CHI - Channel Infrastructure Ltd (NZR)

[dodgy]

hi D,

no need to ask now thanks, I am going to go to the meeting now it is in Auckland so will ask the question over a club sandwich unless someone asks during the meeting or its addressed during there presentation.

Hi bull....
As you wish. Usually theirs is an upgrade on clubs, so you should come away happy on all fronts.
Regards
-dodgy (owner/shareholder - very interested party)

[bull....]

international freight ccosts are falling so if they can get bigger ships with more load nzr should add a bit of margin, although some of there ships come in under loaded at the moment I believe weight restrictions maybe?

[bull....]

on throughputs again I would have thought with big immigration into Auckland rap throughput should be up significantly?

[psychic]

you are crying over spilt milk that was spilt decades ago.
minority shareholders are wasting time and effort trying to change what benefits 70% of share holders.
Anyone invested in the company has done so knowing the share holding structure and being aware of the financial benefits to the majority shareholders whether you voted for, against or did not vote at all.......get over it or get out but please stop whining about something that you or anybody else can not change.... sounds like you are Mr Halliwell.
Your argument is not pointless but is a complete waste of time and effort.
If you hold the stock I really do not understand why.

What, do you always roll over? This is about chipping away at the bastards. Support for Halliwell's campaign rose from 1.5m votes at the 2013 AGM to 14.8m 2014. He would like double that this year. This is about gaining the support of the minority shareholders. Obviously the majors are never going to vote for it but that does not mean we should just accept this ongoing rort. But it is hopeless if apathetic new shareholders stupidly follow the majority vote just because it is what it is.

The Gross refining Margin formula was set in 95 - it cannot be changed without the approval of the non-user shareholders. There is a reason for this. But from 2009 the boys secretly introduced this "allocations" back hander. $4 of profit has been diverted from every share since, (and you wonder why the SP is cheap?)

It is ongoing and it affects you.

[bull....]

What, do you always roll over? This is about chipping away at the bastards. Support for Halliwell's campaign rose from 1.5m votes at the 2013 AGM to 14.8m 2014. He would like double that this year. This is about gaining the support of the minority shareholders. Obviously the majors are never going to vote for it but that does not mean we should just accept this ongoing rort. But it is hopeless if apathetic new shareholders stupidly follow the majority vote just because it is what it is.

The Gross refining Margin was set in 95 - it cannot be changed without the approval of the non-user shareholders. There is a reason for this. But from 2009 the boys secretly introduced this "allocations" back hander. $4 of profit has been diverted from every share since, (and you wonder why the SP is cheap?)

It is ongoing and it affects you.

If this is the case I would have thought the nz shareholders assoc would have been all over them?

[golden city]

hopefully more good news comming tomorrow agm

[dodgy]

What, do you always roll over? This is about chipping away at the bastards. Support for Halliwell's campaign rose from 1.5m votes at the 2013 AGM to 14.8m 2014. He would like double that this year. This is about gaining the support of the minority shareholders. Obviously the majors are never going to vote for it but that does not mean we should just accept this ongoing rort. But it is hopeless if apathetic new shareholders stupidly follow the majority vote just because it is what it is.

The Gross refining Margin formula was set in 95 - it cannot be changed without the approval of the non-user shareholders. There is a reason for this. But from 2009 the boys secretly introduced this "allocations" back hander. $4 of profit has been diverted from every share since, (and you wonder why the SP is cheap?)

It is ongoing and it affects you.

Hi psychic
Well said - agree entirely.

-dodgy (OWNER/shareholder - will support Halliwell as in the past - 120k)

[dodgy]

Hi bull...
NZSA - pull the other one - I think they normally maintain a foot in both camps and progress in none.
Have a great night and hopefully a more than decent meeting.
Regards
-d

[psychic]

pretty poor keep secret.... pass me a tui
snaps never rolls over but is clever enough to put his energy and efforts into battles that can be won.

lol

We all know what happens to those who turn up to fight a battle they will never win.

Oh, and what happens when you just, ahh, bend over?

Your posts indicate you believe it is the large shareholders to blame for the very low share price....may I suggest you look at other refinery businesses performance around the world..... I think you will find they have all been struggling until recently.

Sure. Over 2014, the Users costed their NZRC-refined products, into the markets, on the basis that they paid processing fees, of
$US9.92 per barrel. However, their discounts diverted $US6.45 per barrel, of that, directly to the Users. So Users paid
NZRC only $US3.47 per barrel. That was only 31.5% of the 2014 Caltex figure of $US11.03.

Her's some hints pertaining to NZR, high oil input costs, ageing plant, high kiwi $, lower margins etc.
And ...ONE BILLION DOLLARS diverted to Users in the last 5 years

Many of you sound like disgruntled long term shareholders that may have payed way to much for the shares in the first place and held on for far to long. That would make me grumpy to but that is no ones fault but your own.

You were a shareholder a couple of years ago right? They were ripping you off then you poor thing. Didn't feel a thing eh

[PSE]

snaps is very happy with an average buy in of $2.03 so I don't share your pain or attitude.
Why do you hold an interest in a company that you believe is ripping you off.......... totally makes no sense to me.

Shareholder activism when successful is a great way to release value for all shareholders. Management should be held to account and there aint no one but us to do it.
When you buy cheap companies, typically it is something management have done (or haven't done) that is making them cheap.
Buying cheap companies is a valid investment approach.
You don't have to support it but I think your criticism of it is unfounded, in this case the register is dominated but can't hurt to try.