GRR Valuation, page-111

So funny.

If an entity has a "GST Income" of $75,000 or more, it must register for GST. So from this, we can assume that Pacific International, whoever they are, does little if any actual business, anywhere. Correct? Therefore they seem to be a "shell company".

This is not a case of someone from overseas having an address in Australia. Pacific International is an Australian company, with an ABN. Does anyone know anything about them? Just an interested bystander here, myself.

As for the dividend, you were all shouting at each other a few weeks ago about how unfair it was that GRR was not paying out 25% of free cash flow. It was getting so heated, I though the Riot Squad was going to be called. As there were a few comments again just recently about this, I thought I'd throw in a few thoughts that I don't think any of you had considered.

My first thought was twisted around when it came back. All I was suggesting was that most of you HC readers, who probably hold GRR within your SMSFs would see dividends, coming back to you as Dividend + Fully Franked Amount as more valuable, per share, than Shagang does, as they only receive the Dividend. Seemed like a self evident truth to me. But somehow it came back as the Politics Of Envy, or something. Envy has nothing to do with my argument. If you are in the situation of holding GRR in your SMSF and you are in Pension mode, then the whole Franking Credit is yours to keep, in addition to the whole of the dividend, yes? Major win for you.

I am well aware of the reasons for Shagang's interest in Grange. I also know they don't trade or sell their shares. But some day, probably outside my remaining lifespan, Shagang will be a seller. There are a number of possible reasons for that. When that day finally happens, they will leave with a wave, and no CGT to pay. Speaking of their shareholding, how is it that a single entity is holding way more than the 20% takeover threshold, yet do not have to make a takeover offer. The 20% rule is there just for this reason, to stop one shareholder holding undue influence in the Boardroom.