Offers for readers

The comment stream

Recent comments

Join the Interest community to be a registered commenter so you can:
- Edit your comments
- Avoid the CAPTCHA
- Vote on comments
Register Here

Already registered? log back in here ..

Forgotten your password? No problem! Click here

Finance sector jobs

Senior Legal Counsel
At NAB, it's all about our people reaching their full potential. And that means we drive t...more
Australia
Senior Financial Planner (Business) - Bondi - NSW - NAB
Senior Financial Planning professional to join our Business Banking team in Bondi....more
Australia
Senior Manager, Operational Risk & Monitoring
At NAB, it's all about our people reaching their full potential. And in MLC and NAB Wealth...more
Australia
Corporate Recovery Senior – Australia, Audit experience welcomed
Successful applicants will have the opportunity to work with this leading Australian Advis...more
Australia
efinancialcareers.com

Reader poll

Who do you think should be appointed Reserve Bank Governor to replace Alan Bollard when he retires in September?

Choices

Perpetual tells Hanover, United investors that it's uncertain about many things

Posted in News

Perpetual Trust, which is a trustee for investors in United Finance and Hanover Finance, has told investors there are significant risks and uncertainties around Allied Farmers' bid for a debt-for-equity swap, but that there were uncertainties around other scenarios. Perpetual declined to make a recommendation one way or the other for investors due to vote on the proposal on December 16. Here is Perpetual's letter to investors and some of its comments below.

Perpetual Trust chief executive, Louise Edwards, said no matter how investors voted there are significant risks and uncertainties. "There are three scenarios which investors need to consider. "The first is that the Allied Farmers proposal is accepted by investors. The second is investors vote against the proposal and continue under the current debt restructuring arrangements. The third is the Allied Farmers proposal is voted against but Hanover and its subsidiaries eventually go into receivership. "Regrettably, no matter what investors collectively decide, there are significant potential downsides, risks and uncertainties for them in each scenario. "In the case of the Allied Farmers proposal, the recent financial performance and financial position of Allied Farmers has been varied and the outlook for Allied Farmers is not certain, despite the benefits of the transaction identified by Grant Samuel in its report, including increased equity. "There is no certainty as to what price the Allied Farmers' shares will trade and it is possible, especially in the short-term, that the share price may trade at a material discount to the price at which the Allied Farmers shares are issued to investors. Any upside is totally dependent on the market price of the shares received, and on any dividends, for which no projections are given. "However, the directors of Hanover Finance and United Finance have advised that full repayment under the debt restructure that investors agreed to last year is unlikely. There has been a significant write down in asset values since the vote and the forecast payout that management now believes is possible has been reduced. The timing of recoveries is also uncertain. "The third scenario is that the Allied Farmers proposal is voted down and Hanover and its subsidiaries default. There are currently no defaults under the debt restructure. If the companies were to default a potential outcome is that the companies would be placed in receivership. In that scenario and the Allied Farmers proposal, the two principal shareholders, Messrs Hotchin and Watson are relieved of their obligation to back investors with their $20 million pledge (except where receivership is caused by the default of the principal shareholders). In a market of falling property values, the outlook for investors is uncertain. "Our letter aims to provide an overview of the transaction and observations from the Grant Samuel report, and to highlight our areas of concerns and various matters which we believe investors should take into account when making their decision. "Our role is not to advise investors on how they should vote. That is a question for investors based on their individual circumstances. We are seeking to make sure that investors have sufficient information they need to make a decision in their best interests. I re-iterate that this is a complex decision and a significant departure to what investors originally invested in and a shift away from the debt restructuring plan that investors voted for in December last year. If in doubt investors should seek independent advice from someone they trust." Perpetual Trust is trustee for the secured debenture stockholders in United Finance Limited, the subordinated unsecured noteholders in Hanover Finance and the secured bond holders in Hanover Capital.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment in the box on the right or click on the "'Register" link at the bottom of the comments. Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making these comments.

2 Comments

I think the investors should

I think the investors should opt for receivership and dissolution of the Evil Empire.

They should vote for Stat

They should vote for Stat Man. Receivership will just be a fire sale, with the receivers taking their creme, and investors will be lucky to get back much at all.

At least if the ALlied bid fails, the directors will be forced to cough up another 20 million in cash, which could be a significant amount at the end of the day.

If they vote for the allied bid, the shares will no plummet, as many people try to get what they can, and wipe their hands of it. Who would actually want to buy the shares, unless they were really cheap. They may even end up getting taken over, and investors will be forced to sell the shares at almost nothing.