Okay, here is the sentence, and clearly I mean fund managers/ ASX releases. Dubya holds the big record for dumb sentences
Notwithstanding the exceptional shareholder returns over this extended period, the recent performance of the portfolio has highlighted the advantages of a specialist fund manager dedicated to this sector of the market. 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. Going forward, CGA will be able to manage and service its existing wholesale microcap strategies more effectively. The Company is confident that CTN shareholders will benefit from the appointment of NAOS to manage the portfolio, a top tier manager with a great performance record, that is well positioned to provide high conviction exposure to the microcap market.
I now add comments to clarify my point
Notwithstanding the exceptional shareholder returns over this extended period, the recent performance of the portfolio has highlighted the advantages of a specialist fund manager dedicated to this sector of the market. okay, you put your hand up and say you aren't that good. We accept that because the tables show that. You've resigned, given up, handing it over, well done. Would have been a hard call but such it is.You gave it a go such is life
Given CGA’s renewed focus on large and midcap companies, yep, thats consistent, the performance stank, you're a fund manager, gotta sell the future and buy a few years of Hope from your backers, I support that, no problem there, just sad for shareholders in CGA because clearly they've wasted money backing a donkey manager or been dropped into a turkey
the Company is of the view that an alternative specialist manager would be better placed to manage the portfolio. umm, this isn't sounding good. I mean, if CTN said that you would understand, but no fund manager says someone else is better, or that investors are better having their money with in a competitors fund, never mind a listed one. Yeah that's never a good thing to ever tell investors, shareholders or the market. Another critical reason is, you are telling those insto's with money still in your own microcaps fund, that a competitor is better. I mean, why on earth would you say this? For what benefit to CGA is there to actually write this? The only, only outcome from this sentence is that you will be undermining your own company and share price. Basically, I think this shows that CGA and CTN confuse which hat their are wearing, rather, the media company that writes this does, and the directors of CGA forget who they are responsible to
Further, CGA had a limited opportunity to grow its broader microcap strategy as it had been approaching capacity for this strategy. well no, this isn't true remember. Someone just paid off OC to take that $30m back because apparently CGA was the better manager and capacity was not an issue. But now it is. So if CTN paid out OC did CGA tell CTN capacity was not an issue? Question: Are we able to inspect the CTN minutes of the meeting where CTN paid out OC to cancel that contract and bring the $30m back? I would like to know what assertions were made by CGA to CTN to pay out OC's contract in regards to capacity. They have certainly lost a lot of money through relative underperformance and paying OC out. And the EGM board spill costs
Going forward, CGA will be able to manage and service its existing wholesale microcap strategies more effectively.
whoa whoa whao, stop right here. Is this for real? Did I just read CGA say that they intend to stay in microcaps? This is a joke. Surely? Not 2 sentences before, inside the very same paragraph, CGA just said they are exiting micro's, weren't good, weren't specialist, and NAOS are better. Now we read them say they are better able to manager and service existing clients? Huh? You're going to be firing your microcaps team now, you will have less staff, less resources, less clout to have a meaningful microcap presence, pay less brokerage, get less research, in other words go from being THE biggest microcap beast in Australia, to one of the smallest, and this will make you MORE effective? There are no words for this. It is not possible that anyone with 15 minutes experience in funds management could write that sentence, unthinkable that anyone in CGA could let that sentence be committed to an ASX release, never mind on the same paragraph as the other, and unfathomable that they thought people would not pick this up. Who are these people and what is going on in their heads?
The Company is confident that CTN shareholders will benefit from the appointment of NAOS to manage the portfolio, a top tier manager with a great performance record, that is well positioned to provide high conviction exposure to the microcap market.
Well I don't know where to start. First, it is not for CGA to tell CTN shareholders they will be better off, thats CTN's responsibility. Second, here we go again, NAOS are better all around. This is a listed fund manager telling the market a competitor is better than them and even they are giving them their clients money. These truly have to be the worst 2 back to back paragraphs I have ever read by a listed company. I have no idea how the board would let these through. Shareholders would surely be calling an EGM on this to ask questions of directors who appear at best out of their depth and at worst, well.......
So what comes next? Well, maybe this was a carefully crafted letter to the ASX after all, the board missed the deeper messages in it, and a certain key staff member at CGA is about to resurface at NAOS? That's where my money would be
Expand
