Second stab at Burger Fuel denied

Trading in Burger Fuel shares has been spasmodic at best, since listing on the NZAX
on July 17 2007. They hit a low of 29c earlier this year.



The Burger Fuel(BFW) chart tells a horrible story.

Down 18% today to NZ 42 cents and testing its all time low of 29c.

No operating news yet but sales and profit figures will be coming up in the next month or so.

Some news just at the end of last year though that a Wellington Burger Fuel store was extensively damaged. That would take out a fair amount of revenue.

My efforts to get BF shares have again come to a greasy end.

I tried to put a bid in today at 25 c but was refused by ASB Securities because "it was too low"

The "5% rule" applies, where you cant bid below 5% of what the last sell price was.

That is, even though a bid of 29c was on a buy order a few weeks back and the last sell was above 60c the buy order was allowed to be placed.

The ASB broker told me "someone at the NZX put it through".

I still cant figure out how I'm supposed to get my bid in, for what I think the company is worth, in such an illiquid stock if I'm not allowed to put my bid in how I see fit.

Time may take care of the share price though.


Related reading on the Share Investor Blog

NZX share trades with strings attached
Don't buy Burger Fuel, yet
Burger Fuel: Inside info?
Burger Fool IPO: Burger Fool?
Exclusive Interview with Burger Fuel's Josef Roberts
Burger Fuel's Daytime drama
Burger Fuel share price out of gas
Beefing up store numbers
Director explains share price drop
Burger Fuel slims down in value
Burger Fuel and Coke
Marketing Burger Fuel's future
Pumpkin Patch VS Burger Fuel
Burger Fuel results and commentary


C Share Investor 2008

What happened to risk?

What happened to risk?

A question no doubt in some of my readers minds.

In relation to financial markets, investing and business it seems to be an archaic concept only seen as a entry in the Oxford dictionary.

The market turmoil that started with the Sub Prime fallout and associated credit crunch, several months ago, has highlighted what has been going on for many years, those that take risks in business and investing no longer seem to suffer consequences when the risk that they took doesn't quite give the expected payoff.

After global State bailouts of banks with "liquidity" problems and talk of sub prime borrowers being bailed out or their bad decisions to buy houses they could ill afford, the latest avoidance of risk involves the insurance companies that insured sub prime bonds against collapse.

For goodness sake you want to remove risk from insurance?

Let me borrow and modify a classic Tom Cruise flick, insurance is risky business!! Please don't sue me Tom.

The talk of a bailout last week led to US markets doing a Lazarus and finishing up by around 2.5%.

It ain't a positive investors, its a pure unadulterated negative.

The investing world isn't the only place risk and consequences has been removed from life, Governments worldwide have been trying to do this for years.

In New Zealand Helen Clark, and her merry bunch of Labour Party socialist risk aversionists have recently passed a law to allow citizens to easily declare bankruptcy and come out of it without paying back debtors. This is linked to student loans that don't attract interest and therefore students have no incentive to pay them back.

All risk taken and no consequences for that risk.

Over the last 9 years Aunty Helen has bubbled wrapped an entire nation so much so that the risk that she talked about when she gave a eulogy at Sir Edmund Hillary's Funeral has almost been completely removed.

When we remove consequences for risk though, we increase the risk that mistakes will continue to occur.

Those in the financial industry being bailed out, institutionally and individually are simply going to continue to do what they have done if there are no brakes on their behaviour.

The looming danger is ironically low interest rates, what led us into the whole sub prime fallout and reckless borrowing and lending in the first place.

Record low rates after 9-11 led to a frenzy of cheap credit and with similar low rates coming down the pipeline one doesn't have to be a Warren Buffett to figure out that this is not such a good thing at all.



Related Political Animal Blog Reading

Labour's Socialist Peril

Related Share Investor Blog Reading

Leaders must come clean over losses
Credit Crunch a blessing in disguise
Global Credit Squeeze: There is no free lunch


C Share Investor & Political Animal 2008

What happened to risk?

What happened to risk?

A question no doubt in some of my readers minds.

In relation to financial markets, investing and business it seems to be an archaic concept only seen as a entry in the Oxford dictionary.

The market turmoil that started with the Sub Prime fallout and associated credit crunch, several months ago, has highlighted what has been going on for many years, those that take risks in business and investing no longer seem to suffer consequences when the risk that they took doesn't quite give the expected payoff.

After global State bailouts of banks with "liquidity" problems and talk of sub prime borrowers being bailed out or their bad decisions to buy houses they could ill afford, the latest avoidance of risk involves the insurance companies that insured sub prime bonds against collapse.

For goodness sake you want to remove risk from insurance?

Let me borrow and modify a classic Tom Cruise flick, insurance is risky business!! Please don't sue me Tom.

The talk of a bailout last week led to US markets doing a Lazarus and finishing up by around 2.5%.

It ain't a positive investors, its a pure unadulterated negative.

The investing world isn't the only place risk and consequences has been removed from life, Governments worldwide have been trying to do this for years.

In New Zealand Helen Clark, and her merry bunch of Labour Party socialist risk aversionists have recently passed a law to allow citizens to easily declare bankruptcy and come out of it without paying back debtors. This is linked to student loans that don't attract interest and therefore students have no incentive to pay them back.

All risk taken and no consequences for that risk.

Over the last 9 years Aunty Helen has bubbled wrapped an entire nation so much so that the risk that she talked about when she gave a eulogy at Sir Edmund Hillary's Funeral has almost been completely removed.

When we remove consequences for risk though, we increase the risk that mistakes will continue to occur.

Those in the financial industry being bailed out, institutionally and individually are simply going to continue to do what they have done if there are no brakes on their behaviour.

The looming danger is ironically low interest rates, what led us into the whole sub prime fallout and reckless borrowing and lending in the first place.

Record low rates after 9-11 led to a frenzy of cheap credit and with similar low rates coming down the pipeline one doesn't have to be a Warren Buffett to figure out that this is not such a good thing at all.


Related Share Investor Blog Reading

Leaders must come clean over losses
Credit Crunch a blessing in disguise
Global Credit Squeeze: There is no free lunch


Related Political Animal Blog Reading

Labour's Socialist Peril


C Share Investor 2008

Warehouse Court of Appeal case could be dismissed next week

The Commerce Commission will need new evidence to
prove their claims of lessened competition in supermarkets
in the Court of Appeal.


Foodstuffs, the owner of the Pak 'n Save Supermarket chain, has just been given approval to open an outlet on Auckland's North Shore after 17 years of trying. Opposition to the company's plans were put up by Woolworths Australia [WOW.ASX] Foodstuffs opposition in New Zealand.

The battle by Foodstuffs to get this market up and running has been intense, sometimes underhanded and cruel. It has cost Foodstuffs and the North Shore millions of dollars in lost revenue and wages from the 300 hundred jobs that the supermarket will bring to the shore.

Woolworths as a foe has been a hard nut right to the end.

Foodstuffs and Woolworths are currently in a fight to win control of The Warehouse Group [WHS.NZ] and the High Court in November overturned a ruling by the Commerce Commission which prevented Woolworths and Foodstuffs bidding for The Warehouse.

The court will hold a hearing on Jan. 29 to decide whether the regulator is allowed to challenge the ruling in the Court of Appeal.

The obvious link to the two battles is clear.

None of these two retail chains are going to give up the fight for the Warehouse until all resources are exhausted.

The battle for control or to buy the Warehouse has been going for almost 2 years. There have been endless appeals by the two companies (as well as the Warehouse itself) and a denial by the Commerce Commission for a deal to go ahead. There will be more legal challenges if there is first a Court of Appeal case after the Jan 29 decision, and these will go as far as New Zealand's new Supreme Court, if the two appellants don't get their way and are not allowed to bid for The Warehouse.

In order for the Appeal Court to accept the Appeal by the Commerce Commission, they will have to furnish new information to the case to prove their point that if either of the two supermarket companies buy the Warehouse, competition or potential competition in the supermarket sector will be severely diminished.

This was the CC argument in the High Court and they lost on that point, so on that basis alone the Court of Appeal shouldn't hear the case.

If a case is to be heard with new evidence furnished, I cant figure out what that evidence could possibly be.

Given the preponderance of fact that seems to be on the side of the defendants, at this stage, I don't see the Court of Appeal giving approval for a hearing before their court on Jan 29.

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

• Summary
• Charts
• Dividends
• News
• Announcements
• Price History
• Related Securities

Related Amazon reading




The Wal-Mart Effect: How the World's Most Powerful Company Really Works--and How It's Transforming the American Economy by Charles Fishman
Buy new: $10.20 / Used from: $8.50
Usually ships in 24 hours



c Share Investor 2008 & 2009