Hey Jim, we have been doing 60+ pages of conspiracy stuff until you and David stumbled upon us!Boys and girls, ladies and Gentleman
I leave you guys alone for five minutes and there are more conspiracy theories …
Because it is stated as fact in the PDS and it isn't?Why all the stuff about the accuracy of Brisbane's growing population?
Surely one of the most questionable aspects of the PDS is the traffic report? This report seems to indicate that there will be about 70 million trips per year. How Brisconnection's tollway could carry several times the traffic volume of the Eastern Distributor and match the revenue of City Link leaves me totally dumbfounded.
Why all the stuff about the accuracy of Brisbane's growing population? Surely one of the most questionable aspects of the PDS is the traffic report? This report seems to indicate that there will be about 70 million trips per year. Last year, the Eastern Distributor had 17.4 million trips to raise $73.7 million (source:http://www.transurban.com.au/transurban_online/tu_nav_black.nsf/obj/SHR+08/$file/040.htm). Without considering inflation, were Brisconnection's tollway to have the same traffic volumes as Transurban's CityLink tollway (http://www.citylink.com.au/261.jsp), a tollway more than three times the length running through Melbourne, they could pay off the project's debt over the term of its concession, as well as provide unit holders with a little under 10cents in annual dividends. How Brisconnection's tollway could carry several times the traffic volume of the Eastern Distributor and match the revenue of City Link leaves me totally dumbfounded.
Is anyone else concerned that all is not as it seems? There’s always a pay off and nothing is for free, especially now given money isn’t as easy as it once was. I’d encourage everyone with a material exposure to this to seek their own independent legal opinion, rather than relying on the altruism of some chap on a forum.way to go MeToo - it must be a relief to have them off your hands. It sounds like you're lucky to have Jim and his backers around and then also there is David/JAB_Charity also willing to take a risk to help people out of the situation.
Is anyone else concerned that all is not as it seems? There’s always a pay off and nothing is for free, especially now given money isn’t as easy as it once was. I’d encourage everyone with a material exposure to this to seek their own independent legal opinion, rather than relying on the altruism of some chap on a forum.
Is anyone else concerned that all is not as it seems? There’s always a pay off and nothing is for free, especially now given money isn’t as easy as it once was. I’d encourage everyone with a material exposure to this to seek their own independent legal opinion, rather than relying on the altruism of some chap on a forum.
all smoke and mirrors
just look at one of the early instigators mr bolton, the knight in shining armour coming to the rescue of the illinformed.
there is no altruism when it come to business and finance imo.
Everything has its time and place. When the livelihoods and homes of so many families are on the line, this is probably not the place for it.is not the purpose of the forum for people to come together , share thoughts and information . some serous and some a bit light hearted .
there are always comercial risks in all forms of commerce .
this is no different .
There will be two forms of pay of for me and my client .
Money of course we have built up a big stake , we have formulated a plan of attack . we have prepared a class action ,we have arranged to fund same .
the funder makes a tidy fee (about 33% ) of the total settlement some .
the agrieved get 66% ...
until now they where geting shafted , zero , zip zilch ..nothing .
whats better a 100% of nothing or 66% of something .
second payoff is very personal to me and it comes in two forms .
mac Bank have been a little unkind to me in the past and this is a little payback . also having had an interesting and not always smoth sailing corporate life , does anyone understand what sought of personal satisfaction one derives my not only getting paid to do a service but helping close to 1000 people who have been badly efected by there dealings in BSC .
saving many from what would be finacial ruin. It is soul satisfying and also good for ones own karma
This is usually the case in these sort of games.Alternatively, have the little guys been played as pawns in a larger game.
Here is one point we believe is unable to be 100% proved correct.
The PDS
In Big letters says Brisbane is the fastest growing capital city in Australia …suffering from critical transport and capacity constraints (page 7)
Thereafter they say forecast population growth 2004 2031
Brisbane is the fastest growing capital city in Australia
Source Bureau of statistics.
... saving many from what would be finacial ruin. It is soul satisfying and also good for ones own karma
Between the three Bs (Humphrey excluded!), they have relieved many mums and dads of their toxic units. IMO, for this they should be applauded. What strategies are played out from here will hopefully remain between the big guys and the mums and dads they rescued can now get on with their lives.
Absolutely! All they wanted to do was remove that horrendous liability. And whatever the motives of the big players are, the liability was all that mattered to the mums and dads. Who cares if the big players then go on to make a profit from it? I certainly wouldnt have given a toss!
jim your alter ego " metoo" is too obvious.
I don't know how helpful this one is - from an article highly critical of the BCS traffic forecasts: linkok all you i have enclosed the link to the brisconnections PDS
http://www.brisconnections.com.au/Portals/0/docs/investors/Final_PDS_NoApplication 24 June 2008.PDF
or just go to brisconnections web site and follow your nose to PDS
have a look and i am very keen for the good readers and bloggers to provide me info re PDS mistakes . The lawyers and i have found 42 mistakes in the PDS
BRISCONNECTIONS: A CASE STUDY
One of the key risks identified in the BrisConnections Airport Link Project Product Disclosure Statement is that of traffic volumes (see section 6.2.1, page 60). The PDS states that:
The impact of a significant and sustained increase in fuel prices on traffic volumes is a risk that should also be considered. Increased fuel prices may lead to a reduction in car ownership, car utilisation and a shift in modal share to public transport, walking, cycling or motorbikes and scooters. (p. 60)
The traffic forecast model for the project was developed by Arup. Arup’s Traffic forecasts for the Airport Link Project (pp 110 – 124 of the PDS) predict that the average increase in traffic volume across the three tollable sections will be 47% from 2012 to 2031. This is in comparison to a potential shortfall in Australia’s oil supply of 64% to 80% by 2025.
The PDS risk chapter refers to the potential impact of fuel prices on traffic volumes six times. However nowhere in Arup’s traffic forecast is there any mention of the impact of fuel prices or fuel availability. This raises the question of why was the impact of the future availability and cost of fuel not mentioned during the traffic forecasting process. For an issue of such vital signifance to the viability of the entire project this appears to be negligent at best and is something that warrants further investigation.
Questions submitted to Arup
1. Queensland Transport Facts 2008 was published in May 2008. Why is it not being made available to the public like previous versions? (edit - the forecasts were based on 2006 data)
2. The IPO occurred at the end of July 2008. Why did the PDS ignore this data from May? Was this misleading?
3. The assumptions in the PDS are now "materially incorrect". Why is BrisCon not disclosing this to their investors?
BrisConnections is not aware if the 2008 Transport Facts report has been distributed publicly, but we note that it is not on the Queensland Transport website.
We also note that in relation to the 2006 report, Queensland Transport has the following disclaimer on its website:
''The report is not a formally endorsed Queensland Government statement on transport trends but is an independent assessment prepared using both public and private sector data sources, with quality controls overseen by supporting agencies.''
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?