Ann: Response to Media Speculation, page-17

Agreed. But on another post i commented on the main thrust of where this sentiment came from (and for what its worth I don't think it is a ponzi scheme, the AFR are pushing it a bit strong) is that there are fund managers who see the level of involvement of Blue Sky in this space is distorting the market. So in essence they have properties with intrinsic water rights, they sell these rights to farmers etc. But at the same time they are buying water rights from other groups in a kind of water rights banking process, which causes the market price to rise. There are hedge fund managers out there who are saying (and this was where the AFR's interest started) that if Blue Sky stepped out of the water rights market, the market price would fall like a stone as its operating outside of normal market dynamics.

The issue is one of trust, because after all the debacles with valuations in their funds, with the way Blue Sky is a bit too tricky with their reporting and how they set things up to manipulate the markets perception in whats happening, people are looking at the water fund and saying, hmmm, 17% per annum returns, seems like something is off, and if it is, when does it all fall down?