NZSX50 - Good News!

[Toulouse - Luzern]

At least one radio news comment I heard suggested they would sell overseas shares and investments ...
I have no personal or other knowledge on this subject ...

PS While I was typing this two other posters expressed similar views

[winner69]

Nil. They hold around $5 billion cash, and from what I remember JK saying, all of their equities are overseas. This makes sense, as it would adversely effect NZ if they had to liquidate quickly, and the fact a major earthquake could put a dampener on the economy too (think Wellington).

All up they have around $15 billion in assets, which is quite impressive given the commission was only set up in the 90's.

EQC net assets are $5.5 billion. From the PGC thread what I posted a week or so ago

You will pleased to know mouse that EQC don't have any NZ shares

Accounts for 2009 said they had $3.8 billion of Govt Stock and related stuff , $0.25 billion of NZ bank Securities and $1.7 billion of overseas equities.

No NZ stuff because the total market is only $50 billion and the Govt may as well leave that to ACC .... and whats the point of investing in stuff that has a possibility of taking a hot from a series of disasters

[upside_umop]

EQC net assets are $5.5 billion. From the PGC thread what I posted a week or so ago

Ahh maybe John Key had it wrong when I was listening to him the day or two after the earthquake...or maybe I was too shaken up to listen properly!

The point is, there will be no net effect on the NZ stockmarket.

Edit. I just checked eqc website. I'm sure I heard JK say it was set up in the 90's....here the website says 1945. I think the interview was with Paul Holmes, but I can't be sure, as he had heaps of interviews!

[RRR]

John Key said EQC had 15 billion in the news-I clearly remember that. Some Aussie stocks in the sell list??

[upside_umop]

Q+A: Interview with John Key
PAUL But then you add the two billion in, or possibly the two billion. I mean have you got that money, can we afford that. I know the South Canterbury money was set aside.
JOHN Yes in the case of EQC, so the Earthquake Commission has enormous funds, 15 billion dollars, largely invested offshore very logically, because of course if there is an earthquake you don't want those funds invested in the country that's affected. They have about six billion in cash. So this is well and truly affordable from that perspective. The real issue actually will come not so much to those people, because they're covered to the first 100,000 and beyond that from their private insurance. It's the five or ten percent of people that don't have insurance that have said look I'll risk it, and in fact I met a couple yesterday in Christchurch who said look our insurance policy ran out four weeks ago. And that's the moral hazard for the government, because on the one hand if we pay everybody out, why would people take insurance. On the other hand you're gonna have people with real hardship and deprivation, and it's getting that balancing act right. It's not going to be easy.

Appears Mr Key was misinformed. 1994 was when treasury started doing projectons, apparently.

Sorry to put you guys wrong at the start....it was from a good source

[winner69]

EQC last annual report .... pretty pictures .... and now we know where a lot of our insurance money has gone ... and no doubt premiums to go up to build up the reserves for the Wgtn quake

http://www.eqc.govt.nz/downloads/ar-...rt-2008-09.pdf

[Jaa]

EQC has re-insurance just like the commercial providers albeit from a much higher level.

EQC chief financial officer Phillip Jacques said it would gradually be selling assets, such as global equities to pay for the first $1.5b of claims, before its $2.5b reinsurance kicked-in.

Also re future costs I'll doubt you will notice much:

The concept of insurance is about sharing and spreading losses. In this earthquake the losses suffered by around 100,000 households and probably 50-60,000 businesses will be shared with all of those taking insurance in New Zealand and around the world.

New Zealand is seen as part of the Australasian insurance market and therefore we tend to have events in Australia impact on our cost of buying global reinsurance.

[CJ]

Also re future costs I'll doubt you will notice much:

But insurance is based on the expected cost, expected risk and number of people paying.

The Chch earthquake was unexpected so fell outside the insurance calculation so there will need to be some catchup. But given the number of people contributing, the extra burden shouldn't be that great on the individual level.

[Hoop]

Study backs up hallowed traders' whim



GREG NINNESS - Sunday Star Times Last updated 05:00 31/10/2010
Share
Print
Text Size


It seems you can't go wrong if you buy after Halloween and sell in May, leaving your money on term deposit in between.



Tomorrow might be a good time to buy shares according to new research which confirms the effect of the "Halloween Indicator".
The indicator is a long-held theory among share traders that share prices start to rise in November and begin to fall back in in May, leading to the maxim you should buy after Halloween and sell in May, leaving your money on term deposit in between.
Research undertaken by Professor Ben Jacobsen and PhD student Cherry Zhang from Massey University's School of Economics and Finance, suggests the theory is true.
The pair looked at monthly data from the UK stock exchange going back to 1693 as part of a project to look at long-term seasonal influences on share prices, and found that prices do tend to rise in November and fall from May.
Jacobsen has also been studying data from this country which suggested the New Zealand market had been following the same trend since 1998, something he attributed to the increasing integration of the world's financial markets. He had followed the theory when investing himself and had achieved good returns, he said. "An investor with an investment horizon of five years would have remarkable odds of beating the market 80% of the time, with returns, excluding dividends, on average three times higher than the market, if they followed the theory," he said.
"With an investment horizon of 10 years, the historical odds increase to 90%."
Jacobsen and Zhang have published their findings on the Social Science Research Network.

[winner69]

Hoop

You'll love Chart of the Day today
http://www.chartoftheday.com/20101029.htm?T

Compelling eh .... sell in may and come back in October works ... on the US markets anyway

Nearly ALL the gains on the US markets have been made thru winter .... spooky eh