South Canterbury Finance metathread

cyc · 26th June 2010, 18:51

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ectid=10654475

It grinds my gears to no end that when it comes to financial matters, NZ only has ONE journalist/opinion writer worth a damn. As usual, Brian Gaynor is bang on. As someone who's done work on securities stuff, it's unbelievable to me that so many thinks what Allan Hubbard has done is just A-OKAY.

JiggaRoll · 27th June 2010, 17:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyc

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ectid=10654475

It grinds my gears to no end that when it comes to financial matters, NZ only has ONE journalist/opinion writer worth a damn. As usual, Brian Gaynor is bang on. As someone who's done work on securities stuff, it's unbelievable to me that so many thinks what Allan Hubbard has done is just A-OKAY.

I don't get it either. He may be a nice guy etc but all would take is him to get into strife and not be able to pay it back then you would have the same people crying that no one was there protecting them.

Same kind of thing happened with one of our local finance companies, directors were giving each other and their family members dodgy loans. The newspaper reports on it and half the people investing with them say it's ok, they won't rip us off, they are locals from good families etc. 6 months later finance company goes into receivership. Cue confused and angry investors wondering how it could have happened.

cyc · 27th June 2010, 17:09

The message from the protestors seem to be that if you're a nice guy you should be exempt from the provisions of the Securities Act. And, on the face of things, this isn't just a case of Hubbard possibly not complying with the niceties of rules like issuing a fucking prospectus if you want to offer securities. There are also potential issues of "We claim to invest your money with/in A but in fact we invested in B". How can that possibly be allowed?

Ab · 29th August 2010, 21:51

This GMG.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/4072...ealth-wipe-out

CCS · 29th August 2010, 22:05

Which particular aspect of that grinds your gears? The fact that the govt is bailing it out? Don't worry Ab, it's not your tax money.

cyc · 29th August 2010, 22:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

This GMG.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/4072...ealth-wipe-out

Seeing the Hubbard Joke unravelling and the way some of his naive supporters continue to blindly defend him also GMG. From what we are able to discern from the media, the companies associated with Hubbard appears to be a group of collective clusterfucks that behave as if all rules of corporate governance and securities law are to be ignored. Yet, according to the average moron, nothing is wrong cos Uncle Alan will look after the good people of Timaru and make up any losses. Looks like Unkie Hubbard is about to be cleaned up himself.

Redneck · 29th August 2010, 23:28

Awwwwwww, would you just look at him? How can you be so mean to such a nice old man!?

Ab · 30th August 2010, 01:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCS

Which particular aspect of that grinds your gears? The fact that the govt is bailing it out? Don't worry Ab, it's not your tax money.

Yes it is.

I can't believe the NZ government is going down the slippery slope of bailing out shitty finance companies. Let them GO UNDER FFS.

CCS · 30th August 2010, 01:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

Yes it is.

Oh yeah? How much tax do you pay here in a year?

Ab · 30th August 2010, 01:17

Enough that I'd prefer it was going to training cops and building schools and not going to dumb shit investors who deserve to lose their money.

CCS · 30th August 2010, 01:28

Hundred dollars? Two hundred dollars? More?

Pimp-X · 30th August 2010, 09:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

Let them GO UNDER FFS.

Ab · 30th August 2010, 11:18

If for no other reason than this... can you imagine the shitfest that will erupt if the National government is seen to rescue a bunch of retarded old people just because they happen to be country farmers? after it didn't rescue a bunch of retarded old people who happened to be urban Hanover investors?

xor · 30th August 2010, 12:00

The world governments bail out crippled financial companies. Then the govt realises it needs to sell local assets to cover the cost, so they sell it back to the same people they bailed out on the cheap. Pretty sweet deal imo

Saladin · 30th August 2010, 13:18

I think the government should loan the finance companies some money at 0% interest, so that they can then loan it out at market rates - that always sounds like such a great idea!

Cynos · 30th August 2010, 13:24

God I wish we'd actually let capitalism take it's course.

cyc · 31st August 2010, 14:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

If for no other reason than this... can you imagine the shitfest that will erupt if the National government is seen to rescue a bunch of retarded old people just because they happen to be country farmers? after it didn't rescue a bunch of retarded old people who happened to be urban Hanover investors?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10670115

Apparently SCF going under is all the government's fault. No, Unkie Allan, it couldn't have been related to the SCF going into speculative lending in property. NEVER!

Ab · 31st August 2010, 14:32

Quote:

Hubbard said some people may consider his management style old fashioned

Yeah, asking for written records to be kept of hundred-million-dollar investments, that's totally unreasonable. Why, back in the day all you needed to do was make a tick on a slate with a piece of chalk! Mind like a steel trap! Kids these days with their new-fangled "laws" and "regulations". Get off my lawn.

cyc · 31st August 2010, 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

Yeah, asking for written records to be kept of hundred-million-dollar investments, that's totally unreasonable. Why, back in the day all you needed to do was make a tick on a slate with a piece of chalk!

And how dare you expect that written prospectuses contain, you know, the truth!

Juju · 31st August 2010, 14:52

But he lent to farmers and their families man. THEIR FAMILIES!

oh god think of the children.

cyc · 31st August 2010, 14:55

There seems to be some suggestions around the place (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10670087) that someone might have been playing Mr Generous with others' money.

leadinjector · 31st August 2010, 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyc

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10670115

Apparently SCF going under is all the government's fault. No, Unkie Allan, it couldn't have been related to the SCF going into speculative lending in property. NEVER!

lol at the anti fat cat bit at the end

HE IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE YOU FUCKING INBREDS

Cynos · 31st August 2010, 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyc

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10670115

Apparently SCF going under is all the government's fault. No, Unkie Allan, it couldn't have been related to the SCF going into speculative lending in property. NEVER!

Dear NZHerald. "straight-jacketed" is not a word. But holy shit at Bernard Hickey's claim that "rural debt is at 500% of rural output."

Cynos · 31st August 2010, 16:31

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/finance-co...ectid=10670138

Quote:

Prices for the company's listed bond maturing in 2012, after the extended guarantee, fell to a deep discount earlier this year, with the yield reaching 40 per cent in March.

That meant audacious punters could buy them cheap and get paid out in full if South Canterbury failed.

"There will be a lot of money made in the listed bonds with prices up to 20, 30 and 40 per cent, which was all paid today," chief executive Sandy Maier said in a conference call.

"A lot of bets in the casino paid off big time today."

Well holy market-distortion batman. Turns out that government guarantees distort the market.

Redneck · 31st August 2010, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynos

Dear NZHerald. "straight-jacketed" is not a word.

They're quoting someone else

Cynos · 31st August 2010, 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redneck

They're quoting someone else

That's why you stick (sic) in. To be a snarky grammar/spelling dick.

chiquelet · 31st August 2010, 21:40

I fortunately/unfortunately have money with SCF (not my decision). I'm just glad that I can *eventually* get my money and place it more prudently. The returns were amazing but I knew that the company wouldn't last until 2012 (which was when my term was up).

cyc · 31st August 2010, 23:35

Well, there's one bright side to the SCF affair. A few relatives (my family is full of wily old accountants) apparently bought some bonds of SCF when they were being flogged off at under-value due to panic. They might be pretty happy now.

fixed_truth · 1st September 2010, 10:21

The SCF affair is a joke. The owners get the profits while the tax-payer takes the losses? Fail.

Allan Hubbard owes New Zealand an apology

Quote:

By that point the Government had already effectively decided the company was too big to fail. That is the only sane reason it could have been allowed it to stay in the government guarantee scheme when it was extended.

So Hubbard's debenture holders were given the luxury of a state guarantee - despite the fact that some of the lending this company did was every bit as convoluted and risky as that of other failed finance companies.

Ab · 1st September 2010, 13:02

So far the most detailed analysis of the whole fucking trainwreck that I've seen is one posted today by Cathy "Cactus Kate" Odgers, a Kiwi tax lawyer based in Hong Kong.

http://asianinvasion2006.blogspot.co...ver-hotch.html

Basically it looks like what I feared.

Quote:

“Make no mistake, the decision to bailout SCF immediately with funds entering to the receivership, to place it in the Government Guarantee Scheme, then to honour the guarantee when it is questionable that the government even had to, is an entirely political decision of National Party rural stock.”

Deadmeat · 1st September 2010, 15:40

I still can't grapple the fact that investors are being paid interest.

fixed_truth · 1st September 2010, 16:57

Exactly it's a Deposit Guarantee Scheme ffs.

English and his dishonest mates knew very well back before the scheme was extended in April that SCF was fucked from it's crappy loans. Tax payers didn't have to get shafted by this rural welfare payout.

Ab · 1st September 2010, 17:01

Quote:

TIME TO ABANDON SHIP

The Government has spent $1.7 billion of taxpayers’ money to rescue a rabble of South Island National Party members, sorry, farmers, who put their money into a shonky Timaru finance company that paid them unbelievably high interest rates while charging hardly any interest to the shonky people and companies it lent the farmers’ money to.

Where are those who bewailed as “the train set” the rescuing of the country’s railway system after it was looted and destroyed by the National Party’s mates? Why, they are cheering the National Party Government for spending twice what the trains cost on rescuing a rabble of South Island National Party members, sorry, farmers, from their own greed and stupidity.

That South Canterbury Finance was able as recently as April to join the Government’s retail deposit guarantee scheme — a scheme established to protect the banking system during the global financial crisis — despite its shonky state being well known, then go on a profligate spree of borrow-and-spend, says everything one needs to know about there being privilege for the inside few and the harsh rule of law for everyone else.

When the National Party’s South Island rural rump can help themselves to $1.7 billion of public money like this — money they can then “invest” in another shonky finance company to “earn” high interest until it collapses and the taxpayer rides to the rescue again — it is truly time to get out while one still can, methinks.

http://poneke.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/pillage/

SID|DensitY · 1st September 2010, 17:04

I'm annoyed the Deposit Guarantee Scheme was extended to finance companies. It should of only been there for banks and credit unions.

getting their interesting paid too.. Fuck off, you invested and got a % based on risk, that risk came true, accept that you lost out.

cyc · 1st September 2010, 18:47

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10670285

I'd like to know why no one has mentioned the possibility of suing the then directors of SCF for negligent directorship yet. You can't tell me that these people have a rock solid claim of having complied with all the relevant provisions of the Companies Act.

MadMax · 1st September 2010, 19:29

realisation that not everyone gets paid out to hit the media in 5... 4...

zeekiorage · 1st September 2010, 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadmeat

I still can't grapple the fact that investors are being paid interest.

What the fucking fuck? And these investors are still complaining about how this whole issue was handled? The question of extending the deposit guarantee scheme to a dodgy company aside, I have to agree with Bill English - show some fucking gratitude.

Lightspeed · 1st September 2010, 21:10

So what is the reason why it's better to spend this $1.6b on propping up a finance company and not spending it on health and education?

What would the real world effects of this company failing be?

A Corpse · 1st September 2010, 22:17

National losing some right farmers' votes in the next election. Obviously.

Deadmeat · 1st September 2010, 22:53

More importantly than votes, National losing contributions to their election war chest. I mean if you want to look at it cynically, nat can expect some percentage of the money paid out from this back in contributions. Granted it may be small, but do you think anyone getting their money back is likely to run off and donate to Labour?

26th June 2010, 18:51	#1
cyc Objection!	South Canterbury Finance metathread http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ectid=10654475 It grinds my gears to no end that when it comes to financial matters, NZ only has ONE journalist/opinion writer worth a damn. As usual, Brian Gaynor is bang on. As someone who's done work on securities stuff, it's unbelievable to me that so many thinks what Allan Hubbard has done is just A-OKAY.

29th August 2010, 22:05	#5
CCS Stunt Pants	Which particular aspect of that grinds your gears? The fact that the govt is bailing it out? Don't worry Ab, it's not your tax money. __________________ I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?

30th August 2010, 01:28	#11
CCS Stunt Pants	Hundred dollars? Two hundred dollars? More? __________________ I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?

1st September 2010, 19:29	#36
MadMax Stuff	realisation that not everyone gets paid out to hit the media in 5... 4... __________________ My degree of sarcasm depends on your degree of stupidity.

1st September 2010, 22:17	#39
A Corpse talkative lurker	National losing some right farmers' votes in the next election. Obviously. __________________ Broke my addiction! Bye bye Eve, hello Minecraft. Wait... >_<

27th June 2010, 17:09	#3
cyc Objection!	The message from the protestors seem to be that if you're a nice guy you should be exempt from the provisions of the Securities Act. And, on the face of things, this isn't just a case of Hubbard possibly not complying with the niceties of rules like issuing a fucking prospectus if you want to offer securities. There are also potential issues of "We claim to invest your money with/in A but in fact we invested in B". How can that possibly be allowed?

29th August 2010, 21:51	#4
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	This GMG. http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/4072...ealth-wipe-out

29th August 2010, 23:28	#7
Redneck	Awwwwwww, would you just look at him? How can you be so mean to such a nice old man!?

30th August 2010, 01:17	#10
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	Enough that I'd prefer it was going to training cops and building schools and not going to dumb shit investors who deserve to lose their money.

30th August 2010, 11:18	#13
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	If for no other reason than this... can you imagine the shitfest that will erupt if the National government is seen to rescue a bunch of retarded old people just because they happen to be country farmers? after it didn't rescue a bunch of retarded old people who happened to be urban Hanover investors?

30th August 2010, 12:00	#14
xor	The world governments bail out crippled financial companies. Then the govt realises it needs to sell local assets to cover the cost, so they sell it back to the same people they bailed out on the cheap. Pretty sweet deal imo

30th August 2010, 13:18	#15
Saladin Nothing to See Here!	I think the government should loan the finance companies some money at 0% interest, so that they can then loan it out at market rates - that always sounds like such a great idea!

30th August 2010, 13:24	#16
Cynos	God I wish we'd actually let capitalism take it's course. __________________ So the perkbuster Hide abusing perks, crimbuster Garrett actually a crim - what's next? Roger Douglas is secretly poor? --Saladin

31st August 2010, 14:52	#20
Juju get to da choppa	But he lent to farmers and their families man. THEIR FAMILIES! oh god think of the children.

31st August 2010, 14:55	#21
cyc Objection!	There seems to be some suggestions around the place (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10670087) that someone might have been playing Mr Generous with others' money.

31st August 2010, 21:40	#27
chiquelet Mrs Colin Farrell	I fortunately/unfortunately have money with SCF (not my decision). I'm just glad that I can eventually get my money and place it more prudently. The returns were amazing but I knew that the company wouldn't last until 2012 (which was when my term was up).

31st August 2010, 23:35	#28
cyc Objection!	Well, there's one bright side to the SCF affair. A few relatives (my family is full of wily old accountants) apparently bought some bonds of SCF when they were being flogged off at under-value due to panic. They might be pretty happy now.

1st September 2010, 15:40	#31
Deadmeat	I still can't grapple the fact that investors are being paid interest.

1st September 2010, 16:57	#32
fixed_truth	Exactly it's a Deposit Guarantee Scheme ffs. English and his dishonest mates knew very well back before the scheme was extended in April that SCF was fucked from it's crappy loans. Tax payers didn't have to get shafted by this rural welfare payout. __________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

1st September 2010, 17:04	#34
SID\|DensitY	I'm annoyed the Deposit Guarantee Scheme was extended to finance companies. It should of only been there for banks and credit unions. getting their interesting paid too.. Fuck off, you invested and got a % based on risk, that risk came true, accept that you lost out.

1st September 2010, 18:47	#35
cyc Objection!	http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10670285 I'd like to know why no one has mentioned the possibility of suing the then directors of SCF for negligent directorship yet. You can't tell me that these people have a rock solid claim of having complied with all the relevant provisions of the Companies Act.

1st September 2010, 21:10	#38
Lightspeed	So what is the reason why it's better to spend this $1.6b on propping up a finance company and not spending it on health and education? What would the real world effects of this company failing be? __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

1st September 2010, 22:53	#40
Deadmeat	More importantly than votes, National losing contributions to their election war chest. I mean if you want to look at it cynically, nat can expect some percentage of the money paid out from this back in contributions. Granted it may be small, but do you think anyone getting their money back is likely to run off and donate to Labour?