They also completely ignored my online question about how the sales at the Hellier are going. Very disappointing.
Printable View
They also completely ignored my online question about how the sales at the Hellier are going. Very disappointing.
I’ve said it before and nothing seems to have changed …..in Oceania’s eyes you get the impression that shareholders don’t count ….even an unnecessary evil …and only count when we hold out the begging bowl.
A pity you weren't at the meeting as the manager in charge of sales was and may have been able to enlighten you discretely. I sense that both at the meeting and in the media there was/is an undercurrent of envy and disapproval regarding the Hellier concept. When you put that alongside the fact that 25% of OCA's existing facilities, being those where basic rest home beds predominate and which lack any future development potential, are "held for sale" on their balance sheet, together with the other two similar but leasehold facilities that they have been grateful to exit on lease expiry this year, you have clear evidence of an ongoing pivot which many would consider has political ramifications.
Brent didn't say that the two existing facilities on-sold presently have settled yet (end August was anticipated, I thought) and there was no detail offered in regard to the remaining eight except to suggest there are parties being talked to in the marketplace. I suggest actually designating/naming these facilities publicly is clearly a step too far for obvious reasons. He did make the point that the combined value on the balance sheet is around $100m (compared to the value of those not "held for sale" which is $2.5b). So this won't raise much in the way of capital but will mitigate overhead in a more significant way. They will be marginally profitable operations at best while adding complexity and administration cost without an adequate return on investment and without potential to "add value". Of course, that begs the question how you divest them to a third party in that circumstance. We will have to wait and see.
I found Brent very impressive, and of course the Chair is highly credentialed too.
Thanks, I heard that. Would have preferred to get their view on their inflection point comments some years ago, would have preferred to get some sales update on the Helier as well as their view on whether they see the Helier just as a one - off or as the start of a super-luxury market.
But I guess this was probably just too hard for them to answer anyway, so they preferred to just fob of the questions of the shareholders who came in person instead of fobbing off the other questions as well. Ignoring is easier.
Not the impression I got. Sure - Brent conveyed little real information with plenty of words ... and Elizabeth clearly had problems to deal with the complexities of a hybrid meeting. Overplayed it however fabulous by just ignoring the online share holders.
Maybe we need in future a chair able to deal with digital media?
I found them both quite robotic, reading the words in front of them quite poorly at times.
I hope what they lack in personality they make up for in ability.