Originally posted by joda
This is absolutely confusing and most unfortunate considering the jouney over the last 18mths.
The thing is you would think I would understand this world. I have been in the Collection/PDL world since it began in the 80's and transacted millions is debt sale alone e.g. sales as far back as Repcol when it was in business, for several major market players in debt sale and contingency debt.
Having closely looked at both sides of the argument I have come down on the side of Collection House.
Why - because Levi in his latest letter 1/ makes no future comments about what changes he would make and 2/ nor does he provide enough detail and understanding of the business model to convince me that there is substance to his various issues.
SteveSage (as an example) on the other hand, makes a very good argument about several actions taken by the company that are in no way short term benefits to Directors or result in recent inflated profits in my estimation. Raising amortisation rates is a classic example, it improves the buffer should purchases prove harder to collect, as is getting back on the front foot buying more ledger debt. These actions take potential profit off the immediate table.
I am also pretty sure that with the recent focus on analytics, automation and the staff accountability with their nose to the grind stone as they balance compliance will and is clearly driving improved productivity as per the $'s collected.
Conclusion - because its what I would do and therefore it makes sense to me.
So no longer will I sit on the fence - as a top 100 shareholder I have put my money where my mouth is and just voted my proxies 100% in favour of the company position.
Can someone post a link to Lev's letter which went out to shareholders (or post the contents of the letter on HC).
