Jump to content

Baghdad Riverboating


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 374
  • Created
  • Last Reply

B4,

 

Any way you cut it,Bush has had a very good week,i for one may have underestimated the man,my expectations now are that we will not see a crash until interest rates start to rise,the Fed and all their lackeys can run around telling anyone who will listen that rates will remain low,but the amount of stimulus the Fed has applied to the economy will prove to be their undoing,they will be undone by their own success.Easy credit has fired a speculative frenzy,interest rates are gunna be the trigger to send it spiralling out of control.

Bad news is a bears worst enemy,that just gives the Fed the excuse to jam,lots of good news is required until they have to raise rates to cool the economy,it has started here in OZ,with devastating results,it will happen there sooner or later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest libertas
B4,

 

Does this mean that you are jointly and severally liable (just like a partnership) if for example,you own ERF (Enerplus Energy Trust), or PVX (Provident Energy Trust ) shares and those companies are sued?

 

TIA

The answer is, nobody knows. It has never been tested. It is not clear that the trusts provide the same levels of protection that a common shareholder has. On the other hand it is not clear that it does not. Clear?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

B4,

 

Does this mean that you are jointly and severally liable (just like a partnership) if for example,you own ERF (Enerplus Energy Trust), or PVX (Provident Energy Trust ) shares and those companies are sued?

 

TIA

The answer is, nobody knows. It has never been tested. It is not clear that the trusts provide the same levels of protection that a common shareholder has. On the other hand it is not clear that it does not. Clear?

ConfusedAss Always :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best example is that there are tons of mortgage trusts, Reit's hotel trusts etc. Most are set up with a managing partner and limited partners (i.e. the shareholders) the limited partners liability is limited to their holdings i.e their shares. The beauty of a trust is that the profits minus the management fee are distributed yearly to the shareholders both of whom receive favorable tax treatment. The profits are distributed in the form of a dividend. In GG's case with zero debt, huge reserves and proven management i believe IF they chose to go that route the share price would triple. Trade Safe!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest libertas
The best example is that there are tons of mortgage trusts, Reit's hotel trusts etc. Most are set up with a managing partner and limited partners (i.e. the shareholders) the limited partners liability is limited to their holdings i.e their shares. The beauty of a trust is that the profits minus the management fee are distributed yearly to the shareholders both of whom receive favorable tax treatment. The profits are distributed in the form of a dividend. In GG's case with zero debt, huge reserves and proven management i believe IF they chose to go that route the share price would triple. Trade Safe!

brian4 just remember that you are talking about Canadian (and Ontario) law here. These income trusts are a unique item. They are not partnerships and they are not share corporations. The liability issues are unclear at best. Legislative action has been pending for some time to clarify the situation, but to the best of my knowledge there has been no resolution. It is certainly true that the income trust structure is popular and there is probably little risk.

 

Income Trust legislation

 

More

Link to comment
Share on other sites

B4,

 

Does this mean that you are jointly and severally liable (just like a partnership) if for example,you own ERF (Enerplus Energy Trust), or PVX (Provident Energy Trust ) shares and those companies are sued?

 

TIA

The answer is, nobody knows. It has never been tested. It is not clear that the trusts provide the same levels of protection that a common shareholder has. On the other hand it is not clear that it does not. Clear?

I don't know if the question was addressed to US citizens or Canadian.

 

Under the US law, in general, as long as the trust distributed all its earnings and was more of an asset holding company than an operating company, it would probably qualify as a trust under US law. Income might be ordinary income and not dividends (although dividends now get special treatment anyway). So there is not a great benefit to US shareholders.

 

There are even possible adverse tax effects to US citizens. If it is determined that this is primarily a bullion trust with bullion held outside of the US, long term capital gains from selling your interest may all be taxable at a 28% rate (and not at lesser special rates).

 

I guess all the details will be eventually spelled out in a prospectus. It would be preferable to most US investors if it was considered an investment company under US laws, like CEF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Roger Arnold is right and the 10-year will be pushed down to 2.5% yield in 2004, as the Fed will be buying any and all paper related to keeping the housing bubble afloat.

Wndy or anyone,

 

Do you know anything about Roger's < 5% mortgage?

I mean if someone you know has got mtg from him then what was their experience?

 

I spoke to him about 3 months ago and he said that the mortgage cannot

be refinanced for 3 years. His rate that time was about 4.75%.

 

I want to know what other catch there could be.

 

Thanks

You can refinance or sell. However there is a penalty 3%/2%/1% depending on whether it is in lst/2nd/3rd year.

 

I don't think he is still offering this. The deal was through Key Bank. What they are offering may not be significantly lower than current convetional rates and may not be worth doing.

 

They do a lot of their loans through Access National Mortgage, which is ok, but Ditech may be better on rates and closing costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Investment Trusts -- "Fund managers told him, "We're not going to touch these babies because (if) anyone decides to sue, we're on the hook," McEwen said at the conference, which was broadcast over the Internet."

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...79095&mid=47660

 

Anyone -- what does this mean???

Confused-- Owning a unit in an income trust is not like owning a share in a corporation.

 

A corporation is a legal entity. It is liable to its creditors. So if you own a share of a corporation and it defaults on payment to someone, the corporation is liable, not the shareholder.

 

Until legislation is passed in Ontario (which regulates the Toronto Stock Exchange),

the unit holders of an Income Trust are jointly and severally liable to creditors. The Trust is not a legal entity, apart from its unitholders. Each is totally individually liable for all of the Trust's indebtedness, subject to a right to claim contribution from his or her fellow unitholders.

 

As most Income Trusts are profitable, the problem is largely theoretical. But....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weak December is normally followed by the Christmas present time. Let see what Santa bring this year.

 

Bears got to read Doug Noland every week. It?s gold mine and it?s totally free. Don?t forget everyone dismissed him with March reflation warning and Money supply idea now.

 

End result is weak dollar.

post-7-1070094575.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Stool Pigeons Wire Message Board? Tell a friend!
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • ×
    • Create New...