Join our investing community

New performance fee proposal.

Discussion in 'Managed Funds & Index Funds' started by Smartypants, 3rd Jun, 2006.

  1. Smartypants

    Smartypants Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Jun, 2006
    Posts:
    226
    Location:
    NSW
    As a fairly new unit holder in the Navra fund, I was just wondering what others think of the proposal to change the structure of the performance fee.

    Personally, I think it sounds fair and may even be beneficial to shareholders (not that I'm a shareholder).

    What do others think?
     
  2. Alan

    Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15th Aug, 2005
    Posts:
    603
    Location:
    Sydney
    Ideally it would be nice if things didn't have to change, but the reality is the Company needs regular cashflow. Hopefully this change gives them a better chance of achieving a more viable model.

    Is that a support? I guess so...........
     
  3. TakeStock

    TakeStock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    14th Aug, 2005
    Posts:
    140
    Location:
    Sydney
    I haven't heard of a new performance fee proposal. Could you kindly give a brief description of it? Thanks.
     
  4. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Co-founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2005
    Posts:
    4,619
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    TakeStock - are you a UNITholder ? You should have been informed last week about the changes.

    Smartypants - this is a topic that has been discussed before - the original proposal was made late last year, but it was decided to postpone any changes until the new financial year to make things less messy.

    I have already stated my view that I think this is the ideal way to go - the best balance between fee-for-performance and actually getting some reasonable income for the fund manager.

    So I will be voting in support of this change. I am both a unitholder and shareholder.
     
  5. Glebe

    Glebe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15th Aug, 2005
    Posts:
    932
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    I am a unitholder and not a shareholder. I have no problem with the change from yearly performance fee to quarterly performance fee. Makes sense.
     
  6. MrDarcy

    MrDarcy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13th Sep, 2005
    Posts:
    283
    Location:
    Sydney
    Share holder hat on: changes are GOOD, reasons are obvious.

    Unit holder hat on: changes are GOOD. Why? I don't want to ever have to pay fixed fees, performance fees are much much better.
     
  7. TakeStock

    TakeStock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    14th Aug, 2005
    Posts:
    140
    Location:
    Sydney
    I knew about the change to quarterly performance fees - I thought there must have been discussion of another proposal. Thanks for the clarification.
     
  8. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Co-founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2005
    Posts:
    4,619
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    I received notice of the meeting via email on Thursday because I had selected that option (email notifications) with InvestorServe. I'm guessing that people who are notified by mail might not have received their notice yet.

    The notice applies to unitholders in the two Australian funds.
     
  9. TryHard

    TryHard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2005
    Posts:
    863
    Notice of fee change

    I'm a shareholder and unitholder. The email I got, presumably 'cos I'm a Unitholder (as it was investorserve-like), just mentioned "Notice of Meeting". When I got a chance to follow the link (just now :p), it then makes the performance fee change clear.

    Some people might not have recognised the email or followed the link yet.

    Regardless, I have no problem with the fee change, for the same reasons everyone else has outlined :)

    Cheers
    Carl