A while ago Nova introduced a “Latest Property News” feature in its web site (bottom of the Home Page
This could possibly have been done with the aim of improving its (generally negative) image as a commercial property operator, although we believe it is simply a form of “window dressing” by them in an attempt to counter the negativity stemming from the fact that the company is being investigated by the CIPC
In this regard, the latest post in the Nova web site is titled: “Post Office financial crisis”
Firstly, this topic is hardly “Property News” and we suggest, hardly relevant to the commercial property world
Secondly, and here’s the irony: Here we have one entity, which: …
* is considered to be insolvent and has been accused by CIPC of reckless trading, * has sold off more than half of the original property portfolio and taken the sales proceeds into working capital instead of using same to repay debentures and all without informing the Debenture Holders of this departure from its mandate let alone asking for their approval * couldn’t pay its municipal services bills for two of its properties in Nelspruit, * was taken to court for failure to pay for cleaning services provided for a number of malls/centres (resulting in a court order attaching two properties. This has since been resolved between the parties), * failed to repay short term borrowings of thirty two million at punitive interest rates (also resulting in a court judgement against them), * across the life of the business rescue process – put in place precisely to ensure that the original Sharemax investors got their money back – has, largely, failed to do so within the time frame stipulated in the Schemes of Arrangement (Nova disputes this but this only begs the question: Why then, were they in such a hurry to have the new Debenture Trustee appointed and, as his first and immediate, function in the role, approve an extension of the time frame for debenture repayment?) * has, no doubt, expended huge amounts on legal fees to defend the above described and other legal actions brought against it. In this regard, there is an element of hypocrisy present here. Deon Pienaar, a long time activist regarding the illegality of the Sarb’s 2010 action in closing down the property syndication industry, was present at the Debenture Trustee meetings in 2021/22 under proxies given by Debenture Holders. He took the opportunity to address Chairman Myburgh to which Myburgh responded by publicly trashing him, specifically as regards a court judgment in favour of Nova and against him. Under same, Pienaar has to pay Nova court costs of some one point three million (still under appeal as far as we are aware). Myburgh made a point of telling the meeting attendees that the money that Pienaar owes the company under the judgement is “your money” (meaning money that belongs to the Sharemax investors and/or could, perhaps, have been used to repay debentures), Therefore, the money spent on any defending legal actions is also “our money”? And so, by extension, the some forty million that must have been paid to RMB (?) to rescue Myburgh as regards his Cold Creek property personal debt to that bank must also have been “our money”. Had this not taken place, it might have been possible to effect some debenture repayments with the funds used to acquire the asset (which is how Cold Creek appears in the Nova financial statements)? Myburgh did not respond when he was challenged regarding his Cold Creek rescue
.. but sees fit to publish in its web site a story on the failures of another entity
Thirdly, and perhaps an even greater irony, is the fact that the article on the Post Office was originated by Moneyweb.
* Nova and Moneyweb have been at loggerheads for years, * There is no love lost between them because Moneyweb tells it like it is. So much so that, when Moneyweb asks for Nova input ahead of an article publication, Nova do not respond or, seldom does (makes you think?), * Nova chair Connie Myburgh, during one of the 2021/22 Debenture Trustee meetings, referred to the media (specifically inferring Moneyweb) as “gutter press”, * Moneyweb’s Ryk van Niekerk has, at least three times now, been prevented from attending Nova meetings – specifically AGMs where he was present under proxy from a shareholder
And, yet, Nova sees fit to on-publish an article written by a “gutter press” journalist on another distressed entity as part of what appears to be its image building as a responsible commercial property operator?
Is the pot calling the kettle black, or what?
Perhaps the Chairman and the Board are not aware of this Latest News item. Perhaps these posts are not selected and published by Nova themselves but rather outsourced to another entity. But is that an acceptable excuse?
Whatever, we suggest that Nova would do far better as regards improving their image if it were to focus on their mandate which is proper management of the company and repayment of the Debentures
