As the article said - ........focus is very much on protecting the banks. Not their investors.
No doubt Heartland will come up with something similar as well
Printable View
As the article said - ........focus is very much on protecting the banks. Not their investors.
No doubt Heartland will come up with something similar as well
That's amazing... wish I had your astounding abilities. "You don't have the time but yet it seems obvious"...(wow) The market decline is due to questions about asset quality (to me it looks like the market is declining in many places so how do you know its due to a specific item such as asset quality) Wow again. Holders are all silly...wow, wow wow. Sure some of us are but ALL of us...ok I guess if you say so..must be right. I retire suitably rebuked and humbled by your superior abilities. However always finish on a positive said my mum...so appreciate your comments and thanks for your wishing us good luck.
But this old dog has been right about HBL and maybe, just maybe he knows a fair bit about these unsecured capital bonds. When it hits the fan you want to be at the front of the queue eating what's there first not the back accepting any mopped up mess you're offered. The Credit Sails issue promised great unsecured returns too and some of us remember how that ended.
A few months back I called the top on MTFHC's at 76, now 68 and no real depth on the buy side. Does it really make the cat's skim milk go so sour when I'm right again.
What did your mother say about sarcasm BB...
You obviously have a need to be top dog and generally regarded as Guru material Roger. Those days are gone for me...my testosterone, along with Elvis, has got up and left the building. I, along with probably many posters, look at shares and the share market as competition to compete with the financial system and to try and eke out a few more % points than what is offered at the bank. We don't look at this as being a competition among other investors. I'm happy for your wins and learn from your losses whomever you are. However when critiques are penned it is always wise to phrase them in non derogatory terms and with a softness as opposed to "you're an idiot for doing whatever".' That's just rude and to be blunt a little arrogant. I'm sure that's not the case but that's the way it comes across. You were dismissive of my request for some information to back up your claim saying "I don't have time". Ok that's fine but that then poses the question why did you post in the first place. Surely it makes sense to have some basis and facts before making a dismissive post. At a primitive, human level, we all have made decisions on what to invest in. It should be obvious that criticism needs to be well founded and robust to be accepted. Poorly researched or unfounded criticism runs the risk of being questioned, as it should be. Your example of Credit Sales although somewhat relevant is like comparing apples and oranges.....ANZ is a much larger, stronger entity. So I stand by my assertion that (A) the SP has bugger all to do with ANZ ability to withstand pressure and (B) that your claim of MASSIVE issues with dairy and mining is just gross exaggeration. However I will watch developments and keep an eye on what is happening...and refrain from making any statements until something actually happens. (As opposed to speculation and guesswork.)
I just call it as I see it BB, never been known for my political correctness and probably never will be. A question you might want to ask yourself after reviewing the SP graph's of the major Australian banks, is why has the ANZ been smacked down a lot harder than the rest of them ? Percy reckons they have the biggest exposure to the Dairy industry and from what I've read elsewhere this seems to be right, (sorry haven't got time to post supportive links but surely you can do some background reading ?) I have seen first hand the carnage these sort of unsecured deeply subordinated instruments have inflicted upon investors first hand during the GFC, that's why I find the terms of them so abhorrent. The other thing is that in a recent article on interest.co.nz the comment was made that about 90% of investors don't understand the implications of the Reserve Bank's open bank resolution and its implications for investors in banks. Sorry but I felt it was worth some more airing on here to help others understand the risks...I am sure not everyone is such a well informed investor as you or I. The risk of loss is small as is the chance of the ANZ invoking any of their "escape clauses" so eloquently written into the fine print of this instrument but in the context of what is starting to look like a pretty serious correction in international banking stocks I thought this was worth some more bandwidth.
I am sure many will be very happy to receive their 7.2% coupon. The odds are they will continue to receive same and all will be well. As Winner suggested earlier, if the ANZ have to invoke some of their clauses or RBNZ invoke the provisions of the open banking resolution there will be so many other problems going on nobody will even notice $500m being compromised so I shall crawl back into my kennel and wonder why I bothered barking in the first place.
The reason seems to be ANZ's higher exposure to Asian markets - now seemingly downplayed since the retirement of CEO Mike Smith and China's slowdown. New management have specifically revoked the previously ambitious target for Asian earnings. Dairy exposure, while significant to the NZ business is much less so in the ANZ Group lending portfolio.Quote:
A question you might want to ask yourself after reviewing the SP graph's of the major Australian banks, is why has the ANZ been smacked down a lot harder than the rest of them ?
Hang on a minute mate. My gut instinct tells me something is not quite right here. Can't be 4%, (I was assuming you were right hence my initial very strong surprise).
7.2% coupon rate and currently trading at about $1.026 per $1. Ticker code ANBHB on NZDX.
So one is paying a 2.6% premium for the remaining life of these instruments.
My understanding is that these have callable features built into them so the bank can call them at the first five year anniversary and any five year anniversary thereafter and that the yield calculation is usually based on the assumption that the bank call them at their first option, (although this is probably unlikely in the current environment IMO).
These were first listed on 1 April 2015 so there's just over 4 years to run to the first possible redemption date by the ANZ bank. In simple terms without getting into a full bond calculator analysis you're paying a 2.6% premium for the next four years coupon's of 7.2% so the yield to first possible maturity is approx. (7.2 x 4) - 2.6 = 26.2 / 4 = 6.55%.
This corrected approximate yield makes more sense and gives something of an idea where HBL will need to pitch their Tier 2 capital raise in terms of yield.
I still don't like them for all the reasons mentioned earlier in the thread but I can understand in an ultra low interest rate environment, lowest in more than 50 years, which is likely headed even lower how these would have some appeal, (as a modest part of a well diversified portfolio of other investments) to bond investors chasing yield.
They were 1.062 last week
https://www.nzx.com/markets/NZDX/hyb...B?icharts=true
Look at the chart - price fallen down a cliff face. ha ha