The last bit is crucial for me as well. Even if they are not the reason for the shutdown OCA have a 100% ethical responsibility to look after their paying guests.
I own shares in OCA
Printable View
That's an idiotic and stupid thing to say. Winner69 is, as usual, stirring the pot. I'm not sure why, but it's not unusual for him? to be sarcastic. At his age you'd think he would grow up and engage in productive discussion.
The Helier is not a rest home, it's luxury retirement apartments at the very top end of NZ choices for retirees' who can afford millions to get into it, with care close at hand. The comparison is ridiculous.
The Wesley Care Centre is a bog standard rest home, on a lease arrangement, just standard one bed rooms rest home, some 'premium' (that means a toilet and shower - or ensuite if you like), with communal resident space for the mobile residents, and hospital and dementia care for the less so. Just the type of rest home that is prevalent across the listed and not listed RV sector that is so vulnerable to the governments' under funding of rest home care.
Many of the residents will be on the government funding, some will be paying for it themselves if they failed the assets means test. But it's still just the most basic of care facilities, which as we know, is not viable for Oceania, or for that matter, any listed RV aged care provider.
It might be confronting if it turns out that Oceania quit Wesley just because it's not profitable, but it's an important business decision, a careful balance of good business, shareholders expectations not to sustain unprofitable properties, against a considered and realistic exit plan for residents.
Agree, but we don't know the whole story yet do we, both parties are reporting conflicting statements. I assume it will become clear very quickly where each party stands, as especially Oceania have an obligation to disclose, whereas the landlord has no obligation.
I only hope that the exit from Wesley, if that's what's happening, is considerate of the residents. Having had parents in these types of facilities, it would be traumatic to have to move, let alone to have no where to go and be turfed out .. after all, they're way beyond making decisions for themselves.
I think the ball is in Ocenia's court to explain what's really going on and what they're doing about it. So far it's not looking good, but I suspect there's a decent story behind it.
Sometimes and this might one of them, it would be helpful if the discussion wasn't flippant, cynical, obtuse or ignorant.
When something important happens, with our investments, an open honest and thoughtful discussion is helpful, whereas all the game playing nonsense is not.
Hopefully we can discuss this openly and honestly and form our opinions from it, otherwise the discussion is of no use.
OCA have a choice here, we'll see soon how they respond,.
The true measure of the culture of a company, country or person is how they treat the needy, not how they pander to the privileged and entitled.
Oceania better have a good explanation for not wanting to extend the lease by another 6 months to at least give all the residents decent time and notice to arrange alternate arrangements.