Hang on. They're using shareholders money in the LIC, to buy a competing fund manager, to get substantial, which just coincidentally manages the very fund that they walk away from managing, and give them 2 seats on the board and take the management fee and take the management over.....and will pay them a LOT of money to buy the contract from them, and then manage for what, 0.2% for 5 years? And they, the fund managers, are the main beneficiaries of this? You're kidding me. Why wouldn't NAOS have just run CTN and said we can do it for 1%. not paid CGA out. There appears about 16 conflicts of interest here. My head is spinning this makes no sense. Unitholders money to buy the rights to something that benefits the fund manager. Or will the LIC own those rights?
Why don't they just tell CGA not interested any more and walk? Okay "because they have a contract with CGA". Well this relies on CTN shareholders approving it. Then how can you contract that then? Again, why not just tell CTN shareholders "hey we've changed out minds vote no". Then deal falls over, CGA have walked from the management as we read, then renegotiate with the CTN board
Basically, you can all make up your own mind on what happened, what is happening, and what should happen. IMO it is repugnant and despicable and I thought our industry had moved past these kind of back room deals.
CGA Price at posting:
80.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
