NWF - NZ Windfarms

[JAYAY]

Well - maybe you just need to look into history: Vector had for a long time de facto the absolute majority in the NWF board despite just holding a meagre 27 (or so) % of shares. Remember - Chris is a Vector man as well (worked for them many years and still has his office at Vector premises), and so is the new chair (working as contractor for Vector). Nothing happens at NWF against Vectors wishes.

Jantar asked a number of very good questions - but just looking into long term SP performance is it hard to pretend that the overwhelming Vector influence did any good to NWF. Sure - they might have their own agenda and a cheap NWF might feature well on that. Question is just - how good is what Vector is doing for the minority share holders?

Jantar's questions are loaded with assumptions. The first and last questions are hilarious.
I have no recollection of these questions being asked at the last AGM.

The point I am driving at is who are these people Gupta and Southworth who would want us to lose the clout of a cornerstone shareholder like Vector.
What makes you think these guys can do better?

[Jantar]

Jantar's questions are loaded with assumptions. The first and last questions are hilarious.
I have no recollection of these questions being asked at the last AGM.....

I'm glad you find them funny, but I would question just what assumptions you think they are loaded with?
As for them being asked at the AGM, I can't answer that for all of them as I wasn't there. But the last one was a resolution that was voted on by the shareholders and the directors had recommended that it be voted down. If you read the resolution it was asking no more than the directors prioritise costs in order to start making a profit. Isn't that a core duty of any director?

[BlackPeter]

Jantar's questions are loaded with assumptions. The first and last questions are hilarious.
I have no recollection of these questions being asked at the last AGM.

The point I am driving at is who are these people Gupta and Southworth who would want us to lose the clout of a cornerstone shareholder like Vector.
What makes you think these guys can do better?

Agreed - Jantar's questions are somewhat provocative ... however, if you know the history of the company, it is easy to see where he is coming from. I agree as well, that in some of the cases it is not easy to tell from outside whether the board acted stupid, skirting negligence or incompetent ... and there are of course as well cases which look only stupid in hindsight (e.g. the incredible lease agreement they signed). Fact is however that they didn't had a good hand with council relations, neighbours nor in cutting down the NZ wide empire they intended to build to the Palmerston North Operation, they ended up with. Ah yes - and they didn't had a good hand with some of their financial agreements either.

So - why do you want to protect a board which is reliably losing shareholder money - year after year after year?

Fact is - The Vectra led board destroyed over 10 years roughly 85% of all shareholder capital. Difficult to see how anybody else could have done a worse job.

BTW - if you have been on the last AGM, both of the gentlemen you are referring to have been there as well. And I agree, nobody knows, whether they can do better, however - their agenda might be better aligned with the agenda of other minority share holders?

I agree however, that it would be good to get some more info from them as well as from the old board, before we need to make a decision, but I certainly will give them my ear and listen ... and I must say as well that the stone walling of the old board so far didn't show any greatness or interest for the share holders - just old boyz looking after themselves.

[JAYAY]

I'm glad you find them funny, but I would question just what assumptions you think they are loaded with?
As for them being asked at the AGM, I can't answer that for all of them as I wasn't there. But the last one was a resolution that was voted on by the shareholders and the directors had recommended that it be voted down. If you read the resolution it was asking no more than the directors prioritise costs in order to start making a profit. Isn't that a core duty of any director?

The question assumes that they don't want to make a profit. That's what is funny.
Actually I think the end game for Vector is to achieve profitability to the point that the farm be sold to recoup their investment.
I don't think for a moment that Vector really wants to own a wind farm.

[Jantar]

The question assumes that they don't want to make a profit. That's what is funny......

Oh, I see. I am sorry that you saw that as an assumption. I thought it was a given.

[BlackPeter]

Looks like Vector is waking up and might have even noticed that maybe not everybody under the remaining 77,89% of share holders they so far choose to ignore is happy with them running the show:

https://www.anzsecurities.co.nz/Dire...spx?id=4146821

Sounds like a wee confidence vote, just to test the power balance. Let the games begin!

[Poet]

Looks like Vector is waking up and might have even noticed that maybe not everybody under the remaining 77,89% of share holders they so far choose to ignore is happy with them running the show:

https://www.anzsecurities.co.nz/Dire...spx?id=4146821

Sounds like a wee confidence vote, just to test the power balance. Let the games begin!

Yes interesting times indeed.

Can someone correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Vector have the right to appoint one director under the terms of the share subscription agreement a few years back

[BlackPeter]

Yes interesting times indeed.

Can someone correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Vector have the right to appoint one director under the terms of the share subscription agreement a few years back

good question ... and not sure. However - so far I can remember have the Vector directors always been elected by the AGM, i.e. if they have the right to appoint one director, than so far they didn't use this right.

[Jantar]

Is there a problem with NWF's wind farm? Both Te Apiti and Tararua right next to it are generating strongly and the Wholesale price is currently $92. But NWF are generating zilch

Edit: All is good. . 15 minutes after I posted they started generating again. . http://203.114.161.10/trh.htm

[BlackPeter]

Is there a problem with NWF's wind farm? Both Te Apiti and Tararua right next to it are generating strongly and the Wholesale price is currently $92. But NWF are generating zilch

Edit: All is good. . 15 minutes after I posted they started generating again. . http://203.114.161.10/trh.htm

Looks more like a SW Glitch. Check again ... production now seems to be back to normal