Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

simgrund · 26 June 2011

HANDS OFF OUR JENNY

In sympathy to Jenny; a personal solicitation,

As I was nearing the end of a long return journey from yet another aborted meeting, IT occurred to me.
The "IT" being your solution, no; your Salvation no less.
Salvation from all these Court houndings. Salvation from member bashings, press shellacking, peer group downgrading and similar denigrations to your persona.

Jenny; your solution is to declare yourself mad.
Or as lawyers like to characterise such condition in their court depositions as “cuckoo” “loony” “psycho” “raver” & ad nauseam other.
Your urgent Application will be given preferential treatment by any Court Registrar as they will fondly associate this Application with many previous from you for other, no less lunatic, legal endeavours.
Certification will be a cert!
You will not have to rely solely on your own self-assessment, as there will be multitudes from PIF midst to support the Application with glowing testimonials.

The benefits will be immediate.
You will be protected, cosseted, sanctuarised and insulated from outside rubble.
Entire Government Departments will be at your disposal to attend to any murmur of a complaint from you in the defense of your “protected status”.
Once in the safety of such rectum rectification facility, you no longer will have the need for your “imaginary friends” such as IAC or PIF Reaction Group.
You will have real ones. I can be one. I can come and have some chess playing with you.
All real Mad People played brilliant chess, like Fisher, Morphy,
Steinitz, Pillsbury. Indeed, you will be in illustrious company.

Once you acclimatise, you may be upgraded to superior chicken soup made
from free-range chickens. Unlike myself; as I now won’t be able to afford even the rarest of stakes after the expenses of this last trip to Sydney.

Please, do not hesitate to explore this propitiatory proposition.
I can guide you further.
As I recently guided Marrickville Mayor after her infestation with international affairs, while forsaking the locals.
Or the Burwood Court Magistrate from my recent case there.
This one may have gone to the Dark Side for good.
But I digress.

Feel free to use this friendly Forum for any supportive purpose.

Sincerely,

marcom · 27 June 2011

ASIC to warn before taking action: report

Published 7:52 AM, 27 Jun 2011 Last update 7:52 AM, 27 Jun 2011

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...report-pd20110627-J7TE2?OpenDocument&src=hp11

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) is set to warn companies, boards and advisors before it moves to take any action against them, in the wake of recent criticism over its transparency, according to The Australian Financial Review.

According to the report, the change is part of a move by the regulator to be more open in its dealings and is being pushed by new ASIC chairman Greg Medcraft.

Calls for the change came out of a recent ASIC stakeholder survey and will bring the regulator into line with fellow watchdogs such as the tax office and ACCC.

The policy is in contrast to that of former ASIC chair Tony D'Aloisio, who believed that such an approach limited flexibility, according to the AFR.

Its not warnings we want, we want ACTION!!!!

Duped · 27 June 2011

zixo said:
Can someone advise me if Unit holders who have already voted for wellington who after reading the latest facts about our TRUSTEE now choose to change their vote..are they still eligible.

Can you please tell me what needs to occur?

If its at all possible I Stongly suggest anyone who now has Now finally seen the light to send your proxies to computershare.

Because perhaps wellington Capitals and Armstrongs registries computers may still be in the 2nd floor foyer at the grace hotel printing out PIF units to young unsuspecting students?

Didn't someone post on this thread that unit holders can just send in another voting form and that the latest form will displace any previous form? Perhaps call Castlereagh for confirmation because it's in their interests to get your vote AND for that vote to be valid. Castlereagh may even send out a a fresh form. Computershare confirmed that that you can vote again and it's the latest one that counts.

Duped · 27 June 2011

DoraNBoots said:
Just a reminder that yesterday’s rent-a-crowd is not the first time a group has been paid to show support for WC. On 15 Sept 2008, WC advised some investors there would be a rally held by investors on the front steps of the WC building. The rally was to show support for WC and disapproval of ASIC taking WC to court (the judge ruled WC had mislead with regard to the "quarterly thereafter statements" in the Explanatory Memorandum)

Here's a picture of the rally of 'investors' that took place on the front steps of 307 Queen Street Brisbane 15 Sept 2008:
View attachment 43377

The members of the rally were of course not investors but uni students who were paid $75 cash each. WC were supplying bottled water. The students could not answer questions about the PIF when asked by a bystander. Their spokes person and organiser was not an investor in the PIF either.

The students were chanting and handing out a red flyer which among other things said "PIF off ASIC!!" The flyer had the same feel to it as the two anonymous letters all unit holders received in the mail recently.

How prescient that one dissenting woman in the middle with the sign 'GO Jenny'. Yes Jenny, please just go when your RE is voted to leave!

Mutchy · 27 June 2011

Duped said:
Didn't someone post on this thread that unit holders can just send in another voting form and that the latest form will displace any previous form? Perhaps call Castlereagh for confirmation because it's in their interests to get your vote AND for that vote to be valid. Castlereagh may even send out a a fresh form. Computershare confirmed that that you can vote again and it's the latest one that counts.

Yes, you can submit a new proxy form and it will supersede your previous form. You can change anything on the form including who you nominate to be your proxy holder at the next meeting if you can not attend and want someone to represent you. New forms can be downloaded from the Castlereagh Capital website:

http://castlereagh.rlbrandmgmt.com.au/include/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/PIF_Proxy_Form.pdf

I understand voting will cease 72 hours before the next Extraordinary General Meeting which is to be held on 14th July 2011.
Steve

DepressedDad · 27 June 2011

From Wikipedia:
Bribery, a form of corruption, is an act implying money or gift given that alters the behavior of the recipient. Bribery constitutes a crime and is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal duty.

The bribe is the gift bestowed to influence the recipient's conduct. It may be any money, good, right in action, property, preferment, privilege, emolument, object of value, advantage, or merely a promise or undertaking to induce or influence the action, vote, or influence of a person in an official or public capacity.[1]

__________________________________________________________________
Despite Hutson not knowing anything about it (but instructing the people who had been bribed, about how to vote) crimes have clearly been committed. The payment of $100 was solely a bribe, (no photo shoot in sight) and there is concrete evidence of how & who paid the bribes.

Apart from the abhorrent fact that she is so despictably dishonest & immoral & unprofessioonal to have done this to us, HER investors, it is a crime.

Surprisingly her lawyer husband (working for the law firm we pay) didn't point out to her that bribery is actually against the law.

selciper · 27 June 2011

Will ASIC take action based on the recent SMH report by Michael West about the dark side of the aborted EGM? It's more than likely that the ASIC "flying squad" will remain grounded, yawning their way through yet another one of tjeir inactive weeks.

k.smith · 27 June 2011

Interesting development..??

1,000,000 shares have just traded on the NSX for 9.8c/10c

Duped · 27 June 2011

Mutchy said:
You are correct. The sum of all proxy votes should all add to the same figure. You can't have any discrepancy because only whole proxy forms are acceptable and the total figure will be the total number of proxy forms received. As I understand the practice, unticked boxes are an "abstain" unless the person counting the proxies ticks one of the the unticked boxes "for" or "against". That's why an unbiased and unrelated independent company should tally the votes.

Compared with the figures I have seen from Computershare the figures for the "abstain" vote are about one sixth of those received by Computershare. Also the figures for the "For" vote are lower than those from Computershare.

The magnitude of the figures suggest Armstrong Registry Services have combined the figures from Computershare with their own. Otherwise the total numbers of proxies lodged would be about 900,000,000. This exceeds the total number of units on issue being 830,000,000. Armstrong have been supplied with Computershare figures on an almost daily basis while Armstrong have refused to do the same.

Based on the proportions of votes received being about 90% "for" and 5% "against" as Mr Phil Armstrong of Castlereagh Capital has said, the total number of investors who would vote against the motions would be about 5% of 755,000,000 ie 37,750,000. This assumes all of the proxies voting against the motions had been received by Armstrong Registry Services and 100% of our investors had voted.

The total issued units is about 755,000,000 being original issue and 75,000,000 being the Placement ie 830,000,000.

If we assume the total placement voted "against" and add that number to the maximum proportion calculated above we get 75,000,000 + 37,750,000 = 112,000,000.

To see figures approaching 300,000,000 "against" is unbelievable. When coupled with other discrepancies, especially the totals not being the same, the table in the NSX release appears to be a fabrication. One could therefore seriously doubt the ability and integrity of Armstrong Registry Services.

Steve

Too true Mutchy. I slipped up with the total units on issue. NSX this morning lists it as 830,532,768.

When I add the 325 million Castereagh totals (that was reported in the press) to WC's totals I get:
Resolution 1: 818,747,927
Resolution 2: 818,920,563
Resolution 3: 818,425,650
Resolution 4: 820,567,028
Resolution 5: 856,546,372
Resolution 6: 856,970,337
Resolution 7: 818,388,031

If I remove the implausible results for 5 and 6, the average is 819,009,840. I.e. about 1.387% of units didn't vote. Is this about normal? Seems like a high 'turnout' to me.

If we apply this total of 819,009,840 to the totals of 'FOR votes' given by Castlereagh and Wellington for Resolutions 5 and 6, then the 'FOR vote' won by 59.27% and 62.41% respectively. (This calculation effectively just removes about 38million 'AGAINST votes' from WC's published list.)

(If WC won the chair and directed the 'open votes' AGAINST resolutions 5 and 6 then these numbers drop by about 2.5%.)

(If I also drop the statistically 'out laying' total for Resolution 4 then the average (for resolutions 1-3 and 7) comes down to 818,620,543. I.e. 1.434% of units didn't vote. If I apply this total of 818,620,543 again to Resolutions 5 and 6, then the 'FOR vote' wins by 59.30% and 62.44% respectively.)

Now Castlereagh was reported in the press as saying that 82% of the 325million votes received for Res 5 where FOR, whereas it was about 90% for the other 6 resolutions. I.e. 9% lower FOR votes for Res5. If I apply this same pattern to WC's published totals then Resolution 5 gets about 466.5 million out of the above calculated 819,009,840 votes cast: i.e. 57.0% FOR votes.

Of course, these calculations are wholly reliant on completely unaudited and obviously questionable figures.

Duped · 27 June 2011

k.smith said:
Interesting development..??

1,000,000 shares have just traded on the NSX for 9.8c/10c

Those transactions went straight through. I.e. I checked the BIDS earlier this morning and there was nothing listed above the 140+ thousand at 8.8c. My guess is that many unit holders are all sitting on huge capital losses that apparently can be offset against capital gains made elsewhere. Given that we are three days out from the end of the financial year I'd guess that some, out of the ordinary, transactions could take place. Although fingers crossed that the price is on the up after last week's activities.

JohnH · 27 June 2011

Duped said:
Those transactions went straight through. I.e. I checked the BIDS earlier this morning and there was nothing listed above the 140+ thousand at 8.8c. My guess is that many unit holders are all sitting on huge capital losses that apparently can be offset against capital gains made elsewhere. Given that we are three days out from the end of the financial year I'd guess that some, out of the ordinary, transactions could take place. Although fingers crossed that the price is on the up after last week's activities.

Maybe it's the Red Witch cashing in to pay for her minders and ring-ins!

Duped · 27 June 2011

Duped said:
Those transactions went straight through. I.e. I checked the BIDS earlier this morning and there was nothing listed above the 140+ thousand at 8.8c. My guess is that many unit holders are all sitting on huge capital losses that apparently can be offset against capital gains made elsewhere. Given that we are three days out from the end of the financial year I'd guess that some, out of the ordinary, transactions could take place. Although fingers crossed that the price is on the up after last week's activities.

Furthermore, these transactions mean that WC can hence report in the next Update that 30.9% of the units traded in the quarter were at or above 10c. (This of course can change during the next 3 days.)

Duped · 27 June 2011

JohnH said:
Maybe it's the Red Witch cashing in to pay for her minders and ring-ins!

Begs that question too doesn't it. I understand that off market transactions are legal. But I'm not sure if these are recording as 'trades' with the NSX (or ASX for that matter). Either way, why did someone pay 10c each when they didn't even bother to bid at e.g 9c for even just a day?

astevo · 27 June 2011

JohnH said:
Maybe it's the Red Witch cashing in to pay for her minders and ring-ins!

or someone needs a million units to help 'stack' the next meeting! (and maybe it's tax deductible or even re-imbursable as "meeting expenses")

- Alan.

Sutho81 · 27 June 2011

Should we be worried about the excissive trading on the NSX and who is getting those units?

Does anyone have information about that other attempted take over from ALF, could they have purchased units in the fund and are now selling them back as their attempt failed?

The actions be Wellington have certainly made me more determined to get rid of them. It is clear to me that all Wellington wants is to drain our fund of whatever money they can get out of it and leave us with nothing.

Mutchy · 27 June 2011

Interesting decision by the court regarding the role of directors and their reliance on their auditors. It may well bear on our Class Action.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/27/3254406.htm

Steve

Jadel · 27 June 2011

Mutchy said:
Interesting decision by the court regarding the role of directors and their reliance on their auditors. It may well bear on our Class Action.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/27/3254406.htm

Steve

I sincerely hope this court judgment means we can get the CEO Andrew Peacock back from America to face the music Mutchy ??? . It is deplorable that he is not mentioned as
having had any responsibility at all in the fraudulent activity regarding the PIF.

He would be living the high life in that society ,with his ex ambassador wife , no doubt oblivious to the fact that he has destroyed the lives of a great many investors, who completely relied on his integrity and reputation to invest in MFS and the PIF.

charles36 · 27 June 2011

Just to let you know that Seamisty and her husband are both well and still on their trek north. My wife and I were pleased to have them as our guests for lunch today. She asked me to inform you that she is still in touch with ASF and is eagerly awaiting a chance to again post on the forum. We wished them well on their journey on behalf of all PIFAG members and avid readers of the ASF. In the meantime our lawyers are busy sharpening their pencils and preparing for the forthcoming Court case on the 6 July, 2011at the Supreme Court, Brisbane. I am looking forward to receiving my subpoena demanding my presence.

pifed · 27 June 2011

Jadel said:
I sincerely hope this court judgment means we can get the CEO Andrew Peacock back from America to face the music Mutchy ??? . It is deplorable that he is not mentioned as
having had any responsibility at all in the fraudulent activity regarding the PIF.

He would be living the high life in that society ,with his ex ambassador wife , no doubt oblivious to the fact that he has destroyed the lives of a great many investors, who completely relied on his integrity and reputation to invest in MFS and the PIF.

I would doubt that Andrew Peacock would have enough nouse to know what he was getting involved in, and hence the Crook MFS directors needed a stooge like him

zixo · 27 June 2011

This is about our old "friends" in the ALF.
I wonder if the premium Income fund is susceptible to another takeover from "colourful" characters since WC took control with our very own list of "colourful" Characters?

ALF hopes for better luck listing
Scott Rochfort
June 27, 2011
CBD
After taking more than a year to win over 1.17 per cent of the unitholders in the MFS-founded Premium Income Fund as part of its popular takeover bid, the business advised by the banned company director Jim Byrnes is now looking to list on the ASX.

On Friday, ALF PIF Finance (a subsidiary of a former lingerie firm) took what appeared to be its first steps towards a planned listing by changing its name to ALF Finance Ltd. It is now believed ALF (aka Australian Litigation Funders), which includes Byrnes's wife, Gina, as a director, along with the former ragtrader Michael Pakula, hopes to lodge a prospectus with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission in the next few weeks.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/alf-hopes-for-better-luck-listing-20110626-1glt3.html

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency