I welcomed Amy Adams independent review of Chorus’s financial claims in response to Chorus’s sad song. Not something I should say in a left leaning site but it does show an increasing awareness from government of big business endeavours to manipulate NZ to their advantage.
I felt that the Minister had a gun to her head when Chorus started threatening all sorts of dire consequences should the copper pricing not be fixed soon. It makes me nervous and suspicious when business starts threatening the government and making noises about urgency particularly when the decision has long running consequences.
Given that Chorus knew about the review of copper pricing did they work out what they thought it might be and make plans accordingly or have they assumed they could convince the regulator to give them the price they wanted and then proceeded to get themselves into a situation that meant that a change in the price would result in them going broke?
Chorus must have made an assumption about a pricing range. If they assumed the same or a single price then that is poor. They would then have made business plans based on that, and took a risk that pricing would be in that range. The question is, was that a fair pricing range assumption or was a mistake made? It is looking like a mistake was made then they’ll have to make other plans or trigger the contingency plans if they exist. Things do not always go the way you plan.
Recent developments have seen a plunging share price; please explain questions being issued by the ASX; political support for government intervention evaporating; assurances that Chorus would not walk away from the contract when it was suggested they could and changes in tone from the management. See this article (Not everyone buys the claim Chorus could walk). The share price fall sounds like the end of the world if you listen to some commentary. I’d make the following points.