Well said - It seems Governance issues still prevail at PAC....

First 11 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
tocqueville

88 Posts.

4

02/09/19

14:47

Post #: 40277991
Share
Originally posted by muscat: ↑

I agree that Carlisle is a good investment. I have not looked at any detail. I could not see what the contribution of Victory Park was in these results. It was such a large investment and the expectations were that it would generate $9.5m. There was a reference to an accrual of $3m but there was a reference to a $2m accrual at December so was the $2m paid or was the $3m inclusive of the $2 from December?

The things that caught attention were: the cost of running the corporate continues to increase at a level which reduces the leverage. This needs to be addressed as the management expense ratio is too high. If this business was in the hands of a PE firm it would be managed so much more efficiently. The write down in Seizert is worrying and indicates that the expectations for this business are negative with a further amount to pay the founder. This has been a destroyer of shareholder capital. The additional payment will add to another impairment in 2020. The Nereus investment has been on the market since November and still no buyers. This suggests no buyers or low offers. The notes in the release again highlight the USD25 million to be paid in two years. The net cash does not include the eventual payment of this so it is artificially inflated.

Based on the presentation showing net assets, interestingly not net intangible assets, the amount of cash and the share price at 30 June, it looks like an invitation for someone to make an offer.

Expand

Well said - It seems Governance issues still prevail at PAC. Smoke and mirrors spring to mind.

We had the opportunity to listen in on the PAC conference call and were more interested to hear about the Company’s investment in Victory Park (VPC). I don't think It produced any cash, as promised, for the year for the benefit of PAC's shareholders. Looks like it has turned into a cumulative payment?

Like Ord Minnett, to some extent, we share the same concerns regarding PAC’s investment in VPC.
We note when the VPC investment was made Paul Greenwood told shareholders - VPC found PAC. PAC did not find VPC.
VPC was to be, a purely passive investment. Little involvement required from PAC.
The expected return on investment approximately 10% (Ord Minnett mentioned in the conference call the amount of $9.5m which was expected to turn up from this investment).
PAC is now saying something quite different about the investment in VPC. It seems the VPC investment was more complex than what PAC shareholders were told.
We foolishly thought the VPC investment would deliver a return from the top line similar to that coming from GQG!
It seems the investment in VPC, is inextricably market linked to a great degree, and therefore hardly passive.

Moreover, PAC mentioned Seizert was facing (serious) headwinds. May cost $700,000 in lost income?

PAC controls Seizert - We have asked PAC, what is it doing to support and restore Seizert, from both (or more) marketing and product development?

Furthermore, PAC states in its Appendix 4E for the period 30 June 2019 as follows….
"Further significant information needed by an investor to make an informed assessment of the entity’s financial performance and financial position is contained in the attached Unaudited Financial Report for the Year ended 30 June 2019”.
In that regard, nothing could be further from the truth. PAC’s shareholders once again, are being presented with messy financial accounts which fail the transparency test.
PAC Price at posting: $5.95 Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
2 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply