detailed rebuttal of cleo 1234

Rebuttal of Cleo 1234

You said under PXU:

“In my business career I have always been able to put myself in 'the other guys position' and then work out my strategy.

Have the PIGS done that? I think not.

If I was a Paperlinx Director and the PIGS were causing all of this bad publicity, running me down and basically bullying me, would I pay a distribution. Probably not.

Do you respond well to a bully?

Do you respond well to threats of being wound up?

I know I don't.

Why not take a deep breath and THINK!!!

The intelligent way through this does not involve being a bully, shaming Directors or trying to put the company into administration.”

REBUTTAL

Cleo, I rebut all of the above by encouraging you to follow your own sound advice - Walk a mile in our shoes. Research the facts.

Everything you say is correct if it was true. The facts, as opposed to some ill-informed commentary here, fail to support your assertions.

PaperlinxPIGS and SuX want just one outcome – proper recognition of our position.

There has never been one suggestion of winding up PaperlinX. If you believe otherwise, kindly provide evidence else please retract this claim.

Gaby and I didn’t arrive at this position overnight. If you read the material published by PaperlinX and its officers, there can be only one conclusion. I’ll let you do the research.

If you think we’ve been so ghastly, ponder these questions:

1. Why hasn’t PaperlinX closed me down?

2. Why hasn’t James Orr challenged me over creating his nick name “No New News” man?

3. Why hasn’t James Orr challenged me over PaperlinX in Denial at http://www.paperlinx-sux.com/2011/11/paperlinx-in-denial.html

4. Why hasn’t James Orr challenged me over Orr is Awesome at http://www.paperlinx-sux.com/p/orr-is-awesome.html?

5. Why hasn’t James Orr challenged me over Sad Email Exchanges at http://www.paperlinx-sux.com/p/exchanges-of-email.html

6. Why didn’t PaperlinX challenge me over “7 PaperlinX stumbles yet again, oh dear” published at http://www.paperlinx-sux.com/2012/01/orbis-vs-paperlinx.html

7. Why didn’t PaperlinX challenge me over “8 More debunking of Marchant’s vision of accelerated diversification” ” published at http://www.paperlinx-sux.com/2012/01/orbis-vs-paperlinx.html

WHY? Because they are all based on evidence and the first defence against defamation is TRUTH.

Some other questions for you to ponder:

1. Why did the Responsible Entity agree to meet three representatives of PIGS, and provide such a high-powered line up of attendees at the meeting?

2. Why did Christopher Joye write and Eurek Report publish “Attack of the Hybrids” on November 21, 2011? http://www.paperlinx-sux.com/2011/11/attack-of-hybrids-by-christopher-joye.html

3. Why did ASIC issue a public warning to consumers about hybrids and notes on November 24, 2011? http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/byheadline/11-270MR+ASIC+warns+consumers+about+hybrid+securities+and+notes?openDocument

4. Why did Treasury issue a discussion paper on December 13, 2011 titled:

“Development of the Retail Corporate Bond Market: Streamlining Disclosure and Liability Requirements”

It specifically includes hybrids. Full details available here. http://www.treasury.gov.au/contentitem.asp?NavId=&ContentID=2266

5. Why do I get info from whistle-blowers, keen to right some of the “alleged wrongs” within PaperlinX?

6. Why do so many aggrieved or confused PXUPA holders seek our help?

7. Why
8. Why
9. Why, I could go on however I guess everyone gets the message.

Because things are seriously wrong with the way hybrids generally are created, sold and then managed by issuers, and not only by PaperlinX. For further info on attacks on other issuers, I suggest you read the piece by Christopher Joye.

Why the need for a Government discussion paper?

Developing the retail corporate debt market is a whole of Government Issue; aimed to address things like:

1. In 2011, 60% of OZ corporate debt was raised offshore;

2. Most self-funded retirees are foolishly over weight in more the volatile asset classes of equities and property;

3. Raising debt via hybrids and notes is overly expensive for corporate Australia; and

4. Addressing ASIC’s concerns.

Time permitting, I intend making a submission using PXUPA as my example of the obvious deficiencies that affect all parties, just not investors. I’ll try to be even handed!


IF YOU THINK I’ve bullied or shamed the directors, I assure you that I’ve acted with restraint. There are things known to me, or in the process of being validated, that will surprise many people if I’m ever game enough to publish them. I hope I don’t have to.

As for the balance of your commentary below, it is your usual colourful banter that I don’t intend to dignify with a response.

I look forward to your retractions in due course.

END of REBUTTAL

I hold PXUPA and have been trading them for a few months. Most of my profits are on a PIGS back, so to speak.

I look at the way this campaign is being run and I don't see a lot of card carrying Mensa members involved.

When I see some intellect in this action, I will support it, until then, being JEWish, I can't support PIGS!!!