Valid points, can I add to your points these comments? Not SHOUTING, just don't know
>After this, CGA would have FUM of $400m - if it has not lost any more other mandates.
WHAT ARE THE MANDATES, AND WHY WOULD ANY MICROCAP ONES REMAIN? IF THERE ARE ANY, THEY WOULD CERTAINLY LEAVE ONE WOULD ASSUME. I MEAN THEY JUST GOT TOLD BY THE MANAGER THEY ARE NOT A GOOD MICROCAP MANAGER AND WANT TO FOCUS ON ANOTHER SIZE. AS FOR THE GLOBAL CROWD FROM THE USA, THEY MUST BE WONDERING WHAT THEY HECK THEY JUST JUMPED INTO BED WITH
>Revenue will have dropped here by $2m approx. ( $170 m @ 1.25% ) Rev down to $3m+ pa Costs were $2.2m in June Qtr, Cash flow bleed
ADD IN THE MONEY FROM THE CTN ON-SALE, AND THAT BUYS ANOTHER HOW LONG? ADD THAT TO CASH IN BANK. CARRY THE 4, SUBTRACT THE 2.....BUT ITS ALL ARITHMETIC ISN'T IT. THEY ARE LOSING CLIENTS AND HAVE SOLD OFF THE GOLDEN GOOSE. THEY ARE BLEEDING MONEY, TOP HEAVY WITH HIGH CARRYING COSTS. NO SHAREHOLDER IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD GIVE THEM ANOTHER DOLLAR WHEN THEY TRY ANOTHER PLACEMENT OR RAISING SURELY?
>It could not have been by an independent expert.
HAR! YEAH, RIGHT. YOUR'E ASKING A QUESTION ABOUT PROPER PROCEDURES AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE IN THIS THING. YOU FUNNY.
>calling a EGM to have a proper review
ONE WOULD THINK, BUT SHAREHOLDERS ARE CLEARLY LOW DOWN THE POLE FOR INTERESTS BEING SERVED HERE
>It is ironic that the reasons the two new CTN Directors last March put forward to get 3 Directors axed last March -- ARE NOW PART OF THE JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THIS MOVE - better performance, size of mandate etc (YOU FORGOT CAPACITY)
HEY, DON'T FORGET CAPACITY. THE OLD DIRECTORS DID IT OVER CAPACITY, THE NEW ONES BROUGHT IT BACK IN, NOW CAPACITY IS AN ISSUE. POOR MR KERR MUST HAVE COUGHED HARD WHEN THEY GAVE HIM THAT LINE
>CTN shareholders need to remember that NAOS had invested approx. $7+ m from its NCC fund ( $80m capital ) in CGA - now some 15% underwater . So is this deal protecting both NAOS, as well as CGA? With ( as ever ) no thought of the clients' shareholders. AND which NAOS is funding it?
THIS IS A VALID POINT. I FAIL TO SEE HOW SEEING A RELEASE FROM THE CTN BOARD TO CTN SHAREHOLDERS TELLING THEM TO VOTE IN FAVOUR OF THIS SALE THEY APPROVED IS IMPARTIAL....WHEN THERE ARE 3 PEOPLE FROM NAOS NOW ON THE CTN BOARD. WHAT HAPPENS IF SHAREHOLDER REJECT THE SALE/ TRANSFER? THIS IS JUST ABOMINABLE.
I KNOW I AM IN A CGA THREAD BUT I CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CGA OR CTN, TO ME IT IS ONE AND THE SAME. AND I THINK TO THEM IT IS TOO, I SAY THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE THINGS WRITTEN IN ASX RELEASES THAT SPEAK FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE OTHER ENTITY AND ACTUALLY UNDERMINE THEIR POINT.
CASE IN POINT BETTER MICROCAP MANAGER. CTN COULD SAY THIS ABOUT CGA AND NAOS, AN IMPARTIAL BOARD SAYING HEY, CGA AREN'T ANY GOOD WE'RE PROTECTING SHAREHOLDERS HERE AND AWARDING IT TO NAOS. BUT FOR CGA TO SAY THAT IT IS BIZARRE. I MEAN CGA IS A $40M COMPANY AND IT IS RELEASING STATEMENTS TELLING THE MARKET AND SHAREHOLDERS THAT THEY AREN'T VERY GOOD, A COMPETITOR IS BETTER AND NO LONGER WILL THEY BE RUNNING MICROCAPS.
I WOULD UNDERSTAND IF I READ SOMEONE SAY THEY ARE TAKING LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE CGA DIRECTORS OVER DERELICTION AND NEGLIGENCE. (note I am not inferring or suggesting this at all, just saying I would understand if someone did take case against them). THERE IS ALSO A LOT OF TAIL WAG DOG, WHY WOULD CGA TELL CTN SHAREHOLDERS WHAT
>Where is the "best of breed Corporate Governance" proclaimed from the treetops by FM's and LICs?
WELL THIS IS A DEEP, DARK, STAGNANT POND ISN'T IT. MAYBE CTN SHAREHOLDERS SHOULD BE HAPPY THEY SOLD THE PUP FOR $13M WHEN THEY DID BECAUSE CGA IS ONE SERIOUS FAIL OF A FUND MANAGER AND ISN'T WORTH 20 CENTS NEVER MIND 85 CENTS.
I FEEL SAD FOR THOSE SUCKERS IN CGA WHO DID NOT KNOW ANY OF THIS AND THOUGHT SOME OF THOSE BIG NAMES WERE TALENTED AND KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING. THE TIDE HAS GONE OUT ON THIS ONE AND SHOWN WHO WAS ALL HOT AIR AND WHO KNEW HOW TO RUN A FUND MANAGER AND BRING DOLLARS THROUGH THE DOOR. WHAT WE HAVE IS ONE TEAM (GONE) WHO KNEW HOW TO MAKE MONEY AND BRING IT THROUGH THE DOOR, AND THE NEW ONE WHO ONLY KNEW HOW TO SPEND MONEY AND SEND IT BACK OUT THE DOOR
>Given CGA’s renewed focus on large and midcap companies, the Company is of the view that an alternative specialist manager would be better placed to manage the portfolio. Further, CGA had a limited opportunity to grow its broader microcap strategy as it had been approaching capacity for this strategy.
OKAY, I WANTED TO ADD THIS. IN SENTENCE 1 THEY SAY FOCUS NOW ON LARGE AND MIDCAP. ERGO SENTENCE 2 WE ARE SELLING THE RIGHTS TO THE MICROCAP ONE.
THIS SENTENCE WOULD RIGHTLY INFLAME CGA SHAREHOLDERS "that an alternative specialist manager would be better placed to manage the portfolio" BECAUSE REMEMBER CGA JUST SPENT MILLIONS BUYING IT BACK FROM OC. SO THEY'VE THROWN IN THE TOWEL ON MICROCAPS AND IN AS MANY SPECIFIC WORDS TOLD THEIR EXISTING MICROCAP CLIENTS TO LEAVE.
BUT THEN THIS... Further, CGA had a limited opportunity to grow its broader microcap strategy as it had been approaching capacity for this strategy. WHICH SUGGESTS THEY WILL HAND OVER THE $200M TO FREE UP CAPACITY FOR THEM TO GROW THEIR MICROCAP STRATEGY
THIS IS JUST MENTAL BIZARRO STUFF. YOU SERIOUSLY COULD NOT THINK THIS UP LYING IN BED HAVING JUST TAKEN A BEX AND DRUNK SOME COLA. ARE THEY NOW SAYING THEY ARE GOING TO GET MORE MICROCAP MANDATES? BECAUSE THATS WHAT I JUST READ
Going forward, CGA will be able to manage and service its existing wholesale microcap strategies more effectively.
OH GOD THEY ARE! THEY REALLY ARE. THEY REALLY THINK THAT THEIR WILL NOT ONLY KEEP THE OTHER MONEY BUT GET MORE THROUGH THE DOOR NOW.
the Company is of the view that an alternative specialist manager would be better placed to manage the portfolio
OH GOD I HAVE TO START A NEW THREAD ON THIS. MY HEAD IS PHYSICALLY SPINNING. I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING FUND MANAGERS FOR OVER 30 YEARS. I HAVE NEVER, EVER, EVER, SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS
MY 12M PRICE EXPECTATION FOR CGA....20 CENTS. NO, 12 CENTS. NO, NOTHING, NOT A CENT, GONE.
DYOR[/QUOTE
THIS SENTENCE WOULD RIGHTLY INFLAME CGA SHAREHOLDERS "that an alternative specialist manager would be better placed to manage the portfolio" BECAUSE REMEMBER CGA JUST SPENT MILLIONS BUYING IT BACK FROM OC. SO THEY'VE THROWN IN THE TOWEL ON MICROCAPS AND IN AS MANY SPECIFIC WORDS TOLD THEIR EXISTING MICROCAP CLIENTS TO LEAVE.
AFU. Your quote a slip. CGA did not pay OC - as you pointed out earlier in your post. CTN shareholders have paid and will do so for five years paying out OC. Thanks to CTN Board. No doubt with CGA urging. Else over time maybe more FUM goes elsewhere, and also at CIE or CQG - if they have independent Boards
However, life is obviously stressful if you lose clients and have big red ink cash flow and little in the bank. And it must be really desperate if the solution is to let go your major client and revenue ( 40 plus per cent ) in your once prime sector
So the magician appears to make this mini crisis into a major victory. They just needs some friends who would really like the company to be a success. But it is hard to find all the right words!
And to do so using only " best breed governance " !
As a aside the upcoming Switzer conference features NAOS, George Boubouros amongst the speakers. So they will also get to swap investment tips?
Expand
