Attention Mum and Dad investors

Written By: - Date published: 9:58 am, April 10th, 2013 - 91 comments
Categories: capitalism, International, Privatisation - Tags: , ,

Labour is breaking some good stories lately. Here’s one that might interest all you Mum and Dad investors out there in Mum and Dad Investorland:

Incentive to sell MRP shares offshore

The Government’s three major brokers will get double the commission for selling Mighty River Power shares to overseas investment companies rather than New Zealand institutions, Labour state-owned enterprises spokesman Clayton Cosgrove says.

The Mighty River Power share offer document released last Friday showed the joint lead managers, Goldman Sachs, Macquarie and First NZ Capital, will get 0.4 per cent commission for selling shares to Kiwi institutional investors and 0.8 per cent for share sales to their overseas counterparts.

Prime Minister John Key has assured New Zealanders that 70 per cent of Mighty River Power shares will remain in Kiwi hands.

“With the massive risks surrounding the sale becoming apparent with Tiwai Point, the Government is worried that Kiwis will run scared,” Cosgrove said.

“National’s sole concern is getting a good price for the sale. That’s why they’re encouraging brokers to sell more shares overseas to keep the price up. That puts more shares in foreign hands.”

From my point of view the higher the price (income to government) the better, but I’m not sure Mum and Dad investors will be thrilled. As for the built in inventive to send ownership offshore, that just contributes to our underlying long term economic problems. It is a stupid shortsighted footnote to the stupid shortsighted policy that is asset sales.

91 comments on “Attention Mum and Dad investors ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Private Baldrick 1
    10 April 2013 at 11:05 am

    It’s jolly lucky I can get Captain Adder back in dear old Blighty to buy some on my behalf.

  2. dumrse 2
    10 April 2013 at 6:59 pm

    Attention Mum and Dad….. Gosgrove’s whinge is getting the attention it deserves.

  3. Colonial Viper 3
    10 April 2013 at 7:06 pm

    Interesting that Key and English are actually pushing for more shares to be sold to foreigners, and incentivising their brokers as such.

    • Lanthanide 3.1
      10 April 2013 at 8:26 pm

      They’ve been doing this weird two-faced act all along, saying they want to get the best price for the government and then also saying they want lots of mums and dads to invest in these great companies etc. They can’t really have it both ways.

  4. millsy 4
    10 April 2013 at 9:49 pm

    Offshore v local ownership is a red herring to me.

    100% public ownership should be the goal.

  5. Lloyd 5
    10 April 2013 at 10:52 pm

    So this bonus to selling shares to foreigners is the loyalty bonus?

  6. Walter 6
    11 April 2013 at 9:20 am

    Whats the real issuie, The Tax Payer will still own 51% of any state asset.
    People owning their own share’s is a good way for growing Financial security and for people to get ahead on their own,

    It adds another way of building savings for ones future.

    • vto 6.1
      11 April 2013 at 9:45 am

      “People owning their own share’s is a good way for growing Financial security and for people to get ahead on their own,”

      And, conversely, people who can’t own shares are worse off.

      The divide grows.

      Walter, you should go away and have a think about the value of capitalising everything. Also consider that the country’s second largest business, Foodstuffs, actively discourages capitalisation of its businesses and look up the reasons for it.

      What you advocate does not help with growing a decent society. In fact it actively does the opposite.

      • Walter 6.1.1
        11 April 2013 at 10:03 am

        I dont agree, everyone has a choice to either stay in the place they are in or to make changes to become better off then they currently are.

        This can be acheved by More share ownership, home ownership, Reducing undue spending and by mainly making a choice to advance themself. Everyone has the same oppoutinty to basic education, Health care and standard of living, but it is reflected in the choices people and familys make to better themselfs or to spend money on crap they dont need and to really just complain about their hand in life.

        IT’s not my fault its the Rich….

        Its the left which want people on benifits, Living in state houses and being under the control of the state, this has and will always be the way of the left, you can complain all you like about the rich but everyone has the ability to get up the ladder.

        ITS ALL ABOUT CHOICE

        • vto 6.1.1.1
          11 April 2013 at 10:07 am

          woosh.

          do that reading.

          capitalising everything benefits only very few people, that is why our second largest business limits it.

          your waffle about choice is secondary to the point made. first things first. second things second.

    • georgecom 6.2
      11 April 2013 at 11:28 pm

      It will benefit the 5% of people who will buy the shares, Walter, and help them get ahead.

      The other 95%, well, they will sacrifice future benefits eh.

      It’ll also benefit th overseas buyers who will end up with a good slice of the shares, and help them get ahead as well.

      It all looks real good for a few to line their pockets. The issues however is about collective ownership and collective benefit, for the many, vs benefits for the few.

  7. Walter 7
    11 April 2013 at 10:11 am

    Don’t come on here with your double standards and complain when it was the labour government that sold::::

    Government Printing Office, State Insurance Office,Telecom Corporation, Air New Zealand, Shipping Corporation, PostBank……

    The list goes on…

    Talk about short memory

    • vto 7.1
      11 April 2013 at 10:14 am

      You egg. Sure, it was the labour party but it was right wing policy. Get the difference?

      • Walter 7.1.1
        11 April 2013 at 10:20 am

        Bull Shit, And like always the left disowning their own policys

        • vto 7.1.1.1
          11 April 2013 at 10:22 am

          Bull shit what?

          which part of my point was wrong?

          and why?

          • Walter 7.1.1.1.1
            11 April 2013 at 10:25 am

            Right wing or Not the point was it was a labour government that sold of the family silver.

            Right or left makes no diffrence.

            • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1.1.1
              11 April 2013 at 10:27 am

              Labour got taken over by Right Wing neolibs. The fact that they cloaked themselves under a red banner was just camouflage. So it is indeed the heart of the issue.

            • vto 7.1.1.1.1.2
              11 April 2013 at 10:32 am

              “Right wing or Not the point was it was a labour government that sold of the family silver. Right or left makes no difference”

              Ok, well you go on and keep hammering the labour party. It is irrelevant, except in party political internal machinations. It has no bearing on what is good for the country.

              The fact of the matter is that the policies were right wing policies. And they were shit then and still shit now. Doesn’t matter who implements them – the same issues apply.

              • felix …
                11 April 2013 at 10:59 am

                Exactly v.

                John Key has been caught out lying to parliament and the people of NZ.

                This govt’s only electable person, Key, is endangering their only reason for being in power, asset sales.

                And this is the only response they can muster. A group bitch about the 1980s.

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.1.1.2
          11 April 2013 at 10:23 am

          Polly wanna cracker?

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.2
      11 April 2013 at 10:18 am

      Talk about vacuous drivel. There are people here who can make up their own minds whether asset sales are a good idea, but not Walter: he does nothing but regurgitate other people’s lines like a stupid parrot.

    • chris73 7.3
      11 April 2013 at 10:21 am

      Over 9 billion bucks worth and the ghost still haunts labour to this day (in comparison John Keys sold none)

      • felix 7.3.1
        11 April 2013 at 10:25 am

        Correct, whenever the right are in power they sell off everything the left have built up.

        Hey chris, you think it’s a good thing that Key has sold none?

        • chris73 7.3.1.1
          11 April 2013 at 10:29 am

          I think its good he kept his election promise and it’ll be better when the partial sell down goes ahead (ive got a spare couple ready to go)

          • Walter 7.3.1.1.1
            11 April 2013 at 10:34 am

            Do you rember the 1984 MP’S mallard, king, goff, who are currently in parliament and who still believe in rogernomics

          • felix 7.3.1.1.2
            11 April 2013 at 10:36 am

            So you’re full of shit chris.

            If it’s a good idea to sell them, it’s a good idea to sell them.

            • chris73 7.3.1.1.2.1
              11 April 2013 at 10:40 am

              I think its a good way to raise capital while retaining a majority share and helping kiwis get ahead while boosting the performance of the nz stock market

              the fact it annoys the left and will help me become better off is merely a nice fringe benefit

            • Walter 7.3.1.1.2.2
              11 April 2013 at 10:41 am

              The State has no place owning Businesses

              • felix …
                11 April 2013 at 10:48 am

                You have no place owning a computer.

                Any business that we the public would have to bail out if it failed should be owned by we the public. Anything else is financially irresponsible at best and corrupt at worst.

              • BLiP …
                11 April 2013 at 11:12 am

                ‘

                The State has no place owning Businesses

                ^^^ This is what is wrong with National Ltd™ supporters. The essential infrastructure required to ensure an equitable distribution of services, and thus further ensure equal opportunity (one of their mantras, ironically), is considered a “business”. In fact, New Zealand itself is considered a “business”. Just as Maggie Thatcher sought to reduce British society down to the elements of running a corner grocer, John Key and his acolytes are seeking to reduce New Zealand society down to a dodgy sharebroker’s sideline loan shark operation. How do you reach these people?

                • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                  11 April 2013 at 11:46 am

                  Good question.

                  Sub-par intelligence denies them the cognitive capacity for rational discourse and the best way to educate them is through their emotions.

              • Frank Macskasy …
                11 April 2013 at 9:55 pm

                “The State has no place owning Businesses”

                Why?

                In a free market, anyone can own a business. The State is not excluded. Otherwise it is not a free market.

        • Rob 7.3.1.2
          11 April 2013 at 10:33 am

          Does this illusive “left” that you guys cream yourself over even exist. Now we see that some left parties are not in fact left parties and some Left Govt’s were not left govts, give us a real example of a “left”.

          • felix 7.3.1.2.1
            11 April 2013 at 10:38 am

            Who’s creaming over an illusive left?

            It’s you guys who keep bringing up right-wing govts and pretending they’re something else, not me.

            • Rob 7.3.1.2.1.1
              11 April 2013 at 10:42 am

              I am not bringing up any Govts at all and I am not part of this collective that you are referring to. So for 2014 if I vote Labour and they got a majority would they deliver a Left Govt in your veiw?

              • felix …
                11 April 2013 at 10:49 am

                Why should I care what you get delivered? I’m not here to explain the electoral system to morans.

  8. Walter 8
    11 April 2013 at 10:29 am

    The facts are.

    1) It was clearly put to the electorate that in our second term asset sales would happen.

    2) That we would keep 51% of SOE shares of any that are sold.

    So what is the Issuie, when people voted for the current government they new what they would be getting.

    Open and Transparent i would have said….

    • vto 8.1
      11 April 2013 at 10:36 am

      more people voted for parties that opposed asset sales walter.

    • chris73 8.2
      11 April 2013 at 10:36 am

      no no you don’t understand, see the left wing don’t want asset sales therefore national don’t have a mandate, they don’t have a mandate because the disagree with it. Understand now?

      • Walter 8.2.1
        11 April 2013 at 10:43 am

        Vto your so wrong, anything but the truth is ok by you.

        Get over it we won the ELECTION and you LOST.

        We have clear policys which will build this country, not cause the rot of the last labour government.

        • vto 8.2.1.1
          11 April 2013 at 11:31 am

          what were the numbers for each party and their policy around asset sales?

          • chris73 8.2.1.1.1
            11 April 2013 at 11:45 am

            Whos in power?

            • vto 8.2.1.1.1.1
              11 April 2013 at 11:52 am

              that’s not the question i asked and neither does it relate to the point being made in response to walter

              • chris73 …
                11 April 2013 at 12:09 pm

                Yes it does, it matters a whole lot. Labour said the election was about asset sales:

                http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/election-will-be-referendum-asset-sales-goff/5/79913

                The population of NZ wanted National in power not Labour, National said it would wait until the second term before implementing their plan and the population of NZ voted National into power.

                National won you lost etc etc

                • Walter …
                  11 April 2013 at 12:22 pm

                  Didn’t labour say at the election that a vote for labour would mean no asset sales.
                  And then what happend LABOUR LOST .

                  • Lanthanide …
                    11 April 2013 at 12:25 pm

                    The only way we will truly know peoples opinions on asset sales is when we have a referendum on asset sales. Otherwise it is impossible to know why someone did or did not vote for any particular political party.

                    • Walter …
                      11 April 2013 at 12:32 pm

                      We had one as Phil Goff said, It was the last Election

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      11 April 2013 at 1:31 pm

                      And we’re going to have another one, and when the result comes in, the person whose lines you are so diligently copying will have to give you some more drivel to swallow.

            • Descendant Of Sssmith 8.2.1.1.1.2
              12 April 2013 at 7:05 am

              Who’s in power?

              No one.

              Who is in government – a coalition of several parties
              Who can introduce legislation – the government
              Who can pass laws – parliament which includes all parties

              You do understand there is a separation of powers don’t you and that national does not have any authority to do anything in law.

              You should be concerned by how they abuse parliamentary processes however – as you should when any government abuses those processes eg ignoring select committee consultation, using urgency unnecessarily.

              When you suggest National have the power to do more than introduce legislation you degrade the authority of parliament and make us all susceptible to abusive governments.

              Those powers were made separate for good reason and the efforts from this government to pass, including retrospectively, legislation to increase authoritarian powers is particularly concerning.

              But I guess you likely have an authoritarian inclination yourself so probably don’t notice anything wrong with this – and likely if Labour was introducing the same types of leg you would also not blink.

          • Walter 8.2.1.1.2
            11 April 2013 at 12:27 pm

            National 1,058,636, LABOUR 614,937.

            Facts are facts

        • Frank Macskasy 8.2.1.2
          11 April 2013 at 9:58 pm

          Actually, VTO is correct. More preople voted for Parties that OPPOSED asset sales than for those that supported the policies.

          I submit, for your education: http://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/mandates-majorities/

    • felix 8.3
      11 April 2013 at 10:42 am

      Well Walter it didn’t happen exactly like that, asset sales weren’t put on the table until after the 2008 election. Until then it was just ‘no sales in the first term’ which is not at all the same as what you’re saying.

      Your point 2 is bullshit because as has been shown again and again the govt has no way of holding on to 51%.

      But apart from that I have no problem with it. NZ voted for a bunch of slimy crooks, they got a bunch of slimy crooks, and if they didn’t want their assets sold they should’ve paid more attention.

      More fool them I say.

      • Walter 8.3.1
        11 April 2013 at 10:45 am

        Rubbish the government can issuie more shares and hold 51% at all times.

        • felix 8.3.1.1
          11 April 2013 at 10:51 am

          Yay, so we just keep paying and paying and paying. And Mum & Dad’s shares become worth less and less and less.

          Bloody expensive these asset sales. Only supported by those who want to see the govt throwing taxpayers’ money down the toilet.

          For. Nothing.

        • fender 8.3.1.2
          11 April 2013 at 1:15 pm

          Oh share printing? So you will be a fan of QE as well?

  9. Lloyd 9
    12 April 2013 at 9:55 pm

    The last election was won by that lovely smiley John Key and anyone who worried about selling things off was assured by the smiley man that they wouldn’t really be sold off because we would still own 51%. Also they were told we had to sell off that tiny bit of the power companies because we were broke and because government debt was up a bit we had to sell ASAP. Really it was a vote for the smiley man rather than that grumpy Labour person.

    Just like when Iwi were told that the pakeha only wanted a little bit of land and the Iwi would really still own all the rest……

    • felix 9.1
      12 April 2013 at 11:23 pm

      Yes very much like. This is what colonisation looks like in the post-nation world.

      “they wouldn’t really be sold off because we would still own 51%”

      I still can’t believe how many people fell for that. Look at poor Walter, above – he thinks a 51% shareholder can just issue themself more shares. Because, y’know, they’re the boss.

      Dumb savages, when will they learn?

      • Colonial Viper 9.1.1
        12 April 2013 at 11:33 pm

        These pretend capitalists are really shit. Proves Professor Steve Keen’s point: neoliberal economists don’t even know their own theory.

Links to post