MET - Metlifecare - one for the fundies?

[Beagle]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12291970

A bit about Stephen Hunter their new (hopefully top gun), QC in there.

[Balance]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12291970

A bit about Stephen Hunter their new (hopefully top gun), QC in there.

These days, barristers and solicitors will normally get a QC opinion on an uncertain outcome when considering litigation.

The opinion does not come cheap - anywhere from $10,000 to $25,000 for an opinion.

[crighton100]

I read this bit from Chris lee on here,what a load of bollocks.We were owned by the ross group biggest villians in NZ,before we were bought out by MET [the place was going to the dogs under their ownership]Thankfully I can tell you this place is now up to scratch & they keep the place in a modern condition,they have spent millions on the place,which is why the shares are underpriced,I still think $7 is a reasonable price.I can tell you we came in 11 years ago & looked at sum & boy was we dissappointed with them [shoddy workmanship in the units,hopefully they have improved since then].Good to see my PPH still going strong.

[King1212]

Happy for you crighton....I did well with PPH..sold a bit early but no regrets...got my profit. Always a believer of PPH...just don't have the stomach to ride through.

[winner69]

I read this bit from Chris lee on here,what a load of bollocks.We were owned by the ross group biggest villians in NZ,before we were bought out by MET [the place was going to the dogs under their ownership]Thankfully I can tell you this place is now up to scratch & they keep the place in a modern condition,they have spent millions on the place,which is why the shares are underpriced,I still think $7 is a reasonable price.I can tell you we came in 11 years ago & looked at sum & boy was we dissappointed with them [shoddy workmanship in the units,hopefully they have improved since then].Good to see my PPH still going strong.

crighton - when Lee said .... Metlife faces the most difficult future, a perpetual victim of an ugly childhood, its listing as hairy as could be, and later left with various guardians including a stint with the unloveable Todd Group, which had a controlling interest for some years. I think he is referring to the stock MET rather than the villages themselves

Many have wondered why MET the stock is always 'cheap' and 'undervalued' - what Lee says hits the nail on the head. Once tagged the way MET has been its very hard to change market perception - once a market pariah always a market pariah some market commentators say.

PS - Todds did own a fair chunk of Todd around the turn of century and had 35% when they sold out in 2005.

[macduffy]

PS - Todds did own a fair chunk of Todd around the turn of century and had 35% when they sold out in 2005.

Should that read "a fair chunk of MET", winner? From memory, a division of AMP held the rest.

[winner69]

Should that read "a fair chunk of MET", winner? From memory, a division of AMP held the rest.

My memory is that when Todd’s held 35% Cliff Cook still held about 25% and they both got about in about 2005.

[King1212]

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money...-on-offer.html

That is the reason why...NZ property will hold up plus low interest n LVR

[Longhaul]

More reading for you all, this time from Simpson Grierson:

https://www.simpsongrierson.com/arti...ractual-issues

"Pandemic as a triggering event: Even if you have a MAC provision, and it looks like it might allow you to terminate your contract, you should talk to your lawyer to check whether it gives you the termination right in the circumstances. MAC clauses are notoriously difficult to uphold, they must be specifically drafted and the clause must clearly apply in the specific circumstance. Further, as a matter of general contract law, if there is any ambiguity or uncertainty in a provision like this, it will be interpreted in favour of the non-cancelling party. We are not aware of any examples of MAC provisions being successfully invoked (in NZ, the UK or the US), as a result of epidemic or pandemic events (such as the 2003 SARS epidemic, the 2009 swine flu pandemic or various outbreaks of MERS starting in 2012).

Global economic conditions as a triggering event: It is unlikely also that a (perhaps inevitable) global economic slow-down will trigger a MAC clause. Frequently such events are expressly excluded from the list of triggering events. So, once again, you will need to check carefully what the MAC clause says."

Updated with another from Harvard: https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020...ng-agreements/

I'm starting to get a feeling that MET has the upper hand and it's more likely than not that they will settle before it gets to court. The relative success of New Zealand's containment of the virus to date might also be a positive for MET.

Of course these are just my two cents from reading the articles I've posted. Be interested to hear others' points of view.

[bottomfeeder]

Met and its shareholders can only benefit from court action, subject to unforseen judgement by the court. That is I can't see any downside. Either damages as well as specific performance, or damages and renegotiation of terms (only small movement I would imagine perhaps tops at 10%), rather than damages and repudiation of the agreement. Full repudiation without damages is not a possibility. SP onward and upward.
Thanks Longhaul, will put my buy order in for Monday.