PGC - Licenced to Bank

[percy]

Ahh, is that where you got the 'gospel truth' from percy - let me know when he publishes his retraction......


as you know I don't bother with anything Lee says

At the last PGC meeting I attended,G Kerr was asked about Torchlight loan to SCF.Kerr stated that a number of years ago Hubbard was the only person who would lend him money,but Hubbard took a "huge pound of flesh".!!! He was happy to repay the favour and also take a "huge pound of flesh." So when Lee mentioned a $20mil break figure,I took it Kerr had taken a "huge pound of flesh".I have no way of measuring a huge pound of flesh, And I doudt if any one will tell us,
so like you I am left to guess.

[Lizard]

I would still consider it a possibility that Torchlight was paid out loan plus interest "immediately after" but was then paid a break fee at a later date... after all, there is a fairly big discrepancy between the amount owed to prior chargeholders in the first report of $109m and the amount paid out later as per the second report of $175m - which, not coincidentally - roughly matches the amount of the crown loan to cover the prior chargeholders.

[Xerof]

Liz, if you get a hold of the NBR for last Friday, it was laid out by Downey exactly where the 175m went. Torchlight got 106m. End of story. It was a paid content story online, but I presume it will be in hard print

In fact, thats actually not end of story, because Fortress Australia are strongly rumoured to have had the lions share of the 100m loan to SCF, so Torchlight would only get a pro-rata share of the break fee. That would also tie in with numbers outlined in the in specie prospectus, which show Torchlight's value has barely moved ahead of the original 15m, maybe a mill or so at most.

[Lizard]

Thanks for that Xerof. I will try to find the NBR.

Torchlight and EPAM are at cost in those accounts (there is another .75m of other investments), so doesn't help as far as figuring out if the fund itself made anything.

Here's a June NBR article, that only confuses the ownership of the $100m further:http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/pgcs-to...ce-100m-124210. (Reality is pretty clearly covered in PGC's release to the NZX of 28 June, titled "Torchlight - Media Release Clarification"). This part of the NBR release seemed relevant - I guess they could have got this from a search of the PPSR?

Torchlight now has a prior charge on up to $151 million or 7.2% of South Canterbury's assets under the company’s trust deed.

Agree that PGC itself would only get the benefit of 15% or less of any break fee via their investment in the fund. Though maybe they pick up some performance fees via their role as Manager.

[percy]

I have read the NBR article.
"All $100 million would mature on Nov 30,2011 and would be secured by a prior charge in the debenture tust deed.Mr.Downey confirmed this week that Torchlight was repaid $100 mil plus interest of $6 mil immediately following SCF's receivership". End of story? may be,may be not.!! No mention of break fees , so we are only guessing.I think I may have to ask G.Kerr at next meeting.Going from the notice of meeting there is no way of seeing "a pound of flesh".As Lizard noted it appears to only show the amount PGC put into Torchlight.Should we take only modest profit,one must ask why bother to take the risk of lending SCF $100mil.?

[corlemar]

I have read the NBR article.
"All $100 million would mature on Nov 30,2011 and would be secured by a prior charge in the debenture tust deed.Mr.Downey confirmed this week that Torchlight was repaid $100 mil plus interest of $6 mil immediately following SCF's receivership". End of story? may be,may be not.!! No mention of break fees , so we are only guessing.I think I may have to ask G.Kerr at next meeting.Going from the notice of meeting there is no way of seeing "a pound of flesh".As Lizard noted it appears to only show the amount PGC put into Torchlight.Should we take only modest profit,one must ask why bother to take the risk of lending SCF $100mil.?

Percy, i suspect that TIG would continue to take fees for funds loaned to SCF. In fact SCF going down the gurgler, was probably the worst news for TIG, cos it meant their investment was repaid immediately, and they could no longer clip the ticket on fees. You could never say there was no risk, but TIG was in the box seat with their funding to SCF, as they knew if it went down the toilet they would be paid out before anyone else.

[percy]

Percy, i suspect that TIG would continue to take fees for funds loaned to SCF. In fact SCF going down the gurgler, was probably the worst news for TIG, cos it meant their investment was repaid immediately, and they could no longer clip the ticket on fees. You could never say there was no risk, but TIG was in the box seat with their funding to SCF, as they knew if it went down the toilet they would be paid out before anyone else.

Agree.There was talk by Chris Lee that Kerr extracted a huge break fee [$20mil].I would be interested to know if there was a break fee,and if so how much,and how much went to the manager[PGC]???

[Xerof]

I try to be subtle but accurate when I quote figures in my posts, especially in the interests of ensuring facts are presented........percy mate, read post number 753, which has a suggested break fee. Scout's honour........


As you say you are going to the meeting, why don't you directly ask the question of PGC 'where in your accounts to the end of Dec 2010 can I find the $20 million break fee Chris Lee says you gouged from SCF', instead of wishfully hoping that Chris Lee knows what he is talking about - he doesn't.

I can't answer your final question, as I don't know, but to put it in perspective with the fabled 20 million (which is really actually 6m) - refer to Receiver's quote - depending on how much of the 100mill Torchlight Security Trustee actually lent to SCF (and as I have said earlier, it is strongly rumoured to be only a small % of the total), then their share of the break fee is rather small.

How much got back to PGC? - god only knows, as it first would go to Torchlight (GP) 1, who then would, after doubtless keeping a proportion for themselves as set out in the Partnership Agreements with LP's, pro-rata the balance across all the individual partners - the associated Torchlight LP 1 holders, of which we know PGC is a 15m limited partner and (somewhat ludicrously) SCF is a 30m LP. The others remain anon. Torchlight (GP) 1 is owned by TIG. TIG is owned by Perpetual Group, which in turn is owned by PGC. So I imagine PGC should get something as a LP in Torchlight (GP) 1 - 10%, as it was reported the fund closed at 150m - and as the ultimate shareholder up the chain, of Torchlight Security Trustees

This is all public information sourced from the last SCF prospectus, the Receiver's figures, and the Companies Office website, (with the exception of the rumored participation of Fortress and the amount they put up).

Chris Lee clearly believes that facts shouldn't be allowed to get in the way of a good story - each to his own

[Balance]

I try to be subtle but accurate when I quote figures in my posts, especially in the interests of ensuring facts are presented........percy mate, read post number 753, which has a suggested break fee. Scout's honour........


As you say you are going to the meeting, why don't you directly ask the question of PGC 'where in your accounts to the end of Dec 2010 can I find the $20 million break fee Chris Lee says you gouged from SCF', instead of wishfully hoping that Chris Lee knows what he is talking about - he doesn't.

I can't answer your final question, as I don't know, but to put it in perspective with the fabled 20 million (which is really actually 6m) - refer to Receiver's quote - depending on how much of the 100mill Torchlight Security Trustee actually lent to SCF (and as I have said earlier, it is strongly rumoured to be only a small % of the total), then their share of the break fee is rather small.

How much got back to PGC? - god only knows, as it first would go to Torchlight (GP) 1, who then would, after doubtless keeping a proportion for themselves as set out in the Partnership Agreements with LP's, pro-rata the balance across all the individual partners - the associated Torchlight LP 1 holders, of which we know PGC is a 15m limited partner and (somewhat ludicrously) SCF is a 30m LP. The others remain anon. Torchlight (GP) 1 is owned by TIG. TIG is owned by Perpetual Group, which in turn is owned by PGC. So I imagine PGC should get something as a LP in Torchlight (GP) 1 - 10%, as it was reported the fund closed at 150m - and as the ultimate shareholder up the chain, of Torchlight Security Trustees

This is all public information sourced from the last SCF prospectus, the Receiver's figures, and the Companies Office website, (with the exception of the rumored participation of Fortress and the amount they put up).

Chris Lee clearly believes that facts shouldn't be allowed to get in the way of a good story - each to his own

Chris Lee is behaving like a scorned love-sick puppy - he was so full of Hubbard and SCF he cannot now stand the pain of being so wrong. End of story.

Oh yes, he also got a whole heap of other finance companies wrong - Provincial, Hanover, Strategic Finance, St Laurence etc.

[winner69]

A trend reversal in place?

Agree belg ... its all up from here

We will never ever see 30 cents again methinks

its going to cost george heaps to take this baby private