NZX - NZ Exchange

[POSSUM THE CAT]

Done on the cheap. Take it or leave it. Make bigger profits at all cost seem to me to M Weldon's philosophy. Never mind pandering to the Investors & Traders providing the profits. The Old Web site was more use than the new one.

[macduffy]

Yes, it is a bit obtuse but personally I don't have a problem with it. I assume the purpose is to ensure that companies make full disclosure of such transactions and don't try to cut corners in their announcements.

[winner69]

If you read the full form one fills out it makes perfect sense
https://www.nzx.com/files/attachments/151116.pdf

However I have always thought there should be an 'executive summary' at the top - like "Mr Prendergast as a result of his retirement his entitlement to various ahres and options has lapsed"

[Silverlight]

Michael The NZX is a service company. And it has sacrificed service for profit eventually it will disintegrate. The high fees have IMO sent several brokers to the wall & other companies to list on other exchanges. 90% of my share investing is now on the ASX as there is F/All left on the NZX. I do not wish to repeat myself on my opinion of Mark Weldon, Please note the ASX is not listed on the ASX

I don't think you understand how NZX generates its revenues; listing fees, trading fees, selling data. 10 years ago listing/ trading was 90% of revenues (service). Data is what has driven growth, and the likes of bloomberg, Iress, Reuters paying for NZX's data is what drives revenues. This is a generic product, of numbers, in a text string format, that is collected and crucnhed by computers. If NZX only had five listed companies tomorrow, in CEN, TEL, CNU, FBU, AIA the data buyers would still pay exactly the same amount.

I think there needs to be two threads on NZX, NZX the listed business, and NZX the market operator which is the subsidiary of the listed business. As a listed business there has been phenomenal growth in revenues and profits, exactly what shareholders like in any investment.

In the market operations from a stakeholder viewpoint trade volumes, trade values, and listed companies to invest in have been awful, you can blame Weldon, the NZ savings rate, the dodgy regulations, the property speculators, the small amount of businesses listing, the fact that we are an exporting nation, whatever you want, long term it won't change a great deal, until the government do something to promote (force) companies to list here.

ASX will always have more companies to invest in, so what? NYSE, SWX, LSE will have more again. It's as easy to buy NZ companies as ASX ones, what the heck does it matter where they are listed? What does it also matter how big the sharemarket quotes in the paper are? You buy shares to get returns, if you think NZX is going to keep increasing revenues, then you buy the stock when you think its valuable, if you don't, then say so, and give a reason why (ie the Euro crisis will lead to less foreign brokers subscribing for NZX's data which will impact revenues, or NZX's data is priced in USD, and the NZD is likely to outperform, leading to declining revenues in NZD for NZX)

Lastly ASX is listed on the ASX.

[macduffy]

Great post, Silverlight!

About time someone pointed out the difference (conflict?) between NZX as an investment and NZX as the market operator with a largely captive business - at this stage. You say many of the things I thought, but was too lazy to point out.

[POSSUM THE CAT]

Silverlight why would you list With the NZX when listing with the ASX is a better deal. this is what Mark Weldon has done. I am more interested in the ASX as service & news plus the range of companies even NZ ones is better even though There is double taxation on most Australian Dividends. I am still clear better dividend returns of ASX stocks

[Silverlight]

Silverlight why would you list With the NZX when listing with the ASX is a better deal. this is what Mark Weldon has done. I am more interested in the ASX as service & news plus the range of companies even NZ ones is better even though There is double taxation on most Australian Dividends. I am still clear better dividend returns of ASX stocks

As an investor it does not matter which exchange a business is listed on, you can buy into both just as easily.

If ASX is a better deal, can you quantify that view? The only thing that makes ASX better, in my view, is the greater liquidity, but this does mean an NZ business listing on ASX will be liquid. Outside of top 200 the liquidity falls away fast. If you compare any NZX business vs a similar sized ASX business you will find the same low liquidity levels.

ASX vs NZX companies on your claim dividends are better, is not an NZX vs ASX issue, that is an economic issue, NZX doesn't control the economy.

Double taxation is a government issue not an NZX vs ASX issue, NZX is not the government.

[POSSUM THE CAT]

Silverlight Brokers provide better service for less because the ASX has far lower fees than the NZX & it costs less to list on the ASX in comparison for a much larger market & better service. If the NZX is charging more it is not a govt. problem. Greed kills. Just go to a library & have a look at the financial section of the NZ Herald & see the difference in listings Basically unless there is some special need for listing on the NZX they go elsewhere, or stay private

[Silverlight]

Silverlight Brokers provide better service for less because the ASX has far lower fees than the NZX & it costs less to list on the ASX in comparison for a much larger market & better service. If the NZX is charging more it is not a govt. problem. Greed kills. Just go to a library & have a look at the financial section of the NZ Herald & see the difference in listings Basically unless there is some special need for listing on the NZX they go elsewhere, or stay private

Again I ask, please quantify your views, I don't know what better service means for you. Do you mean advice, research or execution? I can't tell the difference between execution on NZX or ASX other than liquidity which I have already highlighted.


If Telecom (3.9b Mcap) listed tomorrow on NZX is would be charged $817k and then and ongoing fee of $91k. On the ASX it would be charged $862k AUD (or $1.135m NZD at 76 cents) then an ongoing fee of $111k NZD.

If Mainfreight (950m Mcap) listed tomorrow on NZX is would be charged $294k and then and ongoing fee of $60k. On the ASX it would be charged $328k AUD (or $431k NZD at 76 cents) then an ongoing fee of $61k NZD.

If Rakon (90m Mcap) listed tomorrow on NZX is would be charged $71k and then and ongoing fee of $30k. On the ASX it would be charged $91k AUD (or $120k NZD at 76 cents) then an ongoing fee of $34k NZD.

These three random examples shows there is hardly any difference in ASX and NZX costs, and that ongoing listing fees are basically irrelevant.

What costs are you referring to when you say "ASX has far lower fees"?

[POSSUM THE CAT]

Silverlight point one for the same amount of fees you get a bigger market point Two why is brokerage from the Broker I use for an Australian trade less than half the price of a NZ trade of a reasonably large order & they have to pay an Australian broker as well it was even cheaper still when I could use an Australian Broker. Check with your broker how much they are charged every time you push the button for an instant price quote. And remember for the much smaller market the NZX should be far cheaper. I have yet to find an Australian broker that would even bother to trade the NZX for you. But bar for the fact that most of the Australian brokers require you to be an Australian resident. When I was dealing with Westpac Broking Australia it was about 40% of what Direct Broking are charging me
ANZ E Trade was even cheaper but had volume or cash deposited requirements that did not suit my requirements Just check the company information on the ASX web site compared with the NZX one