Eddie Hobbs new Brendan Investments vehicle

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sunny - Just to explain the fundamentals of leverage

80% leveraging computes to 400% as per your calculation.

For instance if you are to buy a property for 25,000 and borrow 75,000 this would equate to 75% leverage or 300%

following on from this

if you are to buy a property for 25,000 and leverage at 80% this equates to c. 125,000 or 400% on your calculation.

The point is that all these syndicates are geared at largely the same basis and therefore the fees for the annual management are all approximately the same.

As someone who has worked in corporate finance all my life maybe I haven't explained in my example well enough this point.

The reality is all these funds need to charge these fees to pay for management of the property etc. None of them are excessive.

This comment should also cover off the claim of vested interests. Simply trying to give the facts in a balance and simple way
 
This comment should also cover off the claim of vested interests. Simply trying to give the facts in a balance and simple way
Click to expand...

You misunderstand me. I wasn't claiming anything.

I just asked - have you or alser2 any connection with Brendan Investments?
 
i only logged in today for the first time as a friend suggested i check out this website for a discussion. i dont have any connection with brendan investments, i am simply trying to get a full view of the package and i am also aware of the impending deadline at the end of october. i have not invested before so i want to be thorough.
 
Finally, some hard facts from Medici. The paucity of informed competent analysis on this thread is finally laid bare.

What has been the response of some people ? It is to disregard the informational quality of the comparative analysis and question the poster’s motives.

People should read this thread in the full knowledge that (a) posters are anonymous and (b) many have no qualifications and professional competence in providing independent objective informed analysis. There are a few posters who demonstrate a professional competence in these matters: that is they have provided solid information, facts and well informed analysis. This is evident from their posts. There are also some industry enthusiasts and amateur armchair pundits who largely base their assessment on anecdote and third party information, cutting and pasting it, to shore up their partially informed views. A few are who are knowledgeable have engaged either naively or knowingly in misrepresentation peppering their posts with comments and innuendo which in my opinion are both scurrilous and malicious in its intent.

Converse/ Hydra - I have deleted your continued attempt to introduce red herrings to take the debate off the product.

We have been extremely patient with you and your continuous attempts to take the thread off topic. In future, we will simple delete the entire post.


Brendan
Administrator
 
medici said:
I have been digging around my inbox and found the latest offerings to the German market - some interesting comparisons for fees.
Click to expand...

Don't know about the Merrion Raglan fund - On the CMC fund you are mistaken. Here is the relevant section of their brochure:

http://www.cmccapital.ie/Information Memorandum CMC 5 German Property Syndicate.pdf

If exceptional returns are generated, then CMC Capital earns performance fees. These will be 20% of the profits in excess of 12% p.a. return on investment (i.e. 20% of the profits in excess of €90,000 over 7.5 years, on a €100,000 investment)​

This equates to an 8.93% IRR - not 8%. That said, I would agree the way CMC have put this is confusing to say the least.​

I note, medici, two things: firstly, you are yet another new poster posting in favour of BI and secondly, you are continuing the pretence by other similar posters that property acquisition costs which you have listed for Merrion, CMC and Augusta will not also be incurred by BI. Once again, these are costs such as stamp duty and legal fees which it is certain BI will incur. BI have disclosed this in their prospectus but haven't quantified them.​
 

Thank you for clarifying this.

Any Yes or No answer from medici?
 
no problem LD, i will keep reading up here and hopfully someone can answer any questions i may have. i'm fairly sure i will go ahead but i guess there is time yet to get more detail.
 
converse2007 said:
Finally, some hard facts from Medici. The paucity of informed competent analysis on this thread is finally laid bare.
Click to expand...
Oh, Lordy, Lordy...

converse2007, thanks for the cut-and-paste job. Fascinating. There were in fact several responses to your earlier, eh, 'suggestions' about defamation and innuendo. I was just one of those who put it to you then that the boot was rather on the other foot — that the only defamation going on around here was coming from the direction of Mantus and of those (presumably entirely separate?) individuals — all of them newly-registered posters — who have been promoting Brendan Investments on this board.

While (justifiably) critical of certain aspects of this investment product and the manner of its promotion, nobody here has for one moment 'called into question the competency and integrity' of either Eddie Hobbs or the board of Brendan Investments Plc. Some have challenged the arguments being advanced here (if they may be called arguments) for investing in their product, which is entirely legitimate. Others have expressed a suspicion that some of these newly-registered posters may have some connection to Brendan Investments. Some of us (myself included) have simply asked these posters in the simplest possible terms to declare whether they have any such connection. Most of those requests have been ignored, or sidestepped along the lines of 'I'll declare when all youse other feckers declare first...', usually overlaid with further accusations of bias, incompetence and/or assorted personal shortcomings.

So maybe you'd hang on to your defamatory hat there for a minute?

Now, Liam has asked medici for a simple 'yes or no' clarification, so I'll ask you again the .

(a) Yes or no, are you and Mantus the same person?
(b) Yes or no, do you have any association with the Brendan scheme or with its promoters?

The hard facts will do.
 
Converse2007,

If someone anonymously posts on Askaboutmoney "I think Liam Ferguson is a fantastic broker and you should all give him a call", it is hugely relevant for other readers to know whether or not the poster has a connection with me or is just a happy customer.

Readers of this thread should bear in mind that NOBODY who has posted here, myself included, is offering professional advice in this thread. This is stated in the Askaboutmoney guidelines. Those that post in support of BI may have a vested interest in doing so. Those that post in criticism of BI may have a vested interest in doing so.

Thanks for the link to a UK court case. I'll take it into consideration when deciding whether or not some of the comments made about me in this thread constitute defamation.
 
Brendan
This is not the first time you have moderated and deleted what you consider to be off thread points by me. Whilst I may not agree, I do respect your decision in this. I respectfully suggest that the case cited might be brought to posters attention.

DrM
To answer your questions (a) I am not Mantus and I am not associated with BI or its promoters interests. Nor do I have an interest from which I derive an income in analysing BI or advising on BI.

In which case I’m sure you won’t mind answering a question of mine:

  • Have you an interest in BI or any of its the promoters beyond this discussion board ?
  • Do you derive income from this interest ?
(I used a cut and paste which was accurate and linked to a definitive source. I imagine that you would do likewise.)

Liam
You’ll note my helpful link was removed. I haven’t mentioned “advise” merely analysis. You say “Those that post in support of BI may have a vested interest in doing so. Those that post in criticism of BI may have a vested interest in doing so.”

I assume you are referring to constructive support or criticism demonstrated through objective fact based analysis.

In general observation:
Also of interest is the direct persistent questioning of posters “vested interest in BI” and not of “vested interest in criticising BI.”

Converse
 
Last edited by a moderator:
converse2007 said:
  • Have you an interest in BI or any of its the promoters beyond this discussion board ?
  • Do you derive income from this interest ?
Click to expand...
Absolutely none, on either count. I do not and will never derive one flat cent of income, commission, fees, share options, dividends, or emoluments of any nature from analysing or advising on BI or any of its putative rivals.

Nor do I have any family, marital, social or professional connection to Eddie Hobbs. But I guess y'all figured that one out already.
 
My oh my, I've been away for the day and already my last post is buried 2 pages deep.

Lots of new recruits to AAM, Boss. I wonder will they come and go just like Billy.

alser2 said:
no problem LD, i will keep reading up here and hopfully someone can answer any questions i may have. i'm fairly sure i will go ahead but i guess there is time yet to get more detail.
Click to expand...

No, this cannot be serious. I was always assuming that the only followers of the Pied Piper would be those seduced by the high profile and misrepresentative promotion of the scheme. I cannot believe that anyone who has read this thread would embark on this currach for love nor money.

What is this baloney about the anti lobby having vested interests? Afraid of the competition, that is ridiculous, but even if it does exist it would be infinitesimal compared to the vested interest of those about to make millions from BI.

Protestions of independence from the Hydra reminds one of that old cliche "they would say that wouldn't they".
 
Harchibald said:
What is this baloney about the anti lobby having vested interests? Afraid of the competition, that is ridiculous, but even if it does exist it would be infinitesimal compared to the vested interest of those about to make millions from BI.
Click to expand...

That is certainly true. (Although we all know how tenacious vested interests can sometimes be in response to even the tiniest perceived threat.)

Pretending for a moment you were a member of the great unwashed with a spare 20 grand, which you wanted to invest in european property (for some reason), would you invest in
  1. that rental apartment in Bulgaria
  2. Brendan Investments
  3. european property index ETF e.g. IPRP
  4. something else (let us know)
 
Indubitably 3
 
Dr M

Thanks for your response. I’m intrigued by your subsequent addition and doubling up on putative. (has post editing recording & dating been disabled?) It seems we share a common position in a declaration of no conflict of interest thus we comply with posting guidelines.

I detect nonetheless what I term a “vested” bias. For example your direct reference to one of the promoters by name hints perhaps at a motivation that is both intentionally provocative and reflective of the motivational sub-text of those whom LDFerguson has termed the “vested interests critical of BI” and its promoters.

General observation and comment
LDFerguson, probably inadvertently, hit the nail on the head when he wrote of the vested interests of those critical of BI (and its promoters).

Now why would anyone have a vested interest in being critical ? This is a question readers of this thread should carefully consider.

For example the contributor, Harchibald, appears to colloquially articulate a vested bias, portrayed though a consistent theme of writing of “exploitation” and “misrepresentation”, dispensed both in this and another thread.

Of course readers should be mindful that posts supporting BI may have a promotional motivation.

Before you rush in to responding to my quite deliberate discursive approach, I will declare my “vested bias” which is a genuine interest in discerning the motivation behind the text of those who react to challenging propositions. (Particularly those who understand the nature of internet publication and heading tags.)

Converse2007
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Holy F, I will make allowances that Converse may, on this Friday evening, be partaking of intoxicating liquor, but can anybody else make sense of this ramble?
 
Nope. That certainly sounds like gobbledegook to me. Sounds rather like it's veering towards the kind of meaningless nonsense you might find in a paper produced by some postmodernist/deconstructionist 'academic'.
 
Moderators, is it not about time that this thread, which has obviously been infiltrated by unannounced vested interests and is consequently devoid of all credibility, is shut down?
 
Converse 2007 (hydra,mantus et al.)

I have changed the status of Converse2007 to Frequent Poster, so that you can respond to this thread through one name only. You have attempted to distract the discussion through multiple registrations.

You do still have to abide by the Posting Guidelines. Attempts to drag the post off-topic will be deleted.

Brendan
Administrator
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register