Archive for July, 2009
Thursday, July 30th, 2009
Someone told me last week that New Zealand’s fund managers are all too eager to “drop their pants” to secure a mandate with the New Zealand Superannuation Fund (NZS). That is, managers will accept substantially lower fees for the privilege of running the huge lumps of money that NZS doles out to the lucky winners – even to the extent of making the whole exercise barely profitable for the firms in question.
And that’s exactly what both ING and the NZX-owned index fund manager Smartshares told me was the case after they were fired last week by NZS.
The mandate losses – $200m in the case of ING and double that for Smartshares – would hardly dent their respective bottom lines, I was informed. There is, of course, a pinch of PR posturing in these statements – no-one likes to lose business – but even discounting the usual corporate spin, I got the sense that both ING and Smartshares weren’t overly concerned at being turfed out of the NZS fold.
The Smartshares story is particularly revealing for what it says about the difference between wholesale and retail pricing in funds management.
“[The NZ Super mandate] was a significant part of Smartshares’ funds under management but it was a much less significant part of its revenue,” NZX markets development manager, Geoff Brown told me.
From what I could ascertain, Smartshares was charging NZS less than 10 basis points (or .01 per cent) to manage $400m matched to an index of New Zealand equities. For the same service, retail Smartshare investors must part with over 70 basis points, which is high by international standards for a simple listed equities index fund (Australians, for example, pay about 35 basis points for a comparable product).
That is an extraordinary spread – or I hope it is.
In this relationship it’s easy to see who’s wearing the pants.
Tags: David Chaplin, NZ Superannuation Fund Posted in Investing | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 28th, 2009
 NZX50
Just look at this chart – the markets are happy.
And not just in New Zealand, equity markets around the world are breathing again. It’s almost as if the greatest financial crisis in generations didn’t even happen.
It did, of course, and there’s still a fair mess to clean up as the most powerful man in money, Ben Bernanke, head of the Federal Reserve,in a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) opinion piece this week.
At some point, Bernanke admitted, the Fed would have to pull a reverse stimulus or its fiddling with the money supply “could ultimately result in inflationary pressures”.
“We are confident we have the necessary tools to withdraw policy accommodation, when that becomes appropriate, in a smooth and timely manner,” he said.
The Fed certainly had the tools, a companion WSJ editorial noted, but questioned its will to use them in time to avert another bubble.
“… the Fed chief reiterated that it’s too early to start tightening and that the Fed will keep its current policy of near-zero interest rates for “an extended period.” So how long is extended? Mr. Bernanke didn’t say, and we are all supposed to assume that he’ll know the right moment when he sees it,” the WSJ editorial said.
Someone has to know the right moment, right? This English couple thought they did.
In my favourite story of the week, this UK pair gathered together £46,656 (which they brought to the track stuffed into a “Tesco carrier bag”) to bet on every permutation of finishes in a six-dog greyhound race in a fail-safe strategy to scoop the £101,110.39p jackpot pool.
Impeccable logic. Except two other gamblers, including one online punter identified as ‘Scoop6 Squirrel’, also picked the right combination of dogs leaving the sure-things with only a third share of the jackpot – equating to £33,703.46 or a net loss of almost £13,000.
The moral of the story, I suppose, is that no matter how confident you are of your tools or your strategy, other people can always screw it up.
Tags: David Chaplin Posted in Personal Finance | No Comments »
Monday, July 27th, 2009
The stand-off continues. Share prices pushed higher. Significantly for some traditional analysts, the Dow Jones Transportation Index surpassed recent highs. Commodity prices were up.
The ‘risky’ currencies such as the NZD, AUD and HUF appreciated and the low-cost JPY depreciated. All signs of a greater appetite for risk. And yet the currency moves remain unconvincing (the NZD edged up to a new high at 66.28c but not so the AUD, CAD, EUR or GBP – likewise for a wider set of risky assets), while the general risks around economic growth and company profits remain high. I still believe these are good opportunities for people looking to sell but a very risky time to be buying.
This week sees the RBNZ once again decide on the Official Cash Rate. No change to the 2.5% current rate is expected. The RBNZ appear caught between a rock and a hard place (as usual): they will be concerned that a rising NZD will curtail any export pickup but they will not want to fuel any faster housing recovery by reducing the cash rate.
The net effect may be to prompt the Governor to warn about the need for restraint with debt accumulation, and to state the RBNZ’s willingness to consider more direct means to slow credit growth in future.
Tags: Anthony Byett, Foreign Exchange Posted in Foreign Exchange | No Comments »
Monday, July 27th, 2009
Anyone who takes a bus in Wellington knows about Snapper cards – the little red credit card lookalikes that make a voice blurt: “Please Don’t Forget to Tag Off”, “Card Value Low” and, most ominously, “Insufficient Funds” as you board.
They let you travel at a discount to cash fares and some day, hopefully, they’ll be in a lot more shops and cafes than they are now. They’ve had their teething problems and probably discourage the congenitally introverted from ever taking public transport with their braying messages, but they do seem to work.
By the end of this year, says Tim Brown of Infratil, which launched Snapper in Wellington, they could be in use on all bus lines, rail services, ferries, taxis and even the Wellington cable car.
He already has a Wellington Stadium pass with a Snapper card built in that knows he’s a season ticket-holder, creating a secure entry system to the big games that beats the pants off the mauled bits of cardboard that most of us punters use to get through the turnstiles.
The Snapper system uses world-class technology that stands the daily test of 25 million transactions in the teeming public transport systems of the South Korean capital, Seoul, and it’s cost less than $11 million to get to this point.
Imagine a system like that, says Brown, in operation on Auckland transport when the Rugby World Cup is on. You could leave the house without your wallet and take buses, trains, taxis and ferries to get to Eden Park, swipe your way into the game, buy a beer in the stands and get home again – all with just your Snapper card.
That is Infratil’s vision. Brown says it could be implemented well before the Rugby World Cup, draw on lessons from the Wellington launch to go more smoothly, and best of all, not a cent of ratepayers’ money would be involved.
Except that it will probably never happen. Instead, says Brown, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority will spend many times what Infratil proposes and may, if all goes smoothly, have a pilot scheme in place by some time in 2011.
ARTA controls the introduction of electronic ticketing for the country’s biggest city, and is so ideologically opposed to a private sector solution, says Brown, that it is hard-wired to expect the successful implementation of Infratil’s solution to be “all a horrible private sector mistake”.
As a result, ARTA and its chairman, Mike Lee, will end up giving Aucklanders something very like a Snapper card, at very much greater cost, through a French rather than a local provider, and none of this in time for the Rugby World Cup. Infratil have beaten several paths to the door of Transport Minister Steven Joyce, whom Brown says would have “killed it (the ARTA process) in five seconds” if he could have, but the system must grind on.
In the process, he notes, ARTA has already spent $11 million – more than it cost to implement the whole Snapper system in Wellington – just to hold the tender process for Auckland’s system. It appears almost certain to see a contract awarded to the French provider, Thales, who will have no more than a pilot scheme in place by 2011.
Worst of all, says Brown, this will all be done on the public purse when private money would willingly take the risk and do it at lower cost.
Now, of course, Brown has an axe to grind. He must be particularly steamed to have the head of the New Zealand Transport Agency, Geoff Dangerfield, dismiss the Snapper as no more than a “bus-based stored value card”. Dangerfield is in charge of thinking about a national e-ticket system, which of course Infratil would love to run.
As Snapper’s CEO Miki Szikszai said yesterday: “Obviously we need to have a chat with him. We have a different view of our capability.”
Infratil was also unsuccessful in challenging the way the ARTA tender round was conducted and, in the best Kiwi traditions of giving a dog a bad name, Snapper and Infratil are in danger of just looking like sore losers.
ARTA’s Mike Lee is certainly rampantly unsympathetic, telling BusinessWire recently: “Infratil have their own semi-integrated ticket which they are now trying to foist on Auckland, lobbying their friends in government. It’s not up to international standards.
“Infratil would increase their monopoly influence over Auckland. All my advice is that the Snapper card and Infratil don’t come anywhere near the winners but want political influence by holding up the process.”
But hang on – Snapper is in place and working in Wellington, and is clearly lower cost than whatever process ARTA proposes since it’s already spent more on a tender than Infratil spent getting it up and running. And if ARTA isn’t a kind of monopoly, then what is?
And as Brown gleefully observes, a Sydney local government effort to introduce e-ticketing has only just been abandoned after years of enormous cost, for a system that was supposed to be in place for the Sydney Olympics, however long ago that was.
Why would we trust local government to do this sort of thing well, he argues?
Infratil’s interest in this is naturally profit-driven – it owns the bus companies in Auckland and Wellington and it wants to capture as big a slice as it can of the spending on transport, coffee, buns, and newspapers that go with the working day while automating its cash handling. No doubt it earns interest on funds deposited on the thousands of cards in circulation.
But if the alternative -public ownership – requires far longer, potentially greater execution risk, lost opportunity for a showcase world sporting event, and unnecessarily large costs to taxpayers and ratepayers, what are we gaining from all this? Why does it matter who owns it as long as it works and doesn’t cost us all more than it needs to?
So here’s a suggestion. Next time you find yourself listening to Bill English rabbiting on about New Zealand’s feeble productivity and the need to do things quicker, smarter, and cheaper, and you’re not quite sure what he means, think of this example.
Even if Tim Brown is only half-right about the hurdles a good idea faces in this country, we should all be very worried. It’s no way to run a bus service, let alone a country.
(BusinessWire)
Tags: Pattrick Smellie, Smellie Sniffs The Breeze Posted in Politics | 7 Comments »
Thursday, July 23rd, 2009
ING’s offer of settlement to disgruntled investors in the now-infamous ‘frozen funds’ is still generating controversy despite the fact that almost 95 per cent of unitholders accepted the terms. Specifically, some are arguing – including the former Commerce Minister, Lianne Dalziel – that ING should withdraw its requirement for investors accepting the deal to waive any right to future legal action.
But Dalziel and co are conveniently forgetting that those investors were not compelled to sign the agreement. Any investors who truly felt they were mis-sold the ING funds, and could prove it or wanted to hang on until the Commerce Commission investigation is complete, were free to fight their case through the courts. Investors who bought the dud CDO funds through the ANZ bank do also have another week or so to seek further recourse through the Banking Ombudsman, and if they haven’t lodged a case yet they should.
As Philip Macalister – publisher of Good Returns and ASSET, the magazine I edit – argued in a recent blog, there’s more than a hint of hypocrisy in the politicians plea on behalf of ING investors.
I believe that many people were mis-sold the ING CDO funds but this really has to be proved on a case-by-case basis.
Legal action is, of course, expensive and the odds are probably stacked against investors. In his Herald column this week, Brian Gaynor, charted an interesting development in New Zealand with the launch of a new private litigation funding company (it’s not the only one as this Lawlink article reveals).
“There are a number of recent circumstances, including Hanover, Bridgecorp, Blue Chip, the ING income funds, Vestar, Feltex and Tranz Rail, where litigation funding would have been welcomed by investors,” Gaynor says.
And he’s right. Although in the ING case the end result would probably have been much the same, given that litigation funders will skim off between 20-40 per cent of any successful settlement. The real purpose of litigation funders is to help the wealthy fight each other and generate enormous fees for lawyers.
I reckon most ING investors would not class themselves as wealthy. Even making conservative assumptions – say the two CDO funds at their peak totaled about $850 million spread amongst 14,000 investors, that’s an average investment of $60,000. I don’t know the true figures but I expect the majority of punters actually had less money than this invested with the ING funds.
For investors with relatively small lumps of money at stake a better solution than the lawyer-heavy litigation funds would be a low-cost complaints body. Particularly if the issue is one of mis-selling, an industry funded body such as the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) in Australia, that covered all consumers of investment products (not just bank customers as is currently the case) is the way to go.
Oh that’s right, there’s one on the way, but it really should have been here decades ago.
Tags: David Chaplin Posted in Personal Finance | 1 Comment »
Monday, July 20th, 2009
So much for a weak US share market in July, or at least the 7% S&P500 surge last week did not indicate weakness. Unfortunately movements of this magnitude are more a sign of the volatility and uncertainty at present rather than a compelling signal of confidence (5 of the last 7 weeks with 5%-plus surges have been followed by a weekly decline!). Importantly the earnings season is only just starting, with only 38 of the 500 S&P500 companies having reported so far.
The most likely scenario remains a broad sideways pattern for global financial markets, including the NZD, while the risk of a sell-off of risky assets cannot yet be dismissed. Tellingly, the S&P500 remains below its June high; likewise the major currencies, including the NZD, against the USD. Very little is ever certain about the future but current trading still looks more like noise.
Support for a scenario of general financial market sideways movement came from two quarters last week: Morgan Stanley forecast the US government 10-year bond yield to range trade between 3-3.75% over most of second half 2009 (any growth surge being tempered by underlying subdued US consumption growth – sound familiar?); and CBA predict the oil price to broadly centre on US$60/barrel for the rest of the year (there being excess supply available to meet any demand increase).
Tags: Foreign Exchange Posted in Foreign Exchange | No Comments »
Friday, July 17th, 2009
Things may be grim, but for a brief, double-take moment during John Key’s speech on the economy this week, it looked as if the Prime Minister might see things as even more apocalyptic than the rest of us.
Having just labelled New Zealand a “third-division economy” in the OECD, he went on to put us in the same league as “Greece, Korea and the Czech Republic”.
Greece, yeah, not flattering. Czech Republic? Not sure, but plausible. But Korea? Huh? Which one? Surely he doesn’t mean North Korea, the collapsing, nuclear-capable kleptocracy that starves its people and posts border guards to stop its citizens from mass exodus.
But if he meant South Korea, then a few in the audience were left thinking: “we should be so lucky”.
South Korea’s GDP per head is still a little lower at US$24,550 than New Zealand’s at US$26,796, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit.
However, there’s no escaping that those two basic measures of wealth have been converging for years as New Zealand slips down the ranks and South Korea moves up.
An economy increasingly based on the manufacture of high value, technologically advanced goods, South Korea has a current account surplus of 2.2% of GDP, and is undertaking a big fiscal stimulus package in response to the credit crisis with little risk to the national balance sheet thanks to that.
The last 10 to 15 years of South Korea’s economic history show the country growing much faster than its domestic demand growth, indicating high productivity and growing returns from exports.
New Zealand, on the other hand, has a whopper of a current account deficit that has improved a little thanks to the depth of the recession here, but which is still stuck stubbornly high at around 8% of GDP and is getting not much better at selling agricultural products except as commodities.
Our export performance is poor compared to the hoop-la, and to the record of similarly sized OECD economies.
A persistently high Kiwi dollar post-Budget worsens the short to medium term outlook, and that was one of the reasons Fitch Ratings put us on negative outlook this week.
The kiwi took an immediate hit, but by start of play Friday had bounced back up through overnight trading to pretty much where it had been before. Who knows what it’s really up to? People elsewhere seem to think we’re still good for our debts. Whew.
Other signs are not so good. For annual inflation still to be clocking at 1.9% for the year to June 30 goes to show what an overheated time the New Zealand economy was having before the bust.
To be at the middle of the Reserve Bank’s inflation target range at what looks like the bottom of a very nasty recession should be cause for caution, especially when this period reflected a very large drop in petrol prices, which only turned back up in the last quarter.
All of this is why Key and his deputy, Finance Minister Bill English so consistently downplay the alleged New Zealand recovery.
“Any optimism is welcome,” said English this week.
Or as Key said of the expected upturn: “I hope that’s the case because I want New Zealand to be back on track and growing and employing people.”
This, after pretty much trashing the economy’s readiness for anything approaching sustainable economic growth where we actually pay our way in the world.
By cobbling together some publicly available numbers that no one had much looked at that way before, Key pointed out that the tradeables sector of the economy, the bit that earns actual new wealth, had effectively been in recession for five years, shrinking by 10%.
“During that period, the non-tradeable sector – which has lower productivity – has grown by 15%,” he said. “That constitutes highly unbalanced growth.”
New Zealand can’t avoid this gear-graunching end to the 15 year debt binge, so the mood at home is, at best, cautious, according to the ING pan-Asian investor sentiment dashboard score for New Zealand of 84, compared with 132 for the region as a whole.
That made New Zealand investors the most pessimistic of the 13 countries surveyed. Even Japanese investors – so bearish that ING excludes them from the regional index to fend off the impact of their overwhelming gloom – were more optimistic than New Zealanders in the second quarter of this year.
So, what about our new foe and comparator, South Korea?
Sixth on the league table of 13, leaping from seriously pessimistic in Q1 with a score of 73, to 122 in Q2, not far off the regional index score of 132.
That looks a lot more like green shoots than anything going on here, although as ING’s New Zealand investment strategist Stuart Millar pointed out: “The risk is that Asian investors become too optimistic too early. It will be difficult for global equity markets to advance strongly while economic growth in the developed world is continuing to contract.”
Spoken like a true Kiwi, in other words.
It still feels as if South Korea will keep getting wealthier, while we keep slipping. Catching Australia, whose continuing good fortunes are also New Zealand’s, is becoming more of a pipedream by the day.
And that was the problem with John Key’s speech outlining the Government’s economic agenda, it was impressive in its frankly worded analysis – the New Zealand economy had “flattered to deceive,” he said at one point.
But it was weak on where the productivity lift is coming from.
The six identified areas of focus – regulatory reform; infrastructure investment; better public services; education; innovation and business assistance; and a world-class tax system – are all very well.
But for the first four, Key outlined only what we know already – regulatory reform is glacial and possibly suicidal in Auckland local government; infrastructure is getting a decent lump of money hurled at it; and public services may get better, but there’s no immediate reason to think they’re doing anything other than getting smaller at the moment.
In education, there is a lot of action in the primary and secondary areas, but policy action on getting more out of our universities and CRI’s appears slow in coming despite their vital role in finding the “high quality, efficiently farmed” products that Key identified as our gravy.
On the business innovation and exporting front, there is clearly something big coming for MFAT, with the new chief executive, John Allen, now in place. Heavy-hitting Ministers like Gerry Brownlee see the foreign service as spending too much time on “the niceties” and not enough time getting their hands dirty to make the country some money.
In tax reform, too, there are the seeds of big change. Key’s comments this week effectively endorsed the thrust of Treasury Secretary John Whitehead’s controversial tax speech several weeks ago.
The trouble with chasing improvements in productivity is that they come from hundreds of places, all at once, piling up on one another to push the national economic flywheel that little bit harder.
But when the wheel is turning slowly, and the pushing is weak, it can be hard to know if you’re achieving anything. That, more than anything, is how the New Zealand economy feels today.
Tags: Pattrick Smellie, Smellie Sniffs The Breeze Posted in Economy | No Comments »
Friday, July 17th, 2009
It didn’t sound like US money manager, Michael Holland, was being ironic when he described Goldman Sachs as “the smartest guys in the room” for piling up income of US$3.4 billion in the three months to June 26 – an 89 per cent increase compared to the same period last year.
The ‘smartest guys in the room’ tag, of course, is now inextricably linked with the Enron executives and their “faulty and corrupt business practices”, which led to a financial scandal that has since been eclipsed by Madoff et al.
Holland wasn’t for one minute suggesting Goldman Sachs was faulty and/or corrupt, he was merely expressing an admiration (mixed with jealousy) for fellow investment professionals. However, in this wonderfully bilious piece Rolling Stone contributor Matt Taibbi, fingers Goldman Sachs as the source of all financial evil.
In his second paragraph of the story titled ‘The great American bubble machine’ Taibbi launches straight into it, with this visceral description of Goldman Sachs: “The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.”
Great stuff, the rest of the story’s pretty good too, as it explains how a vampire can extract nourishment from a bubble. An article in the UK Daily Telegraph, offers an alternative explanation, positing that Goldman Sachs just might be “damn good at what it does”.
The two conclusions may not be mutually exclusive.
Tags: David Chaplin Posted in Personal Finance | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 14th, 2009
Finance Minister Bill English confirmed last week that the government was pushing on with a plan to allow pension portability between New Zealand and Australia.
“Although details are still to be discussed, this stands to be an important step forward. It would allow New Zealanders and Australians to consolidate their financial affairs in the country in which they live,” English said in a statement.
The plan, which was first floated last year, will allow New Zealanders to import whatever superannuation savings they have accumulated in Australia across to a KiwiSaver account only.
According to some estimates plucked out of the ether, New Zealanders might have upwards of $5 billion unwittingly stored away in so-called ‘lost super’ accounts in Australia. There will also be plenty more super savings stashed away in Australian accounts which returned New Zealanders haven’t lost track of.
As I argued previously there are several reasons why you might want to leave your super in Australia.
Transferring to a KiwiSaver account will also lock in the money until you are age 65, whereas in Australia retirees can access their super from age 55, depending on when they were born (don’t ask, it’s complicated).
If they want, Australian retirees can also choose to drawdown part of their superannuation each year, with some tax benefits for doing so, rather than a lump-sum payment. And with now being the worst time to retire ever, accepting a lump-sum which has been degraded 20-30 per cent over the last couple of years might not be the best option.
However, it is the only option open to some New Zealanders who have saved through their own workplace savings schemes. I was chatting to a friend who described that very scenario being played with one of his co-workers, who was being forced to crystalise massive losses in his pension because he was retiring, which meant selling down the entire depressed super account.
“He’s a bit disappointed,” my friend told me. His former workmate is currently in the process of downsizing retirement dreams – less golf, more canned food.
A more flexible approach to the pension drawdown might have prevented him from writing down 30 per cent of his private retirement savings immediately – and some schemes do offer flexibility.
But as Auckland academic, Susan St John, wrote in her 2006 paper ‘The Policy Implications of Decumulation in Retirement in New Zealand’:
“There are few, if any, suitable New Zealand annuity products to meet the risk of outliving additional capital. While private pensions can be helpful, fewer companies are offering these… and fewer again of these pensions provide protection from the erosion of inflation.”
KiwiSaver will be no help here – it has been designed as a lump sum scheme with no thought to managing post-retirement cashflow.
Tags: David Chaplin, kiwisaver Posted in Personal Finance | 1 Comment »
Monday, July 13th, 2009
The NZD/USD slipped further last week, mainly on the back of global risk aversion (the JPY was strong and share prices dropped) and other negative influences on the AUD (RBA say there is scope for further easing of monetary policy, commodity prices declined and there was the unusual cancellation of a Chinese coal shipment).
At 62.8c (Saturday morning), the NZD/USD is still within 1% of its average rate since entering the current trading range during the week ending 22 May. In other words, the NZD/USD is down but there is little evidence at present to suggest it is doing little more than trading in a broad sideways pattern.
That would not be unusual. In the last four years the NZD/USD market has existed in such states approximately half the time e.g. the NZD/USD ranged about 2-3c either side of a 62.4c average for 23 weeks between Mar-06 and Aug-06. At other times the period of range trading was longer. Seen from this perspective, the current ranging period of 7 weeks so far is brief.
Eventually, though, the NZD/USD (and other NZD rates) will trend again. As mentioned in previous weeks, there is a strong chance in the near-term that any break would be downwards. As time goes on, the risks for the NZD/USD swing more to the upside as the sheer volume of offshore-owned debt in the US weighs on the US dollar itself.
Tags: Anthony Byett, Foreign Exchange Posted in Foreign Exchange | No Comments »
|
|
FREE Email News
Today's Market Numbers
| NZX 50 Index |
3324.67 |
 |
9.50 |
| S&P/ASX 200 |
4290.70 |
 |
16.50 |
| Dow Jones Industrials |
12878.20 |
 |
33.10 |
Stock Quote
Most Commented On
|