Why I won't be voting Labour...

[speights boy]

I have done in Australia, UK and US, it's really simple.

Curses batman.
Foiled by experience.

However, my point remains.
As a State sell-off of shares, with statements made to NZ public....this is very different from a normal company IPO , for example, facebook.

To see those who stag for 17%, at the expense of NZ retail is particularly galling.

Plus, by having to buy on the secondary market the bonus shares that were touted as an incentive to invest are NOT available.

[iwik]

Was IPO shares offered to international investors for the other power companies ?

[elguapo]

Curses batman.
Foiled by experience.

However, my point remains.
As a State sell-off of shares, with statements made to NZ public....this is very different from a normal company IPO , for example, facebook.

To see those who stag for 17%, at the expense of NZ retail is particularly galling.

Plus, by having to buy on the secondary market the bonus shares that were touted as an incentive to invest are NOT available.

Well, compare to Royal Mail, that had a 40% stag profit. Don't forget the Government still owns 51% of the company, the public profits from that 17% rise as well.

[speights boy]

Well, compare to Royal Mail, that had a 40% stag profit.

Which was then subject to a scathing and critical report from the National Audit office.
The Govt's own spending watchdog.

However, it is not the % stag as such, it's the fact that so much of it was done by offshore speculators.....exactly as it was for the other two.
Causing those "front of the queue" NZ investors to pay a much higher price without any bonus shares.

What % of the UK RM IPO was allocated offshore?

Don't forget the Government still owns 51% of the company, the public profits from that 17% rise as well.

How exactly?

[skid]

Do you bank with kiwibank or TSB ?

We can buy shares in companies in other countries so what is the difference ?

Many in here moan along same lines but think nothing of marching to an Australian bank for a loan come monday morning.

Key our last hope !

The difference IWIK is that in this case ,we coundnt buy shares in our OWN company(correction-we could get 1/3 of what we applied for)
That means normal Kiwis (you know-like the ones you saw in the commercials) got scaled back by 2/3 of what they wanted.
Now can you think of a logical explanation why Kiwis shouldnt have gotten first dibs on Genesis.
On the opening day,there were institutions selling sometimes 500,000 shares on the market for a 17% gain (probably back to us)
In my experience I have found that most who complain of those ''moaning''usually have their head in the sand,or just dont have the energy or motivation to stand up to that sort of thing(with all due respect if Im wrong)

Key may be the only alternative to the bumbling Labor but IMO some issues should be raised to keep him a bit more honest (unless you just want to ''lay down''so no one accuses you of moaning)----

[elguapo]

However, it is not the % stag as such, it's the fact that so much of it was done by offshore speculators.....exactly as it was for the other two.
Causing those "front of the queue" NZ investors to pay a much higher price without any bonus shares.

I very much doubt those offshore buyers were unloading to mom & pop investors on one day of trading, 55% of the float went to individuals, only 12% when to overseas insitutions. The buyers would most likely have been funds looking to get to there allocation for index matching etc.

What % of the UK RM IPO was allocated offshore?

Very hard to tell, the City of London is the world's number one financial center, they don't need to make the offer to offshore institutions, the vast majority have operations in the UK.

[speights boy]

The buyers would most likely have been funds looking to get to there allocation for index matching etc.

So; the NZ kiwisaver funds had to pay the higher staged priced thereby sending the profit immediately offshore ?
Retail investors via their kiwisaver were still disadvantaged by this.
Overseas institutions were awarded 24% of available shares; a greater number than NZ institutions (20%)

My annoyance is not diminished I'm afraid.

[speights boy]

I very much doubt those offshore buyers were unloading to mom & pop investors on one day of trading, 55% of the float went to individuals, only 12% when to overseas insitutions.

Not the point; but I have little doubt many buyers were NZ retail who ended up with a small parcel that was of little use to them without adding to.
Why were NZ retail and funds scaled so massively ?
The NZ demand was there.

English promoted bonus shares to a maximum of 2,000 shares for retail.
To obtain all these you had to be awarded 30,000 shares.
Most retail probably got less than 5,000.

[skid]

So my point is basically this--Im not suggesting to necessarily vote labor.
But if these points are raised(and addressed by National) hopefully by voting for them you will be getting a ''better National government''than you would have before because they will realize that the public is expecting them to be accountable.

As it stands--They not only decided to sell off a large portion of the assets,but in this case,they didnt even allow us,the NZ public to buy them aside from a measly 1/3 of what was applied for.
It may not be the case,but it certainly has an ''old boys'' feel about it.
It ''feels'' like they are taking some of Americas bad habits.
It certainly seems like a stretch to say they had the benefits to normal Kiwis in mind when they set this up.

[iwik]

The difference IWIK is that in this case ,we coundnt buy shares in our OWN company(correction-we could get 1/3 of what we applied for)
That means normal Kiwis (you know-like the ones you saw in the commercials) got scaled back by 2/3 of what they wanted.
Now can you think of a logical explanation why Kiwis shouldnt have gotten first dibs on Genesis.
On the opening day,there were institutions selling sometimes 500,000 shares on the market for a 17% gain (probably back to us)
In my experience I have found that most who complain of those ''moaning''usually have their head in the sand,or just dont have the energy or motivation to stand up to that sort of thing(with all due respect if Im wrong)

Key may be the only alternative to the bumbling Labor but IMO some issues should be raised to keep him a bit more honest (unless you just want to ''lay down''so no one accuses you of moaning)----

In my experience people who come from a line of personal attack like you have done (no matter how subtle) have been put on their back foot, take it you will not be checking your Kiwibank or TSB balance anytime soon ?

With Key wanting best price he can get to pay off overseas debt, offer to bigger market and get bigger price. As the old adage goes better to have slice of a good pie, kiwis lucky to get in have benefited. Being concerned about individual gains at the expense of the greater good has labour voter written all over it.

The 55 million dollar man's intent is to shit on New Zealanders long term - yeah right !

[speights boy]

With Key wanting best price he can get to pay off overseas debt, offer to bigger market and get bigger price.

Incorrect.
The price was set at what he considered to be "a fair price".....not a "bigger price".
In fact, in was so "fair" there was likely sufficient demand from inside NZ to full the complete order if he had chosen to do so.

Incorrect.
The proceeds are not being used to pay off overseas debt.

[iwik]

Struth for a sec thought I had been tele-ported back to school.

Incorrect eh ?

Since you got all the answers why did you not answer the question I asked twice ?

Key was probably not taking any chances with the dismal buying by kiwis with the last lot of sales.

I see you said likely.

You seem to be forgetting the government still owns 51% (there abouts) so by offering to a bigger market
have increased the govt wealth which could be handy in the future.

Its much needed govt income, if it pays peter, paul could pay debt.


I do smile and at times even have a wee chuckle when some people in here try and circum-guess John Key, the guy an
economic genius and has the pudding as proof - show me your 55 million plus and I might bother to digest your dribble.

[speights boy]

Since you got all the answers why did you not answer the question I asked twice ?
.

I'll do my best.
What was it again ?

[skid]

Struth for a sec thought I had been tele-ported back to school.

Incorrect eh ?

Since you got all the answers why did you not answer the question I asked twice ?

Key was probably not taking any chances with the dismal buying by kiwis with the last lot of sales.

I see you said likely.

You seem to be forgetting the government still owns 51% (there abouts) so by offering to a bigger market
have increased the govt wealth which could be handy in the future.

Its much needed govt income, if it pays peter, paul could pay debt.


I do smile and at times even have a wee chuckle when some people in here try and circum-guess John Key, the guy an
economic genius and has the pudding as proof - show me your 55 million plus and I might bother to digest your dribble.

This coming from the guy who has accused me of personal attack?

Heres the thing IWIK,
After the expressions of interest,it was obvious that there were far more interested parties than there were shares on offer--AT THAT POINT they could have scaled overseas institutions more, so ordinary Kiwis would get a fairer share.
They didnt have to worry about dismal buying by Kiwis-They already had the money from ordinary Kiwis sitting in the bank.
Instead they returned 2/3 and gave them (the Mom and Pop Kiwis)1/3 of what they asked AND PAID FOR.
whats the point of giving the advantage to overseas Institutions---wheres the genius in that?


PS--I said with all due respect if Im wrong

[skid]

In my experience people who come from a line of personal attack like you have done (no matter how subtle) have been put on their back foot, take it you will not be checking your Kiwibank or TSB balance anytime soon ?

With Key wanting best price he can get to pay off overseas debt, offer to bigger market and get bigger price. As the old adage goes better to have slice of a good pie, kiwis lucky to get in have benefited. Being concerned about individual gains at the expense of the greater good has labour voter written all over it.

The 55 million dollar man's intent is to shit on New Zealanders long term - yeah right !

''Individual gains (by normal Kiwis) at the expense of the greater good(of foreign institutions)''----Give me a break....

National is IMO is the lesser of two evils ATM,but it doesnt mean they shouldnt be kept''honest''

They are involved in some things that will make economic issues pale in comparison,in the future