PDA

View Full Version : Allied Farmers Limited Capital Notes (ALF010)



Alan3285
25-01-2010, 02:46 PM
Hi Guys,

Happy New Year to you all.

Has anyone looked at the ALF010 bonds?

My (very simplistic) analysis of these is as follows:


They are currently yielding 16% (based on 'offer' on the board as of right now);


They rank ahead of all the equity shares.

Therefore, I am thinking that whatever risk attached to the bonds before the Hanover deal, there is now greater asset backing than before (whatever final value is actually extracted from the Hanover loan book), and all of the equity that 'financed' the acquisition of those assets ranks behind the bonds.

Therefore, whatever the risk in the bonds prior to Hanover, the risk must be relatively lower today (without getting into absolutes!)

That makes them look quite attractive to me, but am I missing something from the above analysis?

Thanks,

Alan.

macduffy
25-01-2010, 03:33 PM
When do they mature?

Not perpetuals, are they?

Alan3285
25-01-2010, 03:44 PM
When do they mature?

Not perpetuals, are they?


No - not perpetuals. They mature on 15 Nov 2011.

Yield (quoted above) is YTM.


Alan.

Contrarian
29-01-2010, 06:21 PM
Gidday Alan
I've been trading the NZDX for a year or two & it's interesting.

I've got a few ALF010 which I got before the notes were gold plated as you have pointed out. I look at it like this "One can earn say $1,600 interest with a fraction of the capital required to earn $1,600 at a banks deposit rates" Working back like that gives you the rest of your capital for other things.

Alan3285
29-01-2010, 10:37 PM
Hi Contrarian,




I've got a few ALF010 which I got before the notes were gold plated as you have pointed out.




So I take it you also believe that the massive increase in capital from the Hanover deal has made the ALF010 bonds pretty much rock solid?

Am I correct in my analysis above that the assets from Hanover all add to the buffer on the bonds?

If so, what is your opinion as to why are they still trading at such a high yield?

Thanks,

Alan.

GTM 3442
02-02-2010, 06:39 AM
My understanding is that the ALF010 issue are Capital Notes, which will convert into Allied Farmers shares on maturity.

So perhaps the question should be why is the yield so low.

macduffy
02-02-2010, 02:48 PM
Is the conversion on a one for one basis?

Or does a (say) $1 note convert to $1 worth of shares at conversion date valuation?

Have/do these securities actually trade at quoted levels, ie how liquid are they? There doesn't seem to be any transactions whenever I take a look.

Alan3285
02-02-2010, 04:11 PM
Hi GTM,




My understanding is that the ALF010 issue are Capital Notes, which will convert into Allied Farmers shares on maturity.





For the purposes of discussion, I'll go with a working assumption that the shares are currently fair valued (and leave it to those who know better to vote on that on the market itself).


The conversion formula is here:

(Page 46 of the document, Page 50 of the PDF, Clause 6.14.3 and Refer to 11.1 - Definitions) (http://www.companies.govt.nz/pls/web/DBSIFRAME.I_Init?p_access_no=66BBCB44DAE8BE15876F4 B339D1A896F&p_receipt_number=9412403&p_sequence_number=1&p_reference_number=169597&p_called_from=ALLTAB|doc5)

Number of Ords =

= Issue Price of Notes / ( (100% - Conversion Discount) x VWAP during Reference Period) )

If I substitute using the current figures:

= $1 / (95% x $0.105)

= 10 Ords for each capital note (rounded)


In other words, the formula delivers approximately $105 of market value shares for each $100 of nominal value capital notes.


However, the capital notes are currently trading at approximately $90 per $100 of nominal, so a conversion would mean:

$90 of market value capital notes = $105 of ordinary shares


Hence, upon conversion, a theoretical gain on conversion (today) of about 16%.





So perhaps the question should be why is the yield so low.





Is my maths correct?

If so, then what calculations are you doing that are deriving a market value for the capital notes that is substantially lower than $90 with a current yield to maturity of about 18%?




Thanks,

Alan.

GTM 3442
02-02-2010, 05:24 PM
Just a creepy, sneaky feeling that the whole thing revolves round finding value in the Hanover loan book - where Hanover couldn't - and where nobody else was game to try.

The record of some of the other finance companies who are failing to make scheduled payments in their recovery plans doesn't induce confidence.

For real thrills and excitement, I don't think you can go past RPC010 -

Buy 110%
Sell 90%
Last 100%

Alan3285
02-02-2010, 07:49 PM
Hi GTM,




Just a creepy, sneaky feeling that the whole thing revolves round finding value in the Hanover loan book - where Hanover couldn't - and where nobody else was game to try.

The record of some of the other finance companies who are failing to make scheduled payments in their recovery plans doesn't induce confidence.





Okay - but my point above in the OP was that whatever value is extracted from the Hanover loan book all of it is now a further additional buffer for the ALF010 holders compared to the pre Hanover position.

That makes those capital notes very secure from what I can see.

The new shares issued were something like 1.5 billion at a theoretical value of 20c each (or something like that) making about NZ$300m of theoretical value in the Hanover book (my numbers might be out a bit - I was going from memory so please adjust if appropriate).

That figure was based on a valuation by PwC or Grant Samuel (or both?)


If they get just 20% of the theoretical value out, that is still $60m sitting behind, and securing the capital notes.

Doesn't that make them more secure than pre-Hanover?

If so, what realistic assumptions can we use that would get the valuation on the capital notes materially below the current $90 / $100?


Alan.

Alan3285
03-08-2010, 09:04 AM
as at 09:53:39, Tuesday 03 August, 2010 (NZT)
GENERAL: ALF: Allied Farmers Seeks $19.30 million

ALF
03/08/2010
GENERAL

REL: 0953 HRS Allied Farmers Limited

GENERAL: ALF: Allied Farmers Seeks $19.30 million

Allied Farmers Seeks $19.30 million

Allied Farmers today announced a partially underwritten $19.30 million
capital raising as the company seeks further cash injections to achieve
longer term business plans and reduce debt.

The capital raising, which has been partially underwritten by McDouall Stuart
Group Limited for $9 million, will consist of two parts:

An institutional placement raising $2.25 million at 2.5 cents per new share;
and

A rights issue to current Allied Farmers shareholders entitling
them to 1 new share at 2.5 cents for every 3 shares held.

Allied Chairman John Loughlin said McDouall Stuart had today arranged a
placement of $2.25 million to a number of institutions and professional
investors, which when combined with the underwritten component of the total
capital raising would mean that at least $9 million would be raised.

"I am also encouraging our current shareholders to take up their rights, not
only to support the business and its future plans, but also to avoid any
dilution effect from the capital raising".

"In raising any capital we are mindful of the interest that has been shown by
a number of our investors in supporting the company. We have decided that the
rights issue with a placement is the best current option for us to bring in
fresh capital to launch some of our planned initiatives and gives us the time
needed to realise good value from our asset portfolio, and continue our focus
on reducing debt. We are conscious of giving existing investors the
opportunity to further invest in the company and believe rights issues are
the appropriate format to look after the interests of existing investors."

The new shares will be offered at 2.5 cents per share, which represents a
discount to Allied Farmers' current share price of approximately 5.5 cents
per share. In addition, to protect investors in the capital raising from any
future erosion in the net tangible assets of Allied Farmers, the number of
shares issued will be increased next year if the Group's net tangible assets
are less than the issue price at the June 30, 2011 financial year end. The
details of this adjustment mechanism will be set out in the prospectus.

John Loughlin said that given the continuing challenges in the rural and
finance sectors, coupled with the current market for the realisation of the
ex-Hanover and United assets, we felt it appropriate to recognise and protect
the downside risk for investors.

As an additional benefit, the rights to new shares will be renounceable. This
means that shareholders who do not wish to subscribe for more shares can sell
their rights, which may have a value, through the NZX rights trading
facility. However, for those shareholders who want to invest more than
their entitlement, provision has been made for oversubscriptions (allowing
shareholders to apply for additional new shares).

Allied Farmers has also, subject to compliance with its placement rights
under the Listing Rules, provided the sub underwriters with a right (but not
obligation) to apply for any shares not taken up in the offer or committed
under the underwriting.

Mr Loughlin said, "Allied Farmers' expects the finance sector and asset
values to recover in time and the recently completed sale of Five Mile, for
close to its latest valuation, demonstrates what Allied Farmers can achieve
from the former Hanover assets. However, in a market in which demand and
finance for property development was flat, realising good value from further
asset sales would continue to take time."

"We continue to seek opportunities for realising value from those assets and
we have a number of initiatives planned for our rural services businesses
that will differentiate our business and stimulate our market share."
"It will take time to fully realise that value, attract fresh capital to
implement initiatives and reduce debt levels. The recent extension to our
banking arrangements with Westpac, albeit with restructuring and capital
raising milestones that are required to be met, signalled confidence in our
plans, which we too are confident provide a solid foundation for our future
growth."

"We are seeing some signs of recovery in the rural sector - especially on the
back of the dairy payout - and we have confidence that the rural services
sector, including the finance sector, will recover. But that recovery will
also take time."

Mr Loughlin expected the prospectus to be lodged early next week with the
document in the mail to shareholders from about 11 August.

Media Inquiries to:
Malcolm Boyle/Alan McDonald
Star Public Relation
Allied Farmers
09 912 7827 or 021922 022 or 0212 813 004

Rob Alloway
Manager Director,
09 912 7827 or 021922 022 or 0212 813 004 021 376642

Offer Timetable
10 August Record date for Rights Issue Entitlements
11 August Offer opens and prospectus mail out begins
24 August Rights trading ceases on NZX
30 August Closing Date for Offer
6 September Allotment of new shares and statements issued

6 September New shares begin trading on NZX
End CA:00197953 For:ALF Type:GENERAL Time:2010-08-03:09:53:39





I haven't gone through in detail (and we await the prospectus), but it looks like it can only be positive for the ALF010 holders?

Alan.

Beagle
03-08-2010, 10:16 AM
Alan,

Some perspective. This is a company that did a woefully pathetic job of "so called" due dilligence when they were shafted by the Hand-over guys.
Present management have a very poor track record.
They said the shares were worth approx 20 cents when they were issued in respect of the Hand-over shafting, and at the time I was saying the shares were really worth 2 cents, if that.

Now they agree with me and are saying the shares are really only worth 2.5 cents, hence such a deeply discounted rights issue. With the benifet of some more history and hindsight, the shares from where I sit look completly worthless.

When will people wake up and smell the coffee and realise that if you have totally incompetent management, extremly poor quality assets and a soft economy, that's a recipe for losing money, there is NO OTHER possible outcome

Put another way, this company with its truly appalling record, is saying give us some more money, we will look after you. YEAH RIGHT !!

Alan3285
03-08-2010, 10:19 AM
I haven't gone through in detail (and we await the prospectus), but it looks like it can only be positive for the ALF010 holders?

Alan,

Some perspective. This is a company that did a woefully pathetic job of "so called due dilligence when they were shafted by the Hand-over guys.
Present management have a very poor track record.
They said the shares were worth approx 20 cents when they were issued in respect of the Hand-over shafting, and at the time I was saying the shares were really worth 2 cents, if that.

Now they agree with me and are saying the shares are really only worth 2.5 cents, hence such a deeply discounted rights issue.

For the record I think the shares are completly worthless.

When will people wake up and smell the coffee and realise that if you have totally incompetent management, extremly poor quality assets and a soft economy, that a recipe for losing money.

This is a sad, sad, saga, that needs to be brought to its inevitable conclusion, receivership ASAP.


Roger,

I'm, not sure what analysis you have in there in relation to the bonds (perhaps implicit?) - apologies if I missed it?

Are you saying that this is not positive for the ALF010 holders?

Thanks,

Alan.

winner69
03-08-2010, 10:24 AM
Roger,

I'm, not sure what analysis you have in there in relation to the bonds (perhaps implicit?) - apologies if I missed it?

Are you saying that this is not positive for the ALF010 holders?

Thanks,

Alan.

Prob Roger is saying that positive for bond holders in that it keeps the company afloat a bit longer ...... longer term well maybe the bonds might be worthless as well

Needing $20m in real money signals to me that they have recovered very little of real money from the hangover assets that was meant to be the capitalisation to end all capitalisations ... what was the value of that new capital now ,,,, that was going to be turned into real money over time

Alan3285
03-08-2010, 10:29 AM
Prob Roger is saying that positive for bond holders in that it keeps the company afloat a bit longer ...... longer term well maybe the bonds might be worthless as well

Needing $20m in real money signals to me that they have recovered very little of real money from the hangover assets that was meant to be the capitalisation to end all capitalisations ... what was the value of that new capital now ,,,, that was going to be turned into real money over time

That's the way I see it - this can only be positive news for the ALF010s.

If they get the whole $20m then that is another $20m that further secures the bonds on top of whatever the total amount recovered from the Hanover assets.

These bonds have only gotten more secure in the last nine months?

Alan.

Beagle
03-08-2010, 11:41 AM
That's the way I see it - this can only be positive news for the ALF010s.

If they get the whole $20m then that is another $20m that further secures the bonds on top of whatever the total amount recovered from the Hanover assets.

These bonds have only gotten more secure in the last nine months?

Alan.

Alan, To be fair I am just venting my spleen, this whole Hanover Rort and the way the current ALF "management" if you can call them that have handled the whole thing is truly reprehensible. They havn't a single shread of credibility left in my opinion.

Sure if they can raise the money in the only "partially" underwritten rights issue, that'll keep them going a bit longer but wouldn't you be better off down at the casino if you want to have a punt at least down there you can manage your own money rather than let those completly incompetent fools at ALF do it.

I refuse to back any company whose directors and management are coimpletly inept and totally incompetent, penny dreadfuls or otherwise.

That's my 2 cents worth I know its not terribly analytical or scientific but in my opinion ALF's record speaks for itself and to me it screams You'd have to be crazy to invest in this rotten dog.

Alan3285
03-08-2010, 12:28 PM
Alan, To be fair I am just venting my spleen, this whole Hanover Rort and the way the current ALF "management" if you can call them that have handled the whole thing is truly reprehensible. They havn't a single shread of credibility left in my opinion.

Sure if they can raise the money in the only "partially" underwritten rights issue, that'll keep them going a bit longer but wouldn't you be better off down at the casino if you want to have a punt at least down there you can manage your own money rather than let those completly incompetent fools at ALF do it.

I refuse to back any company whose directors and management are coimpletly inept and totally incompetent, penny dreadfuls or otherwise.

That's my 2 cents worth I know its not terribly analytical or scientific but in my opinion ALF's record speaks for itself and to me it screams You'd have to be crazy to invest in this rotten dog.

I don't agree - I am in the money on my ALF010 but I am not selling at this point.

The yield is good for the relative risk (which seems to have been falling since the time the Hanover deal was first announced), and the security is getting better.

If your risk appetite is not great, you might be better off in ASB with a term deposit than these types of bonds.


Alan.

Beagle
03-08-2010, 01:52 PM
Good luck Alan, ALF have a record of wealth destruction and have proved themselves appallingly bad at extracting any value from Hanover's receiveables, then again, there was probably very little there in the first place. Of course credible management who did even a half way reasonable job at due diligence would have allready known that.

Alan3285
03-08-2010, 04:28 PM
Good luck Alan, ALF have a record of wealth destruction

Not for me they haven't ;-)

They have been my second best performer in the last 12 months behind SCF only - that's looking at pure 'gains' only.

Whilst making great gains, I have also been yielding an average of about 26% pa while holding them.

I'm fairly happy with that so far....

Alan.

Balance
03-08-2010, 04:53 PM
Not for me they haven't ;-)

They have been my second best performer in the last 12 months behind SCF only - that's looking at pure 'gains' only.

Whilst making great gains, I have also been yielding an average of about 26% pa while holding them.

I'm fairly happy with that so far....

Alan.

26% alone tells you what the market thinks of the risk?

I can remember Skellerup bonds giving investors 35% pa return - then it blew up.

Alan3285
03-08-2010, 06:36 PM
26% alone tells you what the market thinks of the risk?

That's right - but no matter what, I can't 'lose' on them over 12 months now, since I have 10,000 units remaining held, and I am already cash positive on them.

Any real analysis that implies they will fall over would be interesting to go through.

Alan.

percy
04-08-2010, 08:29 AM
That's right - but no matter what, I can't 'lose' on them over 12 months now, since I have 10,000 units remaining held, and I am already cash positive on them.

Any real analysis that implies they will fall over would be interesting to go through.

Alan.
I am sure you will find Chalkie's article on ALF of interest.

Alan3285
04-08-2010, 08:38 AM
I am sure you will find Chalkie's article on ALF of interest.

Where is it?

Alan.

Alan3285
04-08-2010, 10:46 AM
Saw your post in the ALF shares thread:


www.stuff.co.nz/business/.../Time-for-Hanover-investors-to-get-angry


Thanks!

Alan.

Alan3285
09-08-2010, 04:10 PM
ALF is putting their $19m capital raising on hold:

Stuff (http://www.stuff.co.nz/marlborough-express/business/4006433/Allied-capital-raising-on-hold)




Allied Farmers' attempt to raise $19.3 million capital has hit a snag as its trustee continues to ask questions about a breach of financial trust deed obligations by its finance subsidiary, Allied Nationwide Finance.

The company had set a record date for the partially underwritten capital raising of tomorrow, August 10, but has opted to delay, says Allied Farmers chairman John Loughlin.

"Our preference is for the prospectus to disclose the very latest information, and with our Trustee having some questions over our finance subsidiary we feel it is prudent to delay the prospectus.

"We believe the Trustee's concerns can be resolved quickly and we have been working towards a speedy resolution since we were informed of NZ Guardian Trust's concerns on Friday. "

Loughlin says at issue is its "future liquidity position and how it would be funded after the Government's guarantee expires on October 11".

"The finance business has been self funding for the last three years or so. While our current audit is yet to be signed off, our numbers show that continues to be the case, and we are confident we will continue to have or obtain sufficient funds necessary to pay back debenture holders."

He also says a solution might involve Allied Farmers contributing further capital to Allied Nationwide Finance, perhaps out of assets recently acquired from Hanover Finance and United Finance.




Alan.

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 09:43 AM
Further announcement by ANF (not ALF - the subsidiary):

http://www.nzx.com/markets/NZDX/ANFHA/announcements/4044042/ANF-Update-on-position-under-Trust-Deed


Putting pressure on the trustee?

Alan.

winner69
20-08-2010, 09:51 AM
Bloody disaster the whole affair though isn't it Alan

minimoke
20-08-2010, 10:10 AM
If they didn't pay debenture maturities due yesterday - isn't that a default event so the Deposit Guarantee is triggered?

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 10:13 AM
Bloody disaster the whole affair though isn't it Alan

For the original ALF shareholders - absolutely. They should have sold when the Hanover deal was put on the table (or voted it down).

For the ex-Hanoverians? Difficult to say - the assets might have been worth the same within ALF or outside, in which case, no real difference to them either way. I guess they might think they could have had a pop at the Hanover guys, but in reality those amounts would have been relatively small compared to the overall book values (although perhaps not so small compared to actual values in hindsight!)

Alan.

Beagle
20-08-2010, 10:37 AM
For the original ALF shareholders - absolutely. They should have sold when the Hanover deal was put on the table (or voted it down).

For the ex-Hanoverians? Difficult to say - the assets might have been worth the same within ALF or outside, in which case, no real difference to them either way. I guess they might think they could have had a pop at the Hanover guys, but in reality those amounts would have been relatively small compared to the overall book values (although perhaps not so small compared to actual values in hindsight!)

Alan.

The deal letting those crooks off wasn't it $20m and the way that Hanover was heavily dividend stripped in its last two years of operation, from memory over $80m in dividends were stripped by the Hanover owners, were major factors why investors should have voted this fiasco down in the first place.

The irony of just squeaking through by the barest of margins just over 75% isn't lost on me. I'm sure Eric Watson and Mark Hotchin will be lauging into their Pina Colada's while they sun themselves in 5 star luxury somewhere in a sunny part of the world.

Don't forget to tell us about your losses when they go under Alan, oh no wait, I suppose your ahead on these as well....

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 10:57 AM
The deal letting those crooks off wasn't it $20m and the way that Hanover was heavily dividend stripped in its last two years of operation, from memory over $80m in dividends were stripped by the Hanover owners, were major factors why investors should have voted this fiasco down in the first place.

The irony of just squeaking through by the barest of margins just over 75% isn't lost on me. I'm sure Eric Watson and Mark Hotchin will be lauging into their Pina Colada's while they sun themselves in 5 star luxury somewhere in a sunny part of the world.

Don't forget to tell us about your losses when they go under Alan, oh no wait, I suppose your ahead on these as well....

If my ALF010s become worthless, then I would be down about $240 (taking into account brokerage, interest received, and deducting tax effects). In fact, just about half of that loss would actually be brokerage on three trades.

However, for my ALF010s to become worthless, the ex-Hanover and original ALF investors 2,042,294,858 ordinary shares all have to be completely worthless first, so I am hopeful I won't lose out overall, and if I do, the ride was fun!

It was my decision to get into them, and if I am up or down, it is entirely down to me.

They aren't likely to knock SCFHA off my 'top performer' chart!

Alan.

minimoke
20-08-2010, 11:33 AM
Further announcement by ANF (not ALF - the subsidiary):

http://www.nzx.com/markets/NZDX/ANFHA/announcements/4044042/ANF-Update-on-position-under-Trust-Deed


Putting pressure on the trustee?

Alan.
Any picks on what their announcement later today will be? Trustees phone is probably running hot!

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 11:38 AM
Any picks on what their announcement later today will be? Trustees phone is probably running hot!

No idea - I guess it will depend on what ALF are bringing to the table in terms of:

1) Whether ANF has actually breached those trust deed terms
2) What capital raising / funding lines ALF has been able to arrange
3) Whether the trustee wants to take the 'blame' for bringing down ANF when it might have been able to keep going (legitimately)

Of course, the trustee can't lose by digging their heels in at this point, since the debenture holders are currently covered by the Govt Guarantee, so they'll probably look to their own best interest, and pull the plug on ANF.

Does that mean ALF is doomed? Not sure. It might actually mean less cash outflows for ALF (not having to support ANF), but they'd have to write off the value of the investment in ANF and probably some or all of any loans to ANF.

Alan.

minimoke
20-08-2010, 04:04 PM
Oh well, theres goes some of my tax to depositors in ANF

Beagle
20-08-2010, 04:09 PM
Oh well, theres goes some of my tax to depositors in ANF

Cheer up Minimoke, this is just the warm-up for the main event on or before 31 August and is inconsequential compared to the thorough drilling taxpayers will get when SCF goes under.

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 04:32 PM
Cheer up Minimoke, this is just the warm-up for the main event on or before 31 August and is inconsequential compared to the thorough drilling taxpayers will get when SCF goes under.

ANF is 'only' about $135m or so?

Alan.

minimoke
20-08-2010, 04:40 PM
I wonder if we should help SCF save some time. They could just edit ANF's statement like this:

SCF
20/08/2010
RA

REL: 1630 HRS SOUTH CANTERBURY FINANCE Limited

RA: SCFHA: SOUTH CANTERBURY Finance Limited - Receivership

20 August 2010

SOUTH CANTERBURY Finance Limited - Receivership

Further to the announcement this morning, SOUTH CANTERBURY Finance Limited
(SCG) advises that its Directors have this afternoon requested that its
Trustee, TRUSTEES EXECUTORS (TE) appoint receivers to the Company.

TE has advised that it will appoint SANDY MAIER as Receivers of ANF. SANDY MAIER has been acting as
independent advisors to TE and prepared a report on TE which resulted in
the alleged breach of its Trust Deed ratio, as advised on 6 August 2010.

SCF has been working diligently on a number of strategic initiatives that it
considered would provide the Company with sufficient short and medium term
liquidity, and position the Company to meet Trust Deed and regulatory capital
requirements. However the notice received from TE of the alleged Trust Deed
ratio breach and the subsequent withdrawal of SCF's prospectus had a
significant and immediate impact on these initiatives, and the ability of SCF
to continue to meet its obligations.

The Board and management of SCF will cooperate fully with the Receiver in the
interests of all stakeholders of the Company, including deposit and bond
investors, staff, customers and AlAN FHUBBARD as shareholder. SCF expects
an acceptable outcome from the receivership on the basis of its current net
asset position and level of shareholder funds.

SCF remains covered under the Crown deposit guarantee scheme in respect of
its secured deposits and further information will be provided by the Receiver
in relation to the process for claims under the guarantee in due course.

ENDS
End CA:00198637 For:SCF Type:RA Time:2010-08-20:16:30:43

Beagle
20-08-2010, 04:43 PM
I wonder if we should help SCF save some time. They could just edit ANF's statement like this:

SCF
20/08/2010
RA

REL: 1630 HRS SOUTH CANTERBURY FINANCE Limited

RA: SCFHA: SOUTH CANTERBURY Finance Limited - Receivership

20 August 2010

SOUTH CANTERBURY Finance Limited - Receivership

Further to the announcement this morning, SOUTH CANTERBURY Finance Limited
(SCG) advises that its Directors have this afternoon requested that its
Trustee, TRUSTEES EXECUTORS (TE) appoint receivers to the Company.

TE has advised that it will appoint SANDY MAIER as Receivers of ANF. SANDY MAIER has been acting as
independent advisors to TE and prepared a report on TE which resulted in
the alleged breach of its Trust Deed ratio, as advised on 6 August 2010.

SCF has been working diligently on a number of strategic initiatives that it
considered would provide the Company with sufficient short and medium term
liquidity, and position the Company to meet Trust Deed and regulatory capital
requirements. However the notice received from TE of the alleged Trust Deed
ratio breach and the subsequent withdrawal of SCF's prospectus had a
significant and immediate impact on these initiatives, and the ability of SCF
to continue to meet its obligations.

The Board and management of SCF will cooperate fully with the Receiver in the
interests of all stakeholders of the Company, including deposit and bond
investors, staff, customers and AlAN FHUBBARD as shareholder. SCF expects
an acceptable outcome from the receivership on the basis of its current net
asset position and level of shareholder funds.

SCF remains covered under the Crown deposit guarantee scheme in respect of
its secured deposits and further information will be provided by the Receiver
in relation to the process for claims under the guarantee in due course.

ENDS
End CA:00198637 For:SCF Type:RA Time:2010-08-20:16:30:43

That's pure gold mate, well done.

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 04:43 PM
I wonder if we should help SCF save some time. They could just edit ANF's statement like this:

Bit irresponsible posting that?

Alan.

minimoke
20-08-2010, 04:45 PM
Bit irresponsible posting that?

Alan.
Did you miss the lowered credit rating today?

Beagle
20-08-2010, 04:46 PM
Bit irresponsible posting that?

Alan.

Not really, all they have to do is cut and paste, first thing Monday morning.

Beagle
20-08-2010, 04:47 PM
Did you miss the lowered credit rating today?

I did, can you post a link ?

minimoke
20-08-2010, 04:48 PM
I did, can you post a link ?
See SCF thread

minimoke
20-08-2010, 04:54 PM
ANF is 'only' about $135m or so?

Alan.
and 4,500 depositors. I wonder how long it will take to get their money. They might be glad they are the next cab off the rank and not the last one. Getting stuck in the queue may delay things even more.

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 04:56 PM
Did you miss the lowered credit rating today?

No - it was also posted in the SCF discussion.

I'm not in SCF right now, so not watching them too closely.

Alan.

Beagle
20-08-2010, 05:01 PM
and 4,500 depositors. I wonder how long it will take to get their money. They might be glad they are the next cab off the rank and not the last one. Getting stuck in the queue may delay things even more.

Yeah, I'm picking they will be very happy. Just imagine being in the queue behind 30,000 SCF depositers and limited manpower to process the paperwork...

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 05:06 PM
Yeah, I'm picking they will be very happy. Just imagine being in the queue behind 30,000 SCF depositers and limited manpower to process the paperwork...

They can always re-deploy from the Stat Mgt of AH!

Alan.

minimoke
20-08-2010, 05:10 PM
I'm not in SCF right now, so not watching them too closely.
.
As a tax payer you are right into SCF so worth watching if only for that reason

Beagle
20-08-2010, 05:14 PM
[
QUOTE=minimoke;316253]As a tax payer you are right into SCF so worth watching if only for that reason[/QUOTE
That and its the biggest train wreck to ever happen and in such incredibly slow motion so we all get a really good look, its quite bizarre but who can help themselves watching closely ?, (obviously not me LOL.)

minimoke
20-08-2010, 05:30 PM
[
its quite bizarre but who can help themselves watching closely ?, (obviously not me LOL.)
I think its called "Investor Porn"

Alan3285
20-08-2010, 06:40 PM
As a tax payer you are right into SCF so worth watching if only for that reason

Not really worried about that. The govt will get back most of what it shells out - the losses won't be ruinous to the country, and the harm was all done by Goff's Boys in 2008 - can't change it now.

Alan.

Alan3285
05-10-2010, 09:09 AM
Amazing story in the NBR last week about how Ed Sullivan sent some papers over to hos meatworker brother-in-lae to sign and then the brother in law ended up as the sole owner of the Hyatt Regency and owed SCF $42m odd .... all to muddle the related party loans situation

Supposse Alan thought this was all kosher as well



Perhaps that is meant for the SCF thread?

Alan.

Edit: Okay - Done.

Alan3285
28-04-2011, 03:17 PM
Alloway has resigned from the board, staying on as CEO until Jun 2011:

Alloway resigns from Allied Farmers (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/alloway-resigns-allied-farmers-db-91802)


Not sure if it means much?

Alan.

Balance
03-07-2011, 11:42 AM
Alloway has resigned from the board, staying on as CEO until Jun 2011:

Alloway resigns from Allied Farmers (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/alloway-resigns-allied-farmers-db-91802)


Not sure if it means much?

Alan.

Rob Alloway has done his bit to the further destruction of Hanover's investors already depleted funds. Crying crocodile tears as he quit does not absolve him in anyway in his role from this most disgraceful chapter of NZ's financial history.