Key Post Investment in Irish Forestry Funds

[duckduckgo7]

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?....

UK asset manager plans to build on Irish forestry deal - Independent.ie

London based specialist alternative asset manager Gresham House Asset Management (GHAM) is planning new forestry and renewable projects after taking over management of 10,000 acres of I

www.independent.ie

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

 

[Aquajg]

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]

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]

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?

 

[arboretum]

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.

 

[Bronte]

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.

You can all email each other to your heart's content. I've been on here long enough to know that people having ideas of skulduggery may OR may not have a ring of truth. I'm merely here pointing out flaws in what is being 'vaguely' suggested. So that posters don't end up sending good money after bad. Which is why this article has a particular headline:

When something looks too good to be true it often is

Analysis: A group of Irish forestry funds have failed to deliver for investors

www.irishtimes.com

And so far I see nothing of note to suggest everything wasn't above board. Sure the returns that were 'predicted' didn't come true. Sure great returns were suggested at the beginning. What prospectus doesn't promise the sun moon and stars would be my view of it. I haven't heard one word about 'guaranteed' returns.

 

[duckduckgo7]

Above board you say...The issue is not the preformance here and not about guaranteed returns... Its not about that at all.

The question is why did the land value not increase at all basically in the 20 year funds??

Why does VEON still earn money from the assets?

Why did Deloitte introduce GHAM to the opportunity almost a year ago and then still audit the accounts?

 

[Bronte]

Above board you say...The issue is not the preformance here and not about guaranteed returns... Its not about that at all.

Really. From the IT article:

Key to the group’s concerns are the level of returns received.

Do you think they sold the land for a knock down value. If yes, what do you base that on. I know nothing about VEON but Deloitte are the big boys so you'd want to be careful taking those boys on unless you're very sure of what you're at.

 

[arboretum]

You can all email each other to your heart's content. I've been on here long enough to know that people having ideas of skulduggery may OR may not have a ring of truth. I'm merely here pointing out flaws in what is being 'vaguely' suggested. So that posters don't end up sending good money after bad. Which is why this article has a particular headline:

When something looks too good to be true it often is

Analysis: A group of Irish forestry funds have failed to deliver for investors

www.irishtimes.com

And so far I see nothing of note to suggest everything wasn't above board. Sure the returns that were 'predicted' didn't come true. Sure great returns were suggested at the beginning. What prospectus doesn't promise the sun moon and stars would be my view of it. I haven't heard one word about 'guaranteed' returns.

I am not emailing anybody, some of the people who are have told me they started checking up within a year or two, I laughed at the whole thing from day one.
One thing that puzzles me is why Lar says this happened to him before.
If people want to fight this more luck to them.

 

[Bronte]

They started checking up what?

And when, when the fund started 20 years ago?

 

[extopia]

Bronte, are you protesting too much? It seems you've made a number of points, many of which I agree with. But at this point perhaps you might acknowledge that if people want to question or resist what happened - even if the IFS/IFF/Veon people seem to have acted within the letter (if perhaps not the spirit) of their legal bounds - well good luck to them?

 

[AileenWalsh]

Really. From the IT article:

Key to the group’s concerns are the level of returns received.

Do you think they sold the land for a knock down value. If yes, what do you base that on. I know nothing about VEON but Deloitte are the big boys so you'd want to be careful taking those boys on unless you're very sure of what you're at.

Look at the listing particulars, their representations and their assumptions about their forestry and then see what Deloitte has signed off you might worth ago. But you need to sign up a lot of people to fight with you and it would take a lot of time and money and if you have invested say 10k is it really worth it?

 

[Bronte]

Bronte, are you protesting too much? It seems you've made a number of points, many of which I agree with. But at this point perhaps you might acknowledge that if people want to question or resist what happened - even if the IFS/IFF/Veon people seem to have acted within the letter (if perhaps not the spirit) of their legal bounds - well good luck to them?

I prefer to deal in facts, figures and legalities. No issue with questioning things either. But so far I've seen nothing illegal or even underhand. I've even learnt a bit about forestry beetles. When Brexit happens and if it causes a recession the investors might be very glad they got their money back now. Nobody on here however is making that point.

 

[Bronte]

Look at the listing particulars, their representations and their assumptions about their forestry and then see what Deloitte has signed off you might worth ago. But you need to sign up a lot of people to fight with you and it would take a lot of time and money and if you have invested say 10k is it really worth it?

Deloitte did their job. So what. Deloitte do not sign off on guarantees on investments which are based on assumptions. Every single investment is based on assumptions. Which is why people like me (severly risk adverse according to my bank) won't touch them. If even half the assumptions in the prospectus were true the whole country would have been growing trees.

 

[duckduckgo7]

I've given up thinking about this.

 

[arboretum]

They started checking up what?

And when, when the fund started 20 years ago?

What do you think they were checking up on, if you have shares or know someone who has contact with Lar you might learn more.

 

[cremeegg]

SHAREHOLDERS,

Were you common shareholders or preference shareholders.

If, as I suspect, you were preference shareholders, management have little responsibility to you and the auditors less.

 

[cremeegg]

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

Not an unreasonable price.

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).

I dont know if they averaged out the proceeds and if they did if they were entitled to do, however land with forestry on it for 21 years is worth less than land planted for any much shorter or longer time.

The premiums have expired, the thinnings are done, the time to harvest is getting shorter.

 

[arboretum]

Not an unreasonable price.



I dont know if they averaged out the proceeds and if they did if they were entitled to do, however land with forestry on it for 21 years is worth less than land planted for any much shorter or longer time.

The premiums have expired, the thinnings are done, the time to harvest is getting shorter.

I thought it was called marginal land, in other words not the best agri land.
Good lord the 2018 chairman's letter was very positive the assets still going up demand etc, but he does mention Brexit.

 

[Cuchulainn]

I have seen that the return (via cheque) on the 8th IRISH FORESTRY FUND is twice that of the 6th fund, which I don't understand.

//
Admin: apologies for previously posting in the other similarly-named forum.