Interest.co.nz: Ross Asset Management investor, with six-figure life savings invested …

An un-named investor in Ross Asset Management spoke on Radio New Zealand this morning about the company’s principal David Ross, the documents he presented which the investor’s accountant reckoned tallied up, and how plausible Ross appeared to be.

She spoke of her shock at the news that Ross’ activities appear to have been a Ponzi scheme, of double digit returns (although not in the last few years), and of how everything appeared to stack up.

Read the Story …

NBR: Ross Asset returns may have been made up

The receivers for Ross Asset Management have found just $10.2 million of investments, slightly more than 2% of the total of $449 million.

PwC receiver John Fisk says it is likely the historical returns advised to investors are exaggerated and may be fictitious.

In a progress report to the High Court, released today, receivers Mr Fisk and David Bridgman say RAM and its nine associated entities are insolvent and should be liquidated.

Read the Story …

 

Media Release: 15 November 2012

Ross Asset Management Investors Group

Palmerston North, New Zealand; Tel 06 357 1901

Mobile 027 437 9050, e-mail: bruce.tichbon@gmail.com

 

15 November 2012: For immediate release.

MEDIA RELEASE

The Ross Asset Management (RAM) Investors Group has the following objectives:

To be a unified voice for investors in RAM in dealing with statutory and other bodies and to keep them updated on relevant events associated with the receivership of RAM and related entities, with the aim of helping to maximise value for investors.

Our recorded membership is approximately 300 at this time.   Many of our members represent other investors in a family, trust or professional capacity.  We estimate our circulation now reaches 80% of the RAM investor base.

Continue reading

Interest.co.nz: Ross Asset Management receivers PwC say can only find NZ$10m of investments

By Alex Tarrant

Returns reported for the supposed NZ$450 million Ross Asset Management ‘investment fund’ were likely exaggerated and possibly fictitious, while withdrawals by investors over the last five years appear to have been funded by contributions made by other investors, receivers PwC say, in language that hints at a Ponzi scheme.

Read the story …