SkyCity Centre Winnipeg | 45F | 575 Ft | 175.26 M | Cancelled

[Finessing]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

... theu haven't done anything super sketchy yet on this project, I should have said.

I completely agree with your point... despite their shadyness, I want them to succeed because then less people or nobody gets screwed and our downtown benefits.

I personally wouldn't invest with them in a million years based on their history and as a company, I remain highly critical of them. But SkyCity as a project, if it moves forward, I cannot be too critical about. Everyone skews presale rates and it's not easy to discuss grants without riling up Winnipeggers, not that I'm actively trying to justify them.

If this project was in its infancy, before anyone could invest or pre-purhcase, then I'd be more opposed, but by now the ball is rolling fast enough that the best way forward is through completion, hence my position.

I don't know why people still have this impression? It's clearly been a scam from the beginning.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/i...owed-interest-as-bonds-default-1.4124954

Investors who have put money into the startup costs of a massive downtown Winnipeg development are waiting on interest payments after finding out their bonds are in default, according to documents obtained by CBC News.

There are also questions about the actual value of the land on which the proposed SkyCity Centre development is to be built.

Fortress bought the land, which was and still remains a surface parking lot, for $9.5 million in 2013. The city currently has the lot assessed at $4.4 million.

The stated value of the land where SkyCity is supposed to rise has gone from $18 million in 2013 to $25 million in 2014 to $37.3 million in 2015, according to a series of valuations gleaned from investor documents obtained by CBC News.

The opinions of value were not done by an accredited appraiser from the Appraisal Institute of Canada.

Several proposed class action suits launched against Fortress and BDMC last year allege they provided investors with an inflated current value for the real estate.

[esquire]

For the sake of argument I'll be the devil's advocate here...

If this project really was nothing more than a scam, wouldn't someone have stepped in by now to put an end to it? Securities commission, RCMP, Manitoba consumer affairs... all of them seem to be OK enough with things to let the developer keep doing its thing.

[Finessing]

Originally Posted by esquire

For the sake of argument I'll be the devil's advocate here...

If this project really was nothing more than a scam, wouldn't someone have stepped in by now to put an end to it? Securities commission, RCMP, Manitoba consumer affairs... all of them seem to be OK enough with things to let the developer keep doing its thing.

Ontario regulator lacks expertise to regulate syndicated mortgages, says former registrar

The Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) lacks the expertise and knowledge needed to regulate syndicated mortgages, according to the province's former registrar under the Mortgage Brokers Act.

"They don't understand any of this," said Bill Vasiliou. "They don't even understand their legislation."

On Monday CBC News reported that more than 120 Chinese investors in the Greater Toronto Area were set to lose nearly $9 million in syndicated mortgage investments with Black Bear Homes, a developer in Fort Erie, Ont. Most of the projects involved renovating or building houses or townhomes in the Crystal Beach community on Lake Erie.

Vasiliou examined the syndicated mortgage contracts and ledgers for Black Bear investments and, in his opinion, he said, "This is open fraud."

In a statement, the Ministry of Finance says it is "committing to strengthening protection for investors" in Thursday's budget by "transferring regulatory oversight of syndicated mortgage investments from FSCO to the securities regulator over time."

There are multiple lawsuits, including class-actions against Fortress and other syndicated mortgage lenders. Securities regulators (the fact that there are so many is one of the problems) in Canada are notoriously useless and reactive.

[esquire]

^ Yes, but this is literally years in the making, not some fly-by-night boiler room telephone investment scam. Surely enough people have brought this to the attention of regulators that they could have engaged some expert advice by now to find out if this is on the up and up?

[Roger Strong]

Originally Posted by esquire

If this project really was nothing more than a scam, wouldn't someone have stepped in by now to put an end to it?

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't work that way. This the grey area of speculative investment. One can keep making promises, and no-one can "step in" until those promises are broken. Definitively broken, with nothing grey about it.

A grey area like SkyCity's years-long delays lead to permits expiring and bonds defaulting and the loss of public funding. They can just declare those to be temporary setbacks. Just a normal part of the business. It may still get built, and as long as that possibility is there, no-one can "step in and to put an end to it."

Even where wrongdoing seems obvious to some, well, there are already multiple class action lawsuits against the company. There's your "stepping in."

And when everything finally does definitively go south? Consider the $3M paid to "investor victims" of their previous company. "Victims of unlawful activity." Both labels used in court by the Ontario Civil Remedies for Illicit Activities Office. Which also led to Fortress owners Rathore and Petrozza being banned from trading in securities for the next 15 years, but allowed to continue trading in mortgages. ​(Rathore was also banned from selling mutual funds in 2005.)

They were able to walk away claiming "There was no findings of guilt or wrongdoing or anything else like that, so we are happy to have made a settlement on that non-related business." And "It's important to be clear that the order and the Ontario Securities Commission settlement it relates to have nothing whatsoever to do with Fortress Real Developments, SkyCity or any other projects Fortress is involved with."

The city and Fortress's subcontractors can protect themselves by not making any significant investments until Fortress's funding is in place. Build the parkade for now, a reliable investment even if the tower doesn't go ahead.

The investors are protected by due diligence. The information necessary is obviously out there, as the links above show. Civil and criminal court action comes only after the fact.

[balletomane]

I think its best to just wait for November to see if this project actually starts construction.

Debating the credibility of Fortress over and over again won't go anywhere, as seen many times in the past.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by balletomane

I think its best to just wait for November to see if this project actually starts construction.

Debating the credibility of Fortress over and over again won't go anywhere, as seen many times in the past.

Agreed, the horse has been dead for ages, stop beating it. We established Fortress wasn't the most reliable company eons ago, I don't know why people seem so intent on discussing that, and only that. Let's talk about the potential build itself and enjoy the discussion.

[Cam]

Originally Posted by balletomane

I think its best to just wait for November to see if this project actually starts construction.

Debating the credibility of Fortress over and over again won't go anywhere, as seen many times in the past.

True, but there's also nothing else to discuss until then either

[Roger Strong]

Originally Posted by balletomane

I think its best to just wait for November to see if this project actually starts construction.

Agreed!

er, Which November?

[bicycles]

Originally Posted by esquire

For the sake of argument I'll be the devil's advocate here...

If this project really was nothing more than a scam, wouldn't someone have stepped in by now to put an end to it? Securities commission, RCMP, Manitoba consumer affairs... all of them seem to be OK enough with things to let the developer keep doing its thing.

Oh wow this is the funniest post on here in awhile. You think white collar criminals are punished? The entire top 10% of earners in Canada are criminals and only get away with it because they have lawyers who find legal loopholes or their crimes are portrayed as being for the good of the economy or some other 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by bicycles

Oh wow this is the funniest post on here in awhile. You think white collar criminals are punished? The entire top 10% of earners in Canada are criminals and only get away with it because they have lawyers who find legal loopholes or their crimes are portrayed as being for the good of the economy or some other 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵

That is a pretty strong claim. There are certainly people who break the rules but if you can work the system and play within the rules then it's not those who are using the system who are at fault. Close the loopholes I say.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bicycles

Oh wow this is the funniest post on here in awhile. You think white collar criminals are punished? The entire top 10% of earners in Canada are criminals and only get away with it because they have lawyers who find legal loopholes or their crimes are portrayed as being for the good of the economy or some other 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵

Better expand the jails, because the richest 10 per cent of individuals in Canada are those making more than $80,400. (Source: http://globalnews.ca/news/834758/one-per...-the-canada-of-old-statcan-survey-shows/)

So by your standards, huge numbers of schoolteachers, nurses, auto-body shop owners, police constables, airline pilots, scientists, bank managers, civil servants and accountants, not to mention all sorts of other professionals, are all criminals.

[Roger Strong]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

That is a pretty strong claim. There are certainly people who break the rules but if you can work the system and play within the rules then it's not those who are using the system who are at fault.

Again, consider the $3M paid to "investor victims" of their previous company. "Victims of unlawful activity." Both labels used in court by the Ontario Civil Remedies for Illicit Activities Office. Which also led to Fortress owners Rathore and Petrozza being banned from trading in securities for the next 15 years, but allowed to continue trading in mortgages. ​Rathore was also banned from selling mutual funds in 2005.

They were able to walk away claiming "There was no findings of guilt or wrongdoing or anything else like that, so we are happy to have made a settlement on that non-related business." And "It's important to be clear that the order and the Ontario Securities Commission settlement it relates to have nothing whatsoever to do with Fortress Real Developments, SkyCity or any other projects Fortress is involved with."

The investment and banking sectors consider breaking the rules to be part of working the system. "Playing within the rules" includes taking advantage of illegal behavior having a larger pay-off than the penalty.

[Finessing]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Yes, but this is literally years in the making, not some fly-by-night boiler room telephone investment scam. Surely enough people have brought this to the attention of regulators that they could have engaged some expert advice by now to find out if this is on the up and up?

Heh, you don't have much experience with government and bureaucracy eh?

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by roger strong

agreed!

Er, which november?

2021.

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

That is a pretty strong claim. There are certainly people who break the rules but if you can work the system and play within the rules then it's not those who are using the system who are at fault. Close the loopholes I say.

Good luck with that.

[FormerREIN]

Why would they scam people on Sky City and not the 22 other projects where funds have been returned to investors?

This page https://fortressrealdevelopments.com/progress-updates/#all shows a bunch of other developments being built, why would they build these and not SkyCity?

Don't kill the messenger, just asking.

[Roger Strong]

Originally Posted by FormerREIN

Why would they scam people on Sky City and not the 22 other projects where funds have been returned to investors?

You really ought to read some of the other links that have been posted in this thread. You're making some unsupported assumptions about the other 22 projects.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

2021.

That soon? Exciting

[OTA in Winnipeg]

Oh FFS, let's just see what happens okay? All this negative 🞵🞵🞵🞵 brings nothing. Frankly it looks like there's a lot of different people/players that have an agenda. I don't, other than the fact that I would like to see it built.

Let's see what happens. I would love to see this in our skyline.