court hearing, page-10

Re the description of BCSCA. I wholeheartedly agree with all the previous comments. My interest in this matter is that I have cloe friends who frankly fell into a trap but one which I believe should not have been placed & to which ample bait was added by Mr Rowe & his spruiking of the ROI even as the value plummeted & as Macq quietly dumped their share of an investment which they had only just been party to promoting. These so called "units" should have been described as instalment receipts, as in T3. If you look at the care taken over the original CBA pp float (see my earlier post) and compare with the way in which these were traded (& the lack of health warnings in the Rowe post float comments), the contrast is horrific. Sure, the investors upon whom Macquarie et al happily dumped their holdings should have known better, as should the naive and elderly who continue to succumb to the likes of David Tweed and his lowball share offers. Yet if we are to encourage widespread shareholding and financial independence (as we must if the state pension reliance is not to explode), then Mum & Dad investors must be protected from the greed and crap that unfortunately passes as just the workings of the free market.