for their own research and/or decisions.Fed Govt has announced that margin lending will now be covered by the new national consumer credit protection bill - this is a positive move from the Storm fiasco.
Had it been round 2 years ago we would not have the destruction from Storm.
Carey, your suggestion above promotes the myth that people do not need to take responsibility for their own research and/or decisions.
We need to encourage more personal responsibility, not less!
Already we have far too much legislation attempting to protect people from themselves.
We need to encourage more personal responsibility, not less!
Already we have far too much legislation attempting to protect people from themselves.
Julia
this is not about protecting people from themselves - it is about protecting people from predatory lending practices.
what this has done is require the same degree of diligence from a lender for a margin loan that they must provide for a home loan - so how can this be a bad thing?
quite simply margin lending is now a regulated loan as opposed to an unregulated loan - this is a very good move and long overdue. quite simply history has shown that the oversight of margin lending was defective and the government quite rightly too has recognised this and has acted - to place it in your words they are "taking responsibility".
i cant quite get over the continual bleating on here for storm investors to "take responsibility" - investors that are in complete financial ruin are most certainly taking responsibility - they are living their poor decision every minute of every day. many are out there trying to do whatever they can to put food on the table and pay the bills - i know some storm victims are doing 2 and 3 jobs just to keep their head above water.
i am yet to come accross a storm victim asking for a handout. most are mad, very mad about their situation and the deception they suffered. many have publicly spoken out (and that can be very embarressing) and pushed for the parliamentarty enquiry with their main objective being that they didnt want to see anyone in the future in the position they were in. most wanted to stop other people from making the same mistakes they had made.
in short they have choice but to take responsibility.
Julia
this is not about protecting people from themselves - it is about protecting people from predatory lending practices.
what this has done is require the same degree of diligence from a lender for a margin loan that they must provide for a home loan - so how can this be a bad thing?
in short they have choice but to take responsibility.
Carey let me ask you a couple of simple questions.....
a) If the Storm clients portfolio's were protected with a simple put option in MARCH 08 (When it was bloody obvious to Blind Freddy that things were going pear shaped in the Markets)... how many of them would have gone down the gurgler?
b) If a properly risk weighted reserve was in place for the margin lending portfolio... how many of them would be in this position?
This issue is not one of "predatory lending practices", but a complete and total lack of risk management practices. I frequently use the double debt strategy that is talked about in that article - but I use it in a manner that is safe and not the freaking cowboy approach that Storm employed.
Now the industry gets more regulation (instead of more education) and I have to wade through more red tape to do the same thing. More red tape = less time per client - so to make the same amount of money I was making last year - I need to have richer clients. Which means I target my services towards rich people - and the Mum and Dad investors get left to the tender mercies of "Dodgy Brothers 'R us" financial services group.
Cheers
Sir O
So GG you are the bank plant on this site..... SICAG getting too close to the bone are they.... you seem to spend a lot of time attempting to discredit them.... yes they have become bothersome to the banks haven't they...and FYI... they are ants on the website.... thought you could at least tell what an ant looked like with all your worldly knowledge. We decided the ant symbol was indicitive of our fight. One could be stomped on and flicked away however a few thousand ants might just be able to keep attacking long enough to see some result.
IMHO there is no use contiuing to rant at EC & co we all know they were snake oil salesman who were aided and abbetted by many others including the banks. We will leave EC to the authorities and continue to fight the banks who are intent on picking over the rotting carcasses of the storm survivors.
I suppose we all have our own attitudes to life and its vicissitudes.
Earlier on the thread I described how I'd lost money some years ago, the amount being really significant to me at the time.
I'd failed to take notice of a warning sign in the form of an interest rate that was decidedly above the market rate.
Did anyone force me to sign up? No.
Did I object while the good money was coming in? No, absolutely not.
Did I feel foolish when it all fell over? You bet, and very sorry I'd exposed myself to the risk.
But it simply didn't occur to me to go on to all and sundry about how I'd been victimized. My choice. My responsibility. My result.
Nothing to do but move on and learn from the lesson.
Believe it or not mate, but I hate banks more than you do.
What gets up my nose is your crawing position on your site.
There is is not one comment about Storms deriliction in their management of their clients portfolio.
Manny laughs, SICAG has money spiders on their web, and the whole cycle will repeat itself.
Wake up mate.
gg
So GG you are the bank plant on this site..... SICAG getting too close to the bone are they.... you seem to spend a lot of time attempting to discredit them.... yes they have become bothersome to the banks haven't they...and FYI... they are ants on the website.... thought you could at least tell what an ant looked like with all your worldly knowledge. We decided the ant symbol was indicitive of our fight. One could be stomped on and flicked away however a few thousand ants might just be able to keep attacking long enough to see some result.
IMHO there is no use contiuing to rant at EC & co we all know they were snake oil salesman who were aided and abbetted by many others including the banks. We will leave EC to the authorities and continue to fight the banks who are intent on picking over the rotting carcasses of the storm survivors.
at least do me the courtesy of reading the post before you reply....
oh I am not your mate either..darl....
I suppose we all have our own attitudes to life and its vicissitudes.
Earlier on the thread I described how I'd lost money some years ago, the amount being really significant to me at the time.
I'd failed to take notice of a warning sign in the form of an interest rate that was decidedly above the market rate.
Did anyone force me to sign up? No.
Did I object while the good money was coming in? No, absolutely not.
Did I feel foolish when it all fell over? You bet, and very sorry I'd exposed myself to the risk.
But it simply didn't occur to me to go on to all and sundry about how I'd been victimised. My choice. My responsibility. My result.
Nothing to do but move on and learn from the lesson.
Now Imagine that 1000 other people were involved, that you started an action group, that you complained loudly through the press and now the Government have decided that the style of unlisted fund you were invested in must now be governed by the APRA/ASIC/ASX and that if you wanted to invest in that style of product in the future you'll have an extra 30 pages of disclaimer..... would it have made any difference whatsoever to your investment decision? No you trusted the adviser involved. Once again it's not the product or asset class involved, it's how it's used/promoted and the ignorance of the audience involved
Sir O
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?