NZX - NZ Exchange

[simla]

To be fair, I'm not convinced that any decisions by the NZX would have changed the reducing volumes. Rogernomics / Reagonomics/ Thatcherism basically meant that any country with money (eg US, UK) could buy out the best assets in any country and then demand ongoing rent. Just look at how much money flows out of NZ to the Aussie banks alone. This has meant NZ has become a poorer and poorer country over the years despite the headline claims by politicians. Nobody even reports the balance of payments any more because it is never good, now we only talk of the balance of trade. How does a local exchange do well when everyone in the country is getting poorer?

And I'm just trying to figure out whether the company can itself make profit anyway if they remain keen and alert. A merger may well be logical and still profitable for shareholders in the circumstances, for example.

[bull....]

To be fair, I'm not convinced that any decisions by the NZX would have changed the reducing volumes. Rogernomics / Reagonomics/ Thatcherism basically meant that any country with money (eg US, UK) could buy out the best assets in any country and then demand ongoing rent. Just look at how much money flows out of NZ to the Aussie banks alone. This has meant NZ has become a poorer and poorer country over the years despite the headline claims by politicians. Nobody even reports the balance of payments any more because it is never good, now we only talk of the balance of trade. How does a local exchange do well when everyone in the country is getting poorer?

And I'm just trying to figure out whether the company can itself make profit anyway if they remain keen and alert. A merger may well be logical and still profitable for shareholders in the circumstances, for example.

the day when sentiment turns in the stock market ( bear market ) is when nzx will suffer big time thru reduced traded volumes , fees etc for associated products flow on of funds leaving smart shares etc

[Balance]

To be fair, I'm not convinced that any decisions by the NZX would have changed the reducing volumes. Rogernomics / Reagonomics/ Thatcherism basically meant that any country with money (eg US, UK) could buy out the best assets in any country and then demand ongoing rent. Just look at how much money flows out of NZ to the Aussie banks alone. This has meant NZ has become a poorer and poorer country over the years despite the headline claims by politicians. Nobody even reports the balance of payments any more because it is never good, now we only talk of the balance of trade. How does a local exchange do well when everyone in the country is getting poorer?

And I'm just trying to figure out whether the company can itself make profit anyway if they remain keen and alert. A merger may well be logical and still profitable for shareholders in the circumstances, for example.

Who is gonna want to merge with NZX?

There was a time way back in the early 2000s when NZX was attractive to a player like ASX or Singapore Exchange. Now both have grown exponentially while NZX has gone backwards.

It is a small regional exchange ($101 billion) with bugger all growth, bugger prospects of growth and a horrendously expensive cost structure if it is to meet best practices of providing information and services to the market at fair price.

Each of the top 4 biggest stocks (CBA, BHP, WBC & ANZ) alone on the ASX is bigger than the whole of the NZX!

Total market cap of ASX is A$1.7 trillion so NZX is but 6% of ASX!

Heck, even the Philippines Exchange is bigger than NZX!

NZX under Weldon and the board of self-interested sleeping directors was a grossly mismanaged exchange with profits coming principally from the relentless increase in fees and charges - it stopped when the listed companies had enough and threatened to take NZX to the Commerce Commission for monopoly abuse. The goose was well and truly plucked by then by Weldon & the directors.

[frostyboy]

When businesses with membership type customers change their prices, revenue (P x Q) is immediately impacted but quantity (memberships) have a lag. Weldon exploited peoples short term evaluations on profits, if he didn't do it someone else probably would have.

NZX are paying consultants to look for lucrative add-on revenue streams to their core service whilst their core service is in decline, the consultants are likely to agree that is a good strategy.

NZX should play the strategic long game of improving process and reducing cost of their core service.

[Balance]

When businesses with membership type customers change their prices, revenue (P x Q) is immediately impacted but quantity (memberships) have a lag. Weldon exploited peoples short term evaluations on profits, if he didn't do it someone else probably would have.

NZX are paying consultants to look for lucrative add-on revenue streams to their core service whilst their core service is in decline, the consultants are likely to agree that is a good strategy.

NZX should play the strategic long game of improving process and reducing cost of their core service.

Precisely why NZX is buggered as the goose has had its feathers plucked clean by Weldon - ably assisted by the sleeping board of directors and some of the profile shareholders.

ASX was not operated on that short term basis when it was demutualised - the goose was fed well and grew new feathers and flew higher.

Likewise, London SE and Singapore SX.

[Balance]

For the record, this is indicative of what the sleeping board was like:

Exhibit A. October 2011 when commenting on Weldon's resignation -

"Under his stewardship, NZX has grown from a small and threatened mutual exchange to a
thriving information, markets and infrastructure business, with a range of integrated business
lines, a healthy balance sheet and a valuable set of options for future growth,” said NZX
Chairman Andrew Harmos.

Absolute garbage written by Harmos.

1. NZX threatened? Hardly - shareholders would have been much much better off as part of a huge Australasian exchange and received ASX shares.

ASX has gone from $10.85 in 2003 to $58 today.

2. Valuable set of options for future growth?

Tim Bennett found no growth and no options for growth - smart enough though to leave and appeared to pick up a generous severance pay (2016 total pay - $2.89m vs 2015 - $1.1m).

Why would a resigning CEO be awarded a severance pay? Smelly?

Exhibit B. February 2012 when announcing appointment of new CEO Tim Bennett:

"It is a credit to departing CEO Mark Weldon, and to NZX's
management team, that both the company and the role are seen as providing highly
desirable opportunities to local and international candidates." wrote Andrew Harmos, Chairman.

Garbage again by Harmos.

Tim Bennett found an NZX bereft of management depth and experience, and a stinking mess & very revealing revelations from the Clear Grain litigation of how dysfunctional the NZX was under thec 'my way or highway' management of Weldon.

He could not leave fast enough.

May 2012 - NZX sp was $1.25. Now - $1.06

ASX was $29.36, now $58.00.

[RGR367]

...................

May 2012 - NZX sp was $1.25. Now - $1.06

ASX was $29.36, now $58.00.

Wasn't there a share split in June '12? So your NZX price could not be just $1.25. Maybe $2.25 would be a better one. But even then, yeah, NZX when compared to ASX sucks.

[Balance]

Wasn't there a share split in June '12? So your NZX price could not be just $1.25. Maybe $2.25 would be a better one. But even then, yeah, NZX when compared to ASX sucks.

Price adjusted for share split.

[Balance]

Another $750m gone from NZX - and absolutely no signs whatsoever that there will be a replenishment any time soon for CBL as well as Xero.

Adding to the toll of duds on NZX - Wynyard, Intueri etc.

There is no excuse whatsoever for another Feltex but in CBL, NZX has showed that it has learnt nothing from the Feltex disaster.

[Bazingaboy]

So I got my first dividend cheque and note that I was taxed 33% (109.20 gross minus 36.04 tax) - is the tax rate normal? Any way to reduce?