I find it interesting about the 'discussion' concerning the...

I find it interesting about the 'discussion' concerning the performance fee totalling $255 million.

If you look at page 4 of the Proposal to Internalise Management of Map you will notice a schedule outlining both the base fee and the performance fee.

Now notice that $217million of the $255 was received in just a single year (2004) a smaller fee of $37 million was received in 2005. In all subsequent years there has been no performance fee!!!!!!

Why?
because maybe the market waked up to the fact that that macquarie was ripping money out from multiple angles and hence priced MAP units accordingly.

Therefore the only relevant figure in my opinion is the base fee (which was $42 million in 2008).

The net 'cost savings' of internalisation are roughly $30million based on 2008 figures. However if we go into a prolonged period of deleverage this figure becomes smaller (since part of the base fee is calculated on debt, not just net assets).

Therefore we are effectively paying 12 years and possibly more (if future performance fees drop, yet macquarie has to pay for management staff and other costs).

This wont get my vote, i will also vote NO.