Post Reply
441-460 of 540
What makes you guys think all unitholders want to change the manager ? There are thousand of unitholders , the manager can be changed so easily by 50 ,100 or 500 signitures ?
Usually the manager is owned by the sponsor , and manager is the most lucrative asset-light business , if so easy to kick out the manager , then the original founding managers of many other reits with good asset class will not be around today , they should have been kicked out long long time ago !
NAIVE is the WORD !
Well, Mr. Low, you have all the freedom to accuse me of whatever you want? (sent by the Manager? you must be kidding me!)
This is the reason why I discourage people to sign your resolutions (see what I wrote below). Because your irresponsible efforts could jeopardize the whole efforts and hurt the chance for us to remove the Manager. Fighting the Manager is already an uphill battle. If the resolutions cannot convince the unit holders, the lenders and the government, it will fail and many people will bu hurt by it.
" I don' t understand why Mr. Low refused to wait for another 2 weeks to iron out the details and insisted on his timeline to push his half-baked resolutions. We cannot afford to have a failure on the first attempt and we won' t even have another chance, since it is such an uphill battle. So, let' s wait for another 2 weeks while we iron out the details, before we present a workable plan that will give confidence to all the lenders, unit holders and the government."
So, why don' t wait for a while (1-2 weeks) so that we can iron out a much better plan? You kept telling me that " you have promised a lot of people" . I don' t understand why these people cannot wait for another 2 weeks. There could be a lot of different possible reasons, but I am not here to speculate.
Last point, if you want, we can still work together. It will enhance the chance. However, we need to have a workable plan and I am open to discussion. The Trustee is just not going to solve the problem for us. So, take some time to work out an executable plan so that everyone can benefit.
Yee Kan
ACTIVIST_SPEAKS ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 16:00) Posted:
|
Agree, remove the irresponsible manager first before we talk about other plan or resolution. We don' t even cross the bridge yet so why worry about what to do next.
Fangqq ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 15:56) Posted:
|
It is not about defensive. You will understand why if you have followed his threads closely. There is no need for me to justify his actions but I just feel that it is unfair to him. I do not know them before until they initiated to remove the irresponsible manager than I gave my full support to them.
jackson5 ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 15:30) Posted:
|
If MAS allows unitholders to remove the Manager, MAS must have a plan in place to ensure it is properly executed.
I am more concern that Unitholders like us do not have the expertise, yet want to lead/dictate in the execution of the resolution.
kohyeekan ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 14:23) Posted:
|
Is there a reason why you need to be so defensive ?
ACTIVIST_SPEAKS ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 14:52) Posted:
|
I just request for an explanation. I didn' t say there is any hidden agenda. This is not only your efforts. this is everyone' s efforts please.
Please don' t sideline my main concerns for Mr. Low' s resolutions: 1) There is no executable plan, which will bring chaos to the REIT and harm the unit holders. 2) Why there is an urgent need to push for the half-baked resolutions and want an EGM by Feb 15. Whether there is any hidden agenda only Mr. Low know. But so far, I didn' t hear a good explanations to these 2 questions.
ehclim ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 13:55) Posted:
|
I am fully agree with you. We are the victims of the irresponsible manager and you stand up to fight for our miserable small retail unit holders. Yet out of the blue, you are being accused of unwarranted remarks. Our objective is to boot out the irresponsible manager and what hidden agenda that Mr. Koh is talking about. Let stand together to fight for our common goal or otherwise we will not succeed.
ACTIVIST_SPEAKS ( Date: 01-Feb-2017 22:57) Posted:
|
It is a naive thinking that MAS allows unitholders option to remove the Manager and yet MAS does not have a system in place to ensure that it is executed in an orderly manner.
kohyeekan ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 12:01) Posted:
|
Cheng hu says " em sih wa yi tai chi" .
kohyeekan ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 12:01) Posted:
|
This is a very naive thinking. The government cannot determine who is the Manager for a private company. There is a huge difference between a good and a bad Manager and the government is not going to be responsible for that. The governemnt is not going to help you to sell the properties. There is a huge difference between selling at a high price and a low price and the government is not going to help you with them. There must be someone we trust to monitor these processes. If not, you will lose everything and the price of the units will tank to almost nothing.
Fangqq ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 11:17) Posted:
|
My understanding is that they will leave immediately. For my version of the resolutions, we will keep the Property Manager to run the daily routine business of the REIT. The Property Manager is usually a subsidiary company of the Manager. However, I take advantage of the fact that they are separate entity by laws, so that we can remove the Manager, to strip their power to make any major decision for the REIT (eg buying or selling properties), but at the same time ensure that the REIT will be run properly. This will buy time for the Special Committee to find a suitable replacement, and the solutions proposed by the Special Committee need to be approved by the unit holders as a whole...
nngeeh ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 11:35) Posted:
|
Does anyone know what happen the moment we vote out the manager? Will they leave immediately .... just like IHC where the directors were discharge immediately the moment the vote to remove them went thru?
If yes ... what will happen the moment the manager got voted out ..... no managers until we found someone? ...... can' t imagine what will happen to the share price if that happens...
Does anyone has the knowledge on this matter? I won' t want to trust anyone else that we have no knowledge of their background to just take over ...
Fangqq ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 11:17) Posted:
|
We should just exercise our rights to remove the Manager and leave the execution of the resolution to the professionals.
It is not unitholders responsibility to find the new Manager.
MAS allows unitholders the rights to remove the Manager. Are you saying that after the resolution approved by unitholders, MAS then tell us that you are not abe to remove the Manager because you do not have a plan?
kohyeekan ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 09:30) Posted:
|
I totally agree with you! That' s why I haven' t started to collect the signatures yet. I am in communication with people, trying to have some good people on board. However, it is very difficult, and the process takes time. Also, the design of my resolutions is that there will be a Special Committee tasked to find a good replacement. The eventual solution needs to be approved by the unit holders through an EGM, not just by individuals. That will make sure that we can find the best person that the unit holders feel comfortable. The Special Committee can even renegotiate with the current Manager, although that might be the least favorable situation. That said, if everything fails, we still need to divest, and honestly, that is still better than 38 cents we will get now.
nngeeh ( Date: 01-Feb-2017 23:20) Posted:
|
Most likely consequence is that we are not able to remove the Manager without a plan. The government is not going to help to find a solution for us. Also, how good is the manager is very important. We cannot simply just find someone!
Fangqq ( Date: 02-Feb-2017 02:25) Posted:
|
" If we remove the manager now ... and without any management ... it' ll be even worst"
To remove the Manager means we want it to be replaced by a new Manager. If MAS allows unitholders to remove the Manager, it must be aware of the consequences, do you think MAS allows current Manager to leave without a replacement?
MAS requires REIT managers to be licensed.
Hi Mr Low & Mr Koh, I' ll like to thank you both for your initiative to improve the values of this REIT. I sold my share when they announced the rights issue, but bought it back after it dropped to unbelievable value. After reading both your comments, frankly, i have more concerns and questions.
We are not happy that the manager choose to continue to buy more properties (than selling) when the rental market is going soft and they are buying property price at its current market value (if they bought at a steep discount ... perhaps we could understand). Raising Rights knowing that it' ll cause the share price to drop further. The price/NAV keep dropping to unbelievably low value ... and yet they took the initiative to buy more .... which cause the price to drop even more ....
However, i' m more agreeable with Mr Koh' s view that if we remove the manager now ... and without any management .... it' ll be even worst. If you look at Croesus REIT which internalised the management, they raise fund to do so. It didn' t seem to be that simple. However, if we choose to form a new committee, how can we be very sure that this new committee can perform better .... if you look at Cambridge, their DPU is also dropping ... and if the market is really soft ... even if the new committee is form, can they perform better? Do these members really have the experience in this line? The shortiests are waiting for reason to start shorting this REIT again..
If the market is soft, i' m not expecting the DPU to improve much ... but i' m definitely hope that Price/ NAV will go to a more reasonable value .... and the managers stop buying properties (unless it' s really at an attractive price like 60% off the market value) .... and try to sell at least 40% of the current properties at value to bring the debt down .... and stop raising fund.
I think we should really sort this out first before asking to remove the manager .... if we can get support from some big organization like what happen to IHC where Oxley and OUE limited sees value... it' ll be even better .. the Sabana' s Price/ NAV is also really attractive now ... .
This is just my thought.