Ok ... then ... I will repost with an edited point 3. I have included the relevant paragraph from the Half Year Report that relates to the rent.
So ... the question is ... who does own the property at, 24 Birriga Road, Bellevue Hill? Is AGMPL leasing the property? AGMPL provide the service.
AGMPL is a company owned and controlled by Pnina Feldman according to the HY report.
As a refresher -
the rent costs went from $54,000 to $84,000 in the space of 12 months. (HY Report). Fact is, whoever owns that house might be doing very well. Unless of course the increase is going to AGMPL solely and not the "owner". Either way - QBL holders are paying and have been for some time now.
My previous post.
Evening Daniel.
A reasonable post with respectful overtones. Thanks.
And good on you for having the 'courage of your convictions'.
However, irrespective of how much some around here want to simply wish away the numerous points made about this company - those points will not simply disappear by an act of wishing or, burying one's head firmly in the sand.
1. This company, on the available evidence, has not produced commercial returns of any significance in 10 years. Will this change?
2. This company pays out hundreds of thousands of dollars to entities related to directors and has been doing so for many years. Will this change?
3. "
AGMPL also provided suitable fully serviced offices to the Group at its Sydney offices at 24 Birriga Road, Bellevue Hill, which includes use of office space, kitchen, daily cleaning, and essential office infrastructure, including telephones, fax, printer, broadband internet connections and suitable office furniture" (HY Report)
4. This company appears wholly reliant on funding supplied by shareholders (CR's) and or the placement of additional shares to fund its 'activities'. It seems to me that it has no other visible means of income. When will this change?
5. This company, on the available evidence, grossly overestimated it's proposed CR by 54%. To date, I am yet to see, what I would regard, as a rational explanation for why they got this so wrong?
6. The directors of this company are yet to declare whether they will take up their full entitlement in the impending CR. When will this change?
7. This company has, in my view, failed to live up to its own projections regarding its bauxite mining program. If they are done with bauxite then just come out and tell people. See my last post on the port infrastructure at Mourilyan. That was actually hilarious - in a very sad sort of way.
8. This company has not yet completed the acquisitions that it promoted in the 'transformation' announcement two months ago.
9. The upcoming CR for the transforming 'acquisitions' will cause significant dilution of the wealth of existing holders. And no one seems to care. Three billion shares plus and no targeted questions - seriously!
10. This company has no independent board chair. Will this change?
And on and on and on the list goes. I appreciate that my views cause disquiet for some. The facts are sometimes uncomfortable particularly if one is caught in the seductive trap of '
confirmation bias'.
If, what is noted in the 'pro posts' of holders fills you with confidence, then good luck to you.
"...
but it's probably time to stop whipping a dead horse."
Lastly ... that is precisely what a few of us have been trying to tell many around here for some time. I believe that it is, indeed, a veritable
dead horse! And every pro poster seems blind to its current state of ill health!
Enjoy your week.
See you all in October.
And good luck.
