The other side would like to think that I was
still involved with the Rivkin group probably because they would like
to make repeated references to “associated with convicted insider
trader” or the like. But I am not associated with Rivkin, nor has the
requisition come from interests associated with Rivkin.
A significant number of investors that acquired units in IWI were subscribers to The Rivkin Report but they have now sold.
My firm has in the past provided shareholder activism services to the publishers of The Rivkin Report. This
included Securenet which had traded around 80-90 cents for an extended
period before being taken over by a US crowd at a significant premium
to asset backing (cash $1.54).
I do hope that we again achieve a
similar outcome and enhanced value for the wine fund investors,
particularly after Berren has failed in its more recent attempts to
shift considerable unitholder value to other people’s pockets – those
proposed beneficiaries of unitholder value not being unitholders!
respect to disclosing any further particulars about the proposed
Responsible Entity, Condor Asset Management Limited, all I will say is
that the Duke of Wellington didn’t disclose his battle plan to Napoleon
in advance of the Battle of Waterloo.
Until Berren releases the
Notice of Meeting I do not propose to outline to a Board of a
Responsible Entity that is devoid of ideas our plans in advance of when
we have to present that information to unitholders. We believe that
Berren will endeavour to obfuscate the calling of a meeting of members
in an effort to prevent unitholders from exercising their right to
consider the appointment of an alternative Responsible Entity.