Liz is not a very tidy person. 1859745 shares. personally I would have rounded it up to 1860000 for an extra $204
Printable View
Liz is not a very tidy person. 1859745 shares. personally I would have rounded it up to 1860000 for an extra $204
I think it’s more likely she’s a big fan of the block Australia tv show and she watches it while reading her oca directors notes at night and she saw that fella Danny Wallace bid in random amounts…he really makes the auctioneers work for their fee and generally confuses everyone including himself.
Here’s his latest efforts…
He also bought Tom and Sarah-Jane’s property for $4,100,000.99 – giving them a profit of just $20,000 – and Rachel and Ryan’s for 4,249,999.50,
Surely Liz isn’t trying to confuse us poor oca shareholders anymore than the company reports do . I thinks she doing a Danny and hoping we can’t count.
Great intel on Chris Lee guys and thanks in particular to whoever posted the stuff article.
For anyone that instantly didn't recognise the signs of a massive shyster after reading the first few lines of that 'Taking stock' article, please be careful out there.
It was alright as I said at the time but nothing anyone here couldn't write and nothing anyone here would have learnt had they been reading this thread.
However that wasn't what I was talking about.
As I said if you didn't recognise a Shyster when confronted with one in a very raw fashion be careful out there.
While it seems to become fashionable to smear others under the protection of a semi anonymous forum, I don't think that anybody needs to be proud of doing this - and it certainly is not "intel", it is smear.
I do know Chris personally - and I consider him a honorable man and a good investment advisor. That's more than I can say about some of the cowards and snipers with a personal agenda.
Chris has a habit of talking straight - and not everybody appreciates that.
He is well connected and knows the tools of his business.
I think he is good in recognising the big picture ...
and I often learn by listening to him another valid perspective.
but ...
he is not able to predict the future, and he makes mistakes as well. We all do.
Similar as everybody else - he is not an infallibel stock picker. And I don't think he ever claimed that.
I propose that his haters either go home and get a life - or approach him in person.
Anything else is just telling us so much more about them than about Chris.
Some of the maths in the article seem a little sketchy, for example arguing DMF fees have no costs associated with them, and have a 100% net profit margin. Sure there probably is a present value benefit to receiving it upfront, but DMF fees are not 100% margin.
I don't think it does. It is a highly emotional and very bad researched article.
I don't know which contractual relationship this couple had with Chris, and if the reporter knows than he chooses not to tell us.
Even a cursory research would have revealed, that Chris Lee offers a number of different contract options starting from a basic interactional client broker relationship looking only into the requested transaction, over advise as requested (incl. some portfolio reviews) through to full portfolio management.
Service level as well as price are naturally different between these options.
Do you know? If not, what exactly do you accuse Chris of?
Some people who had some sort of relationship with Chris lost some money during the GFC. So?
Whatever it takes to smear somebody ...