http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/c...ee-period.html
Surely this is good news for tower?
Printable View
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/c...ee-period.html
Surely this is good news for tower?
Could be. Let’s see whether Cyclone Gita or any other severe weather events affect NZ this year. And let’s hope there isn’t another big quake. That’s the thing with insurance - one black swan event and all your profits (and then some) could be gone in minutes. We’re having a lot more “one in a hundred year” events lately, and as CBL showed the actuarial assumptions are not always up to scratch.
Wowee TWR up 8.8% at the open ... didn't think todays news was anything we didn't already know ...
Hope they have good food at the AGM this afternoon :D
Looks like Tower's fortunes have indeed turned?
1. https://www.nzx.com/announcements/314906
"Policy numbers have increased by more than 5,000 in the four months to 31 January 2018, and combined with improved pricing, has led to GWP for the New Zealand book growing 14.3% compared the same period prior year. Despite accelerating activity in the business, management expenses remain contained and in line with the same period last year."
At that rate, GWP will be up $21m for HY18 - less reinsurance but with expenses contained, could be $18m straight to bottom line.
Most important thing is that the Tower brand appears intact - and business is growing.
2. https://www.nzx.com/announcements/314891
Good to get that $22m in - cash in while profit impact is non-cash.
There was some uncertainty about the collection of this reinsurance.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU180...dend-plans.htm
Resumption of dividend payments on the cards from this year.
Starting to look like Heartland after the restructuring of Marac.
Many punters will be a bit shy in investing in this as after all it is an insurance company. CBL was looking ok last year to many and look what happened there. TWR say they may be resuming dividends if profit allows but I notice that they are not brave enough to predict a profit.
Brain...IMHO they are quite different situations. CBL has/had some quite questionable characters behind it, expanded way too agreesively and got caught out not unlike an overly aggressive finance company in the mid-2000's.
Tower is a sound business that got badly hurt by a huge event (Chch) and has managed to survive as its balance sheet was just strong enough to cope, has raised more capital to strenghten the balance sheet (which was not an option for a dodgy operator like CBL), and is making an operating profit month to month which is helping strengthen the balance sheet. Although FY18 will likely be another loss due to the Peak Re write-off the major risks for Tower are being settled and the cashflows are strenghtening. I'd expect at least a 2cps dividend in November this year ($6.7m cost) and all going well 5cps in FY19 ($16.8m cost).
I guess quite easy to call CBL dodgy now. I don't disagree with this qualification, but I think Brains point was that 2 months ago everybody thought as well that CBL is a quite healthy company with nothing but a decent and honest board. Which of their directors did you consider as questionable last year?
It just appears to show that our checks and balances don't seem to work, which obviously throws a shadow on similar sort of companies operating under NZX and RBNZ rules. Sure - they might be all good guys, but nobody really knows given that the regulator seems to be asleep and mislaid their dentures anyway.
There’s one or two commentators around who don’t say nice things about the Tower Chairman ...just saying in the context of this discussion comparing CBL and TWR