Does any one know how much of the fund managment business relates to loans to external parties versus loans to MFS related companies and holding direct property?
Key in all of this is to keep the "advisors" from becoming administrators or receivers in any of the funds.
Time fixes many problems in property so the more time they have to work out problems, finish properties, work with borrowers who are behind the better the position.
Retail investors would rather if given a choice take a reduced return if a solution is presented that protects capital.
Trustee's saying they have appointed advisors always makes me wonder what they have been doing as they are "supposed to be on the bridge making sure ship is been steered correctly"
I still think FM business needs to be bundled up and partner brought in to provide comfort to retail investors. Without their confidence you have no FM business.
Looking at structure there would still be some residual assets held I assume.
MFS
mfs limited
