SCS Farmland

Ark_Welder

I'm always amused with how these operations that sell tangible assets, such as buildings or land, prefer to operate publicly via intangible locations, such as virtual and temporary offices.

Even the address in Argentina is from serviced offices. (I had time on my hands...:))

savvyguy

Look I have read this thread.

I do have a vested interest in SCS as I have invested through my SIPP fund.

The project is legitimate, is managed through a UK based trustee, security is in agricultural land, I have received annual dividends for five years now and I have opted to remain in the scheme for longer. This is a logical, transparent and secure investment.

This has outperformed all of my Uk property investments by a country mile.

This is not an alternative investment, alternative to losing money maybe. If you investigate it properly it is a legitimate, secure asset backed investment which drives a revenue through soya production in Argentina. We all need food and commodity prices are increasing.

Hundreds of businesses operate out of serviced offices and seeing as the contact details are on the website it doesn't take a genius to research this. It is entirely logical for a South American company to have UK representation when selling into a Uk investment marketed.

The strength of the investment is in the security associated with the project and not whether there are serviced offices or not.

For serious investors just contact SCS, speak to the project manager, arrange to see him, understand the trustee relationship and how your investment is secured and decide if it is right for you or not!!!

For people who just like to pretend to be clever and informed please put disparidging comments after this post and fill five minutes of an otherwise lonely and empty day.

Ark_Welder

savvyguy wrote: »

For people who just like to pretend to be clever and informed please put disparidging comments after this post and fill five minutes of an otherwise lonely and empty day.

How would you like to list the due diligence that you performed that allowed you to form the opinion that this was a worthwhile investment?

qpop

Don't feed the trolls (or scam company employees)!

Ark_Welder

qpop wrote: »

Don't feed the trolls (or scam company employees)!

I wanted to see if his due diligence came up with: serviced offices in London, Cambridge and B.A., or a registered office in Bristol, or a change of company name away from something that was meaningful, or a limited company that is not registered at Companies House (possibly because it might have been registered in the Caribbean), or a simliar company name that is registered in the UK, or a book-keeping service in Northampton.

There was a bit more, but Eastenders had started...

savvyguy

Obviously I know forums are primarily for people who want to be negative and comment on things they know nothing about.

Obviously when people have something positive to say it must be a conspiracy. I will just keep earning my 14% interest per annum whilst your money devalues in the bank. :rotfl:

Best advice I can give is if you do not know how to research an investment then don't invest.

Get a good independant international lawyer
Check out the trustee compeny (They act for you)
Check the security (Deeds, Title, exit strategy)
By the way the reason that SCS farmland is not FSA regulated is because the FSA don't cover Argentinean Agricultural Land.
Since when did FSA regulation mean anything anyway, my endowment linked pension is FSA regulated and that's like throwing money down the toilet.

Ark_Welder

http://www.comova.org.br/pdf/observandosoja/13-Argentina-s-soya-boom.pdf

Conflicts of land tenure – small farmers are driven off the land: It is not unusual that in dubious transactions investors acquire land titles on land where small farmers (with rights of possession – legal occupation through "posesion veinteañal", but without land title) have lived for decades and have always tilled the soil. There have been situations of confrontation between small farmers and bulldozers deployed for woodland clearance. In most cases, there simply is no public cadastre that would bring about a clear legal situation. One major obstacle to ensuring more legal certainty for small farmers is that land owners have to pay the costs of any land survey and of the legal procedure to acquire a land title themselves, which small farmers simply cannot afford. So they just stay on the land they have been occupying, hoping they will be left in peace – a hope which is more and more often frustrated as a result of the advancing agro frontier in the Chaco. The new owners typically submit a legal application for “restitution of property”, which, if granted, means that the small farmers can be evicted. And if a small farmer’s cattle, which traditionally are allowed to roam freely, gets onto a neighbouring large-scale plantation, it is simply killed – which means that the small farmers lose what little they own.

Twelve years of GM soya in Argentina - a disaster for people and the environment
How producing RR soya is destroying the food security and sovereignty of Argentina
GM soya "a death sentence" for Argentina

Hungerdunger

savvyguy wrote: »

Obviously I know forums are primarily for people who want to be negative and comment on things they know nothing about.

Obviously you know very little about the MSE forums.

temagami

Following on from Ark Welder's link above, I see that right now a company called Food Water and Energy SA seems to be having a few legal issues regarding land rights in Argentina:

http://www.elliberal.com.ar/ampliada.php?ID=12625

Obviously, SCS Farmland could be backed by a different Food Water and Energy SA ...

From far upthread:

I won't name them but at least two of the magazines directed at individual investors have run ads from companies which turned out to be less than honest.

As someone who has worked for a few investment magazines, I want to add that just because something in advertised is a magazine does not mean the editorial staff like it. The sales team sometimes drag in advertisers that make the writers cringe, but unless they are obviously fraudulent, they will rarely be rejected. An advert in even the most well-regarded magazine means absolutely nothing in terms of quality control.

cloud_dog

temagami wrote: »

As someone who has worked for a few investment magazines, I want to add that just because something in advertised is a magazine does not mean the editorial staff like it.

Yes, I believe its called 'advertisement' and the 'advertisee' pays money to the advertiser to include it in a publication.

Perhaps there is something fraudulent around this.......... hmmmm.