Much has been made of the facts behind Riveroak's bid to become a CPO partner and a lot of misinformation has been put out into the public domain. Some I dealt with in the previous blog "Propaganda War" You can read that here.
To continue the theme of misinformation:
They have Billions, They not into building houses.
Strange then that this is the combined balance sheet they sent TDC when they were asked to provide financial information.
Assets include the property included in each of the 3 funds currently in force and amounts to $221948000 ($222M). So pretty asset rich, however their cash in bank is $1.6M which isn't a huge amount of money.
Their liabilities (money owed to others) shows RO owe $157706291 ($158M) to mortgage companies with a further $67M owed to Investor funds and retained earnings.
Overall they have most of their funds tied up in property with little available for the current project. This asset mix is overstated due to them not removing an item subject to an ongoing court case. Hardly a prudent thing to do.
This last also shows that they are into building seeing as this was an empty building plot with extant planning permission that went pear-shaped because they undermined the foundations of the next door property.
So if, as the pro supporters would have you believe, they aren't into property why does is say Commercial Real Estate?
They ran Dallas Fort Worth Airport:
Really?
They have a AAA+ rating
Do they really? Hardly as I pointed out the A rating paid for because they use the "Better Busines Bureau" which is as a Real Estate company. There is also some muddying of the waters because Orix Aviation has a Moody's rating but this is nothing to do with Riveroak despite a lot of effort in tying the two companies together in the same breath.
Tony Freudmann has been involved in running airports for many years.
This is his bio from Riveroak's website:
However what the bio ignores is the failure at every airport and the shattered lives he left behind during his stripping of their assets during which he managed to pay himself handsomely.
What it also ignores his his ignominious end to his career of Leader of Shropshire Council, Part time judge and a lawyer because he admitted to 27 counts of misappropriation of clients money.
Riveroak have stuck to their guns despite the actions by TDC
Interesting comment this seeing as my last post shows their potential for being profitable is razor thin at best however when you look at Freudmann's prior history and his approach to TDC planners at the end of 2013 as MD of Annax Aviation (He asked them if they would encourage his plans to build 1000 homes on the Northern grass) it seems maybe an airport isn't what he wants. Riveroak state on their website:
So simple mathematics 1000 houses at an average £250K equals £250M now thats much more profitable so why cannot Freudmann be a tad more honest. No wonder the pro supporters would like these points suppressed.
Well argued again. But after a CPO he would have a liability to pay the previous owners out on a profit share of house builds wouldn't he ?
ReplyDeleteBit more complicated than that seeing as he would only get that land "which is to be used as an airport" so I doubt he would get the Northern Grass anyway
ReplyDeleteUnless they sit on the land bank ten years before building ?
ReplyDeleteNo as in the land they CPO must be for the airport and that isn't the Northern Grass
ReplyDeleteSo CPO applies to airport and if there is a change of use after acquisition they would be liable to pay out to Ann Gloag and Co the change of use value add ? But this would not apply to housing on Northern Grass ?
ReplyDeleteThe current land is 720 acres of brownfield owned by Cartner & Musgrave. My understanding the CPO can only apply to that land need for an airport so the Northern Grass would remain in the ownership of C&M as it isn't needed to run the airport.
DeleteAs you know not my subject but Northern Grass would be an adjoining precedent ?
ReplyDeleteI find the blinding hypocrisy of the pro-airport campaign to be unlike anything I have ever encountered. Day after day they casually malign the legal owners of the site, calling them liars and accusing them of deceit. But, as you have illustrated above, the entire pro-airport campaign is built on lies and misrepresentations. I assume they mist be so desperate to reopen the airport that they have convinced themselves that the end justifies the means.
ReplyDeleteAnd day after day those vile creatures, called Pro Supporters, get worse with their abuse. One of them is on the FORS committee. I certainly don't want this nasty ****** representing our seafront.
DeleteI though Orix Aviation, owned by the much bigger Orix Corporation of Japan were one of the investors who met with Gale and who's name had been redacted in the letter that Wells has supposedly seen. Is this not the case ?
ReplyDeleteHaven't a clue you should ask Adem Mehmet
DeleteOk will do
DeleteApparently Orix are rated by Moody's, Fitch and S&P so if they are involved that's pretty strong.
DeleteIf they are then why do they not approach C&M and buy it themselves. Riveroak aren't needed then are they?
DeleteGood point Barry, I've no idea. I think it was the Pickles that first mooted Orix involvement not SMA so perhaps they could shed some light on this if you have connections with them. I suspect it will all be over after scrutiny anyway unless Bayford forms his coalition and appoints RO.
DeleteBarry do you have any later accounts for RO ?
DeleteYou will have to ask RO this is all they have provided TDc and this was October 2014
DeleteI think 20 36 that it is safer to say they are desperate to acquire the 720 acres Barry specified above. The jury is out re their purported plans to operate it long term as an airport.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/commercial-aircraft-disassembly-dismantling--recycling-market-report-2015-2025-525913901.html
DeleteQuite a market.
What is happening with Pleasurama and Parkway?
ReplyDeleteDunno but tory police candidates announced
ReplyDeleteGood meticulous research Barry. I am still in the dark as to Roger Gale's motive in all this. So far as a neutral observer of the commercial case I would say you have reduced the other side's case to almost absurdity. And you have exposed much of their claims as untrue.
ReplyDeleteThe public interest case does not reside only on the immediate commercial criteria. Within the public interest case is security of the realm and it is in that component Roger Gale has elected not to answer.
Dig up the runway and be rid of manston
ReplyDeleteCPRE: Kent 15k housing targets unrealistic:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thanetgazette.co.uk/Campaign-Rural-England-brand-housing-targets/story-28178915-detail/story.html
So where/how did they come from?
Regarding the housing situation I don't think the pros are against housing that RO might propose as long as they open the airport. If you're right Barry and they can make £250m from houses on the Northern Grasses then they will certainly have the money for the airport or be able to borrow against that future receipt
ReplyDeleteMaybe that's their plan. Get TDC to CPO then pay it off once they build the houses. Certainly not going to pay it off running an airport
DeleteExactly Barry, housing is going to happen, it's housing and industrial units or housing and airport one or the other. Housing provides the money for the other thing and housing provides revene to Tdc.
DeleteThe pros are airport fanatics who would agree anything to reopen manston which is why ukip have split and good riddance to both of them
ReplyDelete