I am disappointed to read that as I verily believe even the...

I am disappointed to read that as I verily believe even the Mangement fee was attached to positive/negative market value conditions. If they are extracting fees without accountability that rings alarm bells for the investment community on which the very bases . Wasn't the ASX formed for this reason. Notwithstanding ASIC conditions because of compliant issues.

At this stage let me say I am passive and waiting for further guidance from the company. I t would be appreciated as a shareholder.

Sonic - this is one not to get too hung-up over although the exit mechanics for BGFC are non-existent or extremely expensive.

There are two potential fees:

1. The management fee above, which is in place to reimburse the investment manager (BPAM) for having key staff employed by them but operating in the business. Unfortunately in my opinion it would be getting abused by BPAM. As an example, the only two reasons I can see in shuffling deadwood mute Ebert into Dairies is to protect BPAM from a termination cost and to move him into the books of BGFC under Dairies.

2. The performance fee which as you noted is indexed against the share price which has never been paid (or deserved). This sounds okay until you work through a few scenarios and understand that any fee generated here would be an expense for the business and come off profit, reducing the amount available to shareholders, and depending on the relative movements can result in profits becoming losses for shareholders whilst BPAM pocket the cash.

The whole relationship between BPAM and BGFC is a joke and holds back the company. Who do think Sexton in thinking of as Chairman of BGFC when he also runs BPAM - I can guarantee you it's not the shareholders!!