It is my inescapable conclusion that fraud has occurred and will likely continue over the next few weeks within the Australian public listed company IncentiaPay (ASX:INP) in relation to the sale of the Bartercard asset. I understand that this sale is due for consummation in a few weeks to the very people evicted from the Board for fraud! A short while ago I blogged my concerns (and here).
My thinking has now moved from concerns to as near enough to certainty of fraud as I can determine from my Tipline here in New Zealand. Hence this PUBLIC WARNING.
I simply cannot see how this sale to private interests benefits the ASX:INP shareholders in any way, shape or form, certainly at the actual sale price mentioned anyway, no matter who was the recipient of the asset.
Furthermore, all signs appear to me to point to a clear conspiracy to defraud ASX:INP investors yet still further, after having watched in horror as their investment fell to [now] only 12 cents. I predicted penny stocks at the outset of this disgrace to commerce and they almost are.
Sadly my conclusion is that the perpetrators of this fraud include the man installed by the aggrieved corporate investors to right the ship, the new CEO Iain Dunstan. I have previously shared that Iain has ceased communications with me, whereas previously he was pleased to present his side of the story. That’s very telling!
The resignation of the long-term chairman (Murray D’Almeida) after many years at the helm shortly after the announcement of the sale; Iain’s substantial personal shareholding and the termination of previous Directors for insider trading and financial fraud; their lack of prosecution, combined with a secret sudden fire-sale to these very crooks previously evicted are all red flags for anyone with an ounce of caution.
Just some of these should be sufficient to insist that the Bartercard sale be investigated forthwith and that share trading should be prevented by the appropriate authorities immediately. Combined though, they simply scream “CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD”. Hence then my public warning – fraud is afoot within ASX:INP.
It is my opinion that:
a) Iain Dunstan’s promoted role as ‘White Knight” for the ASX:INP shareholders should change to be seen as traitor extraordinaire, in the circumstances and absence of satisfactory answers to the key questions [below]. Ian’s conduct in multiple ways simply defies logic unless he was (or became) an inside man, transferring the Bartercard asset back to the crooks at less than true market value;
b) Murray D’Almeida’s recent resignation indicates an inside working role to have secured the sale. His experience, close relationship with the Bartercard crooks and long-term insider status within the upper echelons while fraud was proven to exist paints a picture for the uninitiated [something that we in the industry all knew] that Murray too was one of what I called the crooks, Smiles in Suits. Recent events give me the freedom to now blog this – it’s obvious to anyone observing now!
c) The three Smiles in Suits will be laughing all the way to the bank should their purchase proceed. Their return to the fray having essentially secured private ownership of their Bartercard ‘asset’ via a corporatisation of private debt off the backs of the little people is a real joke. It’s criminal conduct in my book and those who lost will be forever suckers if the crooks have their way! Substantial private debt incurred upon purchase from the founder was transferred into public ownership (ASX:BPS) using fraudulent claims and insider arrangements. Pension funds took a hit whereas the Directors’ didn’t. Buying the core asset back for a paltry sum less than market value by an order of multiples would be their “happiest day of their [respective] lives” to use the phrase the founder used when he flogged it off to the Smiles in Suits.
d) There are so many unanswered questions that ASX:INP shareholders should be asking. With the ASX:INP AGM announced today and proxy forms issued for a 16 November 2018 AGM, contemporaneously with consummation of the shonky deal of the century (for the crooks) ASX:INP investors appear to be fooled into losing an asset in a pretty obviously fraudulent manner. I posture that endorsement at the upcoming AGM of those who flicked an asset out the back door (most likely for personal gain) would be insanity.
e) Regulatory intervention is unlikely. I and others warned the ASX at BPS Technology’s inception that fraud was afoot. I’m told that complaints have been laid with the ASX over this sale. Expect more of the same. Why would ASIC want to bring down one of their own?
f) Action should be in the domain of the people affected. I’m a blogger, author, analyst, commentator and general all-round sticky-beak with brain. I’m not an activist per se. Bringing back the crooks into the Bartercard business while it would suck for the ASX:INP investors would ensure more “fun in the sun” for me personally as these guys would continue the BS for personal gain much further than otherwise, thus keeping my attention their way much longer. What that action should or could be is up to those concerned. First ASIC would need to know that there are concerns with the sale. That is a formality. Then they would need to investigate or at least look at it. The key questions I publish below would be the questions I would start with. That any sharebroker or agent could recommend, facilitate or even participate in the sale of shares after a public warning like this and no meaningful answers would concern me. They should or would surely be exposed if fraud is proven.
- Iain Dunstan sold the Bartercard asset. Why? It was producing income and had debtors in excess of the sale price as far as I can tell. It did not need to be sold; there was no screaming need according to INP management other than that it wasn’t a core asset. Excuse me?! Somebody is hiding something.
- I’ll rephrase this critical question: Iain has given different answers at different times regarding this dodgy sale. The only constant is that he wants out. Why, when it has only ever been billed as a strong business?
- What did Iain Dunstan receive personally, either directly or by way of agreement with others to facilitate that sale? I strongly suspect a backroom deal either with share swaps, a paper-deal or possibly cash but something untoward has clearly happened with a sale in someone else’s interests other than the current owners of the asset (shortly to be IMHO big losers).
- Where is the public audit trail of all aspects of the sale process? Advertising; the tender process; the valuation and any attempt to secure best value for the shareholders is totally non-existent.
- Iain Dunstan has confirmed that NO valuation was obtained to sell the core asset of the public company. Why not?
- Why was there no formal tender process when I have been informed that there WERE indeed interested buyers and willing to pay substantially more than the actual selling price too?
- What complaints have been laid and what is ASIC’s approach to the sale? Silence indicates impropriety. Do the authorities ever ask questions to initiate inquiry (while suspending trading for a period) or do they intend to wait until the sale is complete and then act retrospectively (which will be likely too late) or are they too fraudulent and do nothing as the company being inquired into in 2018 would hint strongly that there were issues in 2013, thus that my blogging commentaries, predictions and warnings four years ago were highly (no, totally) accurate?
- I understand that the business still makes net over $2M net profit. Based on average ASX PE ratio of 1: 14, the business should probably have been sold for $28M plus debtors. Why didn’t this happenand where did Ian’s extremely low selling price come from? Remember also that this was the company valued much, much more only a few years ago!
- Why did Iain Dunstan allow the Bartercard chair to remain after he “terminated” the three Bartercard directors for gross misconduct?
- To what extent are Tony Wiese, Brian Hall and Trevor Dietz (and the ex-chairman) involved with the new private company that will shortly own the Bartercard business?
- When was the deal actually struck?
- Was the reason that the Directors accepted their termination for false accounting and insider trading so readily that there was already and agreement structure of the sale of the Bartercard business back to the Bartercard crooks? If so, then that would explain why the crooked directors left control of their public company happily and did not fight Iain Dunstan AND it would also explain why no police complaint nor criminal charges were laid!
- Did Iain Dunstan exchange the former director’s controlling shares of the public company for the Bartercard business? This makes perfect sense to me and the only conclusion therefore is that Iain Dunstan is part of the conspiracy to defraud the shareholders.
There’s more to come. Watch this space if you’re interested or have some skin in the game.
Bartercard in 2017/2018
- Something’s up with Bartercard!
- Bartercard – Analysing the Rot
- Bartercard Update – Bye Bye Trev
- MEDIA RELEASE: Bartercard Insider Trading
- Bartercard Boardroom Battle
- Bartercard 2018 Q1 - We Lied!
- Fighting Bartercard in Court
- Bartercard vs Down – CIV 2014-096-428
- Bartercard vs Down – Trial Analysis
- Bartercard vs Down – Trial Report
- Bartercard’s Demise: Updates
- Seasoned Investor: Sells ASX:BPS
- Fair Market Value of Trade Dollars
- How to Fight Bartercard (& win)
- Analysing the Bartercard Sale
- Bartercard Sale Questions & Feedback
- PUBLIC WARNING: Fraud Within ASX:INP
- History of ASX:INP’S Bartercard Sale
- Open Letter to ASX:INP Shareholders
- MEDIA RELEASE: Blogger Calls Fraud on ASX:INP
- ASX:INP Management Fraud Identified
- PUBLIC WARNING TO ASX OVER ASX:INP