I should clarify some of my earlier comments as this thread gets...

I should clarify some of my earlier comments as this thread gets longer.

My reference to the "Jewish dudes" purchasing some loans as part of the receivership / liquidation at $0.07 in the dollar was to illustrate that the BEN loan book provisions are way lower than they should be.

Of course packaged loans come in all shapes and types and I am not suggesting that BEN's book is worth this amount, just an amount lower than is currently provided for given the amount and percentage that are > 90 days overdue.

Further however, BEN purchased loans from a solvent GTP / GSF as part of a normal securitisation process for which they paid GSF a fee.

BEN's loans were purchased from GTP at 100 cents in the dollar.

The earlier points about disclosure I think are good ones.

I am sure there is a legal discussion about whether GSF was acting as an agent for BEN given GSF "approved" the loans using BEN's lending criteria.

I also think the early loans that BEN acquired are totally fine.

My specific comments relate to the 2007 and 2008 (there were even some 2009 loans in which the MIS project did not proceed but BEN is still calling for the loan repayments) which as was quoted earlier are a tangled complicated web.

For the record, I owe BEN and the "Jewish dudes" some money, a point I do not dispute. How much is the question and that will only be answered once I am certain everyone was acting as they should have during the whole mess.