Thursday, August 14, 2008

Helen Clark play comes to the Pumphouse

From the Listener is a run down of a play currently touring New Zealand and now at the Pumphouse on Auckland's North Shore, where I live coincidentally.


It looks like it might be quite a good show and you will probably see me there. Buy Tickets

In 2005, before the last election, essayist Richard Meros used that intrigue as the founding block from which to build a discourse on such topics as Rogernomics, gender studies and bodily fluids. He called the philosophical and satirical result On the Conditions and Possibilities of Helen Clark Taking Me as Her Young Lover. Then, in 2007, mindful of the next election and with funding from Creative New Zealand (thus indirectly from the arts minister herself), actor Arthur Meek and director Geoff Pinfield mined that essay for dramatic possibilities – and struck gold when their one-man show premiered at Bats Theatre in Wellington in January this year.


On the Conditions is now touring nationally. In it, Meek plays Meros, presenting his essay as a PowerPoint-aided lecture and trying to convince us: a) that Clark must take a young lover to ensure her political survival; b) that Clark’s acquisition of a young lover will benefit the country; and c) that he, Richard Meros, between whose brown wool vest and brown tweed trousers exists a certain chemistry, should be that young lover. (The latter conclusion bringing a spontaneous applause from the near-capacity audience on the night I attended.)


Meros, furthermore, intends the tour of his lecture to bring him to Clark’s attention, so that he can gain the proximity necessary for him to persuade her to take him as her young lover.

Absurd. Brilliant. Delightful.

More from The Listener

Buy tickets to Pumphouse shows


c Political Animal 2008

Evidence mounting for a restructuring of ACC

With The National Party promising a long needed restructuring and the element of competition with the Accident Compensation Corporation, the highly inefficient government department continues to provide evidence that it should be privatised completely.

Over the last two weeks, ACC staff were exposed using taxpayer money to get pet grooming for spot and fluffy and day spas and manicures for themselves, a woman who lost all her limbs in a work accident is only allowed a maximum NZ$117,000.00 payout for loss of income, even though she would have made that sum in just one year, and the latest story to hit the media, again, cements ACC as the dinosaur that most know it as.

Mike Gibson, the man caught on video lifting boulders, mowing lawns and doing all sorts of work but officially unable to because of a bad back and getting ACC compensation for it, has not yet been prosecuted by the department and doesn't look likely to anytime soon.

According to reports this individual has been collecting ACC fraudulently for 20 years or more but ACC seem uninterested even with the mounting evidence against him.

These are only three stories that have hit the media, there are thousands more like them that havent. The Mike Gibsons of this world are ripping off the taxpayer and ACC are allowing them to, and the limbless woman not getting what they deserve are the just tip of a well manicured finger.

All this and ACC staff have the best looking pets and finger nails in the land, all courtesy of you and me.

All good reasons to privatise and ACC agrees with that too. The insurance scheme that covered ACC staff for pet grooming etc was provided by Southern Cross.

An efficient, well run private insurance company.


Related Political Animal reading

Labour backs ACC rorts
ACC staff spending on day spas and pet grooming

c Political Animal 2008

Warehouse appeal decision imminent

Since the decision by the Appeal Court to deny Foodstuffs and Woolworths Australia [WOW:ASX] the right to make a takeover for The Warehouse [WHS.NZX] we are half way along the 20 working day period for the appellants to take leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision.

Investors in the company might be thinking a number of possible scenarios.


1. That no appeal will be made

2. That an appeal is taken and won or lost

3. If lost what the prospects are for the company in its current form

4. If won how much shareholders want for their shares

5. Will Stephen Tindall make another play at full private control of his company?

6. If either Foodstuffs/Woollies or the Commerce Commission lose in the Supreme Court will either seek a judicial review?


I'm guessing here but if either Foodstuffs or Woolworths was going to drop an appeal to the Supreme Court I think they would have come out already and put us all out of our collective misery. The fact that nearly ten working days have passed would indicate that lawyers from both companies, as well as The Warehouse itself, would be mulling over the Appeal Court ruling, looking for inconsistencies, mistakes and holes that they could drive a successful argument through in the Supreme Court.

I think there will be an appeal for those reasons.

At present the retail sector in New Zealand isn't looking too bright. Christmas 2008 shopping is looking dim and the prospect for a serious spending upswing isn't likely until well into 2009 in my opinion.

Never fear though!

As always with economics and the economy things do change and the retail sector will pick up and The Warehouse will be stacking up profits once again.

Where things will get really interesting is if Tindall or Foodstuffs/Woollies get control. We will likely see an expansion of the company towards larger format stores that stock more food items- a complete roll out of the "Extra" format in other words.

This is unlikely to happen under the current ownership, as the capital needed will be large and the deep pockets of an owner like Woolworths or a private partnership, along with Tindall will be able to modernise the chain with that big capital base behind them, with the ultimate benefit going to the consumer. This is where the Commerce Commission has erred in my opinion-a significant expansion of The Warehouse is only likely to happen if the company is able to be put up for sale.

The possibility that Stephen Tindall would make a play for full control is a likely one if all else fails. I don't think this can happen until after the tussle between Foodstuffs/Woollies and the Commerce Commission is resolved. It would be nice to see him own his baby outright again though. The question would then be how much would he offer to take control.

Some commentators have said Tindall wouldn't have to bid much higher than the current share price of a round $NZ3.50 per share. I think that is dreaming myself because Foodstuffs and Woolworths both have 10% holdings that cost them considerably more than that and would not accept anything less than what they paid.

Tindall would need the 20% sum of those two companies holdings to make a successful takeover and so the offer to all shareholders would have to be north of the $6.50 price that Woolworths bought their 10% for.

Woollies and Foodstuffs would clearly hold the upper hand in this position.

In the case of a competing bid for The Warehouse by Foodstuffs or Woollies should they ultimately be allowed to bid for the company, it is up to shareholders not to shortchange themselves. Tindall already owns about 53% of the company, so they need to grab his holding, the 10% either of the two bidders owns , so that would leave 27% of shareholders like myself to agree with the price the two big shareholders agree to sell for to take an offer to the 90% threshold and therefore compulsorily take the remaining 10%.

Of course everything could be left completely up in the air for another year or so, after waiting for a Supreme Court hearing, by a judicial review of a decision made in that court.

It has been done before by Foodstuffs in the case of Progressive Enterprises wanting to merge Foodtown's brands with Woolworths NZ in 2002. Woolworth's Australia then bought that merged entity in 2005.

Whatever the final outcome, investors can be sure there will be a considerable wait to get a final decision.

Disclosure: I own WHS shares




The Warehouse Group @ Share Investor

The Warehouse: Is it Time to Bow Out?
Share The Warehouse: What the Fuck is it Doing?
Share Investor Q & A: The Warehouse' Ian Morrice  
Share Investor Q & A: Questions to The Warehouse' Ian Morrice
Long Term View: The Warehouse Group Ltd
Share Investor Short: Warehouse Group yield worth a look
The Warehouse Group: 2010 Interim Profit Review
The Warehouse: Big Brands, Big Opportunities
Warehouse strike opportunity to buy
Long Term Play: The Warehouse Group
Share Investor Short: Warehouse Group yield worth a second look
Woolworths supermarket consolidation an indicator of a move on the Warehouse?
Stock of the Week: The Warehouse Group
Warehouse 2009 interim profit a key economic indicator
When will The Warehouse bidders make their move?
Long vs Short: The Warehouse Group
Warehouse bidders ready to lay money down
The Warehouse set to cut lose "extra" impediment
The Warehouse sale could hinge on "Extra" decision
The case for The Warehouse without a buyer
Foodstuffs take their foot off the gas
Woolworths seek leave to appeal to Supreme Court
Warehouse appeal decision imminent
Warehouse decision a loser for all
Warehouse Court of appeal decision in Commerce Commission's favour
MARKETWATCH: The Warehouse
The Warehouse takeover saga continues
Why did you buy that stock? [The Warehouse]
History of Warehouse takeover players suggest a long winding road
Court of Appeal delays Warehouse bid
The Warehouse set for turbulent 2008
The Warehouse Court of Appeal case lay in "Extras" hands
WHS Court of Appeal case could be dismissed next week
Commerce Commission impacts on the Warehouse bottom line
The Warehouse in play
Outcomes of Commerce Commission decision
The fight for control begins soon

Discuss WHS @ Share Investor Forum - Register free 
Download WHS company reports




Related Amazon Reading

Security Analysis: Sixth Edition, Foreword by Warren Buffett (Security Analysis Prior Editions)Security Analysis: Sixth Edition, Foreword by Warren Buffett (Security Analysis Prior Editions) by Benjamin Graham
Buy new: $41.77 / Used from: $32.40
Usually ships in 24 hours








c Share Investor 2008 & 2009

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Don't let the bastard go


c Trace 2008

Amongst all the recent political news of those close to Labour bugging the opposition National Party conference, Ruth Dyson advocating for multiple partner relationships and having the State financially support them, ACC rorts and The labour Party frothing at the mouth over John Key and his Party's policy to make welfare a much less rosy alternative , we seem to have all let one Winston Peters head out of the noose.

This slippery little bugger has had a few problems with secret donations to him or his political party from big business going astray and political corruption likely over donations made from the Vela racing family and Peters as minister of racing passing favourable tax laws to enrich his benefactors.

The worst seems to be over for him, and if all he gets is bad press inches from his underhanded backroom deals and lies, this country and its political masters should be well ashamed if they let him get away. Again.

I guess we cannot expect much from a group of people who would pass a retrospective law to make legal something they did illegally or indeed set their own pay rates and employment conditions.

We really need to hold this little prick to account though. To let him get away with it means the new low that he would set for politics will be limboed under by some other polly in the future.


Winston Peters payola scandal @ Political Animal



c Political Animal 2008