Your right though, Brynes must know something the general public doesn't. It is a very positive sign that he is buying up shares.
Everything is telling me, don't touch finance companies. However, it is hard not to jump in.
368,000 shares done at 55 cents! Somethings up! Whats up bro?
I saw that too... im wondering who is doing the selling. Is VIK still selling and if so who is buying. Just trying to work out how low it can go and if its time to start accumulating. That said the cricket is more depressing :)
Lets assume its VIk (and not a bad assumption)... that would mean they have about 1.2 million to go.... Interesting times
Hmmmm....buyer paying 2cents above opening price ...price slipped a cent since the 356000 haul....
A willing big buyer is lurking ...methinks.
Not interested in the seller it's the buyer I'm interested in......willing to shell out $2 million exactly assuming commission comes to $4200 (0.2%).
Discl: disgruntled ex holder who bought at mid $2 & held for a year & sold at mid $2 after totally losing faith in management.
I have bagged this stock since it was $1.50 & will keep on doing it until someone (preferably management) can reveal a profitable business plan. The reported profits for the last 2 years have relied on one off asset sales.
I think that instead of wondering about a 200k trade by a director why not think about why Hugh Green wanted his 20m back? At these prices why did he not do a full takeover? Do you think he knows this business? Do you think he has trust in management or the business plan
A broker offering advice as to which are the undervalued stocks on the market with potential ????..... nah...nice thought through.
Probable assumption...... DPC loving investor looking to pick up a large chunk in a illiquid stock and has to make the broker do a honest days work in scratching around to find the shares to trade....yeah I 'll settle for this assumption until better informed
No announcement yet so assume Byrnes wasn't the buyer
There must be a time period otherwise there is no need to disclose. My thougts were 2 weeks but that is only a guess
The rules are on the NZX website...
Looks like a large buyer is prepare to take out VIK's holding.
Something's up!!!
Easily - Ask yourself - how much operating profit did they make in the last two years before the finance world went kaput? Will they accurately report provisions on the loan book? Have they sold Equity investment advisors & why not (is it loss making?) What is the current NTA after they have sold the property? Will investor sentiment turn positive on the finance sector while the media have a blue chip / MFS / LOM / Geneva / field day with endless tales of misery to sell papers / advertising with?
A better question is - what are the odds on this company not going into receivership? They are never quoted as one of the big boys & appear to be under capitalised.
I am very negative on this one & have been for a long time - Can anyone change my mind with any factual positives on this company??????
Dont need to change your mind Dsurf. If you dont like it, then stay well clear of it. Maybe you can sleep better at nights. This stock is for people with large steel balls that dont need to sleep and have a $2,000 Italian coffee maker in the kitchen. :D
DPC is now considered a speccy stock. However most speccy stocks start the otherway. i.e start ups and not mature co's.
itheresting volume and good point.. who is buying?
The melt down continues.. the difficult thing about investing in this type of stock is how good is their cash flow and how bad are the loan defaulters. That i am afraid is the big unknown. Too many companys now how to make a profit but still go bankrupt
Dsurf,
After talking about the massive collapse to 47 cents on $284 of trades, are you now going to discuss the quick recovery to 50 cents on a major, twice as big nearly, $500 of trades?
I was wondering how brent king feels.., when the price droped to 47 cents, and bio droped to 2.7 cents
just came across the latest DPC business update ...
(check http://www.dorchester.co.nz/About-Do...enuId/186.aspx
Looks pretty good to me - still plenty of cash reserves ($30M). If we assume that they don't publish plain lies - can anybody explain to me what all the fuss is about?
I'm very comfortable in knowing that Dorchester no longer own Direct Broking...
Excuse my ignorance.I could open the pdf file from the computer i as using. Here are some questions i would ask.
If they have $30m is cash reserves or equivilant then why did they need to borrow $20m. Is there something i missed? Did they sell a big asset or something?
It has a market cap of $17m. Something doesnt add up and smells funny. Whats going on? A fanastic bargin at todays prices or anothander finance company on the brink?
Meanwhile, the trend is still down.
Watching with interest.
OK - ask yourself what they are not saying or what they are really saying - I willl translate since this company has been talking utter shyte for so long. Quotes are from the marketing update.
1/ "Since our last update in early December we have been focusing on the three key platforms that I believe will position the company for the future - refocus, strengthen and
simplify."
refocus = what we did last time is not working - we got it wrong or we were not focused last time but now we are - it is all different - we have learnt from our unfocused past
strengthen = we are in weak position even though we are making a big deal about having 30m in cash or equivalents - How much is cash & what are the equivalents? If the equivalents include shares - which companies & when were they marked to market. The devil is always in the detail so don't ruin our marketing by giving details!!!
Simplify = we have a lot of loss making operations that were bad business decisions to get into. This resulted from our unfocused strategy
2/ "I have made a commitment to communicate with our investors openly and honestly so that you can fully appreciate the fundamentals of our business and its future direction."
The fundamentals are not reported - what is the re-investment rate, how many loans are in arrears, is the loan book growing or shrinking, etc etc
The future direction is to strengthen, refocus and simplify - fantastic direction which I am very appreciative of
3/ "As our loans are being collected more promptly and efficiently this has resulted in a reduction in penalty fee income, which debtors pay on overdue loans. We have deliberately adopted this policy of securing full cash repayment as soon as possible as we believe that “cash in the bank” is prudent in the current market."
Translated to - our income is reducing, our loan book is reducing, our profitability is reducing
4/ "The process of simplifying our business is on going as we ensure that we are right-sized for the market and opportunities available to us. This is a natural consequence of the new environment, where we believe retail funding will continue at lower than historical levels."
Translated - our business model is outdated where we rely on retail funds. Because we were unfocused we have only just realised this. the business is shrinking because we are having to sell our assets to protect liquidity since our funding base is no longer available.
5/ To supplement this (retail funds) we are continuing to explore institutional funding lines, with several potential opportunities being developed.
There are no no concrete offers because we are in the middle of a credit crunch and we have acted far too slowly
6/ "Cash (and equivalents) represented 12% of Dorchester Finance’s total assets as at the end of February. Through March our cash position has remained consistently above $30 million."
So what - Are they making operating profit. Does it cover fixed costs. How long will it last
7/ "The Graphs"
Funding obligations within next 12 months = around 160m
Financial assets & cash equivalents = around 177m
177 - 160 = 17m which is the amount of bad loans that can be absorbed & liabilities will be <= assets.
17m / 160m = 10.6%
In other words as long as:
1 they are generating operating profits that cover fixed costs
and 2 Bad debts do not go over 10.6%
then there is no problem.
Of course what we really need to know is who the loan book is to, how much in cars, property businesses etc, how much is 1st priority debt & how much is 2nd priority debt. etc etc
dsurf. good post and you are probably very accurate in your assessment.
Over the years i have become more very (call me cynical) of lack of true disclosure. When a company starts generalising about their position i begin to worry. What are they hiding/not telling the average investor. The mere fact they mention $30m cash or equivelant (what is the equivelant made up of) raises red flags.
On face value this stock looks a dead set bargin. Its only when you lok into it that there are concerns raised. It seems the further you dig, the more questions and copncerns are raised. Dsurf, you mention about their book value. is their business shrinking or growing. How much money do they have exposed to where. These are all pertainent questions.
For the sake of investors and a friend who invested heavily in this company i hope i am wrong.
Just my opinion of course all all investors should do their own research
The small finance sector is in an advanced bear market phase of its own and is at present still suffering from a prolonged capitulation phase (wave c). This segment is more advanced within it's bear market than the NZX index overall which is the "averaging" (weightings?) of the companies within differing sectors..
Some sectors within the overall market get clobbered more than others. Note that the energy segment of the NZX such as companies Pike and NZO is still in a bull market phase cycle.
Ok This Finance sector is suffering from a rather particular severe form of Bear ...this bear is very nasty, and it's destructive (an asset gobbler). Most finance companies have meagre NTA's... exception being DPC and so perhaps this is the reason for its severe mauling.
Bear market phases are notorious for their illogical behaviour..and results in unjustified terminations of companies as well as possible bargain buys of others.
So...2 questions.
Have we hit the bottom of this sector bear phase (the beginning of the U ???? ......
My personal feeling is no/maybe (negative). If/when the bottom is reached, expect a long lag to recovery (the U).
What financial companies will survive this bear ? Identification, so to re-invest at the middle of the U curve....DPC ? (the example given, as this is the DPC post thread)...............
All indications suggest yes. Against many commentators beliefs I believe in Chris Lee's comment that Management and the larger wealthy shareholders are DPC biggest strengths ...Management ability to quickly adapt to the changing landscape of the NZ financial secondary market and to its major wealthy shareholders who are willing to put their money into DPC at times of need.
Disc: no DPC..... on watchlist
Agree that if this one survives then it will at some point in time worth buying. however it needs to build an extended base before I would dream of buying it.
The large shareholders are an asset and they have shown that they are willing to lend to DPC. They also want thier money back! What I can't resolve though is that are willing to lend to protect thier investment, but they are also saying that the investment is not worth having 100% of.
I strongly disagree that management have acted quickly. The finance crisis has been going on for well over 6 months and that was when they should have broadened the funding base.
Looks to me like HG has said "go and loan from someone else and prove this is a viable business still because I have better places to put my money"
dsurf - Thanks for a good analysis and explanation. I agree that you hold a valid view point - and yes, the company management is probably not as good as it could be!
On the other hand - Paul Byrnes (company director and chartered accountant) just bought another 50.000 shares (@47 cents each). I would expect he knows how much these cash reserves are worth ...
cheers ...
Yes Paul Byrnes buy ins is very positive. It would confirm that at this stage Paul assumes that DPC will be a survivor and it's share price must be grossly underpriced for him to be buying in at a time of the rapidly falling shareprice.
Although it's nice to think Paul Byrnes knows what he doing...From the outside looking in it seems he is making mistakes.....mostly timing his buy ins. He's trying to catch that falling dagger...ouch! Maybe Phaedrus can give him some advice..:)
I guess its that old strategy of risk verses reward I mentioned in one of my posts earlier.
Is that announced future rights issue still on the agenda ????
Assuming you had to buy......
Who would you buy ?
Hanover, Dorchester, or Dominion Finance and in which order.
Cheers BB
Billy Boy Dorchester, Dominion Finance then Hanover
Currently I would say Dominion, Dorchester, Hanover...
Nita
quote Did they sell a big asset or something?
Yes they did, at the end last year they sold the building and leased back the floor(s) that has their head office in. Sold it for just over $30 Million from memory..slightly above book value. This is the reason why DPC has such a high NTA/share compared with other finance companies.
That $30M alone accounts for NTA/s = 30M/36.098M* = 83 cents/share
Not sure Steve....finance companies as you know are complex beasts and very hard to find accurate data.
Unless someone in the know can tell us, I guess we will have to wait until the end of May for the Full Year Result. I think the NTA was about $1.65/share at the last count wasn't it ?
DB details has it as $1.67
Using Total equity from the half year report it works out at $1.78. How much of this is realisable is anyones guess.
The NTA figure at full year result (end of May) will give us the amount of burn if any.
Agree with you that no one is sure of NTA. Just looked at Dorchester Finances Prospectus and in the last six months the current management lent over 70% of their capital to one party. This is astonishing in a time when the CEO says they are preserving cash. Assuming that this is a property loan I hope its not that big property development in Queenstown that some of the other finance companies are struggling with.
On the big seller a couple of weeks ago, rumour is that it was not Viking but ACC. Rumour is also that Viking have not been selling much in the last couple of months. Anyone know if that is true??
ACC only has a small amount in DPC.
Yes Nina-I understand that-was just responding to a question re the repayment of the $20m.
If the assets of the coy are worth the stated values it may be in the best interests of shareholders to liquidate the coy.
Thanks, my info was that they sold down to the small holding they now have.
The $20m plus loan in Dorchester Finance had nothing to do with the shareholders loans. I also noted that they also lent on another loan $15m thats 35m plus in the last six months to Sept lent.
Hope they aren't loans bailing out St Laurence.
Understand that the St Laurence capital raising hasn't gone well.
The only one that seems to be making money out of DPC is the CEO who appears to be doing nothing, and the directors (other than Byrnes) whose definition of risk seems to be getting out of bed in the morning.
They announced at the Annual Meeting that they were selling the Investment Advisary business. Still no info on the sale. How long does it take to sell a small loss making company?
They must be relying on the Insurance business, but I can't see how this is going to prop them up. The RAM market is too small and they lost out to Sentinal big time two years ago.
Totally lost faith and the sp would indicate I am not alone.
If you are not relying on retail debenture money, now would be a great time to set-up a well run finance company.
The CEO is a joke - His biggest crimes of which there are many!
1/ Getting into a public verbal warfare with the founder and large shareholder, which has singlehandedly destroyed 75% (was circa $2.00 when the tiff got public) of the owners (shareholders) money. Fantastastic value destruction
2/ Having no plan or direction - RAM did not work and they were very slow getting into the market. Was BS all the time by an academic who appears to know jack about business - first adopter, competiton (senate) , etc
3/ did not see the liquidity crisis, retail funding crisis, etc so destroyed the companies liquidity position & created huge financial & funding risk
I think a three year finance course could be written on the back of his performance as a guide of: lack of planning, lack of direction, lack of focus, lack of strategy, negative communications, value destructive policies, Risk & how to create it, NTA destruction, Governance, Reporting standards & transparency, etc etc
Is dsurf Brent King? lol
dsurf - nah, don't stop, it takes many views to make up a forum. I'm just gently mocking as you seem to absolutely hate the bloke, much like BK :)
dsurf.
I thought is was BK who startd the the public and media slanging of DPC CEO. Maybe im wrong. Alll the same what BK did was totally stupid unless he wanted the shareprice to drop for some other motive.
Although i thought BK has lost the plot he is still very clever in being able to use other peoples money to his benefit. How this pans out i have no idea. I am sure some others in the know have any idea on what is going to happen
Hi DSurf,
I commend you on the mildness of your opinion on this. I'd love to hear your real views.
by the way is DPC short for Dopes Performing Cluelessly?
My only problem is with Byrnes buying , is that unless he is breaking the insider trading laws he is actually confirming to the market that nothing is going on at DPC. Buying could be seen as a criticism of DPC's management and his own Board
Does that mean that they:
Don't have a buyer for Equity
Don't have alternative funding
Can't complete the St Laurence deal (remember they had some option to buy another 25%)
No business strategy
I'm with Dsurf the current management is nothing short of an expensive receiver
He is criticising the board I am
Brynes being buying at 80cents and the price is now 47 cents. mmmmmmmmmmmmm.
He may have been better buying NZO or taking out a DPC unsecured convertible note.
If something is happening behind the scenes I'm with mskv.
Let's review what happened.
BK sold his shareholding to Bridgecorp in a deal which was censured by the NZX.
BK started buying back into DPC at over $2.00, trying to regain control.
BK could not regain control, start criticising the company whilst he sold out of his shareholding at ever lower prices.
We are missing something here, geniuses?
I think that line 3 is incorrect.
I see no evidence of BK buying more at $2.
His remaining shares were tipped into Viking.
They have been selling.
They are also carrying a massive book loss on their holding.
So I can understand why BK is grumpy.
If Byrnes hadn't been buying I wonder what the share price would be?
It appears to me that Byrnes is only delaying the inevitable, Zero.
DPC have no business strategy, inept management, and I only own a few shares of DPC so i can attend their AGM. Its amongst some of the best comedy you can get and the clowns are up centre and in front on what they call the Board Table. Thoroughly recommend it to you all, my only issue is that they only serve tea at the end not Martini's (shaken not stirred).:p
Lets really review what has happened to DPC.
Yes BK did sell to Bridgecorp (in hindsight a great deal wish I was part of) in 2004
He resigned from DPC when price was $2.50
His shares were tipped into Vik
DPC appoints CEO with no industry or CEO experience
No finance sector experience on the Board or management at a time when the well predicted demise of the sector was under way.
Vik buy shares hoping to put a Director with finance exp
25% of St Laurence purchased for $30m!!! with option in a years time. Podmore added to board
Media criticisms from both DPC and BK (who starts it is debatable)
Did not manage their cash (requiring a urgent top up loan from shareholders) after spending $20m in cash to buy St Laurence and 45m in two loans(done with in six months of the loan from shareholder)
Criticisms of the performance of the company have born true as the company has failed to generate operating profits, lacks strategy for future.
Current Board's best approach is to put it into volantary receivership and hand back the Net asset backing of $1.70 to shareholders
Money to be made in this stock in the wind up!!
Balance, please be rational, how can you condem BK who sold 19.9% of DPC at 3.70 and know they are worth 47 cents.
BK sounds like a bloody genius!!!
Yes, he made have bought more at around $2.00 but it was peanuts in comparision to what he used to own, Play Money, Bloody Play Money.
BK is the guy who got out of the finance company sector at its top, told everyone it would turn nasty and nobody listened. Many would have now wished they had!
If i was the owner of DPC i would get BK on the phone and ask him to come and sort out this mess. Cause you can bet you last dollar on the fact that the current management only have on solution. Sell all assets before they go to ZERO!!!!
BK is a genius?
This is a guy who seems to have seen the credit crunch coming - note his comments of a few years ago about profiting from a time when asset prices start to fall via VIK.
But, what is he in? Penny dreadful BIO and DPC, held through penny dreadful "investment" company VIK!
I see little sign of BK profiting from a period when assets are being repriced due to risk being repriced.
What he has said doesn't count : what counts is what he has done. As the old saying goes, predicting rain doesn't count, building an ark counts.
Regarding the new CEO - and comments that he is effectively a highly paid liquidator - I think there is actually an element of truth in this, but, the negative inference is completely wrong. Highly paid? He doesn't set his pay level. Liquidator? Well....
You guys appear to be saying that the company sucks, the sector sucks, the board sucks etc.
You then bash the CEO for implementing a strategy that involves preserving cash, collecting loans in, not making many new loans etc. In other words, winding back / winding down the business, or at least the size of it.
If we accept that "everything sucks" is the correct analysis, then I see the actions of the CEO as rational.
The CEO deserves criticism for:
Acting to slowly when the finance company fallout was well predicted
Having no strategy
Not being focused (& telling everyone)
Not having a direction (&telling everyone)
Selling Equity at the worse time possible
Destroying the share price via imcomprehensible public fighting with BK
Destroying share holder loyalty
Destroying a potential funding base from those shareholders
The lack of operating profit
The hopeless board that has not changed
Being the top guy who has the responsibility
Starnger Danger -What does he deserve praise for?
dsurf,
In ordinary times, much of what you say would be relevant. Today though, he only has job : make sure the company survives the next 12 months, then work out what to do at that stage.
I believe the moves he is making - with the cards he was dealt, and dealt to himself early in his reign (St Laurence) - are the correct ones to maximise the chances of survival.
He is a brilliant investor! Brilliant at destorying shareholders value. Would anyone here invest in VIK? LOL what a laugh.
Hey MSKV, since you love BK so much, do you own any VIK shares? If so at what price did you get VIK? If not, then you are full of shiat.
Dr Who
Interesting response. I seem to have hit a raw nerve.
I am a disgruntled DPC shareholder who paid too much and have watched the value be systematically destroyed to under a third of the net asset value.
I have not endorsed BK at all, this is about the performance of this company and its CEO.
Stranger Danger, what do you mean by the card he was dealt?
The cards were a nice set, orchestrated by BK who was furiously diversifing income streams of DPC prior to his departure. BK was predicting the downfall of many finance companies, and was setting up DPC to profit from it, building significant cash reserves. Unfortunately Walker steps in with a merchant banker attitude and just had to buy something, ST Laurence, at the peak of the market at a premium price.
SD if you attended the last DPC AGM you would have seen Podmore on stage smiling from ear to ear, one happy boy. He was like the cat that got the cream, Walker bought a PUP as they say.
James Bond I agree buying St Laurence was very stupid
I would like to highlight the brilliant communication skills by the CEO in todays herald article. (give him a pay rise!!!)
Providing info is annoying!!!!!!!!
By definition DPC already comply!!!!!!!!!
Andrew Walker, chief executive of Dorchester Pacific Group, one of a handful of remaining listed finance companies, said the request from NZX was clearly a kneejerk reaction to Lombard's failure and "a rather annoying hindrance to our business".
He said it would divert management from core tasks "to come up with answers to questions which by definition you should already be in compliance with".
NZX puts finance firms on notice after failure
5:00AM Tuesday April 22, 2008
By Adam Bennett
Finance companies in freefall
Geneva fate in hands of debenture investors
Trade in PFG suspended
In the aftermath of Lombard Finance's failure, New Zealand Exchange has moved to improve the information disclosed by the remaining handful of listed finance companies.
The market operator and regulator said that "in the current environment" it considered finance firms' monthly reinvestment rates, debt servicing obligations, expected monthly income and loan concentration "material information" that should be disclosed to the market.
Unless they explain by the close of trade today why they do not consider this information material, they will be required to disclose it by the end of each month beginning on April 30.
NZX specified that information on loan concentration should detail the proportion of a firms' overall lending to its biggest five borrowers, "and any significant connections" between them.
This month, the Herald reported that the loan book of Lombard Finance and Investments, a subsidiary of the listed Lombard Group, had become highly concentrated. The information was in an amendment to the company's prospectus filed to the Companies Office last Christmas Eve, but despite its apparent significance, Lombard's parent did not disclose it to the market.
After Lombard Finance's receivership on April 10, NZX confirmed it was investigating the company's compliance with disclosure rules.
Andrew Walker, chief executive of Dorchester Pacific Group, one of a handful of remaining listed finance companies, said the request from NZX was clearly a kneejerk reaction to Lombard's failure and "a rather annoying hindrance to our business".
He said it would divert management from core tasks "to come up with answers to questions which by definition you should already be in compliance with".
NZX head of market supervision Elaine Campbell denied that the request was a reaction to Lombard. "This is a sector that has been seeing troubles now for some lengthy period of time."
Under the present conditions the information NZX was asking for was clearly material in that it was "what a reasonable person would expect to have an effect on the price of securities".
"This is what we believe these companies should be disclosing and we have given them the opportunity to dispute that."
NZX's beefed-up approach to disclosure applies to listed finance companies or companies with material finance company subsidiaries. It would apply to Cynotech Holdings, Dominion Finance, Dorchester Pacific Group, Marac Finance's owner, Pyne Gould Corporation, and New Zealand Finance.
Listed finance companies or finance company subsidiaries of listed companies which have struck difficulties in the past two years are Lombard, OPI Pacific Finance -formerly known as MFS Pacific Finance, and Nathans Finance.
OPI Pacific Finance is not in receivership and is seeking a moratorium from investors. Campbell said its parent company was expected to comply with NZX's request.
Meanwhile, Lombard Group chief executive Michael Reeves yesterday said no value would be attributed to Lombard Finance in the group'scoming March year results. The value of $2 million in Lombard Finance debenture stock held by the group would be assessed after an initial receivers' report.
Reeves also said that Lombard Group has sold its Maestro online insurance and mortgage facilitation business to the company's general manager, and Lombard's board was reviewing the group's operations in the light of the Lombard Finance receivership.
WHAT NZX WANTS
* Listed finance company information - NZX deems the following "material":
* The reinvestment rate of investors for the month to date.
* The debt being serviced for the month to date.
* The expected income for the following month.
* The concentration of the loan book, specifically the proportion of the overall loan book in the top five borrowers and any significant connections between the top five borrowers such that the failure of one could impact on the other.
I must admit ..D surf.. reading between the lines from Andrew's statement it sounds very much like they(DPC) haven't an ongoing updating financial monitoring system in place...if that's the case a financial company not monitoring its own performance is scary to say the least. With a monitoring system in place it should not be a onerous task in reporting to the NZX every month.
I also have a feeling these guys still don't get it!!
....Andy, my lad, have a look at your companies share price...it could tell you why the NZX acted this way....there is no knee jerk reaction from where I sit.
Anyway....Guys...tough!!! If NZ small finance companies want to act like secret societies and ignore your investors and shareholders, treat them like second class citizens, and feed them with childish like sales propaganda bullsh1t..then you get want you deserve....regulations!!
As I said in my last post ..Good idea NZX.
I hope now that the industry wakes up and gives it's shareholders/investors the respect they deserve. It's long overdue.
Disc: I have no shares in this sector at the moment.
At that time, that it was a defensive move...a textbook example of merging with the big guys so they can protect ones backside from a hostile takeover as well as protection against an increasingly hostile financial environment. At the time DPC was exposed (high NTA value) with funds drying up, a shortage of experienced skilled personnel, and Hugh Green at that time may not had been seen as a reliable white knight stockholder.
In hindsight... a good move for DPC as a ongoing company.....bad news/no win situation for the shareholders.
Why not just ask for a monthly cashflow statement. And if DPC cannot provide this then they can send in copies of their bank statements to the NZX and highlight capital items vs p&l items. Forget about the bulls*it, no depreciation etc .All as they need is a photocopier and a highlight pen.
The NZX will soon work out if the Company is in trouble of not. Hell, I'll do it for a $1000 a month. I'm sure that the shareholders will not mind paying this small amount for an independent report each month on the cash position.
Qualifications. Member C.A since 1990, B.Com, U.K banking 8 years. Now mucking around home growing Kiwifruit and analysing companies on the NZX,ASX.
Hoop how do you come to your hindsight decision. Because my thoughts are that the colapse of ST Laurence will kill Dorchester and I think there is a big probability that ST Laurence will colapse
StL collapse??? I'm under the impression StL is one of the few very strong Financial company Groups in NZ and Australia...Chris Lee who is in regular contact rates it highly.
A La, secret society...I'm probably the last to know ..so Possum (without libeling yourself) what's the gos??
Hoop just my nose tells me it smells. & My nose detected a very foul odour from Provincial Finance over four years ago and Cris Lee was rating it very highly. Do some research on national property trust and there conection with some of the ST Laurence people. My nose has told me that Strategic Finance is not in the best of condition either. Some very big holes in the ground here in Auckland that are not going anywhere at moment the newspapers say they are financing. Very glad to have my money out of Strategic.
The NZX should have demanded this long ago. It would have been preferable to the weak 'confirm that nothing is wrong' request that they did when it was first hitting the fan. Better later than never, I guess...
What's surprising is that they obviously don't have daily management reporting with regards to liquidity etc, given their loan book size and current market conditions, which should be available with the push of a buttom on any halfway decent finance-company accounting system.
Disc: have previously worked in the finance industry.
Well I read DPC response to NZX enquiry.....hate to admit it.. but.. I didn't understand one word that was written :confused::confused:...could anyone with a higher IQ than me please tell me the state of DPC with facts from this piece of gobbledygook nonsense.
Oh dear!!! as an investor I going off DPC and the rest of these financial companies in a big way!!!!
NZX..I consider this disclosure as unacceptable.
DPC 22/04/2008 GENERAL REL: 1648 HRS Dorchester Pacific Limited GENERAL:
DPC: Dorchester Pacific Limited -
Continuous Disclosure Inquiry 22 April 2008
Ms Elaine Campbell
Head of Market Supervision
New Zealand Exchange Limited
P O Box 2959
Wellington
Dear Ms Campbell
Dorchester Pacific Limited - Continuous Disclosure Inquiry
Dorchester Pacific Limited ("DPC") has received the letter from NZX Regulation referred to in their press release dated 18 April 2008 entitled "Finance Company Disclosure".
DPC undertakes regular reviews of a broad suite of financial metrics relevant to assessing its financial and trading position, and its solvency. Whilst the matters listed by NZX Regulation in its 18 April 2008 letter are important considerations, they are a subset of the broader suite and focussing on these factors without regard to the other metrics provides an incomplete and potentially misleading picture.
These financial metrics are reviewed by DPC against the background of its continuous disclosure obligations under Rule 10.1.1 of the NZSX Listing Rules and the disclosure requirements placed upon Dorchester by its various trust deeds. Should any such factor, when considered in the context of other relevant information, be "material information" under the NZSX Listing Rules, then DPC is required to disclose such information to the market.
The Directors confirm that as at the date of this letter DPC is in full compliance with its obligations under Rule 10.1.1. In providing this confirmation, the Directors have specifically considered the matters listed by NZX Regulation.
Yours sincerely
Barry Graham Chairman
End CA:00163570 For:DPC Type:GENERAL Time:2008-04-22:16:48:30
At the same time, whether you can decipher the detail of the statement or not, it pleases me to see DPC and others telling the NZX to stick it up their kilt. The school prefectly tone of their communications alone puts my nose out of joint. Then there's their utter lack of commercialism. What a bunch of cardy-wearing hacks!
DPC management have not got time for continuous financial disclosure but have time to get into a legal dispute with the 'system' by taking on the very establishment that is trying to give them a platform to show how secure they actually are. Hence, making it easier for them to raise capital.
This is an opportunity for the financial companies, not a threat.
But then again, it all depends on how 'bent' you are. i.e what you have to hide.
Full Disclosure?
What about DPC's investments in Queenstown? Why is it that I know about it yet the market doesnt? How about some shareholder ask DPC these investments. Or ask about how much tyhey arte making/losing on the reverse moortgages. Getting sour by the day but then again, what would i know?
If any of you people are holders, give them a ring and ask how these investments are going. Then see what happens in the next few months.
In hindsight we can call this purchase of St Laurence anything we like. It may have been all sorts of strategies.
The issue is that amongst all the turmoil of the finance sector DPC purchased 25% of ST Laurence for $30m. now that makes by my arithmetic a valuation of $120m when STL net assets were $50m.
As a DPC shareholder my only hope is that there is some value in the StL holding?? How did there capital raise go?
Last year when the shares started down turning at an accelerated pace, I emailed DPC as an concerned shareholder, gave them all my personal information so they would know I was genuine... eg shareholder number phone number to ring etc etc...After no response to my email I rang twice and got mucked around (busy,sorry unavailable). They never did reply to my phone-calls neither...so I took the view this was a bad sign.
Also well done Pyne Gould Corporation Limited (PGC) Marac!!!
Just goes to show who the switched on finance companies are in NZ.
They were happy to comply, no grizzles....Saw an opportunity to promote their company and did so..Got great free advertising for their efforts from the media. They come across as investor friendly, nothing to hide, no bullsh1t, we are doing alright attitude showing facts to prove it.
The rest...sad to say more of the same old BS, unfriendly tardy companies with I don't give a sh1t altitude..gave an impression to media that they have issues and lots to hide...
Apart from Marac who took this as a good marketing opportunity the rest I'm afraid dropped the ball.
This guys( Reihana & Co).... is commercialism at work...... Companies who see opportunity within a poor situation and milk it for what it's worth....Marac is miles ahead in this department and this probably why they are successful within this tough financial environment.
[QUOTE=Hoop;196127]Well I read DPC response to NZX enquiry.....hate to admit it.. but.. I didn't understand one word that was written :confused::confused:...could anyone with a higher IQ than me please tell me the state of DPC with facts from this piece of gobbledygook nonsense.
Oh dear!!! as an investor I going off DPC and the rest of these financial companies in a big way!!!!
NZX..I consider this disclosure as unacceptable.
Hoop let me translate:
Dorchester Pacific Limited ("DPC") has received the letter from NZX Regulation referred to in their press release dated 18 April 2008 entitled "Finance Company Disclosure".
= It is only a letter under the "Finance company disclosure rules" therefore we only need to obey the legal & technical guidelines of these rules (shareholders, debentureholders etc don't need info, this is for the insiders only)
DPC undertakes regular reviews of a broad suite of financial metrics relevant to assessing its financial and trading position, and its solvency.
= We will not tell you which metrics or whart thier values are because it is not anyones business
Whilst the matters listed by NZX Regulation in its 18 April 2008 letter are important considerations, they are a subset of the broader suite and focussing on these factors without regard to the other metrics provides an incomplete and potentially misleading picture.
= We disagree that these metrics are important since they only tell part of the story and we are not keen to tell any of the story since the publice etc are too dum
These financial metrics are reviewed by DPC against the background of its continuous disclosure obligations under Rule 10.1.1 of the NZSX Listing Rules and the disclosure requirements placed upon Dorchester by its various trust deeds.
= We are obeying the rules but refuse to prove it
Should any such factor, when considered in the context of other relevant information, be "material information" under the NZSX Listing Rules, then DPC is required to disclose such information to the market.
= as per the rules
The Directors confirm that as at the date of this letter DPC is in full compliance with its obligations under Rule 10.1.1. In providing this confirmation, the Directors have specifically considered the matters listed by NZX Regulation.
= as per the rules
All up another collossal communications failure by the board.
Best they go - they are hopeless
p.s. does anyone know what they are focusing on - RAM? property loans? car loans? anything profitable? shareholder relations? capital raising?
Seems all they do is cover there own backsides while protecting their jobs