Share Investor

Saturday, December 22, 2007

Media Release (21.12.07, NZ time) Auckland Airport signs confidentiality deed

Important additional information regarding the Auckland Airport takeover:

21 December Media Release:

The directors of Auckland International Airport Limited (Auckland Airport) have signed a confidentiality deed with an international party which has expressed interest in the company.

Chairman of Auckland Airport, Tony Frankham, said the party had initially expressed an interest when the board asked its financial advisors to seek any other takeover offers in November.

Following the signing of the confidentiality deed, this party has been provided access to preliminary due diligence.

"This party is the one referred to in our Target Company Statement sent to shareholders. We are releasing this notice today to confirm the position to the market.

Auckland Airport will keep the market informed of any significant developments with this party or any other party should they come forward" he said.

Mr Frankham said that Auckland Airport has also received formal clearance from CPPIB to seek other proposals while the partial takeover offer is open to shareholders.

"A provision within the CPPIB takeover offer prevented this, however, CPPIB has advised that it will not apply this provision to any process we undertake to identify alternative proposals which need not necessarily be takeover offers.

Therefore we will begin a new process early in 2008 to seek a partner who better meets the criteria established by the board. However, the directors consider that the outcome of this process will not be known until well after the CPPIB takeover offer closes on 13 March" he said.

Earlier this week directors recommended that Auckland Airport shareholders reject the partial takeover offer being made by CPPIB for the 39.53% of the Auckland Airport shares not already held by CPPIB at $3.65 per share and hold their shares.

A copy of the Target Company Statement including the independent adviser's report is available on the Auckland Airport website www.auckland-airport.co.nz and has also been sent to all shareholders.

Essential Links:

Download Target Company Statement, 2.8MB PDF Released 21 Dec (NZ time)
Reuters (update 2, 9.30am 21 Dec EST)
Speed it up say Canadians NZ Herald (22nd Dec NZ Time)
Mystery Airport Suitor gets due dilligence Stuff Website (22nd Dec NZ Time)

C Auckland Airport & Share Investor 2007

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Auckland Airport directors bribe brokers

The contempt that I feel over Auckland Airport management paying brokers to advise their clients who are thinking about selling not to vote for the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board buyout of a 40% stake in the port is only matched by my anger over who is doing it.

The Auckland Airport board is essentially
bribing brokers to advise clients not to sell.

Lloyd Morrison and company have allot of questions to answer.

I was hacked off by some of the directors that were voted onto a new board at the end of November and mentioned various agendas that might have been on the table and it looks like the current crop of board members will do just about anything to fulfill whatever their agendas are.

Forgetting all about their shareholders and basically treating them like mushrooms who are too thick to make up their own minds, they are bribing brokers with their own money in order to get their own way!

All the board should have done is present their retort to the CPPIB bid and then let shareholders sift through the information and then it is up to them to decide whether they will part with their own property.

It doesn't bode well for minority shareholders like myself, who's rights as Auckland Airport shareholders are being stomped on at every turn.

With this sort of single minded attempt to run a public company like a family dynasty, Auckland Airport directors need to take a good hard look at themselves and ask one salient question.

I'm I doing this job for my own benefit or for the benefit of shareholders, as I was elected to do?

Shareholders need to fight back and make it clear to their employees, the directors, that this sort of immoral practice is not acceptable.

Disclosure: I am a Auckland Airport shareholder

C Share Investor 2007

Commerce Commission impacts on The Warehouse' bottom line

The future of The Warehouse Group [WHS.NZ] is on hold, after the Commerce Commission announced earlier this week that they are going to appeal the High Court decision to the Court of Appeal to allow Foodstuffs and Woolworths Australia [WOW.ASX] bidding for the retailer.

Unless the Commission can argue new evidence in the higher court or argue on a technicality on a point of law then their appeal is not likely to be a positive one for them.

The Commission also face the distinct possibility that their appeal maybe thrown out before it begins at a preliminary hearing, due to sit on January 29 to decide whether leave to appeal will be granted.

Warehouse management have publicly backed the two bidders so it shows the direction the company wants to go.

The Commerce Commission clearly see the High Court decision to allow the two Warehouse suitors to bid as a watershed decision that must be fought with all their state backed muscle.

Personally, like most state apparatus and workers within those apparatus, there is a little bit of self preservation involved. In the Commission's decision to appeal we have a little job justification going on and any brakes on the growth of a business like The Warehouse, while they have to wait, and they have waited for over a year because of the CC dilly dallying, is purely incidental to those at the Commission.

It is outrageous that the state can take such a lengthy time to make such an important decision over the property rights of Warehouse shareholders. While it is understandable that there will be competition issues in business from time to time and these should be arbitrated, it is even more serious an issue when arbitration of these issues materially affects an important business because of unnecessary delays, not to mention the negative impacts to those individuals and groups who own that business.

The Commerce Commission should take the lay of the land and come to the conclusion that much wiser heads at the High Court did, that the Warehouse and its current owners need to be able to freely sell an asset that is theirs, to two willing buyers that want it.

The millions of dollars that it has cost The Warehouse so far since their business has been on hold is a serious issue and the strangle that the Commission has on its business at present must be let go so the losses don't continue to mount.

Disclosure: I own WHS shares

The Warehouse Group @ Share Investor

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

Share Investor Forum-Discuss this topic

Related Links

The Warehouse Financial Data