Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF
- Thread starter breaker1
- Start date
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Hello again.
Javier has given a report which covers all the points I intended to cover.
On the nature of the 3 cents capital payment:
JH said today that there were three concepts necessary to embrace concerning the 3 cents payment. There is the common concept of cash, the accounting concept of dividend/capital and the taxation concept of dividend/capital. Three cents in the hand is cash to all of us. Three cents return on a $1.00 investment is a dividend in accounting parlance. The PIF balance sheet now holds large amounts of money as losses which may for taxation purposes be offset against earnings. When the earnings are offset by a corresponding loss and then given to unit holders they are said to be capital. The 3 cents as Javier has reported is not capital to be subtracted from our $1.00 nominal unit value and for most of us will be tax free.
As time goes by and earnings which cannot be offset by losses form part of the dividend then this will be clearly stated in the end of financial year statement and correspondingly tax may be payable on a proportion of the funds received in your hands depending on your own particular circumstances.
Mutchy
Hello again.
Javier has given a report which covers all the points I intended to cover.
On the nature of the 3 cents capital payment:
JH said today that there were three concepts necessary to embrace concerning the 3 cents payment. There is the common concept of cash, the accounting concept of dividend/capital and the taxation concept of dividend/capital. Three cents in the hand is cash to all of us. Three cents return on a $1.00 investment is a dividend in accounting parlance. The PIF balance sheet now holds large amounts of money as losses which may for taxation purposes be offset against earnings. When the earnings are offset by a corresponding loss and then given to unit holders they are said to be capital. The 3 cents as Javier has reported is not capital to be subtracted from our $1.00 nominal unit value and for most of us will be tax free.
As time goes by and earnings which cannot be offset by losses form part of the dividend then this will be clearly stated in the end of financial year statement and correspondingly tax may be payable on a proportion of the funds received in your hands depending on your own particular circumstances.
Mutchy
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
As it can only happen in QLD for us old enough to remember.
Now that the media chooks were now fat and well fed by Joe, some hungry chickens begin to ask some embarrassing questions to which Joe replied;
"Now don't you go and worry yourself about that".
Does this story sound familiar to what is happening to us.
If history repeats itself in QLD, we about the witness the biggest investor upset and enquiry ever in Australia.
As it can only happen in QLD for us old enough to remember.
Now that the media chooks were now fat and well fed by Joe, some hungry chickens begin to ask some embarrassing questions to which Joe replied;
"Now don't you go and worry yourself about that".
Does this story sound familiar to what is happening to us.
If history repeats itself in QLD, we about the witness the biggest investor upset and enquiry ever in Australia.
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Deano - We've been over that on about 100 past posts. Have a read.
Dstar - you aren't an incarnation of Tuart are you?
We are looking for answers/solutions, not throwing more fuel on the fire of already angry investors.
Deano - We've been over that on about 100 past posts. Have a read.
Dstar - you aren't an incarnation of Tuart are you?
We are looking for answers/solutions, not throwing more fuel on the fire of already angry investors.
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Many thanks to all who have been reporting on the meetings which many of us were unable to attend. Except for a couple of the posts, I feel moderately encouraged by the impressions. This AG, in the circumstances, is a Godsend. And it's good news to hear that ASIC is a growing priority.
Many thanks to all who have been reporting on the meetings which many of us were unable to attend. Except for a couple of the posts, I feel moderately encouraged by the impressions. This AG, in the circumstances, is a Godsend. And it's good news to hear that ASIC is a growing priority.
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Tuart is on holidays so cross him off the list!! At the end of the day it is simple arithmatic.If in the next 12 months we can realise 50-65 cents value in our units and can cash them out somehow and re-invest that capital we would be better off than being locked into a fund that will just dribble a 5-6% return if we are lucky over 3-5 years with the uncertainty of the end result of a lesser unit value. If JH is half the business woman she has been given credit for,she would have an ace up her sleeve, whether it be in the way of having secured money relating to the $50million Support facility or another avenue.Gone are the days of ignorant unsophisticated investors!!! Rest assured that even if the PIF Action Group only represents a small minority of holders in the PIF, we will endeavour to keep others informed in any way possible. I am still hoping to be proven wrong and that WC will prove itself worthy of making the best of an already tainted product. If ever an opportunity was made available to make a name for yourself as an enterpreneur this is it WC, go for it!! seamisty
- Joined
- 13 June 2008
- Posts
- 4
- Reactions
- 0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Folk,
Frustratingly I was unable to attend today's PIF forum in Sydney, but must commend WC on the prompt & courteous reply to my emailed apology. I received (on Dad's behalf) the '3 scenarios' letter from WIML in today's mail: in my mind, the current/realisable value of PIF units net of costs is $0.14 and anything else is highly speculative. I have NO doubt that this figure allows for generous compensation for the liquidator and all other parties involved in the wind-up should this be the sorry outcome by 31-Mar-09.
Sorry to be harsh, but look around you - the value of any 'assets' (other than cash) held by PIF are declining in the current market with no upside in sight. The real value of an asset is what it sells for (net of costs) NOT what you think it might be worth - rampant speculation and 'imaginary' valuation of assets is what got the fund where it is today not to mention some highly questionable 'smoke and mirrors' loan transactions - from which, I'm sure, various 'facilitation fees' etc. were siphoned off at every possible stage.
I am resigned to the fact that Dad's investment has been lodged with an industry that can't tell corporate governance from a hole in the ground, run by people who don't give a damn about their investors' livelihoods or circumstances. It is not the nature of this industry to be transparent (or, it seems, even accountable) and I don't see Jenny Hutson as being sufficiently removed from the MFS/Octaviar gene-pool to be free of the taint despite the very public posturing of recent days.
My suggestion, unsavoury though it may be, is to regard the realistic value of PIF units as being $0.14, and question in the strongest terms the lkelihood of any further REAL value being added to this in 3~5 years. I would regard as delusional the 'Going concern with full recovery of $147.5m from MFS' scenario, and I would strongly question the asset-backing that supports the $0.45 unit valuation as a 'Going concern with no recovery from MFS' based on the ongoing write-downs and write-offs which are the order of the day.
As for transparency, I wonder how much of the Price Waterhouse Coopers report will ever see public scrutiny? Let's face it, this is an industry driven by greed and opportunism not ethics or altruism.
Sorry for the pessimistic view,
Rick.
Folk,
Frustratingly I was unable to attend today's PIF forum in Sydney, but must commend WC on the prompt & courteous reply to my emailed apology. I received (on Dad's behalf) the '3 scenarios' letter from WIML in today's mail: in my mind, the current/realisable value of PIF units net of costs is $0.14 and anything else is highly speculative. I have NO doubt that this figure allows for generous compensation for the liquidator and all other parties involved in the wind-up should this be the sorry outcome by 31-Mar-09.
Sorry to be harsh, but look around you - the value of any 'assets' (other than cash) held by PIF are declining in the current market with no upside in sight. The real value of an asset is what it sells for (net of costs) NOT what you think it might be worth - rampant speculation and 'imaginary' valuation of assets is what got the fund where it is today not to mention some highly questionable 'smoke and mirrors' loan transactions - from which, I'm sure, various 'facilitation fees' etc. were siphoned off at every possible stage.
I am resigned to the fact that Dad's investment has been lodged with an industry that can't tell corporate governance from a hole in the ground, run by people who don't give a damn about their investors' livelihoods or circumstances. It is not the nature of this industry to be transparent (or, it seems, even accountable) and I don't see Jenny Hutson as being sufficiently removed from the MFS/Octaviar gene-pool to be free of the taint despite the very public posturing of recent days.
My suggestion, unsavoury though it may be, is to regard the realistic value of PIF units as being $0.14, and question in the strongest terms the lkelihood of any further REAL value being added to this in 3~5 years. I would regard as delusional the 'Going concern with full recovery of $147.5m from MFS' scenario, and I would strongly question the asset-backing that supports the $0.45 unit valuation as a 'Going concern with no recovery from MFS' based on the ongoing write-downs and write-offs which are the order of the day.
As for transparency, I wonder how much of the Price Waterhouse Coopers report will ever see public scrutiny? Let's face it, this is an industry driven by greed and opportunism not ethics or altruism.
Sorry for the pessimistic view,
Rick.
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Someone has to take up the “no” debate. For the record I have a large stake in this fund, and have some insights into the industry workings and its drivers, and in MFS legacy. Other AG members also do, so don’t shoot the messengers. We have yet to see those explicit risks shared with the investor base and that is critical to protecting our current (liquidated) fund value. I haven’t heard an impartial expert observer support WC strategy moving forward, and yet several that dispel it as nonsense.
Opinions expressed by Jenny are qualified in her own words, as “hopes and commitment” but not backed by either track record or disclosures to hang your hat on. E.g. WC was ‘picked’ out of 6 to manage the fund - however that doesn't say anything about WC or the undisclosed other bidders. When promoters speak, listen also to what is not said. Remember JH legal background and business agenda. I recall days with my rebellious young children having to say “I love you all but this is not a democracy ….”
The alternative is not all doom. It's not a zero return like some other funds. There is still the option of a return in the short term, with a degree of certainty. The is still claw back possible from MFS with/without WC. We all want to hope in 'white knight' but can anyone identify one bailing out any mis-managed funds having turned to dust?
There is no benefit in sentiment after a bad investment, or sense in risking an opportunity compared to, say, taking a stop-loss position.
Considering all, ask whether you would recommend someone else to buy into this PIF for another 3 years? Bird-in-the-hand vs (?) in the bush.
Someone has to take up the “no” debate. For the record I have a large stake in this fund, and have some insights into the industry workings and its drivers, and in MFS legacy. Other AG members also do, so don’t shoot the messengers. We have yet to see those explicit risks shared with the investor base and that is critical to protecting our current (liquidated) fund value. I haven’t heard an impartial expert observer support WC strategy moving forward, and yet several that dispel it as nonsense.
Opinions expressed by Jenny are qualified in her own words, as “hopes and commitment” but not backed by either track record or disclosures to hang your hat on. E.g. WC was ‘picked’ out of 6 to manage the fund - however that doesn't say anything about WC or the undisclosed other bidders. When promoters speak, listen also to what is not said. Remember JH legal background and business agenda. I recall days with my rebellious young children having to say “I love you all but this is not a democracy ….”
The alternative is not all doom. It's not a zero return like some other funds. There is still the option of a return in the short term, with a degree of certainty. The is still claw back possible from MFS with/without WC. We all want to hope in 'white knight' but can anyone identify one bailing out any mis-managed funds having turned to dust?
There is no benefit in sentiment after a bad investment, or sense in risking an opportunity compared to, say, taking a stop-loss position.
Considering all, ask whether you would recommend someone else to buy into this PIF for another 3 years? Bird-in-the-hand vs (?) in the bush.
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Rick & Dstar - i agree with you both - forget 65c valuations - forget 45c valuations thats the hope wellington are selling you to keep the thing alive so they can generate a fee / income for themselves out of your money - Rick i'm in the same boat as you - my mum and little brother both done their shirts in this thing after being told 12 months prior to get their money out - they said to me those people were so nice and convinced us to stay in the fund - hope the people doing the convincing have a proper authority to provide investment advice otherwise those people can be persued quite easily by ASIC - you can't give anything that would be considered advice or a recommendation without authority.
the value of the fund is 14c until they come clean on the asset side of things and tell everyone what the actual assets are that back the valuations they have provided - once you know what the assets are then it will be very easy to work out whether the valuation of the particular asset is real and over what time frame its realiaseable ( thats what you have to find out to make your decision on which way to head with your investment)
Investment banks around the world are shedding staff hand over fist at the moment because there is no work around - these are the best investment banks in the world and they are struggling to write a ticket - why should you freely hand control to someone - who i think is providing lip service to the key issue - is definitely conflicted with her involvement - i hope i'm wrong - but having worked with many investment bankers in my day - there all in it for the thrill of closing the deal and bragging about the fee - very few of them really care about the end investor - if it can be spun and sold it works for them - and i'm getting a wiff of that the more i read on this.
Wellington must provide a detailed summary of all assets and provide details on the process for coming up with their valuations - if they do that then i think there is some credibility there - if they don't - i smell a rat
Rick & Dstar - i agree with you both - forget 65c valuations - forget 45c valuations thats the hope wellington are selling you to keep the thing alive so they can generate a fee / income for themselves out of your money - Rick i'm in the same boat as you - my mum and little brother both done their shirts in this thing after being told 12 months prior to get their money out - they said to me those people were so nice and convinced us to stay in the fund - hope the people doing the convincing have a proper authority to provide investment advice otherwise those people can be persued quite easily by ASIC - you can't give anything that would be considered advice or a recommendation without authority.
the value of the fund is 14c until they come clean on the asset side of things and tell everyone what the actual assets are that back the valuations they have provided - once you know what the assets are then it will be very easy to work out whether the valuation of the particular asset is real and over what time frame its realiaseable ( thats what you have to find out to make your decision on which way to head with your investment)
Investment banks around the world are shedding staff hand over fist at the moment because there is no work around - these are the best investment banks in the world and they are struggling to write a ticket - why should you freely hand control to someone - who i think is providing lip service to the key issue - is definitely conflicted with her involvement - i hope i'm wrong - but having worked with many investment bankers in my day - there all in it for the thrill of closing the deal and bragging about the fee - very few of them really care about the end investor - if it can be spun and sold it works for them - and i'm getting a wiff of that the more i read on this.
Wellington must provide a detailed summary of all assets and provide details on the process for coming up with their valuations - if they do that then i think there is some credibility there - if they don't - i smell a rat
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
More Scott-Octaviar entanglements reported today in Business Spectator.
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/ANZ-nets-Octaviar-chiefs-stake-GDN64?OpenDocument
More Scott-Octaviar entanglements reported today in Business Spectator.
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/ANZ-nets-Octaviar-chiefs-stake-GDN64?OpenDocument
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
A significant portion of Mr Scott's 4.64 per cent stake in Octaviar, formerly MFS, is understood to have been placed in stock lending agreement with Primebroker, Herald Sun reports.
According to the report, Chimaera management failed to notify Mr Scott that his margin lending account had did not meet its loan-to-valuation requirements.
Last week ANZ placed Primebroker, a subsidiary of Chimaera Financial Group, into receivership. On Tuesday, ANZ revealed it had acquired control of 5.05 per cent of Octaviar, and significant stakes in nine other companies.
While said it will ANZ proceed with the sale of its newly-acquired stock, there may be some problem in moving Octaviar's scrip with the company presently suspended from the ASX.
Earlier this week, ANZ also gained control of 13.2 per cent of Bill Express after the payment company collapsed owing the bank $53 million.
Here is the article:::Octaviar Ltd chief executive Chris Scott has been caught up in the collapse of Primebroker, resulting in Australia and New Zealand Banking Group seizing most of his holding in the stricken firm.
A significant portion of Mr Scott's 4.64 per cent stake in Octaviar, formerly MFS, is understood to have been placed in stock lending agreement with Primebroker, Herald Sun reports.
According to the report, Chimaera management failed to notify Mr Scott that his margin lending account had did not meet its loan-to-valuation requirements.
Last week ANZ placed Primebroker, a subsidiary of Chimaera Financial Group, into receivership. On Tuesday, ANZ revealed it had acquired control of 5.05 per cent of Octaviar, and significant stakes in nine other companies.
While said it will ANZ proceed with the sale of its newly-acquired stock, there may be some problem in moving Octaviar's scrip with the company presently suspended from the ASX.
Earlier this week, ANZ also gained control of 13.2 per cent of Bill Express after the payment company collapsed owing the bank $53 million.
- Joined
- 22 May 2008
- Posts
- 758
- Reactions
- 0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
The $0.14 is a liquidation value if it was all sold today, not a windup to 31/3/09.
They've had 333 Capital (division of Korda Mentha) helping work through this. With the attention this is going to get from ASIC/Press, do you think WC are going to make statements (i.e. $0.45) they cannot support in terms of valuations??
If you want to vent some anger, maybe scream in the backyard. We are looking for solutions not more negativity.
Any property developers felt aggrieved by MFS in the past need not post on this forum.
Cheers
The $0.14 is a liquidation value if it was all sold today, not a windup to 31/3/09.
They've had 333 Capital (division of Korda Mentha) helping work through this. With the attention this is going to get from ASIC/Press, do you think WC are going to make statements (i.e. $0.45) they cannot support in terms of valuations??
If you want to vent some anger, maybe scream in the backyard. We are looking for solutions not more negativity.
Any property developers felt aggrieved by MFS in the past need not post on this forum.
Cheers
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Deano1
Not sure how far back you go with reading this thread but after the Melbourne forum I posted that I had asked jenny to provide a transparent break down of the fund- assets, loans etc (I understand that due to confidentiality reasons she can't provide the names of lenders so I asked if she could provide it in a Loan A, Loan B type format). She committed to providing this information when she releases information regarding her plan to take the fund forward upon which we are to vote in August.
I think people need to remember that JH is only 40 (young), she has a very good resume and has a very good reputation, which i am sure she wants to uphold.
By the end of next year we will have hopefully received 9 cents in predominantly tax free distributions and our remaining units will be worth at least the current 45 cents , so to sell now at 14 cents would be outrageous.
Whilst on the 14 cents if you believe that is all this fund is worth, you are kidding yourself. As I have openly stated on 2 or 3 occasions on this thread, I went through the Fincorp debacle, which I perceive as far worse than this and to date through ADMINISTRATION (different to liquidation) we have received 50 cents with a further 7 cents due shortly and potentially more in the future pending legal action.
A large amount of the current losses in the fund are due to capital devaluation, which is something that has occured across the board, so if you want to sell $11 million properties for $1.1 million (example used by JH - true value of one of our properties v a recent offer) then go ahead and vote for liquidation but this would be completely sacrificial and clearly you have not considered everyone else, especially those in the wholesale fund and expect A fight from those who want to continue the fund.
Do the maths first!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Deano1
Not sure how far back you go with reading this thread but after the Melbourne forum I posted that I had asked jenny to provide a transparent break down of the fund- assets, loans etc (I understand that due to confidentiality reasons she can't provide the names of lenders so I asked if she could provide it in a Loan A, Loan B type format). She committed to providing this information when she releases information regarding her plan to take the fund forward upon which we are to vote in August.
I think people need to remember that JH is only 40 (young), she has a very good resume and has a very good reputation, which i am sure she wants to uphold.
By the end of next year we will have hopefully received 9 cents in predominantly tax free distributions and our remaining units will be worth at least the current 45 cents , so to sell now at 14 cents would be outrageous.
Whilst on the 14 cents if you believe that is all this fund is worth, you are kidding yourself. As I have openly stated on 2 or 3 occasions on this thread, I went through the Fincorp debacle, which I perceive as far worse than this and to date through ADMINISTRATION (different to liquidation) we have received 50 cents with a further 7 cents due shortly and potentially more in the future pending legal action.
A large amount of the current losses in the fund are due to capital devaluation, which is something that has occured across the board, so if you want to sell $11 million properties for $1.1 million (example used by JH - true value of one of our properties v a recent offer) then go ahead and vote for liquidation but this would be completely sacrificial and clearly you have not considered everyone else, especially those in the wholesale fund and expect A fight from those who want to continue the fund.
Do the maths first!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
I am sure the 30 Million quoted by JH would include agent fees and other costs associated with selling (legal etc....)
The whole 30 million would not go in the liquidators hand
I agree with iamspeed - POSITIVITY - be negative somewhere else and put some thought into things
I am sure the 30 Million quoted by JH would include agent fees and other costs associated with selling (legal etc....)
The whole 30 million would not go in the liquidators hand
I agree with iamspeed - POSITIVITY - be negative somewhere else and put some thought into things
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Rocky dont get me wrong i honestly think the value could not have diminished to the point of 14c - but until we get a full listing of the assets i'll start from a worst case scenario - which in the grand scheme of things is atleast some value there - once we can understand the assets then everyone will be in a better position is determine whether its 14c - 65c or somewhere in between and how quickly that can be realised - i'm skeptical on the how value can be improved - remember a 40 year old hasn't really seen anything but economic growth in this country for their entire working adult life - we are in the midst of the biggest economic decline this country has seen in 40+ years so making any promises without all the facts on the table is just a case of trust me - the only two issues i have with wellington are 1 - conflict situation - is this in the best interest of unit holders 2 - whether there is enough experience there to really make a difference - the alternative is not good - but until we get all the facts on the table - no one can make a decision with any sort of reasonable basis to it.
I really want to understand what the $300 mill of alternative investments is - the majority of investors in the fund would not qualify to invest in an alternative investment and why were these considered appropriate investments for the fund - ASIC /APRA need to be involved here and that is the responsibility of the Responsible Entity and Wellington need to get on the front foot here - the longer this stuff takes the more difficult it is to freeze assets - which in the light of day maybe accessable by the fund holders.
Rocky dont get me wrong i honestly think the value could not have diminished to the point of 14c - but until we get a full listing of the assets i'll start from a worst case scenario - which in the grand scheme of things is atleast some value there - once we can understand the assets then everyone will be in a better position is determine whether its 14c - 65c or somewhere in between and how quickly that can be realised - i'm skeptical on the how value can be improved - remember a 40 year old hasn't really seen anything but economic growth in this country for their entire working adult life - we are in the midst of the biggest economic decline this country has seen in 40+ years so making any promises without all the facts on the table is just a case of trust me - the only two issues i have with wellington are 1 - conflict situation - is this in the best interest of unit holders 2 - whether there is enough experience there to really make a difference - the alternative is not good - but until we get all the facts on the table - no one can make a decision with any sort of reasonable basis to it.
I really want to understand what the $300 mill of alternative investments is - the majority of investors in the fund would not qualify to invest in an alternative investment and why were these considered appropriate investments for the fund - ASIC /APRA need to be involved here and that is the responsibility of the Responsible Entity and Wellington need to get on the front foot here - the longer this stuff takes the more difficult it is to freeze assets - which in the light of day maybe accessable by the fund holders.
- Joined
- 30 May 2008
- Posts
- 328
- Reactions
- 0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF
Article from todays ARF attached.
Article from todays ARF attached.
