Morning guys,
If this turns out as it is looking likely to, then you are attacking and angry at the wrong people.
Glaucus and Hot Tuna are not the people responsible for this. It squarely lies at Frank Wilson's feet and, again if this progresses at it appears to be, then it is my opinion that he may be guilty of more than just non-disclosure.
Again, if allegations are indeed borne out, then the Board is also culpable of negligence and falling under the cult of personality.
Glaucus and others, followed by the Australian media have certainly uncovered a number of irregularities and that may, in time, result in more serious allegations than simply negligence and non-disclosure. For example the matter of how the institutional sales figures may have been massaged past the $100m level to secure the $50m of withheld bond funds. I note that this is media speculation for now.
Based on the fact that QIN doesn't generate sufficient operating cash flows (from cash based management fees and product sales) to meet its planned capex/ opex for the next four years, their access to capital markets and institutional investors is critical.
Judging from the substantial shareholder notices I think that it must be considered improbable that QIN will secure material institutional investments in its 2017 plantation offering before 30th June.
Likewise, I would also think that there is an ever increasing risk that the Put Option will be exercised at the first available opportunity by QIN's counterparty as the risk of insolvency increases.
Whilst I have lost money on QIN, I at least listened to the bear case instead of dismissing it and this has saved me considerable additional losses.
Whilst the shorters provided the 'seed', QIN has certainly provided fertile soil for it to germinate and grow in.
When looking at companies such as ORE, SYR, WSA, VOC, etc it may be wise to consider why these companies are so heavily shorted and what the alternative thesis may be.
Regardless; good luck to the longs. I sincerely hope that something is salvageable here. It's also a good lesson for James Cornell subscribers; despite his successes, he isn't infallible.
Cheers
John
Expand
