Regulators Refusing to Act - Hyflux & Noble Group's Decline

[JustLikeThis]

Rules of the game: https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/co...pite-olivia-lums-sweetener-to-small-investors

At a scheme meeting on April 5, creditors will be split into respective classes to vote on the deal. Whether Hyflux gets restructured or liquidated will boil down to how two classes of creditors vote.

Perp and pref holders will vote as one class. Holders of unsecured claims - comprising bond holders, unsecured banks and contingent creditors - will vote as a separate class.The scheme needs to be approved by at least 75 per cent in value and 50 per cent in number of each creditor class.

If this condition is not met, Hyflux can still proceed with the restructuring,
so long as a majority in number of creditors representing 75 per cent in value of claims voted "yes".
​

Senior Unsecured Creditors (SUC) - Banks, Contingency Creditors, Notesholders
Junior Unsecured Creditors (JUC) - Perpetuals and Preference Shareholders
(Interesting that Perpetuals and Preference Shareholders are grouped together as a class because Hyflux already triggered a technical default in perpetuals which gives more seniority to their claims).

Ok, let's play according to their rules, here's the maths,
Assuming SUC supports the restructuring, and JUC objects, so we need a majority in number of creditors representing 75 per cent in value of claims voted "yes"."

If $600-700m of senior unsecured creditors turned up and voted "YES" and just $100-150m of JUC turned up to vote "No", does it mean that the 75% threshold is crossed? By adding contingency creditors, it diluted the JUC so much that whatever JUC votes is not important?

So all retail investors must turn up and vote NO and EGM a special resolution to sack Olivia and Angela ok?

 

[Filloz]

I tell you all a secret ok?

Ernst & Young, Salim and Olivia planted people among the investor email and chat groups. When I was exposed to Noble and in our chatgroup, there were moles who worked to discourage voting attendance and passionately defended the management wrongdoers whenever Iceberg Research fired Noble.

These moles served to discourage and disrupt discussions so that the retail investors are at a lost. You can try contacting Olivia or Salim to render your services in exchange for a better bail out under-table package. https://www.ft.com/content/15e9498e-f170-11e8-ae55-df4bf40f9d0d

 

[FuckOttoke]

Ha Ha !

so many sinkies get conned by Ftrash olivia lum !

 

[Soul]

I was quietly thinking Budget day got plans to help Hyflux since got so much spare cash left.

In FY2018, the Government expect an overall budget surplus of S$2.1 billion or 0.4 per cent of GDP. This is S$2.7 billion more than the S$0.6 billion deficit forecasted a year ago.

 

[JustLikeThis]

I was quietly thinking Budget day got plans to help Hyflux since got so much spare cash left.

In FY2018, the Government expect an overall budget surplus of S$2.1 billion or 0.4 per cent of GDP. This is S$2.7 billion more than the S$0.6 billion deficit forecasted a year ago.

Don't mean to be rude but really unlikely. In the same logic, they are going to focus on getting support from 500,000 strong merdeka generation folks in their 60s. Hyflux is just 50,000pax. Newspapers dare not warn retail investors that their votes will be non-factor unless there is significant attendance representing the bulk of the $900m retail exposure.

You see, the whole macro-aspiration is to make Singapore the world's greatest Debt Restructuring Hub.

Hyflux's huge causality-rate is going to prove to the world that our Debt Restructuring law can protect any insolvent companies against their investors and creditors, as long as they incorporate and bankrupt here. No mercy, even if it is 50,000 Singaporeans.

It is a whole new world for our Legal and Banking & Finance industry. Overnight, more financial boutiques and corporate lawyers from all over the world will be posted here. Hyflux is a lure that can bring all these will bring on-shore.

 

[Filloz]

Thoughts of a Cynical Investor
https://atans1.wordpress.com

Will Oliver Lum and other Hyflux investors still vote for the PAP?
In Financial competency, Infrastructure, Political governance, Public Administration on 18/02/2019 at 7:21 am

Amid all the KPKBing by SIAS, Hyflux investors aided and abetted by the anti-PAP cybernuts, why doesn’t anyone from this mob of born losers point out the “honest mistake” made by an agency of the PAP govt that led Hyflux to build Tuaspring? The Electricity Market Authority (EMA) got a key economic projection wrong, badly wrong, by 50 percentage points: see bits I bolded below.

t is important to highlight that when the Tuaspring project was first awarded in 2011, the outlook for the Singapore power market was very favorable. The Tuaspring power plant was projected to turn in profits from day one. At that time, new power generation plants were planned to support the country’s projected electricity demand with a reserve margin of 30%. Today, however, due to oversupply of gas in the market, the projection by Electricity Market Authority (EMA) in their Singapore Electricity Market Outlook 2017 showed an increase in reserve margin to 80% in 2018. By way of illustration,the average wholesale electricity price has dropped from about SGD220 per MWh in 2011 when the Tuaspring project was awarded to an average of SGD81 per MWh in 2017, resulting in significant losses from electricity generation.
https://www.hyflux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Hyflux-responses-to-SIAS-letter.pdf​

Hyflux fiasco shows why “book value” is BS
In Accounting, Corporate governance, Financial competency on 17/02/2019 at 1:12 pm

And why audited accounts are juz another genre of fiction: science fiction is closer to reality.
I tot these tots when I read Hyflux’s response to a question from Securities Investors Association of S’pore (SIAS) which read:

On what basis was Tuaspring being valued at SGD1.4 billion? This has proven to be overstated by at least SGD900 million as Hyflux has confirmed any bids received in the 2018 sale process for Tuaspring were for less than Maybank’ s outstanding project finance debt of approximately SGD500 million?​

This is what Hyflux said:

When Hyflux was first awarded the Tuaspring project in 2011, based on the financial model which modeled the cashflow projections from the project, the power plant was expected to generate profits from day one. This financial model was audited by an external financial model auditor and furnished to the offtaker. In 2013 when Tuaspring was able to secure a non-recourse project financing loan, the lender commissioned an independent market study of the project which arrived at similar conclusions supporting the book value of approximately SGD1.4 billion.
When the Tuaspring power plant entered into commercial operations in 2016, the lender commissioned another independent market study before the drawdown of the second tranche of the project finance loan, which valuation also then supported the book value ascribed to the Tuaspring project. However, while the 2017 divestment process attracted three preliminary non-binding bids that also supported the book value of the project, the 2018 sale process for Tuaspring during the moratorium did not yield a similar bid due to the limited number of parties pre-qualified to perform due diligence at such time. Please refer to https://www.hyflux.com/qa-from-second-noteholders-townhall-meetings/ for further details on the Tuaspring divestment process.
https://www.hyflux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Hyflux-responses-to-SIAS-letter.pdf​

So book value is what Hyflux or any company says it is. To be fair, this can only happen with the approval of the accounting prostitutes profession and other prostitutes experts.
Think I’m unfair?
This is Hyflux’s response as to how the major assets of Hyflux were valued, and in particular why no impairment write-downs were made:

All major assets of Hyflux are measured at fair value, in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standard (“FRS”) 39 –Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and FRS 105 –Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations. These assets are assessed at the end of each reporting period to determine whether there is objective evidence that they are impaired, in accordance with FRS 36 –Impairment of Assets.
In accordance with the Group’s accounting policies (set out in the Annual Reports), an impairment loss, once determined, is recognised in the Income Statement in the relevant period.
Impairment losses recognised in respect of all non-derivative financial assets and non-financial assets, including investments, (if any) have been disclosed in the Annual Reports in the respective years.
The financial statements of Hyflux, as in all general purpose financial statements, have been prepared using the going concern basis of accounting.Under the going concern basis of accounting, the financial statements are prepared on the assumption that the entity is a going concern and will continue its operations for the foreseeable future.
https://www.hyflux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Hyflux-responses-to-SIAS-letter.pdf​

But Hyflux and the prostitutes accountants and other experts, can point out that the non-recourse lender (Maybank) “commissioned an independent market study of the project which arrived at similar conclusions supporting the book value of approximately SGD1.4 billion.”



Did Hyflux’s auditors mislead?
In Accounting, Corporate governance, Financial competency on 16/02/2019 at 11:44 am

Further to A really curious incident, where I criticised SIAS for not KPKBing early, here’s one criticism it got right, though why didn’t it raise this earlier, much earlier?

“On Mar 22 2018, KPMG provided a clean a clean audit report for Hyflux Group for the financial year 2017. On May 22 2018, Hyflux Limited and a number of subsidiaries filed for court protection from creditors,” SIAS said, asking what transpired between Mar 22 and May 22 in 2018.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...eo-olivia-lum-remuneration-financial-11229034​

Really shumething must be done about the audit prostitutes profession. Very related post: igNoble Hse omnishambles puts spotlight two int’l accounting firms

 

[Focus]

they are going to focus on getting support from 500,000 strong merdeka generation folks in their 60s. Hyflux is just 50,000pax.

Some people said more than 50,000 affected. No only if you include the dependents or family members, some are buying through nominee accounts (not limted to CPF and also SRS, Leverage account or foreign funds). Many un-listed investors in nominee accounts, definitely more than 50,000. In fact, I shared earlier that even Police Co-op is badly burnt in this investment. Police force also got bitten.

 

[JustLikeThis]

You see, the whole macro-aspiration is to make Singapore the world's greatest Debt Restructuring Hub. Hyflux's huge causality-rate is going to prove to the world that our Debt Restructuring law can protect any insolvent companies against their investors and creditors, as long as they incorporate and bankrupt here. No mercy, even if it is 50,000 Singaporeans.

It is a whole new world for our Legal and Banking & Finance industry. Overnight, more financial boutiques and corporate lawyers from all over the world will be posted here. Hyflux is a lure that can bring all these will bring on-shore.

Singapore makes it to Nikkei Asia Review Headlines
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Co...r-supplier-Hyflux-aims-to-cut-some-debt-by-89

SINGAPORE -- Water treatment company Hyflux has proposed a restructuring plan that will slash some of its debts by 89%, bringing the utility closer to a rescue led by Indonesian conglomerate Salim Group. The plan calls for Hyflux to pay off its debts with cash and shares. For every 1,000 Singapore dollars ($737) invested, high-priority creditors like banks will get SG$246.35, while perpetual security and other subordinate debt holders receive SG$106.54. Many of Hyflux's roughly 34,000 holders of subordinate debt are retail investors who will be displeased as their retirement savings disappear under the plan.

 

[Filloz]

Dear focus, this will not happen. Hyflux investors who blamed PAP in the telegram group were told to shut up. Ball less people there think that they should not scold PAP if they want PAP to help.

It's like a dog bites you but you don't dare to kick dog because you scared the dog bites harder and don't let go, so these fools prefer to coax and beg the dog instead.

 

[Filloz]

Olivia is too famous. Singapore cannot be disgraced.

So every wrongdoing about Hyflux will swept under the carpets and drown the investors. Even the media is telling uncles and auntie investors that Olivia sacrificed a lot for them. hahaha dumb fucks

This is why she will not be charged or arrested.

 

[Asterix]

Thoughts of a Cynical Investor
https://atans1.wordpress.com

Will Oliver Lum and other Hyflux investors still vote for the PAP?
In Financial competency, Infrastructure, Political governance, Public Administration on 18/02/2019 at 7:21 am

Amid all the KPKBing by SIAS, Hyflux investors aided and abetted by the anti-PAP cybernuts, why doesn’t anyone from this mob of born losers point out the “honest mistake” made by an agency of the PAP govt that led Hyflux to build Tuaspring? The Electricity Market Authority (EMA) got a key economic projection wrong, badly wrong, by 50 percentage points: see bits I bolded below.

t is important to highlight that when the Tuaspring project was first awarded in 2011, the outlook for the Singapore power market was very favorable. The Tuaspring power plant was projected to turn in profits from day one. At that time, new power generation plants were planned to support the country’s projected electricity demand with a reserve margin of 30%. Today, however, due to oversupply of gas in the market, the projection by Electricity Market Authority (EMA) in their Singapore Electricity Market Outlook 2017 showed an increase in reserve margin to 80% in 2018. By way of illustration,the average wholesale electricity price has dropped from about SGD220 per MWh in 2011 when the Tuaspring project was awarded to an average of SGD81 per MWh in 2017, resulting in significant losses from electricity generation.
https://www.hyflux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Hyflux-responses-to-SIAS-letter.pdf​

Hyflux fiasco shows why “book value” is BS
In Accounting, Corporate governance, Financial competency on 17/02/2019 at 1:12 pm

And why audited accounts are juz another genre of fiction: science fiction is closer to reality.
I tot these tots when I read Hyflux’s response to a question from Securities Investors Association of S’pore (SIAS) which read:

On what basis was Tuaspring being valued at SGD1.4 billion? This has proven to be overstated by at least SGD900 million as Hyflux has confirmed any bids received in the 2018 sale process for Tuaspring were for less than Maybank’ s outstanding project finance debt of approximately SGD500 million?​

This is what Hyflux said:

When Hyflux was first awarded the Tuaspring project in 2011, based on the financial model which modeled the cashflow projections from the project, the power plant was expected to generate profits from day one. This financial model was audited by an external financial model auditor and furnished to the offtaker. In 2013 when Tuaspring was able to secure a non-recourse project financing loan, the lender commissioned an independent market study of the project which arrived at similar conclusions supporting the book value of approximately SGD1.4 billion.
When the Tuaspring power plant entered into commercial operations in 2016, the lender commissioned another independent market study before the drawdown of the second tranche of the project finance loan, which valuation also then supported the book value ascribed to the Tuaspring project. However, while the 2017 divestment process attracted three preliminary non-binding bids that also supported the book value of the project, the 2018 sale process for Tuaspring during the moratorium did not yield a similar bid due to the limited number of parties pre-qualified to perform due diligence at such time. Please refer to https://www.hyflux.com/qa-from-second-noteholders-townhall-meetings/ for further details on the Tuaspring divestment process.
https://www.hyflux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Hyflux-responses-to-SIAS-letter.pdf​

So book value is what Hyflux or any company says it is. To be fair, this can only happen with the approval of the accounting prostitutes profession and other prostitutes experts.
Think I’m unfair?
This is Hyflux’s response as to how the major assets of Hyflux were valued, and in particular why no impairment write-downs were made:

All major assets of Hyflux are measured at fair value, in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standard (“FRS”) 39 –Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and FRS 105 –Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations. These assets are assessed at the end of each reporting period to determine whether there is objective evidence that they are impaired, in accordance with FRS 36 –Impairment of Assets.
In accordance with the Group’s accounting policies (set out in the Annual Reports), an impairment loss, once determined, is recognised in the Income Statement in the relevant period.
Impairment losses recognised in respect of all non-derivative financial assets and non-financial assets, including investments, (if any) have been disclosed in the Annual Reports in the respective years.
The financial statements of Hyflux, as in all general purpose financial statements, have been prepared using the going concern basis of accounting.Under the going concern basis of accounting, the financial statements are prepared on the assumption that the entity is a going concern and will continue its operations for the foreseeable future.
https://www.hyflux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Hyflux-responses-to-SIAS-letter.pdf​

But Hyflux and the prostitutes accountants and other experts, can point out that the non-recourse lender (Maybank) “commissioned an independent market study of the project which arrived at similar conclusions supporting the book value of approximately SGD1.4 billion.”



Did Hyflux’s auditors mislead?
In Accounting, Corporate governance, Financial competency on 16/02/2019 at 11:44 am

Further to A really curious incident, where I criticised SIAS for not KPKBing early, here’s one criticism it got right, though why didn’t it raise this earlier, much earlier?

“On Mar 22 2018, KPMG provided a clean a clean audit report for Hyflux Group for the financial year 2017. On May 22 2018, Hyflux Limited and a number of subsidiaries filed for court protection from creditors,” SIAS said, asking what transpired between Mar 22 and May 22 in 2018.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...eo-olivia-lum-remuneration-financial-11229034​

Really shumething must be done about the audit prostitutes profession. Very related post: igNoble Hse omnishambles puts spotlight two int’l accounting firms

That is why one cannot solely rely on so called fundamental analysis when speculating ahem I mean investing in shares. Price action will give you the clue that something might be wrong. Even if you spend three years studying accounting, what makes you think you can beat the thousands of analysts reviewing the books, researching the industry, blah, blah, blah. Those who have inside information will sell and their selling will be reflected in the price action. You just need to be able to read the price action and have the discipline to Cut Losses In Time Or Regret In Sorrow aka CLITORIS.

If these speculators ahem investors had stuck to two rules, they would have done just fine. One - not more than 20% of portfolio in one stock. Two - cut loss at 8% of entry price. Using only 2 rules, their maximum risk would be 1.6% of their portfolio. Can easily make back from other stocks. If you lose money in HypeFuss stock, you don't have to make it back from HypeFuss. You can make it back from any stock like City Dev, UOB, Keppel, etc.

 

[gummybear]

That is why one cannot solely rely on so called fundamental analysis when speculating ahem I mean investing in shares. Price action will give you the clue that something might be wrong. Even if you spend three years studying accounting, what makes you think you can beat the thousands of analysts reviewing the books, researching the industry, blah, blah, blah. Those who have inside information will sell and their selling will be reflected in the price action. You just need to be able to read the price action and have the discipline to Cut Losses In Time Or Regret In Sorrow aka CLITORIS.

If these speculators ahem investors had stuck to two rules, they would have done just fine. One - not more than 20% of portfolio in one stock. Two - cut loss at 8% of entry price. Using only 2 rules, their maximum risk would be 1.6% of their portfolio. Can easily make back from other stocks. If you lose money in HypeFuss stock, you don't have to make it back from HypeFuss. You can make it back from any stock like City Dev, UOB, Keppel, etc.

Keppel can earn meh ?

 

[gummybear]

I will kill the dog and cook it to eat before I go to jail.

 

[Filloz]

I will kill the dog and cook it to eat before I go to jail.

 

[JustLikeThis]

Hyflux plan raises transparency questions in Singapore
https://globalrestructuringreview.c...an-raises-transparency-questions-in-singapore

Facing growing criticisms for what some have termed an opaque process placing a disproportionate burden on unsecured creditors, Singaporean water treatment company Hyflux has asked a court to schedule scheme meetings for a restructuring plan it revealed over the weekend.

 

[Asterix]

Keppel can earn meh ?

Can...somebody claimed to have bought around 5.7 and maybe still holding.... now 6.32... about 10% lah:

https://www.sammyboy.com/threads/keppel-corporation-shares.262796/page-5

If one loses 50% on a stock, must make 100% on the now reduced principal to get back to square one. On other hand, if one cuts loss at 8%, need make only 10% on reduced principal to get back to starting point.

 

[gummybear]

Can...somebody claimed to have bought around 5.7 and maybe still holding.... now 6.32... about 10% lah:

https://www.sammyboy.com/threads/keppel-corporation-shares.262796/page-5

If one loses 50% on a stock, must make 100% on the now reduced principal to get back to square one. On other hand, if one cuts loss at 8%, need make only 10% on reduced principal to get back to starting point.

So u every time can win ?

 

[JustLikeThis]

Good morning, I refer to this earlier post from the friend who first highlighted that the proof-of-claims was fishy.
https://www.sammyboy.com/threads/hy...egulators-refusing-to-act.258403/post-2853044
He is a former legal counsel with one of the parties involved. This is a cut & paste of a whatsapp warning from him this morning.

..........it is just numbers manipulation, Ernst assumed total claims from project disruptions, so unsecured bankers get about 25% back. In actual fact, if there is no claim from project disruptions, colleague told me that unsecured bankers just need to lose 25%, and can get back up to 75% (likely 60-75%). Ernst has also gently asked DBS corporate bankers if DBS can consider using the nominee account votes to give the support. Brother, this is unheard of.........​

I draw the following conclusions:

1. Apparently, Hyflux added contingency liabilities, termed "project disruption" above, to dilute the retail votes. This was what common sense told us last week, when we realized that the proposal can't be bothered with us (eg. 3% cash back deal).

2. The friend explained that intentionally or not, our media was fooled to believe that unsecured bankers get back only about 25% (24.7% mentioned in the press). His sources explained to him that if all projects are completed, then unsecured bankers can get about 60-75%, vs our miserable compensation. This is very scheming and misleading. Almost all bankers will support such a sweet deal at the expense of retail investors and EY manipulated the voting eligibility by adding contingency liabilities.

3. DBS's nominee accounts has massive Hyflux exposures because they offered leverage on Hyflux Preference & Perpetuals, along with those brought with SRS and CPF. With large loan exposures to Hyflux, it is in DBS corporate bankers' interests that the restructuring will give them 60-75% money back, EY is shrewd to recommend DBS vote in favor of the restructuring using the Preference & Perpetual votes that received no instruction from clients. Usually bankers will abstain from voting if no instructions given, but it is also technically legal for DBS to vote in the best of their judgement to recover monies from bankrupted Hyflux investors who bought with leverage; getting 3% cash back and some worthless shares is better than nothing if Hyflux liquidates.




With these, I shall end with the following article titled,"How Hyflux was taken advantage by almost everyone"
http://investmoolah.blogspot.com/2019/02/why-hyflux-was-taken-advantage-by.html

 

[Asterix]

So u every time can win ?

No, I cannot every time win. That's why need to cut losses when proven to be wrong. Otherwise, one big loss will wipe you out.

It's called "let your profits run and cut your losses short". Assuming:

- one cuts losses at 8% and maximum allocate 20% to one stock and assume portfolio turnover of 4 times per year (i.e. 20 stocks bought and sold over the year but only 5 held at any one time)
- of the 20 decisions over the year, 12 turn out to be wrong and only 8 turn out to be right
- 12 X 1.6% (i.e. 8% cut loss X 20% of portfolio in one stock) = 19.2% loss
- 8 X 4% (assuming average gain is 20% X 20% of portfolio in one stock) = 32% gain
- Net gain for year = 32 -19.2 = 12.8%

So, if you "let your profits run and cut your losses short", you can be wrong 6 times out of 10 and still make 12.8% per annum. Of course, there WILL be many times when after you cut loss at 8% of entry price, the stock will go up ........ without you on board! Better than, you don't cut loss at 8% of entry price and the stock continue to go down to 50% loss ...... with you still on board! Like this only 10 consecutive losses will wipe out your entire portfolio - less needed if you don't stick to maximum 20% in any one stock.

 

[Filloz]

Good morning, I refer to this earlier post from the friend who first highlighted that the proof-of-claims was fishy.
https://www.sammyboy.com/threads/hy...egulators-refusing-to-act.258403/post-2853044
He is a former legal counsel with one of the parties involved. This is a cut & paste of a whatsapp warning from him this morning.

..........it is just numbers manipulation, Ernst assumed total claims from project disruptions, so unsecured bankers get about 25% back. In actual fact, if there is no claim from project disruptions, colleague told me that unsecured bankers just need to lose 25%, and can up get up to back 75% (likely 60-75%). Ernst has also gently asked DBS corporate bankers if DBS can consider using the nominee account votes to give the support. Brother, this is unheard of.........​

I draw the following conclusions:

1. Apparently, Hyflux added contingency liabilities, termed "project disruption" above, to dilute the retail votes. This was what common sense told us last week, when we realized that the proposal can't be bothered with us (eg. 3% cash back deal).

2. The friend explained that intentionally or not, our media was fooled to believe that unsecured bankers get back only about 25% (24.7% mentioned in the press). His sources explained to him that if all projects are completed, then unsecured bankers can get about 60-75%, vs our miserable compensation. This is very scheming and misleading. Almost all bankers will support such a sweet deal at the expense of retail investors and EY manipulated the voting eligibility by adding contingency liabilities.

3. DBS's nominee accounts has massive Hyflux exposures because they offered leverage on Hyflux Preference & Perpetuals, along with those brought with SRS and CPF. With large loan exposures to Hyflux, it is in DBS corporate bankers' interests that the restructuring will give them 60-75% money back, EY is shrewd to recommend DBS vote in favor of the restructuring using the Preference & Perpetual votes that received no instruction from clients. Usually bankers will abstain from voting if no instructions given, but it is also technically legal for DBS to vote in the best of their judgement to recover monies from bankrupted Hyflux investors who bought with leverage; getting 3% cash back and some worthless shares is better than nothing if Hyflux liquidates.




With these, I shall end with the following article titled,"How Hyflux was taken advantage by almost everyone"
http://investmoolah.blogspot.com/2019/02/why-hyflux-was-taken-advantage-by.html

Told you all that everything is staged, the accounts, Olivia, lawyers, auditors, SIAS, the moles in discussion............