“Paul in my view you’d be most mistaken to be buying in the equities markets at this point… You buy equities now in companies that depend on consumer spending and you’ll be looking at a long hard row before it gets back to even break-even.”

From MacRumors.com

“Apple announced their financial results today for the 4th quarter of fiscal 2008 . Apple posted revenue of $7.9 billion and net quarterly profit of $1.14 billion, or $1.26 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of $6.22 billion and net quarterly profit of $904 million, or $1.01 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 34.7 percent, up from 33.6 percent in the year-ago quarter. International sales accounted for 41 percent of the quarter’s revenue.

Apple shipped 2,611,000 Macintosh computers during the quarter, representing 21 percent unit growth and 17 percent revenue growth over the year-ago quarter. The Company sold 11,052,000 iPods during the quarter, representing eight percent unit growth and three percent revenue growth over the year-ago quarter. Quarterly iPhone units sold were 6,892,000 compared to 1,119,000 in the year-ago-quarter.

“Apple just reported one of the best quarters in its history, with a spectacular performance by the iPhone — we sold more phones than RIM,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “We don’t yet know how this economic downturn will affect Apple. But we’re armed with the strongest product line in our history, the most talented employees and the best customers in our industry. And $25 billion of cash safely in the bank with zero debt.”

Get that, more iPhones, more iPods, more Macs, ZERO debt and $25billion dollars worth of cash in the bank, now that’s a sensible stock to buy.

My god man where do you start,

tranzrail shares, yes no maybe
Maori seats, yes no maybe

Voting papers in the country need to change

“Who do you vote for. You can tick any box”? ”

John Key
Tick yes if he lied and you don’t care
Tick no if he lied and should be thrown away without parole
tick maybe if you can’t decipher the double talk.

“strike 3, lie to either Pita Sharples or the Public”

Why would he promise something for nothing in return? The story does not check out.

I still don’t see how he has any credentials to be a politician

If you mean he’s not a lying, dishonest megalomaniac then I agree. The problem is that too NZers (incl you?) have been conditioned to believe that such traits are essential.

“Paul in my view you’d be most mistaken to be buying in the equities markets at this point… You buy equities now in companies that depend on consumer spending and you’ll be looking at a long hard row before it gets back to even break-even.”

Funny, I pointed to Apple as a very liquid company with massive cash deposits and people laughed.

Just in;

“Apple’s unit shipments year-over-year grew 32% according to IDC, and 29.4% according to Gartner — more than six times the industry average.”

“As Gartner measures it, Apple’s market share hit a record 9.5% in calendar Q3, up from 7.7% in the same quarter a year ago.”

“It’s almost as if Apple were in a different business than Dell (DELL), HP (HPQ), Acer and Toshiba. While the average selling price of PCs continued to drop this summer — thanks, as Gartner notes, to the growing popularity of under-$500 “netbooks” — Apple kept its prices high as it added memory, power and stylish features.”

(http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/)

To think in blanket terms of consumer instability in the equity market, that equity stocks aren’t the way to go, is to not see the trees for the forest to use a phrase.

The policy is nuts. The Nats need ACT more than I realised!

The New Zealand Superannuation Fund is nuts. So it’s nuts on nuts.

At least ACT has an “ambitious” Tax policy unlike National(What happened to “Amibitious for New Zealand”?). Looks like Prime Minster John Key will soon be appointing Finance Minster Roger Douglas and Minister for Education/SOE’s Rodney Hide to the “Cabinet expenditure control committee”. Good luck and happy hunting.

strike 1, scrap R&D – piss of Business NZ and the Manufacturers and Exporters Association.
strike 2, 40% legislation – piss off all bar one genuine economic commentator & forecaster (and only natural coalition partner)
strike 3, lie to either Pita Sharples or the Public – piss everyone else off.

How many strikes was it under National’s crime policy. I think Key qualifies for no parole.

Now that’s comedy.

I still don’t see how he has any credentials to be a politician

Well that pretty much rules them all out then.

The head of currency at a huge international investment bank is “middle management”?

Wasnt Key the one doing the firing in the restructuring rather than the one being fired?

Exactly what sort of moron are you?

Quite.

The first is that he knows it’s a dumb idea but thinks it smart politics. That would make the commitment woeful and irresponsible.

‘Dumb ideas, smart politics’ – kinda National’s unofficial campaign slogan so far eh Rodney? Not sure if that is the actual Rodney – does Real Rodney talk about himself in the third person?

There are two possibilities behind John Key’s announcement that $40 billion of the $100 billion Cullen Fund is to be directed into New Zealand assets.

The first is that he knows it’s a dumb idea but thinks it smart politics. That would make the commitment woeful and irresponsible.

The second is that he thinks it’s a good idea – now that would be truly appalling.

Having the government buy up assets does nothing to improve economic performance. Nothing.

At the same time, political direction undermines entirely the Fund’s purpose.

The policy is nuts. The Nats need ACT more than I realised!

Obviously an oversight – how ’bout:
John Key, National, Election 08, Cullen Fund, Credit Crisis

…and a couple of new ones:
Election promises, State ownership of NZ Economy (aka Dancing Cossacks), Keysian Economics (no, that is not a typo)

Nice quote!

Much, MUCH less than two percent PaulL.

Why would people invest overseas when the local market is appreciating in price?

The issue of concern for me is not that the super fund can find a better return elsewhere, it is that they can find a return with less than if this NZ40% constraint was in place. They will be taking on more risk by investing in NZ, which increases the probability of not achieving their goal. That means that future governments will have to fund the shortfall and will either need to borrow or raise taxes, which is precisely what the fund was created to avoid.

Bringing the funds “back home” is transfering wealth from the future to today.

The other issue is what it would do to the overall asset allocation. There just isnt enough equity opportunity in New Zealand so a lot of the Super fund will have to be redirected to bonds.