GDP figures expose business confidence survey nonsense

Written By: - Date published: 1:29 pm, September 20th, 2018 - 99 comments
Categories: business, capitalism, Economy, economy - Tags: , ,

Gross Domestic Product in the June quarter rose 1.0%, exposing the ANZ Bank’s Business Outlook confidence survey as little more than a National Party and big business propaganda tool.

At an annualised growth rate of 4.0%, the economy has been expanding well beyond what the Reserve Bank believes is sustainable without creating excessive inflation and may have to be hosed down by an interest hike.

The RBNZ, which had forecast only a 0.5% rise in GDP in the quarter, estimates the sustainable annual growth rate is only around 3.0%.

Analysis by independent researchers at the Parliamentary Library shows the ANZ Business Outlook has the poorest correlation between what is forecast and reality of major forecasting tools.

Both Treasury’s and RBNZ’s forecasts have been far more accurate as has the Outlook’s survey of businesses’ own prospects.

Throughout the years of the Clark Labour government ANZ’s Outlook survey remained gloomy despite the economy growing at an average 3% during those nine years.

Westpac Bank economists said today’s data showed encouraging signs in the economy.

“Not only was the overall result stronger than expected, the details were more encouraging for the economy’s growth prospects going forward,” Westpac economists said in a note.

Growth was shared widely across the whole economy.

Ironically, ANZ’s senior economist Liz Kendall admitted the economy is “in an okay space”.

Net exports, which ANZ had forecast would be negative in the quarter, instead made a solid positive contribution.

The only negative contributor was — surprise, surprise — business investment – no doubt the result of the funk that business leaders have talked themselves in the wake of the surprise election result that tossed the National Party out of government.

Westpac economists said the result was significant for the Reserve Bank’s official cash rate decision next Thursday. Any thought the economy needs more stimulus via a further cut from the already low Official Cash Rate level of 1.75% can be cast into the same garbage bin as the Outlook survey.

Capital Economics said the Reserve Bank can assume consumer and business gloom is overdone and that growth would “reaccelerate” next year.
Though Westpac’s Consumer Confidence Survey shows consumer confidence at six-year lows, optimists still outweigh pessimists. Its chief economist Dominick Stevens says consumers may be simply reacting to the highly publicised negativity of the business community.

A recent IPSOS survey showed New Zealanders are feeling more positive about the Labour-NZ First coalition government than they were about the previous one.

Recipients thought that the current Labour-led government was doing a much better job than National was in July 2017. Labour scored a mean score of 5.4 out of a maximum possible score of 10, and National scored 4.9.

(Simon Louisson has reported for The Wall Street Journal, AP Dow Jones Newswires, New Zealand Press Association and Reuters and has worked as a political and media adviser to the Green Party.)

99 comments on “GDP figures expose business confidence survey nonsense ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. greywarshark 1
    20 September 2018 at 2:17 pm

    It’s all nonsense that comes out of the financial authorities, business and government.

    The latest relates to the Australian Agriculture Minister who says that his name is Littleproud. How can you believe any people who come out with odd things like that?
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/107223952/boy-arrested-over-pins-in-australian-strawberries

    And if our business confidence is low with so little weighing down our business scales, what is Australia’s like now that tonnes of F&v are getting discarded as some of their own anomic atomics have been putting needles in strawberries with hateful glee and abandon?

    It is hard to find the balance between going doolally or po-faced, regarding everything as a potential threat that is yet to be revealed.

    • Muttonbird 1.1
      20 September 2018 at 2:29 pm

      You should alway wash and cut strawberries before eating. Preferably with vanilla ice-cream and dusted with icing sugar.

      • peterh 1.1.1
        20 September 2018 at 5:06 pm

        Never Icing sugar, I have was a strawberry grower for 30 years, always castor sugar and a small amount 1 dessertspoon of brandy per chip

        • JanM 1.1.1.1
          20 September 2018 at 5:51 pm

          Even better – dip in sour cream and then raw sugar – super yum!

          • In Vino 1.1.1.1.1
            20 September 2018 at 6:35 pm

            Sorry – it has to be top French Champers as in ‘Brideshead Revisited’. Forget the rest of that sugary stuff: sugar is now the new evil.

  2. Kat 2
    20 September 2018 at 2:25 pm

    All those business’s will still be sulking about as they begrudgingly throw their toys back into their blue cots. They have been shown up for the “funk” merchants they are. What will Amy Adams say now.

    • Wensleydale 2.1
      20 September 2018 at 2:40 pm

      “It was Labour’s fault!” probably. Isn’t that the go-to line whenever they’re caught with their pants around their ankles?

  3. Siobhan 3
    20 September 2018 at 2:29 pm

    Growth was shared widely across the whole economy….if only the benefits were shared fairly across the whole gamut of citizenry…then again as long as the Citizens are only ever referred to, or acknowledged as, ‘Consumers’, and when even a political and media advisor for the Green Party can write a piece about the economy without even once mentioning the word ‘worker’…then you realise why the business sector think their miserable opinions and vague feelings are all that really matter.

  4. Andre 4
    20 September 2018 at 2:30 pm

    Seems we need an addition to the old one about the reason we have economic forecasters is to make astrologers look good: we have business outlook surveys to make economic forecasters look good.

    • greywarshark 4.1
      20 September 2018 at 3:01 pm

      What is happening Andre? I seem to agree with you. It gives me a strange tingly feeling. Hmmmm.

  5. shadrach 5
    20 September 2018 at 2:30 pm

    The author seems to be confused.

    A 1% growth in one quarter is not an annualised growth of 4%, other than by a simplistic mathematical formula. The actual growth rate over the June year was 2.7% (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12128463).

    Also, the author writes “which had forecast only a 5% rise in GDP in the quarter”, surely the rise forecast was 0.5?

    But perhaps the most obvious confusion is over the difference between business confidence and GDP numbers. The GDP number is an historical measure of what actually happened. Business confidence is business perception of what MAY happen. In my view business is being overly negative in its outlook, but we will only know that when economic results from the confidence period are matched.

    [lprent: Corrected the typo .5% -> 5% and all of the other bumf that happens when pasting from a word document.

    Personally I see this as being a classic case of whining by the economic parasites in the property sector, their supporting bankers, and other unproductive areas of limited economic value (including Mike Hoskings). Meanwhile the quiet productive people just work and don’t fill out questionnaires from Business NZ or banks. ]

    • soddenleaf 5.1
      20 September 2018 at 2:42 pm

      Obviously the announcement over tax changes will dampen some intentional confusion exciting confidence drops. Consumer confidence may reflect the awful scam that is food supermarket shopping. Business and consumer confidence are likely at odds, unless something is stressing the whole sector leave both down. I.e change is coming and about time. Key govt was a disaster for all.

      • shadrach 5.1.1
        20 September 2018 at 2:48 pm

        How can a 6 year low in the consumer confidence survey (https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/09/new-zealand-consumer-confidence-drops-to-six-year-low-survey.html) relate to ‘the awful scam that is food supermarket shopping’ (whatever that is supposed to mean), when supermarket shopping has been around for decades?

        • greywarshark 5.1.1.1
          20 September 2018 at 3:03 pm

          How can you state that something has been round for decades and imply that means that everything about it is known, settled and unchanging. Do you live on another planet?

          • shadrach 5.1.1.1.1
            20 September 2018 at 3:07 pm

            I didn’t imply that. My response to soddenleaf was a question. I assume he/she will reply by explaining what they mean by ‘the awful scam that is food supermarket shopping’.

            • Dukeofurl 5.1.1.1.1.1
              20 September 2018 at 3:45 pm

              ” In my view business is being overly negative in its outlook, but we will only know that when economic results from the confidence period are matched.”

              It was the June quarter- April-may- Jun.

              ( btw the ANZ itself had a ripper of a first half -‘statutory profit of NZ$964 million, up 11% on the corresponding half in the 2017 financial year- but I digress to the real world and back to the chin stroking)

              Actual Morgan-ANZ survey was
              April- Headline business confidence eased further in April. A net 23% of
              businesses are pessimistic about the year ahead, down 3 points from March
              May-A net 27% of businesses are
              pessimistic about the year ahead, down 4 points from April.
              June-a net 39% of businesses were pessimistic

              So there are your ‘confidence’ numbers to compare shadrach- down down down
              real world – UP

              https://www.anz.co.nz/about-us/economic-markets-research/business-outlook/

              • shadrach …
                20 September 2018 at 5:38 pm

                I agree. My comments related to comparisons between current survey’s (i.e. ones being published now) and historical data.

                • Dukeofurl …
                  20 September 2018 at 6:59 pm

                  There isnt much difference between surveys ‘now’ and surveys in the first half the year.

                  You are just talking nonsense when you want month by month comparison- I gave it to you and you just try your normal gish gallop onto new questions.

                  • shadrach …
                    21 September 2018 at 10:31 am

                    “There isnt much difference between surveys ‘now’ and surveys in the first half the year.”
                    The difference is timing. I was referring to current survey’s, not as far as the results but as far as what data we should be comparing them to.

            • mickysavage 5.1.1.1.1.2
              20 September 2018 at 3:48 pm

              Looks like a certain sector has managed to talk themselves into a huff. Meanwhile in the real world things are not so bad.

              The only practical threat to our economy is America’s behaviour. This Labour Government, like all other Labour Governments knows how to steer the economy.

              • shadrach …
                20 September 2018 at 5:39 pm

                “Looks like a certain sector has managed to talk themselves into a huff. Meanwhile in the real world things are not so bad.”
                Absolutely.

                “This Labour Government, like all other Labour Governments knows how to steer the economy.”
                Let’s not forget it was a Labour government (from 1984) that laid the foundations for the economic prosperity we now enjoy.

                • Dukeofurl …
                  20 September 2018 at 6:55 pm

                  really ?

                  And Australias record length of positive growth with its capital gains tax, national awards and so on.
                  Rogernomics actually decreased growth over the last 30 years or so.

                  The rationale for the reforms was our economic growth was ‘too low’ at the time.

                  Actual numbers haven’t changed all that much afterwards, ie were still hovering around the 2% plus level.

                  But you of course will now say – another round of Rogernomics is the answer rather than looking at at near neighbour who never did.

                  • shadrach …
                    21 September 2018 at 10:16 am

                    “And Australias record length of positive growth with its capital gains tax, national awards and so on.”
                    Australia’s growth for decades has been built around mineral extraction. And Australia implemented it’s own brand of Rogernomics throughout the 80’s and 90’s.

                    “Rogernomics actually decreased growth over the last 30 years or so.”
                    I doubt that, but I’m happy to review your evidence.

                    “The rationale for the reforms was our economic growth was ‘too low’ at the time.”
                    No, the rationale was that Muldoon’s command economics had near wrecked the economy, and that we had to move to being a more competitive economy on the global market.

                    • Dukeofurl …
                      21 September 2018 at 12:58 pm

                      “No, the rationale was that Muldoon’s command economics had near wrecked the economy”

                      He used the levers of the state to maintain nationals rural electorates. Key offered the same command economics when they said they would pay employees for short weeks during GFC.

                      Wasnt printing money during the GFC also command economics.

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 3:28 pm

                      “He used the levers of the state to maintain nationals rural electorates. Key offered the same command economics when they said they would pay employees for short weeks during GFC.”
                      During a GFC. Muldoon deployed command economics when he should have been liberalising. Thank goodness for Douglas.

                • Ross …
                  21 September 2018 at 6:40 am

                  Let’s not forget it was a Labour government (from 1984) that laid the foundations for the economic prosperity we now enjoy.

                  Yeah nah. We were prosperous in the 60s and to a large extent in the 1970s when we had full employment or near-full employment. But the Labour government of 1984, and those which followed, didn’t think full employment was a goal worth pursuing. “Rob Muldoon once half joked he knew all 70 odd registered unemployed by name. Yes that was 70!”

                  http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1409/S00069/why-cant-we-have-full-employment-in-new-zealand.htm

                  We are a low wage economy. Some workers, like nurses and teachers, are trying to change that. But it’ll be changed by taking industrial action and by negotiating hard. It won’t be changed by a benevolent government.

                  • Halfcrown …
                    21 September 2018 at 6:51 am

                    +1

                  • shadrach …
                    21 September 2018 at 10:17 am

                    The only reason we were prosperous in the 60’s was because we had captive markets for our farm production. Thus low unemployment. Those days went with Britains entry into the EEC.

                    • Dukeofurl …
                      21 September 2018 at 12:52 pm

                      You have a fairly tale view about ‘captive market’

                      ‘British bulk purchase of NZ farm exports ended in 1954 and from then NZ had to negotiate access. One limit on NZ exports was the increasing output of British farmers – a policy decision which was understandable in light of British vulnerability to blockade in time of war. Another was Britain increasing dairy imports from Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, and Ireland.

                      In 1957, the minister of agriculture, Keith Holyoake, had to threaten to end preferential treatment for British manufactured exports to NZ in order to secure continued free access for NZ meat and dairy produce to Britain.
                      “From 1961, NZ reluctantly accepted quotas on dairy exports to Britain as the only way of maintaining reasonable prices.

                      British were always did anything on self interest.
                      In reality joining the EU mean similar rules for British and existing EU markets.

                      We were always being screwed by UK , even before WW2
                      https://www.victoria.ac.nz/news/2016/07/it-wasnt-all-sweetness-and-light

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 3:26 pm

                      All of which demonstrates that Britain supported our export income well into the 1970’s.

                    • Dukeofurl …
                      21 September 2018 at 6:14 pm

                      Not really any more so than today.
                      It wasnt ‘Britains farm’ that some seem to push

                      as a bloc exports from nz to EU are $8 bill, which is dwarfed by imports of $11.5 bil

                      ‘In the 1950s more than 50% of New Zealand produce received no preferential treatment in Britain, yet 90% of British goods got preferential treatment in New Zealand.’

                      And of course NZ retained special access to EU after Britain joined.

                      The 2 major oil shocks of the 70s and Muldoons farmer subsidys/Think Big just made times a bit harder than they should

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 9:53 pm

                      “Not really any more so than today. It wasnt ‘Britains farm’ that some seem to push.”
                      Wrong.
                      “A continuing role as ‘Britain’s farmyard’ underpinned New Zealand’s prosperity. While Britain began to contemplate closer economic ties with continental Europe, for most New Zealanders an economy without the certainty of the British market seemed unthinkable. At the end of the decade the UK received more than half our exports and provided nearly half our imports. ”
                      https://nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/the-1950s/overview

    • Draco T Bastard 5.2
      20 September 2018 at 2:47 pm

      Business confidence is business perception of what MAY happen.

      Are you sure about that?

      Consider that there are business outlook and business prospects surveys and that they contradict each other with the latter being closer to what actually happens in GDP.

      Analysis by independent researchers at the Parliamentary Library shows the ANZ Business Outlook has the poorest correlation between what is forecast and reality of major forecasting tools.
      Both Treasury’s and RBNZ’s forecasts have been far more accurate as has the Outlook’s survey of businesses’ own prospects.

      We’re seeing a major conflict in business peoples mindset as they say that the economy is all going to hell but their business will be doing well.

      • shadrach 5.2.1
        20 September 2018 at 3:04 pm

        “Are you sure about that? Consider that there are business outlook and business prospects surveys and that they contradict each other with the latter being closer to what actually happens in GDP.”
        Both survey’s look to the future, as ‘outlook’ and ‘prospects’ are both future looking concepts. So yes, I am sure.

        “We’re seeing a major conflict in business peoples mindset as they say that the economy is all going to hell but their business will be doing well.”
        That’s understandable, given the lag between policy implementation and outcomes. Business people may perceive that the government is implementing policies unfriendly to business, but those policies may not be impacting them yet. We are one year into a new government; realistically there has not been enough time for policy changes to have impacted materially on business performance, if indeed they are going to.

        • Muttonbird 5.2.1.1
          20 September 2018 at 3:10 pm

          I though you guys said the government was doing nothing but setting up working groups. Now you say they’ve made policy changes.

          Please make up your mind.

          • shadrach 5.2.1.1.1
            20 September 2018 at 3:30 pm

            Who are ‘you guys’?

            This government has made a number of policy announcements that impact on business, including around the minimum wage, oil and gas exploration, regional investment, building and construction, the list goes on.

            • Dukeofurl 5.2.1.1.1.1
              20 September 2018 at 3:52 pm

              “including around the minimum wage, oil and gas exploration”

              Minimum wages were increased every year by national – so not too much change there.
              Oil and Gas- that only impacted future ‘applications’ for non taranaki and offshore exploration. Thats not a major activity as offshore has negligible local impact as floating rigs and ships come from overseas with their own staff.

              • shadrach …
                20 September 2018 at 5:42 pm

                “Minimum wages were increased every year by national – so not too much change there.”
                Perhaps only in the rate of change, but in principle you are correct.

                “Oil and Gas- that only impacted future ‘applications’ for non taranaki and offshore exploration. Thats not a major activity as offshore has negligible local impact as floating rigs and ships come from overseas with their own staff.”
                I disagree on that one. The problem for business was not the decision per se (although some may disagree!), it was the lack of consultation.

                • Dukeofurl …
                  20 September 2018 at 6:50 pm

                  Oil and gas exploration is a tiny part of the economy. The webiste for Fitzroy Enginnering in NP shows their O&G work is overseas and the local work is mostly construction based.
                  Lack of consultation is just a buzz word about what used to happen under nationals Cabinet Clubs

                  • Muttonbird …
                    20 September 2018 at 6:53 pm

                    I also see that the massive 20% drop in economic activity in the oil sector was down to a failure on one rig.

                    That goes to show how small it is and how unreliable it is.

                    Glad to be done with it – roll on sustainables!

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 10:30 am

                      I agree. But the point I was making was about consultation. If the government wants to enjoy the tax revenues that flow from business, it needs to send it clear and consistent signals, and talk to it before making decisions of this nature.

                  • shadrach …
                    21 September 2018 at 10:19 am

                    I agree, but that’s not the point. The point is that a government made a decision about an industry without consultation. I’m not commenting on the quality of the decision, just the quality of the signalling.

                    • lprent …
                      21 September 2018 at 10:35 am

                      Several points.

                      1. Nothing has happened to any existing concession gained from the government. Most of those have decades to run.

                      2. The policy simply limits future concessions. If a business or even an employee was banking on things happening in the future as they have in the past when politics is involved then they shouldn’t be in business.

                      3. As I remember it, this was flagged as being policy in two of the three parties long before they formed this coalition. It was going to be implemented if they got elected. This in the business world that I inhabit is known as ‘risk’. Risk is something that must be managed, have contingency plans and alternate strategies. Managers and shareholders who can’t do that deserve to fail.

                      4. The oil business have a perfect democratic right to transparently lobby before and after the election. They did. All of their work appears to have focused on a 3rd term National – which makes them look stupid.

                      To be frank, what we are seeing is simple whining by businesses attempting to be parasites on our citizens. They had ample opportunity to deal with this over the last 15 years that Labour have been signalling that this was where their policy was heading (and the Greens even longer).

                      Parasite businesses battening off future concessions can go screw themselves…

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 10:51 am

                      LPrent

                      You make some good points, but I’m not sure they address the point I’m trying to make. For example you say “The oil business have a perfect democratic right to transparently lobby before and after the election.” Well that’s correct, but it’s difficult to lobby about something you don;t know is going to happen.

                      You say “To be frank, what we are seeing is simple whining by businesses attempting to be parasites on our citizens. ” How is the oil and gas industry ‘parasites on our citizens’? The industry provides products to our community and saves the country money in the process. If we don’t want to burn fossil fuels, we need to address the demand side first.

                      But overall your comments address only the one industry, not the wider concern of business. The government made this decision against a single industry for reasons of it’s own. Whatever the merits of those reasons, it should have consulted with the industry first. If the government can do this to one industry that doesn’t meet it’s ‘favour’, then it can do it to others. It’s perception.

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 11:04 am

                      Sorry, but to add to the above, in response to your point abut pre-election policy:

                      “However, the decision to stop issuing offshore oil and gas exploration permits was not pre-election policy. Although Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was musing privately months ago about the politics of such a move, it is barely a month since she broke from her formal programme to accept a petition from Greenpeace on the forecourt of Parliament.”
                      https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/environment/is-the-govts-ban-on-new-oil-and-gas-exploration-brave-or-naive/

                      And when you say “It was going to be implemented if they got elected”, are you seriously suggesting that any policy that was contained in at least two of the coalition partners pre-election manifesto’s is ‘going to be implemented’?

                • Craig Glen Eden …
                  20 September 2018 at 8:49 pm

                  “Lack of consultation” oh please! No new ability to get a right to drill after 2050. Shit how much lead in time do you want? Wouldn’t it have been nice if Opunake Maori was told years in advance that a company wants to remove iron sand from its ocean floor. Makes me laugh how big Business thinks it should get preferences that the average citizen, local Comunity or Maori tribe don’t get. The self interest and political bias shown by big business is sickening.

                  • You_Fool …
                    21 September 2018 at 9:15 am

                    Also, anyone who had any sense knew the announcement was coming, it was well telegraphed and something had to be given to the greens early on as well

                  • shadrach …
                    21 September 2018 at 10:20 am

                    Lead time is not consultation.

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 11:14 am

                      “It is disingenuous to claim that existing permits might sustain a healthy oil and gas sector until the 2040s. The fruitless hunt for major gas fields in the Great South Basin since the 1960s proves the point that exploration is expensive and usually unsuccessful.

                      But perhaps the biggest risk is the promise of a Government-led “transition” to new industries of the future. Airy ministerial talk of capital being redeployed to new activities is a carbon copy of Rogernomics-era rhetoric. Capital was redeployed, but not necessarily in New Zealand.

                      The Government is talking a big game on its ability to direct the emergence of such new industries, but its capacity to deliver this upside of transformative change is untested and the value of the industries it is disrupting is all too measurable.”

                      https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/environment/is-the-govts-ban-on-new-oil-and-gas-exploration-brave-or-naive/

                    • Dukeofurl …
                      21 September 2018 at 1:48 pm

                      Consultation doesnt mean you get any of your concerns either. You are just using it as a rehetorical stick but doesnt have any real meaning that you are personalyy aware of.

                      I know small business owners connected to Fletchers who are often the last to hear about its sudden changes in direction. Much the same for Fonterra and other large businesses. the only consultation is internal.

                      Oil and Gas firms had won a number of exploration rights back when oil prices were sky high.

                      The price collapse meant in some cases they ‘walked away’ from previously won exploration ( drilling) obligations.

                      Where was the consultation then other than – Dont want it anymore.

                      ” Oil and gas exploration has collapsed to $10 million in 2015 from $300 million in 2010 due to international market changes,”
                      https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2018/04/21/105687/rod-oram-shedding-light-on-the-gas-sectors-claims

                      and
                      2012 -Brazilian oil giant Petrobras dumps NZ exploration permits
                      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10851863

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 3:32 pm

                      “Consultation doesnt mean you get any of your concerns either.”
                      No, but it means you get to contribute to the debate in a meaningful way.

                      “You are just using it as a rehetorical stick but doesnt have any real meaning that you are personalyy aware of.”
                      Oh yes it does. consultation would have enabled the industry to argue it’s case, including pointing out the unintended consequences of the decision, such as loss of jobs (“Methanex, which exports more than a billion dollars’ worth of natural gas a year as methanol, will probably disappear. Its Think Big-era plants at Motunui and Waitara can be unbolted and moved to another country)” and potentially higher short term emisssions (However, the naivety of the Government’s new policy is that it will not, of itself, reduce global carbon emissions, but could increase New Zealand’s if it leads to more coal use in the meantime).

                      https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/environment/is-the-govts-ban-on-new-oil-and-gas-exploration-brave-or-naive/

                      It seems to me you are arguing for shoddy practise simply because you approve of the decision. That’s shallow and self serving.

                    • Dukeofurl …
                      21 September 2018 at 6:24 pm

                      Job losses like this – Not
                      http://www.interest.co.nz/news/94853/methanex-signs-agreements-gas-suppliers-so-it-can-keep-producing-methanol-nz-until-least
                      kiwiblog isnt a reliable source for economic information

                    • shadrach …
                      21 September 2018 at 9:55 pm

                      What has kiwiblog got to do with my source?

        • Dukeofurl 5.2.1.2
          20 September 2018 at 3:48 pm

          I remember much the same views of the US economy in election year 2016

          If you were a Trump supporter , egged on by Trump himself, the economy was in the doldrums and any numbers that said different were ‘faked by Obama’

          Come the year after the election and the economy was much the same path, but same numbers were ‘best ever’ – even when they wernt .

        • Draco T Bastard 5.2.1.3
          20 September 2018 at 11:19 pm

          Both survey’s look to the future, as ‘outlook’ and ‘prospects’ are both future looking concepts. So yes, I am sure.

          What a load of bollocks.

          They are not the same. One looks to the average business person’s belief on how the country is doing and one looks their belief on how their business is doing. They only have any sort of understanding of the their business and even that’s likely to be more belief than real understanding.

          That’s understandable, given the lag between policy implementation and outcomes.

          And there you’re just making excuses for the average business person’s incomprehension that they haven’t got a friggen clue.

          • shadrach 5.2.1.3.1
            21 September 2018 at 10:24 am

            “One looks to the average business person’s belief on how the country is doing and one looks their belief on how their business is doing.”

            The words ‘outlook’ and ‘prospects’ are both about the future. I can suggest a good dictionary if necessary.

            “And there you’re just making excuses for the average business person’s incomprehension that they haven’t got a friggen clue.”
            Really? Do you have any connection or contact with the business community in NZ? I’d suggest your comments reflect your own ignorance and just a shade of envy.

    • Chuck 5.3
      20 September 2018 at 3:01 pm

      Yep, you have Leading, Lagging, and coincident indicators.

      GDP is a coincident indicator (happened roughly at the same time as the result measured).

      Business Outlook confidence survey…well as in its title – an Outlook.

      • SPC 5.3.1
        20 September 2018 at 5:14 pm

        The outlook before the June quarter began was pessimestic …. yet the growth was 1%.

        If you look at the surveys more closely, they were pessimistic about the general economy (for political reasons) but not for their own business – which explains the result.

    • Simon Louisson 5.4
      20 September 2018 at 5:58 pm

      You’re right about the typo — it should have been 0.5% but the annualised figure of 4% is ok — that is the current run rate – multiplying the last quarter by 4. The historical annual average growth rate for the last year was 2.7% — essentially adding the 4 quarters.

      • shadrach 5.4.1
        21 September 2018 at 10:26 am

        Hi Simon

        Multiplying the current quarter by 4 is ok mathematically, but it is far to simplistic to mean much from an economic analysis standpoint.

  6. ankerawshark 6
    20 September 2018 at 3:09 pm

    Ha, ha ha ha ha ha ha.

    But Barry S said Jacinda’s comment was economically dangerous. Surely the ships about to sink

    • lprent 6.1
      20 September 2018 at 3:12 pm

      Barry Soper is a economic numbskull more interested in filing stories than actually thinking.

      The problem is that there are so few economically literate people in the parliamentary press gallery that we get all kinds of trash passing through them direct from National’s similarly business stupid cortiere of staffers.

      A bit like undigested peanuts in stools. If you don’t grind them closely with your teeth then you get white flecks in the output. 😈

      • Stuart Munro 6.1.1
        20 September 2018 at 3:22 pm

        It’s a lot like Blomkvist’s description of business reporting in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo – no standards whatsoever. Even Enron was being lauded 2 years before it went belly up.

      • ianmac 6.1.2
        20 September 2018 at 3:23 pm

        Does that mean Soper is a white fleck?

      • In Vino 6.1.3
        20 September 2018 at 3:49 pm

        lprent – is there an explanation for that strange word ‘cortiere’? I assume you meant ‘côterie’? (‘Cortège’ might be a wishful possibility?)

        • Dukeofurl 6.1.3.1
          20 September 2018 at 3:54 pm

          Im sure the ‘coterie’ are writing their ‘we were duped’ stories for tomorrow ?

        • lprent 6.1.3.2
          20 September 2018 at 5:00 pm

          Yep. I didn’t spell check it.

          My natural written English is that of Shakespeare. You wave a pointed stick at the word that you want and see what pops out this time.

          It’s a battlefield. However these computers are like a pacifist corset – they constrain expression.

          • In Vino 6.1.3.2.1
            20 September 2018 at 5:07 pm

            Yes… I suppose we can be glad that it did not come out as ‘corsetry’..

            • lprent 6.1.3.2.1.1
              20 September 2018 at 5:09 pm

              Indeed.. 😈

            • lprent 6.1.3.2.1.2
              20 September 2018 at 5:17 pm

              That’s ok.

              I just butchered pronouncing ‘renaissance’ with a few extra ‘a’s attached to the gales of laughter from my partner. She nearly had a nasty accident.

              But seriously, this week is the first holiday I have had in a couple of years. I can drop the compiler taskmaster and its insistence on accuracy. I am free to wander through the freedom of the english language landscape and let everything hang out.

              Being in vino helps of course.

              • In Vino …
                20 September 2018 at 7:00 pm

                Yes – the renaissance is tricky: I blame other tricky French words like liaison.. and the illogicality of English in general. Bonne continuation with the holiday and vino.

  7. AB 7
    20 September 2018 at 3:56 pm

    It’s possible to have GDP growth and decreasing business confidence.
    Business confidence is more based on where the fruits of economic growth are going.
    If higher GDP is indicative of higher wages and more spending into the economy, but squeezed profits, business confidence will go south.
    Conversely, if GDP growth is based on increased economic activity due to people being so desperate they’ll do multiple, casualised, low paid jobs, business confidence goes ups.
    Business confidence is dropping because they fear they are moving from the latter scenario (enabled by National) to the former. Not much to do with GDP in itself.

    • Patricia Bremner 7.1
      21 September 2018 at 1:03 pm

      This is much closer to the truth of it. Business says “Give us certainty”
      What they mean is ……………………………………………….. “Give us OUR rules”

  8. SPC 8
    20 September 2018 at 5:10 pm

    So the bumper revenue flows indicated by the Crown accounts were a hint that the GDP figure for the quarter would be up there … who knew (anyone who had expert economic advice)

    Puts a few morons in the blog world and media in their place …

  9. Coolas 9
    20 September 2018 at 5:19 pm

    Nobody mentioned John Key yet?

    As ANZ Chairman he must have influence over tone and we know he was apt at confusing content

    • Muttonbird 9.1
      20 September 2018 at 6:07 pm

      I can see him and Max firing up the iPad changing all the survey results.

      • greywarshark 9.1.1
        20 September 2018 at 10:27 pm

        Referring to Keys happy place at the bank.
        This from a Bryan Gould piece put up in Open Mike 20/9 by savenz at 13:

        confirmed by detailed studies produced by the Bank of England and other central banks – that around 97% of our money has been created, not by the government, but by the commercial banks, which create the money by simply making a bank entry in the accounts of those to whom they lend money, usually on mortgage.

        Quotes: What a piece of work is man, How noble his reason.
        and
        Nice work if you can get it, and if you get it, won’t you tell me how.

    • Patricia Bremner 9.2
      21 September 2018 at 1:04 pm

      100% Lurking!

  10. Bearded Git 10
    20 September 2018 at 6:50 pm

    looks like a rockstar economy to me…well done Jacinda….ooops that doesn’t fit the zeitgeist

  11. Brian Tregaskin 11
    20 September 2018 at 7:10 pm

    Expect a winter of discontent from Business right to the next election.

  12. Observer Tokoroa 12
    21 September 2018 at 2:47 am

    The Anz ,,, has a lot on its mind …

    Isn’t that the bank you go along to, to play with little pigtails ?

    .

  13. Antoine 13
    21 September 2018 at 10:17 am

    It’s entirEly reasonable that business confidence could be low despite a quarter of good GDP growth. Labour’s policies that woUld most affect business are still to come.

    A.

    • Dukeofurl 13.1
      21 September 2018 at 2:22 pm

      What would they be … surely you know these things since…. to not like something you have to know what it is.

      • Antoine 13.1.1
        22 September 2018 at 10:34 am

        I didn’t say I disliked anything. I am talking about the views of the people who were polled to determine business confidence. I don’t own a business and have not participated in such a poll.

        A.

  14. Observer Tokoroa 14
    21 September 2018 at 2:30 pm

    Desperado Antoine

    You seem to be in distress you poor creature. Having labelled yourself by your name as the top goat in the French hierarchy and predicted the destruction of NZ Productivity – you are now dribliing like a dog Antoine.

    Let me assure you, no matter what happens in NZ, you and your friends (key, english, collins, bennett and adams) will be able to take any amount of wealth you like from the honest people of New Zealand. You are Capitalists.

    You spend your miserable lives stealing from the Workers and the poor. And you shunt them into Homelessness.

    The Guillotine is only a Jet flight away. Don’t forget it Desperado.

    • Antoine 14.1
      22 September 2018 at 10:33 am

      > you are now dribliing like a dog Antoine.

      Actually, I thought my comment was short, lucid and to the point, while you appear to be gibbering.

      A.

      • Tricledrown 14.1.1
        23 September 2018 at 11:10 am

        Antione ANZ is in serious trouble across the ditch and could be here.
        The big banks make massive profits out of spiralling House and land prices.
        Looking at the Aussie banking enquiry
        Shows the behaviour the major 4 banks + AMP have been up to.
        These financial monopolies need an enquiry on this side of the Tasman.

  15. Tricledrown 15
    23 September 2018 at 12:34 pm

    Antione because you live in a Silo.
    I could mention the consumer confidence survey which shows gloom despite a 4% growth in sales facts vs rumours.