Key Post Investment in Irish Forestry Funds

Mullaghan

New Member
Messages
3
I received an email earlier today. Seems like a blanket response, so i imagine many of you have had the same.
 

Bagehot

New Member
Messages
5
The Board minutes should be requested in addition to a copy of any independent valuations received by the Board. Shareholder consent should have been sought for the sale and voluntary liquidation of the various companies (I think 75% approval is the requirement for a voluntary liquidation) - albeit would need to check what voting rights the preference shareholders were entitled to.
 

extopia

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,111
The Board minutes should be requested in addition to a copy of any independent valuations received by the Board. Shareholder consent should have been sought for the sale and voluntary liquidation of the various companies (I think 75% approval is the requirement for a voluntary liquidation) - albeit would need to check what voting rights the preference shareholders were entitled to.
Preference shareholders had no voting rights. Clearly stated in prospectus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jpd

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,825
Preference shareholders had no voting rights. Clearly stated in prospectus.
I’m confused why people are outraged. They invested in shared with projected returns. Not guaranteed returns. The prospectus highlighted an amazing projected return, well it would wouldn’t it! They even took out misleading ads, tell tale signs there. And low and behold the returns weren’t as high as projected.
 

Lar Sheeran

Registered User
Messages
23
I have engaged a QFA Investment specialist to prepair a report with the intention of issuing proceedings against Veron and Deloitt,
Is anyone interested in joining the case, I will be taking out an advertisement in the Times to gather up investors,
This is not the first time this has happened to me
my e mail address is
larsheeran@gmail.com
 

Sunny

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,939
I’m confused why people are outraged. They invested in shared with projected returns. Not guaranteed returns. The prospectus highlighted an amazing projected return, well it would wouldn’t it! They even took out misleading ads, tell tale signs there. And low and behold the returns weren’t as high as projected.
I agree to an extent but my understanding is that there have been regular updates since the launch where no concerns about increased risks or falling returns were raised. I haven't invested though so nog sure. Never liked the look of it to be honest.
 

Bagehot

New Member
Messages
5
I’m confused why people are outraged. They invested in shared with projected returns. Not guaranteed returns. The prospectus highlighted an amazing projected return, well it would wouldn’t it! They even took out misleading ads, tell tale signs there. And low and behold the returns weren’t as high as projected.
I think it’s more about governance/conflicts of interest than anyone expecting a guaranteed returns
 

Aisling Murphy

New Member
Messages
2
The Board minutes should be requested in addition to a copy of any independent valuations received by the Board. Shareholder consent should have been sought for the sale and voluntary liquidation of the various companies (I think 75% approval is the requirement for a voluntary liquidation) - albeit would need to check what voting rights the preference shareholders were entitled to.
It seems that the 6th Fund was described as having gone into voluntary liquidation, but I was a shareholder in that fund, and despite many requests for information prior to the sale about the expected value of the shares, before I consented to the sale of the fund, my requests for information were ignored. I went to Veon offices in person with another investor on 22 August after receiving my paltry cheque, and made it clear I wasn't happy with the whole process, either the sale of my investment without my consent, the paltry amount they were sold for, Trevor McHugh and Paul Brosnan's poor performance in representing the best interests of their 12,400 investors, and their conflict of interest in acting as forestry managers for the new owners of our forestry investment funds Axa. I am currently in contact with some other investors including Lar Sheeran (post above number 310) and a number of us are willing to put some funds together to investigate this whole process. We need a common platform where we can all communicate and share resources (e.g. political contacts, journalistic contacts, etc.) so if anyone has a suggestion please put it out there. Anyone interested in coming on board please contact me at aislingmurphy1@gmail.com Thanks
 

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,825
I think it’s more about governance/conflicts of interest than anyone expecting a guaranteed returns
And for all that none of you have pointed out what was done incorrectly. Also where were you all for the last 20 years. About governance or conflicts of interest.

Why now, when the projected returns didn’t materialise.
 

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,825
I have engaged a QFA Investment specialist to prepair a report with the intention of issuing proceedings against Veron and Deloitt,
Is anyone interested in joining the case, I will be taking out an advertisement in the Times to gather up investors,
This is not the first time this has happened to me
my e mail address is
larsheeran@gmail.com
If it’s the second time why did you invest in this? How did it work out the last time. AAM readers might learn from it. I take all this with a large pince of salt after I saw the fiasco with Eircom when the whole country lost the plot.
 

HowyaHorshe

New Member
Messages
2
If it’s the second time why did you invest in this? How did it work out the last time. AAM readers might learn from it. I take all this with a large pince of salt after I saw the fiasco with Eircom when the whole country lost the plot.
One genuflects at the alter of the righteous....from my read of the threads above people are not placing blame but would like some very simple questions answered.....please forgive them!
 

HowyaHorshe

New Member
Messages
2
And for all that none of you have pointed out what was done incorrectly. Also where were you all for the last 20 years. About governance or conflicts of interest.

Why now, when the projected returns didn’t materialise.
No one is pointing any blame (yet). For the last 20 years all the messages were quiet sanguine (amen!)
 

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,825
One genuflects at the alter of the righteous....from my read of the threads above people are not placing blame but would like some very simple questions answered.....please forgive them!
I’ve only read page one of this thread, poster Rainyday at post 3 was asking questions back in 2002, he continued in other posts and then another poster at post 12 joined in asking questions. From those posts alone it was raising questions to me about his sound an investment it was. As it happens it was sound. People are getting their money back, plus interest. Not bad in these days of negative interest.

The projected returns were stratesphoric from the get go, the guys running in just happened to place an ad so misleading that a state body got involved.

And at the end of the day we have the guys running the fund sitting pretty, quelled surprise, while the investors are disgruntled.
 
Last edited:

Lar Sheeran

Registered User
Messages
23
Preference shareholders had no voting rights. Clearly stated in prospectus.
Deloitt have a case to answer, They have a responsibility to the SHAREHOLDERS, not the Directors
I have invested in renewable funds for many years, For example, Eddie O'Connors Mainstream windfarms investment has doubled my investment in 10 years,
I also have many sucsscesful investments which are giving me a good return
Lar Sheeran
 

duckduckgo7

New Member
Messages
3
I'm in for organizing.

If you take the 8000 acres and multiply by the current average prices for agri land it comes to around 7K per acre.(Not exact)

That's 56 million, very similar to the total shareholder funds. This may indicate(perhaps) that what they have done is sell the land and just average it out against all funds which is totally wrong as the 21 year old funds land would have appreciated significantly. But by the return It seem that it has not appreciated at all. Remember each fund is its own entity they should not be mixing assets. (I'm only speculating).

But that's neither here nor there at this stage, as they have done the deal clearly not in everyone's preference.

I've requested a breakdown of the original land prices against what they were sold for, also the current stock figure. We deserve to know the details regarding this, we are the ones that put the money down and waited over two decades.(I doubt i'll receive a reply).

This whole deal is very suspicious.

Also check out the article that Fearghal O'Connor made in the independent on the 26th may. Delloitte were the ones that "introduced" Tony Dalwood to "this opportunity" almost a year ago........Deloitte were also the ones that conducted the audit. In today's independent article again by Mr. O'Connor the fees the auditors received were almost a million..... Anyone see issues here?....


@Lar Sheeran when are you gonna put the ad out? Actually best keep that part between the group.
 
Last edited:

Aquajg

New Member
Messages
1
I have engaged a QFA Investment specialist to prepair a report with the intention of issuing proceedings against Veron and Deloitt,
Is anyone interested in joining the case, I will be taking out an advertisement in the Times to gather up investors,
This is not the first time this has happened to me
my e mail address is
larsheeran@gmail.com
[/QUOTE
Lar I've just emailed you with my contact information. I had 4 shares in the 3rd Irish Forestery Fund and would like to join the case. I had been led to believe that this sale was in our best interest but what about all this conflict of interest with the directors who had a duty of care to us for the duration of their contract ie in my case 30 years. Not 21years and selling us out behind our backs when they will still be benefiting by stil maintaining them and being paid by AXA to do so. As there was no more grants due after the 20 year period I presume they would not be paid until the tres are cut, and the trees and land sold!
This in my opinion seems to be part of their reason for selling and not to get a good deal for us shareholders!
 

extopia

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,111
Why don’t you post some more details. Who have you engaged? What was their initial expert assessment of the situation? What’s the plan? Are there fees involved?
 

arboretum

New Member
Messages
9
I think it’s more about governance/conflicts of interest than anyone expecting a guaranteed returns
At time Paulie and Clever Trevor were saying its a gamble, well why not let the race run it's course?
 
Last edited:

arboretum

New Member
Messages
9
And for all that none of you have pointed out what was done incorrectly. Also where were you all for the last 20 years. About governance or conflicts of interest.

Why now, when the projected returns didn’t materialise.
You are not privy to what monitoring of the situation over 20 years was done, because people who were shareholders are discussing in this in emails.
 
Top