B
Blueboy1
Guest
Stop wasting everyone's time on this forum,we have enough to worry about without you bleating on over irrelevant topics.
Blueboy1
ASICK - I appreciated your previous post which I will respond to but don't preach to someone when you don't know or understand their circumstances. If this person wants to help people then don't do it by bagging and misrepresenting the facts. If this person is trying to help people involved with PIF - then why the "attack" on G8 Education??
My focus is not "very much focused with SIDS in complete indifference to the anguish suffered by members of the PIF" This is a foolish unmeasured quote. At least the people of PIF have some hope - whether it is with their current management team or if they choose to vote otherwise with someone else. I hope they make the right decisions for themselves - at least they have some hope - I was a shareholder of MFS I had no say in it when Michael King sent it down to tubs and I got ZERO. everyone....stick to the facts stop playing the man and ASICK do your want to stick your other foot in your mouth. Poor attack and poor form! RMStrader.
Perhaps all our complaints regarding the rights issue are having some impact....
in our case,it would be PATHETIC if it is a case of better late than never...
http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.ns...acquisitions approved by members?opendocument
''......ASIC is also proposing to update RG 74 to take into account the significant developments to the law since the guide’s initial publication in 1994. These developments include more specific disclosure requirements and an extension of the regime to listed managed investment schemes. Importantly, there is significant new guidance about the circumstances in which ASIC will provide relief for ‘trust schemes’- complex transactions used to acquire control of a managed investment scheme.
ASIC’s updated guide will provide entities and their advisers with our current views on how the exception in item 7 applies, how we monitor compliance with item 7’s requirements and our policy on granting relief in relation to those requirements.
ASIC is seeking comments on the proposed update to RG 74 by 1 August 2011 and plans to publish a final guide by the end of the year.
Jadel, thanks for sharing your tale with us. Before reading your tale I was convinced that we just had the misfortune of falling in with a few crooks. Now I am really, really concerned as there is a pattern developing of recurrent fraud, deception and theft on a massive scale by an organised group of criminals that have been operating for many years with impunity. I just thought the regulators were incompetent, under-funded and inept, and hoped maybe they would take at least some action down the line. How naive I was! THERE IS NO CORPORATE REGULATION IN AUSTRALIA, and we are left to fend for ourselves in a shark pool.
They only seek industry comment not investor comment. TOO LITTLE TOO LATE ASIC!
Just a reminder that your votes have to be at computershare no later than the 13th of June.
Remember to vote FOR the amendments if you intend to stop the excuses, Lies and Rorting of the fund.
If people can't attend the meeting on the 16th of June and intend to cast a proxy vote. I strongly suggest you please use the paperwork supplied by Castlereagh Capital and send it to computershare rather than Armstrong registries.
I've found out personally that Strange things occur when any mail is directed to Armstrong registries and Wellington Capital.
My new motto. Don't let a lawyer anywhere near your money. Being a lawyer doesn't automatically mean you make good business decisions. Being a lawyer may get you through the forest without bumping into any trees, but at which side of the forest will you end up?
Breaker's latest AG newsletter is a fine example of dedication and professionalism which is of great benefit to us all. I'm sure that the "Hutson team" wishes that that Charles36, Breaker and the AG would just peacefully retire and grow roses. I suspect that when Wellington took over PIF they never dreamt that an agile action committee would be formed. After all, so many investors were from an elderly demographic...
ksmith please post the number that you called Computershare on to verify your vote as I have had several enquiries from voters wanting confirmation of receipt. Thanks, Seamisty
Wellington has recently issued a pink proxy form which advises that it should be returned to:
Armstrong Registry. Armstrong, is a company beneficially owned by Jenny Hutson the
Chairwoman and Managing Director of Wellington, Mary-Anne Greaves a Director of
Wellington and Rachel Weeks director of McLean Legal, who is the solicitor acting on behalf
of Wellington in relation to the meeting. Armstrong’s annualised costs for registry services
are $500,000. Castlereagh has received a quote from an independent registry operator to
perform the same service for $100,000.
It is our view returning proxies to Armstrong creates a significant conflict of interest. We
encourage you to ignore the pink proxy form sent by Wellington and only return your
yellow proxy to Computershare who are an independent Australian leader in proxy
registration. Computershare are required to act honestly and independently as part of their
charter. They do not have the same conflicts as Armstrong.
Thanks to all those who had notified me that they have voted by private message on the forum, by email and ph calls. Great work, early days.Seamisty
Thanks to all those who had notified me that they have voted by private message on the forum, by email and ph calls. Great work, early days.Seamisty
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?