Can you afford to buy shares?

Written By: - Date published: 9:27 am, July 5th, 2012 - 106 comments
Categories: privatisation, wages - Tags:

The median household has $1700 in the bank – you couldn’t really term that savings, it’s operating cash. The Nats want us to fork out at least a grand a time to participate in each share float. That just doesn’t add up.

Labour and the Greens are right, this isn’t an opportunity for ordinary people to invest, it’s a wealth transfer to the elite.

As Russel Norman pointed out last week, Treasury expects only 7% of kiwis to buy shares – also known as the elite.

Now, Bill English’s line is that people might not have much in the bank but asset sales give them somewhere better to put their money than in the bank or paying off the mortgage.

Two problems with that: $1700 isn’t savings, it’s the money families need to meet expenses week to week, and with the government planning dividends of 4% on the assets, which is a 3% net return for ‘mum and dad’ -they’re better off using the money to pay down their 5-7% mortgage.

106 comments on “Can you afford to buy shares? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. higherstandard 1
    5 July 2012 at 10:28 am

    Yes

    • Deano 1.1
      5 July 2012 at 10:31 am

      That’s 1.

      1 rich rightie.

      What about the other 4 million of us?

      • TheContrarian 1.1.1
        5 July 2012 at 10:48 am

        Make that 2 (I am neither one of the elite nor a rightie)

        • Deano 1.1.1.1
          5 July 2012 at 11:07 am

          Do you have no interest-bearing debt and no opportunity to invest at greater than 4% (ie a term deposit)?

          Or are you expecting significant equity gain – which means you expect the government to underprice the shares (given that share price is meant to be the present value of future dividends)

        • McFlock 1.1.1.2
          5 July 2012 at 12:24 pm

          You have disposable cash for shares. You’re one of the elite.
          You think having disposable cash for shares is not an elite position in this economy. You’re a rightie.

           

          • TheContrarian 1.1.1.2.1
            5 July 2012 at 12:27 pm

            “You have disposable cash for shares. You’re one of the elite.”

            Bullshit, my disposable income came from not having a mortgage’s and not creating debt for myself.
            That doesn’t make me elite, that makes a guy without a house but without any debt. 

            • McFlock 1.1.1.2.1.1
              5 July 2012 at 12:40 pm

              And I’m sure your income’s $15k p.a. /sarc

              • TheContrarian …
                5 July 2012 at 1:46 pm

                I can only afford shares because I am married with no children, no mortgage and 2 incomes.

                Otherwise I wouldn’t be able to buy them (or at least that’s not what I’d be spending any spare cash on) 

                • McFlock …
                  5 July 2012 at 1:51 pm

                  So you support only yourself with an income that others use to support 2 or more people.
                  And you don’t consider your position at all privileged. 

                  • TheContrarian …
                    5 July 2012 at 1:55 pm

                    I am a young man who works with a young wife who works and we have no debt because we don’t own anything.

                    I don’t consider that elite.

                    • McFlock …
                      5 July 2012 at 2:09 pm

                      I know you don’t.
                      The trouble is that you think that as long as you make all the right choices, nothing bad will ever happen to you.
                      News flash: shit happens.
                           
                      The fact you live comfortably is largely a matter of luck. 

                    • TheContrarian …
                      5 July 2012 at 2:10 pm

                      “The trouble is that you think that as long as you make all the right choices, nothing bad will ever happen to you.”

                      No, I don’t. Thanks for trying to tell me what I think though.

                      “The fact you live comfortably is largely a matter of luck. ”

                      No, it isn’t. You have no idea who I am, how I got here, what I had to do, what I used to do and the actions I had to take. 

                    • McFlock …
                      5 July 2012 at 2:30 pm

                      If you aren’t master of your own destiny (i.e. only your choices determine whether you live comfortably), then it largely is down to luck.
                           
                      One or the other.
                         
                                   
                      I’m not saying you never worked for it.
                      I’m just saying that you could have worked twice as hard and still been in a bad way – defrauded, illness, accident, never met the contact that got you a good job or contract, whatever. Or you could have worked half as hard, gambled, and won lotto. It’s mostly luck that puts us where we are. You’ve never had a moment where a car could’ve been an inch to the left, or you’ve been in the same class as someone who became a good friend, mentor, partner or spouse? It’s all been determined by you? Or are many of the key moments in your life pure luck?

                    • TheContrarian …
                      5 July 2012 at 2:33 pm

                      Your level of meta-discussion is completely unhelpful.
                      Why don’t you go one step further and say “if that gene hadn’t have mutated we would have never evolved in the first place”

                       

                    • McFlock …
                      5 July 2012 at 2:56 pm

                      Not really.
                           
                      You have excess wealth you can can gamble on the stockmarket. Many don’t (as pointed out in the actual post). Hence your situation is privileged.
                            
                      You might not consider that elite.
                      But in this country, in this economy, it is.
                           
                      You took credit for your privileged position by saying you’d avoided debt, etc. A lot of that is down to luck, not you. Call it “meta-discussion” if you want, but you’re claiming credit for something that is largely down to luck.
                             
                         
                      The fact you are so out of touch with the real world while claiming credit for your good fortune makes you a rightie. 

                    • TheContrarian …
                      5 July 2012 at 3:01 pm

                      Indeed, I was very lucky not to have accidently bought a house or somehow, out of bad luck, took out a lot hire purchase agreements on products I didn’t need.

                      higherstandard was right…bizarre.

                    • McFlock …
                      5 July 2012 at 8:59 pm
                       
                       

                      You are lucky that your role models taught you financial skills.
                      You are lucky that you found a good job.
                      You are lucky that you made few if any long-term mistakes as a teen.
                      You are lucky that your decision to not own your own home worked out for you – others have had a succession of rent increases and 40-day vacancy notices as a result of property speculation.
                      You are lucky that some seemingly minor decision you made in the past 30 years didn’t blow up in your face.
                                    
                      I am lucky to have these things as well.
                      I recognise the degree of pure chance that goes into them, though. Some things literally did blow up in my face, so I’m very aware of the unpredictable millimetre left or right that can fundamentally change the course of our lives.

                       
                    • TheContrarian …
                      6 July 2012 at 8:58 am

                      Sorry I got to this late:

                      You are lucky that your role models taught you financial skills 
                      Had no such role model

                      You are lucky that you found a good job. 
                      Not lucky at all – had to go through years of shit jobs (spent 2 years working two jobs – an 8am – 5pm followed by a 5:15pm to  8:30pm) to get here. Luck had nothing to do with it.

                      You are lucky that you made few if any long-term mistakes as a teen.
                      I don’t how you figure to know me so well. I made huge mistakes. Even as an adult I have made big fuck-ups. If anything I have been unlucky.

                      You are lucky that your decision to not own your own home worked out for you – others have had a succession of rent increases and 40-day vacancy notices as a result of property speculation. 
                      This I can agree with – my living situation is pretty good in comparison. 

                      You are lucky that some seemingly minor decision you made in the past 30 years didn’t blow up in your face. 
                      Heh, you have no fucking idea.

                      Thanks for your bullshit analysis.

                       

                    • McFlock …
                      6 July 2012 at 1:08 pm

                       

                       I made huge mistakes. Even as an adult I have made big fuck-ups. If anything I have been unlucky.

                      Says it all right there. You’re one of the very few NZers who have spare cash to play with on the stockmarket, and you still think you’ve been unlucky.

                      But I love that you used to work very hard. After all, it’s not like, say, other people are working just as hard as you once did and still don’t anything approaching you have, and probably never will.
                          
                      Why? Because you’re in the 7% of the population who have money available to buy what they already own. But you think you’ve been unlucky. 
                         
                      Get some perspective. 
                       

                    • TheContrarian …
                      6 July 2012 at 1:16 pm

                      You’re one of the very few NZers who have spare cash to play with on the stockmarket

                      Round in fucking circles. We have been over this. I only have spare cash because I have no debt. You say I have no debt because of luck, I explain I have no debt because I have no children or home, you say that is mainly because of luck, I say I have had some damned terrible luck so it isn’t down to luck, you come back with “see because you have spare cash you are lucky”.
                      Jesus fucking Christ… 

                       No where did I say I  used to work hard. I work fucking hard.

                      You analysis is complete fucking garbage.

                    • McFlock …
                      8 July 2012 at 6:42 pm

                      Real simple:
                      How much of your current position is due to good luck?
                      How much is due to bad luck?
                      How uch of it is due to you being master of your own destiny, making the right choices, and not getting into debt / procreating?
                       
                      For me it would probably be 60:1:39. You?

                    • TheContrarian …
                      8 July 2012 at 8:39 pm

                      I never considered it.

                      But lets make it simpler and more to the actual point here:

                      Can I afford to buy shares?
                      Yes. However if I had already bought a house, hadn’t worked 2 jobs to pay for my student loans and my wife was home with child could I afford to buy shares then?
                      No.

                      Is my not buying a house, working 2 jobs to work my way out of debt and to practice safe sex (and to decide on an abortion many years ago, when I was with someone else in my youth) down to luck or my own decision making?

                      But this is pointless because I am visiting an issue last visited 2 days ago in response to a person who thinks he knows all about my life despite knowing nothing more the I have deigned to share and won’t listen anyway.

                    • McFlock …
                      8 July 2012 at 8:53 pm
                       
                       

                      The only cause you attribute for your disposable cash is the brilliance of your financial planning.
                           
                      You “have never considered” the role luck has played in your life.
                           
                      There are many people in this country who do not have kids, not not own their own home, yet still do not have enough money to speculate on the stockmarket.
                          
                      And yet you still claim to be neither privileged nor right-wing.
                          
                      Says it all.
                       
                      PS: sorry I wasn’t waiting with bated breath for the next utterance from a master of the universe. The real world got in the way – not a problem that tories can identify with, I understand…

                       
                    • TheContrarian …
                      8 July 2012 at 9:15 pm

                      Wow, you sound like a a snide sneering punk who is unhappy that someone has it better than others so therefore he must be right-wing or privileged in some way.

                      What a cock. You can go fuck yourself.

                    • McFlock …
                      8 July 2012 at 9:23 pm

                      Having it better than others is a privilege if it is the result of chance, not merit.
                          
                      And yeah, I am unhappy that you can fritter money on the stockmarket when children go hungry in the same country, if not the same neighbourhood. Inequality sucks, but more importantly is a threat to the stability of any society.
                          
                      But it’s not your privilege that makes you right wing. It’s the fact that you don’t even have the self-awareness to examine just why you have such a privileged situation.
                           

                    • TheContrarian …
                      8 July 2012 at 9:46 pm

                      “Having it better than others is a privilege if it is the result of chance, not merit.”
                      You know nothing about me and are certainly in no place to judge.

                      So yeah, go fuck yourself. You are far nastier and jealous than I could ever be. So ass backwards as fuck you can’t even begin to see how appalling it is to judge people, and label them, based upon a personal grievance or difference of opinion you have with them on a blog.

                      I have my scars and regrets so I don’t need to take shit from some scum sucking parasite upset that someone else has done better than him….and isn’t ashamed of the fact.

                    • McFlock …
                      8 July 2012 at 9:57 pm

                      You don’t even know how much of your privilege is the result of luck. You said yourself you’ve never thought about it.
                          
                      And I’m not so sure we’re in that different an income bracket -better than many, less expenses than most.
                          
                      And complaining about being “judged” is rich coming from you. But that’s only the opinion of a “parasite”. Got any reason for giving me that apellation, oh great one?
                       

                  • Psycho Milt …
                    5 July 2012 at 2:00 pm

                    Er, not having children isn’t a privilege.

        • Fortran 1.1.1.3
          5 July 2012 at 1:26 pm

          Make that three.
          Am rationing my funds to get a share in all of them.

      • higherstandard 1.1.2
        5 July 2012 at 1:30 pm

        1. What’s rich ?
        2. What’s a rightie ?

      • higherstandard 1.1.3
        5 July 2012 at 1:31 pm

        What’s rich ?
        What’s a rightie ?

        • McFlock 1.1.3.1
          5 July 2012 at 1:35 pm

          Having spare money to gamble on the stockmarket.
          People who think having spare money to gamble on the stockmarket is a normal situation in this economy.

          • higherstandard 1.1.3.1.1
            5 July 2012 at 1:46 pm

            So rich is having spare money to gamble on the stockmarket ?
            So a “rightie” is having spare money to gamble on the stockmarket ?

            …….bizarre….. lots of people probably drop significantly more on sky, ciggies, booze and the lotto than it’ll cost for some shares.

            • McFlock 1.1.3.1.1.1
              5 July 2012 at 1:49 pm

              Yes.
              No. Read it again.
               

              • higherstandard …
                5 July 2012 at 2:27 pm

                As I said bizarre.

                • McFlock …
                  5 July 2012 at 2:39 pm

                  Two questions.
                  Two answers.
                  You misunderstood the second.

                  • higherstandard …
                    5 July 2012 at 3:07 pm

                    I understood both ..as I said bizarre.

                    Although I see my original query was directed at another poster who in response to my answer of eddies question chose to classify me as a ‘rich rightie’ so I’m more interested in what they consider to be “rich” and/or “right”

                    • TheContrarian …
                      5 July 2012 at 3:08 pm

                      It would seem not agreeing with McFlock = rightie

                    • higherstandard …
                      5 July 2012 at 3:19 pm

                      Don’t worry it’s all part of the quick afternoon troll with my tea and helps to keep our respective points up as part of membership requirements of the grumpy old mens trolling club…. McF and I are long time members.

                    • McFlock …
                      5 July 2012 at 3:38 pm

                      People who think having spare money to gamble on the stockmarket is a normal situation in this economy.

                      =/=

                       So a “rightie” is having spare money to gamble on the stockmarket ?

                       Hint: try to identify the subject of the first sentence.

                    • McFlock …
                      5 July 2012 at 3:40 pm

                      Oh, and C –  no.
                          
                      It’s not recognising your privilege that makes you a rightie.
                      Disagreeing with me is just an expression of your denial. 

  2. freedom 2
    5 July 2012 at 10:31 am

    short answer, NO,
    my $220 power bill from last month takes priority at this juncture, and i am a single person low income household, how families are managing to pay every month is beyond me.

    on a related matter,
    Today i received my reply from the Office of the Governor General and there will be no Refusal of Assent for the MOM Bill. They were very polite about it and it was always a billion to one shot, but as my Mumma says, If you don’t ask you never get.

    On another related matter the official Referendum Petition is by all accounts going strong and the Avaaz petition, thanks to a lot of effort from many people has thankfully slowed to a crawl. There has been zero communication from Avaaz re the petition’s rewording after signatures were collected and still no sign of the promised presentation of the petition to the PM.
    (I have also had numerous people suggest that it was indeed started by him that will not be named but sadly no hard evidence, guess we wait for the presentation to the PM . . . tick tock tick tock)

  3. Carol 3
    5 July 2012 at 10:32 am

    Just heard Tim Bennett, CEO of NZX, on Nine-to-Noon, initially talking about the gender balance and the need for diversity in business.

    Then Ryan asked him about who would be able to buy shares in the power companies. He trotted off a load of figures, saying it would extend share ownership to more people – but still only in the low hundreds of thousands. He was up beat about this, in terms of many people having more opportunities to invest in.

    I would apply the line from the UK correspondent that followed him, Dame Ann Leslie.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/20120705

    Leslie was morally outraged by the attitude of UK bankers like Diamond and cronies. She asked, “What parallel universe do they live in?” – these people who live in extreme comfort shielded from the realities of life that most people experience (like shopping at the supermarket themselves, rather than employing a “shopper” to do it for them.)

    Bennett seemed to be oblivious to the fact that the minority would benefit from being able to buy shares, while the majority would be still continuing to struggle to pay the increasingly costly bills needed for survival.

    National MPs keep talking about “Planet Labour” as though they are more in touch with the ‘real world”. But that’s National’s and cronies Orwellian version of the world – parallel universe indeed!

  5. Janice 5
    5 July 2012 at 10:47 am

    If I find $1,000 to invest in shares what would the brokerage fee be? Would there be an annual fee to the finance adviser? Not much left of the $700 balance I bet.

    • Pete George 5.1
      5 July 2012 at 11:01 am

      Typical rates for New Zealand trades:
      0.3% with a minimum of NZ$30.00 per trade
      0.7% with a minimum of NZ$35.00 per trade

      You don’t need to pay an annual fee to anyone. If you pay up front for financial advice they should tell you to buy some shares and hold them for a medium term at least, as a dividend earner.

      • Deano 5.1.1
        5 July 2012 at 11:29 am

        So, mum and dad take half the money they have in the world – $1,000 – and buy shares. But they’ve got to pay $35 on top of that in fees (or the government, ie everyone else, pays that instead).

        And, then, when little Johnie needs school equipment and they need to get their cash out of the shares, that’s another $35.

        $70 – or 7%, gone in fees. That’s over 2 years net dividends gone just there.

        • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1
          5 July 2012 at 11:32 am

          Thats what these people in the financial industry do. Investors gain, they gain. Investors lose, they gain.

          See the assymetry?

    • felix 5.2
      5 July 2012 at 11:03 am

      Especially when you consider that you’ve already paid tax on that (net) $1700 to fund infrastructure such as the electricity network.

  6. TightyRighty 6
    5 July 2012 at 11:27 am

    Yes, I’ve worked hard for this country. I deserve a chance to own a bit more of it outright, seeing as the other 3m generally have transfers in their favour, thanks to the largess of labour governments happy to spend my cash on shit that produces nothing.

    • Deano 6.1
      5 July 2012 at 11:32 am

      there aren’t 3m people getting net transfers from the government. we’re not all parasites on your Randian superhero back.

      also, do you have no interest-bearing debt and no opportunity to invest at greater than 4% (ie a term deposit)?

      Or are you expecting significant equity gain from the shares – which means you expect the government to underprice the shares (given that share price is meant to be the present value of future dividends)

    • Colonial Viper 6.2
      5 July 2012 at 11:33 am

      Its not your money.

      And if you benefit the most from the running of a civilised society and ordered economy, don’t bitch about paying the most back.

      • TightyRighty 6.2.1
        5 July 2012 at 12:38 pm

        It is my money CV, it’s the way things work. not the way you wish they would.

        I benefit because I make good choices and work hard. Others benefit by not working and making stupid choices. Who should come out on top given the two options?

        • McFlock 6.2.1.1
          5 July 2012 at 12:42 pm

          Really? You can make all the good choices you want – whether any money is in the bank at the end of the day is down purely to luck. 
                   
          But keep telling yourself you’re a randian superhero, master of the universe.

        • prism 6.2.1.2
          5 July 2012 at 1:19 pm

          If you were a competitive rower and fell in the water just near the finishing post you would have worked hard and done your best and still miss out on your medal, you would be a loser and have to join the community of human beings who try hard all the time, or sometimes, and sometimes win but not all the time.. You sound smug. Which book, teacher or was it a parent who, told you gathering money is all about hard work and successful choices?

    • Pascal's bookie 6.3
      5 July 2012 at 12:02 pm

      Oh poor Trighty.

      Seeing it’s the US’s birthday here’s a wee quote from one of their founding fathers, damnably communist though it may be, its like he is speaking quite directly to your alleged woe:

      All the property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it.- Ben Franklin

    • felix 6.4
      5 July 2012 at 12:09 pm

      I like it when the righties just come out and say what they really think for a change.

      Good on you UptightyWhitey. You deserve more because you’re better than most.

    • mike e 6.5
      6 July 2012 at 5:29 pm

      Tighty almighty yes taking the assets off the other 3 million.Great

  7. Carol 7
    5 July 2012 at 11:45 am

    Yes, I can, but I won’t. I have money in term deposits for my old age. Don’t approve of the privatisation and would rather keep my savings in relatively low interest places.

  8. Blue 8
    5 July 2012 at 12:03 pm

    I’ll buy some, from my median income. Its a good investment isn’t it?

    • felix 8.1
      5 July 2012 at 12:12 pm

      Long term, yep most likely. Not so good if you’ve got a mortgage to pay though.

      Which tells you what they really mean by “Mums & Dads”, innit.

    • Dv 8.2
      5 July 2012 at 12:21 pm

      >>Its a good investment isn’t it?
      Maybe. You will need to see the price and prospectus.

      Contact has given a 4% per year return from 1999, including ‘growth’ in share price and dividend.

  9. just saying 9
    5 July 2012 at 12:09 pm

    I’m guessing that commenters here and at other political blogs would be more likely than the population at large, to be able to afford to buy shares. (There was a study a few years ago about the demographics of the political blogosphere, might be a bit different now but I suspect not).

    I’m hoping that members of the political left that can, wont. On principle.

    • Te Reo Putake 9.1
      5 July 2012 at 12:25 pm

      That’s the category I fall into, just saying. I can blow my holiday savings on buying a proportion of the shares I have had taken from me in some sort of arsebackwards ransom demand or I can go down south and wander the rivers, beaches and golf courses of the west coast and actively help the local economy while enjoying myself immensely.
       
      On principle, I’m going to put Hokitika ahead of legitimising this intergenerational theft.

      • just saying 9.1.1
        5 July 2012 at 2:51 pm

        West Coast. I love the West Coast! Great choice.
        Much better for your health too, including your ethical health.

  10. Blue 10
    5 July 2012 at 12:12 pm

    JS – surely the more shares the middle income left buy, the less will go elsewhere.

    • felix 10.1
      5 July 2012 at 12:21 pm

      Why should the “political left” shoulder the cost of others speculating for their own gain?

      Fuck off, you want to take our assets you pay for them. Well just take them back later.

      • Monique Watson 10.1.1
        5 July 2012 at 1:02 pm

        How are they your assets? have you been issued with a deed of ownership?

        • Deano 10.1.1.1
          5 July 2012 at 2:19 pm

          That’s like saying ‘how is it your government’ or ‘how is it your country’.

          English was on RNZ just this morning saying that Kiwis own the shares through the government.

      • joe90 10.1.2
        5 July 2012 at 1:18 pm

        How are they your assets? have you been issued with a deed of ownership?

        As PB notes, because it’s Americas birthday.

        Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.”

        John Adams; Thoughts on Government, 1776

        • Monique Watson 10.1.2.1
          5 July 2012 at 2:08 pm

          Governments exist to preserve property rights for the individual or conglomerate. Otherwise they are called dictatorships.
          john Adams was talking about the mandate to preserve the rights of common man to advance his own happiness and prosperity via business ownership in whatever shape or form that took rather than have a privileged group of people do so supposedly on the behalf of the people.
          Like say, China, Nth Korea or Cuba.
          An SOE is a business built up by the government; the government of the day being democratically elected has a right to preserve or dispose of it as it wishes.
          Have you been to the U.S.A for an extended period, and do you actually know anything about the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution or the cultural mores implicit? If not I would suggest it is impossible to apply one nation’s founding principles to another. Especially since New Zealand hasn’t actually declared independence from Englund. Unlike America. I’ll be blogging about this.

          • Pascal's bookie 10.1.2.1.1
            5 July 2012 at 3:34 pm

            I reckon if he meant that, he would’ve said that.

            But he didn’t, he said something quite different.

          • Pascal's bookie 10.1.2.1.2
            5 July 2012 at 3:56 pm

            Wow. Just read your ‘Yay or Nay’ post.

            This is quite possibly the most wrong headed thing I’ve read about the Teaty of Waitangi. Including the stuff written by the ‘Celts were here first’ crowd.

            New Zealand has a holiday that we are told is a national holiday: Waitangi Day.
            How it can be called a National holiday beats the hell out of me.
            It’s a day that celebrates the signing of a ‘Treaty’. A mere agreement to case and desist all fighting and efforts towards autonomous rule and instead roll over and get ones tummy tickled by royalty in return for guns, booze and smokes.

          • mike e 10.1.2.1.3
            6 July 2012 at 5:41 pm

            Mediocre Waffler I suppose labour could have continued with the unpopular Fart tax and then we wouldn’t have to listen to your BS spin.
            Or we should all get tractors and drive them up parliaments steps moniker.

  11. penny 11
    5 July 2012 at 12:29 pm

    Genuine question:

    Let’s say you’re a solid lefty, and you’re ardently opposed to asset sales – so much so, that you helped either Labour or the Greens (or, I guess, New Zealand First) at the last election, and have spent some time collecting signatures for the CIR.

    But let’s say you also happen to have a bit of money in the bank – significantly more than the $1,700 median ‘savings’ that is being bandied about (FYI – that’s a 2006 figure – pre-global financial crisis).

    Should you buy shares?

    • just saying 11.1
      5 July 2012 at 2:42 pm

      They represent a monopoly of an essential scarce resource which the whole community has built up over years for the common good. The reason they are so tempting is because buying these shares is virtually a license to print money limited by the amount ot shares bought. The company would never be allowed to fail because taxpayers will always prop it up. And the guaranteed profits come straight out of the pockets of the majority who can’t afford to buy shares, your fellow (poorer) citizens.

      So no.

    • DH 11.2
      5 July 2012 at 6:45 pm

      I think I must be in a parallel universe. Who the hell would waste their time buying $1000 worth of shares? If they return the expected 6-7% a year you’re only looking at making $60-70 on them, $30 more than if you left the cash in the bank. WTF? Why bother for a measly thirty bucks that you may not even get?

      All this mom & pop stuff is ridiculous. This is a money-maker for the big boys, offering bread crumbs to the masses is just a patronising appeasement.

      I can afford to buy shares. I won’t be though, I don’t buy stolen goods.

      • dd 11.2.1
        6 July 2012 at 9:28 am

        This is a good point.

        I would only have between 5k to 10k available for this at the most. And I would be much more comfortable putting less than 5k in. Unless we put off our world trip plans but that’s not going to happen.

        Which really becomes a bit of a waste of time?

        • DH 11.2.1.1
          6 July 2012 at 11:19 am

          From what I’ve read the small investor won’t be offered even $5k worth of shares, you’d have to buy in to all of the floats to build up any kind of investment. Could be wrong but that’s the way I read it. The article linked to says that parcels will be minimum of $1000 and maximum of $2-$3000 allocated to mum & dad.

          The small investor is usually just the patsy in a share float like this. They add to the demand so the float is oversubscribed & then the favoured bigger buyers can make a quick killing unloading their surplus shares at a higher price to those who missed out. It works a bit like ticket scalping.

          • dd 11.2.1.1.1
            6 July 2012 at 11:44 am

            So in your opinion how much money would be required to make it worthwhile.

            It sounds as though it’d be a pretty large amount. In that case i’d imagine even less that 7 percent of nzers will invest other than indirectly through kiwi saver.

            • DH 11.2.1.1.1.1
              6 July 2012 at 12:23 pm

              Who knows? This is a game for the big boys, the small players are just along for the ride. We don’t know if the big players are chasing a quick capital gain or a long term dividend yield.

              I think the ‘small’ investor the Govt is targeting is those with more than $10k in the bank. The priority rule of investing in shares is to spread the risk so anyone new to the sharemarket will be ideally looking at buying in to each of the floats. $2-3k on each = $10-15k.

  12. jack 12
    5 July 2012 at 12:39 pm

    I rather invest in solar heating or solor panels and get a return on my investment. The higher electricity goes up, the more solar panels I put in. That is a win win situation. Less dependent on the grid and more dependent on new technology. Noticed Key and National took the rebate off solar panels last month. How convenient.

    • Kotahi Tane Huna 12.1
      5 July 2012 at 1:42 pm

      Hmm. Sounds good, but if you’re putting in a 3kW system, say, you will need considerably more than $1-2,000. I agree that it’s a better investment though.

    • DH 12.2
      5 July 2012 at 6:51 pm

      I’m wondering how long Meridian will keep their 1:1 feedback tariff. The other powercos only pay about 1:3 which makes grid-tie a bit marginal, Meridian’s deal makes it worthwhile.

      People who think the power company shares are a good long term investment are mad IMO. Sunlight has no cost, it will never go up in price. Solar panels can only get cheaper and power prices can only go higher… do the maths.

  13. Lanthanide 13
    5 July 2012 at 12:46 pm

    I can and will probably buy some, depending on how much money the government is determined to give away and whether or not Labour/Greens threaten to buy them back at their issue price etc.

  14. vto 14
    5 July 2012 at 12:49 pm

    dont buy it.

    everybodys going off grid haven’t you heard.

    • Lanthanide 14.1
      5 July 2012 at 1:06 pm

      Or, more likely, with peak oil on the horizon, electricity will gain more and more prominence as an energy source, much like it was back in the early 1900’s before fossil fuels took off.

  15. Flying Kiwi 15
    5 July 2012 at 1:07 pm

    Yes I can afford to buy shares, and I’m going to buy as many MRP shares as I can. And I hope to have up to $150,000.00 to spend tho’ if there’s a share cap I’ll not need so much but it’s likely to be oversubscribed so the more I can apply for the more I’ll get up to that cap

    I did not vote for National, never have and never will, think the Govt. selling Mighty River Power is stupid economically, (tho’ no more stupid than the original creation of the power companies was) and a one-finger gesture to all New Zealanders. I believe power generation and distribution should be a single public utility managed for efficiency and provided at the least possible cost. I would vote against the sale and do anything in my power to prevent it going ahead, but if it is to go ahead I’m going to buy as many shares as I can and hang onto them for as long as I can.

    Does this make me one of the ‘elite’? I don’t think so. I’m not a ‘mum and dad’ investor, but the reason I have $150,000 to put up for MRP shares has a lot to do with the fact that 30-years ago my wife and I decided we didn’t want children and so were able to pursue two careers/incomes without the expense of raising and educating them. We had no ‘inherited’ cash, have worked hard, lived frugally and unostentatiously and as a result are now in our 60’s with a debt-free property and no other debts plus the kind of savings that would enable us to live comfortably on the income even without Super despite an almost negative rate of return on savings.

    • John72 15.1
      5 July 2012 at 2:34 pm

      Flying Kiwi, congratulations. With so many people crying hardship and poverty, it is pleasant +++, to hear from someone prepared to get out there and work and BUDGET. I have given up reading this site regularly, the negative attitude of so many writers is depressing, but people like you restore hope.
      Thank you for having the courage to speak up.

    • framu 15.2
      5 July 2012 at 4:22 pm

      so you think its bad for the country economically, you think its a big middle finger to all NZers, youd vote against it and do anything in my power to prevent it going ahead and you believe power generation and distribution should be a single public utility managed for efficiency and provided at the least possible cost…

      … but your happy to profit from it for as much as you can get, even though you know its bad for others?

      Speaks volumes

      • Lanthanide 15.2.1
        5 July 2012 at 7:57 pm

        I don’t think it “speaks volumes” really. It’s common sense.

        I, like Flying Kiwi, never voted for National and probably never will and I don’t want to see these assets sold. But because they are going to sell them, whether I like it or not, I might as well try and benefit from it as much as possible. If I don’t, someone else will.

        Given the (apparent) structure they’re trying to put in place, to guarantee all retail investors can buy at least a minimum allotment before they are dished out to others, it doesn’t seem like that my buying the assets is disadvantaging anyone else; unless you’re going to say that someone me buying a few thousand worth is going to prevent kiwisaver funds from buying those same shares, and therefore I’ll be preventing others who can’t afford to buy shares outright but belong in kiwisaver will miss out. But the answer to that is: if there is sufficient demand, the individual price per share will go up, so there will still be enough to go around for everyone.

        • framu 15.2.1.1
          6 July 2012 at 8:27 am

          “, it doesn’t seem like that my buying the assets is disadvantaging anyone else;”

          erm… im talking about reduced long term revenue to the state, the pursuit of an idealogical goal that goes against majority opinion, the removal of OIA oversight, and projected higher power bills (all concepts that FK outlines in their original comment) – not whether one private share holder gets more than another.

          so it might be all “common sense” from a rational economic actor position – but it still speaks volumes

  16. Psycho Milt 16
    5 July 2012 at 1:23 pm

    Yes. Like the Contrarian, through being debt-free. My only investments apart from the retirement fund ones I contribute to are term deposits, on the basis that the NZ sharemarket is a means of parting fools from their money, and banks are somewhat less likely to simply steal our savings than the typical NZ finance company director.

    However, I can’t picture myself buying any asset sales shares because it’s wrong in principle – wrong of the govt to ask us to pay for something we already own, and wrong for the already well-off like me to make even more money at everyone else’s expense.

  17. Fortran 17
    5 July 2012 at 1:29 pm

    Kiwisaver Managers will go for all they can get – so if you have an account you can expect to see a share whatever.

    • mike e 17.1
      6 July 2012 at 5:34 pm

      Fartrain My financial advisor is telling me to stay well clear of shares until the global markets settle down again.
      Max keiser also says this gold and silver platinum are going to be the safest look at Teresa Gattung sold all her poorly performing Telecon shares and bought Gold at $800 a troy ounce now its worth more than double.

  18. quartz 18
    5 July 2012 at 2:04 pm

    Yes. Plenty of spare cash but not buying shares because (1) I consider it receiving stolen property and (2) I don’t think that these companies will be a good investment.

  19. Sweetd 19
    5 July 2012 at 2:45 pm

    Yes.

  20. chris73 20
    5 July 2012 at 4:45 pm

    Oh yes (picture me tapping my fingers together to get the right idea)

  21. Wayne 21
    6 July 2012 at 12:04 am

    Of course it helps to understand median, half above half below. Most people buying shares will be over 40. Much more of the half above will be in in this group. So I suspect a lot of people, not the elite will buy the shares. The elite if that’s how you call that group is surely not more than the top 5 to 10 percent. But a share offer of this kind will go to more households than that, just not so many younger households.