Thursday, February 21, 2008

Owen Glenn: Snouts in the trough bent out of shape




If you haven seem Emerson's take on the Owen Glenn scandal I thought I would share it with you here.


NZ Herald's coverage of Owen Glenn Scandal

Labour president offers to quit over Owen Glenn saga
Glenn offered Howard Morrison $1m to stand as MP
Honour not for loans, says Clark
Peters fury over handling of millionaire donation story
Donor now says Labour offered Monaco post
Business school 'crucial' to NZ success
Clark must explain quote, says National
Big heart, deep pockets
Labour should squirm over links to billionaire
Clark denies offering post to supporter
This building means business



The little Labour piggy though clearly got kicked out of Owen Glenn's "rich prick" billionaire sty because the chief sow wouldn't go anywhere near him today.

Trevor Mallard occupies Owen Glenn (right) and keeps him away from Helen Clark. Photo / Paul Estcourt
Photo Glenn Estcourt, NZ Herald

Glenn is spirited away from Clark by
Trevor "the bash" Mallard. Clark kept her
distance the whole evening of the opening
of the business school that bears Owen Glenn's
name, and the reason he got a Government
Honour in the New Years list.


For the life of me I cant understand why a political party like Labour would first of all take a donation for the 2005 election from the likes of an individual who they would call a "rich prick" and pays no tax, which they also despise, then take a secret "loan" from him after the election and then try to avoid him at all costs.

At the time of the concealed secret $100,000.00 loan made by Owen Glenn to Labour, Helen Clark and her minions were railing against "big money" and "secret donations" that the National Party had apparently benefited from, when they debated the anti democratic , anti freedom of speech Electoral Finance Bill.

So its only big money and secret donations when your opposition gets the benefit. It seems that is it.

There is more to go on this scandal and it has all the participants running for cover, covering up, lying to protect themselves, political friends and their careers.

In a saga and acting job worthy of an Oscar for best fictional adaption of a screenplay, Clark asked her Labour Party President to render his resignation to her today and then refused it.

This is typical Helen Clark stuff, deflect the rightful responsibility for her or party's errors or corruption by attacking her rightful accusers, then blame either a public official, junior minister or in this case Mike Williams, the Labour Party Prez.

Even Clark's lapdog Winston Peters has got in on the act. Rumours abound as to where the money came from to pay off the $158,000.00 of taxpayer money he stole to fund his 2005 election bid last year.

A secret donation of around $100,000.00 was made into party coffers at the end of 2007. Was it from Glenn? Nobody from NZ First is denying the accusation.


Related Political Animal reading

The Owen Glenn story: Singing the same tune but hitting a bum note

Labour Party Election funding murky at best

C Political Animal 2008


Auckland Airport profit stays grounded




Full NZX profit announcement for AIA
Update on CPPIB Bid
CPPIB response to payment of Interim DIV
NZ Herald report



I haven't got much to add to today's profit announcement by Auckland International Airport
(AIA) except to point out that the total revenue for the first half up 7.9 per cent to $NZ172.325 million, even though after tax profit was down by approximately 4% to $47.5 million for the half year and all other important figures for future performance and profitability are good.

Other important key performance factors from the half:


* Total passenger movements increased 4.9 per cent to 6,449,543.

*
Retail income was up 10.4 per cent.

* Car parking income, up 15.5 per cent.

* Rental income was 15.7 per cent higher.

One can also see from the stats below that AIA makes for a good long term investment.



Revenues (m)
EBITDA (m)
Operating margin(%)
Depreciation (m)
Amortisation (m)
EBIT (m)
Net profit before abnormals (m)
Net profit (m)
Income tax rate(%)
Net profit margin(%)
Employees (thousands)
Long term debt (m)
Shareholders equity (m)
Net Gearing (%)
Net Interest Cover (x)
Return on capital(%)
Return on equity(%)
Payout ratio(%)




Although profit has stalled recently, due mainly to increased capital expenditure on expansion of terminals, retail space and other airport upkeep, revenue and passenger numbers have increased well year by year.

When shareholders vote to accept or reject the Canadian Pension Plan Investment board offer they must look at todays and past profits and look at where the airport and therefore their investment might be in 10 years time.

The Airport is paying an increased dividend of 5.75c per share to use up imputation credits should the Canadian bid take off, so the offer by the CPPIB has been reduced by the dividend payout.

Further to the merger proposal, as of yesterday, CPPIB has advised that acceptances have been lodged for 81,422,529 shares, representing 6.66 per cent of the total shares in the company.

89,267,833 shareholder votes, representing 7.30 per cent of the total shares in the company, have also been received. Of the votes received to date, 57.62 per cent are against CPPIB acquiring a 40 per cent stake and 42.38 per cent are in favour of the offer.

Slowish going so far for the CPPIB but New Zealanders are notoriously mogadonish when making decisions and tend to leave these things to the last possible moment but shareholders still have until March 13 2008 to make up their minds.


https://ost.asbbank.co.nz/581DDC9B56D4715202EDE783905236E3/Research/GetChart.ashx?url=http://asbc.iguana2.com/asb/hist/NZSE/AIA/10y/1/line/30/60/linear/vol
c ASB Securities 2008

One can see from the 10 year chart that long term shareholders have been handsomely
rewarded. Generous dividends amounting to 55.1c over 10 years plus tax credits have been
paid.


Long term AIA management seem bullish about company prospects but short term drags related to "the global economy" and "global credit tightening" appear to be excuses used to defuse shareholders expectations should profit be stagnant in the coming year.


Related Share Investor reading

Softening opposition to CPPIB bid for AIA
Directors of AIA bribe brokers not to sell
What is Auckland Airport worth to you?
Second bite at AIA by CPPIB might just fly
AIA new directors must focus on shareholders
Auckland Airport merger deal nosedives
The Canadians have landed
AIA incentive scheme must fly out the window
Government market manipulation over AIA/DAE deal
DAE move on AIA: Will it fly?


Disclosure: I own AIA shares


c Share Investor 2008





Bruce Sheppard: Of councils and airports

Bruce Sheppard gives (AIA) shareholders the details and lowdown about the coming vote to sell 40% of AIA to the Canadians.

It is essential reading for shareholders


Bruce Sheppard in Stirring the Pot | 6:00 am 20 February 20o8

The Canadian pension fund has made a bid for 40 per cent of the outstanding shares in

Auckland International Airport at a price of $3.65 for each share acquired. The current price is approximately $1 less than the offer price.

The total number of shares outstanding is 1991 million, which means that the Canadians seek to buy 796.4k. The total premium amounts to $796 million and will be shared among those shareholders who fill the second form in to accept on pro rata basis.

The Auckland and Manukau city councils have each said that they intend to vote “no” on the first form, which is their prerogative. While they have not explained their rational for this, and nor are they obliged to, it is clear that the decision to vote “no” is in response to public opinion. Given it is the voting public that elect them, this is no surprise and understandable.

This vote requires 50 per cent of those who vote to choose “yes” in order to pass. Should the vote go “yes” the Canadians will succeed in achieving 40 per cent ownership and those who accept will share in the premium. If the vote is lost, then all those who accepted the offer do not sell any of their shares to the Canadians and will retain all shares they currently hold.

airport-pic1.jpgIt is clear both domestic and foreign institutional investors and hedge funds will vote “yes”. This to is unsurprising as such funds are measured on quarterly performance and thus in the main are short-term focused and opportunistic. These funds more than balance the council shareholdings. Thus small shareholders will have to vote strongly “no” for the resolution to be lost. Small shareholders are traditionally a bit of a lottery and the institutions are hoping for a small turnout on the vote.

So the first and only choice in this matter is how to vote on the poll, the second choice is not a choice at all, if you are rational.

Small shareholders should all exercise their right to vote. If they don’t want the airport sold and they do not want to sell either, then they must vote “no”. If they want to get somewhere north of 40 per cent of their shares bought at $3.65 and bag their share of the premium, they should vote “yes”.

I have now discussed this bid with both the board of AIA and the Canadians directly.

I will outline the value add as the Canadians express it:

1. The Canadians propose an amalgamation post this transaction merging the takeover vehicle with AIA. This will create subscribed capital, which can then be returned to all shareholders tax free, this redemption being funded with debt. They say, therefore, that the after tax cash flows on your remaining 60 per cent will be about equal to what you were getting on your original 100 per cent. This requires shareholder, board and Inland Revenue approval. Opinion is divided on whether the IRD will approve it.

2. The second biggie is that they will increase the board firepower and give AIA access to overseas business that can increase the route traffic. They will do this by infomercial marketing using their network of other investments.

3. They will change the airport’s focus from a focus on travellers as its customer to a focus on schmoozing airlines. Music to Air New Zealand’s ears. On this they do have a point. AIA gets much of its income from airlines and it is airlines that need to be wooed to increase AIA traffic.

4. They will focus management on improving the business of AIA.

5. Now interestingly here is the contradiction. While they have some criticism of AIA management, some justified, they respect them sufficiently that they think they can lever the management into managing other peoples airports, an interesting contradiction.

Now to local body politician stupidity. Between Auckland and Manukau their share of the control premium is approximately $200 million. They have publicly stated that they will both vote no and not accept. The net effect of this is that they are transferring this sum of money to the shareholders who accept, the majority of which will go to foreign institutions and hedge funds. How dumb is that! Because the balance of the sales will be made up from those who do want to sell, the control premium will be paid to those sellers only.

Ratepayers in Auckland and Manukau should be deeply concerned that their elected officials are going to transfer money from them to foreigners, never to be recovered.

If they do not wake up to this, remember their stupidity when you face your next rates hike and vote them out. In the meantime write to them to counter balance the “public opinion” that they think they are adhering too.

The New Zealand Shareholders’ Association is not an investment advisor but I am authorised to say categorically that regardless of how you vote on the resolution whether or not to sell 40 per cent, all shareholders should accept the bid. It is simply crazy to transfer your share of the premium to those who do accept. If you vote “no 40 per cent sale” and win on that vote, there are no sales to anyone. If you lose that vote and the Canadians are successful, your chance of extracting a subsequent control premium is so close to nil that you can discount it entirely.

In summary, the issues for shareholders to consider before they vote are these:

First , in relation to the 40 per cent sale issue:-

* If I sell and get cash, what will the remainder of my shares be worth and how many will I get sold?

* If I take cash, I then have to reinvest it, (reinvestment risk) and what are my chances of finding a recession proof investment such as AIA?

* If I only get 40 per cent of my shares sold, I am only getting a control premium of 40 cents on current prices, or the equivalent of about $3 per share. This is below the independent advisors valuation range, so am I getting full value?

* Can the Canadians add enough value to AIA to make the deal worthwhile, i.e. can they improve the price of my remaining shares?

Secondly, in relation to the offer to sell your own shares if the first vote is successful:

REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU VOTE THE FIRST ISSUE, THE RATIONAL RESPONSE IS TO ACCEPT THAT (CONDITIONAL) BID.


Disclosure: I own AIA shares


AIA takeover calendar

Early March: Auckland City Council votes on its response to CPPIB offer
March 6: Deadline for Auckland airport board to review its objection
March 13: CPPIB offer deadline for shareholders


Related Share Investor reading


Softening opposition to CPPIB bid

Directors of AIA bribe brokers not to sell
What is Auckland Airport worth to you?
Second bite at AIA by CPPIB might just fly
AIA new directors must focus on shareholders
Auckland Airport merger deal nosedives
The Canadians have landed
AIA incentive scheme must fly out the window
Government market manipulation over AIA/DAE deal
DAE move on AIA: Will it fly?


Links c Share Investor 2008

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Pumpkin Patch a screaming buy

I'm going to do something I have never done before and recommend a stock to buy. I own shares in Pumpkin Patch Ltd [PPL.NZ] and the share price is at near the IPO price when it listed a few years back. It finished down 9c at NZ$1.83 today after reporting a near 23% fall in 2008 first half profit.

The fundamentals of the share price have changed, putting this company into the realms of an income stock whereas before Mr Market priced it as a growth stock-it had reached the dizzy heights of close to 5 bucks last year.

In my opinion though little fundamental has changed to the business itself during its market re-rating.

While profit was down 22.3% to just over $12 million, revenue was up soundly by 13.5% to $205 million, indicating that sales growth is on track and the appetite for the Pumpkin Patch brand is strong.

Clearly costs and a strong NZ dollar have bitten into profit.

As I have said before though, there is nothing the company can do about the exchange rate and many of the increased costs are those associated with growing a company in new markets. All relevant to the business and no surprise to retailers, people who own businesses and those in the market who don't focus on unnecessary hyperbole related to a short term view of the sharemarket.

I love the brand, the management and believe that their growing pains are just that.

Operations in the USA and UK are having a toughish time of things, but all retailers there are. They are still growing revenue, admittedly from a smallish base and once the one-off establishment costs are kicked touch, things should start to focus more tightly on the all important margins.

Managements forward outlook for the coming year is muted but a focus on increasing profitability at the large numbers of new stores they opened in 2007 is a good idea considering the short-term downturn in the retail sectors of their two biggest growing markets, the USA and UK.

I have no idea if $1.83 is the bottom share price wise, probably not, but it would surely find some resistance at the $1.25 IPO price, where brokers, who were extremely bullish on the company less than 4 years ago(and now seem they wouldn't touch it with 3 barge poles) might decide that is a good price to re purchase the stock they sold when the company hit a speed bump.

I recommend this stock as a very strong buy at these current prices if you have an investment horizon of 5 years or longer.

If it is less than that, forget it.


Disc I own PPL shares in the Share Investor Portfolio.


Pumpkin Patch @ Share Investor

Pumpkin Patch Ltd move downmarket

Long Term View: Pumpkin Patch Ltd
Pumpkin Patch's North American Downsizing a Prudent move
Digging at Pumpkin's Profit
Long vs Short: Pumpkin Patch Ltd
Pumpkin Patch Buyback shows Confidence in the Future
Pumpkin Patch takes a hit
Pumpkin Patch ripe for the picking
What is Jan Cameron up to?
I'm buying

Why did you buy that Stock? [Pumpkin Patch]
Rod Duke's Pumpkin Patch gets bigger
Buyer of large piece of Pumpkin Patch a mystery

Pumpkin Patch a screaming buy
Broker downgrades of PPL lack long term vision
Pumpkin's expansion comes at a cost
Pumpkin Patch vs Burger Fuel
Pumpkin Patch profits flatten
New Zealand Retailers ring up costs not tills

Discuss PPL @ Share Investor Forum



c Share Investor 2008