Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Many many thanks Seamisty, what a champion you are!!!!

JohnH said:

I think Jadel's advice - "Perhaps you should contact ASIC to find out if the people behind this offer are trustworthy." is very relevant.

Better the devil we know.................. etc., etc.,

Click to expand...

Re ASIC; aren't they still "loking into" this offer or should we regard the fact of mailing out as an affirmation of an offer having passed ASIC's bastions of scrutineers?
I would appreciate from ASIC the same "REJECT" screamer of a message we are getting from Wellington.
October 29 can't come fast enough to bury this unsolicited saviour.
Regards,

breaker1 said:

Has anybody NOT received Wellington Capitals "Target's Statement" yet in the mail (with the red/balck cover page & 31 pages long)?

Has anybody received the ALF Offer Statement yet in the mail?
thanks

Click to expand...

Hi breaker,
Yes I received mine yesterday (ALF offer).
I will be happy to pass it on to whoever needs it urgently for just one tenth of their fully paid ordinary share.
You can name your own implied value.
Cheers,

I wonder if this mob know that such a capital raising would not get off the ground in Australia, hence the offshore (Vienna) connection/listing. Seamisty


Irw-Press: Alf Group Holdings Ag: Alf Group Holdings Ag – Extraordinary General Meeting And New Class Of Shares

Alf Group Holdings Ag (AG1) wholly owns ALF Group Pty Ltd and its subsidiaries, which includes one of Australia’s largest litigation funders, and a corporate restructuring services company which also provides funding and debt and equity solutions. It is also an acquirer of distressed assets.
For further information please contact:

Full article
http://www.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=179698&catid=590

I finally found time to go through our Weekend Financial Review 11-12 July 2010 and found the attached article entitled "Friends with fast cars, but not in high places" with a photo of the man behind the hostile takeover of the PIF. It makes my blood run cold to think this person of "notorious reputation" might be able to get his hands on our hard earned money...what is left of it.

A quote from the article:

Quote: "That was until an uncharitable Justice George Palmer vetoed the scheme, taking an unhappy view of Our Jim: "Mr Byrnes has a notorious reputation as a standover man and associate of major criminals. In an inquest in 2008 into the murder of one Max Gibson, the coroner described Mr Byrnes, a named 'person of interest' in the inquest, as 'untruthful' and 'manipulative', who had been 'caught lying to the court on more than one occasion'." End Quote

Cookie1 said:

I finally found time to go through our Weekend Financial Review 11-12 July 2010 and found the attached article entitled "Friends with fast cars, but not in high places" with a photo of the man behind the hostile takeover of the PIF. It makes my blood run cold to think this person of "notorious reputation" might be able to get his hands on our hard earned money...what is left of it.

A quote from the article:

Quote: "That was until an uncharitable Justice George Palmer vetoed the scheme, taking an unhappy view of Our Jim: "Mr Byrnes has a notorious reputation as a standover man and associate of major criminals. In an inquest in 2008 into the murder of one Max Gibson, the coroner described Mr Byrnes, a named 'person of interest' in the inquest, as 'untruthful' and 'manipulative', who had been 'caught lying to the court on more than one occasion'." End Quote

Click to expand...

Exactly Cookie, and all those ALF Group Holding overseas investors will be ignorant of the James Warren Herbert Byrnes/ Catherine Gina Byrnes, connection and associated antics. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/cathy-fails-to-rsvp-to-asic/story-e6frezb0-1111118197634

Our Mr Byrnes sure has held some interesting directorships in his time!! Did you know he was a director :bunny: of Sydney’s biggest illegal brothel, Xanadu, before it was shut down? http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/01/found-sydney’s-biggest-illegal-brothel/

Seamisty

http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021722965.PDF

Form 603
Corporations Act 2001
Section 671B
Notice of initial substantial holder

At Present ALF PIF Finance Limited
does not have a relevant interest
in any units in the Premium Income
Fund. ALF PIF Finance Limited is
required to give this notice
pursuant to s671B(1)(c) of the
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
because it has made a takeover bid
for all of the units in the Premium
Income Fund.

Does anyone know if Anthony Stanton has actually resigned and why??? Or what he is doing now??

In the news today...
" nasty memories??"... We unitholders are living this nightmare day to day...

http://www.smh.com.au/business/all-doubts-are-banished-20100712-107yb.html

"...SIGNATURES

While some HFA shareholders may hope the rebranding will erase the nasty memories from its past association with its former shareholder MFS Limited, one former listed HFA satellite still has some clear links with the collapsed Gold Coast financial services firm.

HFA Accelerator Plus, which recently changed its name to Signature Capital Investments, is chaired by John Morrison. He helped advise MFS in his role as a consultant at Grant Samuel. By sheer coincidence, Morrison indirectly owns a stake in another corporate advisory firm, Kaleb Partners, founded in 2008 by the former MFS legal counsel Louise Edwards. By another remarkable coincidence, Edwards is the company secretary of the now named Signature.

The former MFS director Paul Manka also remains a director at Signature. But there is another coincidence: some of Edwards's private business ventures at one point shared the same office space as some of the private ventures of the former MFS chief executive and founder, Michael King.

King, who entered into a personal insolvency agreement last year to appease margin lenders owed $127 million, recently told the Herald: ''I'm never going to be involved in a public company again, never going to be CEO of a big organisation again, and never going to be in financial services again.''....."

K Smith

At least Balmain Trilogy are offering the actual value of the underlying assets to their investors .They have not listed to vultures on the NSX who are preying on the sick and desperate . Additionally we now have to contend with shonky takeover offers from predators who are trying to get the remaining assets for a song.




It is now more than a year since the Rodger Bacon-headed Trilogy Funds Management and its partner, Balmain NB, were voted in as the joint responsible entities of the frozen City Pacific First Mortgage Fund, after vowing to ''stop the rot''.

Stopping ''the rot'' was taken by many of the thousands of investors with $900 million of deposits trapped in the fund as a signal that Balmain Trilogy might try to unfreeze the fund as soon as possible. Or at least try to make a partial capital return.

Yesterday Balmain Trilogy announced plans to hold a unit holder meeting next month ''to vote on a new strategy for the fund''.

It is believed the meeting will ask unit holders to vote on a resolution for a hardship program to help desperate unit holders and a plan to introduce a variable unit price.

This means that instead of each of their units being valued at $1 each, they will be valued to reflect the asset value of the sinking mortgage fund. At last count, 47 ¢ each. Balmain Trilogy has argued that by doing this, unit holders will be able to get some of their money back as soon as possible.

infinitysmart said:

Does anyone know if Anthony Stanton has actually resigned and why??? Or what he is doing now??

Click to expand...

infinity I was told earlier this year that Anthony Stanton from WC had resigned. Perhaps he thought he would get out with his business reputation still intact!!! I do not know what he is doing now but Linkedin has listed a ::Anthony Stanton
Title
Independent Investment Management Professional
Demographic info
South Brisbane Area, Australia
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Tony/Stanton/au-4909-South-Brisbane-Area,-Australia I don't know if it is one and the same. Seamisty

seamisty said:

http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021722965.PDF

Form 603
Corporations Act 2001
Section 671B
Notice of initial substantial holder

At Present ALF PIF Finance Limited does not have a relevant interest in any units in the Premium Income Fund. ALF PIF Finance Limited is required to give this notice pursuant to s671B(1)(c) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
because it has made a takeover bid for all of the units in the Premium Income Fund.

Click to expand...

Thanks seamisty.
s671B(1)(c) A person must give the information referred to in subsection (3) to a listed company, or the responsible entity for a listed registered managed investment scheme, if the person makes a takeover bid for securities of the company or scheme.

s671B(3) The information to be given is:
... and
(c) details of any relevant agreement through which they would have a relevant interest in:
(i) voting shares in the company; or
(ii) interests in the scheme; and
(d) the name of each associate who has a relevant interest in voting shares in the company or interests in the scheme, together with details of:
(i) the nature of their association with the associate; and
(ii) the relevant interest of the associate; and
(iii) any relevant agreement through which the associate has the relevant interest; and
...
(g) any other particulars that are prescribed.

What's the scope of 'relevant agreement' and 'associate'? And how hard would it be to prove that ALF PIF Finance Ltd had a verbal 'relevant agreement' with an 'associate' who is say ... um ... let me see .... one of the borrowers.

Anyone?

And who would put their hand up for taking action against a breach of s671B(3)? ASIC? Bwahahaha. ROFL! :bonk:

Anyone?

Two and a half years after MFS/OCV raided PIF and we STILL don't know when MSF/OCV became insolvent. I have no confidence in any protection alluded to by this legislation.

Anyway, hands up anyone who thinks ALF PIF has any chance of getting 90%?

If not then, what's plan B.

Um ... let me see ... the AFR reported "Mr Byrnes, who bills himself as a disputes resolution specialist, has been attempting to obtain the PIF action group database since April" and then quoted Jim Byrnes saying "I acted originally for a couple of borrowers who were borrowers from MFS who had very large damages claims."

Say I owed PIF $40m. First I'd hire a tough negotiator like lets say, Jim Byrnes, to see if he could get Hutson's WC to ... negotiate. If that doesn't get me a better deal than what better way to get Hutson off your back than to buy the bank, i.e. PIF, turf Hutson's WC out and replace management with individuals with less to gain from ... let's say ... such high valuations? PIF's 'assets' could get more readily written down.

Trading at 8.5c on the NSX I could buy the whole bank (PIF) for $68m. And pick up all the other 'assets' too. Problem of course is that as soon as I start buying in bulk the price will go up. And I'll be named as soon as I hit the top ten shareholders or 5%. Oh and I dont have $70m odd.

1 + 1 = takeover bid.

If I get 51% then I'm only 3 (out of many thousands of a disgruntled) investors away from calling a meeting and voting out WC's 2% golden handshake (i.e. PIF constitution clause 23.3 and/or 23.4) and then turfing WC out completely. Right? Am I wrong?

I wouldn't even need to remove the golden handshake clauses completely. I'd just need to amend the constitution and devalue the 'assets' so I only have to pay WC a few million under clause 23.4.1 to go away.

Oh and I'd get $38m odd coming to me almost immediately from the Wollongong deal.

Probably a flight of fancy. But some red flags have popped up. Like the said negotiator apparently briefly turning up on this forum. But more importantly see paragraph 3.4 of the Bidder's Statement.

"This section sets out ALF’s intentions if the Offer closes and ALF does not acquire 90% of the issued capital of PIF. A number of possibilities are open to ALF including the following:
• allowing the Offer to lapse;
• waiving its 90% minimum acceptance condition; and
• acquiring additional PIF Units to the extent permitted by law;
• requisitioning a meeting of Unitholders to change the current responsible entity."

So when it comes to the ALF PIF offer. It's very very simple for me: no cash up front, no vote. Serious bidders only need apply.

SHOW ME THE MONEY.

Very, VERY well said Duped!!!

http://www.smh.com.au/business/beating-gridlock-the-westfield-way-20100713-109g1.html

SLOW STARTERS

The Jim Byrnes-mentored subsidiary of the former lingerie firm Can Can Holdings (now called ALF) has had a encouraging start in its planned $270 million scrip takeover of the ex-MFS managed Premium Income Fund.

Five days after opening its offer to unit holders of the Newcastle Stock Exchange-listed PIF, the Michael Pakula-chaired ALF disclosed yesterday it held no units in the fund, which was once worth $1 billion.

It is unclear if PIF shareholders are holding out for ALF to raise its scrip offer.

Perhaps they are just concerned about the new details ALF had to provide in its second Bidder's Statement relating to Byrnes's track record as a former bankrupt and banned company director.

Or their reticence may relate to ALF's resubmitted Bidder's Statement noting that PIF unitholder's would only ''share in approximately 20 per cent of the upside'' if they backed the offer.

Maybe they're just reluctant to see the fund's responsible entity - Wellington Capital's Jenny Hutson - get paid the $5.3 million she is due if she is removed as PIF's manager.

Seamisty, It seems to me once we pay out Jenny Hutson there will be nothing left! What are you doing up so early posting messages????

Investor262 said:

Seamisty, It seems to me once we pay out Jenny Hutson there will be nothing left! What are you doing up so early posting messages????

Click to expand...

Didn't Jenny Hutson say at one of the 'travelling roadshows' something to the effect that if she did not perform she would not endorse the exit fee or is that just wishfull thinking? I have suggested she resign due to total lack of performance on several occassions but I am still waiting for an answer. Perhaps she will tell me in person in one of 'my periodic discussions' (June, Oct, Feb) with the managing director offered to me by WC on the 2nd Feb 2010 which I accepted. Oh dear dear!!! Another deadline missed by WC, or another broken committment?

Up early? 3.30 am is a sleep in for me!!!

Seamisty

Received Jim's, or is it Alfie's offer in the post today, together with the latest Gold Coast rates demand.............

......................... not sure which is the most depressing!!!

JohnH said:

Received Jim's, or is it Alfie's offer in the post today, together with the latest Gold Coast rates demand.............

......................... not sure which is the most depressing!!!

Click to expand...

I am still holding onto a faint hope that our IAC will offer some reassuring direction to disperse these confusions.
A great shame that the offer got past ASIC's gates. Not in keeping with their mission statement of "protection" and "in best interests of...".
Thanks seamisty and all AG for continuing information vigilance. Priceless!!!
PS.
Any news on the $20 mil. Fortress judgement frozen by the court.

simgrund said:

I am still holding onto a faint hope that our IAC will offer some reassuring direction to disperse these confusions.
A great shame that the offer got past ASIC's gates. Not in keeping with their mission statement of "protection" and "in best interests of...".
Thanks seamisty and all AG for continuing information vigilance. Priceless!!!
PS.
Any news on the $20 mil. Fortress judgement frozen by the court.

Click to expand...

'Faint hope' simgrund? I don't know about hope but I would probablly ':22_yikes:FAINT' with shock if we even heard anything other than 'regurgitated Wellington Capital rhetoric' from just one of them!! There are also many others concerned as to the effectiveness of our duly 'appointed' IAC representatives and I was asked on behalf of some AG members to contact WC which I did earlier today as follows::


Dear duly appointed IAC reps,

I have not yet received a response from any of you to acknowledge that you have received my previous e mail. Does that mean that PIF investor correspondence is only being tabled three times a year when you meet with WC prior to Investor updates being released?
I have had no response from any of you in relation to previous requests made to have direct contact with Premium Income Fund Action Group representatives. Due to this lack of acknowledgement I am concerned you are not receiving any of my emails.


On behalf of the Premium Income Fund Action Group, with in excess of over 900 current members, I would like the following questions/concerns answered as to the viability of the PIF continuing to fund an IAC committee.

1. Do you as our duly appointed IAC Representatives consider the position you hold
important and beneficial to all PIF investors, considering your continued reluctance
to correspond or have contact with PIF Action Group Representatives?

2. Since you are able to meet with the Fund’s management team, but do not have access
to any information which is not already available to all Unitholders and appear unable to
provide Unitholders with any assistance, do you consider the ongoing role of the IAC as
having ANY future benefit to PIF investors?

3. Do you consider 'tabling correspondence', that is, concerns raised by PIF investors
which has been previously received and scrutinised by Wellington Capital a fair and
honest way to represent investors best interests and for a committee to be conducted?

4. As duly appointed IAC representatives do you consider it transparent and honest that
the voting results of the IAC were withheld from not only those who voted, but also
the other participating IAC nominees?

I would appreciate a response from at least one of you.:::


I would assume that at least one of them would be interested enough to take a peek at our Wellington Capital Premium Income Fund dedicated thread?

How do we even know if our correspondence is passed on?

Seamisty

I think that the next IAC “report” will read something like “ your committee is reading the newspapers which are reporting news about the hostile bid. We agree that it’s an interesting situation and look forward to a positive outcome. Our next report to investors will be forthcoming at a date yet to be determined.”