Huge drop in value - Mining/Gas/Ag town - what to do??

AGL recently announced they were going to drop the fracking side of their business. Fracking wasnt worth the investment with such a low oil price and it was also a huge PR disaster.

All the big energy companies are preparing to switch their focus to renewables and battery technology.

AGL quits coal seam gas, to focus on “energy evolution”

 

I would assume the same thing and no one held a gun to any of the land owners to sign. Yes the OP lost money but that is the risk of any investment. No results are guaranteed (no risk/no reward) and if the properties were booming you wouldn't be asking for people to stand up and voice but instead asking them to attend a workshop about how to make millions in property.

 

U rea

THX Clearly u have no clue about it do u? A lot of people in that particular case didn't want to go, they were not offered unified prices for there land. They were bullied off (the ones who didn't want to go), the town & community was once a vibrant regional area but now has been ripped apart. Some were happy to take the money & retire. The money wasn't much better than the current market value on the day for some so hardly an incentive to go. If it was consistent all round it would have been much more acceptable. It was a huge food producing region not that'd you'd care. The particular company promised a lot but delivered little not that that's anything new. That's right u assume they all got paid, some are still being strung along 8 years later can't get out if they wanted to. It is only ur opinion. I'm not going to keep arguing with u it's a complete waste of my time unless I was face to face with u. Ur completely off the point of my original post. Asking for advice from others who may have been in the same boat & what they found useful, most replies have been very helpful. End of!!!

 

MBO, I agree with you. We who live in cities are really quick to judge the people living on the land. We don't know the reality. It's certainly not all beer and skittles. imho, people on the land get NOWHERE near the support they deserve. I don't go into detail, because I've talked about it elsewhere (maybe on SS).

I've worked on a lot of parliamentary committees about the challenges faced by those in rural Australia, whether it's farming practices, able to compete on world markets, or FIFO.

Sorry MBO you have to listen to ignorant remarks made by people like Thx.

btw, while companies have an obligation to shareholders, I, as a shareholder, expect them to act responsibly towards the communities they enter and the land they pillage. Remember that those resources belong to ALL of us as Australians. In many instances, they not only didn't give back to the communities that hosted them while they ripped resources out of the ground, but they exploited those communities.

 

I am no lawyer but if they have breached contract there would be a case and why would a person hand of title without payment?

 

Why would they be offered unified prices? that makes no sense, as you admit they were offered above market value for their land.

Everything you've said is an opinion, no facts, and it amounts to I don't like this wah wah. Well big deal. Obligations were met, I assume no laws were broken, you don't own what is underneath your land, the state does. The public receive the benefit from mineral rights via royalties.

 

His ''story'' doesn't add up.

 

No they don't. They belong to the state. States charge royalties.

I'm waiting.

 

Completely agree but us city slickers don't know the whole story, however any of the major law firms would love to take a class action out if there was anything substanitle.

Either 1 no one has approached them either they know there is no case or to lazy.
or
2 they have approached a major law firm and they have said there is little to no case here.

3 would be no money and the law firm isn't offering no win no pay as the work involved and the little chance of getting paid (doing their RISK assessment)

 

Most people do not understand this part, it is only a couple of metres you actually own below - the rest belongs to the government.

 

@MBO This is pretty much par for the course for Australian mining companies. They do it here in Australia and overseas, and they've been doing it for years. An article which is a few years old says it well:

Australia is reaping the rewards of an extended mining boom so both government and industry can well afford to devote some of the profits to ensuring communities' grievances are heard and resolved. We should not enjoy the riches of this mining boom without protecting the lives and livelihoods of those whose resources are being extracted for our benefit.

Australian mining companies need to develop a conscience - Opinion

 

Who do you think the 'state' is working for?

Us.

Meanwhile, last year in another resource rich country;

'Everyone in Norway became a theoretical millionaire on Wednesday, in a milestone for the world's biggest sovereign wealth fund that has ballooned thanks to high oil and gas prices.'

Norwegians become crown millionaires as sovereign wealth fund hits benchmark - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

And mining companies pay royalties to the state. Did you miss this part where I mentioned it about a hundred times?

 

@MBO The issues mining towns face are discussed in this article:

When resources are located where other industries (or populations) are already well established, there is real potential for land use conflicts to emerge. Currently we are seeing this played out across Australia where land uses such as mining, agriculture and tourism among others are attempting to coexist in the landscape. The presence of mining in a landscape can completely transform not only land use but also the infrastructure and labour force of a region – in some cases to the detriment of the more traditional or well established sources of economic production.

Some of the key challenges that have emerged for mining regions are the increasingly high cost and shortage of housing, the impact of “fly in and fly out” (FIFO) or “drive in and drive out” (DIDO) workforces, and a significant gap in the wages paid to mining staff and those who work locally in service industries. This in particular creates inequities in communities and is often described as the “two-speed economy”.

Communities in mining regions have been vocal about the need to see some of the benefits of living in Australia’s mining towns. In an article in Resources Policy, Dr Galina Ivanova and Professor John Rolfe from CQU explored what mining communities want, using the town of Moranbah in Queensland as a case study.

As a nation, it is important that we think about the benefits of mining balanced against the costs – those resources under the ground belong to all Australians and we should be active in shaping how they are exploited and how the benefits that flow from mining are used and distributed.We don’t currently take a national approach to managing this issue so we don’t really have a complete picture of exactly who is benefiting and who is bearing the costs of mining, or to what extent this is occurring.


The Social Implications of Mining in Australia | Issues Magazine

 

@Esel, the northern European countries are leaders in most things: childcare, social welfare, human rights, women's rights--as well as how they deal with their countries' resources.

 

its stories like these that actually scare me and my positon, I have virtualy no mining town or resource town properties and my portfolio is decent (well not eveyrone will agree)

since I have a lot of regionals, (is logan considered regional?) what would happen if there was a recession or a correction (im not talking about a collapse) im talking about a significant drop., lets say 5-10%
would I stay afloat??? obviously if I dont sell it wont matter as much but what if prices drop and I cant find a tenant for a lot of my properties!

 

Also leaders on tax, remember someone always needs to pay.

edited for clarity on what tax you pay in Norway..

VAT here is a whopping 25%. Personal income tax rates border 55%. Corporate profits tax ranges from 28% to as high as 78%. Norway even has a direct WEALTH TAX.

 

I think the government missed an investment opportunity when they sold our resources.

You're an investor, do you think australia got a good deal?

 

Norway could teach Australia a thing or two about managing wealth and mining:.

... Australia ... strayed so far from Norway’s stellar example on how to manage the dumb fortune of a resources boom.

The Norwegian government : “One day the oil will run out, but the return on the fund will continue to benefit the Norwegian population.”

The ... fund ...is set to top $one trillion within this decade.

Norway’s oil piggy bank is worth more than the GDP of Switzerland. ... US’ ... annual military budget. In effect, Norway is a country of five million trustifarians – with each person theoretically being a millionaire.

Despite the relatively robust health of the Australian economy, there is no such opportunity for Scrooge McDuck behaviour largely because of the botched way Australia has managed its once in a generation mining boom.

Oil tax: Norway could teach Australia a thing or two about managing wealth |

 

And, funnily enough, people there are happy to pay.