The Haier bid

October 19th, 2012 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

The Dom Post reports:

Haier looks likely to succeed in its takeover bid for Fisher & Paykel Appliances after lifting its offer for the Kiwi whiteware maker, according to an institutional investor.

The Chinese firm yesterday announced it would raise its offer by 8 cents to $1.28 per share, a level that comes in at the bottom of the $1.28 to $1.57 per share value range independent adviser Grant Samuel put on the firm.

The new offer has won favour with institutional shareholders Accident Compensation Corporation, Harbour Asset Management and AMP Capital, who have all agreed to sell the 14.1 per cent of F&P Appliances they collectively hold.

Haier paid about 80c a share for its existing 20 per cent stake in 2009 as part of make-or-break capital raising by F&P Appliances to stave off a potential debt default.

Haier has already secured an agreement with Australian fund manager Allan Gray to buy its 17.46 per cent stake, and now has control of 51.56 per cent of F&P Appliances’ shares.

Haier’s offer was conditional on getting over 50 per cent, although it would prefer a full takeover.

“Our view is this price should enable Haier to get 100 per cent of the company and we think it is very fair from a shareholder’s point of view,” said John Phipps, deputy head of New Zealand equities at AMP Capital.

Never mind being fair to the shareholders. has invented a new policy on the hoof, of fuck the shareholders. have announced:

“The implications of its sale to New Zealand are too important leave the takeover approval to officials. Such a major decision must be made by Ministers. That’s Labour’s policy.

Labour’s view is that they will decide, who can buy a private company listed on public sharemarkets. Such decisions will of course be based on populism. Labour seem determined to retreat into a xenophobic fortress NZ policy that we last had in the 1970s.

Can you imagine the horror of Ministers personally deciding on all NZ takeovers? We’d become rife for corruption amongst other things. You want to be able to buy a company – make sure you look after the Minister.

Tags: ,

35 Responses to “The Haier bid”

  1. anonymouse (715 comments) says:

    Labour has invented a new policy on the hoof,

    Not quite true, It is the same policy inflicted on those evil Canadian retirees in 2008

    [DPF: Worse than that. That was primarily about sensitive land, and stretching the definition. This is now saying that Ministers will intervene in sales, just because a brand is popular]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    Mr Farrar- one question.

    Do you think there is any difference between (a) selling a NZ company to another company partly owned by the Chinese Government, a bunch of totalitarian dictators who hold power by means of the gun, and who have clear plans to dominate the globe economically and politically and militarily, and (b) selling a NZ company to a private company that is based in a democratic country and has no interest in global political and military hegemony?

    Is there any difference at all in those two trades?

    [DPF: Yes, there is a difference. But I think China opening up its economy has improved China and improved the world economy and I think allowing NZ companies to invest in China and vice-versa is a good thing for both countries, and will also see China become a more open society. They will never be as open as NZ, but things are massively better there than 20 years ago]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Mark1 (90 comments) says:

    Wouldn’t this have to have been approved under the Overseas Investment Act? Section 13 I think.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. scrubone (3,099 comments) says:

    Not quite true, It is the same policy inflicted on those evil Canadian retirees in 2008

    It’s a natural progression, but one that more clearly demonstrates just how bad a policy it is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Bed Rater (239 comments) says:

    Current significant shareholders of FPA. Discuss.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. williamsheridan (63 comments) says:

    I can only presume that is the “Chinese” menace that scares Labour….. in which case their solution is to impose a totalitarian regime to overcome a communist peril….. well, that makes perfect sense then….. it is a case of the pot calling the kettle Red, I think.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. 2boyz (262 comments) says:

    yet labour signed off (didn’t stand in anyones way) on the Wellington electricity network being sold to a chinese firm, all rather confusing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    So Labour still don’t like Chinese people? Why not just make them subject to a special poll tax like we did in the good old days.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,903 comments) says:

    Fuck it, these Labour people arr piss weak. What a half hearted policy.

    Why don’t they go full on and send our illustrious Air Force and what’s left of the Army over there to attack the slanty eyed bastards? Declare war and conquer them. Shit, they’ve only got three zillion people in their country. Mallard will lead the troops ashore.

    They might as well do that as wage economic warfare on NZ citizens who own shares in companies.

    Labour has today ensured that any Kiwis who might have been considering investing in stocks and shares will have ceased such consideration. Perhaps its their subtle way of derailing the partial sale of SOEs. Will they legislate to prevent the sale of those shares by NZers? Don’t be surprised.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    William Sheridan-

    David Farrar only ever engages with debate on this issue with his left wing critics.

    He will not respond to those who are against or care about totalitarian political regimes being given economic and political influence in NZ.

    (Y’know there was once a similar debate going on about Adolf Hitler and German businesses and the Nazi party, and those who did business with that regime were subject to some serious criticism at the conclusion of WWII.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    What I am trying to say is that as always with the petty differences that arise between National and Labour, the argument is only about which big government left wing perspective is the correct one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    Is there any difference at all in those two trades?

    You mean by selling out to the Chinese we risk contributing to the growing “Whiteware Gap”.

    When the Chinese invade we may be equipping them with dreaded dishwashing and washing machine technology.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. williamsheridan (63 comments) says:

    I think you are misguided Redbaiter.
    Why would DPF respond to his allies?

    …. and please dont try to cite Hitler in this…. this Labour-party policy is a clear indication of their economic and financial incompetence and the serious danger that their elevation to government would pose on NZ’s economic wellbeing. Let’s just have that stand on its own demerits without hysterical links to any other madmen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Red

    Tell the story properly – those who did business with that regime DURING THE WAR were subject to some serious criticism at the conclusion of WWII

    We do l business with Bayer today, I bet you don’t boycott asprin and they are the same company that used slave labour during the war – do we hear you gobbing off about that ? answer no – we just hear you gobbing off -never a solution, just gobbing off

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Kimble (4,438 comments) says:

    We’re doomed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Nick K (1,244 comments) says:

    Um, er, um, er………….WE are not selling anything to the Chinese.

    Repeat: WE are not selling anything to the Chinese.

    Repeat: WE are not selling anything to the Chinese.

    Repeat: WE are not selling anything to the Chinese.

    Repeat: WE are not selling anything to the Chinese.

    How many more times do I have to say it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Mark (496 comments) says:

    I thnk that’s Labours point after all if you have to donate to Labour to get citizenship when officials are advising against it in the stongest possible terms, they must be rubbing their hands together about what donations they will be getting if you want to buy freely traded shares in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    It is a mistake to add to the economic well being of totalitarian political regimes with their eyes on the prize of global domination.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Kimble (4,438 comments) says:

    It is a mistake to add to the economic well being of totalitarian political regimes with their eyes on the prize of global domination.

    Better to leave them a poor nation with much more to gain from violent military expansion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. calendar girl (1,232 comments) says:

    anonymouse @ 12:12 – well remembered.

    For those who don’t know what your reference is to, the Labour Government (Clark / Cullen leading the band) stopped a passive Canadian pension fund buying a minority 40% (with restricted voting rights) of Auckland International Airport Limited. Those of us who were shareholders at that time, 5 years ago, had the offer of $3.65 wiped out by by Labour’s warped attitude towards investors from a friendly country, Canada. Labour’s ignorance of investment markets also played a material part in that dreadful decision which could validly be described as inventing “new policy on the hoof”.

    Today AIAL shares are trading at $2.65 per share – a drop of over 27% despite ongoing good performance of the company. The financial cost to AIAL shareholders of 2007 was significant enough (at a single stroke of the Labour “rich prick” pen, I myself lost over $10,000 of my investment’s market value). At least as important, however, was the damage done to investor confidence in the NZ sharemarket in general, both at home and abroad.

    The lesson is if you want a a good part of your Kiwisaver fund invested securely in the NZ sharemarket, don’t look to a Labour Government to protect your investment rights or your humble attempts at your own wealth creation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. projectman (224 comments) says:

    “Can you imagine the horror of Ministers personally deciding on all NZ takeovers? We’d become rife for corruption amongst other things. You want to be able to buy a company – make sure you look after the Minister.”

    Sound a bit like Ministers making decisions (against considered advice) about who to allow into the country through the immigration process.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    If Nick K could only draw his eyes away from his own navel for a minute or two he might one day have something useful to say.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Bed Rater (239 comments) says:

    Redbaiter, you think the government should step in to stop, or otherwise alter this sale between consenting parties? How do you reconcile this with your alleged hatred of “big government?”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    “How do you reconcile this with your alleged hatred of “big government?””

    Easy- the scum in China who hold power by terror and murder are probably the biggest of the big governments out there. If we can bring them down we’ve done more for freedom than anything any fucking silly little navel gazing ACT destroying limp wristed so called Libertarian will do with his plaintive simplistic bereft of strategy whining on the issue.

    Those silly blinkered parochial pricks would let the Chinese Communist party rise to control the globe and they’d do this stupid thing in the name of liberty. Fucking idiots.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    [DPF: Yes, there is a difference. But I think China opening up its economy has improved China and improved the world economy and I think allowing NZ companies to invest in China and vice-versa is a good thing for both countries, and will also see China become a more open society. They will never be as open as NZ, but things are massively better there than 20 years ago]

    The answer I expected but one that I disagree with quite strongly. You do realise that a large part of the wealth generated from China’s international trade is being used to beef up its armed forces, with particular expenditure on nuclear submarines? Does this concern you at all?

    See here-

    http://armscontrolnow.org/2011/11/04/china%E2%80%99s-nuclear-modernization-efforts-cast-a-long-shadow-2/

    I believe that trade with China is counter productive and will not provide the benefits you claim. Tune into a few Chinese military chat forums and sample the widespread and over powering hatred that exist therein for the west.

    http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/

    It will take a little more than goodwill to change the minds of these indoctrinated zealots I’m sorry to say.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. labrator (1,850 comments) says:

    Reds under the baiter!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. scrubone (3,099 comments) says:

    (Y’know there was once a similar debate going on about Adolf Hitler and German businesses and the Nazi party, and those who did business with that regime were subject to some serious criticism at the conclusion of WWII.)

    I don’t people will get into too much trouble trading with us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Nick K (1,244 comments) says:

    @ Redbaiter – I thought setting out clearly that NZ is not selling anything to the Chinese is pretty useful.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    As someone who has actually been to China on many occasions I can report there is no “widespread hatred of the west”. This might not be the same sample size as staring at “Chinese military chat forums” through one’s foam-flecked screen but it’s probably more representative of reality.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Nick K (1,244 comments) says:

    I’ve been twice. They pretty much embrace the West, except for two matters: they can’t relate to the West’s welfare states and our debt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    I have only been to Hong Kong but I have also dealt with a lot of communist Chinese “business” groups in other parts of the globe. They’re not the cuddly little bunnies bringing sweetness and light that left wing globs like Kiweakgreg imagine them to be. Every business negotiation has an underlying arrogance that smacks of an assumed superiority over the west.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. labrator (1,850 comments) says:

    8/31. Not quite Philu or Penny numbers (in their prime) but annoying enough.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Penny and minto stopped going to china when they started liberalising. Cuba good.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. godruelf (55 comments) says:

    Let us also not forget the govt interference in the Singapore airlines bid for partial ownership of air new Zealand and the ensuing debacle with ansett.as a shareholder wish govts would just butt out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Redbaiter defines his every comment @ 5.14 …………….has an underlying arrogance that smacks of an assumed superiority…….

    but the Chinese generally have something to feel superior over especially when compared to Comrade Red

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote