Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

k.smith · 7 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

simgrund said:
Mellifuous, with all due respect, we crave constructive inputs on this thread.
I am sticking my neck out here rather than on member's message facility by pointing out that self flagellation was left behind in 2009.
Just as all are entitled to their own opinions, so too all are entitled to a consideration by fellow members.
Don't mean to patronise, but I consider posting POSITIVE to be a consideration.
Such as the news from Melbourne Herald Sun (23 Dec, as posted by Selciper) that Multiplex's attempt to have Class Actions deemed as "managed investment scheme" thrown out.
That was a big win for "reason & logic". More of the same to be hoped for in the future.
Regards

Simgrund,

I think the truth is that we all crave some GOOD NEWS.
The last two years have worn us ragged, and of course we are all optimistic that this year will be better. But hoping and wishing will get us nowhere, we need to make a loud noise so that the powers that be take notice.
I do not consider Mellifuous' comments to be either positive or negative, but informative. It is only when we question, analyse and criticize every avenue and every issue that we can effect change, and this is a very tough industry, and it needs a tough stance to take on the issues.
GOOD NEWS will only come by effecting changes in this industry, and the more changes that can be made to strengthen the unitholders position, the better.

mellifuous · 7 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

simgrund said:
Mellifuous, with all due respect, we crave constructive inputs on this thread.
I am sticking my neck out here rather than on member's message facility by pointing out that self flagellation was left behind in 2009.
Just as all are entitled to their own opinions, so too all are entitled to a consideration by fellow members.
Don't mean to patronise, but I consider posting POSITIVE to be a consideration.
Such as the news from Melbourne Herald Sun (23 Dec, as posted by Selciper) that Multiplex's attempt to have Class Actions deemed as "managed investment scheme" thrown out.
That was a big win for "reason & logic". More of the same to be hoped for in the future.
Regards

Ok, sorry Simgrund, you want 'positive', you don't want 'factual'.

When I sit back and watch members too scared to post an email from the manager, and too afraid to face the reality of their circumstances to ask the ATO just what a mess they are in respect to respect to tax, and then read your post, then I say at best, many prefer to live in a fool's paradise.

We have the choice of either facing the reality of the circumstances in which we find ourselves, or alternatively sticking our respective heads in the sand.

It's not about 'positive' or 'negative', it's about the facts.

But, up to you how you prefer to deal with it.

Your fund has one chance, and that is your class action.

That is only my opinion. Give the ATO a call - if I'm wrong, then I'll stand corrected.

..

Duped · 7 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

mellifuous said:
But isn't this bs just another example of ASIC's passion for 'form' over 'substance.

...

ASIC wrote us and told us our losses in the FMF were the result of our 'prudential choice'.

...

Too true about form over substance. I blame my losses on ASIC's incompetance at pragmatism. Bunch of lofty idealistic appartchiks. They're out of touch breathing in the pure mountain air in Canberra with their clear views of Black Mountain, Brindabellas and Mt Ainslie. The federal agencies have soiled themselves by extending their empire to include the murky bottom end of the market. They should totally distance themselves from anything below the level of APRA compliant. Not tomorrow, today.

ASIC's 'approval' of these funds gave them an air of quality. ASIC effectively elevated their prudential status. Knowingly? Then ASIC stamped Financial Advisors with it's magic stamp of quality to broaden the highway to steer us into these funds.

This is all the agencies' fault. Fiddling with the markets. All they ended up doing was removing the natural defensive barriers that kept us fish away from the sharks. Maybe it's deliberate. To supercharge the velocity of money in Australia. Maybe the Godwin Grechs deep at the core of the earily quiet metropolis of the Federal Triangle didn't like the rate of investment in Australia so it got the agencies to trick us into reallocating our resources. Disarming me. Bang - all our money is spent in a flash instead of over the next 20-30 years of us sitting around in retirement. Oh and presto - the Feds bonus is we all have to go back to work for another ten years producing more GDP, GST, 9% super guarantee, income tax etc etc.

Am I the only one stunned by the Ripoll revelation that my 'Financial Advisor' didn't have a fiduciary duty to me. I mean WTF. What a collosal reckless oversight ... or was it an oversight?

k.smith · 7 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Duped said:
"....ASIC's 'approval' of these funds gave them an air of quality. ASIC effectively elevated their prudential status. Knowingly? Then ASIC stamped Financial Advisors with it's magic stamp of quality to broaden the highway to steer us into these funds..."

Duped,

You are so right. We didn't invest in Fincorp because their PDS dislosed they had some conflict with ASIC...just the mention of conflict in the PDS deterred us.
And from the news today...

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/kleenmaid-founder-turns-to-property-20100106-lspy.html
'...Mr Young’s son Jared, of Next Property Group, is listed as the sales agent for the Stringybark Road development.

Thousands of customers and repair businesses were left out of pocket when the Maroochydore-based Kleenmaid Group collapsed last April with a net debt of at least $82 million.

Mr Young, the original owner of the four-hectare site, who sold it for $890,000 in 1996, denied he was behind the development...."

Enough to make us feel downright negative.
All the more reason to keep up our efforts to effect some changes.

seamisty · 7 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

mellifuous said:
Hey Seamisty, how many times do you have to throw the light switch before you realise the light isn't going to come on?

Although my experience with managed funds is not as lengthy as yours, I have learnt one thing, and that is -> if you don't make the manager feel real pressure, then you waste your time.

I wonder if any of your membership (or leadership) has phoned the help liine at the Tax Offfice and sought advice about the tax implications of 'distributions' and 'payments' by your manager to yourselves - I'm betting there'll be tax implications no matter how payments/distributions are made.

Your manager is able to pay taxable distributions (cost of capital - expense of the fund) even in a fund devoid of income - and that's because the fund is now listed. W.C. can't allow you to be paid redemptions because you're no longer entitled to them.

If the fund had not listed, W.C. (1) could not pay distributions because there is NO income (after expenses of the fund have been accounted for, including impairments) from which to pay them, and (2) could pay members some level of redemptions without any tax considerations.

I wonder if listing the fund is going to cause more BIG troubles than it was worth?

Would payments of 'distributions' or 'payments' comply with the Corporations Act if some members actually have to pay tax? That is, would they be treated equally to other members who did not pay tax?

Food for thought?

mellifuous lListing our fund on the NSX was never a popular option with PIF investors and WC was always aware of this but never the less proceeded with their own agenda regardless. From my own perspective it has been a dismal, albeit expensive exercise and I am sure that Jenny Hutson from Wellington Capital has ignored investors concerns regarding the issue along with many others, ie lack of transparency and failure of initial promises being high on the agenda.

Until such times as PIF investors actually receive their 3 cent return of capital, (income from PIF assets having already being listed on the endangered species list!!!) enabling WC to trigger their ultimate motive of receiving management fees at little or no capital outlay initially, the taxation issue on income cannot be adressed IMHO!! Investors have different circumstances, mine being that any return of capital below the original $1.00 aquisition of unit cost becomes a capital loss which can be carried over or off set from other income in my superannuation fund. We cannot plead our individual cases with the ATO until this scenario actually eventuates!! I do thank you for drawing attention to this potential problem, as you can bet your buttocks PIF investors will be left to do their own research when this long awaited outcome actually eventuates. (if ever)

The difference with PIF investors is, we always knew we were victims of greed, lies, gross mismanagement and yes, even fraud!!! From day one some of us raised the alarm bells (thanks Jadel) which were grossly ignored and fobbed off, only to be recognised and acknowledged well and truly after the damage was done and the evidence supplied from others apart from us!! Yes k.smith, you are correct, results will only be achieved by the decibel of the voice and noise made, otherwise it is of no use shutting the gate after the horse has bolted!!! Keep up the good work those individual investors that plug along regardless and I know you are many. We will make a difference, the blinkers have been discarded and the power will be switched back on, thanks. Seamisty

seamisty · 7 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I would also like to add that this thread is for all PIF investors and related entities to voice their individual opinions/concerns and be open for discussion while at the same time recognising we are all not of the same opinion but respect others point of view even if we disagree. I would hate to see this avenue of communication lost due to conflict of opinion again. Thanks, Seamisty

mellifuous · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

seamisty said:
mellifuous lListing our fund on the NSX was never a popular option with PIF investors and WC was always aware of this but never the less proceeded with their own agenda regardless. From my own perspective it has been a dismal, albeit expensive exercise and I am sure that Jenny Hutson from Wellington Capital has ignored investors concerns regarding the issue along with many others, ie lack of transparency and failure of initial promises being high on the agenda.

Until such times as PIF investors actually receive their 3 cent return of capital, (income from PIF assets having already being listed on the endangered species list!!!) enabling WC to trigger their ultimate motive of receiving management fees at little or no capital outlay initially, the taxation issue on income cannot be adressed IMHO!! Investors have different circumstances, mine being that any return of capital below the original $1.00 aquisition of unit cost becomes a capital loss which can be carried over or off set from other income in my superannuation fund. We cannot plead our individual cases with the ATO until this scenario actually eventuates!! I do thank you for drawing attention to this potential problem, as you can bet your buttocks PIF investors will be left to do their own research when this long awaited outcome actually eventuates. (if ever)

The difference with PIF investors is, we always knew we were victims of greed, lies, gross mismanagement and yes, even fraud!!! From day one some of us raised the alarm bells (thanks Jadel) which were grossly ignored and fobbed off, only to be recognised and acknowledged well and truly after the damage was done and the evidence supplied from others apart from us!! Yes k.smith, you are correct, results will only be achieved by the decibel of the voice and noise made, otherwise it is of no use shutting the gate after the horse has bolted!!! Keep up the good work those individual investors that plug along regardless and I know you are many. We will make a difference, the blinkers have been discarded and the power will be switched back on, thanks. Seamisty

Yes, we're all seeing things a lot clearer with 20-20 vision.

My comment about the light switch relates to asking manager questions that remain unanswered.

Sometimes I get the feeling that it's all a fait accompli - like a motor vehicle accident - one is behind the wheel, one's foot is hard on the brake, but the impact is unavoidable.

No matter what we do, it seems nothing improves for us. Managers have accept to legal resources (at members' expense), we have to pay for our own.

Managers have direct access to ASIC, ASIC treats members like grumblers.

Managers have ALL the information about the fund, members have next to nothing.

There is a gross imbalance between the powers of the manager viz-a-viz investors, and it's all in managers' favour.

As Harry correctly pointed out, these funds were in the new BIG time when they were failing, but now they've failed, there is next to no media coverage.

There just has to be a better system for managed funds that been so decimated.

Mary Lynch · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

A bit of humour never goes astray either.

Duped · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

mellifuous said:
...
No matter what we do, it seems nothing improves for us. Managers have accept to legal resources (at members' expense), we have to pay for our own.

Managers have direct access to ASIC, ASIC treats members like grumblers.

Managers have ALL the information about the fund, members have next to nothing.

There is a gross imbalance between the powers of the manager viz-a-viz investors, and it's all in managers' favour....

Too true. Why is this so? Because of the cosy relationship between the two major parties and industry. And in our case, the finance industry. The vested interests in the finance industry have mobilised forces to fight the introduction of a 'fiduciary duty'. Would they bother trying if they didn't think they might succeed?

Liberal/Labour appease us with words (committees, studies, panels, reviews, boards, etc) but appease the vested interests of industry with actions.

Well, its time to show parliament who's boss. We are.

I believe the only voice we'll ever have, voice that they can't fob off, is on election day. So it's time to shake things up a bit. So this year maybe we should all vote for anything but the two major parties. Remind them us voters are their boss and not industry. Maybe a bit of chaos in parliament house for a few terms will reverse the trend of imbalance and remind them who's boss. Think about it. Am I wrong?

They have their lawyers and lobbyists. We have our vote. Use it.

selciper · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

If the "December" update does not contain the actual numbers which led to the IAC results, we have something extra to worry about. That such fundamental figures (within a democratic country) could be withheld for such a long time is a serious matter. Hopefully, the figures will be published shortly (six months after the event). If they aren't, we can't allow the situation to rest there.

simgrund · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

mellifuous said:
Ok, sorry Simgrund, you want 'positive', you don't want 'factual'.
When I sit back and watch members too scared to post an email from the manager, ,,[balding added],,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
It's not about 'positive' or 'negative', it's about the facts.
But, up to you how you prefer to deal with it.
Your fund has one chance, and that is your class action.
That is only my opinion. Give the ATO a call - if I'm wrong, then I'll stand corrected. ..

Hello Mellifuous,
"Sorry" accepted. If nothing else, these exchanges helped me finally to spell your name right.
Please believe me when I say that "constructive" is exactly that.
But "flogging over flogging over flogging" in a dog's tail chasing exercise is not constructive. Together with you and many, I have a mile long list of destinations where I can spit my venom.
But on review, our combined wisdom could not prevent Constitution changes in mid 2006, which in my view have started the decay.
It would be a progress to have IAC involved on this thread.
I again appeal to John H to post that answer from IAC (#4738). That would be both informative and inclusive.

Stay positive, good friend,
Regards

simgrund · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

seamisty; said:
Good Day Seamisty,
There is no chance of that.
I have been attending anger management courses recommended by ASIC, no less, and have not known despondency since.
Thanks for your last update.
Cheers, simgrund

seamisty · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

selciper said:
If the "December" update does not contain the actual numbers which led to the IAC results, we have something extra to worry about. That such fundamental figures (within a democratic country) could be withheld for such a long time is a serious matter. Hopefully, the figures will be published shortly (six months after the event). If they aren't, we can't allow the situation to rest there.

In my opinion selciper (for what it is worth) the whole Investor Advisory Committee exercise was nothing more than WC making token gestures to pacify PIF investors by delivering one promise made initially. What is there to hide? Why do the results remain a closely guarded secret by WC unless as was predicted by a fund manager, 'the whole exercise will be a total farce'!!!. Well from the amount of correspondence I have received in relation to the issue, JH certainly has not done herself any favours by refusing to make the results public. Just another bit of :bs: useless WC rhetoric, same as telling investors the next investor update was due to be released at end Dec 2009.

Blueboy previously posted comments he received from WC staff;;" WC live in the real world of fact not fiction and only see things from a legal standpoint and it would be pointless for them to join in and answer to a handful of individuals who do not represent the bulk of the fund's unit holders."

Well hello JH, fiction:::a. An imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented. b. The act of inventing such a creation or pretense. ...
www.thefreedictionary.com/fiction

It is FACT that you have provided investors with information which has not eventuated, thus becomes FICTION in my opinion, although it could also be called by other names as well.

Seamisty

mellifuous · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

My recent posting on the Managed fund group.

Re: Managed fund co-operation group

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have an idea ---

The following overcomes one of the drawbacks for investors, the lack of cohesion amongst investors in their respective managed funds (listed and unlisted).

The fact that the manager is organised and focused always puts the manager at a distinct advantage over individual investors.

In order to bring some degree of balance between respective powers, I suggest the following:-

When a managed fund is created, a necessary step in the process is to establish a website (be it the manager's website or elsewhere) with a forum, or alternatively with Yahoo Forums.

The website forum should be moderated by democratically elected members of the fund.

Leadership should be democratically elected from within the forum, with guidelines published for
elections, time frames, etc. It should not be ad hoc.

As each member invests in the fund (scheme), the manager should be compelled to provide that member with a username and password for access to the forum.

There should also be some mechanism for the forum to handle postal communincations to and from members who do not have access to a computer.

I believe that no one should be banned (but postings should necessarily be moderated), and it should be illegal for anyone to join the forum who is not a member of that managed fund.

Any comments?

Duped · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Seamisty. Perhaps this explains everything.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z86V_ICUCD4

selciper · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Newcomers to this forum are advised that Ms Hutson's short homily about life's journey taking us "From Me to We" is still available on Youtube. In other words, the key to success is offered to you in a quick lesson. I sense the video has been modified a little since I last saw it, but I could be wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H60lzsGvAWQ

JohnH · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

simgrund said:
Hello Mellifuous,
"Sorry" accepted. If nothing else, these exchanges helped me finally to spell your name right.
Please believe me when I say that "constructive" is exactly that.
But "flogging over flogging over flogging" in a dog's tail chasing exercise is not constructive. Together with you and many, I have a mile long list of destinations where I can spit my venom.
But on review, our combined wisdom could not prevent Constitution changes in mid 2006, which in my view have started the decay.
It would be a progress to have IAC involved on this thread.
I again appeal to John H to post that answer from IAC (#4738). That would be both informative and inclusive.
Stay positive, good friend,
Regards

Simon, There is really nothing to add that is of relevance. Copywrite issues aside, I could post the complete pdf, but that includes my personal details, and my PDF writer which is 10 years old won't recognise it for editing.

k.smith · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

selciper said:
Newcomers to this forum are advised that Ms Hutson's short homily about life's journey taking us "From Me to We" is still available on Youtube. In other words, the key to success is offered to you in a quick lesson. I sense the video has been modified a little since I last saw it, but I could be wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H60lzsGvAWQ

nice banner in the background......

simgrund · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

JohnH said:
Simon, There is really nothing to add that is of relevance. Copywrite issues aside, I could post the complete pdf, but that includes my personal details, and my PDF writer which is 10 years old won't recognise it for editing.

Sorry John H, I certainly was not prodding for inclusion of any Personal Details. Just the gist of IAC reply to feel their breath.
If it's just a proforma as a PDF, then perhaps it indeed is of no relevance.
Thanks, regards

JohnH · 8 January 2010

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Simon, see your Private Message box

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency