Perhaps the portfolio manages at Octopus can also explain how they managed to waste more than £6m of their Eclipse VCTs money on a under performing, loss making investment in Gloucestershire. The project is called The History Press and the total loss of the business this year will amount to more than £1m. Perhaps somebody could explain why? I suspect Titan 4 will continue the awful practice of pumping real cash into failing businesses to cover up for bad investment decisions!

Octopus investments NAVs have been less than impressive, perhaps the comment above provides an answer. Bad investment decisions can be covered up, that is why tougher regulations on private equity are necessary. It would be nice for Mr Myles to explain how did Octopus arrive at the 15% returns and is it true that they use investment cash to pay out dividends? Also, what are they doing about the bad investment decisions?

Investors should be very wary about VCT's - My experience is that they are cash cows for the investment company - not the investor. It appears that poor performing funds get merged into new issues over a period of time. For example in Aug2010 Octopus merged Octopus 2nd Aim with Octopus IHT AIM vct and then renamed Octopus IHT AIM vct as the New Octopus 2nd AIM vct - sounds complex? It is and is a smoke screen for the fact that they diluted the shareholding in the ratio of 1 old Octopus Second Aim VCT share to equal 0.483 New Octopus 2nd AIm VCT shares so 1,000 shares originally purchased for £1,000 are now only worth £483 in NewCo. Not a very good deal! Also since the share value of the new Octopus 2nd AIM is trading at approx 0.64 pence, OldCo shares are worth even less. Other VCT's have followed the same practice, in what amounts to a face saving exercise by sweeping the rubbish funds under the NewCo carpet. What are your experiences??