||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
|Real Estate Investment & Services
Eur.Conv.Dev Share Discussion Threads
Showing 201 to 221 of 225 messages
|"for a cash consideration of EUR1,699,298 to Property Capital Group AD¨"
are any of the following linked to the co. that made the purchase ?!
(ie. selling to themselves....perhaps at lower than the real value)
(cynical ?, moi !)
|.....once a dodgy gang...always a dodgy gang imho
1) there is no reqt. to return any cash to shareholders as cash
2) if the co. is unlisted.....and no cash back to shareholders...then shareholders remain ...trapped...
and the mngmt..esp. Alexander Whammond and Charlemagne...(which has Jim Mellon as a large shareholder) ..can continue to milk the assets as they have over the last X years....
for trust or honourability...I personally give them each 0 out of 10.
(Jim Mellon....look at his deals at Manx Financial
and Charl. and AW in their creation and operation of ECDC
and disgraceful opaque reporting to shareholders
not to mention their blatant and wildly high costs taken each year from the shareholders assets
they have never given a damn for the shareholders imo...
why would that change now ?!
And unlisted they are even further away from the hands of any rules and regulations. Who knows what they will do....or what new rules they will put in place AFTER de-listed.|
|Good news on the revised investment management agreement. Surprised not more interest here.|
|ECDC accounts are a disgrace imo...if not illegal
very little real data.....with pages of blah blah about Rumania and Bulgarian economies and property sale mkts...and for that Charlemagne charge 1M !!
charging 1M is insane....when all the investments are in separate companies...that have own bods that also incur costs.....why or how Charlemagne charge 1M just to report what those other bods have or have not done....is nuts !
but Charlemagne exists to make money......so the ECDC bod (Charlemagne controlled) allow Charlemagne the manager to charge as much as they can....
I asked the co. some basic questions about the accounts and I was told to look at section X of the accounts from 4 years ago....and section Y of accounts from 6 years ago !!
The accounts are required by law to give a true and fair report to shareholders....of all material information.
Not including material data because it is in section X of the accounts from 4 years ago....and section Y of accounts from 6 years ago
does not meet the reqt. to give true and fair reporting.
....it is intentional opaque reporting.
But hey...London mkts...owned by the brokers....Charlemagne is probably one of those owners. So a cesspit of non-control is perhaps to be expected.|
|via the NEF structure...does that mean that Charlemagne can charge 2 times in a row on the same assets !!?
I think so
since they charge at NEF
and they charge 2% of the NAV of ECDC
they get to charge again...imo...on the same assets...
and one could argue that the assets of the shareholders....slowly get moved into the hands of Charlemagne !......and then they maybe declare...sorry ...nothing left !
OCH msg brd. is worth reading for anyone that doesnt know it...
to see how property management can sometimes operate...for benefit of the property managers....and the issuing broker.....and against the shareholders...
Greedfear...you know OCH already I think...|
Thanks for that info.
Ive sold out...you ?
"Charlemagne is managing NEF 3 and it looks like they're charging 1/3 of the NEF 3 revenues for it."
adds to my concerns about high costs charged for managing ECDC by Charlemagne...
total costs are 1M euros....insane.|
|The NEF 3 loan can do a lot of harm to ECDC shareholder value.
The only real asset of value is Cascade. Cascade is currently loaning from NEF 3 at a 27.5% interest rate (compounding) and is really eating up the value.
If this goes on in 4-5 years time the current value (15 million or so) of ECDC's investment in Cascade will be evaporated.
Charlemagne is managing NEF 3 and it looks like they're charging 1/3 of the NEF 3 revenues for it. Can't say for sure they do, but it looks like NEF 3 costs are something like 1/3 of revenues. What kind of costs can a vehicle that only has one asset (a loan to Cascade) have? You tell me.|
|No real surprises in final results, but: DELISTING ???!!!
I really hate delistings.
Must say, I'm surprised the share price is where it is.
I've been in delisting scenarios before and it has always been a total fiasco for the share price.
Maybe this time it will be different....|
some old info
" The development is funded with an investment loan allowing the Company to hold the asset for the long term for a better exit yield."
so, I assume this means that little or no capital repayments are needed in early years...
if Rumania can improve its economy a little and allow the rents to be increased by say 2.5% per year then imo the value of Cascade should increase by 2.5%/yr....1.3ME
5% would be 2.6ME|
|Horndean Eagle.....you bring any HSB with you !??|
|no shares traded...
I would guess that the MM will keep the trading blocked as long as he can
....not selling any...hoping that someone will sell him the shares that he has already sold 2 days ago (price moved up on every trade...indicating imo that they were buys, even though ADVFN listed them as sales)
1 smallish buy and the share price may well pop up...but the MM wont let it happen imo...
couldnt even buy 500 quids worth on-line yesterday while you COULD sell 1.5k worth|
|quote from a property fund for Eastern EUrope
20th Sept 2013
The IMF recently revised the annual economic growth forecast for Romanian
GDP to 2% in 2013 and 2.25% in 2014. Previously, the figures were 1.6%
and 2%. The improved projections were based on 'strong exports in the
first part of the year'. "
- growth projection increased (rather than decreased)
much of Europe would be exstatic to have 2.25 % growth....|
Good news for ECDC shareholders:
"The Romanian real estate market has every chance of becoming important to investment funds in the next 18 months, as the foreign mature markets recover, according to David Tiplea, EY Tax&Law, Business Development Leader Central and South-East Europe. "Aside from the transactions involving individual assets, we are very likely to see the selling of entire portfolios by the big holders of real estate assets which are not developers or investors."
(Source: capital.ro; Date: 2014-02-07; Author: Unspecified"|
I see you started this thread in Dec 2011
good timing !
did you manage to buy any in the dip around then....when the price went to its low of lows ?|
|you cant buy 500 quids worth on line
but you can sell 1500 quids worth on line
imho the MM wants to get stock...and doesnt want to sell ANY
which could infer that this is hopefully going up, at some time|
....looks like a strong hold to me
bit of a shame the disastrous management of ECDC by Mr Whamond and Charlemagne
who have turned maybe 80 M euros into a cap. value of under 10ME.
original investors have been well and truly shafted, or robbed (a good part of their money is now in Charlemagne's pockets via high fees for their incompetent management)
but for those investing now and since the low in 2012.....imo it looks good
Cascade looks to possibly have significant value and noticeably cashflow positive imo
(and personally, I would be happy if Mr Whamond and Charlemagne are replaced....with managers with lower annual cost and with separation between the bod and the inv. manager, as recommended by the Good Governance rules).
One Lesson perhaps
dont invest in any Charlemagne IPO !
INSIDER trading perhaps ?
in Jan. a co. with a Mr Patel as director (and previously with a diff. Patel as co. secretary )
bt. 300-350k pnds worth of ECDC shares
"after" the year end
but before the issuing of accounts
I note that the controllers of ECDC and its inv. manager are all Charlemagne
...specialises in investing in Asia....and has Asian names included in the bod
Patel is an Asian name
A cynic might wonder if 'Patel' now has to scratch Charlemagne's back in return....
or maybe this is C. returning a prev. backscratch or favour.
(it is common in London that if a large investor or 'friend' loses money with one investment (eg. investing in ECDC at the IPO price)....that the managers will try to help that investor out in return later on....in order to maintain that investor as a friend and as a client)
imo the C. fund sold their stake to avoid it being visible to clients of C. and avoid damaging the arriving of new money for 'funds under management'
(imo if new clients saw that C. had turned 80ME into say 10ME at ECDC then they might not be so keen to invest in current funds from C. or to invest so much)
ECDC is traded on a London market, famous for corruption and insider dealing
...so if there was insider trading it wouldnt surprise me...
in the USA they investigate insider trading....and people go to prison...
not in the UK
....looks like a strong hold to me|
You have e-mail!|
|Thank you all for the support thus far! :)|
|I'm not much of a chartist
but ....I can see that the 20, 50 and 200 day sma.s all crossed nicely in 2012
normally taken as signalling the end of the medium/long term down trend that ECDC had been in
and clearly a steady up trend has been in play for a while now