PDA

View Full Version : Usolisited share purchase offers



Soolaimon
29-12-2010, 10:12 AM
I have just recieved offers to purchase my FBU and TEL shares from Cargill Securities and Carlyle Securities respectivly. The offers are way lower than current prices on market.
Who are these people and are they preying on non-savvy holders who may need a few dollars at this time of the year??
I am returning the offers with appropriate comments in the pre-paid envelopes provided and hope they do end up paying for the postage. I trust others who have recieved these offers will consider doing the same.
Merry Christmas.
Soolaimon.

Hoop
29-12-2010, 10:40 AM
Good idea Soolaimon.
Just pulled the NZ Investment Securities LP pre paid envelope out from the rubbish bin sealed it with nothing in it and will post it back to them :p

macduffy
29-12-2010, 11:20 AM
Add to that list:

Chase Securities "offering" $2.41 for NPX

Fairfield Securities want to buy FPA at 32c

NZ Investment Securities think $4.06 is a good price for CEN

The problem of course is that there isn't anything illegal in what these (this?) organisation is doing. Just that they're bound to net a few unsuspecting victims.

Awamoa
29-12-2010, 11:21 AM
I have received one from Cargill Securities for FBU and another from Pearson Securities for GPG.Coincidentally they both have the same return address.
Both have been returned advising them where to stick it.

Jaa
29-12-2010, 11:44 AM
My mother also received lowball offers from NZ Investment Securities or NZI Securities as they call themselves for her Vector shares.

This should be one of the first abuses that the FMA shuts down if they mean business.

blackcap
29-12-2010, 11:51 AM
Thanks for the idea guys, I will be fishing the reply envelope out of the bin and mailing them back with appropriate comments!

nissan
29-12-2010, 12:01 PM
I have also received an offer of $5.60 for fbu shares .Offer closes 7th January
Computershare the company fbu uses should send a warning out to all shareholders not to accept Also the NZX should be able to do some thing to stop these low ball offers .I am worried about some of the elderly people. Are there sharebrokers back at work yet to offer advice to them. Who are these people and what are there names?

Shepherd
29-12-2010, 12:22 PM
I also received an offer for Nuplex shares at $2.40! (currently trading at $3.50). I returned their post paid envelope telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for preying on the vulnerable. At least they will have to pay the postage.

Invercoll
29-12-2010, 12:28 PM
l have received 7 offers from 7 different!!!!!! firms .

Chase Securities for Nuplex
Fairfield Securities for F&P Appliances
Cargill Securities forr Fletcher Building
NZ Investment for Contact
Pearson Securities for GPG
Energy Securities for Vector
Carlyle Securities for Telecom.

Mmmmmm! Address is the same for each one. Sadly no phone number and isn't the timing wonderful! Of course l will rush to give them my CSN and sellout!!!

Who the heck are they???

Casa del Energia
29-12-2010, 12:28 PM
I bundled the whole lot up and posted them .. to the Securites Commision. Vague hope that some legal dude can summon up somethihng like 'unconscionable contract' or at least post it on thier lastest scams website. Hopefully, by burying the offer price deeply in the fine print - and by not noting that it is well below the actual value, the have left themselves open to a bit of heat.

Heke
29-12-2010, 01:06 PM
From “Scoop” Business 29 December 2010

Whimp at it again as shareholders get low-ball offer for kiwi companies
Dec. 29 (BusinessDesk) – Bernard Whimp, a businessman who offers to buy securities at low-ball prices by making a direct approach to investors, appears to have mounted a new campaign over the Christmas-New Year season to buy leading New Zealand stocks.
Investors say they’ve received mailed offers to buy their shares from a range of limited partnerships including Energy Services and Fairfield Securities. Whimp is listed as a partner in both vehicles, which were registered on Dec.17. His address is listed as 93 Liverpool St in Sydney, of which there are several listed on Google maps.
NZX Markets Supervision said it has been informed of offers to buy shares in Fletcher Building, Telecom, Nuplex Industries, Guinness Peat Group., Contact Energy and Vector. It referred those approached to a Securities Commission warning which says while such offers are not illegal it is against the law to mislead or deceive investors into accepting an offer.
“Shareholders should take time to compare the market price of their securities, via nzx.com, with the unsolicited offer price they have received before making any decisions to sell their securities,” NZX Market Supervision said in a statement.
Whimp had some success snapping up shares of DNZ Property Fund Ltd., buying 2.2 million shares at 60 cents apiece in August. Those shares most recently traded at $1.18.
The offers expire on Jan. 7, three days before the Securities Commission is due to re-open after its Christmas break.
Whimp’s use of limited partnerships raised the ire of government officials earlier this year, who have been looking at ways to block banned directors from circumventing disqualification.
He was banned from being a company director for four years in October 2006 after the deputy Companies Registrar found he was linked to the mismanagement of at least two failed companies. In 2003, his contributory mortgage business, General Mortgages, was placed under statutory management by the Securities Commission.

What a great idea, I will post the empty envelope to them also!

macduffy
29-12-2010, 01:24 PM
I'd never do this myself but a party with whom I am acquainted is in the habit of getting his dog to contribute to the contents of the returned envelope.

The problem is that it will probably not be Mr W himself who opens the envelopes.

Deev8
29-12-2010, 01:56 PM
This should be one of the first abuses that the FMA shuts down if they mean business.
It would be good if a regulator could stamp-out practices like this, but legislation would be difficult.

Contrarian
29-12-2010, 02:00 PM
I am worried about some of the elderly people. Who are these people and what are there names?

From www.companies.govt.nz search

Struck off companies include Carlyle Properties

Bernard Terance WHIMP
28 Kotare Street, Christchurch, 5036 , New Zealand

Deev8
29-12-2010, 02:05 PM
Looking at the offers that I received myself, and those that others have mentioned, the offer prices range from 27% to 43% below market price.

According to reports at the time Whimp accumulated 2.2 million shares of DNZ Property Fund Ltd at 60c each back in August. That was a discount of something like 40% to the market price. Brian Gaynor wrote an interesting piece about it in the Herald.

Piggy
29-12-2010, 05:20 PM
I will post an empty evenlope back too

Soolaimon
29-12-2010, 05:31 PM
Thanks for all your support guys, if this sort of thing happened in Aussie or other countries for that matter, there would be hell to pay. Us Kiwis are inclined to roll over and let things go and it is time we got organized and sort these crooks out. I will also be contacting my brokers (when they open) and get them on board too.
Hey, the TV news has got on to it!! GREAT.

Penfold
29-12-2010, 06:06 PM
Where are they getting investors addresses from? And should I be concerned that he hasn't even offered me low ball offers for any of my NZX holdings?

Jaa
29-12-2010, 06:15 PM
It would be good if a regulator could stamp-out practices like this, but legislation would be difficult.

Shouldn't be to difficult, I would do two things:


The registries and companies need to be empowered to be able to say no to any requests for the names and addresses of shareholders. A simple blacklist would be a good start with the onus of proof on the requester (e.g. a creditable company mounting a hostile takeover is a legitimate request).

The FMA should have the power to overturn any deliberate mass lowball offers deemed against the public interest after they have occurred with moderate fines levied against the offerers. A maximum fine of 100K per offer would do it.


Problem solved.

rabcat
29-12-2010, 06:35 PM
From “Scoop” Business 29 December 2010

It referred those approached to a Securities Commission warning which says while such offers are not illegal it is against the law to mislead or deceive investors into accepting an offer.

What a great idea, I will post the empty envelope to them also!


I got one of these letters for Vector. This is disgusting and should be illegal. Potentially with Vector there are a lot of unsophisticated shareholders who would not know the true value of their shares. If the markets wants to be taken seriously this sort of offer should be stopped either by the Securites Commision or the NZX.

Why have the companies involved not issued notices advising shareholders not to sell to these people?

fungus pudding
29-12-2010, 06:39 PM
Shouldn't be to difficult, I would do two things:


The registries and companies need to be empowered to be able to say no to any requests for the names and addresses of shareholders. A simple blacklist would be a good start with the onus of proof on the requester (e.g. a creditable company mounting a hostile takeover is a legitimate request).

The FMA should have the power to overturn any deliberate mass lowball offers deemed against the public interest after they have occurred with moderate fines levied against the offerers. A maximum fine of 100K per offer would do it.


Problem solved.

Not that easy. We all have the right to contract with anyone else in any legal activity, such as buying and selling and that is as it should be. Maybe a cooling off period could be introduced for shares not traded through the exchange, as it has been in door to door sales. There will always be 'sharp' buyers whether you are selling your shares, your car, your house or anything else.

POSSUM THE CAT
29-12-2010, 07:16 PM
Soolamon he copied from an Australian that has made a fortune out of doing it for years & so far as I know the only thing they have been able to do about it is to create a size able charge for the share holders list. AS there is a law that a list of shareholders and their holdings has to be provided on request. They then introduced a ruling that the body or person requiring the list should pay the costs of preparing the list.

Jay
29-12-2010, 07:31 PM
I got one today as well

Pearson Securities for GPG for 49c

I will send back an empty envelope as well

GTM 3442
29-12-2010, 07:41 PM
Shouldn't be to difficult, I would do two things:


The registries and companies need to be empowered to be able to say no to any requests for the names and addresses of shareholders.

No, no, no Jaa. This is public record data and it must be available on request. Such transparency is vital for the effective functioning of markets. It's called transparency.

QOH
29-12-2010, 08:20 PM
Likewise, have retrieved envelope from rubbish and will return to sender, and will do so whenever I receive rubbish like this in the future.

777
29-12-2010, 10:59 PM
Don't send an empty envelope. Put something in it so he will have to open it. A sheet of paper should be enough.
If empty he will just bin it.

QOH
30-12-2010, 12:17 AM
Don't send an empty envelope. Put something in it so he will have to open it. A sheet of paper should be enough.
If empty he will just bin it.
Hmmm maybe we could stick the freepost envelope to a much larger envelope to ensure the postage is as high as we can make it.

POSSUM THE CAT
30-12-2010, 10:54 AM
Vince's Post was a far better Idea. I see it has been removed but the most original idea that I have seen. As he probably employs some sucker to open his mail it would be very distasteful for them.

minimoke
31-12-2010, 11:04 AM
Got my letter offers in the mail today and can't see what the fuss is all about.

Its an offer and its up to the holder to accept or decline. If a person is so dense that they don't know the current value of their shares relative to the price just offered then they ought not to be owning shares.

Whats with all this talk about extra regulation blah blah. I have some sympathy for protecting the stupid from themselves - but if posters want to regulate then it should be aimed at preventing the ill informed from investing/purchasing in the first place.

Felix
31-12-2010, 12:19 PM
I agree Minimoke. The offers are opportunistic, cheeky, mean spirited or whatever you want to call them along those lines. They are not illegal and I don't think they need to be regulated against. Ultimately it is just an offer and like any offer you can choose to accept or decline.

I don't understand the argument that the current market price should be on the document. It's not like this information isn't available in the newspapers, on the internet, through word of mouth by asking relatives etc. The current share price isn't a secret and isn't hard to find.

I do have some sympathy for more elderly shareholders because some are vulnerable. I do think it important for their relatives to play a part in ensuring their elderly relatives are protected, but that applies to more than just finances. Perhaps there needs to be some general legislation put in place to protect/assist people over a certain age (say, 80 years old) but I don't think that should be restricted to financial issues. In terms of their finances, perhaps they need to be provided with a 'cooling off' period, or even perhaps require a second signer for transactions over a certain dollar limit (e.g. a JP or community lawyer).

J R Ewing
31-12-2010, 01:17 PM
Are they in the market for any PRC?

POSSUM THE CAT
31-12-2010, 01:30 PM
J R Ewing Yes they are you pay them 10cents per share for them to take them of your hands. They want to make money not friends.

Year of the Tiger
31-12-2010, 02:39 PM
"Powershares LP" offered me $5.30 per share for my Trustpower shares. Currently trading at $7.35. :scared:

Yep, in the bin for me too...................

YOTT

krusty
04-01-2011, 01:29 PM
How about a homemade cheque in favour of Carlyle Securities LP (or the directors) for the amount they want to give to you. Sure to confuse. Might get lucky if they bank it, as the bank will charge them a bit for the muck around when it is dishonoured.

adv
07-01-2011, 09:09 AM
I received an offer for Contact shares - chucked in the bin on receipt. A fixed amount was stated but not the number of shares or the price per share. I figured I could have sold all bar 2 shares on market and then accepted the offer for the remaining 2 - the offer being for my shares (not single share). However, I have higher moral / ethical standards than Mr Whimp and would not lower myself to his level.

Awamoa
07-01-2011, 12:13 PM
Apparantly this practice is perfectly legal.
Is it perfectly legal to get the local president of Black Power or Hells Angels or whatever to pay this guy a visit and explain that these kind offers should really stop being made.

minimoke
07-01-2011, 01:47 PM
Apparantly this practice is perfectly legal.
Is it perfectly legal to get the local president of Black Power or Hells Angels or whatever to pay this guy a visit and explain that these kind offers should really stop being made.
I'm still struggling to see why there are objections to a person legitimately making an offer in a transparent business transaction.

Is anyone able to point me to the moral arbiter which indicates what an acceptable threshold below the current "buy" might be? Is it less 25% or some other figure?

If I look at PLU on the Direct Broking site, as an example, someone is offering to buy at $0.27 when the last sale was $0.43. Should we look at hanging Direct Broking from the nearest tree and let our Black Power mates have a decent go at them?

Voltaire
07-01-2011, 02:02 PM
I'm still struggling to see why there are objections to a person legitimately making an offer in a transparent business transaction.

Agreed. It's not attractive behaviour but on the other hand there's a tacit assumption by those jumping up and down that there are legions of investors out there so simple-minded that they'll part with their shares as soon as someone offers them a couple of cents for them. I hope that assumption is wrong, but if it's not (and indeed, fools and their money are easily parted), then perhaps those investors are very much in the wrong game in the first place?

minimoke
07-01-2011, 02:30 PM
... there's a tacit assumption .... that there are legions of investors out there so simple-minded that they'll part with their shares as soon as someone offers them a couple of cents for them.
We only need to look at ALF and SCF to see plenty of evidence of that. I'm inclined to have some sympathy for Mr Whimp (or whoever is behind these low ball bids) since he is at least applying some honest toil to his endeavors. Whereas as SCF relied solely on tax payer backing to extract funds from dense "investors" which has to rank very low on any morality continuum and Hotchin and Watson are past masters of extending that continuum to investors that gave a new definition to "clueless".

777
07-01-2011, 02:57 PM
Minimoke there a lot of citizens out there who acquired shares from the likes of insurance companies and power companies. A lot of these people had never owned a share in their lives and have no idea what the sharemarket is all about. When an offer like this comes along they accept it as it is a simple signiture and send it back in a reply paid envelope. It is these people that the likes of Whimp pray on. It is the elderly that I feel sorry for. Sometimes they acquire shares from the death of a spouse or other relative and never having dealt in shares directly themselves get caught in the so called "clueless" lot. How much about trading shares do your beneficiaries know if you were to drop dead tomorrow? This guy is a creep. A rich creep on the back of a lot of people who don't deserve to be conned by the likes of him.

minimoke
07-01-2011, 03:29 PM
Minimoke there a lot of citizens out there who acquired shares from the likes of insurance companies and power companies.
I've been the beneficiary of those my self. They could on one hand be seen as "free" shares and anything a person gets is a bonus. However being "free" does not excuse a person from being disinterested. If they are disinterested then accepting Whimps offer seems an equitable deal.


. When an offer like this comes along they accept it as it is a simple signiture and send it back in a reply paid envelope.
Yup thats the way it works. Someone with knowledge taking advantage of the vulnerable. We'd need a bloody big statute book if we wanted to stop every example of that happening. My preference would be that efforts go into stamping out South Auckland money lenders as one of the first priorities.

It is the elderly that I feel sorry for. C'mon, give the elderly a break. Just because you get old doesn't mean you loose the ability to do the basics in life. Like take an interest or get some advice.


How much about trading shares do your beneficiaries know if you were to drop dead tomorrow? Quite a lot actually. My 10 year old reads the stock pages and started off last year with $10k monopoly money and thats now worth $13k - through good luck rather than anything else but at least there is some interest and learning happening.

troyvdh
07-01-2011, 05:14 PM
Dear Mini...your naivety is spectacular....i wonder what world you circulate in...at times i would probably enjoy it.
Folk like wimp get up in the morning for the sole purpose to cheat and profit from those who are vulnerable...thats all...nothing else...

777 well said

having said that I returned wimps offer for CEN at 406 with a G.. F.....

...whats worse is that those folk who distrust "the market" probably feel totally vindicated.....yuk...

bermuda
07-01-2011, 05:47 PM
Dear Mini...your naivety is spectacular....i wonder what world you circulate in...at times i would probably enjoy it.
Folk like wimp get up in the morning for the sole purpose to cheat and profit from those who are vulnerable...thats all...nothing else...

777 well said

having said that I returned wimps offer for CEN at 406 with a G.. F.....

...whats worse is that those folk who distrust "the market" probably feel totally vindicated.....yuk...

What Whimp needs is a couple of bricks through his front window...... With an appropriate note attached.

Awamoa
07-01-2011, 05:58 PM
This Whimp is a bankrupt who should not be trading.He has apparantly found a way around it using partnerships.
A classic case for authorities to show some strength and deal with him or does the NZ sharemarket keep its Wild West reputation from the 80s.

Soolaimon
07-01-2011, 07:17 PM
Hi everyone, now that the offer expiry date has passed for all the offers how can we find out what the acceptance rate was.?? I don't know what facilities there are -if any- to get a handle on how successfull Whimp's sceme has been but it would be good to know. Cheers, Soolaimon.

stanace
07-01-2011, 10:19 PM
Minimoke there a lot of citizens out there who acquired shares from the likes of insurance companies and power companies. A lot of these people had never owned a share in their lives and have no idea what the sharemarket is all about. When an offer like this comes along they accept it as it is a simple signiture and send it back in a reply paid envelope. It is these people that the likes of Whimp pray on. It is the elderly that I feel sorry for. Sometimes they acquire shares from the death of a spouse or other relative and never having dealt in shares directly themselves get caught in the so called "clueless" lot. How much about trading shares do your beneficiaries know if you were to drop dead tomorrow? This guy is a creep. A rich creep on the back of a lot of people who don't deserve to be conned by the likes of him.

I don't agree with what he is doing, but cannot see any difference between it and people making low ball offers for residential property that is not even on the market. eg on the death of a spouse. If you don't know the value of what you own, whose fault exactly is that. And who is to say where the difference lies. The only difference in this case is that there exists a market that will tell you what is on offer at that moment. Not really that different from real estate, just a matter of timing.

Huang Chung
07-01-2011, 10:46 PM
From the Sydney Morning Herald:

http://www.smh.com.au/business/nz-may-clamp-down-on-share-ruse-20101231-19c37.html

And a scheme with a twist from Queensland:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/telstra-stock-chaser-back-to-give-it-a-third-go/story-e6frg8zx-1225969800771

KS
08-01-2011, 11:04 AM
Brian Gaynor: Low-ball offers won't draw investors back

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10698477

troyvdh
08-01-2011, 11:51 AM
Again the point is made....but most of folk here just dont seem to get it.....the more that this is allowed to happen most of the non investing public are going to miss trust/loathe/scorn et al the share market.

macduffy
08-01-2011, 05:45 PM
Exactly, troyvdh.

It's no wonder that the NZ sharemarket - I hesitate to say "the NZS" - has aquired a reputation as a "Wild West" market and has difficulty in shedding this.

craic
09-01-2011, 08:06 AM
And it hasn't stopped. even wit just a day or two to spare,I am still getting "the offer" But I suppose, that may spook some into selling before checking.as they have no time. If you had the good fortune to back over this guy, by acciddent, would you make the new years honours list next year?

Balance
09-01-2011, 10:28 AM
There is no law against stupidity, nor is there a law against greed.

What Whimp is doing is targeting those who are either stupid or greedy. You have to be one to accept his offer.

At least his is transparent and there for all to see.

Compare his with the billions sucked into finance companies by the likes of Hotchin, Hubbard, Hobbs etc. In some instances, using high profile names like Colin Meads, Richard Long and Greg Muir.

What Whimp is doing pales in comparison.

The question to be asked here is - how many posters writing here condemning Whimp did anything about the finance companies?

And a related question, what about unitized syndicated properties?

777
09-01-2011, 11:00 AM
Balance how can you say that to accept the offer you have to be either stupid or greedy. Taking a low value for your holding can hardly be greed. And as I have brought up in an earlier post you don't have to be stupid to make a wrong decision. However I doubt that you would bother thinking about that.

Balance
09-01-2011, 11:47 AM
Balance how can you say that to accept the offer you have to be either stupid or greedy. Taking a low value for your holding can hardly be greed. And as I have brought up in an earlier post you don't have to be stupid to make a wrong decision. However I doubt that you would bother thinking about that.

Er - if this is not greed, then what is it?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10698034

The prime idiot quoted in the article actually believed that Whimp was offering to sell him Vector shares at below market price.

Meanwhile, bet you any of the idiots accepting Whimp's offer would happily spend half a day checking out and finding out about an appliance or a holiday package before making a decision - but not ten minutes of thought or talking to someone knowledgeable on shares before accepting his low ball offer.

There is no law against stupidity.

So 777, did you speak up against finance companies before they went broke? Wrote anything anywhere? Hope you did.

macduffy
09-01-2011, 04:10 PM
Seeing as I expressed an opinion on the "system" that allowed Mr W to make his offers in the manner in which he did, I just want to add one other category to Balance's "stupid or greedy" shareholders.

We may not like aspects of the "nanny state" and some of us may think that any interference with Mr W's activities would amount to yet another example of that. But most of us would surely agree that there ought to be some protection for the "vulnerable" as we have in other areas of our society?

troyvdh
09-01-2011, 05:02 PM
...balance ...your incredible...words for once fail me......

....as an aside are you aged over 30......

GTM 3442
09-01-2011, 05:19 PM
But most of us would surely agree that there ought to be some protection for the "vulnerable" as we have in other areas of our society?

I hope we would macduffy. but I can't agree with some posters that restricting access to a companies Share Register would be the way to do it. And it is disappointing to see that this was virtually the first suggestion made.

Perhaps an offer for more than a specified number, value, or proportion of shares in a company would have to be "approved" ? But possibly too easy to manipulate around thresholds ?

More realistically, any such offer should have to include the current market price, and a comparitive valuation ? And a statement to the effect that "This offer represents a gain/loss of $nnnn compared to the market price at time of writing".

Balance
09-01-2011, 07:22 PM
Seeing as I expressed an opinion on the "system" that allowed Mr W to make his offers in the manner in which he did, I just want to add one other category to Balance's "stupid or greedy" shareholders.

We may not like aspects of the "nanny state" and some of us may think that any interference with Mr W's activities would amount to yet another example of that. But most of us would surely agree that there ought to be some protection for the "vulnerable" as we have in other areas of our society?

ER ... where was the protection for the vulnerable in respect of :

1. Finance Companies,
2. Blue Chip type property transactions and finance structures,
3. Forestry and farm partnerships,
4. Credit Sails and CDOs,
etc...

You cannot protect people when they choose to be stupid or greedy.

macduffy
09-01-2011, 07:33 PM
Quite so, Balance. Protection was sadly absent. But it appears now that efforts are being made to close a few stable doors there and I've no doubt that something will be done after the event to make it harder for the likes of Mr W. As has been done in Australia, for example.

Balance
09-01-2011, 08:04 PM
Quite so, Balance. Protection was sadly absent. But it appears now that efforts are being made to close a few stable doors there and I've no doubt that something will be done after the event to make it harder for the likes of Mr W. As has been done in Australia, for example.

Latest to hit investors out there, Macduffy - unitized property syndications - another accident just rounding the corner - big fees for the syndicate managers, inflated property valuations and limited rights for investors.

Where are the warnings in NZ/ Why are posters here not jumping up and down?

http://edu.daoblogs.com/7643/otton-exposes-dangers-of-investing-with-property-syndication-groups.html

Whimp is just too convenient to make a few people feel good they are saying something. He is a very very small fry.

minimoke
10-01-2011, 07:02 AM
Dear Mini...your naivety is spectacular....i wonder what world you circulate in...at times i would probably enjoy it.
Folk like wimp get up in the morning for the sole purpose to cheat and profit from those who are vulnerable...thats all...nothing else...

Cynical yes. Naive no. My world is the same as yours its just that I prefer mine not to be one which has regulation set against people plying an honest trade. Sure we may not like what Whimp is doing but how is he "cheating". For what I can gather, he is making a genuine offer in writing (so the conditions are clear) and is recommending punters seek advice before accepting. It seems the rules of the game are clear, there is no coercion

So in your world you would like to see a ban on cheating. Other than what Whimp is doing what do you propose that would put an end to his "cheating". The only option seems that owners of property must place that property into a government trust and the trust would then set about the sale of that property under its own terms - but terms that would apply equally to every other property being held. That doesn't sound liek a world I woudl want to live in.

And you also seem to be against Whinp profiting as well. The backer of these offers is carrying the costs of making the offer and carrying the risk that insufficient numbers of shares are bought which can be onsold to cover those costs. And you don't want him to make a profit!. In my world I like to see risk takers rewarded.

Every morning there are people that get up with the sole purpose of making a profit. I hope there are many people like this in my world.

minimoke
10-01-2011, 07:15 AM
Again the point is made....but most of folk here just dont seem to get it.....the more that this is allowed to happen most of the non investing public are going to miss trust/loathe/scorn et al the share market.
So what if the non-investing public miss trust /loath/scorn the share market. If they aren't a participant, preferring to be uneducated, ignorant bystander why should they get a say in how that market operates.

This is really just a simple example of Darwinism at work. Hopefully the stupid and greedy will have their shares bough off them. This way they no longer get to participate in a market they choose to know nothing about. No doubt they will then go an spend their cash on that next Nigerian deal that comes through their mailbox so that eventually they have no money left to invest. A side effect is that hopefully they can't breed or have any influence over the next generation of financial illiterates so that eventually this gene pool expires.

The likes of Whimp get to continue because there are people out there that think that the stupid and greedy should get our ongoing financial support. The non-investing public should look more closely at them selves before casting stones in the direction of the share market.

Balance
10-01-2011, 07:40 AM
The likes of Whimp get to continue because there are people out there that think that the stupid and greedy should get our ongoing financial support. The non-investing public should look more closely at them selves before casting stones in the direction of the share market.

Right on, Mini.

Look at the billions lost via the finance companies and through the 'investments' in coastal properties.

The catch cry of 'NZX' is wild-west has no credibility when you consider the magnitude of the fraud perpetuated in the US markets - Worldcom, Enron, MADOFF etc.

The NZX is in terminal decline for other reasons - a big part of it is the financial and investment illiteracy of the average NZ saver which sees them putting billions into investments mentioned above, instead of quality stocks like AIA, FBU, Vector, Contact etc.

minimoke
10-01-2011, 08:53 AM
The NZX is in terminal decline for other reasons - a big part of it is the financial and investment illiteracy of the average NZ saver which sees them putting billions into investments mentioned above, instead of quality stocks like AIA, FBU, Vector, Contact etc.
And we will remain financially illiterate when we have people seeking more regulation to protect the stupid while those same regulators create schemes like Kiwisaver which encourages the concept of getting "Free" money or a government that continues to promote "Welcome Home" loans pumping money into the property market via people with little inclination to save

Balance
10-01-2011, 10:09 AM
And we will remain financially illiterate when we have people seeking more regulation to protect the stupid while those same regulators create schemes like Kiwisaver which encourages the concept of getting "Free" money or a government that continues to promote "Welcome Home" loans pumping money into the property market via people with little inclination to save

Bang on again, Mini.

As mentioned, all the regulations in the States have not stopped MADOFF, ENRON, WORLDCOM, LEHMAN BROS, INSIDER TRADING etc.

Best NZ authorities work on education and prevention as much as on regulations.

Whimp is but very small fry but it's great that there has been extensive coverage of it in the media.

What is needed is the same coverage of other situations.

Unitized property syndications, anyone?

whatsup
10-01-2011, 01:34 PM
I'm not sure if this has been suggested, I so far have received 20 different offer docu's, so I bin those docu and paste over the address on the envelops and use them myself as ther are now Freepost and prepaid my the Whimp.

blackcap
10-01-2011, 02:55 PM
Never thought of that Whatsup... is that possible? If it is its great... time to buy some shares in top 10 companies for the free stamps at the end of the year :P Good thinking

minimoke
10-01-2011, 03:26 PM
Never thought of that Whatsup... is that possible? If it is its great... time to buy some shares in top 10 companies for the free stamps at the end of the year :P Good thinking
Ummm? They won't be "free" they'll have cost you $10,000 if you but $1,000 parcels. Or at least $300 in brokerage.

Snoopy
12-01-2011, 04:44 PM
ER ... where was the protection for the vulnerable in respect of :

1. Finance Companies,
2. Blue Chip type property transactions and finance structures,
etc...

You cannot protect people when they choose to be stupid or greedy.


These two would have been OK if the property market had kept going up sufficiently. IMO this was unlikely and so I chose to not invest in leveraged property at all, including ruling out such vehicles for doing so. Nevertheless if you did believe that the property market would continue go up sufficiently then investing in property developments either directly via Blue Chip or indirectly via Finance Companies would have been a legitmate investment strategy, even if it has now been proved flawed after the event.

By contrast there was never any financial circumstance where Whimp's offer to purchase highly liquid shares at a huge discount to market price was going to be a good deal for investors. In every circumstance it would be better to deal directly with a legitimate sharebroker. Whimp deliberately structured his offers so that shareholders would not be able to obtain independent investment advice because those professionals who give it were largely away on holiday. Whimp is nothing more than a confidence trickster skirting around the edges of an evolving law. If he had made such an offer in Australia under ASX rules, Whimp would be under arrest now.

It is IMO spurious to compare the investment deals offered by Whimp with other legitimate yet failed schemes.

SNOOPY

winner69
27-01-2011, 08:32 PM
Whimp has made $343,000 profit on his Vector shares he got cheap

He's happy as are the 300 odd shareholders who sold to him with the money in their bank

Good old entrenuership and free enterprise

Snow Leopard
27-01-2011, 08:49 PM
It is not allowed here any more (http://www.theage.com.au/business/insurer-warns-investors-of-lowball-offer-20110127-1a5zq.html)

best wishes
Paper Tiger

minimoke
28-01-2011, 07:19 AM
He's a piece of **** and I wish I'd taken a crap in my return envelope and sent that back to him. The NZ govt needs to sort this one out quick. What a ****er!
Theres few things I find my self getting offended over but this post is edging up there.

What we have is 300 financially illiterate Vector holders who were offered what they saw as a reasonable price for their shares and they subsequently accepted.

This is a fundamental of a free market - having a willing buyer and a willing seller.

The government does not need to sort this out - why don't we grow up rather than relying on nanny government to look after us.

How would you expect the govt to sort this one out - check out the NZF thread and their buy / sells. Last buy was at 14.5. Sellers want 18 but theres a buyer at 4.5. Thats an offer at 75% less than sellers want. What do you want to happen here. Have the government regulate that the buy bid needs to be within 10% of the sale bid. What utter nonsense!

What about PLU - theres no buy bids there at all. So no-one is even prepared to make a low ball offer. What do you want the government to do. Have some one step in and make sure there is an offer at .4 to keep the markets "honest"?

winner69
28-01-2011, 07:24 AM
Good one minimoke .... no doubt all those 300 odd are as happy as anything and spent the lot and boosted the economy in the process .... hope they spent it on something worthwhile and not down the local bottle shop .... and maybe somebody bought some lotto tickets and is now really rich

CJ
28-01-2011, 07:58 AM
The only regulation I would like to see in this area is a requirement to put the last traded price on the offer as well. Not sure how this would work with somethink like DNZ, and something like Pike River would cause annomolies.

If they wanted to get more heavy handed than that, i would also accept a requirement to add in a web link pointing to a page which advised how to sell shares.

While I think he is scum, he is clearly within the law and is no different to any company that sells items at grossly inflated margins.

minimoke
28-01-2011, 08:16 AM
Finally, to mimmoke, I apologise if you were offended by my post but when people take advantage of others it pisses me off. In my opinion the law does need to be changed at times to protect those who need it and this is one of them.
No need to apologize Tumeric I wasn't offended - just nearly offended. So tell me, how would you like the govt to respond to the two scenarios I gave you. And heres another. One of the things i quite like doing is off market trades where I distribute my holdings amongst family. I've found this quite useful especially at IPO time - and with 4 SOE potentially coming on the block things look good. Its easily done and involves no brokerage. Would you prefer that it be regulated that Forsyth BArr (for example) be the preferred above line agent for such transfers.

Oh - and I do think all 300 vector holders were happy at the time. No one was holding a gun to their head and they probably thought "oooh goody a bit of cash". Its probably an example of the greedy unthinking NZ investor. They probably thought this was such a good deal its too good to be true so best jump at it real quick. That Stiasney is now telling them they have been ripped off is not Whimps problem - Whimp isn't the one telling them they have been ripped off so whose the morally repugnant person here?

If whimp is scum do you think the person offering NZF at 4.5 is scum? Presumably such scum should be outed so you'l be looking for transparency and disclosure of bidders at such low levels so you can jump on your moral high horse and ride though those buyerers back into places you hope they won't return.

minimoke
28-01-2011, 08:49 AM
At the end of the day Whimp is scum, he is taking advantage of people and ripping them off, I dont think even you could disagree with the latter. That is my point. Enjoy your day.
Of course he's scum - though I'd note thats a very subjective terms and could be equally applied to every share trader / investor depending on your view. Perhaps he should be given some credit for making an offer free of commission. Perhaps he should be given some credit for giving these folks some cash - Mr Stisaney hasn't taken the initiative and gone out to holders to see if they would like a top up. And if you are a bit green thats 300 less annual reports that need to be printed and posted so thats got to be good for the environment.

Its one thing to lob bombs at a problem but how about coming up with some ideas for a solution. If you can't provide a solution perhaps there is no problem and the issue is one of personal perception. And for that I don't think you could disagree that we wouldn't want a government regulating the control of our perceptions/.

Balance
28-01-2011, 09:10 AM
Tells you all you want to know about the quality of investors that there are in NZ.

This is nothing compared with the damage done by finance companies and gross mismanagement - e.g. PRC.

Remember Colin "Solid As" Meads? Richard "Able to withstand any conditions" Long? Greg Muir "Brand" Hanover?

I wonder who did greater damage out there?

Xerof
28-01-2011, 09:24 AM
Tells you all you want to know about the quality of investors that there are in NZ.


Correct Balance

He's just a whimp compared to the likes of Watson/Hotchin/Butlers/Bryers/Hubbard, Sullivan, McLeod et al/Gibbs et al/Radford et al/the list goes on in perpetuity, and don't get me started on the brokers who supported/continue to support some of these people

Balance
28-01-2011, 09:27 AM
I also think we should be following the oz lead and make it an offence to use information from a company register to make an unsolicited off-market offer to purchase securities.

What about a law then to stop property syndications? The last episode of property syndications during the 1990s saw investors lost hundreds of millions.

macduffy
29-01-2011, 07:30 AM
"Dropping all the MP's......"?

You do realise, belg, that the Australian states have their own state pollies as well - two houses of them in each!

And do we really want to have the clout of a Tasmania or a South Australia in the Aussie Commonwealth?

skid
29-01-2011, 08:02 AM
Lets face it -the guy is making a living out of taking advantage of others.
The idea of being required to state the current share price is a good one IMO.
It should also pertain to gold buyers,etc-Just because your mum and dad or grandma isnt totally clued up on the sharemarket or POG doesnt mean they should be fleaced by every fly by night bloke who comes along

Jay
29-01-2011, 08:04 AM
Just to play devils advocate here is Wimp too different from some of the other pump and dump characters on various other sharesites - not this one I may add.
If the poeple that buy these pumped shares were more "informed" investors than the so call mum & dad investors, they would know what is going on and just ignore it, yet some obviously do not

kizame
30-01-2011, 07:43 AM
Whimp,Hotchin,Petrecivic they are all scum sailing in the same boat as far as I am concerned.
They need to have their assets stripped from them,sold and distributed to those they ripped off.
I only wish there were people out there with the balls to actually do something about it.

minimoke
31-01-2011, 08:02 AM
Whimp,Hotchin,Petrecivic they are all scum sailing in the same boat as far as I am concerned.
They need to have their assets stripped from them,sold and distributed to those they ripped off.
I only wish there were people out there with the balls to actually do something about it.
I am struggling to see why their is such angst against these people. Whimp I have discussed above. Hotchin/Watson - lets look to ALF to see how Hanover investors continued to get burnt. It was the investors (and a significant % of them) who backed the deal. It was the investors who forgave Hotchin / Watson the $ms they were going to throw into the pot. Did the investors have absolutely no idea about when to cut their losses - name me any investment (outside the Deposit Guarantee scheme - another cruddy scheme designed to protect greedy unthinking investors) that guarantees a 100% return on capital - you don't even get that with money on the bank. At least Hotchin had the balls to front the public. The investors there were plain dumb.

And Pertrecevic. Why would a sane person put their money with a failed merchant banker. Did investors not know about Euro-National and PFS. Did they not wonder why Bridgeorp couldn't get listed on the NZX. Have they no concept of risk and wonder why banks weren't lending to the dubious property developers? The investors were greedy and dumb.

I wish someone had the balls to protect dumb and greedy "investors" from themselves.

skid
31-01-2011, 08:21 AM
If an invester makes a bad decision on a share they pay the price when the share price falls. Thats a bit different than someone fleecing grandma out of her shares at much less than the going rate.--No matter how you dress it up-Its just wrong.

kizame
31-01-2011, 09:00 AM
I believe that we are all greedy and at times dumb investors,if you are the head of a financial institution seeking funds,I believe you have a huge responsibility to those investors,after all as Dumb as they may be,they are giving you their funds Greedily awaiting the better or more secure return you offer,in order that you may pursue whatever return you are greedily trying to make.
If you have ever been to any shareholder meeting,you will notice a large percentage of grey power,sitting there voting for everything,saying nothing and drinking cups of tea and scones afterwards,they annoy me in particular,but they are the ones fronting up with the dosh,I do not believe you push the Dumb Investor blame on them,simply because they either don't do or don't know how to do due diligence.
At the end of the day there will always be the scumbags,(yes Hotchin-and I would say he doesn't have balls,more a bloody cheek)who will take advantage of these investors,that's life infortunately.

I'm sure we all want the best return we can get,for whatever risk we perceive to be acceptable,but are we necessarily greedy?
At the end of the day I think any CEO of a failed financial institution needs to be held accountable to his/her investors and be stripped of assets as necessary to help cover losses,after all they don't go into these deals with their eyes closed do they?(And there are professional directors involved) So they must also be Dumb investors...

There are a lot of people out there, whom and I would say the vast majority of are not financially literate enough to analyse an investment or have the time to do so,(and advice can be shaky as well)and a lot of these people may not have been around when petrecivic had Euro Nat the last time.

minimoke
31-01-2011, 10:40 AM
My, there are some stupid people out there. Since when does the Justice department hand out tax refunds with a fee.: Woman loses $32,000 in 'tax refund' scam: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/4598884/Woman-loses-32-000-in-tax-refund-scam

Jim
31-01-2011, 06:32 PM
I teach them a lesson by enclosing used paper towels and sent them back Ha Ha

skid
01-02-2011, 06:30 AM
I dont think its the grey power folks at the shareholders meeting that are getting fleeced.Its the old lady whos late husband bought the shares in Vector as an investment.Shes getting sa bit vague in her old age and doesnt know anything about shares anyway.
Shouldnt she be able to at least know the going rate for her shares.I believe it should be required

minimoke
01-02-2011, 07:08 AM
Shouldnt she be able to at least know the going rate for her shares.I believe it should be required
Step One: Ask beloved son or daughter or
Step Two: Ask beloved niece / nephew / grandchild or
Step three: Ask someone at the Zonta Club or
Step Four: (and this is a real tricky one) have a look in the Newspaper.

If the little old lady knows nothing about shares she will not know their value so the share script sitting in the bottom drawer is value less. If she owns something that is worth nothing then she is benefiting by having someone offer her something of value.

What I suspect might be happening here is that the greedy offspring are more concerned than the old lady. They are worried about their inheritance being devalued - so its not out of concern for the lady - but self interest.

I see no-one has offered to come up with a Regulation to cover the scenarios I gave in earlier posts. Heres another one. A little old lady, who is a bit vague has this porcelain egg with nice patterns on it. How would you ensure she gets maximum value if someone offered her $1,000 for it. Especially if someone know it was a Faberge.

robo
01-02-2011, 08:12 AM
Step One: Ask beloved son or daughter or
Step Two: Ask beloved niece / nephew / grandchild or
Step three: Ask someone at the Zonta Club or
Step Four: (and this is a real tricky one) have a look in the Newspaper.

If the little old lady knows nothing about shares she will not know their value so the share script sitting in the bottom drawer is value less. If she owns something that is worth nothing then she is benefiting by having someone offer her something of value.

What I suspect might be happening here is that the greedy offspring are more concerned than the old lady. They are worried about their inheritance being devalued - so its not out of concern for the lady - but self interest.

I see no-one has offered to come up with a Regulation to cover the scenarios I gave in earlier posts. Heres another one. A little old lady, who is a bit vague has this porcelain egg with nice patterns on it. How would you ensure she gets maximum value if someone offered her $1,000 for it. Especially if someone know it was a Faberge.


yeah thats a valid point ,however I dont think there is a complete and detailed register( sociographic details etc included) of who holds faberge eggs accessible to anyone , there is a angle that the these lowball offer makers are being helped by the
mechanics of the system itself

minimoke
01-02-2011, 08:30 AM
yeah thats a valid point ,however I dont think there is a complete and detailed register( sociographic details etc included) of who holds faberge eggs accessible to anyone , there is a angle that the these lowball offer makers are being helped by the
mechanics of the system itself
No doubt the registry is helping the vulnerable to be ripped off.However our government has little concern for that - and share offers are the least of their worries.

At the moment we have no regulation at all about who can access a persons property. So we have all these vague old ladies sitting around home having their home scoped by carpet cleaners and the like who have no legal requirement to prove they aren't convicted fellons before entering the property. Worse still is the government allowing minimum wage workers dressed up as "carers" to have access to an old persons home where the unscrupulous take from the pantry and the down write evil steal from the purse.

Stiasney may be on his high moral horse about his 300 shareholders - but the big issue is that there is 300 people out there who are very vulnerable and the vultures are circling - loosing a few bob on their shares is the least of their worries. What has Vector done to protect the interest of their shareholders. 300 people suggests to me that they could be doing a hell of a lot more.

Balance
01-02-2011, 08:53 AM
No doubt the registry is helping the vulnerable to be ripped off.However our government has little concern for that - and share offers are the least of their worries.

At the moment we have no regulation at all about who can access a persons property. So we have all these vague old ladies sitting around home having their home scoped by carpet cleaners and the like who have no legal requirement to prove they aren't convicted fellons before entering the property. Worse still is the government allowing minimum wage workers dressed up as "carers" to have access to an old persons home where the unscrupulous take from the pantry and the down write evil steal from the purse.

Stiasney may be on his high moral horse about his 300 shareholders - but the big issue is that there is 300 people out there who are very vulnerable and the vultures are circling - loosing a few bob on their shares is the least of their worries. What has Vector done to protect the interest of their shareholders. 300 people suggests to me that they could be doing a hell of a lot more.

Lawyers find loopholes al the time to get around legalities and regulations.

So should the government legislate against Lawyers being able to defeat the intent of legislation?

Hoop
01-02-2011, 09:30 AM
Step One: Ask beloved son or daughter or
Step Two: Ask beloved niece / nephew / grandchild or
Step three: Ask someone at the Zonta Club or
Step Four: (and this is a real tricky one) have a look in the Newspaper.

If the little old lady knows nothing about shares she will not know their value so the share script sitting in the bottom drawer is value less. If she owns something that is worth nothing then she is benefiting by having someone offer her something of value.

What I suspect might be happening here is that the greedy offspring are more concerned than the old lady. They are worried about their inheritance being devalued - so its not out of concern for the lady - but self interest.

I see no-one has offered to come up with a Regulation to cover the scenarios I gave in earlier posts. Heres another one. A little old lady, who is a bit vague has this porcelain egg with nice patterns on it. How would you ensure she gets maximum value if someone offered her $1,000 for it. Especially if someone know it was a Faberge.

As a matter of course nowadays...when I get something in the mail that smells..I go to the kids (4 of them, aged 16 to 23years). I say to them what should I do?

Unfortunately over a period of time Dad (me) has become a rather predictable old bugger and the kids eye me up knowing that "what should I do?" is probably a trick question.

With these latest Whimp letters being so official looking a couple of my Kids said sell and take the money...the older one said "dad why did you ask us ..huh, huh???;);)"

I remember a couple of years ago I think it was on Bongos old channel Liz and I discussed with the forum that the NZ education system lacks teaching kids the management of money and that investment theory should be taught in schools which includes of course most common day instruments such as Fixed interest, Kiwishare, bonds, unsecured instruments such as shares, etc, etc, and the basic fundamentals and strategies of how to put money to work once they go out to work and earn money for themselves...its a pity that all the kids including mine think (brainwashed) that they should put money in a saving account which must have a plastic credit card to go with it....end result no money management and poor discipline.

Due to lack of education these days the younger generation would also be easy targets to these Whimp type scams...my "money-educated" kids proved it.

I try to educate my kids that there are more financial instruments out there than just a savings account with a credit card, try to reinforce the old saying "look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves" however the consumer society, the "must have now" and peer pressure together with easy high interest credit is too powerful...


So the purpose of my "out of left field" rant is when your old and lost the plot don't expect your Y-Generation kids to do the right thing when Mr Whimp comes calling.

Marilyn Munroe
17-03-2011, 11:19 AM
I have received an unsolicited mail offer for my Fletcher Challenge Building(FBU) shares.

The offer price of $11.50 is generous when compared to the current price of $8.63.

There is a catch however, If you accept the offer the purchaser will pay only by ten equal annual payments.

You should be wary of this offer and warn others you know who own these shares to be cautious.

Boop boop de do

Marilyn

POSSUM THE CAT
17-03-2011, 11:53 AM
Also doing offers for VECTOR & CONTACT ENERGY

Hoop
18-03-2011, 07:56 AM
Also doing offers for VECTOR & CONTACT ENERGY

Contact Energy Offer $7.60 ... One would (should) ask themselves the question why should someone buy for $7.60 when they could easly buy and pick up the one million shares on market for $5.90ish...then the trap becomes apparant..now you then look for it.
MM...
Is this correct? last payment is in 2021..that's the way I read it ...

Under the payment condition
Quote from the form:....The total amount payable to you is shown on the acceptance form. Payment of the offer price will be made in ten (10) equal annual installments.........


Receiving your last payment in 2021...effectively a cheap loan to (Whimp) Carlyle Securities. Remember this guy(s) are working within the grey area of business.....and me personally would not trust them....Personally it would not surprise me to see Carlyle Securities wound up in a couple of years time and bye bye money.

Hoop personal opinion is to Avoid at all costs.

As per normal I show this to my 4 kids for "advice" (Remember in the future your kids may be handling your affairs)....Should I sell my shares?? My "chart smart" 16 year old looked at the CEN chart and said yes!!!

My 20 yr said it seems good but no, because it looks like the shares are going to quickly rise up in price. So why not accept it now and buy more CEN this morning...hmmm dad its a trap you only show us traps.

oh dear !!...2 kids to go

yabster
18-03-2011, 11:44 AM
The guy is an ahole fullstop. Just because its legal doesn't justify his actions. Either does the argument that the people that he took advantage of are "ignorant investors- and so deserve it".

Would you rip of your Granmother just because shes "am unsophisticated investor"? Because thats in effect what some posters are saying on this site.

Also comparing low ball offers to this situation is also a weak arguement as by default those investors are looking at market depth to see the offer in the first place - an so have a degree of knowledge when it comes to making a decision.

It may be legal but its immoral by any decent persons standards.

blackcap
18-03-2011, 12:19 PM
Remember[/U] in the future your kids may be handling your affairs)....Should I sell my shares?? My "chart smart" 16 year old looked at the CEN chart and said yes!!!

My 20 yr said it seems good but no, because it looks like the shares are going to quickly rise up in price. So why not accept it now and buy more CEN this morning...hmmm dad its a trap you only show us traps.

oh dear !!...2 kids to go

Yes mate you have some serious problems there :P Good luck... but in a sense it shows how financially illiterate our children really are. Is our school system to blame?

QOH
18-03-2011, 12:56 PM
I've had an offer for shares I haven't owned for approx 6 months. Maybe I could get him excited and accept his offer and waste his time.

J R Ewing
18-03-2011, 01:45 PM
I've had an offer for shares I haven't owned for approx 6 months. Maybe I could get him excited and accept his offer and waste his time.

Even better if you get paid the first installment before he works it out!

Hoop
18-03-2011, 03:03 PM
Yes mate you have some serious problems there :P Good luck... but in a sense it shows how financially illiterate our children really are. Is our school system to blame?
Yea blackcap and theres many others of all ages as well...Whimp has proved that.


Who teaches these sorts of life skills....parents or School?

I would like to think the school should have some imput. Since many believe the media , I think an education section in the daily newspaper would be a good idea.
The annoying thing is that these letters requiring one signature are addressed to my kids as they have "blue chip" portfolios started by me.

PS...as before I have posted the return envelopes with a blank piece of paper...at least I get the satisfaction that he has to pay for the postage.

POSSUM THE CAT
18-03-2011, 05:58 PM
Blackcap YES & parents

QOH
19-03-2011, 01:18 AM
Even better if you get paid the first installment before he works it out!

Yes I could pretned to be a confused old lady.

CJ
19-03-2011, 08:37 AM
I see that they are making him pjt the NPV of his offer on the front page and direct people to the small print.

Balance
19-03-2011, 10:15 AM
Yes mate you have some serious problems there :P Good luck... but in a sense it shows how financially illiterate our children really are. Is our school system to blame?

Madoff would say it has nothing to do with the school system. It has everything to do with financial illiteracy.

Hoop
21-03-2011, 07:51 AM
Yes mate you have some serious problems there :P Good luck... but in a sense it shows how financially illiterate our children really are. Is our school system to blame?


Yea blackcap and theres many others of all ages as well...Whimp has proved that.


Who teaches these sorts of life skills....parents or School?

I would like to think the school should have some input. Since many believe the media , I think an education section in the daily newspaper would be a good idea......



Madoff would say it has nothing to do with the school system. It has everything to do with financial illiteracy.

NZ Herald Business Editor + Task force on the same wavelength as us...eh BC, Balance...Lets hope the Govt through Simon Power act on this.

Editorial: Teach investor principles, don't cane celebrities (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10713854)

Quote---- ".......Raising investment literacy by making the subject part of the school curriculum, another of the Capital Market Development Taskforce's recommendations, might attract fewer headlines but it would have more substance......."

Typical media attitude..Mr Editor... You have a Window of Opportunity to help educate people as well by keeping this issue in the headlines.....surely the media can inform their readers with one quality article a day amongst the garbage headline grabbers. The media has a responsibility here as well as the Govt....

Remember Mr Editor...Media showed these Finance Companies adverts to help convince their readers and viewers to invest.

CJ
21-03-2011, 08:47 AM
Hoop - the likes of Gaynor, Shearer, etc do a good job at educating the market. Gaynor can be very critical at times - though the ad to his fund is always near by ;) . The only issue is that to read and understand the articles, you have to have a bit of knowledge already and actually be interested in it to decide to read it.

Otherwise you are left with the likes of Mary Holme who does very well if you remember she is targeting a specific knowledge (dumbed down advice for those who write into newspapers to get financial advice, at least they aren't writing to womans mags).

The Capital Markets development taskforce has a much bigger role. They need to ensure they are making comments upfront. Coming along 2-5 years later to prosecute is far to late. Like the Whimp affair, they should ensure he publishes the market price and the NPV of his offer clearly on the letter. Give people the info the need in a very simple format, then if they decide to hang themselves, they only have themselves to blame.