No Trust
JUSTICE IS COMING...
- Joined
- 22 November 2010
- Posts
- 4,495
- Reactions
- 3,566
Well, that is quite an outburst. I apologise for touching a nerve but I'm still at somewhat of a loss as to what motivates NoTrust's obvious personal vendetta against Mark McIvor given that NoTrust is unlikely to be an investor and, more curiously, has again demonstrated a dedication to diverting any attention away from directors and executives. How does this help unit holders?
Quite ironic that NoTrust speaks of conspiracy theories at the mere suggestion that we should look at DAVID TUCKER of TUCKER COWEN, the ex director who made submissions to the Supreme Court that helped get DAVID WHYTE of BDO appointed as receiver who is now using fund money to pay DAVID TUCKER of TUCKER COWEN to do God knows what. Not get any money back to unit holders that is for sure. I find it more than a little strange that the same two, DAVID TUCKER and DAVID WHYTE are involved in the same way at another distressed fund, LM.
NoTrust demands answers to his/her questions but it is a standard that he/she doesn't think applies to him/her. Seriously, how in the hell can NoTrust be certain that it 'starts and ends with McIvor'? What proof is offered that former MFS execs DAVID KENNEDY and DAVID ANDERSON have nothing to answer for, or DAVID TUCKER of TUCKER COWEN or any other of the board and exec team? Of course the answer is that NoTrust can't be sure at all, so who stands to gain from constantly repeating the assertion? Again, not us unit holders.
The dissembling attempt to dissuade any interest in DAVID TUCKER of TUCKER COWEN, DAVID WHYTE of BDO, DAVID KENNEDY, DAVID ANDERSON and others on the grounds that there is no personnel or money to conduct such enquiries is of course specious.
Really all of this argument from NoTrust looks like it is just obfuscating sound and fury, in reality it comes down to common sense. The idea that none of the board or senior executives, lawyers, accountants, auditors etc who were pulling down MILLIONS AND MILLIONS in fees and salaries have any case to answer for what happened to us at Equititrust is arrant nonsense.
Frankly I'm a little concerned at how much effort and vitriol NoTrust has expended trying to breath life into the unsubstantiated fantasy that 'it starts and ends with McIvor'. Who stands to benefit from this canard?
I had lunch today with several GC business people, one of whom worked at Equititrust for a long time. I don’t know this person well but have met them once or twice in the past.
They said they read ASF from time to time but hadn’t for a while. They also had some interesting comments when I showed them Nordrum’s recent posts on my phone:
- says Nordrum’s posts appear to have “McIvor’s DNA all over them”.
- says they are not aware of any employee being paid millions and understood that the highest paid earned about $250-$300k per year.
- Kennedy and McIvor were once close but had a major falling out over the calling in of bad loans – particularly Quinliven and a few others (some of whom McIvor was mates with) – McIvor didn’t want to, Kennedy said they had to and defied McIvor by pursuing them – McIvor threatened to sue Kennedy and the other Directors for doing so.
- During 2011 McIvor and Kennedy used to have regular shouting matches in the office – only stopped when Kennedy locked McIvor out of the Equititrust office. McIvor then moved to ground floor and worked from there as he owned the building.
- says criticism of board and execs is ill-informed and unfair – this disaster was created by McIvor – the board and execs had to work against McIvor to try to protect investor interests – says they have little doubt the Receivers and ASIC will vindicate directors/execs role in the demise of Equititrust.
- it was several of the board and execs who supported the appointment of Whyte as Receiver to ensure that McIvor did not get back in control after he tried to use his position as sole shareholder to regain control – not a conspiracy as Nordrum would have us believe.
- The board (Goddard/Tucker/Treasure/Kennedy) that has been criticised so much on ASF (and elsewhere) was in office for about a year – in that time they brought $200m in bad debt provisions to account, booted out McIvor (and his wife), cut significant staff numbers/overheads, called in all o/s loans, waived the management fee for the year and almost fully repaid banks - not bad, if true.
- says when Whyte was appointed McIvor started to threaten him but Whyte would have none of it.
Said a few other things I cannot remember now but which may come to me in time.
Interesting observation by someone else at the lunch. When spelt backwards, Nordrum spells Murdron. Murdron was a Transformers character who was a leader of the faction that thinks they are the most powerful but driven by a desire to protect their homeworld, even if it is at the expense of others. He sees himself as a hero. Coincidence?????
Wirrina Cove resort and golf course in SA has finally sold after being on the market for 2 years, for an "undisclosed sum", which no doubt means a fair bit below the $3m asking price they slapped on it after it failed to sell for the first 18 months. After selling the surrounding vacant blocks for less than $100k each and the marina berths for bugger all I doubt David Whyte realised much more than $5-6m for the whole joint - Equititrust lent $34m on it from memory.....
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/wirrina-cove-resort-in-nz-hands/story-fni6uma6-1226718271284
McIvor is ... solely to blame...
As macabrely interesting as NoTrust's posts are, and far be it for me to interrupt his obsession, it is very important that any genuine unit holders visiting this thread understand the abject fallacy of his most oft repeated claim (we can properly leave any discussion of the motivation behind it to medical and legal professionals)
Equititrust was a company constituted under the corporations act and according with statutory obligations had a board of directors and company office holders ALL OF WHOM HAD RESPONSIBILITIES TO US UNIT HOLDERS.
NoTrust has put in an astonishing effort to create the impression that McIVOR alone is responsible for the Equititrust disaster but this claim is FACTUALLY and LOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE and it's acceptance INJURES UNIT HOLDER'S INTERESTS.
The path that lead to the decimation of unit value was pursued under the stewardship of, and thus RESPONSIBILITY LIES WITH, the whole company, but if, as NoTrust is fond of alleging, McIVOR was some kind of rogue maniac hell bent on destroying our (and apparently his own) wealth THEN THE BOARD AND SENIOR EXECUTIVES ARE RESPONSIBLE BY THEIR INACTION.
Either way, unit holders need to look beyond the bankrupt McIVOR and look at people such as DAVID TUCKER of TUCKER COWEN, DAVID KENNEDY, DAVID ANDERSON and others for THEIR RESPONSIBILITY in what occoured to ensure we get MAXIMUM RECOVERY of unit value.
No doubt there will be ample opportunity to discuss the realities of the path to disaster like why/which/and to who loans were made and why/how/which assets came to be disposed of - for peanuts - and no doubt NoTrust will be outraged by the truth I point out BUT IT IS VITAL FOR ANY UNIT HOLDER LOOKING TO MAXIMISE OUR PITIFUL RETURNS that we do not fall for NoTrust's campaign to limit the exposure and responsibility of the board and senior execs by settling for the fantasy that McIvor alone is responsible for what happened.
I must say I am finding a new lease of life in this thread since Nordrum re-entered the scene. It becomes almost impossible to ignore his self-serving posts that are littered with obvious falsities and contradictory statements. One can only ponder what his motivation is.
At the risk of appearing to be No Trust’s new BFF I cannot comprehend where Nordrum is coming from.
He singles out for attack a handful of individuals (who coincidentally are the same individuals who brought about McIvor’s downfall accordingly to court documents/judgements/reports) but not those who were at Equititrust when all the bad loans were made or when the huge amount of money was borrowed from the banks.
I don’t think anybody disputes that those involved in Equititrust need to be investigated as well as the circumstances surrounding the collapse. I would expect that this is what the Liquidators/Receivers/ASIC are doing. You don't have to read too many of No Trust’s posts to see that he has also pushed for this to happen (even though Nordrum would make you believe otherwise).
From what I can see, those who Nordrum attacks (particularly Whyte and Banton) all came on to the scene way after Equititrust was admitted to the intensive care ward with a terminal disease yet he appears to blame these people for its death. As one would investigate medical staff to ensure adequate care was given to a terminal patient prior to their death, Equititrust execs should be investigated to make sure they did all they could to protect unitholder interests during their tenure. What Nordrum suggests however is akin to charging the medical staff with murder because the patient dies whilst in their care. I am not sure how he blames Whyte and Banton but he manages to.
I see that Nordrum does not push for McIvor’s wife’s conduct to be scrutinised even though she was both an exec and a director and obviously had close ties to McIvor with much to gain from any misconduct. Why is this?
The other thing that I find unusual is that Nordum says the board/execs are to blame for their inaction re McIvor in the dying days. This seems unfair if you read the court judgement to see what they did to try to keep him in check. From what I can gather they:
- sacked him from the board (even though he was the sole shareholder);
- sacked him as an employee of the company (even though he was the founder);
- locked him out of the office (even though he owned the building);
- called in all loans including those of his mates (even though McIvor tried to stop them doing so and threatened to sue them personally);
- When McIvor tried to wrestle back control of the company they applied to court to have an independent receiver appointed on behalf of unitholders (even though they had all resigned by then).
Whilst it may be argued that they did not do enough (and that is up to ASIC/Receivers/Liquidators to determine) it cannot be said they did nothing.
The other interesting thing is that Nordum appears to apportion no blame to the board who made the bad loans or borrowed so much money from the banks in the first place but is quite keen to blame the board in control when the effect of such actions crippled the company. Why is this?
From what I have read and what I am told, one of the most startling aspects of the Equititrust collapse was that McIvor accepted no responsibility for it, even at the end. He apparently blamed everybody but himself. It appears that Nordrum shares this view.
I think I may have a clue where the motivation is coming from... McIvor has become irrelevant, nothing, a bankrupt failure and from his foetal position in a dark cupboard wants some kind of catharsis... This ain't the place for sympathy or delusion... McIvor is to blame for the destruction of investors life savings and as is usual for failures like him takes it out on the receiver and lawyers pursuing him... He used the legal system and insolvency practitioners to persecute people for years and now he has been exposed for the loser he is and is getting everything he did to others back tenfold...
Equititrust was a company constituted under the corporations act and according with statutory obligations had a board of directors and company office holders ALL OF WHOM HAD RESPONSIBILITIES TO US UNIT HOLDERS.
Interestingly enough Nordrum/Mcivor (is that you Conivor? It is you isn't it?) has chosen not t.o smear or sully his staunch supporters namely fellow director and all round egret Honeyman, the personally appointed gate keeper running block for Conivor Hall Chadwick and All Bran and lets not forget the other directors Tricky Hickey and I've taken the money and run Racey Stacey. Now trustee of the Gnat Conivors super fund.
Why don they get a mention I wonder
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?