Who would buy Meridian shares after MRP?

Written By: - Date published: 11:00 am, August 28th, 2013 - 209 comments
Categories: class war, privatisation - Tags:

If you invested in Mighty River, you’ve lost 13% of your money so far. That’s hardly the ‘licence to print money’ that ‘mum and dad’ though they were getting (a belief that the government did little to discourage).

The word is the current plunge is prices is institutions selling off in order to force the Meridian listing price lower and Mighty River has a long way to fall yet. But the lower it goes, the less likely ordinary people will be to risk their savings on another privatised power company.

The only people who will win from this are the institutional investors, and all the middle-men clipping the ticket for tens of millions along the way.

lprent: I thought that the following graph might be instructive for mythic potential “kiwi mom & dad” investors. It almost defines a dog stock being milked by brokers and helping to drag the NZX down… You have to admire the way that how much this asset can fall against a relatively stable market.

Mighty river share price

209 comments on “Who would buy Meridian shares after MRP? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Winston Smith 1
    28 August 2013 at 11:37 am

    I did and will

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/financial-results/9096109/Mighty-River-profit-beats-forecast

    – I expect that when National is returned to power the uncertainty about the power changes will be resolved and the shares will track up but then im in it for the long run

    • lprent 1.1
      28 August 2013 at 12:02 pm

      I have this bridge….

    • McFlock 1.2
      28 August 2013 at 12:11 pm

      how long before the dividends make up your share losses?

      • srylands 1.2.1
        28 August 2013 at 12:13 pm

        “how long before the dividends make up your share losses?”

        What share losses?

        • lightly 1.2.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 12:49 pm

          just because you haven’t cashed in your shares doesn’t mean they don’t have a monetary value that anyone with any sense enters into their accounts.

          If you haven’t sold, then you haven’t crystallised you loss, but your loss is still there.

          • framu 1.2.1.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 1:05 pm

            no youve got it wrong

            – according to wonder boy above, investing in shares is exactly the same thing as saving – ergo you cant possibly loose money.

        • McFlock 1.2.1.2
          28 August 2013 at 12:56 pm

          value of the shares when you bought them – value of the shares now

      • Winston Smith 1.2.2
        28 August 2013 at 12:34 pm

        I haven’t lost anything because I haven’t sold anything so when the dividend comes in I’ll be smiling

        • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1
          28 August 2013 at 12:38 pm

          Ignoring the destruction of your capital is the way to go.

          • AmaKiwi 1.2.2.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 12:50 pm

            CV, please give credit. “Ignoring the destruction of your capital is the way to go” is a direct quote from John Key to the people of NZ.

          • McFlock 1.2.2.1.2
            28 August 2013 at 1:00 pm

            Indeed. The bare land red zoners haven’t lost anything, as long as they don’t try to sell…

          • Vinscreen Viper 1.2.2.1.3
            28 August 2013 at 1:05 pm

            Too simplistic.

            Sure, if you bought at $2.50 and have to sell at $2.23 you’ve ‘destroyed’ some capital, but while you don’t sell the loss is purely on paper.

            Sure, if you’d gambled on the price falling you could buy the same holding now for less capital thus preserving it. But that’s a gamble, and is for the professionals.

            However if you invest for income, as most ‘mum-and-dad’ investors do, the day-to-day shareprice is irrelevant. What matters is the return on what you invested, and while the return by way of dividends from what you spent on the shares is greater than the return you’d get on the same amount in the bank – which is presently the case with MRP – where is the ‘loss’?

            • felix 1.2.2.1.3.1
              28 August 2013 at 1:26 pm

              In the value of the shares ffs.

              Do you know how much your house is worth?

              • McFlock …
                28 August 2013 at 1:38 pm

                exactly.

                Even if you factor the “rental income” of dividends (to continue the house analogy) into the equation, then a 13% hit on the “value” still affects your evaluation of the investment decision.

            • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1.3.2
              28 August 2013 at 6:46 pm

              Sure, if you bought at $2.50 and have to sell at $2.23 you’ve ‘destroyed’ some capital, but while you don’t sell the loss is purely on paper.

              Realistically, shorting the piece of shit shares would have been the right move. Instant 500% pa return on investment.

              Might have to do that with Meridian.

        • lightly 1.2.2.2
          28 August 2013 at 1:04 pm

          do you just write off the cash that you spend on buying shares? and when you do your family accounts, do you just put ‘????’ as the value of your shares?

          If not, if you believe that your shares have some value, then you have to accept that a fall in those shares’ value is a decline in your wealth

          • Vinscreen Viper 1.2.2.2.1
            28 August 2013 at 1:28 pm

            Yes – on paper. If I did those family accounts on a daily basis my ‘wealth’ would go up and down like a yo-yo but in the real world it is a meaningless value.

            But let’s say I have an entry in those accounts for ‘income accrued’. The $8,000 I invested in 3,200 MRP shares might today only be worth $7,136 but the ‘income accrued’ column would show a return of $384. Had I left that $8,000 in the bank on term deposit the capital column would still be $8,000 but the income accrued would only be interest at 4% = $320.

            So what matters more? Your worth on paper or the cash in your pocket?

            [on paper? jesus, the money in your pocket or the numbers in your bank account or the value of your shares or the value of your house are all only wealth ‘on paper’ until you exchange them for goods and services and you have to account for all of them if you want to have a clue of whether you’re doing the right thing with your wealth. The only difference between shares and coins in your pocket is liquidity – the speed with which you can exchange that wealth for something else. Your accounts make no sense because you’ve ignored the bloody equity change, have you heard of Total Shareholder Return? Look it up JH]

            • felix 1.2.2.2.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 1:38 pm

              False dichotomy. Both matter.

              You’re deliberately conflating asset value with income.

              • Vinscreen Viper …
                28 August 2013 at 2:14 pm

                Well, I was trying to demonstrate that there’s another side to the coin. The value of shares over the short term is only of relevance to traders, and that isn’t “mums-and-dads”.

                With the bonus issue to come you’d have been pretty silly to have bought these shares if you weren’t prepared to hold them for at least the two years required, so their value after only six months is of no practical interest.

                Of course if you can tell me now what they will be worth in two-year’s time I would be very, very interested.

                • McFlock …
                  28 August 2013 at 2:49 pm

                  So basically you made a long term investment in an unstable marketplace that might lose a significant customer inside this decade or indeed be massively restructured in order to minimise your investment’s profits and therefore dividend returns (as flagged by two parliamentary parties).

                  “stupid”? Maybe not.
                  “foolhardy”? Definitely.

                  I’d suggest that most “mum&dad investors” would not really be in a position to gamble with their savings so flippantly. A two year investment wouldn’t even recover the lost capital costs in dividends.

                  • srylands …
                    28 August 2013 at 4:15 pm

                    “I’d suggest that most “mum&dad investors” would not really be in a position to gamble with their savings so flippantly. A two year investment wouldn’t even recover the lost capital costs in dividends.”

                    If the company is so crap why do you want the Government to hang on to it and expose taxpayers to losses?

                    • lprent …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:22 pm

                      It isn’t losing money except through the costs of the sales process. It does have downside risks and needs for significiant upfront capital investments for both new generation and maintenance. None of which are likely to be provided by the market as the returns for them are too far down the timeline.

                      However the rest of the economy relies on having effective production of electricity. To date the track record of privatising it in this country shows that the required investments to achieve that do not happen under corporatised and/or private ownership.

                      It is infrastructure for the rest of the economy. That is the job of the government

                    • Tracey …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:27 pm

                      It’s not crap which is why I thought we should hold onto 100%.

                      You probably have no mortgage or other debt srylands, given you allege to put 1500 per month into shares. I cant believe you think you are representative of average NZers in that regard.

                    • felix …
                      28 August 2013 at 6:24 pm

                      “If the company is so crap why do you want the Government to hang on to it and expose taxpayers to losses?”

                      The value is not in the money you fool, it’s in owning the infrastructure to meet our energy needs.

                    • srylands …
                      28 August 2013 at 7:15 pm

                      “The value is not in the money you fool, it’s in owning the infrastructure to meet our energy needs.”

                      It doesn’t matter who owns it. It matters how efficient the business is run. Do you care who owns the supermarket you shop at?

                    • felix …
                      28 August 2013 at 7:22 pm

                      Oh ffs.

                      I’m not the customer. I’m the owner. Yes, it matters because now I pay you for energy I made myself.

                • Tracey …
                  28 August 2013 at 3:08 pm

                  do you have a mortgage or any other debt

                  • Vinscreen Viper …
                    28 August 2013 at 3:45 pm

                    Tracey. No, I don’t.

                    McFlock, I agree with you, broadly. However I have holdings in 27 of the companies listed on the NZX, quite a few on the ASX and some in the US and UK. If I knew which ones were going to do well over the next few years I concentrate on those and sell the dogs but anyone who tells you they do know which is which, is a liar and a fool. MRP is not going to be a stellar performer and may yet turn out to be a dog but even if the latter turns out to be the case it’s not going to make a major dent in my portfolio. I happen to think that even under a Labour Govt. it will return slightly better than the same amount placed on bank term deposit, but that’s just my gamble.

                    • McFlock …
                      28 August 2013 at 3:57 pm

                      So, just to sum up:

                      A few people with the disposable cash to gamble with will possibly benefit from the dividends of 49% of a strategic public asset, while (even if that gamble does not pay off) every other New Zealander misses out on the public benefits of those dividends. In order (just to keep the wider perspective) to make it look like the government doesn’t have to borrow so much in order to pay for the tax cuts it introduced as soon as it took office.

                      Oh, and those tax cuts benefited pretty much the same group of people who can afford to make the aforesaid gamble. While 20% of NZ kids live in poverty and hardship.

                      You, and the government, make me sick.

                    • Tracey …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:28 pm

                      do you rent or own?

                    • Vinscreen Viper …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:30 pm

                      Tracey, I own.

                      McFlock, FWIW2U I didn’t and don’t agree with asset sales – apart from the obvious economic stupidity of selling the goose in order to buy a golden egg the whole rationale behind the breakup of ECNZ in 1999 was the work of dogma-blinded idiots and as I’ve said I would support a Labour and/or Green or any other Government re-creating a State-owned vertically-integrated efficient electricity-generation and supply company.

                      And I certainly didn’t benefit from National’s gratuitious tax cuts.

                      There is a legitimate moral argument that if I didn’t agree with the sale I shouldn’t have had any part of it. On the other hand as it was going to go ahead with or without me, what would have been gained by my dying in a ditch over it?

                      I paid the New Zealand taxpayer for the income stream now coming my way from MRP rather than its going into the consolidated fund. I paid $8,000. The Government could have used that $8,000 to help build new schools and hospitals or run those that exist rather than frittering it away on inane new roads, or even used it to help the NZ kids in poverty. Is it my fault that this Government will probably waste it? Even knowing that the Government would fritter it away, who would be better off if that $8,000 was still sitting in my bank? The sale would still have gone through and that income stream would now be going to bolster the fees paid to KiwiSaver fund managers or foreign investment funds or banks rather than my corner dairy or some hard-working ladies of negotiable affection who are at least Kiwis. (Well, maybe not all of them but that’s another story.)

                      It’s easy to throw stones if you don’t own a glass-house.

                    • McFlock …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:45 pm

                      Let’s see:
                      Oh, I don’t agree with the source of the item

                      Can’t stop it, therefore participate in it

                      Equate “refusing to condone” with “dying in a ditch” over it

                      Other people did the actual theft/con, not me

                      Silly government’s/victim’s own fault for making a bad decision

                      The victim would only waste it anyway, I can put it to much better use

                      Does it concern you that pretty much everything you said to excuse participating in a system that you allegedly do not support can also be said by someone buying goods of questionable provenance off a bloke in the pub?

                      It should.

                    • Tracey …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:53 pm

                      Remind me what you disagreed with about asset sales?

                      http://www.ethicsscoreboard.com/rb_fallacies.html

            • bad12 1.2.2.2.1.2
              28 August 2013 at 7:00 pm

              Lolz excuse my french, but cannot you f**king add, if you had of left the 8 grand in the bank you would have $8320,

              The value of your shares is $7136 plus the dividend of $384, so your worth on paper is far less than had you kept the cash and the interest payment from the bank,

              What do you plan on doing with $384, save it for as long as it takes to recoup what your going to lose in value on the shares over the next 5 years,

              Don’t forget when the share price is driven so low so as to make you sell them you will need an extra year of dividends to pay off the ticket clippers that make the transaction for you,

              Shares are a useless investment unless you are so monied so as to have enough of them spread over various companies that will return you a decent wad of cash otherwise you are just keeping the ticket clippers up to date with the latest BMW…

            • QoT 1.2.2.2.1.3
              28 August 2013 at 7:53 pm

              Yes – on paper.

              This strongly reminds me of when Rodney Hide was having a moan about how “meaningless” the Treaty of Waitangi was because “it’s just a bit of paper”, and someone – sadly I cannot recall who – pointed out that shares are “just bits of paper” too.

              I am a lefty, but my understanding is that modern western capitalism is pretty much built on “on paper”.

              • felix …
                28 August 2013 at 8:58 pm

                I’ve got all these bits of paper in my wallet. I thought it was a couple of hundred bucks, but srylands and whoever that other fuckwit is have convinced me that until I spend it, it has no monetary value.

                Which I suppose means that the time I spent earning it never happened either.

                Maybe I should give it a “projected value”, apparently those can be whatever you like.

        • Tracey 1.2.2.3
          28 August 2013 at 1:50 pm

          well, you will at least concede you have lost the use of the money that you paid for the shares?

          • Vinscreen Viper 1.2.2.3.1
            28 August 2013 at 2:20 pm

            I lost the use of the money I paid for the shares when I paid for them. I don’t see the point of your question.

            Yes, if I’d bought the shares looking to sell them for a profit I’d have a red face now, but I didn’t. If I’d bought these shares with money I knew, or even thought, I might need urgently to use for something else you could justifiably call me stupid, but this wasn’t the case.

            • Tracey 1.2.2.3.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 2:25 pm

              my comment was to Winston not you.

              congrats on being able to afford to buy them. The last Labour government can’t have fucked you up too much.

  2. srylands 2
    28 August 2013 at 12:09 pm

    I did and will too. Enthusiastically. Both companies are sound 30-40 year investments, which is the time frame I am looking at for a dividend payment 1-2% points above LT Bond rate and modest capital appreciation.

    Demand for electricity will continue to rise – wait till we have electric vehicles.

    As for NZ Power – it will either (a) be incapable of being implemented or (b) be implemented and cause chaos. In the event of (a) no problem. In the event of (b) the worst case is a National government will reverse the changes in 2021, combined with a full privatisation of any remaining state ownership.

    • Lanthanide 2.1
      28 August 2013 at 12:14 pm

      Or c), be implemented and turn out to not have any insurmountable problems at all, while destroying your share value.

      Same thing with Rio Tinto shutting the smelter down, as they’re definitely going to do in 2015, thus making it Labour’s problem.

      But hey, it’s much easier just to deny that bad things ever happen to you, stick your hands in your ears and go “lalalalalalaa” isn’t it?

      • srylands 2.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 12:22 pm

        “But hey, it’s much easier just to deny that bad things ever happen to you, stick your hands in your ears and go “lalalalalalaa” isn’t it?”

        I don’t think you can stick your hands in your ears. Anyway that behaviour sounds like what I see people doing who end up on welfare – i.e Labour voters.

        • framu 2.1.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 12:57 pm

          “people doing who end up on welfare – i.e Labour voters.”

          thats some pretty insulting crap considering how many people from all walks of life have been made redundant over the recent years

          Do you have the tiniest bit of humanity? will you retract that one?

        • Tracey 2.1.1.2
          28 August 2013 at 1:54 pm

          wow, getting a bit emotional there srylands.

      • srylands 2.1.2
        28 August 2013 at 12:33 pm

        “Or c), be implemented and turn out to not have any insurmountable problems at all, while destroying your share value.”

        You clearly never worked in a regulatory arm of government. It will have massive problems. It will never be implemented.

          • srylands 2.1.2.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 1:25 pm

            You are still quoting Geoff Bertram?

            • geoff 2.1.2.1.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 1:38 pm

              Am I still quoting someone who knows what they’re talking about? Why yes I am, Captain Obvious.

              Do you have an actual response?

              • srylands …
                28 August 2013 at 1:50 pm

                Yes – try quoting a rational economist who gets it right:

                http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/document/pdf/201323/Electricity2.pdf

                NZ Power will NEVER happen.

                • geoff …
                  28 August 2013 at 4:22 pm

                  And you’re still quoting Brent Layton! The man who failed to do his job and did nothing to stop kiwis getting robbed blind. That man should hang his head in shame instead of defending a cartel.

                  I suppose when you’ve bought a lemon, as you have with MRP shares, you’ll stick your head in the sand as long as possible because you can’t admit you made a mistake.

                  • srylands …
                    28 August 2013 at 4:30 pm

                    ” suppose when you’ve bought a lemon, as you have with MRP shares, you’ll stick your head in the sand as long as possible because you can’t admit you made a mistake.”

                    How do you reconcile calling MRP a “lemon” with the view that it is a valuable strategic asset that should be owned by all taxpayers?

                    I honestly don’t give my MRP shares much thought at all. If the price drops to $2.15 I have decided to invest another $2,000 at that price.

                    The only hysteria I see about the MRP share price is from people on The Standard who don’t own any shares, and argue it never should have been sold 🙂

                    If the share price had spiked upwards to $2.75 by now I am sure we would have seen The Standard commentators hysterical that these capital gains had been enjoyed by the rich few!

                    Can’t win.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:34 pm

                      How do you reconcile calling MRP a “lemon” with the view that it is a valuable strategic asset that should be owned by all taxpayers?

                      Oh its worth the tax payer acquiring at about $2/share, no doubt.

                    • Tracey …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:35 pm

                      Why did you think you needed to lie about your own circumstances on a number of occasions to make your points on this site?

                      As for who wins? You know the answer srylands, it’s people with 1500 bucks spare a month to invest in the sharemarket. You are not a victim here.

                      You are trying to make money on the backs of those whose can only focus on their rising rent costs and paying other bills.

                      “hysterical” might describe someone who has to make up stories about themselves in an anonymous world online to make their points… or delusional.

                      That suggests to support policies like MRP etc you need to be delusional.

                    • Tracey …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:37 pm

                      “I honestly don’t give my MRP shares much thought at all”

                      We can see that.

                    • geoff …
                      28 August 2013 at 4:45 pm

                      No you cant win because you’re advocating for the undeserved transfer of wealth to the rich.

                      You strike me as righty who isn’t merely a loyalist to the Nacts, which I can almost understand, it’s kinda endearing. You’re one of the deeply stupid righties who think its a great idea to gut the wealth of a country for the sake of a few rich people as long as you’re one of them.

    • wtl 2.2
      28 August 2013 at 12:19 pm

      Both companies are sound 30-40 year investments, which is the time frame I am looking at for a dividend payment 1-2% points above LT Bond rate and modest capital appreciation.

      So says the person who doesn’t even know the rate of GST in NZ. Why on Earth would anyone rely on anything you have to say? It doesn’t seem like you are very informed. Not to mention that as a direct shareholder you now also have a vested interested in overselling the investment value of the MRP.

    • AmaKiwi 2.3
      28 August 2013 at 12:55 pm

      @ syrlands.

      Do some research. In Germany large power companies are shrinking because of alternative sources becoming more economical, particularly domestic solar.

      There is a US firm selling sealed electricity producing nuclear power plants with no moving parts. They are no larger than an 80 foot container and can supply 10,000 homes for 20 years without maintenance.

      • srylands 2.3.1
        28 August 2013 at 1:31 pm

        ” syrlands.

        Do some research. In Germany large power companies are shrinking because of alternative sources becoming more economical, particularly domestic solar.

        There is a US firm selling sealed electricity producing nuclear power plants with no moving parts. They are no larger than an 80 foot container and can supply 10,000 homes for 20 years without maintenance.”

        Right. So you are saying that MRP ansd Metridian have no future because of the chnaging economics of small scale generation? If the companies have poor future prospects why on earth is the Left opposed to the Government selling them? The Government can simply transfer the losses from taxpayers to gullible investors like me. You should be pleased!

      • Rich 2.3.2
        28 August 2013 at 1:34 pm

        And what’s more if you don’t like the people in the next town, you can extract the plutonium and make a bomb. Free power for 20 years and your rival city reduced to a smoking desert. What’s not to like?

    • Tracey 2.4
      28 August 2013 at 1:52 pm

      How many shares did you buy?

    • Tracey 2.5
      28 August 2013 at 2:05 pm

      “I did and will too. Enthusiastically. Both companies are sound 30-40 year investments, which is the time frame I am looking at for a dividend payment 1-2% points above LT Bond rate and modest capital appreciation.” –

      If you are correct, you have explained precisely why they shouldn’t have been sold.

  3. srylands 3
    28 August 2013 at 12:11 pm

    “If you invested in Mighty River, you’ve lost 13% of your money so far.”

    No I have lost nothing. You would only lose 13% of you sold your shares.

    • Lanthanide 3.1
      28 August 2013 at 12:16 pm

      Your current NW is your assets at their market value minus your liabilities.

      The market value of the shares has decreased, therefore the value they contribute to your NW has decreased. Whether you realise the losses is irrelevant to whether they’ve taken place or not.

      Have you never done accounting 101?

      • srylands 3.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 12:29 pm

        “Why on Earth would anyone rely on anything you have to say?:

        Well fuck don’t buy any shares. It is a personal choice. I am not and never have advised anyone to buy powerco shares.

        I don’t know why people rely on what I have to say. But they pay me so I can buy lots of shares (and pay GST).

        Do you ever get out of your basement flat in Outer Kaiti?

        • wtl 3.1.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 1:02 pm

          Well fuck don’t buy any shares. It is a personal choice. I am not and never have advised anyone to buy powerco shares.

          No, not in so many words. But you are saying that they have great investment potential which is obviously an endorsement of the power company shares. And I am simply pointing out that an endorsement from a random person on the internet who doesn’t even know one of the most basic things about the NZ tax system is worth even less than the endorsement of random guy X at the bar.

          Not to mention that if you really were a savvy investor you would have purchased the shares at the recent $2.20 price – but from the tone of the other comments you’ve posted, it sounds like you were one of the suckers who purchased at the offer price of $2.50, and are now sitting on a capital loss of around 10%.

          I don’t live anywhere near Outer Kaiti. Is that meant to be some kind of insult?

          • srylands 3.1.1.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 1:14 pm

            “I don’t live anywhere near Outer Kaiti. Is that meant to be some kind of insult?’

            Yes

            • wtl 3.1.1.1.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 2:06 pm

              Ah, so now you have started channeling John Key.

              Supplementary Question: Given your answer to the previous question, do you think that your insult had any effect whatsoever, or completely fell flat?

      • felix 3.1.2
        28 August 2013 at 12:31 pm

        Lol you don’t pay GST srylands. You don’t even know the rate of GST.

        • srylands 3.1.2.1
          28 August 2013 at 12:35 pm

          “You don’t even know the rate of GST.”

          It is 10% where I am.

          • framu 3.1.2.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 1:01 pm

            via wtl’s link – “15%, 20% doesn’t matter – whatever it is now just increase it by 5% and let me know when it is done.”

            so you dont even know the GST rate IN NZ do you (because “in NZ” is the location of the topic genius)

            well done randian superman – you get a banana

            • srylands 3.1.2.1.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 1:17 pm

              “so you dont even know the GST rate IN NZ do you (because “in NZ” is the location of the topic genius)”

              yes I looked it up – 15% – but it is 10% in Australia where I live.

              • felix …
                28 August 2013 at 1:29 pm

                That’s funny, just the other week you insisted you lived in NZ.

                And you seemed so legit all along too.

                • Tracey …
                  28 August 2013 at 1:57 pm

                  he started losing his character when he began using insults which he prided himself on not bothering with because he doesn’t get emotional over politics. Perhaps it’s just that he gets emotional over money.

              • McFlock …
                28 August 2013 at 1:33 pm

                How’s it going filling that $100k sorry $150k-200k job in NZ? Is it up to half a mil yet?

                • Tracey …
                  28 August 2013 at 2:10 pm

                  “I am looking to employ a number of people and I just can’t get the people with the right skills so I am importing people from overseas to fill the jobs. These are jobs paying $100,000 plus. There are not enough locals that can do the work…

                  There is a mismacth bewteen (too many of) the unemployed and vacancies. that is my point. We need to inject more flexibility into the labour market and part of that is about incentives.

                  What is distressing is that you are not thinking laterally about how labour markets work, and about how we live in a globalised labour market. As I said, there are lots of jobs in Western Australia. What is stopping a welfare recipient here getting on a plane and trying their luck? Whining and blaming “rich pricks” gets you nowhere.” emphasis added

                  • Richard Down South …
                    28 August 2013 at 4:21 pm

                    “There is a mismacth bewteen (too many of) the unemployed and vacancies. that is my point. We need to inject more flexibility into the labour market and part of that is about incentives.”

                    What the labour market needs is about 150k decently paying jobs for decent employers who value good employees. Thus the unemployment rate would go down, PAYE intake would be greater, people would spend more, thus more companies should make better profits, thus more tax take (if active tax avoidance doesnt happen) and GST intake would increase

                    but no, the govt would rather see wages low 😉 (all the better to increase their own, and their friends, person wealth)

              • Hayden …
                28 August 2013 at 1:34 pm

                That’s weird, a couple of weeks ago you lived in Kapiti.

                From here.

                srylands:

                Yes I do need it becasue it will reduce the time to travel from Kapiti to 125 The Terrace to 34 minutes (about a 12 % saving) and reduce my petrol consumption by 15%.

                Plus I only travel in off peak – arrive at work at 10am and leave the office at 7.30pm.

                Short memory?

                • felix …
                  28 August 2013 at 1:40 pm

                  It must get confusing looking after 8 or 9 trool handles at once.

                • srylands …
                  28 August 2013 at 1:51 pm

                  Who cares? Kapiti, Sydney, doesn’t matter. We are all citizens of the world now anyway.

                  • Tracey …
                    28 August 2013 at 1:58 pm

                    oh dear… we didn’t care until you started making more shit up

                  • Hayden …
                    28 August 2013 at 1:58 pm

                    Well, you seemed to care quite a bit about your travel time from Kapiti. Were you lying about that?

                  • Lanthanide …
                    28 August 2013 at 2:01 pm

                    Ah, yeah, it kinda does matter if you’re talking about a motorway in Kapiti and explicitly talk about how it will save you time and petrol.

                  • wtl …
                    28 August 2013 at 2:11 pm

                    Who cares? Kapiti, Sydney, doesn’t matter. We are all citizens of the world now anyway.

                    Yes, I was right. Definitely channeling John Key.

                  • freedom …
                    28 August 2013 at 2:46 pm

                    bye bye srylands,
                    though largely exasperating in their scope of ignorance, these past months it has been mildly amusing to sit back and watch your lies collapse like so many playroom blocks,

                    I am sure we will see you again soon with a whole new handle

  4. Sinnick 4
    28 August 2013 at 12:24 pm

    I’d pencilled in up to $50,000 to invest in Mighty River Power but in the light of the pre-float revelations throttled that back to only $10,000 and so after allocation ended up with 3,200 shares for $8,000. So to the ignorant and with the share-price currently at $2.23 (midday 28/08/13) I would appear to be sitting on a loss of 3,200 x $0.27 = $864.

    However I still have the bonus shares to come, if I hold MRP for two years as I will. That will reduce the unit cost to $2.40@ so at today’s price my loss would equal 3,200 x $0.17 = $544. Let’s say that instead of partaking in the float I purchased instead my final holding of 3,328 at today’s price with added broker’s commission it would cost me $7,569.87, or a loss of only $430.13.

    So at this moment in time I – and the other ‘mum-and-dad holders’ are sitting on a ‘loss’ of around 5.5%. A $0.05 increase in the share price (a mere 2%) would reduce that loss to $269. MRP gained 1.83% just in a few hours this morning.

    On the other hand, how much would I need to invest in the bank on term deposit to earn the same in interest as I will gain on these dividends? $8,500? The same return from MRP shares will only have cost me $8,000 so whatever the share price I’m $500 ahead.

    This is the reason I will buy Meridian shares. Sure there’s a risk and I will balance my portfolio accordingly, but there’s risk with any equity and if you don’t like it stick your money in the bank for the lower return – and don’t worry about what happened to the poor bastards who had their money nice and safely in Icelandic, Cypriot, Greek and Spanish banks.

    • lprent 4.1
      28 August 2013 at 1:39 pm

      There appears to be no fundamental reason in the market to cause the share prices in Mighty River to rise. Looks to me like there is only risk of further falls. As you have pointed out, the only reason that you can see for gaining a profit at present over the next few years is in the loyalty bribe.

      On the other hand(s). And looking in the same terms – market plus government benefits..

      • The alternate of putting money in a term deposit is largely risk free. Look at the governments response after the GFC.
      • Even most kiwisaver conservative funds would give a better rate – and they have a better government bribe as well.

      Of course there could be dividend returns. However the power market in NZ is pretty flat at present, likely to remain that way for some time, and has the high risk of having an extra ~20% generation capacity being dropped on to the market post 2017

      BTW: Investing in any investment fund that merely tries to emulate the market beta that would give a better return. Perhaps you should do a bit more research.

      It was rather amusing you not pointing to anything in the fundamentals of the MRP’s business about why they’d improve their shares performance. Which is it? – betting or graphing that is your investment vice? Either are pretty damn silly if you’re prepared to hold shares.

      • alwyn 4.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 1:53 pm

        Be careful Lprent.
        This entry may be getting rather close to giving investment advice. Are you an authorised financial advisor?
        Disclaimer. I am not a qualfied lawyer and this statement is not to be taken in any manner as being legal advice. (There, that’s the sort of thing lawyers seem to use to get out of any responsibilty for their work)

        • Lanthanide 4.1.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 2:05 pm

          I don’t think Lprent has any reputation for being able to give investment advice, so doesn’t need a disclaimer.

          It’s people who are involved in the financial industry/media who have to give disclaimers.

          • alwyn 4.1.1.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 2:39 pm

            I’ll take your word for this. I thought the Act excluded certain groups rather than included them so that it was quite easy to get caught up in the rules.
            On the other hand you will have noticed my very broad disclaimer so nobody should rely on my views on the law.
            Actually if you claimed that this blog was a publication and that the contributors were journalists you would probably be in the clear.
            The section on who is NOT covered by the Act appears to include journalists.

        • lprent 4.1.1.2
          28 August 2013 at 2:39 pm

          🙂 People can take my musings or leave them as they choose.

          I did an MBA at Otago in the mid-80’s. Some of the finance courses have proved useful over the years.

          I was kind of amused by Sinnicks view of share investments as being some kind of gambling without *any* discussion of the companies fundamentals as being more like the musings of a PR spinner than any kind of real investor. My father has a better appreciation of investing than that.

          srylands further up has a better appreciation of the investment basics for electricity utilities. They’re a long term investment. There will be a interesting future for them iff the types of electric cars that become prevalent are charged from the grid.

          Of course coming from my science side, I think that is an unlikely and awkward scenario. The limiting factor is the limitations on charge times which shows a remarkable resistance to being reduced. That tends to make self-charging hybrids the more likely development pattern over the coming decades. As fossil fuel prices continue to rise, then it becomes worth while creating alternatives to them. And the fuels produced are portable – which has been the big advantage of liquid fuelled cars over the last century.. Much more likely.

          So I don’t think that there will be a electricity producer’s bonanza – just business as usual. Moreover the business as usual has been seeing a strong flattening in demand even before the GFC. Everything is more energy efficient than it was a decade ago. That is why we haven’t really increased generation capacities significantly in NZ for decades.

          Electricity is rapidly heading back to it’s normal state. An essential natural monopoly industry with a lousy investment profile..

          Should I warn people about tech advice as well?

      • Vinscreen Viper 4.1.2
        28 August 2013 at 2:51 pm

        My personal view – and I’m not an investment advisor – is that the share price in Mighty River will sans unforseen disaster increase because the NZ share market is very small and there are a great many institutions such as the Cullen Fund, KiwiSavers, EQR etc. who have a stream of cash to pump into it. But there again as an investor I play a very long game, tending to buy and hold.

        There is no way on earth I would try to outguess folk with degrees, insider contacts and all the resources of investment banks – particularly as in my experience they don’t have a particularly impressive track record. Hence I go for a wide spread of smallish holdings and hope to gain on the swings as much if not more than I lose on the roundabouts. Sure I’m never going to have Warren Buffet shining my shoes but it hasn’t done me too badly over the last 20-years.

        I’d have agreed that term deposit is ‘largely’ risk free – but that was before the Iceland affair, Greece, Cyprus and Spain. Cypriots in particular took a hiding on their ‘safe’ bank deposits because their banks are largely Greek owned and run much the way that NZ’s banks are Australian owned and run. With the levels of current NZ debt I doubt the Govt would be able to bail out ANZ, Westpac et al if the Australian economy hit the skids.

        Kiwisaver funds put the funds out of reach even of a rainy day, ‘less you’re close to 65. And those that did well did it on the back of a pretty spectacular capital gain by NZ shares over the last year or more. MRP shares produced 5% by income alone. The capital ‘loss’ is irrelevant to me at the moment as I have no reason to realise it.

        Personally I would be delighted if the next Labour Government did the intelligent thing and reintegrated the whole electricity industry into a single entity run on efficient, sensible lines, and I’d be happy to get no more than my $2.50 share back (plus the $3.10 I paid for the Contact Energy shares I still hold).

        • lprent 4.1.2.1
          28 August 2013 at 3:07 pm

          Ok so you’re mostly looking at having a reasonably reliable trickle feed dividend stream.

          I’d guess you are like my old man – retired and looking for dividend income rather than direct capital gains. Willing to take a capital gain if it happens along. Typically sell half when the value hits a predefined trigger value going up, reinvest elsewhere, and reset the trigger for the next half sale. Drop the dogs as soon as you can after you realise that there is nothing behind their business model.

          Provided the MRP power people don’t start pushing into grandiose schemes (ie watch their debt budgets and question yourself about why it is increasing), then MRP should do the traditional utility revenues.

          You’re right on the brokers. Churning transaction fees into their bank accounts.

    • Tracey 4.2
      28 August 2013 at 1:58 pm

      the poor of NZ are pleased for you. Sleep well.

  5. infused 5
    28 August 2013 at 12:25 pm

    Yes, because buying shares is an instant get rich scheme… glad you guys don’t run the country.

  6. Enough is Enough 6
    28 August 2013 at 12:26 pm

    I was against the sales, campaigned against them, and will continue to campaign against future sales. However in the interests of keeping a tiny piece of ownership in New Zealand hands I invested. Yep some of my capital has dissapeared but that is the nature of the beast and risk in any investment. I am reasonably confident it will rise again following Merdians float when the institutional investors stop messing about. I will probably invest again to again keep a tiny proportion in Kiwi hands. And I don’t expect in the medium to long term that either of these companies is likely to faulter in an energy scarce world. Sorry I may be sounding like an Actoid, but share price fluctuations often have nothing to do with the real world, or health of a company and more to do with blind speculation and big player ‘playing’ the market.

    • Tracey 6.1
      28 August 2013 at 2:02 pm

      hmmmm…. you haven’t helped keep them in “kiwi hands” you have helped keep them in ” a kiwi’s” hands, which may seem like semantics but it’s not because largely the dividends would go toward social stuff like hospitals, education, roads and so on. In your hands, not so much.

      I invest in shares. I have had good fortune with shares. I also agree that long term these shares will probably provide a good return. I didn’t buy any and won’t buy any because I don’t agree with the sale.

      Cutting off my nose to spite my face, or practising the values I preach?

      • Winston Smith 6.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 2:57 pm

        Or deciding that your way and only your way is the best way, hubris much?

      • Vinscreen Viper 6.1.2
        28 August 2013 at 4:45 pm

        And I put forward the contrary argument at 1.2.2.2.1 above. I don’t agree with the sale but bought.

  7. Winston Smith 7
    28 August 2013 at 12:37 pm

    Finally a leftie that makes sense

  8. Vinscreen Viper 8
    28 August 2013 at 1:17 pm

    OK. Have just seen Mighty River’s Annual Results. Final dividend = $0.072/share bringing the total payout for the year to $0.12 share.

    So my holding which cost me $8,000 will return $384 this year. To earn the same return from a bank term deposit at 4% (the going rate) I’d have to invest $9,600.

    So by that measure I’m $1,600 up.

    • Hayden 8.1
      28 August 2013 at 1:48 pm

      So my holding which cost me $8,000 will return $384 this year. To earn the same return from a bank term deposit at 4% (the going rate) I’d have to invest $9,600.

      If you had a mortgage (at 6%) you could have saved $480, without taking compounding interest into account.

      • lprent 8.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 2:16 pm

        Which is of course is always the key in the discussion of anyones finances. Do they have debt?

        As an individual paying off debt as an individual usually beats the hell out of any share market investments. It is also risk-free

        Often the key to looking at the way people look at investments has to do with their debt levels. What my mortgage free parents invest in is completely different to what I, with my mortgage, invest in. The transfer mechanism of wealth (ie theft) from those of us who used to own 100% of Mighty River to the rentiers who now own half of it is obvious.

        • Tracey 8.1.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 2:22 pm

          Norman has a point…

          Not very fiscally astute to forego 11% return instead of borrowing at 3%. Of course Key and his supporters think Norman is a looney, which explains their own brand of apparent fiscal stupidity.

          As many say Key isn’t stupid, so he has gone against all fiscal logic for a reason…

          • Rhinocrates 8.1.1.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 2:32 pm

            Key isn’t stupid

            Well, cunning in a way, but that’s what leads all endeavours to disaster – a kind of cunning or rather “glamour” that suits a short-term aim, but spells disaster in the long term. Key epitomises that by being concerned only with the very short term for a very narrow group centred about himself.

            • Tracey 8.1.1.1.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 2:40 pm

              I agree. I meant that he knows who was going to profit from buying these shares, and the next. He comes from a background of duplicity and back-scratching to get places and he is just doing it on our stage now. His reward will come after he steps down or loses, if not already. I would guess he has offshore bank accounts after all his time offshore..

              • Winston Smith …
                28 August 2013 at 3:11 pm

                “I would guess he has offshore bank accounts after all his time offshore..”

                – And whats wrong with that? I’m sure theres one or two labour politicians with offshore bank accounts.

    • McFlock 8.2
      28 August 2013 at 2:00 pm

      $600 up. At the moment.
      You lost a thousand dollars on the purchase price, remember? In a few months, too. Lucky you’re in it for the long term – maybe.

      What’s your threshold to cut your losses?

    • Zorr 8.3
      28 August 2013 at 2:01 pm

      You are operating on a fallacy there Vinscreen.

      If you had a term deposit of $8000 @ 4%, you would have a total net worth of $8,320

      If you bought $8000 worth of shares at the initial offer of $2.50, you would have 3200 shares which gives you your $384 of dividends for the year. *HOWEVER* those shares are now worth only $2.21 which means you only have a total net worth of $7,072 – you have lost over $1000

      The fallacy you are operating under is an assumption that the shares will return to the initial value – there is no guarantee of that. It’s much better to work with reality and make evidence based analysis rather than stare at the clouds for financial guidance.

      • Vinscreen Viper 8.3.1
        28 August 2013 at 3:31 pm

        No, Zorr.

        I’ve no problem with any of your figures. They are quite right. On paper I have ‘lost’ $1,000. But as I have no current intention to realise that loss (ie make it ‘real’) it is meaningless.

        I refute your use of the word ‘fallacy’, as I have no such assumption.

        I have $10,000 for which I have no immediate – or even short-term – need. (Ain’t I lucky!) What do I do with it?

        1. I have no mortgage or debts to pay down – symptomatic of a boring life.

        2. I could go out and buy a nicer car or take a holiday somewhere, but have no desire to do either. In fact I have pretty much everything I want, which includes not having to work for a living but can play at being an artist as long as my investments produce sufficient income for me to live on as my art works never will.

        3. I could give it to charity – but then without the income I’d either have to get a job and keep someone else out of it, become a beneficiary or, ah, apply to charity for support.

        4. I could put the lot on “Wideboy” for the 3.15 at Kempton – if I knew the first thing about horse-racing which I don’t.

        5. I could stick it under the mattress and draw on it as I needed it – in which case it would eventually cease to exist entirely.

        6. I could invest it for the income. That gives me the choice of:

        a) a nice, safe (up to a point), non-inflation-proofed low-paying bank deposit account, or if I judge I already have enough in nice, safe, etc. term deposits to keep me out of the poor-house even in GFC II I might choose to invest it in:

        b) slightly riskier but higher paying equities to give me that little extra for the occasional bottle of a nice single malt or a visit to the accommodating working ladies in that discrete little club of theirs around the corner.

        I judged MRP would deliver enough for a couple of bottles of the malt but wouldn’t pay enough for me to help keep the working ladies gainfully employed, and I was right. So I’m quite happy with my investment in MRP whatever paper loss it might presently be showing.

        • Lanthanide 8.3.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 6:25 pm

          And yet, if you were to apply for a mortgage, what they do is look through all your assets and all of your debts to work out your NW.

          The shares you hold would be valued at today’s market value. The shares are now worth less than what you paid for them. They are now worth less than if you had simply held the $8,000 in the bank.

          Whether you choose to realise the loss is irrelevant as to whether the loss has occurred.

    • Tracey 8.4
      28 August 2013 at 2:13 pm

      “I’m ok mate, fuck the neighbours” –

      I bet you want more crims locked up too, but expect the rest of us to pay for the prisons.

    • alwyn 8.5
      28 August 2013 at 2:15 pm

      You might also care to note that the MRP dividend is fully imputed, ie after tax, wheras the return on a term deposit is pre-tax.
      On the other hand I am very curious to know where, or why, you talk about the total payout for the year being $0.12 in your hand.
      You, like everyone else didn’t own the shares util May and never received the March dividend.

      • Hayden 8.5.1
        28 August 2013 at 2:35 pm

        On the other hand I am very curious to know where, or why, you talk about the total payout for the year being $0.12 in your hand.
        You, like everyone else didn’t own the shares util May and never received the March dividend.

        He (or she) could mean that his holding will return $384 this year, not necessarily all to him, i.e., 4.8c/share to the government. On the other hand it could be a poorly-researched sock-puppet.

        • Vinscreen Viper 8.5.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 4:40 pm

          I was extrapolating a 5% return.

          An outfit like MRP could probably cook the books for many years to support dividends at that level even should earnings not fully support it.

    • bad12 8.6
      28 August 2013 at 7:18 pm

      VV, that definitely takes accounting into the realms of stupidity, mind you the profession in my opinion has never been far removed from that point anyway…

    • QoT 8.7
      28 August 2013 at 7:55 pm

      So by that measure I’m $1,600 up.

      Only on paper.

  9. Tim 9
    28 August 2013 at 2:54 pm

    Mum in dead vestas. Oh dear – here said

  10. freedom 10
    28 August 2013 at 3:29 pm

    it’s been rattling around the ‘ol noggin since I heard a news report on natrad this a.m, but can anyone explain what Blinglish meant when he said we have more dividends from Mighty River now that it has been sold ? 😕

    or was he just spouting rubbish knowing it would be broadcast to the nation without challenge ?

    • lprent 10.1
      28 August 2013 at 4:28 pm

      The state still owns something at or over 51% directly, and indirectly some more through investments of the Cullen fund, EQC, ACC, etc.

      • freedom 10.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 6:22 pm

        I know it is all a done deal now and I should really get over it but when I hear Blinglish hurl that tripe I am only reminded of how we used to receive 100% of the dividends.
        It is a small point, but an important point , lest we forget and all that

  11. chris73 11
    28 August 2013 at 5:13 pm

    Shares go up, shares go down…would I prefer them to be up well sure but it doesn’t bother me in the slightest as I’m in for the long haul

  12. srylands 12
    28 August 2013 at 5:16 pm

    At the end of the day this is partial float of a small power co in a small country.

    It just isn’t worth the hysteria I see here, and that expressed hysteria makes you look silly.

    Either the investment will pay off for those who bought shares or it won’t. Like all investments.

    Ultimately all power generation assets in NZ will be privately owned. That end point is inevitable. There are many more important public policy issues to worry about.

    • McFlock 12.1
      28 August 2013 at 5:25 pm

      A $2.5 Billion company is “small”?

      Fuck off, liar.

      • geoff 12.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 5:38 pm

        +1 McFlock!

      • srylands 12.1.2
        28 August 2013 at 5:53 pm

        Look it is a one off wealth transfer that is equal to 5 weeks welfare payments! Worry about that.

        Worry about the real issues. the thousands who won’t or can’t work, and the children in dysfunctional families all supported by a small number of high income taxpayers! Worry about productivity performance. DON’T worry about who owns a power company or what the share price is or might be.

        So yes it is a small issue not worth the hysterics – for god’s sake the majority of the shares are (stupidly) going to remain in state ownership!

        • Colonial Viper 12.1.2.1
          28 August 2013 at 6:16 pm

          Any particular reason you want us to ignore this wealth transfer to the richest people in the world?

          NZ could use those tens of millions of dollars to create thousands of new jobs.

          So yes it is a small issue not worth the hysterics – for god’s sake the majority of the shares are (stupidly) going to remain in state ownership!

          Seems like you’re the one in hysterics. I think that the Crown should allow the share price to deteriorate over the next couple of years and gradually buy the generators back at a discount rate.

          • freedom 12.1.2.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 6:29 pm

            srylands might be in hysterics, he might be in rapture, who can tell?
            Can he really be expected to know his state of mind?
            He doesn’t even know what country he is in 😆

            • srylands 12.1.2.1.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 7:03 pm

              Oh fuck off.

              Today I am in Wellington. Next week I will be in Melbourne. Tonight I will be driving to the Kapiti Coast (sans Transmission Gully). Last week I was visiting my mum in Sydney.

              But I usually do know where I am. You must be thinking of your stoner welafre mates in Naenae or Matamata or wherever the fuck you live.

              • felix …
                28 August 2013 at 7:11 pm

                More googlemapping. Just pick a couple of maori placenames, eh?

                Bit like last week when you looked at the map and decided the ideal place for a nuclear power station was on a tidal mudflat.

                You. Idiot.

              • bad12 …
                28 August 2013 at 7:27 pm

                Rylands the minor bean counter for a firm of Wellington tax lawyers has long been lost in a little fantasy world of His own makings where He is something more than that minor bean counter,

                Like all compulsive liars when caught Rylands has to stop for an hour or two to think up another complication to the lies already told in an effort to offer up some form of explanation,

                Amusingly that little firm of Wellington tax lawyers who hire Rylands to operate an adding machine would be un-amused to find that He has been accessing the internet on the company’s time to peddle His brand of f**ked up politics to all and sundry and would more than likely kick His arse out the door and laugh at Him while they did so…

                [lprent: Speculating about who people are in real life isn’t allowed. This is an implication of the privacy policy.

                As per the rest of the policy, I’ll confirm or deny my opinion of claims if and only if they claim particular specific identities (to stop identity theft), or if they claim authority by virtue of specific knowledge or expertise (to stop silly flame wars).

                You’d be amazed at what I can wheedle out of the metadata just on this site. That is why access to it is restricted to myself and probably the GCSB (but they have to do it the hard way). ]

                • srylands …
                  28 August 2013 at 7:48 pm

                  I like the capitalise Him. That must be a Left thing. Like Comrade.

                  No thankfully I am not a tax anything or a lawyer anything.\

                  and “my fucked up brand of politics” is simply fucked up through your extreme lens of envy and faith in regulation. My politics simply mirror those of most New Zealanders. As reflected in teh results of the last election. And the current opinion polls.

                  I agree that most New Zealanders don’t like asset sales. They are wrong. But in any case they clearly don’t care enough to change their vote.

                  Ultimately we will be just like Australia – privatisation is a non issue for 90% of the population. Most of them love it because they have a stake in their mutual funds.

                  Imagine any Party in Australia that adopted a policy of ‘buy back the Commonwealth Bank”.

                  Eventually New Zealanders will come around. Internationally it is the naive and mental cupcakes who think Governments running power cos is a good thing !!! New Zealand is just a bit slow to catch on.

                  • bad12 …
                    28 August 2013 at 7:57 pm

                    Your long winded denial is of course as amusing as your claims to being an economist are,

                    Perhaps i have the wrong person,but, i doubt my info is incorrect, just by your sudden change of manner i detect someone who is worried,

                    Of course now you have my interest piqued i will try and make time in the next week to follow up on my initial inquiry, do not be surprised if your bosses take an interest in your use of the company computer over and above their normal concerns…

                  • felix …
                    28 August 2013 at 9:01 pm

                    No srylands, it is the naive and mental cupcakes who think there should be power companies involved at all.

                    • srylands …
                      28 August 2013 at 9:28 pm

                      “No srylands, it is the naive and mental cupcakes who think there should be power “companies” involved at all.”

                      Right so that would be nearly every country in the OECD then?

                    • felix …
                      28 August 2013 at 9:38 pm

                      Correct. The ones run by corporate fucks who have convinced the gullible – like yourself – that it doesn’t matter who owns and controls anything, while simultaneously putting every possible effort into owning and controlling everything.

                  • framu …
                    29 August 2013 at 7:16 am

                    “My politics simply mirror those of most New Zealanders”

                    “I agree that most New Zealanders don’t like asset sales”

                    monumental own goal there liar

                • bad12 …
                  28 August 2013 at 10:16 pm

                  Yes, my bad there definitely transgressed upon the rules, i will spend the week telling myself not to be sucked into such situations,

                  lolz Lprent RE the GCSB they probably have at least half the commenters here up on the screens by the keystroke as we make them…

                  • srylands …
                    29 August 2013 at 12:10 am

                    “the GCSB they probably have at least half the commenters here up on the screens by the keystroke as we make them…”

                    I really doubt that.

              • tricledrown …
                28 August 2013 at 10:00 pm

                srylands ‘but usually I don’t know where I am”
                Stopped telling lies wow.
                welafare
                what ru on schrill

        • McFlock 12.1.2.2
          28 August 2013 at 10:59 pm

          great – now the government has to borrow an additional 5 weeks payments, every year, permanently.

          Oh, and fuck off, liar.

          • srylands 12.1.2.2.1
            28 August 2013 at 11:29 pm

            “great – now the government has to borrow an additional 5 weeks payments, every year, permanently.”

            No they do not. The 5 weeks payment is equal to the capital value. The Government only needs to borrow each year the amount they have lost in dividends.

            • McFlock 12.1.2.2.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 11:34 pm

              lol
              nice clarification – up 5 weeks in one year, down dividends = permanently
              The opposite of a long term investment

          • srylands 12.1.2.2.2
            28 August 2013 at 11:30 pm

            “Oh, and fuck off, liar.’

            Charming

            • McFlock 12.1.2.2.2.1
              28 August 2013 at 11:35 pm

              more charming than a person with no knowledge of even the basics of the NZ economy telling us how to run it.

              • Colonial Viper …
                28 August 2013 at 11:39 pm

                shitlands = a minor minion on an errand from the centre of global empire.

              • srylands …
                28 August 2013 at 11:40 pm

                “more charming than a person with no knowledge of even the basics of the NZ economy telling us how to run it.”

                So you think you run the economy?

                • McFlock …
                  28 August 2013 at 11:42 pm

                  I think new zealanders run the economy, via their parliament.

                  Not australians.

                  Fuck off, liar.

                  • srylands …
                    28 August 2013 at 11:47 pm

                    “I think new zealanders run the economy, via their parliament.”

                    Really? You should go back to the beginning.

                    http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/briefings/1984i/

                    (BTW I think you will find that Australians have immense influence over the NZ economy – certainly way more than the NZ Parliament! )

                    • McFlock …
                      28 August 2013 at 11:53 pm

                      We had an economy before 1984, doofus.

                      Can australians rewrite the foundations of the NZ economy including money supply, taxation, company law, inheritance and gift laws, ownership and sale of strategic assets, regulate monopolistic industries (and any industry), control imports and exports, etc, etc, etc?

                      No? Or did you forget all those things, like the rate of GST?

                      Fuck off, liar.

                    • srylands …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:01 am

                      “Fuck off, liar.”

                      Charming

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:04 am

                      Hey shitlands…

                      Fuck off, liar.

                    • framu …
                      29 August 2013 at 7:18 am

                      “Australians have immense influence over the NZ economy”

                      which is an argument AGAINST everything youve been promoting here

                      liar

                  • srylands …
                    28 August 2013 at 11:48 pm

                    “Fuck off, liar.”

                    Charming

                    • McFlock …
                      28 August 2013 at 11:57 pm

                      Only a randian superhero would assume that everything someone else says is an effort to charm him.

                    • srylands …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:00 am

                      “Can australians rewrite the foundations of the NZ economy”?”

                      Stop dreaming. The foundations of the NZ economy have not been rewritten since 1994. It is the foundation regulations – some of which you mentioned that are critical. (anti trust law, the PFA, employment law, the RBA, and taxation). Since 1994, all those have only been tinkered with – there has been no “rewriting the foundations”.

                      Can you give me an example of foundation economic management settings changing in the last 10 years?

                      By contrast Australian institutions via the banks and the CER have had a major influence.

                      So yes – in the last 20 years Australian institutions have had a bigger effect on the New Zealand economy than the New Zealand Parliament.

                      And for practical purposes, how the economy is managed has 1984 as year zero. Between 1984 and 1994 there were revolutionary changes in economic management.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:02 am

                      Shitlands shit scared, embracing the failed past with a death grip.

                      So yes – in the last 20 years Australian institutions have had a bigger effect on the Australian economy than the NZ Parliament.

                      😀 thanks for admitting it, loser.

                    • srylands …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:05 am

                      “thanks for admitting it, loser.”

                      I am amazed you think it is controversial? (BTW I stated “in the last 20 years Australian institutions have had a bigger effect on the NEW ZEALAND economy than the New Zealand Parliament.” – you misquote me)

                    • McFlock …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:14 am

                      Stop dreaming. The foundations of the NZ economy have not been rewritten since 1994.

                      The electricity sector has been rewritten since then.
                      As has the dairy sector – fonterra becoming a co-op.

                      And the idea that if something hasn’t happened in 20 years then it most likely won’t happen is a pretty stupid concept.

                      Never said aussies don’t have an influence. But the point is that the government has the final word. So yeah, I think NZers run the economy, not australians. So fuck off, liar.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:16 am

                      Nah I didn’t misquote you. You wrote in error exactly as I copy and pasted it. And then you edited it when you noticed your mistake.

                      Anyway, I knew what you meant.

                      Seems you’re still lying through your teeth though.

                    • srylands …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:23 am

                      “The electricity sector has been rewritten since then.
                      As has the dairy sector – fonterra becoming a co-op.”

                      Is that the best you can come up with?

                      Your previous assertions were:

                      “money supply, taxation, company law, inheritance and gift laws, ownership and sale of strategic assets, regulate monopolistic industries (and any industry), control imports and exports, etc, etc, etc?”

                      The next 20 years in New Zealand will involve governments improving the quality of regulations, running sound fiscal policy, and making marginal and progressive improvements to the foundation policies. That was pretty much the story of the 5th Labour Government and the same applies to this government. The differences between Labour and National economic policies are marginal (for all the noise electricty markets and asset sales are marginal).

                      When Labour wins in 2014, none of the foundation economic policies will change. NZ will remain a compliant member of ALL international economic agreements. So you can sound off about “sovereignty” all you like.

                      But watch those Australian bankers – they WILL have a bigger impact on workers than the New Zealand Parliament. Now and forever.

                    • srylands …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:24 am

                      “Seems you’re still lying through your teeth though.”

                      Correcting my typos is not lying.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:25 am

                      You’re an idiot to think the next 20 years is going to be anything like the last 20 years. What a short sighted, backward looking fool.

                      Shitlands the Tarot Toting Bankster Minion.

                      “Correcting my typos is not lying.”

                      So I didn’t fucking “misquote” you did I? I quoted you errors and all, and you tried to make it sound like it was my mistake. Fuckhead.

                    • McFlock …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:32 am

                      don’t conflate who you’re arguing with or what you’re arguing about, doofus.

                      Does not the government control all of those things? Maybe lab6 will be more active than lab5, maybe not. The point is that the government runs the economy. At the moment, it runs the economy badly – look at debt, unemployment, GINI, home ownership. But just because a captain is drunk in their cabin doesn’t mean that they aren’t responsible for running the ship, and have the power to do so. So what if a passenger has wandered into the wheelhouse? The captain runs the ship, and can step in whenever they wish.

                      The NZ government runs the NZ economy, not australians. You are here at the whim of the NZ government.

                      fuck off, liar

                    • McFlock …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:34 am

                      But watch those Australian bankers – they WILL have a bigger impact on workers than the New Zealand Parliament. Now and forever.

                      “forever”? ANZ is not eternal.

  13. vto 13
    28 August 2013 at 5:50 pm

    Right up the top Winston Dingbat Smith said this…

    ” I expect that when National is returned to power …… the shares will track up”

    I will place an imaginary bet of 100 MRP shares that over the next 20 years the share price will do better under a Labour govt than a National govt. This is typically the case (go figure).

    • Colonial Viper 13.1
      28 August 2013 at 6:17 pm

      Actually we want the value of the shares to collapse.

      • srylands 13.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 6:56 pm

        “Actually we want the value of the shares to collapse.”

        Thisis what gets me about the Left – they smugly engage in economic sabotage. You would be totally at home working for Cristina Kirchner in Argentina. Promote the interests of the workers while taking action to wreck the economy and make them unemployed, and then drive up inflation to finish them off. Then blame rich foreign corporates (sound familiar? Oh and then destroy the transparency of institutions like the central bank (come in R Norman).

        Please can you get this in print as Labour policy?

        “Actually we want the value of the shares to collapse.”

        Brilliant.

        It is like saying “Actually we WANT our milk exports to be contaminated with cyanide”

        • felix 13.1.1.1
          28 August 2013 at 7:04 pm

          “Thisis what gets me about the Left – they smugly engage in economic sabotage.”

          Fuck off cunt. Those shares were never National’s to sell and they were never yours to buy. They will end up back in the hands of their rightful owners and I couldn’t give two shits what happens to anyone who tried to profit from them in between.

          My preference is compulsory aquisition without compensation, but that’s unlikely to happen so if we have to drive the price down first and pick them up cheap then so be it.

          Sabotage? Whatever. Funny how you don’t like the free market all of a sudden.

          • srylands 13.1.1.1.1
            28 August 2013 at 7:10 pm

            “They will end up back in the hands of their rightful owners and I couldn’t give two shits what happens to anyone who tried to profit from them in between.”

            No they won’t. There is zero chance of any government buying the shares back. By 2021 all electricty assets will be privately owned.

            “and I couldn’t give two shits what happens to anyone who tried to profit from them in between.”

            That won’t happen either because we would be breaking the investment provisions of the WTO.

            “Those shares were never National’s to sell.”

            No they were the Government’s to sell, acting as the agent for the Crown, which was the sole shareholder.

            • felix 13.1.1.1.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 7:15 pm

              Fuck it, maybe we will just take them back outright then. That was my preference all along.

              • srylands …
                28 August 2013 at 7:29 pm

                “Fuck it, maybe we will just take them back outright then. That was my preference all along.”

                That cannot happen. New Zealand is a signatory to the WTO’s provisions preventing expropriation.

                Stop dreaming.

                • felix …
                  28 August 2013 at 8:51 pm

                  Nah, Parliament is still sovereign mate.

                  Of course if you had your way that wouldn’t be the case, but as Rip Torn says, tough titty.

                  • srylands …
                    28 August 2013 at 9:02 pm

                    “Of course if you had your way that wouldn’t be the case, but as Rip Torn says, tough titty.”

                    Yes I understand that. But no Government is going to breach the WTO provisions. So stop dreaming.

                    • felix …
                      28 August 2013 at 9:08 pm

                      srylands, any govt can breach anything they fucking like. We’re not beholden to the WTO any more than we’re beholden to the Vatican or the Church of Scientology.

                      Not that you’d know that of course, having never visited NZ.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      28 August 2013 at 9:11 pm

                      I think its pretty clear that you back economic treason against New Zealand. Sabotaging the efforts of the 1% to corner an even larger share of our country’s wealth…well that’s just a God given duty for the Righteous.

                    • srylands …
                      28 August 2013 at 9:14 pm

                      “rylands, any govt can breach anything they fucking like. We’re not beholden to the WTO any more than we’re beholden to the Vatican or the Church of Scientology”

                      Of course NZ can breach the WTO provisions. But that will not happen.

                    • felix …
                      28 August 2013 at 9:24 pm

                      Says you, you who has never been here and knows nothing about us.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      28 August 2013 at 9:31 pm

                      You mean shitlands is a paid foreign provocateur? Say its not true shitlands! Say you’re not just parroting pre-scripted memes! Oh, the heartbreak of being lied to. What has become of honour, shitlands?

                    • srylands …
                      28 August 2013 at 10:12 pm

                      “Says you, you who has never been here and knows nothing about us.”

                      You sound like an Elbonian on a Dilbert strip.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      28 August 2013 at 10:20 pm

                      Pretty sure that’s exactly how you view New Zealand and New Zealanders.

                    • srylands …
                      28 August 2013 at 11:44 pm

                      ““rylands, any govt can breach anything they fucking like. We’re not beholden to the WTO any more than we’re beholden to the Vatican or the Church of Scientology””

                      Well good luck getting even the Greens to say they will breach the WTO in government. I look forward to that policy announcement.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:00 am

                      Step by step shitlands. All over the world governments are realising that they need to re-assert national sovereignty. This goes against the grain of globalised capital and multinationals, but nations are being left with no choice.

                    • srylands …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:16 am

                      “All over the world governments are realising that they need to re-assert national sovereignty.”

                      So you seriously think it would be a good idea for NZ to withdraw from the WTO? You are aware of the list of countries NZ would be joining? Or do I misunderstand your inference? Or are you simply suggesting we remain in the WTO but ignore some of its key provisions?

                      Whatever – it will never happen.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 August 2013 at 12:30 am

                      It will never happen? Then there’s no problem is there, why don’t you chillax, fool.

                      Shitlands the Tarot Toting Bankster Minion.

                • lprent …
                  28 August 2013 at 9:59 pm

                  That is why simple regulation as orders in council are the key.

            • Lanthanide 13.1.1.1.1.2
              28 August 2013 at 8:20 pm

              “No they won’t. There is zero chance of any government buying the shares back. By 2021 all electricty assets will be privately owned.”

              Actually it’d be pretty easy for the government to mandate that the Superannuation Fund must purchase the shares as part of the compulsory acquisition.

              My BF pointed out the other day that it’s rather astounding that Cullen simply didn’t transfer them into the fund to begin with, instead of relying on their dividend stream and effectively putting that cash into the fund.

        • framu 13.1.1.2
          29 August 2013 at 7:20 am

          “smugly engage in economic sabotage”

          pot, kettle, pinochet

          liar

    • Lanthanide 13.2
      28 August 2013 at 6:30 pm

      I think you’d very likely lose that bet, vto.

      Labour have already signalled they’re going to introduce legislation that will reduce the share price. Labour simply winning the election will see the share price drop.

      National have done a deal to delay the Bluff smelter from being shut for an extra 12 months. As Labour are likely to win the next election, that puts that massive glut of electricity under Labour’s watch.

      Those two changes alone could put a massive dent in the share price and mean that it would always have dropped more under Labour than it would under National.

    • srylands 14.1
      28 August 2013 at 7:06 pm

      “Solar panels could destroy U.S. utilities, according to U.S. utilities”

      Excellent – lucky for the NZ taxpayer these silly investors are buying our soon to be worthless generating assets.

      • Lanthanide 14.1.1
        28 August 2013 at 8:23 pm

        But as you were claiming earlier, it’s not the capital value of the companies that matter, but the dividend streams.

  15. tricledrown 15
    28 August 2013 at 8:42 pm

    schrilglands aschewli had a look at the cullen fund recently.
    Had muldoon and key not messed with cutting contributions we could all retire wealthy instead we have massive delbt built up by the right!

  16. tracey 16
    29 August 2013 at 5:18 am

    And through it all srylands never answers questions about why he thought he needed to lie about his background.

    you may be right that many nzers share your political views but they dont share your comfortable position and couldnt afford mrp shares or didnt want a part of the sale.

    do you pay tax in australia or nz?

    do you have a family trust?