Showing posts with label NZX regulation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NZX regulation. Show all posts

Sunday, February 21, 2010

NZX needs competition

Monopolies are only good for one party, the monopoly itself.

The NZX , the arbiter of The New Zealand Stock Exchange [NZX.NZ], is one of those parties and boy what a party the NZX , its broker shareholders and institutional investors have been having for many years.

The party has been good for the NZX and its members and mates but the hangover remains for mum and dad investors and the regulation of NZX listed companies as a whole.

The NZX , its shareholder members who are brokers and those close to them, have always been favoured over mum and dad on the street. Price sensitive information flows to the favoured come first and fast and breaking of rules by broker members/shareholders have always been hand slaps rather than anything concrete that would forbid any further breaches of their own NZX rules.

This has two effects. Enriching brokers at the expense of mum and dad shareholders and leaving those same mum and dad investors dubious about investing in the stockmarket in the first place.

The New Zealand Stockmarket has suffered this malaise for many years and it shows especially in its poor performance on the whole since the stockmarket crash of the late 1980s.

Investors would rather buy housing than invest in something that they trust. They simply don't trust the stockmarket and the NZX its mates and their shenanigans are the reason for this.

Why would you spend good money on something you cant trust because some parties have advantages over others?

The irony here as well, is that the NZX is supposed to be an unbiased stockmarket regulator that doesnt favour anyone, not the least of which would be its own listed company NZX , which is itself listed on its own stock exchange.

The antidote to this stockmarket sickness and bias?

Either have a completely independent stockmarket regulator or allow competition in this area.

We know that competition helps provide better service, cheaper prices and a more level playing field for consumers and the same would be true of the stockmarket sector.

I have been arguing for ten years now that surely in this Internet age investors who want to buy and sell shares could be matched together more efficiently and with more expicit fairness other than other dealing with a monopoly like the NZX.

Much like peer to peer downloading, intermediaries could easily be set up to get together willing buyers and sellers with oversight by a third independent party. Even buying shares directly from the company you want to be invested in would be more appropriate. Why have a third party clipping the ticket (your stockbroker) when investing directly you could remove that cost.

Stockmarket investors in New Zealand deserve to have a fairer, more independent way of investing in NZX listed companies. The current system is simply not working in an appropriate and explicit way.

Until then expect continued mediocre performance from the stockmarket.


Recent Share Investor Reading


Buy business books & more at
fishpond.co.nz

Fishpond


c Share Investor 2010

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Bruce Sheppard: Mark Weldon - "The Sherrif of Nottingham"

Something that I have been banging on about for years is the lack of independence of Mark Weldon and his New Zealand Stock Exchange [NZX.NZ] and the very lose structures built around Mark's fiefdom that are supposed to protect shareholders, mostly smaller ones like me.

Its partner in crime, the Securities Commission, has as much bite as Jaws with dentures and is as hands off as a doctor treating a patient with swine flu when it comes to any enforcement.

In Bruce Sheppard's column this last Wednesday he manages to articulate my feelings with alot more detail, finesse and institutional fact.

"The listing rules allowed NZX to grant waivers, of the rules. Shit, this meant that NZX could enforce its rules on everyone else but waive them for themselves. Worse as NZX investigated breaches and prosecuted them, judged the results of the prosecution and fined the offenders, this too created a terrible conflict. How would NZX treat itself if it were to breach the rules?" Read the full article here.

The waiving of NZX "rules" has been high in stockmarket news of late as they have been so busy waiving their own rules for various capital raisings that smaller shareholders are wondering whether it will be their company next that will dilute their shareholding in favour of bigger shareholders.

Essential reading for every small shareholder.

Recent Share Investor Reading

Discuss this stock @ Share Investor Forum


c Share Investor 2009

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Good Morningstar

News out in New Zealand's Business media today about Morningstar's (incidentally a Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffett owned vehicle) ranking of our mutual funds sector and I would argue as a spin-off the NZ financial sector as a whole, should be of surprise to those who only read the sports pages and gossip and perhaps the hapless Mark Weldon, CEO of the NZX.

New Zealand ranked a D minus rating.

As far as my major sphere of interest goes, the stockmarket, I have been banging on about how "wild west" our stockmarket regulation and oversight have been in this respect for 10 years.

The guts from Morningstar for me:

Morningstar researchers evaluated and scored countries in six categories—investor protection, prospectuses and shareholders’ reports, transparency in sales practices and the media, fees and expenses, taxation, and distribution practices. Read full article PDF format

"Investor protection" and "transparency" are two major planks of my rantings and Morningstars.

Recent capital raisings on the NZX have been the latest outrage to be foisted on New Zealand stockmarket investors, with protection for large shareholders managed by the NZX and Securities Commission laws at the centre of capital issues but at the same time leaving smaller investors like my good self drowning in a pool of bile filled anger over being shafted once again.

Mark and his directors down in windy Wellington in that flash building on the waterfront and those not far from him at the Securities Commission should take note.

This time, these are your contemporaries saying this about you, not the investors that keep getting the blunt end of your regulatory axe and perhaps you might listen now that it is your buddies saying this?

One can only hope.

Until then the swirling bile will keep me critical.

The Rankings by Morningstar

United States: A
China: B+

Italy: B
Japan: B
Netherlands: B

Taiwan: B
Canada: B-
France: C+
Switzerland: C+
United Kingdom: C+
Australia: C

Singapore: C
Germany: C-
Hong Kong: C-
Spain: D
New Zealand: D-

Related Share Investor Reading

Related Amazon Reading

Morningstar Guide to Mutual Funds: Five-Star Strategies for Success
Morningstar Guide to Mutual Funds: Five-Star Strategies for Success by Christine Benz
Buy new: $11.53 / Used from: $9.25
Usually ships in 24 hours

c Share Investor 2009

Friday, May 15, 2009

Bruce Sheppard: Explanation Received

Capital raising, company creditworthiness and business viability during these highly unsure and volatile economic times is very important for investors with NZX listed companies in their portfolios and that is why I am following the stoush between Bruce Sheppard and Mark Weldon at the NZX with much interest.


In a post I made this morning I pointed out that I thought Bruce was being irresponsible in blanket accusations over NZX companies defaulting on bank credit terms and the NZX wanted him to explain himself and name names.

I thought he should too.

He has in a general way this morning with a letter addressed to Mark Weldon, NZX CEO:

Mark,

I have thought about this long and hard, read all my blogs. They explain the background to the issue, and they explain the simple matrixes that I have applied and they have explained how I have analyzed the financial statements with this in mind. Either analysts are blind stupid or inefficient, the simple numbers that you need to check reasonable compliance are these and they don't require a detailed breakout of financial statements:

They are these:

1) How much interest are they paying, a bit hard to find sometimes but not hours of work.

2) Continuing EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation), not hard to find either but you do have to make some assumptions about what is recurring and what is not, this is explained in my blog.

3) Interest bearing debt, and where it is parked, parent subsidiary, its composition between capital notes, and those notes' terms, bank debt and so on. Currency risk is an exposure, and hedging polices come into play. I have not analyzed hedging as disclosure on this is such a tangled web of crap that it is almost impossible to work out how they have hedged their interest and debt exposures and the issues that go with that. Many have foreign currency debts with no natural hedge.

4) Book Equity... that is easy.

5) Net tangible assets is a bit harder but not to hard.

Read the full article

Bruce gives his reasons and goes into some detail as to why he made his sweeping accusation without further elucidation and it seems generally correct, to the point, accurate and honest and we need to know that detail.

Having said that, I still maintain all the research and detail that he says is coming on particular companies should have been released coinciding with his general release.

Us investors need to know but need to know in full before he slanders the good NZX listed companies among the obvious bad.


Related Reading

Stirring the Pot - Brucie's Blog

Related Share Investor Reading

Related Amazon Reading

What Is an Exchange?: The Automation, Management, and Regulation of Financial Markets
What Is an Exchange?: The Automation, Management, and Regulation of Financial Markets by Ruben Lee
Buy new: $164.99 / Used from: $6.28

c Share Investor 2009

Bruce Sheppard: Please Explain

I am a big fan of Bruce Sheppard and agree with his usual well considered and fully explained point of view most of the time. He is more often than not right, expert at financial matters and blunt to the point appearing rude.

This blog yesterday received many hits with Bruce's name as a search and I didn't have the time to explore why.

The reason for the controversy is in Bruce's blog post published on May 8.

It is explained in this piece in Stuff.co.nz that basically he has put his line in the sand and alluded to various NZX listed companies having problems with debt levels:

According to Mr Sheppard, around half of 47 major listed companies he analysed during a three week investigation are at risk of defaulting on their bank terms. However, he said he will not reveal names until companies have had a chance to respond to letters he has written to them.

He selected companies based on published 2007/2008 debt levels and applied assumed bank terms to their financial metrics. Mr Sheppard added that his research raises questions about exchange operator NZX continuous disclosure regime and its role as regulator.

What Bruce has failed to do, and this is unusual for him, is provide corroborating evidence that backs his May 8 accusations.

Frankly if he does have evidence, he needed to come out with it at the same time he made his claim, and not scare the horses so to speak.

It is highly unprofessional to do otherwise because it taints every NZX listed stock with the same debt brush.

He has received a "please explain" from the NZX and unusually again I agree with the NZX and that doesn't happen often:

14 May 2009 - Shareholders' Association chair Bruce Sheppard has contributed meaningfully to capital markets debate over the years. The broader interests of the market, and market confidence, would be best served at this time if he released his analysis at a very detailed level. Investors can then draw their own conclusions as to the health of the companies in which they are investing.

NZX shares Mr Sheppard's goal of healthy, open and transparent capital markets in which investors can have confidence. Providing detailed and transparent information to support his conclusions will further that goal.

Time to put up or shut up Bruce.

Read the answer to the NZX request

Related Reading

Stirring the Pot - Brucie's Blog

Recent Share Investor Reading
Discuss this topic @ Shareinvestor.net.nz

Related Amazon Reading

What Is an Exchange?: The Automation, Management, and Regulation of Financial Markets
What Is an Exchange?: The Automation, Management, and Regulation of Financial Markets by Ruben Lee
Buy new: $164.99 / Used from: $6.28

c Share Investor 2009