MRP shares

May 10th, 2013 at 12:49 pm by David Farrar

MRP shares are now at $2.73. Labour and Greens scared off some smaller investors but larger investors have worked out their nationalization policy will never be implemented, and are valuing shares higher.

Tags: ,

31 Responses to “MRP shares”

  1. skyblue (211 comments) says:

    So Fucktard Norman and Thicko Shearer have cost NZ approx $120M, this is smaller than the $100M needed to do the offer. And the press want these losers to be the next government!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    but larger investors have worked out their nationalization policy will never be implemented.

    Or perhaps that it matters less than the eternal bleating here would indicate.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 27 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Lance (2,662 comments) says:

    Greens and Labour hate sessions seem to hurt the ‘ordinary people’.

    MRP shares, the rabid anti private school obsession drove out people on low incomes as govt (Labour govt) funding keep dropping, opposition to youth wages and 90 trial periods all hurting people desperate for a chance to prove themselves, etc etc.

    They either idiotic or are working to a sinister plan to make people more dependent on the state so they can exercise more control.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. labrator (1,850 comments) says:

    If we had some economically literate journalists we might get @skyblue’s point in the news. But we don’t, so we won’t.

    Good to see some depth building in the NZX. We seem to have more and more choices and that’s great news for a robust NZ economy.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    I’d wait a year or two rather than a minute or two before making any judgements on this. And by then things will have changed.

    Very short term movements are often exaggerated and prices gradualy settle to a market value. The price has already dropped back to 2.67.

    Only those who have sold shares have gained any actual value, and that will be a very small minority. And those gains will be taxable.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. hmmokrightitis (1,590 comments) says:

    Must not sell for short term profit taking…ARGH……

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    @ hmmokrightitis – dead right; my investment is a long-term one.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. kowtow (8,524 comments) says:

    Many observers consider share markets to be way over priced at the moment thanks to global money printing.If that is the case there’s going to be a major “correction”.

    That would be the time to buy.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. flipper (4,084 comments) says:

    OK…

    A 9% odd premium is worth about $140million, is it not?
    That is $140 -150 MILLION that the exchequer is short, thanks to illiterate pricks in Labour, red melon country and their MSM disciples.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. labrator (1,850 comments) says:

    @pete george I think you’re missing the point. The reference is to the immediately tradeable value, as in, how badly wrong was the price set. Look to Facebook’s IPO for an example of being overset. Any reference to future trading values is meaningless.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. RJL (146 comments) says:

    A 9% odd premium is worth about $140million, is it not?

    No. It is 9% of the value of stock traded. According to NZ Herald about 24 million shares have traded by 2pm. So, 9% of that is about $5.4 million.

    Also, any “loss” to the government is due to the government setting the price too low. That is Bill English’s fault.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. slijmbal (1,236 comments) says:

    A premium of about 10% for 1st day trading implies the price is about right. 1st day trading is always a bit strange as those who missed out pay a premium for shares and the instant profit takers exit.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    larger investors have worked out their nationalization policy will never be implemented

    Seeing as Labour + Greens don’t have a natioanlisation policy, you’d be right.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. wreck1080 (3,924 comments) says:

    “larger investors have worked out their nationalization policy will never be implemented”

    Assuming you are talking about price controls here?

    I don’t really know why you are so willing to dismiss a major policy announcement by labour as not going to happen.

    Labour will face some long term embarrassment if they don’t follow through. It would show them up as fraudsters if they don’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Only those who have sold shares have gained any actual value, and that will be a very small minority.

    Seems you like you know the difference between real and paper gains. So you must know the difference between real and paper losses.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. flipper (4,084 comments) says:

    @ wreck1080…

    But they are fraudulent.

    They have perpetrated so many frauds on the gullible NZ public (more recently the pledge card, student loan interest, failing to declare massive individual campaign contributions for more than a year when they should have done so within 10 days) as just three examples) that, were they a company, the SFO would be all over them like a rash.

    Used car salesmen have more morality than those red melon and labour frauds.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. stigie (1,224 comments) says:

    To be honest, i cant see Liarbore and Greens having a nationalization policy, it just will not work.

    It will be a complete and utter Phail-ure !!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    To be honest, i cant see Liarbore and Greens having a nationalization policy, it just will not work.

    They don’t. They just have a policy to stop the rest of us being gouged by the feral rentier class. The power float is not capitalism, but socialism for the well off.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 21 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Cunningham (844 comments) says:

    Tom Jackson (511) that is complete and utter bullshit and you know it. Forcing every power supplier to sell at what they say is nationalising the industry! I wouldn’t count on them not implementing it if they did manage to get in power. I am more scared that they would go through and do such a rushed half assed job (even more then they normal) implementing a half assed policy that it will be even more destructive. Just so they don’t face embarassment and to hell with the consequences.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. lazza (381 comments) says:

    Institutional short term “Stag” Investors dribble out small parcels for a while … then dump at the high(est) above strike price. Give it time and the bottom will drop out of the market and will take years to recover. Might earn for a Mum/Dad investor a dividend yield post tax of 1.5% pa not inflation adjusted long term.

    This will end in tears … check it out &; let me know come say 2018.

    Me? … I’m sticking to a mixed derivative-based option-hedged swap portfolio of … Racehorses, Casino and fast women … (lied about the last bit)…

    Cheers & Go the Warriors … or the Bulldogs … there is roughly the same proportion of Oz?Kiwi’s in each.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. coge (190 comments) says:

    The Labour/Greens would be in favour of nationalising NZ’s electricity generation. It would give them 100% ability to manipulate the market to foist an agenda of underdeveloped/overpriced unreliable green energy onto the public. The result would be much higher prices, & potential shortages in the coming years.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Er, there is always a higher price when there is buyer demand. The buyer demand comes from institutions that were willing to buy more than allocated in the float.

    No matter what price the government sold at, if there was demand for the shares – and there is for the dividend return which is above that for bonds – then the price will rise until this demand is met.

    This has little to do with the government selling at too low a price, or the Labour or Green policy either, its just basic market knowledge that serious investors would get.

    So either some here are not serious investors who get the market or they are just spinning this in a partisan way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Ed Snack (1,883 comments) says:

    Tom, which feral was it that pushed power prices up so quickly in 2002-2008. It would be the majority and controlling owner would it not ? Perhaps we should prosecute the chief driver of that policy for theft and fraud, which would mean extradition from the UN HQ in New York, perhaps a quid pro quo for KD-C ?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Ed, if there was need to increase generation capacity and there was, then the companies either financed this by borrowing or by raising prices (anything else would have resulted in a low rate of return on invested capital). As we now have the supply capacity up (now completing investment in improving the supply north), we have a mature (projects approved but yet to be built because there is sufficient supply and or because Tiwai Point could close) system.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Ed Snack (1,883 comments) says:

    SPC, if the increases were to fund expansion that was needed, then almost by definition the increases ween’t excessive, so what is Tom bleating about ? You can’t have it both ways.

    And you’re inpart wrong as well, the generators paid hugely significant dividends to the government in that 2002-2007 timeframe, well above historical returns, and that was a purely political decision to extract extra funds without the political inconvenience of raising taxes further.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Ed, returns on the capital invested are paid to the owners. SOE’s are designed to be government owned businesses that operate for profit.

    Yes it was a political decision as to whether to have low return on capital invested and higher taxes or higher returns and lower taxes. But given Contact had already been floated it was obvious that the remaining SOE’s should also operate to have a higher rate of return in the market place. And this would have happened had National been in office.

    As to whether prices are excessive, the major questions are

    1. is the pricing system fair.
    2. is the market operating to ensure competition.

    Labour Green policy is designed to realise this and it is a system that is used elsewhere. It is used around the world. It would lower profits to those who had surplus power to sell onto the market in times of shortages, and is probably motivated by a desire to side with consumers with a public ownership fall to 50%.

    The regulatory problem is how to manage inter-company power exchange (diminish “windfall” pricing) yet not discourage companies from investing in new generation. This is not an immediate problem as there is spare capacity at present and Tiwai Point may yet close.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. OneTrack (3,121 comments) says:

    “The Labour/Greens would be in favour of nationalising NZ’s electricity generation”

    The Greens would be in favour of nationalising everything. Labour will do whatever Russel says.

    There, fify.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    It might have been intended as black humour, but Onetrack makes a good point. There have been enough indications that Greens would like to nationalise and equalise everything.

    Labour won’t do whatever Russel wants, they’ll at least try to run Government, but there’s a serious question that needs to be asked – how much would Labour accommodate Russel and the “Green” social agenda? A lot would depend on the respective numbers of MPs.

    And we know that Shearer is easily manipulated by his own, it wouldn’t take much for a coalition partner to do the same.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    What Green social agenda?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. coge (190 comments) says:

    One only has to glance across the Tasman to see what happens when a Labor govt becomes lapdog to the Green party.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. kiwigunner (230 comments) says:

    $2.35 now.

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