MET - Metlifecare - one for the fundies?

[Beagle]

https://www.nzx.com/announcements/355536 - Having a real meeting after all, that's good.

[Balance]

https://www.nzx.com/announcements/355536 - Having a real meeting after all, that's good.

No catering, I see.

Don’t want too many shareholders lingering around after the meeting to ask awkward questions one on one?

[Beagle]

I might have mercy on them and send them a list of my questions a few days before or more likely just turn up and start the grilling and barking. Nephew owns a restaruant just around the corner in Kingsland so I won't be going hungry afterwards :D

Might be a few larger shareholders there doing serious grumbling too...could be a pretty good show as far as corporate meetings go.

Anyone on here going to come along and watch the Beagle bare his teeth and do some barking ?

Selfie video - I do not want to give up my $7 lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tuBqRHJ-mo

[Balance]

I might have mercy on them and send them a list of my questions a few days before or more likely just turn up and start the grilling and barking. Nephew owns a restaruant just around the corner in Kingsland so I won't be going hungry afterwards :D

Might be a few larger shareholders there doing serious grumbling too...could be a pretty good show as far as corporate meetings go.

Anyone on here going to come along and watch the Beagle bare his teeth and do some barking ?

Selfie video - I do not want to give up my $7 lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tuBqRHJ-mo

May see you there, Beagle if a deal is not done by then - to provide some balance. 😃

Sp steadily moving a bit higher and there's little selling around.

No reason for the hedge funds and institutions who have been tipped off about a $6.00 offer to sell? Better to agitate the directors to accept, right?

This could be the easiest $1.00 to be made perhaps - note the big 1m+ crossing at $5.03 yesterday? Someone knows something.

[Beagle]

I can't see a deal at $6 getting over the line mate. $6.35 is the mid point of that updated valuation (which it could be argued was done at the worst possible time). Emerging anecdotal evidence and reports suggest the real market has not been hit very hard at all. $6 wouldn't get my support but I would roll over at $6.35 just for the sake of being done with it and moving on.

At $6.00 I'd stick around forever and a day and bark up a storm at every annual meeting of MET just for the joy of making more noise than a lamb lost from its mother :)

[Leftfield]

NZSA's views on the resolutions and prospects of the legal action - see here. (https://www.nzshareholders.co.nz/pdf/proxies/MET_PVI_2020_SSM_.pdf)

[dibble]

Seems to me MET have approached EQT seeking a deal and have been lowballed with a heavily revised offer which MET have rejected.
Where it goes from here is anyone's guess !

Presume that is just your feeling (or was it written somewhere?), if correct wouldnt it suggest that MET blinked first (not an ideal starting position for negotiation)?

[Beagle]

NZSA's views on the resolutions and prospects of the legal action - see here. (https://www.nzshareholders.co.nz/pdf/proxies/MET_PVI_2020_SSM_.pdf)

Thanks for sharing.
Good of them for encouraging a physical meeting.

Regardless of the company’s view of the merits, the costs to pursue this matter through the courts will be large and the process will be drawn out. Even if the company is successful in court and the verdict is in its favour there is still another hurdle, actually enforcing any judgment made against parties in another jurisdiction.
We note there is no indication of the potential costs of the litigation. It would have been helpful if even a broad range of costs had been included to give some context to the risk/reward equation.
They overlook an appeals process that could run in the N.Z. judicial system for about two years...then enforcement action and possible appeals to that in foreign jurisdictions...how long and expensive could this be ?...that's the $64m question ?

This concerns me and something I will want answers too before voting. I can't help but wonder if they can't get a reasonable revised offer VERY close too or above the $6.35 mid point of the revised valuation whether they aren't simply better to get back to running their business. Even in normal times I think it would be fair to say the directors and management struggle to govern and manage this company in an optimal way relative to their peers, throw in the demands of extremely protracted legal proceedings and...then there's the costs if they lose.

If EQT or someone else wants to take them over, let them make a revised offer, if not lets get back to business. 75% is a high bar, it won't surprise me at all if they don't get there and to be honest I am not sure I want to help them get there or not. If they can't at least give some vague idea of costs or timeframe...one wonders what sort of goose chase is this ?

[Baa_Baa]

I think it speaks volumes about a company that the directors are so desperate to sell. Un-investable imho. Current punters can talk up the long term hold prospects if the buyout doesn't happen, but really ... why buy a company that clings to the hope of a buyout after the bid fails? I get it though that if there's a quick win, then also a quick trade, but when the deal falls through best to scalp any profits and move on or take a loss and move on. Something smells bad when these scenarios eventuate, failed buyouts and desperate directors to divest, directors basically admitting they've failed and the only good option for shareholders is to flick the company, to in this case, a vulture, who now doesn't want it.

[peat]

But, if shareholders dont vote to continue litigation the renegers will just walk away.
I'm now wondering if we shouldn't really have a vote on issues like this - we should have faith in the directors negotiating skill which will be severely undermined by a no vote. We should vote yes simply to support the directors optionality. The vote No, only limits it.

I saw Argosy ditched a property today (industrial but still) at a small gain so this would continue to support other property sectors at good levels. There is no rational basis for the property valuation component of the trigger.

[dubya]

But, if shareholders dont vote to continue litigation the renegers will just walk away.
I'm now wondering if we shouldn't really have a vote on issues like this - we should have faith in the directors negotiating skill which will be severely undermined by a no vote. We should vote yes simply to support the directors optionality. The vote No, only limits it. .

I think you're spot on with that post. They are the exact reasons why I've already voted 'Yes'

[winner69]

If the vote is YES or NO Metlife can walk away from / terminate the SIA

It’s a sort of ego trip for them . ..like getting us to give them a big hug and say yes guys we trust you to do what you think is best for us.

Heads you win, tail you win ..is that still the case?

[peat]

If the vote is YES or NO Metlife can walk away from / terminate the SIA

It’s a sort of ego trip for them . ..like getting us to give them a big hug and say yes guys we trust you to do what you think is best for us.


But thats what shareholders in listed companies do?




Heads you win, tail you win ..is that still the case?

No they can still screw it up and I guess on past performance we would consider them a bit ineffectual but all they have to do is huff and puff and put on a bit of a show with a highly qualified silk behind them so its not rocket surgery how to extract a deal.

[winner69]

Wasn’t that long ago Kim said MET could be worth more than 8 bucks (as per the range of valuations they did Themselves)

Sometimes believing your own bull **** clouds one judgement when it comes to reality ...hope Kim and his Board aren’t that delusional.....and see if they got $6 they have done well.

[winner69]

The return on whatever irs settled for is diminishing by the day

One could lucky and get 20% today ....but might only be 10% next week

One shouldn’t dilly dally around and miss out

[bottomfeeder]

I say get the damages, keep the company. It will be worth a lot more in 5 years. What am I going to do with the money anyhow. Everything worthwhile is top dollar.

[Beagle]

Wasn’t that long ago Kim said MET could be worth more than 8 bucks (as per the range of valuations they did Themselves)

Sometimes believing your own bull **** clouds one judgement when it comes to reality ...hope Kim and his Board aren’t that delusional.....and see if they got $6 they have done well.

You should fly up and join in the barking at the meeting.

[bottomfeeder]

Don't understand it, interest rates lowest in 200 years, MET should be $10. I say shareholders dodged a bullet at $7. Get the damages, keep the company.

[winner69]

You should fly up and join in the barking at the meeting.

Too much virus going around in Auckland ....wouldnt feel safe

And AIR would charge me $249 to get up there and if we went for lunch etc $309 to get back home. Rip off eh

And then would pay for Flexifare cos Meeting likely to be called off and even then have ticket to AKL I’d never use

[Beat the Bank]

Well said. Get the damages, keep the company. Retirement villages are almost a strategic asset in providing for our older community. Keep it Kiwi listed. Why sell out to overseas buyers at a discount when we have a limited range of options to reinvest the proceeds into. Infratil? They have cash.
BUT a reinvigorated management team is clearly needed to get an appropriate shareholder return.
Disc Holder at slight profit

[BlackPeter]

Too much virus going around in Auckland ....wouldnt feel safe

And AIR would charge me $249 to get up there and if we went for lunch etc $309 to get back home. Rip off eh

And then would pay for Flexifare cos Meeting likely to be called off and even then have ticket to AKL I’d never use

Who would fly AIR anyway? Fly Jetstar and you get the same service for cheaper seats ...

Well, just checked: not that much cheaper - $125 to AKL and $219 back, but hey - at least you can support an Ossie Airline :);

[winner69]

Who would fly AIR anyway? Fly Jetstar and you get the same service for cheaper seats ...

No convenient flights that day

[Beagle]

I say get the damages, keep the company. It will be worth a lot more in 5 years. What am I going to do with the money anyhow. Everything worthwhile is top dollar.


Don't understand it, interest rates lowest in 200 years, MET should be $10. I say shareholders dodged a bullet at $7. Get the damages, keep the company.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12344851 House prices defy predictions and are actually up ! Anything less than $7 is totally unacceptable and if you have to sue them to get $7, why bother so I tend to agree. No point going on a who knows how many ? tens of millions multi year legal goose chase with an extremely uncertain outcome. Just get back to business and lets keep this Kiwi owned.
I am going to vote against lining lawyers pockets. Keeping it Kiwi :t_up:

I don't need to make a fast buck right now on MET as where the heck would I reinvest the money ? (Already have heaps of OCA).

You should have looked at the JetStar website Winner, the ones who care about their customers with free masks and wipes. Free heads up, AIR don't care, (that even rhymes so its easy to remember) :)

[JohnnyTheHorse]

Liquidity drying up... funds in confidential discussions preventing them dealing on market?

[Balance]

Liquidity drying up... funds in confidential discussions preventing them dealing on market?

They certainly would not be allowed to act on insider information of a credible source has informed them of an offer.

The fact that AFR street talk (used since time immemorial to leak confidential information to get a desired outcome, and hence is extremely credible to the market) wrote that EQT made a revised offer rejected by MET directors means that there are parties who are in the know.

[bottomfeeder]

Wonder what the continuous disclosure rules consider time from event to disclosure as being appropriate. Also surely there must be exemptions for matters of commercial sensitivity.

[Balance]

Wonder what the continuous disclosure rules consider time from event to disclosure as being appropriate. Also surely there must be exemptions for matters of commercial sensitivity.

This continuous disclosure consideration can be a real bugger when parties are in the middle of delicate negotiations and information gets leaked to the media.

[baaantom]

https://www.afr.com/street-talk/engage-or-face-the-chop-hedge-funds-to-metlifecare-chairman-20200702-p5589a

Another leak to AFR. Hedge fund is giving Kim Ellis until end of play Friday to get back into discussions with EQT. Come on, surely a market announcement is overdue now.

[Balance]

https://www.afr.com/street-talk/engage-or-face-the-chop-hedge-funds-to-metlifecare-chairman-20200702-p5589a

Another leak to AFR. Hedge fund is giving Kim Ellis until end of play Friday to get back into discussions with EQT. Come on, surely a market announcement is overdue now.

Looks like EQT wants to head off the meeting next week to endorse directors’ taking legal action against them for breaching the takeover agreement.

Now why is that?

Well, one thing is clear from the article - EQT initiated the current renegotiations.

My take is that EQT is waking up to the reality that their case is weak (refer previous postings by various posters regarding their position) and this is a face saving (& potentially money saving) move to renegotiate.

$6.35?

I think I will now hold out for the $7.00.

[trader_jackson]

https://www.afr.com/street-talk/engage-or-face-the-chop-hedge-funds-to-metlifecare-chairman-20200702-p5589a

Another leak to AFR. Hedge fund is giving Kim Ellis until end of play Friday to get back into discussions with EQT. Come on, surely a market announcement is overdue now.

Probably seal it off at $5.50... this is high enough for a dog stock, if holders are really lucky, EQT might even go as high as $6.
EQT seem quite happy to walk away unless a price is substantial reduced is my take... while insto's don't want the chairman getting to upset about not getting to the $7 mark, basically asking him to settle for less, but to settle for something higher than it is right now (which is already elevated due to take over chat like this)

[Beagle]

https://www.nbr.co.nz/story/hong-kong-hedge-fund-issues-metlifecare-ultimatum

I am not going to support any deal under $6.35. I am also not going to support a multi year legal action which may or may not be enforceable in an overseas legal jurisdiction with completly unknown costs and outcome.
I would support and vote for the removal of Ellis.


"A shareholder group led by a Hong Kong hedge fund has submitted a draft resolution calling for the removal of Metlifecare chair Kim Ellis unless the company resumes sales talks with private equity firm EQT, NBR understands

[winner69]

https://www.nbr.co.nz/story/hong-kong-hedge-fund-issues-metlifecare-ultimatum

I am not going to support any deal under $6.35. I am also not going to support a multi year legal action which may or may not be enforceable in an overseas legal jurisdiction with completly unknown costs and outcome.
I would support and vote for the removal of Ellis.

Thought you would want Kim on your side .....after all he thinks MET is worth north of 8 bucks and not going tp ‘give’ the company away.

[Beagle]

Underwhelmed probably best describes how I feel about how the directors have "managed" this fiasco from its inception to now.

[macduffy]

https://www.nbr.co.nz/story/hong-kong-hedge-fund-issues-metlifecare-ultimatum

I am not going to support any deal under $6.35. I am also not going to support a multi year legal action which may or may not be enforceable in an overseas legal jurisdiction with completly unknown costs and outcome.
I would support and vote for the removal of Ellis.

That's pretty much my position, too.

[winner69]

Almost unanimous (on ST) Kim needs to resign over the weekend.

Surprised it’s taken him so long to work out he’s a distraction (as Clark said yesterday)

Things are so bad even $6 would be a tremendous price to get .....hope I’m not left holding this dog if no deal....not much long term upside from here.

[peat]

Things are so bad even $6 would be a tremendous price to get .....hope I’m not left holding this dog...

such a dog

11746

[Beagle]

Just noticed on the chart its broken up through the 100 day MA. Big volume today. New deal to be brokered over the weekend ?

[Balance]

Just noticed on the chart its broken up through the 100 day MA. Big volume today. New deal to be brokered over the weekend ?

MET directors really need to announce something.

After market close today?

[winner69]

such a dog

11746

Cool chart ...love it ..might look better next week ....hope so

Take out takeover stuff and it would look a bit sick .....and if no takeover continue to do so.

[winner69]

MET directors really need to announce something.

After market close today?

An up day — a 2 mill plus trade as well as a few other sizeable trades but heaps of small trades keep the upward trend going.

Yep Bal, might get that announcement late this afternoon .....but I think the stubborn one will mull on it over the weekend,

[Beagle]

MET directors really need to announce something.

After market close today?

The silence is deafening. All the silence says is "trust us we know what we are doing".
If this deal goes sour, I think the landscape of these deals will change in the future. Each party accepting that they will wear their own costs of circa $15m under these scheme's of arrangement with a very uncertain outcome is very different to the old takeover laws where the acquirer met all potential takeover costs.
I for one will never look at a scheme of arrangement the same again, (even though I did really well from the very generous arbitrage funds paying circa $6.90 in round one when the deal was still uncertain).

[winner69]

Nz may have dodged a bullet first time around with the virus sort of contained.

Not over yet ....probably come back and if it does it’ll prob be worse because kiwis won’t totally lock down again.

So as far as MET goes the future still has a lot of risk attached to it .....they should should take the $6 and pass all that risk onto EQT

To me $6 in the hand is better than $4 if no deal or $3 if the virus takes hold again in next year or so.

[Beagle]

Nz May have dodged a bullet first time around with the virus sort of contained.

Not over yet ....probably come back and if it does it’ll prob be worse because kiwis won’t totally lock down again.

So as far as MET goes the future still has a lot of risk attached to it .....they should should take the $6 and pass all that risk onto EQT

To me $6 in the hand is better than $4 if no deal or $3 if the virus takes hold again in next year or so.

$6.35 Is the price Winner. Got to get that mid point in the revised value so we can feel we weren't shafted.

[winner69]

$6.35 Is the price Winner. Got to get that mid point in the revised value so we can feel we weren't shafted.

That would be good

I’m glad you seemed to have around to accepting that getting something like this is far better outcome Than thinking it’s a great long term investment and would get to $8 plus if allowed to do its own thing (ie not taken over)

[Balance]

An up day — a 2 mill plus trade as well as a few other sizeable trades but heaps of small trades keep the upward trend going.

Yep Bal, might get that announcement late this afternoon .....but I think the stubborn one will mull on it over the weekend,

In which case, better get set or get out before market opens on a Monday when an announcement - could be ‘I spray & walk away!’ or ‘we are negotiating’!

[winner69]

In which case, better get set or get out before market opens on a Monday when an announcement - could be ‘I spray & walk away!’ or ‘we are negotiating’!

The guy in the spray and walk away ad looks like a Hong Kong hedge fund guy too:eek2:

Could the answer ....give the Board a spray of that stuff

[Beagle]

The guy in the spray and walk away ad looks like a Hong Kong hedge fund guy too:eek2:

Could the answer ....give the Board a spray of that stuff

You naughty bear, the board are surely slightly more valuable than the green sludge that grows on ones driveway :lol:

[winner69]

You naughty bear, the board are surely slightly more valuable than the green sludge that grows on ones driveway :lol:

Weren’t you one of many who got pissed off with Ellis and his Board for not doing a share buyback ......until shareholders nagged him into it ....and then he timed it impeccably ;):eek2:

[Beagle]

Weren’t you one of many who got pissed off with Ellis and his Board for not doing a share buyback ......until shareholders nagged him into it ....and then he timed it impeccably ;):eek2:

Timing wasn't quite impeccable, otherwise we'd be talking round 3 here and it was too small and they only reluctantly agreed to it at a token amount and only under duress. Can't say they were proactive. Where's my spray and walk away :D

[winner69]

Timing wasn't quite impeccable, otherwise we'd be talking round 3 here and it was too small and they only reluctantly agreed to it at a token amount and only under duress. Can't say they were proactive. Where's my spray and walk away :D

Yep, that spray and walk away good for stubborn stuff

[winner69]

Our heroes below

Unlike other sector boards that seem to have some health related experience on it the MET board has plenty of power / electricity / gambling experience behind them. We’ll give the ex Fletcher’s guy background a bit of a tick but then it was about building roads and bridges rather than buildings I think.






not very diverse is it

[Panda-NZ-]

All I want for Christmas is a successful court case and/or generous revised offer.

Reworking the business sounds like too much like hard work when there is an easier route for a simple cash offer soonish.

[winner69]

Do Directors get paid penal rates for weekend meetings?

[Panda-NZ-]

Anouncement today? I want $6.35 today, not 4 years from now. I hope an offer is decided on.

[trader_jackson]

Probably seal it off at $5.50... this is high enough for a dog stock, if holders are really lucky, EQT might even go as high as $6.
EQT seem quite happy to walk away unless a price is substantial reduced is my take... while insto's don't want the chairman getting to upset about not getting to the $7 mark, basically asking him to settle for less, but to settle for something higher than it is right now (which is already elevated due to take over chat like this)

https://www.nzx.com/announcements/355786

$6.00 offer as expected, a real get out of jail card for holders... they should be over the moon to get offered such a high amount.

Metlife will probably try ask for a bit more, bit rich to do so, but might as well try (hopefully won't piss off EQT too much more to simply walk away entirely)

[winner69]

Hey Beagle ...they are going to ‘canvas’ you and me to see whether $6.00 is enough.

Keep near the phone mate

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/355786/325857.pdf

[Snow Leopard]

Settle for $6.50

[winner69]

I take it that this means NZ Superfund happy to get about $6.00 to $6.20 ...soon

Metlifecare has been advised that the Guardians of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund (NZ Super) is broadly supportive of Metlifecare urgently progressing APVG's NBIO and deferring the special meeting of shareholders in order to do so.

[Balance]

In which case, better get set or get out before market opens on a Monday when an announcement - could be ‘I spray & walk away!’ or ‘we are negotiating’!

So, it is 'We are negotiating'.

Remember folks, first bid is never the last bid.

This has been toooooo easy! 💃🏻🕺

[bottomfeeder]

$6 is too light, especially with no dividend. But this shows they are running scared. I see lots of damages on the horizon, if its not upped to at least $6.50.
Now what am I going to do with the money.

[Beagle]

Hey Beagle ...they are going to ‘canvas’ you and me to see whether $6.00 is enough.

Keep near the phone mate

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/355786/325857.pdf

$6.35 is okay with me, (mid point of independent valuation range) :)

[Beagle]

Well speculated...how you got heaps at $3.77 or thereabouts.

I think the deal will be done close to the mid point of the valuation range $6.35 and with no MAC clause on the revised offer this is almost a done deal.

Moving quickly along, (the early bird gets the worm), where are the proceeds going to be reinvested ? I think a fair chunk of them will find their way into the other seriously underpriced retirement company OCA. Maybe EQT will look to take OCA over in due course, merge them and extract significant synergies and other benefits by revising MET's business model ?

[winner69]

Well speculated...how you got heaps at $3.77 or thereabouts.

I think the deal will be done close to the mid point of the valuation range $6.35 and with no MAC clause on the revised offer this is almost a done deal.

Moving quickly along, (the early bird gets the worm), where are the proceeds going to be reinvested ? I think a fair chunk of them will find their way into the other seriously underpriced retirement company OCA. Maybe EQT will look to take OCA over in due course, merge them and extract significant synergies and other benefits by revising MET's business model ?

What - take MET and then OCA - EQT collecting up all the flea ridden dogs in the sector - just too kind

[macduffy]

I take it that this means NZ Superfund happy to get about $6.00 to $6.20 ...soon

Metlifecare has been advised that the Guardians of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund (NZ Super) is broadly supportive of Metlifecare urgently progressing APVG's NBIO and deferring the special meeting of shareholders in order to do so.

With NZ Super keen to settle that should be enough for the MET directors to fold - with a few cents above $6, to show that they negotiated!

[dabsman]

Well speculated...how you got heaps at $3.77 or thereabouts.

I think the deal will be done close to the mid point of the valuation range $6.35 and with no MAC clause on the revised offer this is almost a done deal.

Moving quickly along, (the early bird gets the worm), where are the proceeds going to be reinvested ? I think a fair chunk of them will find their way into the other seriously underpriced retirement company OCA. Maybe EQT will look to take OCA over in due course, merge them and extract significant synergies and other benefits by revising MET's business model ?

Bought in the 4s and sold at nearly 7. Bought back in the 3s and selling in the 6s. I wish such incredible badly managed businesses popped up regularly 😉

I think a $6.50 price is a bargain for them including probably 2 dividend payments not paid - unless a special dividend would be paid as part of this sale?

I think Beagle hit the nail on the head - where on earth do you put the money? I am already hugely overweight in OCA

[Leftfield]

Congrats to Beagle and all the holders who had faith in such an outcome! Interesting times ahead. Well done.

[WAIKEN]

The other retirement village companies will definitely be beneficiaries, once the 1.27 billion or more flows back into the market. I see OCA, with its healthy div yield and discount to NTA as being the prime beneficiary. ARV, which had a pretty good recent result, should lift. The ETFs and super funds will all have allocations to the retirement sector, which they will need to maintain, so the whole sector will lift.

[dzhang1510]

Congrats to Beagle and all the holders who had faith in such an outcome! Interesting times ahead. Well done.

Hahahaa so many people selling at 5.75 - must be all the sharesies investors who didn't read the announcement? If i had free cash easy pick up at 5.75 to make a quick little profit.

p.s holder since 3.50!

[peat]

Im getting my threefor!
Up down Up - played it three ways.

You guys who talked about it happening over the weekend. Psychic or what!

[Beagle]

Bought in the 4s and sold at nearly 7. Bought back in the 3s and selling in the 6s. I wish such incredible badly managed businesses popped up regularly ��

I think a $6.50 price is a bargain for them including probably 2 dividend payments not paid - unless a special dividend would be paid as part of this sale?

I think Beagle hit the nail on the head - where on earth do you put the money? I am already hugely overweight in OCA

Its been a fun ride that's for sure :) You could be right about $6.50 being a bargain. Fact is the revised independent valuation was done very early in June and since then we've seen quite a lot of evidence of the real estate market's strength confounding a lot of the experts e.g. Barfoots June sales up $6,000 on average on pre Covid level's, if I remember correctly.

Good that MET and EQT are talking. Like you I have a very fulsome portfolio allocation to OCA and not really sure what to do with the proceeds.

[JeremyALD]

Hahahaa so many people selling at 5.75 - must be all the sharesies investors who didn't read the announcement? If i had free cash easy pick up at 5.75 to make a quick little profit.

p.s holder since 3.50!

$6 is a pretty poor offer in my books. Will be interesting to see what the directors are willing to accept.

[peat]

If i had free cash easy pick up at 5.75 to make a quick little profit.


This is the way lots of people got burned before. Picking up dimes in front of steamrollers is my description. Reward to risk ratio is poor.

[Joshuatree]

Sun has just come out here.No community covid atp.About to go down to my fave cafe for a cup of Joe. We so lucky here ehhh. "Aotearoa, rugged individual, glistens like a pearl, at the bottom of the world"Tim Finn

[Beagle]

$6 is a pretty poor offer in my books. Will be interesting to see what the directors are willing to accept.

Agreed. Interestingly the Super fund has indicated it is keen for MET directors to progress with negotiations which of course is quite different from pledging support at $6.
Maybe the very first offer of $6.50 is where this gets done ?

[winner69]

Did an exercise for Couts late last year ..the old MET / RYM relativity trick. ...conclusion was MET hugely undervalued on the basis.

Bought and lo and behold a week or so later a takeover offer ....sold out near the takeover offer

World panics and Bear got his calculator out said screaming buy in the 320s (did u like the photo then)

Takeover still likely in one or another so held .....might need to see soon.

You never know might get a third go at this.

Good ol corporate action is good for the bank balance ....often better than all this fundamental stuff. In that respect MET was never worth $7 or more as many said .....unless greater fools came along.

Hope I do get that third go ...that be fun.

[winner69]

OIO does not reject much these days so getting their approval shouldn’t be a hurdle.

[stoploss]

Sun has just come out here.No community covid atp.About to go down to my fave cafe for a cup of Joe. We so lucky here ehhh. "Aotearoa, rugged individual, glistens like a pearl, at the bottom of the world"Tim Finn
True, but it's been nearly 3 years in a leaky boat :)

[winner69]

Agreed. Interestingly the Super fund has indicated it is keen for MET directors to progress with negotiations which of course is quite different from pledging support at $6.
Maybe the very first offer of $6.50 is where this gets done ?

Pretty good offer I reckon ...not as good as $7 but world has changed.

NZ avoided the worst of virus so far but we can’t keep it out for ever .....and lockdowns won’t work to contain it .......Herald today had a story along the lines of ‘ House prices: If there's another outbreak, the impact will be 'almost cataclysmic'’

[Beagle]

Pretty good offer I reckon ...not as good as $7 but world has changed.

NZ avoided the worst of virus so far but we can’t keep it out for ever .....and lockdowns won’t work to contain it .......Herald today had a story along the lines of ‘ House prices: If there's another outbreak, the impact will be 'almost cataclysmic'’

With the wider economy as well which is why we need hard lockdowns not soft ones. Yes there's risks and rewards for sure mate. Barfoot saying June sale prices are up on pre Covid level's so NTA is probably slightly more than $7 and its been a long time between drinks for shareholders with a dividend too. Probably settle at that mid point of independent valuation range of $6.35. The good thing with mid points of valuation ranges is everyone gets to save face and feel they got a fair and square deal.
Fact is there's a lot of people trying to save face with this deal, especially EQT, the Directors and not the least by any means the arbitrage fund managers who paid an average of $6.88 !

[winner69]

With the wider economy as well which is why we need hard lockdowns not soft ones. Yes there's risks and rewards for sure mate. Barfoot saying June sale prices are up on pre Covid level's so NTA is probably slightly more than $7 and its been a long time between drinks for shareholders with a dividend too. Probably settle at that mid point of independent valuation range of $6.35. The good thing with mid points of valuation ranges is everyone gets to save face and feel they got a fair and square deal.
Fact is there's a lot of people trying to save face with this deal, especially EQT, the Directors and not the least by any means the arbitrage fund managers who paid an average of $6.88 !

That $7 NTA is only a number on a piece of paper .....strange it came out as such a nice round number in the half year report eh ....wonder why ....and what was the the real number we didn’t get to see?

[King1212]

well, at least we all know $6 is the base offer. it might go another 50c.....as the last offer was $7....now $6
They might come to a deal $6.50!!!

[dreamcatcher]

Lets see where these Retirement stock go ....posted on 4/6

Updated -----------4/6----------..6/7

Arvida ..............$1.37..........$1.48
Summerset.......$6.34..........$6.73
Ryman..............$13.35........$13.04
Oceania............$0.94..........$0.95
Metlifecare........$4.28..........$5.76

[Balance]

Lets see where these Retirement stock go ....posted on 4/6

Updated -----------4/6----------..6/7

Arvida ..............$1.37..........$1.48
Summerset.......$6.34..........$6.73
Ryman..............$13.35........$13.04
Oceania............$0.94..........$0.95
Metlifecare........$4.28..........$5.76

MetLife - the stock which keeps giving - thrice in a year! 🕺💃🏻

[King1212]

We have always indicated that the board of Metlifecare is open to engaging on any reasonable alternative proposal," said Ellis. "We welcome receipt of APVG's NBIO and intend to canvas shareholders on whether they prefer this alternative.


"While there remain a number of issues to resolve and there is no guarantee we will be able to reach an agreement, we look forward to productive discussions with APVG. Shareholders do not need to take any action at this time. A further update will be provided when the Metlifecare Board has further assessed the NBIO and canvassed the views of shareholders.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12345783

[Beagle]

Hey Beagle ...they are going to ‘canvas’ you and me to see whether $6.00 is enough.

Keep near the phone mate

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/355786/325857.pdf

You're mate Kim given you a call yet mate ? I told him I wanted at least $6.35 for mine ;)

Truth is I doubt anyone with less than a million shares will get a call. They're just interested in what the institutions think and we're just along for the ride...but it has been a very fun ride :D

[IAK]

You're mate Kim given you a call yet mate ? I told him I wanted at least $6.35 for mine ;)

Truth is I doubt anyone with less than a million shares will get a call. They're just interested in what the institutions think and we're just along for the ride...but it has been a very fun ride :D

Yes it has been. Thanks Beagle.

[King1212]

I reckon...$6.50.....in the middle n deal

[Balance]

They're not going to renegotiate.

$6 is fair. Better to just take the money before a 2nd covid wave hits and the stock goes back down again.

First bid is never the last bid.

[winner69]

They're not going to renegotiate.

$6 is fair. Better to just take the money before a 2nd covid wave hits and the stock goes back down again.

That's how I see it too mate.

Nz dodged bullet first time around ...covid reality will hurt next time.

Hope they sort this quickly

[Balance]

Technically this is the 2nd bid.

In this environment, count yourself lucky there is a bid.

I don’t as EQT would not be making this bid if they think that their case is solid in a court case.

They have played the hedge funds who are stuck in there and desperate to get out.

[Beagle]

They're not going to renegotiate.

$6 is fair. Better to just take the money before a 2nd covid wave hits and the stock goes back down again.

How is $6 fair? Mid point of revised early June independent valuation was $6.35 and there is ample evidence since then that real estate prices have been far more robust than the so called expert commentators thought they would be. I'm disinclined to support a $6 bid. $6.35 - $6.50 is fair in my opinion.

[Balance]

That's how I see it too mate.

Nz dodged bullet first time around ...covid reality will hurt next time.

Hope they sort this quickly

Time to sell in the market for you, W69?

[Beagle]

First bid is never the last bid.

You have the track record mate. You said this first time around with their original $6.50 bid and you were dead right when they raised it to $7.
You also said this would end up in a negotiated settlement and were dead right and I agreed all along.
Kudos to you mate.
History is highly likely to repeat and we will probably come full circle and end up at, or very close too, the very first bid of $6.50. Won't that be ironic !

[Balance]

You have the track record mate. You said this first time around with their original $6.50 bid and you were dead right when they raised it to $7.
You also said this would end up in a negotiated settlement and were dead right and I agreed all along.
Kudos to you mate.
History is highly likely to repeat and we will probably come full circle and end up at, or very close too, the very first bid of $6.50. Won't that be ironic !

Thanks, Beagle!

I have been receiving thank you notes this morning - happy people out there.

It’s a nice feeling. 😊

[Beagle]

Dear Directors,
I note EQT's revised NBIO of $6.00 and I feel this is too low and note that the mid point of the most recent independent valuation was $6.35.
Since that revised valuation was undertaken very early in June there has been market evidence for June 2020 real estate sales from Barfoot and Thompson that the medium price has been much stronger than expected. Other anecdotal media reports have also suggested this.
In the circumstances I feel the $6.00 NBIO is too low and ask that you do your very best to at least achieve a fair agreed price of not less than $6.35.
The leading share market forum wherein smaller investors such as myself express their opinion is www.sharetrader.co.nz
You can get a good gauge on small shareholder opinion by reading recent posts in the Metlifecare thread here https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?6914-MET-Metlifecare-one-for-the-fundies
My more fulsome opinions are expressed under my user handle "Beagle"
I welcome the opportunity to discuss this further with you on behalf of other small shareholders if you have the time.
I believe there is very little appetite for a potentially very protracted and very expensive legal battle.
Best wishes for a successful resolution of this matter.


Copy of email sent to Metlifecare this afternoon. I would encourage you folks to express your opinion direct to them at the email address they provided for questions to this matter for the forthcoming special meeting, (now on hold). info@metlifecare.co.nz
Don't wait for them to ring you to gauge your opinion, (very unlikely to happen unless you have at least a million shares).

[King1212]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12345795

I think $6 is a done deal...perhaps with a bit of whipped cream 20 to 30c as a topping.

From the sound of it....this deal will go through as NZ fund is the kingmaker

[Balance]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12345795

I think $6 is a done deal...perhaps with a bit of whipped cream 20 to 30c as a topping.

From the sound of it....this deal will go through as NZ fund is the kingmaker

Looks like it.

[King1212]

Unless there is another bid coming in....from other company

[Beagle]

Asked about the fairness of the new $6/share price offer, Ellis said: "It's 15 per cent lower. I would say assets have come back at least 15 per cent since lockdown so it's probably not miles off the button." This view is not supported at all by the real estate evidence to date. Such a defeatist opinion from a very tired old director well and truly past his prime. No wonder the arbitrage investors want to get rid of him. That's truly pathetic coming out in public and waving the white flag like that. Show some fight and try and get at least the mid point of the valuation range, ($6.35) for goodness sake !

[King1212]

Well..he would be very relieved with all the pressure off from his shoulder....

Still 25c off the offer price

[JeremyALD]

This view is not supported at all by the real estate evidence to date. Such a defeatist opinion from a very tired old director well and truly past his prime. No wonder the arbitrage investors want to get rid of him. That's truly pathetic coming out in public and waving the white flag like that. Show some fight and try and get at least the mid point of the valuation range, ($6.35) for goodness sake !

Wasn't he just saying a week ago that the company was still worth $7 and that he disagrees much has changed / impacted the company since lockdown??

[Beagle]

This view is not supported at all by the real estate evidence to date. Such a defeatist opinion from a very tired old director well and truly past his prime. No wonder the arbitrage investors want to get rid of him. That's truly pathetic coming out in public and waving the white flag like that. Show some fight and try and get at least the mid point of the valuation range, ($6.35) for goodness sake !

P.S. Here is the Barfoot and Thompson hard data which makes Ellis's statement that prices have come back 15% look absolutely ridiculous ! https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12344851

[Beagle]

Wasn't he just saying a week ago that the company was still worth $7 and that he disagrees much has changed / impacted the company since lockdown??
Yes he was. I think he's caving in under the pressure. Shareholders rightfully expect better. Real estate sales evidence to date in no way supports the substaintial reduction is prices he is suggesting. Its shameful that he is showing so little spine in this matter. Hopefully the arbitrage funds show a lot more fight than he has because clearly he is a man running on an empty gas tank. If he can't get EQT above $6 the next best thing is for MET to be allowed to pay out 6 months worth of earnings, (about 20 cents per share as a special dividend) Its been a very long time between drinks for those banking dividend cheques with this one.

[Beagle]

Well..he would be very relieved with all the pressure off from his shoulder....

Still 25c off the offer price

I think the arbitrage funds might be a little more cautious this time lol

[King1212]

Once bitten twice shy....

$6 plus dividend in September.....

[JohnnyTheHorse]

If there's an announcement today about shareholder support then $6 it is, if no announcement then negotiations for a bit more are happening?

[King1212]

Probably not today...unless the kingmaker has been talking to them in the last couple weeks

[Balance]

https://www.landlords.co.nz/article/976517137/advisers-buoyed-by-strong-property-market

Strong property market post COVID lockdown.

No doubt this contributed to EQT’s change of heart and revised strategy of offering an unconditional $6 offer.

I would say the data strengthens Metlife’s negotiating position hugely.

Another 25c to 50c on the cards.

[Beagle]

Superfund is not going to have the final say in this. Needs 75% support and there's a bunch of arbitrage funds holding plenty that have a much higher average cost than $6.
How much pain if any they are prepared to accept and how much higher EQT are prepared to go will determine the outcome of this.
It took quite a long time for EQT to come up from $6.50 to $7 originally so I expect negotiations to take a while...and then it has to be framed up into an amended scheme implementation agreement.

I agree Balance. Excellent chance that $6 will be raised to around the mid point of the most current independent valuation. My guess remains $6.35 or very close to that.

[Balance]

Comment in the article :

‘So let's get this right. APVG wanted out claiming material change, it also argued a loss of good standing because metlifecare took the government wage subsidy then it's realised oh bugger actually all the aged care facilities in NZ are doing ok and we have eliminated the risk of covid.

They have no basis at all to pull out of the existing SIA but have cheekily thought let's try and get a discount instead of paying for a lengthy unwinnable and expensive court fight.

Mmm sounds like metlifecare are being played. Counter offer at 6.5 would likely split costs of the court battle and still give APVG a good buy.’

[Beagle]

$1 a share less is $213m less so they are still saying that the assets of MET have gone down by more than $200m. What limited real estate data there is since we emerged from lockdown does not support this contention relative to real estate prices as at 31 December 2019. (Recall medium prices in N.Z. went up 4.9% in the first quarter in N.Z.)

The Chairman's statement that prices have fallen about 15% is probably the most misguided and wimpiest thing I have ever heard a Chairman say.
Has he simply not had time to read anything at all in the press about real estate prices or is this him simply caving in under pressure and waving the white flag or both ?
No wonder the arbitrage funds want him gone, he is completely tone deaf in trying to read the market. I'm extremely disappointed with that (assuming his comments were reported correctly and I hope they weren't).

Really, anything less than $6.35 and MET shareholders have been totally shafted here.

[Balance]

Superfund is not going to have the final say in this. Needs 75% support and there's a bunch of arbitrage funds holding plenty that have a much higher average cost than $6.
How much pain if any they are prepared to accept and how much higher EQT are prepared to go will determine the outcome of this.
It took quite a long time for EQT to come up from $6.50 to $7 originally so I expect negotiations to take a while...and then it has to be framed up into an amended scheme implementation agreement.

I agree Balance. Excellent chance that $6 will be raised to around the mid point of the most current independent valuation. My guess remains $6.35 or very close to that.

Will send you a bottle of French Champagne (minimum $100, Beagle, if your guess is correct but you send me two bottles of said Champagne if I am correct that the final bid is > $6.35.

How does that sound? 😁

[Beagle]

Will send you a bottle of French Champagne (minimum $100, Beagle, if your guess is correct but you send me two bottles of said Champagne if I am correct that the final bid is > $6.35.

How does that sound? ��

LOL - Chances of $6.50 are too good as is your track record with this one :)

[Balance]

LOL - Chances of $6.50 are too good as is your track record with this one :)

Haha - you caught me out, Beagle.

A few bottles of champagne are already on their way to me courtesy of several very happy holders - I thought I may be able to extract another couple from a stockmarket war veteran like you. 😁

[Balance]

https://www.afr.com/street-talk/metlifecare-investor-ramps-up-pressure-on-chairman-requests-spill-20200706-p559he

AFR Street Talk : "The Metlifecare investors out for chairman Kim Ellis' head would have welcomed the company's willingness to engage on a revise takeover offer from EQT Infrastructure on Monday, but that doesn't mean they're easing the pressure just yet."

See the hidden hands of APVG at play?

[winner69]

https://www.afr.com/street-talk/metlifecare-investor-ramps-up-pressure-on-chairman-requests-spill-20200706-p559he

AFR Street Talk : "The Metlifecare investors out for chairman Kim Ellis' head would have welcomed the company's willingness to engage on a revise takeover offer from EQT Infrastructure on Monday, but that doesn't mean they're easing the pressure just yet."

See the hidden hands of APVG at play?

Be in NBR soon eh

Pressure on the stubborn one who doesn’t listen

[Balance]

Be in NBR soon eh

Pressure on the stubborn one who doesn’t listen

He wants $7, given that it could be worth $8 under various scenarios.

Not necessarily a bad thing for the rest of us to have him fight the good fight.

Remember there were those who thought that taking APVG to court was a dumb move by him?

[RGR367]

Gut feel is that it will be more than 6 bucks but just cannot bet on an exact amount.
Accumulated at lock down so I will be of course more than happy to have it from $6 upwards. Happy too to have this go on court but we all know this will not happen at all.
GL to us all!

[bottomfeeder]

Maybe the takeover bid is genuine. Maybe they are running scared, maybe they may renegotiate up to $6.35/$6.50. But we should also spare a thought for another scenario. There is a legal term called mitigation of damages. APVG, has now put a line in the sand whereby Metlifecare has a choice to make. If they dont accept, the damages claim may be severely reduced, which could make their legal claim inefficient to pursue. I have a feeling one scenario is either accept the $6.00 or stop all legal proceedings and walk away. Therefore it may be that there is not much negotiating room after all. Sorry to put a damper on the exuberance, but you have to look at all scenarios.

[Beagle]

Another school of thought is that in APVG's notice of termination, (back when the prospect of Covid becoming rampant in N.Z. was very real) they stated they believed the net assets of MET had gone down by a material amount, as much as $200m or potentially more.
There's 213m shares on issue so perhaps the revised non binding indicative offer is simply an opportunistic attempt to get good assets on a cheap on the basis that their original assessment was correct.
What real estate evidence there has been to date suggests there hasn't been much change since pre-covid prices which were in fact up 4.9% on 31/12/19 prices.
Now that Covid is contained at the border and hopefully stays that way, I would say if I were EQT, absolutely I would try and buy the company at an opportunistic price.
Whether arbitrage investors who paid an average of nearly $6.90 let them get away with it is another matter.

I think the chances of this fiasco going full circle back to the very first offer price of $6.50 (or very close) are very good.

[limmy]

I believe Mr. Beagle's school of thought makes most sense.

[Balance]

Another school of thought is that in APVG's notice of termination, (back when the prospect of Covid becoming rampant in N.Z. was very real) they stated they believed the net assets of MET had gone down by a material amount, as much as $200m or potentially more.
There's 213m shares on issue so perhaps the revised non binding indicative offer is simply an opportunistic attempt to get good assets on a cheap on the basis that their original assessment was correct.
What real estate evidence there has been to date suggests there hasn't been much change since pre-covid prices which were in fact up 4.9% on 31/12/19 prices.
Now that Covid is contained at the border and hopefully stays that way, I would say if I were EQT, absolutely I would try and buy the company at an opportunistic price.
Whether arbitrage investors who paid an average of nearly $6.90 let them get away with it is another matter.

I think the chances of this fiasco going full circle back to the very first offer price of $6.50 (or very close) are very good.

Well, the big change of course is that squillions of stock have gone to the arb/hedge funds so the balance of voting power has changed - hence NZ Super Fund with its 19.9% is now 'kingmaker'.

$6.50 will seal the deal for them, I suspect.

[bottomfeeder]

Lets hope we get a revised offer up, to take into account lost dividends. Either way Im holding on to the bitter end no matter which way it goes. Got no other place to put the money, Got so many OCA, I am starting to get a bit nervous. I bought some more a few days ago, now I have no cash left until the middle of August.

[Beagle]

Bloated with profits and no idea where to spend it ? Get in quick before Cindy gets it https://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used-cars/bmw/auction-2563439643.htm?rsqid=b02f4317a36a433585bdc343b44c9 808-002 :D

[King1212]

good on you Master Beagle!!!

[bottomfeeder]

Bloated with profits and no idea where to spend it ? Get in quick before Cindy gets it https://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used-cars/bmw/auction-2563439643.htm?rsqid=b02f4317a36a433585bdc343b44c9 808-002 :D

Already have one good enough for me, Thanks Tegel Takeover. Same colour as well. https://cdn.bmwblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/2017-BMW-4-Series-Gran-Coupe-facelift-17.jpg

[Beagle]

Very nice. Forthcoming 550 x drive has piqued my interest https://www.bmw.co.nz/en/all-models/5-series/sedan/2020/bmw-5-series-sedan-highlights.html
Much keener on that than a 7.
Anyway back to MET. The more I think about it I can't see the arbitrage boys going for $6. The loss for them and egg on face is too much.
EQT will have to materially up the ante or we're off to court for a multi year legal battle.
I'd better not pay BMW my deposit just yet...

[bottomfeeder]

Thought I would have to take a photo with todays newspaper.

11753

[Balance]

So we now know that Maso Capital of HK is the ‘event driven’ investment fund behind the ‘spill’ to remove Ellis.

Not exactly a big hitter (US$300m fund) so the $66m odd it has invested in MetLife is big bikies. Must be hurting its performance so understandable why it is agitating for a deal to be done with APVG.

Maso is however also one of the 5 funds who supported MetLife taking court action against APVG in the first place.

So what are we to make from the situation?

Fairly clear now that APVG had approached the offshore funds and/or vice versa to settle the pending litigation out of court via a negotiated deal.

Sounds like Ellis & board initially refused, being very confident of Metlife’s position. Hence, the threat to remove him.

But here’s the rub - unless NZ Fund & ACC joined the spill, Maso & the other offshore funds do not have the numbers to roll Ellis.

So looks to me like a deal is done and given NZ Fund & ACC involvement, final price will definitely be higher than initial offer of $6.00.

[traineeinvestor]

So we now know that Maso Capital of HK is the ‘event driven’ investment fund behind the ‘spill’ to remove Ellis.

Not exactly a big hitter (US$300m fund) so the $66m odd it has invested in MetLife is big bikies. Must be hurting its performance so understandable why it is agitating for a deal to be done with APVG.

Maso is however also one of the 5 funds who supported MetLife taking court action against APVG in the first place.

So what are we to make from the situation?

Fairly clear now that APVG had approached the offshore funds and/or vice versa to settle the pending litigation out of court via a negotiated deal.

Sounds like Ellis & board initially refused, being very confident of Metlife’s position. Hence, the threat to remove him.

But here’s the rub - unless NZ Fund & ACC joined the spill, Maso & the other offshore funds do not have the numbers to roll Ellis.

So looks to me like a deal is done and given NZ Fund & ACC involvement, final price will definitely be higher than initial offer of $6.00.

In an exercise in schadenfreude, if I read the disclosure notice correctly, Maso paid an average of $6.88 per share and invested just under NZ$80 million (USD52 million) net between December last year and February this year. If the deal is done at $6.00 they lose NZD10.2 million (USD6.6 million).

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/349227/317927.pdf

[Balance]

In an exercise in schadenfreude, if I read the disclosure notice correctly, Maso paid an average of $6.88 per share and invested just under NZ$80 million (USD52 million) net between December last year and February this year. If the deal is done at $6.00 they lose NZD10.2 million (USD6.6 million).

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/349227/317927.pdf

Which suggests that a higher offer is in the offing.

Maso cannot blame MetLife for APVG terminating the initial takeover offer

but

they can certainly blame MetLife for not engaging with APVG to thrash out a new deal to minimize an arb deal gone wrong.

[King1212]

Today would be a good chance for those want a punt....50-70c gain...if we are talking about $6.20-$6.50 final offer

[winner69]

Today would be a good chance for those want a punt....50-70c gain...if we are talking about $6.20-$6.50 final offer

And we could say we did better than gurus like Maso at playing this arb game :t_up:

Take it you into it big time your majesty

[peat]

Sounds like Maso are taking on big risks with their positions. Crash and burn risks.
Just because they are desperate to extricate themselves and minimize their pain it doesn't mean the deal will be done to suit them though.
I've know I've been pushing for the 7 and APVG have proved themselves to be unscrupulous by withdrawing from the original SIA. 7 is what should be paid!

But what if the Overseas Investment dudes ruled them out on moral grounds because of that reprehensible behaviour!!!
So increasingly I'd be happy with 6. if it was 6 on market I'd probably bail.

[King1212]

With NZ fund as a king maker...this is a done deal....$6 is a base...extra is an icing

[Beagle]

I think if I was in charge of EQT at the time Covid 19 was becoming rampant in N.Z. I would have invoked the MAC clause as it did appear the impact was likely to be very serious. As I mentioned yesterday when they invoked the MAC clause they stated they believed the impact on assets was circa $200m or potentially worse. I also mentioned yesterday there are 213m shares so a non binding indicative amended offer at $6 simply represents a reflection of their original position when they gave notice of termination, a position that was predicated on widespread Covid 19 spread within N.Z.

$6 certainly does not represent emerging evidence from a number of sources, another here https://www.goodreturns.co.nz/article/976517147/values-settle-into-new-normal.html?utm_source=GR&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Another+round+of+rate+cuts.+ANZ+takes +the+lead
of how mild the effect of Covid 19 has been on real estate and it appears its ostensibly unchanged from December 2019, or very slightly up on average and $6 does not represent the excellent progress N.Z. has made on containing Covid 19.

It is fair to deduce therefore that $6 would be an egregious price for most to settle at and I cannot foresee the situation where 75% of shareholders would agree to being lowballed like that, I know I certainly wouldn't. So for this to settle it must be at more than $6. That said one cannot deny the possibility that Covid 19 could take hold in N.Z. again so there removal of a MAC clause from an amended potential scheme of arrangement does allow the passing of some material risk to EQT if shareholders settle and also there's the not inconsiderable multi year legal battle and its costs to consider.

I think splitting the difference makes the most sense at $6.50. Whether ego's or the need to save face get in the way of common sense is the $64,000 question ?
I don't think this is a done deal yet.

[King1212]

Patience is the key...for those that don't have n want to remain in the sector....OCA is the cheapest one.

[bottomfeeder]

At the time they invoked the Mac clause, no one knew where the Covid thing was going to end here or around the world. It could have been far worse, and may still be, but NZ has proven itself to be able to at least get a handle on the spread. So invoking the MAC clause, was reasonable business sense. The value of MET could have gone down to $4. Subsequent events, have shown that the value has largely been maintained. MET is still an attractive long term investment. So a $6 bid is understandable. Results will be out soon. Maybe we should say $7 or nothing and claim damages to recoup our costs. I for one would like to stay in this investment long term.

Either way this is going to carry on for some time. I want a dividend now.

[Joshuatree]

Patience is the key...for those that don't have n want to remain in the sector....OCA is the cheapest one.
But you dont have any do you?:)

[JohnnyTheHorse]

Paywall article: "Metlife investors expect more from Swedish suitor"

https://businessdesk.co.nz/article/metlife-investors-expect-more-from-swedish-suitor

[Balance]

Paywall article: "Metlife investors expect more from Swedish suitor"

https://businessdesk.co.nz/article/metlife-investors-expect-more-from-swedish-suitor

Whatever it is, put it to the vote and let shareholders decide.

Given that institutions now own most of the stock, should not be too hard to get a number and a decision for shareholders to vote on.

[Raz]

Whatever it is, put it to the vote and let shareholders decide.

Given that institutions now own most of the stock, should not be too hard to get a number and a decision for shareholders to vote on.


https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?objectid=12345795&&ref=topbox

And so it goes...on and on and...

[King1212]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/personal-finance/news/article.cfm?c_id=12&objectid=12346572

Property price rebound

[winner69]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/personal-finance/news/article.cfm?c_id=12&objectid=12346572

Property price rebound

......but September will be the true test the headline says

MET valuation ot just dependent on what’s happening today but how the valuers see the future

[King1212]

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called present

The current data showed rebound...the future is no one knows

[Balance]

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called present

The current data showed rebound...the future is no one knows

Especially when the ‘experts’ have got the market so wrong up to now.

[JohnnyTheHorse]

So UBS, holder of 7.27% at last disclosure, is tipping $6.50. Hmm...

https://www.afr.com/street-talk/ubs-tips-higher-offer-for-metlifecare-20200709-p55ago

[bottomfeeder]

So UBS, holder of 7.27% at last disclosure, is tipping $6.50. Hmm...

https://www.afr.com/street-talk/ubs-tips-higher-offer-for-metlifecare-20200709-p55ago

Got to be quick to read that article before the paywall takes over. Finished, but had to do it four times. Good news.

[King1212]

Hahha... screen shot it man!

Yes ...good news.....$6.50 as they said $7 offer was legit and enforced if MET choose to go through the court

[King1212]

"In a note to the client on thrusday, UBS said EQT would be end up paying $6.50 pershare"

Announcement tomorrow....I guess....done deal Master Beagle!

[Jay]

So far Mr Market holding steady around 5.80ish - see how today goes - in general nobody bidding up for $6+ at this point - perhaps all waiting for outcome to the 'negotiation'. I'll be happy with anything around the $6.20ish or more of course

[King1212]

Once bitten twice shy...so Mr market is very cautious this time....

[JohnnyTheHorse]

MET halted on open. No announcement or halt notice yet.

[dabsman]

Can you put a halt on a share without announcing event he halt? If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it does it make a sound?

Are we going to see a jump in all retirement sector stocks like we did when the deal was announced first time?

[Master98]

trading halt just announced.

[Jay]

One would assume so Ogg

[stoploss]

Can you put a halt on a share without announcing event he halt? If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it does it make a sound?

Are we going to see a jump in all retirement sector stocks like we did when the deal was announced first time?

It does say this -Hopefully the $ 6.50 knoctout offer afterwards , here's to hoping , it will make the Friday beers taste better.

"MET has requested a trading halt while its Board considers this afternoon a


final position from APVG in connection with its proposed replacement scheme


of arrangement. "

[King1212]

UBS advised their clients yesterday....expecting $6.50

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12346401

[dabsman]

I would expect $6.50. Well played APVG got what they want for the price they wanted from the beginning. I really dont mind personally as Ive done well with this one. I do feel bad for the NZX as it is another company gone

[Balance]

Drop dead offer by APVG.

Could be bad news (short term) if MetLife decides to go through with litigation.

[Leftfield]

Drop dead offer by APVG.

Could be bad news (short term) if MetLife decides to go through with litigation.

Trading Halt. (http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/356084/326207.pdf) GLH.

[Joshuatree]

New Scheme of Arrangement with EQT Infrastructure (https://www.nzx.com/announcements/356098)

$6 it stays.

[Longhaul]

Kim must have been reading Beagle's recent comments.

[traineeinvestor]

My initial reaction to $6.00 is to give them the finger.

(Not that my vote will make a difference.)

[Balance]

Drop dead offer by APVG.

Could be bad news (short term) if MetLife decides to go through with litigation.

Oh well, both sides blinked - APVG to avoid litigation and MetLife to avoid angst from the hedge funds & NZ Super.

[winner69]

Kim must have been reading Beagle's recent comments.

Kim as stubborn as to the end .....worth in excess of 8 bucks he reckons

At least NZ Super get probably get their wish and finally get rid of this dog

October long time away ....hope price stays in 580/590 next week

[Balance]

Kim as stubborn as to the end .....worth in excess of 8 bucks he reckons

At least NZ Super get probably get their wish and finally get rid of this dog

October long time away ....hope price stays in 580/590 next week

Tend to think hedge funds will be buying at $5.80 to get their 20c upside (2.7% or 11% pa) and make sure this time that they have the numbers to push through the deal.

[limmy]

EQT drives a hard bargain and has taken advantage of the situation to lower their price from $7 (original offer price) to $6.

[winner69]

Directors supporting the deal (all except Kim and the one who abstained) own about 100,000 shares

That should help get the deal through at the meeting :D:p

Token gesture ...but could say they essentially voted with not much vested interest (independent?)

[dubya]

I'm a bit disappointed. I think APVG have got the better end of the deal. I think it will all go through OK, then they can come back for OCA.
A bit old now, but from todays Herald:

Swedes could go further than Metlife
Bupa is seen ripe for the picking, and Oceania Health also a possible target

The New Zealand Herald10 Jul 2020

Metlifecare’s on-then-offthen-on-again takeover by Swedish predator EQT has raised talk in the sector of further M&A activity involving the same business.

Once Metlife is hoovered up at the newly-lowered $6 a share, the Swedes could go even further, perhaps eyeing NZX-listed Oceania Healthcare and the unlisted Bupa NZ’s care home assets. Nothing has been said in public about this, but if that went ahead it could be a $2 billion-plus deal.

The Commerce Commission would be unlikely to look askance at the Swedes, the speculation has it, due to assets being widely held and a deep and evolving market with many operators housing the 43,000 Kiwis in retirement residences.

But due diligence might be tricky due to Covid-19.

The Swedes have around $50b under management and the only pushback could be if the limited partners in the funds say no to the general partner.

Bupa is seen to be ripe for the picking, with a good spread nationally and many large outdated properties giving opportunities to intensify accommodation. The Swedes could even partner with another investor, say Morgan Stanley, whose infrastructure fund is thought to have been interested in Metlife before this current takeover offer.

The industry is seen to have been focused on development, not mergers and acquisitions. Look out. If the talk results in any action, that could all change soon.

The right price?

The $6 per share offer for Metlife will be attractive for some but other shareholders want more, given that it is short of the underlying value of the assets.

Mark Brown, chief investment officer at Devon Funds Management, said there were clearly a lot of short term hedge fund investors looking to exit their positions.

“Many will be facing losses on this trade and will most likely be trying to minimise them in the shortest time possible. These investors have been clearly pushing Metlifecare management hard and will be very keen to accept a deal.” Brown said EQT’s current non-binding offer brings them back to the table within the range set by the valuers.

“I think a deal is very likely, albeit unfortunate for NZ capital markets.”

But Craig Tyson, head of Australasian property securities ANZ Investments, which has shares in Metlifecare, said while $6 was the right starting number it was a little light. “The range from the independent report is $5.80-$6.90, so we would be expecting a price north of the mid-point ($6.35).”

Tyson said EQT had emphasised that it was an investor with a longterm horizon and therefore shortterm house price headwinds should have little impact on the valuation of the business.

“Clearly New Zealand is a desirable place to invest for a bunch of reasons including our handling of the Covid crisis. Metlifecare is a good business with great assets and there would be few better places than NZ to invest so we have confidence in the board to negotiate the right outcome for investors.”

Private equity circling

EQT isn’t the only private equity player interested in New Zealand companies at the moment.

John Fisk, national leader of restructuring for PwC, told journalists this week that it was seeing a high level of interest from the PE sector.

“PEs are active at the moment. We are dealing with PEs that are looking at businesses I’m surprised they would be interested in.” Fisk said the interest included foreign PE investors from Australia.

“The Australians are interested in what we have got here.”

Last month the Government introduced temporary overseas investor changes so that the Overseas Investment Office must be notified of any investment in more than 25 per cent of a business or more than a quarter of a business’ assets, or increasing an existing shareholding.

Previously the OIO screened transactions over $100 million or involving sensitive land sales. The new rules will be reviewed every 90 days. Investors should find out within 10 working days if their transaction can go ahead while some may take longer to work through.

Fisk said the restrictions were something PE investors were aware of. “They can still take an interest in the company under 25 per cent.”

Fisk said investors were not focused on any particular sectors.

“It’s anywhere that is a better return than what they can get with money sitting in their bank.

“The part that I find interesting is that you have got very low interest rates, people that have got money to invest and yet we are walking into a storm of potential insolvencies.”

That could mean some PE investors pick up a good deal while others may get stung as they have in the past.

(More non relevant deleted)

[peat]

Why did trading even start today at 4:44
That is ridiculous and strikes me as manipulative

[dubya]

Why did trading even start today at 4:44
That is ridiculous and strikes me as manipulative

I thought it was a stupid move too. For the sake of 20 minutes, there would be lots out there who hadn't even had a chance to read the takeover decision.

[peat]

I thought it was a stupid move too. For the sake of 20 minutes, there would be lots out there who hadn't even had a chance to read the takeover decision.

1 minute of trading for us mere mortals !

[JSwan]

I'm going to guess that it was a predetermined set time (15 minutes) after an announcement has been made for shares to start trading again, it just so happens that the announcement was made at 4.29pm...

[Beagle]

I am going to vote and advocate against this deal. Why sell $7 of assets for $6 ? MET shareholders are being shafted by a very manipulative EQT and arbitrage funds desperate to mitigate short term losses. Just because N.Z. super fund says they will sell does not mean its a good idea. I still think this is game on and a better offer may eventuate but I am happy to hold long term if one doesn't.

[JohnnyTheHorse]

Very well played by EQT, you have to hand it to them. At the end of the day most of us have played this twice so we really can't complain we aren't getting a bit more.

[Balance]

I thought it was a stupid move too. For the sake of 20 minutes, there would be lots out there who hadn't even had a chance to read the takeover decision.

Once the deal is done, I suspect they have to disclose.

Will be a lot of champagne drank tonight - APVG for saving $213m, the usual hanger-ons (lawyers, advisors and bankers) with their success & arrangement fees and the hedge funds (for dodging a bigger loss).

Go and treat yourself to a glass or two - deal's done and it's time to move on.

[allfromacell]

I am going to vote and advocate against this deal. Why sell $7 of assets for $6 ? MET shareholders are being shafted by a very manipulative EQT and arbitrage funds desperate to mitigate short term losses. Just because N.Z. super fund says they will sell does not mean its a good idea. I still think this is game on and a better offer may eventuate but I am happy to hold long term if one doesn't.

So if there is a better offer can MET get out of this scheme and accept it before the vote?

[winner69]

Once the deal is done, I suspect they have to disclose.

Will be a lot of champagne drank tonight - APVG for saving $213m, the usual hanger-ons (lawyers, advisors and bankers) with their success & arrangement fees and the hedge funds (for dodging a bigger loss).

Go and treat yourself to a glass or two - deal's done and it's time to move on.

Kord Mentha get heaps more for rewriting the independent advisors report ...good work eh

[winner69]

“ In a finely balanced decision, a majority of Metlifecare’s six directors”

Kim against - 4 voted to support - one not able to vote

Suppose 4 out of 5 is finely divided

[Beagle]

So if there is a better offer can MET get out of this scheme and accept it before the vote?

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/356098/326226.pdf
This appears to be covered in section 12 of the new scheme implementation agreement. At first glance on a real quick skim read of the various subsections of section 12 it would appear the short answer is yes there is room for a competing superior proposal but first they have to give what looks like 10 working days to APVG to assess any competing proposal and match it. I've been out all day so I'll read through the full terms of this new scheme implementation agreement early next week.

Looks like there are some very weak holders of MET. $6 is inadequate and I will be voting against allowing greedy and manipulative foreign funds try to buy good assets at dirt cheap prices.

[Balance]

“ In a finely balanced decision, a majority of Metlifecare’s six directors”

Kim against - 4 voted to support - one not able to vote

Suppose 4 out of 5 is finely divided

🤣 Using balance in a most unusual manner!

[bottomfeeder]

Sucks! No dividend and have to wait some time now to get my money. Lets hope when they takeover OCA they are not so tight.

[winner69]

🤣 Using balance in a most unusual manner!

Good one ....have a nice weekend :t_up:

[Baa_Baa]

Biggest complainers are sitting on outstanding capital gains moaning about missing out on 35 cents being $6.35 midpoint. Take the money, enjoy the profits from the double dip and when you get the money buy a truckload off OCA before it gets back to fair value. Win win win.

[trader_jackson]

$6 is no surprise to me, $6 is nothing but a huge get out of jail card for MET. Many should be pleased EQT even bothered coming back... otherwise the share price would be lucky to be in the 4's I'd say.

[Food4Thought]

I am going to vote and advocate against this deal. Why sell $7 of assets for $6 ? MET shareholders are being shafted by a very manipulative EQT and arbitrage funds desperate to mitigate short term losses. Just because N.Z. super fund says they will sell does not mean its a good idea. I still think this is game on and a better offer may eventuate but I am happy to hold long term if one doesn't.

Agree.
Typical, if they buckle. Be another case of look at them, selling our early. Having feet cut from under their legs.

Using Covid as the reason. Selling out Kiwi assets too low.

Play the long game, balance out the winners.

[King1212]

Well...that's it! The kingmaker has decided!.....$6....will vote yes n then move on ehh...

[peat]

I wonder what would happen if the market fell out of bed tonight in the overseas markets.
I wouldnt trust these bidders to follow through (despite no MAC inclusion) because as we know the best evidence for future behaviour is the most recent behaviour.

[moimoi]

""Metlifecare has been advised that its largest shareholder, the Guardians of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund (NZ Super), has entered a voting deed with APVG under which it has agreed to vote its 19.9% interest in Metlifecare in favour of the scheme, subject to certain terms and conditions.""

To the "Guardians".

With your 100 year investment horizon you flip the company for $6?

WTF?

Have you tucked your collective heads in the sand in order to remain blissfully unaware of the undeniable tsunami of NZ's ageing demographic.?

None of you democratically elected while retaining the power to sell everyone else down the river.

The "Revised Scheme" looks odds on be waived through given only another 5% required.

Instead of providing strong shareholder support at both a business and citizen level you gift decades of revenue streams to offshore Pension funds.

The Auckland Residential property market is currently going ballistic. Board members of MET and NZ Super get on the ground and listen!!

The only other option to dissenters will be to evacuate family members from MET Village's once the "Scheme" is waived through.

"Scheme's" of arrangement need to go as effectively 1 shareholder can determine the outcome as evidenced with this backtrack.

The Guardians of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund also need to be restricted to max 5% ownership.

Thank you Kim Ellis for showing backbone.

IMO.

[Baa_Baa]

Your company was trading in the 3’s for ages, you get an offer of 6 for this dog. And still complain.

[dabsman]

""Metlifecare has been advised that its largest shareholder, the Guardians of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund (NZ Super), has entered a voting deed with APVG under which it has agreed to vote its 19.9% interest in Metlifecare in favour of the scheme, subject to certain terms and conditions.""

To the "Guardians".

With your 100 year investment horizon you flip the company for $6?

WTF?

Have you tucked your collective heads in the sand in order to remain blissfully unaware of the undeniable tsunami of NZ's ageing demographic.?

None of you democratically elected while retaining the power to sell everyone else down the river.

The "Revised Scheme" looks odds on be waived through given only another 5% required.

Instead of providing strong shareholder support at both a business and citizen level you gift decades of revenue streams to offshore Pension funds.

The Auckland Residential property market is currently going ballistic. Board members of MET and NZ Super get on the ground and listen!!

The only other option to dissenters will be to evacuate family members from MET Village's once the "Scheme" is waived through.

"Scheme's" of arrangement need to go as effectively 1 shareholder can determine the outcome as evidenced with this backtrack.

The Guardians of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund also need to be restricted to max 5% ownership.

Thank you Kim Ellis for showing backbone.

IMO.

I think it is disgusting. I want to become a board member - be incompetent and still get paid. Brilliant job. Basically these so called captains of the ship are celebrating beaching instead of hitting rocks - they still f#*ked the ship

[Beagle]

Joint managing director of Salt Funds management Mathew Goodson says $6 isn't good enough. https://www.goodreturns.co.nz/article/976517160/energy-stocks-drain-market-for-second-consecutive-day.html?utm_source=GR&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GoodReturns+Market+Report+for+10+Jul+ 2020
See last two paragraphs.

[Beagle]

Biggest complainers are sitting on outstanding capital gains moaning about missing out on 35 cents being $6.35 midpoint. Take the money, enjoy the profits from the double dip and when you get the money buy a truckload off OCA before it gets back to fair value. Win win win.

I am not complaining, merely articulating my opinion and you are right in one sense that for most it has been a wonderful ride and also with OCA of which I have heaps already at an average price of under 70 cents. At issue is not how much you, me and others have made, whether realised or unrealised, its whether selling good, (not outstanding), calibre assets worth $7 each for $6 each to a manipulative overseas suitor makes good long term sense ?

If we allow selling this at 6/7 = 85.7% of last reported NTA, what's next, selling OCA for 85.7% of last reported NTA and supporting a takeover at 0.857 x $1.01 = 86.5 cents ? (That's where your suggested strategy starts to fall apart).

Then there's the murky, (murky because nobody really knows if resident satisfaction survey's are truly independent), question of whether hundreds of vulnerable elderly residents will get the same standard of care under foreign ownership as they would get under local ownership ? Arena living who own among others The Peninsula Club on the Whangaparaoa Peninsula were taken over by different owners a few years back and I have it on excellent authority that under foreign ownership things have really changed there...and not for the better.

Allowing foreign owners to get assets dirt cheap and then lower service standards and take a far more "pure capitalist's approach" to improve their return on investment is not something I welcome. I'd rather invest for the long haul and see excellent service standards maintained.

I will vote for EQT to keep their $6, I don't want it. I want happier residents and to earn more profits over the long haul. Quick profits be dammed.

[nztx]

Okay I'm out of this one a week or so ago, but if I was still in, $6.00 looks a bit light from where I'm sitting (a $0.50 fully imputed dividend on top would please)

$6.50 looks fairer (with a $0.25 fully imputed dividend)

Let's face it with a 100% change in ownership any NZ Imputation credits are curry with a new buyer & a dividend recognises that the Swedes have been dicking the MET stakeholders around for some time now


Of course $7.00 + a fully imputed dividend would be even better

With Real Estate news out via the Media today - I doubt that there has been any reduction in value of MET Assets or Business Now V when the Swede's first $7 Offer hit the table

[Waltzing]

I cant imagine anyone selling oca for a long time surely..

DISC: i always go to sweden for bike and swim training. The driver care for peddle power bike riders is wonderful compared to the locals here.

[Beagle]

Hard to believe that a majority of directors agreed away our rights to sue for $7 for this pathetic new price and no dividend for well over 12 months. Surely there is something in the new SIA about an end of year dividend ?...or the lack of any dividend for more than a year, (by the time this has potentially settled in October) is another way shareholders have been taken advantage of.

[see weed]

I am not complaining, merely articulating my opinion and you are right in one sense that for most it has been a wonderful ride and also with OCA of which I have heaps already at an average price of under 70 cents. At issue is not how much you, me and others have made, whether realised or unrealised, its whether selling good, (not outstanding), calibre assets worth $7 each for $6 each to a manipulative overseas suitor makes good long term sense ?

If we allow selling this at 6/7 = 85.7% of last reported NTA, what's next, selling OCA for 85.7% of last reported NTA and supporting a takeover at 0.857 x $1.01 = 86.5 cents ? (That's where your suggested strategy starts to fall apart).

Then there's the murky, (murky because nobody really knows if resident satisfaction survey's are truly independent), question of whether hundreds of vulnerable elderly residents will get the same standard of care under foreign ownership as they would get under local ownership ? Arena living who own among others The Peninsula Club on the Whangaparaoa Peninsula were taken over by different owners a few years back and I have it on excellent authority that under foreign ownership things have really changed there...and not for the better.

Allowing foreign owners to get assets dirt cheap and then lower service standards and take a far more "pure capitalist's approach" to improve their return on investment is not something I welcome. I'd rather invest for the long haul and see excellent service standards maintained.

I will vote for EQT to keep their $6, I don't want it. I want happier residents and to earn more profits over the long haul. Quick profits be dammed.
:t_up: Good post. And a smart way of getting cheap real estate. They might kick out all the old people and turn it into motels.

[bottomfeeder]

:t_up: Good post. And a smart way of getting cheap real estate. They might kick out all the old people and turn it into motels.

Change the name to Covid Metlifecare. Have to spend some capital in 7foot high fences which I believe is now the industry standard.

[winner69]

Hard to believe that a majority of directorsagreed away our rights to sue for $7 for this pathetic new price and no dividend for well over 12 months. Surely there is something in the new SIA about an end of year dividend ?...or the lack of any dividend for more than a year, (by the time this has potentially settled in October) is another way shareholders have been taken advantage of.

Between them about 100,000 shares ....jeez less than you probably have

One didn’t vote - she had a conflict with being involved in NZ Superfund.

[Blue Skies]

Kim Ellis does not want shareholders to accept the new offer saying it is not a fair deal.


https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/420959/metlifecare-chair-opposes-new-takover-offer

[King1212]

He can not do fxk all.....the kingmaker spoken....4 directors voted yes.....so...move on guyss.....

[Beagle]

However, he believes the scheme consideration... does not represent fair value and should be at least at the mid-point of the range determined by independent adviser KordaMentha at NZ$6.35," the update said. Looks like he read the email I sent him earlier this week with those exact words and good on him for standing up and being counted. Difficult to come to any other conclusion that other directors were influenced by the N.Z. super fund director and with the super fund clearly wanting out this undermined the ability of the board to negotiate a better price.

It will be interesting to see if $6 is enough to get this across the line. Already, well regarded Salt funds management have come out and said its not enough. I very much doubt they're the only major shareholder who are thinking the same. How will those arbitrage funds with an average entry price of $6.88 react to crystalizing an 88 cents per share loss ?

There's going to be a lot of popcorn eaten watching this corporate show play out and a lot of barking to be done at the forthcoming meeting.

[Baa_Baa]

Already, well regarded Salt funds management have come out and said its not enough. I very much doubt they're the only major shareholder who are thinking the same.

@Beagle, do you know what % Salt holds? I can't see them on the 2019 annual report, or the Companies register (last held in their name 2014). Are they hiding their major holding in a nominee company?

TIA.

[Beagle]

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/356098/326226.pdf

No I don't Baa Baa. Truth is I am very time poor this weekend and wondering if someone with a vested interested can trawl through this and see if there's any prohibition on MET paying a final dividend for the year ended 30 June 2020 please ? If they can pay say a 20 cent final divvy then this proposed deal may not be as totally repugnant as it appears at first glance.

[Baa_Baa]

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/MET/356098/326226.pdf

No I don't Baa Baa. Truth is I am very time poor this weekend and wondering if someone with a vested interested can trawl through this and see if there's any prohibition on MET paying a final dividend for the year ended 30 June 2020 please ? If they can pay say a 20 cent final divvy then this proposed deal may not be as totally repugnant as it appears at first glance.

I think the 'Consideration' $6.00 is reduced by a dividend, if paid?

"Consideration means NZ$6.00 in cash in respect of each Scheme Share held by a Scheme Shareholder as at 5.00 pm on the Scheme Record Date, as reduced by the per MET Share value of any other dividend, the record date for which falls between the date of the Scheme Implementation Agreement and the Implementation Date;"

[Beagle]

I think the 'Consideration' $6.00 is reduced by a dividend, if paid?

"Consideration means NZ$6.00 in cash in respect of each Scheme Share held by a Scheme Shareholder as at 5.00 pm on the Scheme Record Date, as reduced by the per MET Share value of any other dividend, the record date for which falls between the date of the Scheme Implementation Agreement and the Implementation Date;"

Thank you.

[trader_jackson]

https://www.nzx.com/announcements/355786

$6.00 offer as expected, a real get out of jail card for holders... they should be over the moon to get offered such a high amount.

Metlife will probably try ask for a bit more, bit rich to do so, but might as well try (hopefully won't piss off EQT too much more to simply walk away entirely)

No surprise to me Metlifecare have endorsed $6.00 late Friday, I thought EQT would come to the party somewhere in the 5's... only thing surprising is how people thought that there would somehow be a higher offer to the point it took it back near EQT's original offer (given during a very, very different time to what we are now in).

Would be like me having a buyer for my car, smashing it massively before the deal is complete, then expecting to get nearly the same offer as before (and being insulted at any other offer)... it just isn't going to happen.

Still sad to see another company head off from the NZX, but MET has been a dog for a while now.

[Ace]

No surprise to me Metlifecare have endorsed $6.00 late Friday, I thought EQT would come to the party somewhere in the 5's... only thing surprising is how people thought that there would somehow be a higher offer to the point it took it back near EQT's original offer (given during a very, very different time to what we are now in).

Would be like me having a buyer for my car, smashing it massively before the deal is complete, then expecting to get nearly the same offer as before (and being insulted at any other offer)... it just isn't going to happen.

Still sad to see another company head off from the NZX, but MET has been a dog for a while now.

More like having a buyer for your car, saying that you'd smash it, but leaving it intact and taking a lower offer because everyone thought that you had smashed it?

[trader_jackson]

More like having a buyer for your car, saying that you'd smash it, but leaving it intact and taking a lower offer because everyone thought that you had smashed it?

Not quite sure I follow... but covid (and its impact on the property market and wider economy - the "massive smash") is certainly not something that anyone can pretend hasn't happened.

[Beagle]

No surprise to me Metlifecare have endorsed $6.00 late Friday, I thought EQT would come to the party somewhere in the 5's... only thing surprising is how people thought that there would somehow be a higher offer to the point it took it back near EQT's original offer (given during a very, very different time to what we are now in).

Would be like me having a buyer for my car, smashing it massively before the deal is complete, then expecting to get nearly the same offer as before (and being insulted at any other offer)... it just isn't going to happen.

Still sad to see another company head off from the NZX, but MET has been a dog for a while now.

Real estate buoyancy seems to have confounded the "experts". One would assume that would include Korda Mentha's "expert" opinion of 5 June, not that to the best of my knowledge they've ever really been recognised at experts in real estate.

[winner69]

Bored today ...quick read through that KM Report ...quite good

Best chart was this one

Jeez 6 bucks looks a great price for shareholders

AVG must have had a moment of madness raising their offer to 7 bucks ...but they often say there’s always some greater fools to buy dog stocks at irrationally high prices

[Beagle]

Those canny investors who bought in the low $4's in late 2019, then sold @ ~ $6.90 to the arbitrage boys and then bought them back in the $3's did pretty well eh Winner :D

Gunna be a hard act to follow finding another rollercoaster that's this much fun to ride.

[winner69]

Those canny investors who bought in the low $4's in late 2019, then sold @ ~ $6.90 to the arbitrage boys and then bought them back in the $3's did pretty well eh Winner :D

Gunna be a hard act to follow finding another rollercoaster that's this much fun to ride.

Maybe OCA the next roller coaster :t_up:

[Baa_Baa]

Maybe OCA the next roller coaster :t_up:

Hopefully not a roller coaster but more a recipient of mega bucks released from MET finding a new home in the retirement sector. All remaining boats on the rising tide.

[Beagle]

Maybe OCA the next roller coaster :t_up:

Might be pretty exciting if MAV gets his $54m on 23 July and punters start thinking $65-70m underlying for FY21, say $67.5m, that's 11 cps.
Experts at Korda Mentha in their valuation of MET reckon a PE of 17 for MET's underlying earnings.
17 x 11 cps = $1.87. Hmmm

[Baa_Baa]

Might be pretty exciting if MAV gets his $54m on 23 July and punters start thinking $65-70m underlying for FY21, say $67.5m, that's 11 cps.
Experts at Korda Mentha in their valuation of MET reckon a PE of 17 for MET's underlying earnings.
17 x 11 cps = $1.87. Hmmm

That’d be good, let’s say 1 for 10 in the DRP. Nice. Very happy with that.

Korda not experts, just a bigger punter talking their books.

[fish]

Real estate buoyancy seems to have confounded the "experts". One would assume that would include Korda Mentha's "expert" opinion of 5 June, not that to the best of my knowledge they've ever really been recognised at experts in real estate.

vote against and go for minority buy out rights-then arbitration-then a fair and reasonable price-which would be the recent valuation median and dividend/imp credits

Do not know if its possible-we did well with SEA/ttp

[fish]

vote against and go for minority buy out rights-then arbitration-then a fair and reasonable price-which would be the recent valuation median and dividend/imp credits

Do not know if its possible-we did well with SEA/ttp

Reading about schemes arrangement it does not look like minority rights are adequately protected.
However can give evidence in court that the scheme is not fair at $6 and try and prevent the scheme being implemented.
Clearly its not fair to reduce the offer to $6 because of Covid which has not reduced valuations or future profits and additionally delay paying and retaining profits in the delay.

[winner69]

Reading about schemes arrangement it does not look like minority rights are adequately protected.
However can give evidence in court that the scheme is not fair at $6 and try and prevent the scheme being implemented.
Clearly its not fair to reduce the offer to $6 because of Covid which has not reduced valuations or future profits and additionally delay paying and retaining profits in the delay.

That’s it fish ....either YES (and AVG get 100%) or NO and (AVG get zilch). The YES if 75% shares vote yes.

If shareholders don’t vote YES is it all off? Maybe AVG want it to go that way ....their get of jail card maybe?

[Longhaul]

If shareholders don’t vote YES is it all off? Maybe AVG want it to go that way ....their get of jail card maybe?

In the meantime, I have some nice shiny MET shares for sale at a bargain price of $5.90, anyone interested?

[Snow Leopard]

I will admit to being 'mildly disappointed' by the board recommending a $6.zero offer.
I am kind of hopeful that we will get more cents for our shares before this is done and dusted whilst accepting that it could all end in tears.

Meanwhile I will vote against every takeover offer because I do not like loosing companies from the NZX.

My already low opinion of the quality of MET leadership has sunk to a level I would not have possible a few days ago. :mad ;:

[fish]

That’s it fish ....either YES (and AVG get 100%) or NO and (AVG get zilch). The YES if 75% shares vote yes.

If shareholders don’t vote YES is it all off? Maybe AVG want it to go that way ....their get of jail card maybe?

A 75% vote for the scheme out of those voting is a big hurdle-as OGOG found last year in their attempted takeover of NZO .
Personally I find the offer derisory and would need it to be sweetened eg pay out a dividend with imputation credits( I presume some tax has been paid in past year so should be some spare imputation credits )

[Scrunch]

That’s it fish ....either YES (and AVG get 100%) or NO and (AVG get zilch). The YES if 75% shares vote yes.

If shareholders don’t vote YES is it all off? Maybe AVG want it to go that way ....their get of jail card maybe?

Insightful points Winner.

IMO EQT has two objectives here:
-Make money by entering deals at an acceptable entry price. The covid price smash on many companies has increased the world-wide number of candidates that make sense to more seriously consider (meaning a new home can easily be found for EQT's money that would have gone to MET shareholders if this deal doesn't go through)
-Get rid of costs/risks from litigation

That they reoffered $6 indicates that at this price MET is still an attractive deal to them - at that price. There is simply no way of knowing if price points like $6.35 or $6.50 are still acceptable to EQT. If they are, shareholder resistance may result in a higher price appearing.

It may however be that EQT is quite happy to see the deal fall over at $6. This price is the combination of what they actually want to pay and a premium to de-risk the situation around litigation risks. This de-risk has now been achieved, even if the new deal falls over.

As announced with the news release:
"The parties have also agreed to discontinue all litigation and settle all disputes related to the original SIA, with the parties to cover their own costs in relation to the litigation."

[winner69]

In the meantime, I have some nice shiny MET shares for sale at a bargain price of $5.90, anyone interested?

Mine are shinier than yours.

[Scrunch]

A 75% vote for the scheme out of those voting is a big hurdle-as OGOG found last year in their attempted takeover of NZO .
Personally I find the offer derisory and would need it to be sweetened eg pay out a dividend with imputation credits( I presume some tax has been paid in past year so should be some spare imputation credits )

You are highly unlikely to get the imputation element of this wish. Most of the retirement companies are paying very little or no income tax. As per the link below, there were no imputation credits attached to the dividends MET paid across 2017 to 2019.

https://www.nzx.com/instruments/MET/dividends

[winner69]

You are highly unlikely to get the imputation element of this wish. Most of the retirement companies are paying very little or no income tax. As per the link below, there were no imputation credits attached to the dividends MET paid across 2017 to 2019.

https://www.nzx.com/instruments/MET/dividends

Fish ...give up on imputation credits - from Annual Report ...and no tax was paid in H120 either

Imputation credits
The imputation credit balance for the Group at 30 June 2019 is nil (2018: nil). No tax payments were made during the year and dividends paid were unimputed.

Anyway apparently the deal says any divie paid comes off the $6 (So I read on this thread)

[winner69]

So what happens if not enough shareholders vote yes and deal is off?

Scrunch expanded my thinking and EQT probably happy with that happening.

Shareholders left with MET ....probably revert back to trading at a large discount to NTA (is a value destroying company). Not a good long term hold at any price (better options elsewhere) but could be a few decent short term trades if price collapses

Then again there’s always hope that somebody else might be interested in buying them but I’d say that only a mad man would offer $7

Interesting times

[Beagle]

Insightful points Winner.

IMO EQT has two objectives here:
-Make money by entering deals at an acceptable entry price. The covid price smash on many companies has increased the world-wide number of candidates that make sense to more seriously consider (meaning a new home can easily be found for EQT's money that would have gone to MET shareholders if this deal doesn't go through)
-Get rid of costs/risks from litigation

That they reoffered $6 indicates that at this price MET is still an attractive deal to them - at that price. There is simply no way of knowing if price points like $6.35 or $6.50 are still acceptable to EQT. If they are, shareholder resistance may result in a higher price appearing.

It may however be that EQT is quite happy to see the deal fall over at $6. This price is the combination of what they actually want to pay and a premium to de-risk the situation around litigation risks. This de-risk has now been achieved, even if the new deal falls over.


As announced with the news release:
"The parties have also agreed to discontinue all litigation and settle all disputes related to the original SIA, with the parties to cover their own costs in relation to the litigation."

I have got to say this. Given that on 10 July there was scheduled to be a vote by shareholders on whether to take legal action against APVG to enforce the original scheme of arrangement at $7, the directors without seeking a vote decided to waive this action and accept a revised scheme at $6, thereby waiving any chance of enforcing the original $7 deal and shareholders rights to sue for that price...to me that would seem to be an egregious breech of shareholders rights. I think the directors have skated on very thin ice with their unilateral decision to waive shareholders rights in respect of the $7 offer and this is quite probably an actionable matter. It may be unfortunate timing for the directors that they entered into the new scheme implementation agreement at $6 on exactly the same day the vote was to occur on the legal enforcement action on the $7 deal.

The question of undue influence must surely also be asked. The N.Z. super fund has a director on the board and it was clear they wanted out rather than litigating this thing. Did that director having such a clear objective influence the other directors apart from Kim Ellis ?

Finally this question must also be asked, what do the majority of directors know about the assets of MET and its near term prospects that shareholders apparently don't know such that they would accept an offer $1 lower than reported NTA as at 31 December 2019 and no dividends for more than a year ?
I cannot recall seeing weakness displayed at this low level before from any board. What on earth are they thinking ?

There is some serious barking to be done at the forthcoming shareholder meeting.

[Poet]

A couple of points that I think need clarifying (I hope I have these right)

Firstly, I would imagine that the dropping of the current legal action will be contingent on 75% of the shareholders ratifying the new Scheme of Arrangement. So there isn't a scenario where the new scheme gets voted down and the Swedes walk away scott free - the MET board (the new board presumably) can still proceed to enforce the original $7

Also, the swedes are also going to reap an unexpected, and quite significant bonus in the new deal (and one which hasn't been mentioned anywhere as far as I can see) and that is the ability for them to retain all of MET's existing carried forward tax losses so that these can be used to offset future taxable profits (should there be any taxable profits in the future) - I wonder what that is worth to them. This due to a pending IRD rule change.
https://www.ird.govt.nz/covid-19/latest-policy-initiatives/changes-to-the-tax-loss-continuity-rules
All in all a right doing over of the MET shareholders in my opinion

[Beagle]

A couple of points that I think need clarifying (I hope I have these right)

Firstly, I would imagine that the dropping of the current legal action will be contingent on 75% of the shareholders ratifying the new Scheme of Arrangement. So there isn't a scenario where the new scheme gets voted down and the Swedes walk away scott free - the MET board (the new board presumably) can still proceed to enforce the original $7

Also, the swedes are also going to reap an unexpected, and quite significant bonus in the new deal (and one which hasn't been mentioned anywhere as far as I can see) and that is the ability for them to retain all of MET's existing carried forward tax losses so that these can be used to offset future taxable profits (should there be any taxable profits in the future) - I wonder what that is worth to them. This due to a pending IRD rule change.
https://www.ird.govt.nz/covid-19/latest-policy-initiatives/changes-to-the-tax-loss-continuity-rules
All in all a right doing over of the MET shareholders in my opinion

As announced with the news release:
"The parties have also agreed to discontinue all litigation and settle all disputes related to the original SIA, with the parties to cover their own costs in relation to the litigation." This is part and parcel of the new scheme implementation agreement and looks like a comprehensive waiver of all rights in respect of the original scheme implementation agreement to me so I think you have your first point wrong and as I stated above MET directors have unilaterally given away shareholders rights to sue for $7 in exchange for this low-ball new scheme implementation agreement. Kim Ellis, you, me and others are right, this is not a fair deal.

In terms of the proposed loss carry forward changes it would appear the thrust of this emerging proposal is that its aimed at companies raising capital due to Covid 19 effects and hopefully not applicable in a takeover situation like this.

I intend to vote and advocate strongly against this egregiously inadequate deal.

[Longhaul]

Mine are shinier than yours.
What is it they say about polishing turds? ;)

[Baa_Baa]

Do the Top 10 shareholders hold enough to reach or exceed the 75% vote for takeover at $6.00?

Well, yes and no. Yes they do collectively hold 82%, but no because most of them are nominee companies, so they will have to canvass their customer shareholders to determine which say YES sell, or NO don't sell.



Metlifecare Top 10 Shareholders - Companies Office 11/7/20











Shares on issue


213,304,722












Shares


%



HSBC NOMINEES (NEW ZEALAND) LIMITED

57,942,710


27.16%



NEW ZEALAND SUPERANNUATION FUND NOMINEES LIMITED

42,363,688


19.86%



JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

24,966,057


11.70%



CITIBANK NOMINEES (NEW ZEALAND) LIMITED

24,366,705


11.42%



HSBC NOMINEES (NEW ZEALAND) LIMITED

9,743,548


4.57%



ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION

6,449,454


3.02%



JBWERE (NZ) NOMINEES LIMITED

3,701,551


1.74%



FNZ CUSTODIANS LIMITED

2,295,969


1.08%



NEW ZEALAND DEPOSITORY NOMINEE LIMITED

2,017,791


0.95%



FORSYTH BARR CUSTODIANS LIMITED

1,872,588


0.88%








175,720,061


82.38%

[Snoopy]

I have got to say this. Given that on 10 July there was scheduled to be a vote by shareholders on whether to take legal action against APVG to enforce the original scheme of arrangement at $7, the directors without seeking a vote decided to waive this action and accept a revised scheme at $6, thereby waiving any chance of enforcing the original $7 deal and shareholders rights to sue for that price.

Finally this question must also be asked, what do the majority of directors know about the assets of MET and its near term prospects that shareholders apparently don't know such that they would accept an offer $1 lower than reported NTA as at 31 December 2019 and no dividends for more than a year ?


What you might be missing is that the property market is holding up due to pent up demand from the lockdown, generous wage subsidies from the government making people feel secure, removal of debt to equity ratios by the government on bank loans and the perception of very poor and or irregular returns on alternative investments: All time lows in fixed interest, many dividends being cancelled and the sharemarket having a big shock in capital terms.

What many of these subsidised and shocked property market buyers do not realise is that come September, there is going to be large reduction is free cash available to chase their property dreams. The government has achieved their aim of stopping a property market collapse, for now. But looking just a little bit further out, I would suggest, that he property market will likely come under pressure. And it is that future reduction in property values that the bidders for MET are worried about.

SNOOPY

[Leftfield]

What you might be missing is that the property market is holding up due to pent up demand from the lockdown, generous wage subsidies from the government making people feel secure, removal of debt to equity ratios by the government on bank loans and the perception of very poor and or irregular returns on alternative investments: All time lows in fixed interest, many dividends being cancelled and the sharemarket having a big shock in capital terms...
SNOOPY

You seem to ignore a possible key factor in recent high real estate prices ( at least in my region) is the impact of wealthy Kiwi's returning home.....(just saying)

[Joshuatree]

Often management are given inducements for accepting a bid all legit but we dont know what the golden parachutes will be will we?

[pierre]

I bought in at 430. I think I'll take 584 now rather than agonise over whether or not we might get another 50c per share. If I invest the proceeds in OCA only need a gain of 9cps to equal 635 in MET. I think it's much more certain and likely to occur faster.

[Leftfield]

I bought in at 430. I think I'll take 584 now rather than agonise over whether or not we might get another 50c per share. If I invest the proceeds in OCA only need a gain of 9cps to equal 635 in MET. I think it's much more certain and likely to occur faster.

Not silly..... It's all about % gains and doing the best with your capital.

While a lot of eyes have been on MET (well done holders) there have been some impressive/better % gains in some small caps such as PLX, PEB etc.

This chart compares gains in MET (in Blue) v PLX (in red).

11772

[allfromacell]

I bought in at 430. I think I'll take 584 now rather than agonise over whether or not we might get another 50c per share. If I invest the proceeds in OCA only need a gain of 9cps to equal 635 in MET. I think it's much more certain and likely to occur faster.

But then there's always the chance OCA underwhelms especially on cost increases as they've done before (or COVID comes back). At least holding out for the $6 is an almost guaranteed gain and still allows one to sell MET and pick-up OCA if they fall to the downside on an underwhelming result (if one still wants to buy).

Personally I already have far too many OCA from backing up the truck during the COVID dive, so although I like the company I don't feel comfortable buying more. Think I'll sit of the MET shares and see what opportunities arise between now and October which might justify selling early.

[bottomfeeder]

The value MET is better in the medium term, say three to four years. My concern with the economy, is super inflation and the coming depression. MET is well placed to benefit in a number of ways. They are a property company that relies to a lesser extent on incomes. If the tsunami of older people dont have the income to pay levies, they can be recovered at the end of the road from the capital. A sort of senior deferred loan. Why do we think the sweedish are buying in. Because there is real value going forward. I would much rather sacrifice this short term gain and vote against the takeover. It might come down to a small number of votes, particularly if one of the largest holders vote against. This will be interesting.

[winner69]

Not silly..... It's all about % gains and doing the best with your capital.

While a lot of eyes have been on MET (well done holders) there have been some impressive/better % gains in some small caps such as PLX, PEB etc.

This chart compares gains in MET (in Blue) v PLX (in red).

11772


A couple of points that I think need clarifying (I hope I have these right)

Firstly, I would imagine that the dropping of the current legal action will be contingent on 75% of the shareholders ratifying the new Scheme of Arrangement. So there isn't a scenario where the new scheme gets voted down and the Swedes walk away scott free - the MET board (the new board presumably) can still proceed to enforce the original $7

Also, the swedes are also going to reap an unexpected, and quite significant bonus in the new deal (and one which hasn't been mentioned anywhere as far as I can see) and that is the ability for them to retain all of MET's existing carried forward tax losses so that these can be used to offset future taxable profits (should there be any taxable profits in the future) - I wonder what that is worth to them. This due to a pending IRD rule change.
https://www.ird.govt.nz/covid-19/latest-policy-initiatives/changes-to-the-tax-loss-continuity-rules
All in all a right doing over of the MET shareholders in my opinion

Poet ...last Annual Report - There are no unrecognised tax losses for the Group at 30 June 2019 (2018: nil)

[winner69]

Beagle commented — “The question of undue influence must surely also be asked. The N.Z. super fund has a director on the board and it was clear they wanted out rather than litigating this thing. Did that director having such a clear objective influence the other directors apart from Kim Ellis”

What about Alistair Ryan (voted yes) and his Chairmanship of Kingfish Funds etc.

Don’t always hear what the Board vote is in these cases. Kim probably said let’s tell everyone I voted NO si I don’t have the hassle of justifying giving away the company like he had to endure with giving away Waste Management.

[winner69]

That shareholders meeting on Friday that never took place had a resolution that didn’t really mean very much at all ...only appeared to be an exercise in making shareholders thinking they were involved.

If the resolution was passed or not the Board still had the option of walking away from pursuing that enforcement legal action.

Seems both sides are pleased where things stand at the moment .....also seems many (possibly including EQT) will be happy if more than 25% vote NO

[Beagle]

https://www.interest.co.nz/property/105977/auction-activity-buoyant-first-week-july-sales-rate-rises-57?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+11 +July+2020

EQT must be drooling at the thought that after rolling the leading sheep over so easily all others might queue up in an orderly manner like lambs to the slaughter. They must think Kiwi investors and directors are a bunch of pathetic wimps.
More anecdotal evidence that real estate is doing just fine.

[Raz]

Interesting thread, nice to be a fly on the wall... would answer a few questions concerning timing of exit.

[Beagle]

You seem to ignore a possible key factor in recent high real estate prices ( at least in my region) is the impact of wealthy Kiwi's returning home.....(just saying)

I agree 100%. There are over one million ex pat Kiwi's overseas.
I think in a Covid 19 ravaged world Snoopy has completely overlooked considering how many tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, will want to come back.
If we can only manage 5,000 per 14 day quarantine cycle, it'll take 280 days per 100,000 who return which suggests the exact opposite of what Snoopy has suggested and we could be on for a protracted period where demand vastly exceeds supply and we all know what happens to prices when that situation arises. Perhaps this has already started ?, see linked article in post #3012 above.

[Baa_Baa]

I think you’re right @beagle there is and will be a relentless return to ‘safe NZ’ driving pressure on housing, confounding the naysayers who expect a ‘normal’ recession. The caps on returnees will be lifted in time. It is different this time, the fundamental drivers are founded in an event that has no precedent for many decades. And the population aging is accelerating, not slowing down. Bodes very well for all retirement sector, meeting demand with supply, releasing housing stock into the market for the younger ones.

[Leftfield]

I think you’re right @beagle there is and will be a relentless return to ‘safe NZ’ driving pressure on housing, confounding the naysayers who expect a ‘normal’ recession. The caps on returnees will be lifted in time. It is different this time, the fundamental drivers are founded in an event that has no precedent for many decades. And the population aging is accelerating, not slowing down. Bodes very well for all retirement sector, meeting demand with supply, releasing housing stock into the market for the younger ones.

A recent property auction in my region saw a property with a CV of $1.2 mill get sold for $2.1 mill.

Purchasers were Kiwi's returning from overseas due to Covid-19.

[dobby41]

A recent property auction in my region saw a property with a CV of $1.2 mill get sold for $2.1 mill.

Purchasers were Kiwi's returning from overseas due to Covid-19.

Yeah - CVs are really lagging and Aucklands revaluation will probably be put off another year.
CVs are, and always have been, mostly nonsence in valueing residential property.

[Bjauck]

A recent property auction in my region saw a property with a CV of $1.2 mill get sold for $2.1 mill.

Purchasers were Kiwi's returning from overseas due to Covid-19. UK house prices are dropping - maybe owing to Brexit and Covid as kiwis and other people move away back to their home countries.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-10/u-k-house-prices-see-biggest-quarterly-fall-since-2009