The Deputy Chairman to say their actuary was very conservative but not good form to (laughingly) add that management think far too conservative and then seek confirmation from management
The Deputy Chairman to say their actuary was very conservative but not good form to (laughingly) add that management think far too conservative and then seek confirmation from management
Annual Report has photos of 6 Directors and 9 people in their Leadership Team
Except for the GM Human Resources all are white males. (HR people tend to be females for some strange reason)
The Deputy Chair clumsily and unconvincedly talked about always employing on merit and Diversity of Thinking is important. Worst justification of having an all male board I’ve heard. He even came with a quote to use and panicked a bit when he couldn’t find it.
How the heck can you have real Diversity of Thinking with the mix of people they’ve currently got.
No wonder share price is languishing
Winner, I think you might be referring to the $53.378m worth of 'Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss' which is on the balance sheet? Go to Note 11 and it is all broken down. The biggest item by far in that break down is $42.600m in term deposits, up from just $122k at the end of the previous year. Now flip over to Note 18 and look at the details on the acquisition of 'Autosure'. There you will see $33.378m of 'cash' that was banked on acquisition. That $33.378m in cash looked like the balance of insurance float cash held by 'Autosure'. Is there a connection with all of the cash brought onto the books with the purchase of 'Autosure', and the subsequent $42.600m of term deposits on the balance sheet or TRA a year later? Perhaps a few million dollars worth of insurance premiums have gone in since to explain the difference?
During the Turners Roadshow Meeting in Christchurch, I recall some remark about using the insurance nest egg cash to help develop properties for the wider Turners operation. The need could not be questioned, because Turners were developing these properties for themselves. So property development risk was effectively zero. I also recall that management would openly look at on selling these properties once the developments were complete. So the insurance cash, if that is what it is, would not be tied up long term. Faced with term deposit returns at low single figures at best, I don't see anything too wrong with doing some low risk 'in house' property development on the side. You might call this gambling. I would call it prudent and measured gambling. I don't think the sum of these developments proposed got anywhere near $40m of capital at risk at one time. And once the profit from a couple of these developments per year got added back into the insurance float, it isn't difficult to imagine the insurance float return might look 'world class'.
I am 'sleeping easy' with this one.
SNOOPY
Maybe this was the Mai Chen quote Paul couldn’t find -
“It is important to ensure that we have diversity and inclusion, that we have the whole talent pool at the table, and that discrimination is not preventing talented ‘diverse’ people from being appointed as directors and from contributing effectively once they are appointed,”
Bold my doing ....not saying they are being discrimatory but excluding the HR person 100% mix of white males does make you wonder.
Provided you can afford to run them there's some really good bargains with used V8 powered cars now. The fuel thing is really starting to get under some people's skin, especially in Auckland but of course its actually much worse in remote parts of the country. Smaller fuel efficient cars are going up in price and anyone with a V8 might as well not bother trying to trade it in at present. The recently enacted families package increases should make a meaningful difference to Turners typical client. I am / was hopeful this might lead to a slightly lower level of delinquent and poorly performing loans going forward but whether this is a realistic hope I am not so sure.
Speaking with my good mate's wife who has done years of work with poor families mainly in South Auckland she said many of the poverty issues are to do with ingrained habits and addictions. Often these are intergenerational learned behaviors. In other words if someone has a problem with alcohol, smoking, drugs, gambling or such like giving them more money doesn't increase the likelihood that they'll make their car repayments on time, its actually more likely to exacerbate their existing problems and addictions and could in many cases be exactly the wrong thing.
I think those poorly performing MTF referred loans will not show much, if any improvement in delinquency rate as a result of the significant increases in support from the families package that kicked off on 1 July 2018 and Turners are dead right to tighten up their credit criteria. If people don't respects the whole loan and repayment thing, (the no asset procedure is a real risk for low level car loans) there's no point initiating with them in the first place.
Winner it seems to me that TRA got some diverse thinking not often found on company boards, 2 directors who not necessarily attend meetings.
That is right TWO, it is not just Grant Baker who did not turn up to the AGM what bothers me but also the new director let slip that he would make an effort to attend at least every quarterly meeting. He might miss more meeting than he attend in person.
Sounds like a diversity at TRA also found in the general population, some motivated and some freeloaders.
TRA got no worries when it comes to lack of diversity on the board. :)
Last Annual Report included this —
The Turners Board adopted a Diversity and Inclusion Policy in September 2017 (a copy of which is available on the Turners website). The Board is responsible for setting measurable objectives for promoting diversity and inclusion within the Company and will do so from FY19 onwards
As an equal opportunity employer it will be interesting to see what measurable objectives they set and how they performed against them
You dont think its kinda offensive excluding the woman to make your statistics fit?
But lets look at their diversity. Some are older and some are younger. Some are fully sighted and some arent. Some are fully hair folickeled and others not so. Can they all think? Well they are bright enough to scheme a payrise so doing better than most of the population.
Theres six people on the board. I dont spot a one legged one, nor a gay one (oops am I allowed to say that?), a foreign one, nor a turban wearing one, nor a religious one, nor an indigenous one, nor a breasted one, nor a young un, nor a poor one, nor an infirm one, nor a lesbian one (cos you cant have a gay without a lesbian - that wouldn't be rightful thinking), nor a Green Environmentalist one. Hang on a moment - how big would you like this Board to be to that it is properly diverse? ( I'll bet that any of the aforementioned are equally able to think of ways of sticking their snout in the trough - so what would you like that differentiates them as worthy Board Members)