Zwu I thankyou for your questions,to answer I have c&p'd your comments and then hopefully replied as to how I see it. Please remember readers that Iam no toute or rep for any Fin adviser.
(1) "Korda mentha ... proposing that the tree owners vote once again ... to sell the trees with the land".
If so, how much do you reckon the growers would get? If the proceeds would split between trees and lands in proportions determined by to the buyers (like TIM's land buyers did) and the buyers would burn down the GTP trees, then the tree owners would get very little.
W,answer// Iam not familar what the growers got from tim,but regardless I stand or fall with Dr.judith Ajani stated in the senate inquiry in to mis forestry and at best 10% of your own money--RE_: Hansard
If "sell the trees with the land", then GNS will lose its RE title, but GNS has already claimed $30m in its 2010 EBIT from that title. Would GNS be compensated? Or would GNS lose that $30m right away and slip back to breaching the bank covenants?
W,answer--very good Question Zwu,especially on Gunns claim on my trees of all things,WOW how come as atree ownner I can't claim again ,just as I did when I iniatly invested?
It is my belief that unless we as growers sack the RE and pay the minimum that Gunns is legally entittled,and remember we as a collective can sack the RE,then I believe Gunns will want what they project as loss compensation,but that can be legally argued by the wigs. Slipping the covenant?,The timing of this ruff deal on growers is going to pan out over to late next year,that would IMO clear the debt Covenant hurdle
(2) I reckon you are not exactly in the same boat with the advisors, who had got 10% commission from the MIS woodlots sold to you. They should honestly return at least that 10% commission to you, before you could welcome them to the same boat to fight against MIS.
W;answer///I got on a piece of paper and a figure that what I signed for and paid for each lot is documented as the owner of a number of lots,that correspond with the prospectus,Iam assuming that GSFM had another sub company that paid the advisers,but it didnot come from my tree lots that I paid. The question that needs to be asked who did the valuations and what was the LVR,I think the loan book discount is a very good clue.
The discussion on the advisers as an investor is a distraction,that suits F&H the administrator who can't work it out,and the taxation department not doing its job diligently and that can be borne out in the witness's in the senate inquiry as to how the trees were chucked in the ground at Kyogle, Just one item on this ,was the land valuation done with my trees included,because if it was imagine the ramifications to the sale value of your trees---worthless
(3) To buy lands with trees from GTP. Only if they are really profitable, if you are a farmer and you have the spare money, and if the lands are next door to you.
At this time,taking that we lose heaps on the voting by the investors in GTP,to form agroup that goes hand in glove to go with the people on the land is a concept that I believe would work. The farmers would benefit in not stretching their finances,and still after a mutual aim of what each party is after and is found viable,you would not be in a hurry to cut the trees for pulp,but instead value add them and at the same time have a vested interst and tax deductabilty like a foreign corporation. To the point that cattle sheep or what ever the land owner is in favour of in the biggest return and at the same time as it grows you expand. As I have stated before this is a Joint venture proposal with the people who know,the farmer.
The land and tree sale is off set by the pittance that you get to make the purchase cheaper for you,as against a total loss
In a nutshell,you have your cake and eat it at the same time,
GTP Price at posting:
12.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
