Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Is there any investor or AG member who has or hasnt had a response from a politician out there?

I'd like to know if there is any politicians worth feeding and if any has bothered to actively involve themselves in bothering to respond.

If so can you please notify me on zixo7@hotmail.com.
I think its about time politicians start getting publicly named for their support or lack thereof with this orchestrated ripoff.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

As mentioned early today I had a discussion with WC on Friday. Here are some comments from the conversation:

WC are saying if everyone participates in the buy back that everyone will get their first 10,000 units bought back at 45 cents. They say this is possible due to the fact that a lot of people don’t have 10,000 units. So anyone with 10,000 units or less could have all their units bought at 45 cents if they choose. WC said that 6,000 unit holders would be paid out in whole if they choose to participate in the buy back. Meaning there are 6000 unitholders with less than 10,000 units in the PIF. But this doesn’t work out because lets just assume there are 6000 unitholders with the minimum investment of 5,000 units that’s already a total of 30,000 units the buy back proposal would have to buy. And there’s still another 4,000 unitholders with more than 10,000 units which adds another 40,000 units to be bought. That’s a total of 70,000 units the buy back would have to cash in but the EM says only 37 mill units will be bought. Even if everyone has two investments in the PIF this still wouldn’t work out. If it’s true that every unit holder is to be able to cash in the first 10,000 units as I was told on Friday there must be some other condition which they are not mentioning. Also we are being asked to agree to a buy back at 45 cents which might not occur for one year. There’s no mention of adding to this value any money from the Octaviar claim and of course no independent audit of our units to say 45 cents is a fair offer now or in one year’s time.

I can see that paying out a large number of investors in whole would be advantageous to WC (the huge number of investors in this fund must be a headache). But I’ve read the average investment is $70,000 so still leaves a lot of money on the NSX for the average investor.

The deadline for the audit is end of Sept but WC are hoping to finish before the vote. I can’t see how it would be acceptable to expect us to vote before the audit is finished and I’m sure people are already voting.

My main reason for speaking with WC was to discuss the rush on redemptions in January that JH mentioned occurred on the DVD. We can see on the balance sheet provided by WC that there was a net decline of $15 mill units in the month of January. We know a lot of money was taken into the fund in the month of January so I was wondering how there could have been a decline in units in that month when the redemption date for term investments was the last day of January - after the freeze (i.e term investments should not have been paid for the month of January) When I asked if all of the redemptions for the month of January were at call investments or express unit holders the answer was: No some were term investments. I know you raised the point about the Constitution saying all term investments were to be the last day of the month but MFS paid out before that date at their discretion. (end of answer which isn’t an exact quote). WC do not seem to find anything wrong with this but it seems to me unitholders were not treated equally. The constitution says:
“The end of an investment term for a unit holder is the last business day of the month following the anniversary of the month of their acquisition of units in the scheme in accordance with the rights and obligations of each class of unit holder. For example a 24 month unit holder may only have their units redeemed from the lat business day of the 24th full month anniversary of their first acquisition of units of this class.”
It doesn’t mention units can be redeemed before the last day at the REs discretion and I can’t see how you could allow this for some and not others.

I requested some information from WC a while back so that I could see what went on in the month of January. WC said they would send me the information and then backed down at the last minute giving me a reason which I know for a fact is incorrect. So I’m left with taking their word for it that nothing dodgy went on.

I also raised the issue with what I think is a discrepancy between the EM and the proposed constitution in the quorum section and the answer was that WC will look into it. We’ll need follow this up as I afraid I’m finding a lot of info coming out of this place to be misleading or down right wrong.

I would still like to hear comments from others regarding the rules for non liquid funds. I’m certain the PIF is not liquid as even the EM states:
“to provide liquidity to current Unitholders, given the recent freeze on redemptions and the current illiquidity of the fund”

It boggles my mind how JH can look me in the eye and tell me the fund is liquid. Does anyone else find this disturbing!!! This after spending a considerable amount of time explaining that liquid funds cannot have their redemptions delayed for more than 360 days. So I still want to know if this rule applies to non liquid funds (and if it even applies to liquid funds.)

I'm going to try and distance myself from all of this for a while as I find it brings me down. If others can follow up the quorum issue that would be great.

Also I would like to thank Javier and Rocky1 for all their hard work and I don't agree with the overreaction some has expressed.

Dora.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Chin up Dora, you've done so well.
Maybe it's time to stop trying to get honest answers from WC. Don't let their BS bring you down.......we are not going to let them defeat us and steal anymore from us...........we will get it together and act to protect ourselves from them. Power to the People !!!!!
P.S. WC are not going to offer any information to what went on in January, because what went on was fraudulent. They held on to funds and kept accepting new funds without disclosing the auditors opinions that the fund was basically insolvent and unable to continue. They are open to litigation.
Cheer up, we will get there one way or another.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Burnt said:

VOTE - 1) NO 2) YES 3) NO
We as unitholders have the power, the ability and the right to hold our own meeting to vote on resolutions that will benefit us and noone else. E.G. a vote on an amendment to the constitution to extend the freeze on redemptions for a further 180 days to give us time to have a completely independant administrator appointed to run the PIF. An administrator will be able run the fund profitably while projects are completed and outstanding loans dealt with in the most favourable manner. A completely independant administrator will charge fees which will be comparable to what the RE is obtaining and we will be able to have complete trust in them acting in OUR BEST INTERESTS !!!! Unitholders will not recover 100%, but only an independant manager will get them back the best amount recoverable.
I know there are some wealthy unitholders out there who can afford to tie up their capital indefinately (and even write it off), who are placing trust in Wellington to deliver on the 6% returns (good luck - no committment by Wellington there) and who plan on recouping some of their capital loss by buying up units on the NSX at 10c to 20c hoping to get a 30% - 60% return (good luck). I don't know if any of you attended the meetings in July and saw the huge number of elderley investors at risk of losing everything - their entire life savings. The looks on their faces - scared, confused and hoping that JH will look after them ! If not, try and recall the last news story where an elderley person was bashed and robbed - remember that look on their face ? Remember it when you go to bed and try to sleep.
Come on guys, have a heart. Don't encourage unitholders to vote for something that is going to lock them in and give them back bugger all !!!! Have some humanity, this might be the chance (or another one) to do something worthwhile to help others less fortunate than you.

Click to expand...

Hey Smokey68, you're on the right track with your thoughts and opinions.
We have the right to look after this fund.........Power to the People !!!!

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

On reading doras post and from the feedback Ive gotten I believe JH and wellington Capital are not acting in the best interests of ALL investors with the proposals they want to steam roll through. No-one is really happy and the cracks are already appearing with WC -
Why should we accept something we dont like.
Its our Fund! Not wellingtons!... They have failed to be honest or give us the promised full disclosure.

I have attached asics online complaint form for anyone interested.

https://www1.edge.asic.gov.au/cgi-b...nt/t=ad3ce3f8c2f7a7a4dafca6502745cbfbc42fe5fe

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

selciper said:

In my opinion to find ourselves in the hands of an administrator would be catastrophic. The world/Australian economy is heading for extreme turbulence. Just read the international/Australian financial press for confirmation. (Babcock and Brown's dramatic decline symbolises the shake-out). At least WC would be watching all these factors closely. An administrator would be interested only in getting on with the job of a wind-up at any price.

333Capital, in Guy Hutching's memorable words, were brought in originally to provide a report to "reassure" PIF investors. They evidently didn't share his overview and must have been very negative in their findings. I believe that the 14c, 45c and 65c are probably correct estimates.

Remember, ASIC are sniffing around.

The letter sent to Breaker1 from a contractor was quite promising in its tone and observations.

WC really need to disassociate themselves completely from any OCV connections and get back any money owing to PIF. To break any OCV ties will invite a fresh era and much-needed confidence from PIF's concerned investors.

By the way, what happened to a Gold Coast court case listed for August 18?

Click to expand...

Hi Selciper,
sorry but I need to challenge your opinions (please don't take it personally).
An Administrators job is not to "wind up at any price". An Administrator's job is to continue as profitably as possible and to achieve the best outcome possible for investors. (just like you would expect an RE to do if you could trust them). Yes you are right, the world economy is in a certain amount of turmoil, but looks like interest rates are going to come down here in Aust., and anyway these same factors affect an Administrator the same as they would effect the RE - no difference. Only difference is the motive.
Motive of an independant Administrator is the best possible outcome for investors - motive of Wellington Capital Hmmmmmm......... Lock funds in....... Lock Wellington Capital in............................lots more could be said.
In regards to 333 Capital, the amount of money paid to them by Octaviar (Chris Scott) was so extreme that the Supreme Court found it appropriate to bring forward the wind up case against Octaviar (documented).
In regards to Wellington disassociating from Octaviar ..... might have more to say about that tomorrow.
Cheers.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

zixo said:

On reading doras post and from the feedback Ive gotten I believe JH and wellington Capital are not acting in the best interests of ALL investors with the proposals they want to steam roll through. No-one is really happy and the cracks are already appearing with WC -
Why should we accept something we dont like.
Its our Fund! Not wellingtons!... They have failed to be honest or give us the promised full disclosure.

I have attached asics online complaint form for anyone interested.

https://www1.edge.asic.gov.au/cgi-b...nt/t=ad3ce3f8c2f7a7a4dafca6502745cbfbc42fe5fe

Click to expand...

Hi Zixo, Good on you !!!!!! Talk about positive action !!!!! I know of at least 15 other unitholders apart from myself who have lodged complaints with ASIC regarding this vote. We have all asked ASIC to look into whether or not Wellington should be allowed to proceed with this vote considering that it is based on unsubstantiated and misleading information. Also that the constitutional changes seem to not be in the best interests of unitholders and that the proposed changes will diminish unitholders rights.
Please all unitholders - make the same complaint. Lets get these people to help us - after all they are employed by us as well !!!!!!

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Burnt -

I have no problem in accepting your comments. That's what this forum is all about. Don't think that I'm not critical of WC's tactics...it's
simply that I fear we might find ourselves in a worse position without them (WC) at the moment. Obviously, those who know better than myself about the workings of these funds are increasingly edgy about the PIF documentation. I share everyone's fury - my money was accepted by MFS in December and January. Thereafter I was lied to every time I called. We are all entitled to be suspicious after all this lost money and time.

Cheers

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

DoraNBoots said:

As mentioned early today I had a discussion with WC on Friday. Here are some comments from the conversation:

WC are saying if everyone participates in the buy back that everyone will get their first 10,000 units bought back at 45 cents. They say this is possible due to the fact that a lot of people don’t have 10,000 units. So anyone with 10,000 units or less could have all their units bought at 45 cents if they choose. WC said that 6,000 unit holders would be paid out in whole if they choose to participate in the buy back. Meaning there are 6000 unitholders with less than 10,000 units in the PIF. But this doesn’t work out because lets just assume there are 6000 unitholders with the minimum investment of 5,000 units that’s already a total of 30,000 units the buy back proposal would have to buy. And there’s still another 4,000 unitholders with more than 10,000 units which adds another 40,000 units to be bought. That’s a total of 70,000 units the buy back would have to cash in but the EM says only 37 mill units will be bought. Even if everyone has two investments in the PIF this still wouldn’t work out. If it’s true that every unit holder is to be able to cash in the first 10,000 units as I was told on Friday there must be some other condition which they are not mentioning. Also we are being asked to agree to a buy back at 45 cents which might not occur for one year. There’s no mention of adding to this value any money from the Octaviar claim and of course no independent audit of our units to say 45 cents is a fair offer now or in one year’s time.

I can see that paying out a large number of investors in whole would be advantageous to WC (the huge number of investors in this fund must be a headache). But I’ve read the average investment is $70,000 so still leaves a lot of money on the NSX for the average investor.

SNIP........

Dora.

Click to expand...

Hello All,
Thanks for your input Dora.
Following are some mathematical musings based on your information:
There are 755,195,542 units issued to 10,387 unit holders according to WC in their last explanatory Memorandum.
"WC are saying if everyone participates in the buy back that everyone will get their first 10,000 units bought back at 45 cents."
So 10,387 unit holders offer all of their units or 10,000 maximum and these are redeemed by WC it will equal 37,750,000 units redeemed at $0.45 each which amounts to $16,987,500. Therefore the average number of units redeemed will be 37 750,000/10,387 = 3,634 units average redemption package. This is less than the minimum allowable investment of 5000 units.
Now that looks like a very low figure to me and I would expect that WC are counting on most unit holders not participating and the average number of units offered for redemption would be closer to 10,000 by something like 3,775 unit holders.
"WC said that 6,000 unit holders would be paid out in whole if they choose to participate in the buy back"
So if 6,000 unit holders are totally paid out that means that the average redemption is 37,750,000/6,000 = 6,292 units. Now this looks more reasonable.
Also if 6,000 unit holders are paid out that leaves 4,387 left in the PIF. That means the average unit holding of those remaining is (755,195,542 - 37,750,000)/(10,387 - 6,000) = 163,539 units each.
As a rough check then, to assess the veracity of the assumptions behind these figures, the average unit holding of all investors would be 6,292 (for the ones paid out) plus 163,539 (for the remaining) divided by 2 = 84,915 units.
The total units held by 10,387 investors is 755,195,542 which equals an average unit holding of 72,706 units each. IMHO that's close enough to verify the statements made by WC.

It will cost PIF 37,750,000 x 0.45 = $16,987,500 maximum to redeem these units. If WC expect that this sum can be raised within a year out of fund earnings they will have to raise 18.5% return on Estimated Realisable Value i.e.:
((16,987,500/413,747,000)x100) = 4.1 percent of the Estimated Realisable Value at 31 May 2008.
If remaining unit holders are paid 6 cents which represents (0.06/0.45)x100 = 13.3 percent
If Wellington are paid .07% and their costs and consultants are .02% and .02% respectively,
then the sum is 4.1 + 13.3 + 0.7 +0.2+0.2 = 18.5%

I am skeptical that this sort of return can be realised under present economic conditions and that not all of WC promises can be met out of earnings.
WC will have a tough task ahead of them.

Mutchy

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Mutchy,

I agree that it will put pressure on the fund. I bet that those who have not got access to other invested monies will be the first to take up the 45c buyback offer.

Another thought, it might put a special distribution on the backburner. Remember there was a real chance of that before the end of this financial year! Would like confirmation from WC if that is still a goer?

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Mutchy....do all of these 6000 unit-holers necessarily own 10,000 units each, perhaps a lot of them might only have 5000 (wasn't that the minimum investment amount?)... that could change these figures somewhat.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Smokey68 said:

My thoughts on this situation we are in.

The processing of a ballot where the ballot papers are returned to the beneficiary does not seem right.

The changing of the quorum requirements such that it will be very difficult to hold a meeting to change things in the future also seems rude.

When the fund is back up to $1 how do you get you money out of the fund at face value?

The 5% buy back, where is the money coming from and are the units being on sold or cancelled?

The mathematics of the distribution seem to be a bit doggy, 6 cents on a 45 cent investment equals a return of 13.33% then add 0.7% fee this would require an internal return of at least 14%.

The statement of the 360 day limit may be what the constitution specifies but this could be changed by the members.

LKM Capital has also run into a redemption problem and is in the hands of a Receiver Manager.
If you check their web site there are two documents setting out how the fund will be wound up and it will be over three years and no fire sales.

How I see it. WC has a business with our $300M + and is assured of an income of at least $2.1m a year.
Our money will be locked into WC for ever and a day because there will be no redemptions, they have created a business on the cheap.
If WC does get the fund back to $770M their fee will be around $5.4M and we still are not guaranteed of getting our money back.

For me my vote is NO, NO & NO

Click to expand...

Smokey where have you been hiding all the time in the past you put the words together much better then me Thanks /The Dane ///

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

k.smith said:

Mutchy....do all of these 6000 unit-holers necessarily own 10,000 units each, perhaps a lot of them might only have 5000 (wasn't that the minimum investment amount?)... that could change these figures somewhat.

Click to expand...

Even if all the 6,000 unit holders that WC say can be paid in whole have only 5,000 units that's already 30 mill units, that only leaves 7 mill units for the 4,000 other unit holders that have more than 10,000 units. I can't see how this would work.

BTW: I am not saying there are 6,000 unit holders that can be paid in whole. This info came from WC and I personally do not agree with this information based on the document I have acquired. I don't want to go into detail as I'm not sure by law what I'm allowed to say.

Regarding funding the buyback, the EM said the “off market buy-back is to be funded through asset realisations”
Also I think the special distribution is coming from any money we get from Octaviar for the support facility.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Juan Mortyme said:

This OCV Creditor Update appeared on the ASX after COB on Friday.

Strange to see that CS & JH still seem to be closely linked and associated. The following quote is from BionicBoy from the HotCopper forum : "Chris Scott, Jenny Hutson, Craig Chapman and others have been doing their best to try get OCV relisted and trading again on the ASX...they really have done the hard yards with what seems looking back 8 months now like an impossible task."

It all seems a bit incestuous to me.

Click to expand...

Hi Juan Mortyme,
QUESTION:
What action should be taken?
I would have thought that from a PIF point of view it would not be beneficial for OCV to be liquidated but more beneficial to be listed and profitably operational.
JH must be involved or should she just let things happen without any involvement at all. Regards, RickH:couch

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

breaker1 said:

Garpul Gumnut,

What we have learnt is NEVER invest in mutual or diversified funds like MFS/OCV/WC/ACR/Donovan Oats/Prudential/Provident/etc, again for just a lousy 1-2% extra interest. NO NEVER it's NOT worth the risk!!

You see this previous MFS Premuim Income Fund was top rated by investment advice groups and promised Lloyds of London insurance, balanced budget, your money spread over multiple loans (projects), etc, etc. I only chose MFS after rejecting many other funds. So lesson learned is: no matter what the fund managers tell you, they can always change the constitution or find a good excuse to channel your good money after bad investments till it becomes worthless. All they need as an excuse is that their interests need protecting NOT yours.

Put your money into rental business real estate, split rental homes, gold, silver, blocks of land, at-call safe bank interest, anything where you've got control of your money and you don't have to BEG abusing inter-connected all-in-the-family freemason fund managers for a look see at half your money sometime 7 years from now and only IF they want to be nice to you!!

Another lesson I learnt was that I should have spoken to my PIF fund manager and said, "You know that safe you put my money in at the PIF, well, could you put that safe inside another safe!!! Yeah! And only with me knowing the combination to both!" LOL

Click to expand...

Hi breaker1,
General Advice only:
I would hope that we have learnt to not put all of our eggs into the one basket but that does not appear to be the case because now it appears that you want to put all of your money into the rental property market.
Please remember that the property market does not always return a profit.
Please remember that we have had a major share market correction.
Question: Do you think the Share market will recover? Is it a good time to sell? Is it a good time to buy?
Please note: Property markets have crashed after previous share market crashes within 12 to 36 months and have then taken years to recover.
Question: Is it a good time to sell? Is it a good time to buy?

Create reasonable guidelines, Example:
1) Do not invest more than 50% of your money into any one investment.
2) Do not invest more than 20% into the one managed fund.
3) Do not invest more than 10% into one Blue Chip company listed on ASX.
4) Do not invest more than 5% total into a high risk investments.
5) Calculate a risk strategy for every investment.
6) Always complete a budget and know what you need.
7) Find an adviser who will help you to achieve your goals and minise the risk to your desired lifestyle.
Regards, Rick:couch

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Munchy has crunched the numbers. Surely WC have done that too. Munchy's results as presented appear to be sound. What does JH have to say about them? Surely they've had their WC calculators busy as well. I can only hope that a smaller number of investors than envisaged take up the offer. There seems to be no end in sight to this mess.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

JohnH said:

Duped, as I understand it (I'm sure more qualified people like Dora&Boots will correct me if I'm wrong) March is when the 366 day redemption freeze is up and the fund has then to start redemptions. There is not enough money in the fund to pay out a $ for a $ so the fund must then liquidate so that every unit holder gets there estimated 11or 12 cents a share equally. ...

Click to expand...

JohnH. I agree something will need to be done by Mar 09. But this doesn't necessarily mean liquidation must be completed by Mar 09.
My understanding (I'm by no means a finance professional) is that something e.g. wind-up, must merely be initiated by Mar 09.

What this means to the returns we'll get and how long it will take to get 'em? - I don't know. (Apparently the Ansett wind-up took many years) But I think it's a safe bet that it'll be more than 14c. How much more than 14c? - I don't know.

The 14c and 65c numbers are probably technically correct. But IMO -they are both spin. The 65c number having lost credibility given WC, on our behalf, appears to have indicated it will accept 22c in the $. (Without an independent or audited valuation of Stella) IMO - Throws doubt on the credibility of the 14c number - boy who cried wolf.

All: Think about this for the 45c valuation - if a residential project is completed while the residential unit market is still supressed, what then? Is WC/Administrator going to support developers, or if PIF is mortgagee in possesion themselves, press ahead with selling or what - rent them out? I doubt it. They'll still be sold in a suppressed market.

(A market that is being suppressed NOT be the media hyped so called 'Credit Squeeze'. It is being supressed by the blunt crude instrument wielded by the RBA. Never forget that interest rate rises are DESIGNED to cause financial pain. Take money away from spenders and give it to the savers. Spenders who would have bought our residential units. There is growth just about every where in the World. There's even a housing shortage in AU right? RBA is more likely to loosen the screws than tighten them right?)

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Duped said:

JohnH. I agree something will need to be done by Mar 09. But this doesn't necessarily mean liquidation must be completed by Mar 09.
My understanding (I'm by no means a finance professional) is that something e.g. wind-up, must merely be initiated by Mar 09.

What this means to the returns we'll get and how long it will take to get 'em? - I don't know. (Apparently the Ansett wind-up took many years) But I think it's a safe bet that it'll be more than 14c. How much more than 14c? - I don't know.

The 14c and 65c numbers are probably technically correct. But IMO -they are both spin. The 65c number having lost credibility given WC, on our behalf, appears to have indicated it will accept 22c in the $. (Without an independent or audited valuation of Stella) IMO - Throws doubt on the credibility of the 14c number - boy who cried wolf.

All: Think about this for the 45c valuation - if a residential project is completed while the residential unit market is still supressed, what then? Is WC/Administrator going to support developers, or if PIF is mortgagee in possesion themselves, press ahead with selling or what - rent them out? I doubt it. They'll still be sold in a suppressed market.

(A market that is being suppressed NOT be the media hyped so called 'Credit Squeeze'. It is being supressed by the blunt crude instrument wielded by the RBA. Never forget that interest rate rises are DESIGNED to cause financial pain. Take money away from spenders and give it to the savers. Spenders who would have bought our residential units. There is growth just about every where in the World. There's even a housing shortage in AU right? RBA is more likely to loosen the screws than tighten them right?)

Click to expand...

Hi Duped,
"A market that is being suppressed NOT be the media hyped so called 'Credit Squeeze'."
Are you trying to say that the Sub Prime problem in the USA is not creating a 'Credit Squeeze' throughout the world and in Australia???
Regards, RickH:couch

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Duped said:

JohnH. I agree something will need to be done by Mar 09. But this doesn't necessarily mean liquidation must be completed by Mar 09.
My understanding (I'm by no means a finance professional) is that something e.g. wind-up, must merely be initiated by Mar 09.

What this means to the returns we'll get and how long it will take to get 'em? - I don't know. (Apparently the Ansett wind-up took many years) But I think it's a safe bet that it'll be more than 14c. How much more than 14c? - I don't know.

The 14c and 65c numbers are probably technically correct. But IMO -they are both spin. The 65c number having lost credibility given WC, on our behalf, appears to have indicated it will accept 22c in the $. (Without an independent or audited valuation of Stella) IMO - Throws doubt on the credibility of the 14c number - boy who cried wolf.

All: Think about this for the 45c valuation - if a residential project is completed while the residential unit market is still supressed, what then? Is WC/Administrator going to support developers, or if PIF is mortgagee in possesion themselves, press ahead with selling or what - rent them out? I doubt it. They'll still be sold in a suppressed market.

(A market that is being suppressed NOT be the media hyped so called 'Credit Squeeze'. It is being supressed by the blunt crude instrument wielded by the RBA. Never forget that interest rate rises are DESIGNED to cause financial pain. Take money away from spenders and give it to the savers. Spenders who would have bought our residential units. There is growth just about every where in the World. There's even a housing shortage in AU right? RBA is more likely to loosen the screws than tighten them right?)

Click to expand...

Hi Duped, You are right of course, it could take 3 years or even more to wind. - three years with no pay outs, and then? At least with WC one would have c. 18 cents (or more -but admitedly could equally be less) in those three years, and then what ever the units are worth.

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Mutchy said:

...
"WC said that 6,000 unit holders would be paid out in whole if they choose to participate in the buy back"
So if 6,000 unit holders are totally paid out that means that the average redemption is 37,750,000/6,000 = 6,292 units. Now this looks more reasonable.
...
Mutchy

Click to expand...

Hi Mutchy,

WC are saying all 10,387 unit holders will be able to have their first 10,000 units bought back. You can't divide 37 mill by 6,000 you have to divide it by 10,387. The reference to the 6,000 is just saying that 6,000 of the 10,386 unit holders have less than 10,000 units (i.e. they can be paid out completely if they choose).