Agree I'll be voting against the director fee rise as well.
Agree I'll be voting against the director fee rise as well.
I also voted against the director fee increase. Am tired of directors and management thinking they deserve returns greater than those they generate for shareholders.
Using shareholder money to pay outside consultants to come up with whatever ridiculous rationale they can think of to increase the fees just makes it worse. Comparing to Australia is not appropriate for Turners.
Management deserve market rates.... great performance deserves bonus remuneration.
Hi all
I can confirm that 2013 was absolutely a typo as most have assumed. Director Fees are not being backdated by 10+ years!
Apologies if there was any confusion caused as a result of this. The legal advice was that we didn't need to make an announcement as it was a manifest typographical error and the resolution was correct.
Certainly not ideal, but I think most people would realise it was supposed to be 2023 not 2013.
I have that feeling there’s going to be a bit of profit downgrade cum ASM time
But on the upside Tina is in the new series of Taskmaster (starting next week). Turners might get a few mentions........
There is always a lot of sensitivity around Directors Fees, hence the advice...but you are probably right, should have just made the correction. But if you can find me a lawyer that charges $250 per hour please let me know!
I think in this case everyone knew it was clearly a typo. If every listed business had to put an announcement out to correct every typo that was found there would be a lot more announcements out there.
Just a reminder to everyone that the ASM is on Wednesday at 10.30am at PWC Tower, Commercial Bay, in Auckland. Parking building very handy and a good time to avoid heavy morning traffic, so I will be in attendance.
The extent of the vote against the proposed Director Fee increase will be interesting. This is a Company where the current Board control quite a significant proportion of the voting shareholding. Does anyone know if they are able to vote those shares towards (a) their own re-election if they are standing, and (b) the intended increase in Director Fees?
Or, if it is legal to do so, if the Institute of Directors/NZSA consider it ethical to do so?
Seems they can’t vote re the fees …from Notice of Meeting
In accordance with NZX Listing Rule 6.3.1, the Company will disregard any votes cast in favour of Resolution 5 by any Director and any of their respective Associated Persons (as that term is defined in the NZX Listing Rules), other than where the vote is cast by a Director or any of their respective Associated Persons as proxy for a person who is entitled to vote on Resolution 5 and in accordance with their express directions on the Proxy Voting Form to vote on Resolution 5
I don’t think they can vote for themselves to be re(elected) …stand to be corrected though
Thanks, winner69. I should have looked more closely at the Notice of Meeting.
I guess my post above marks me (correctly) as a retiree. As a frequent attendee at ASM's if they are in Auckland and I am a holder I do wonder at the prevailing situation where most/all are clearly in my age bracket. I know that most meetings are now hybrid in nature (which is good) but mid-morning/early afternoon timing still is very limiting on attendance. If you are employed hybrid is still not a realistic means of attending during working hours.
Would any listed entity be willing to trial an evening meeting? Say 7.30pm with supper/bar open after? Still hybrid, but designed to be fairer with regard to the opportunity to attend?
I expect some derision here, but wouldn't it be more appropriate?
I know you can vote via a proxy appointment but really the whole process seems designed to exclude an entire class of potential participants, being those gainfully employed.
I think this is a fair comment and a proposal worthwhile to investigate. Having been involved however for some years in setting meetings for shareholders and typical AGM attendents (when I used to sit in one of the regional NZSA committees) I know that it is not straight forward to find a meeting time which pleases everybody (or even to predict a favorite), and no - the preferred time is normally not in the evening. On top of that - many of the AGM attendents do this as part of their job or main occupation. Not sure, I would want to add another 20 or so evening sessions per year into my schedule - would you? Means as well that everytime you go to an AGM which is not local, you need to book not just a flight but as well a hotel room.
What I however think companies could do is just ask their share holders ... and this is something TRA could start. Why not have a poll asking shareholders what time of the day (morning, afternoon or evening) they would prefer for the next AGM?
Quick …..change you NO votes yo YES re payrise for Directors
They working hard delivering record results …even this financial year
http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...864/401061.pdf
What a great business
They were downplaying F24 at full year announcement and pushing out good times to F25.
And then share price fell below 350 so I thought here goes
So todays ‘expect’ better than last year is good news …and no doubt for some a relief seeing so many head winds ,… ……and share price over 370 is awesome
Could be a bit of that rumour fact syndrome eh …but one thing Todd knows how to keep punters excited
I thought it was the reference (again) to being 47th on free float market cap according to their calculations, and ahead of some companies already in the NZX 50 index.
That underpinned a recent investment decision of mine re TRA, and I am waiting for the thesis to play out.
Voting at the ASM on the resolution to increase directors fees now released to NZX.
The last Capital Change Notice (end July, after DRIP figures known) shows 87,366,288 ordinary shares on issue. Less than half took part in voting, and that is if you count the 22.75m abstentions (not sure if the abstentions include the shares associated with the Directors themselves, or not).
In any event only 16.3m voted in favour, and 3.4m against. So supported by well under 20% of the shares on issue with well over 25% abstaining, something of a message I would have thought.
From the Notice of Meeting "In accordance with NZX Listing Rule 6.3.1, the Company will disregard any votes cast in favour of Resolution 5 by any Director and any of their respective Associated Persons"
PLUS from the annual report, directors on a quick sum look like they own over $21m shares, which are all abstentions. Message is that over 4 times as many shareholders voted for the increase as voted against.
BTW, I was very much in favour, the amount close to the change in Household Incomes over the same period (29%) including this year's extraordinary National HH Income growth of almost 10%. Further they have foregone updates for 5 years.
I voted for the pay rise because of the independent report and shareholders association supporting it.
Todd said today the directors are involved in the business on a at least fortnightly basis passing on their experience, knowledge and supporting the management team wherever they can.
Valid points made including not taking pay during covid and in the very early years not taking pay for a year as the business couldn’t afford it. I got the impression of genuine approach to the business and shareholders best interest
It’s been 5 years since the last pay rise and the business is miles ahead of where it was since then and about to enter the NZX50 so fair enough imo.
Pay peanuts and you get monkeys
TRA has a rather unusual Board composition, heavily weighted to those personally significantly invested in the business and with direct operational experience in one or other aspect.
I respect that, so not advocating change, and Todd Hunter doesn't seem uncomfortable with folk looking over his shoulder.
They have attempted to increase "diversity" by promoting Lauren Quaintance from Future Director status (a good choice thou) but remain, in my view (and like the old Sanford Board before it was shaken up by Ngai Tahu) a bit errant on the side of good old boys and who are less aware of nuances to handle a "political" matter such as a proposal to increase directors' fees. As I said earlier on this thread, I didn't begrudge an increase, although I voted against the actual resolution.
A couple of points.
I think entering the NZX50 is a red herring. Directors fees should be based on attracting the complementary skills necessary to oversee a business, whether it is part of the NZX50 or not.
Furthermore directors poking their nose into the business at least fortnightly sounds ridiculous to me, however well intentioned such 'nosing about' might be. Let Todd and Aaron get on with running the show. They seem to be making a pretty good fist of it. If the management team 'needs support', then hire the personnel needed to support them. I wouldn't have a problem with that. I do see the value of keeping the board, the governance personnel of the company, at arms length from the day to day running of the business.
SNOOPY
Fair enough I don’t necessarily disagree. However if the help is welcomed which sounded like is, then no worries here. We don’t truly know the extend it was a quick sentence shared.
Regarding rhe nzx50 point I was referring to the business performance. To achieve this ranking the business must catch up and over take other businesses around its market cap so like reward for good performance is what I was meaning
I realise we have Grant Baker with his 'owners eye' on Turners from his 7.44% Montezemolo Holdings stake.
Then we have Alister Petrie representing Bartel Holdings 11.70% stake (AR2023 p101), who I don't think bring any particular industry relevant skills to the table. Or is the Bartel Holdings stake 12.24% (AR2023 p31)? I wonder which figure is correct? Very sloppy to have two different representations of the Bartel Holdings Turner's stake in the same report!
Next we have Matthew Harrison, the former managing director of subsidiary EC Credit representing summed family interests of 7.47%.
The other directors shareholding interests are large enough to keep an interest, but small enough to keep their noses out of the day to day operations, which I like.
I don't see why any of the above give good reasons for the directors to interfere with the business more than 'once a month' at the board meeting though.
And on that last point ronaldson raised, Todd isn't exactly in a position to complain about the 'extra oversight' he is receiving is he? He gets to check in with the board once a month, and deserves to be given enough space to keep those 'car enthusiast' directors at arms length. Just let him get on with the job in between board meetings I say.
SNOOPY
Without taking a view either way on any individual Board member there is a lot to be said for an active Board with commercial acumen whose contribution rises over and above straight governance and box checking. Being an executive can be a surprisingly lonely job when you are making all the commercial calls without anyone to bounce ideas off of you, test you, and share the emotional burden in decision making. It is frustrating and value destructive for an EMT to show up to a board meeting with meaningful pivots in strategy (w/ all the attendant risk) or sudden change in market/business dynamics and all the Board wants to do is talk about ESG, audit & risk, listing requirements etc.
Good executives in my experience wouldn't bat an eye at fortnightly or even weekly engagements with the Chair or other board members so long as it was focused on 'the right stuff.' Providing mgmt teams with the confidence to make the right long term commercial calls and holding that strategic focus despite day to day gyrations is invaluable and (in my view) value accretive over the long term. Having a more active board means things get socialised and stress tested earlier and allows for more productive Board meetings.
So I was hearted to hear of the Board's engagement at the ASM. While I intended to vote no to the board fee proposal (something more in line with the CAGR in CPI from the date of the last raise in director fees was more my wish) I made a rookie mistake in thinking I could vote online and instead it was just a youtube livestream. Oh well & I've moved on (business performance certainly helped).
So you are saying being a CEO is a tough job? There is no argument from me on that point. That is why CEOs are paid accordingly. In fairness I think it was even Todd himself who has mentioned that he and Aaron make a good senior management team. So I don't see a situation at Turners head office where there is no-one to bounce ideas off. However the general way these things go is that the CEO and the board at least start on the same page with a vision for the company going forwards. Then the CEO gets to execute that vision. If the business vision hangs around making deeply sensitive commercial calls every two weeks, this suggests to me there is a problem with the vision. I would have thought touching base with the board once a month is more than enough to allow a focussed CEO to get on with things.
'Frustrating' can still be important.Quote:
It is frustrating and value destructive for an EMT to show up to a board meeting with meaningful pivots in strategy (w/ all the attendant risk) or sudden change in market/business dynamics and all the Board wants to do is talk about ESG, audit & risk, listing requirements etc.
You are suggesting that Todd does not have the focus and confidence to make the calls without having his hand held tightly? Time to elect his mother onto the board, perhaps?Quote:
Good executives in my experience wouldn't bat an eye at fortnightly or even weekly engagements with the Chair or other board members so long as it was focused on 'the right stuff.' Providing mgmt teams with the confidence to make the right long term commercial calls and holding that strategic focus despite day to day gyrations is invaluable and (in my view) value accretive over the long term. Having a more active board means things get socialised and stress tested earlier and allows for more productive Board meetings.
So I was heartened to hear of the Board's engagement at the ASM.
SNOOPY
There is another way.
If you really want to harness the experience of someone on the board, and you have a specific project with a defined start and an end point , then you should hire that board member 'on contract' to do that specific task. This would involve extra payment, separate to any governance board fees earned. But it would ensure the board member is laser focussed on the task at hand, and was properly rewarded for their expertise - rather than just expecting them to be a universal problem solver for nought extra payment, just because they were a board member. Having a defined task to do would also keep that board member out of other 'operational matters' that they had no business sticking their beak into.
SNOOPY
Maybe I haven't enunciated well enough what I mean because I'm not talking about operational matters per se...certainly not some Board member calling up and wanting to set or have a debate on that week's pricing strategy, wanting to be personally involved in setting the detail of a sales campaign, setting manhours or things like that. The ideal situation (from my perspective) is more of a two way street between the CEO and the Chair (and from time to time other directors) in between Board meetings.
Do we still put some cash into Liam Lawson’s career
Whatever go Liam ….wow a F1 drive and in Ricciardo’s car …good luck
Tina did talk to Liam in April on Instagram
And he posted this on X in April
@liamlawson30
I want to extend a heartfelt thank you to Turners Cars for their support throughout my racing journey. They were my first major sponsor when I ventured to Europe to compete in the ADAC Formula 4, and they have continued to back me as one of my naming rights sponsors ever since.
I can assure you my hand is neither held tightly, or needed to be held tightly, nor is my mother remotely interested in being on the Turners board... thankfully!
I my view the environment you need to foster between the board and the organisation is one of trust and openness. Our board members aren't afraid to come to us with suggestions, ideas or comments. Some of these will be valuable and some won't be. Our management team aren't afraid to give that feedback (either way) in a constructive and respectful way. No one is offended if their idea isn't taken forward...egos are very much kept in check. The most common characteristic in high performing teams is trust. Google did a huge amount of research on this in Project Aristotle if you are interested.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesb...h=1c3202384d17
From my perspective I am always encouraging of board members coming into the business and talking to a wide range of people. There is far more upside from this than downside...they understand the business challenges and opportunities more deeply, our people have a chance to connect to the board who are often just figure heads in many organisations, our people get an opportunity to voice their opinions if they choose to etc.
Like a few have said this all needs to be balanced, and I certainly feel it is at Turners. if you are clear about your priorities and strategy and everyone is aligned on this then generally it becomes pretty easy to test ideas/initiatives against this.
We are very excited to see Liam fulfil his lifelong goal of racing in F1. This guy is a winner. Comes from a very humble background and is very understated, but has an absolute drive and steel to achieve. We have continued to support Liam since his F4 days more recently in a pretty minor way financially.
Tina and Liam did some co-lab earlier this year... https://www.tiktok.com/@turnerscarsn...92571940457730
Unsurprisingly we are giving this a bit more airtime this week and next with Liam racing in Italy at Monza this weekend. We are very excited about his prospects (touch wood) given his strong performance last weekend in the Netherlands. Go Liam!
So Liam and Tina are just in a business partnership
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertain...PXPZL65KB4IXI/
You might not realise that people actually buy new jeans with big holes (they call them ripped or distressed jeans) ... and actually, they are often more expensive than the undamaged trousers. Clearly - it does cost money to rip them.
Who knows, he might be wearing new Hallenstein jeans off the shelf?
https://www.hallensteins.com/clothin...s/ripped-jeans
I am sure Liam will be rolling in the big Formula Apex bucks one day. But no-one gets rich racing in the junior formulas, because their expenses are so high. I think the Red Bull sponsorship covers Liam's racing expenses but not his accommodation for instance. So Liam still needs other external sponsorship to keep his career going.
You also don't get the 'ripped jeans' thing. These pants arrive at the retailer intact, whereby highly paid people called 'ripper offers' with real skill mark out where to make the rips and how to make the rips, - a process that doubles the cost base of the jeans :-P.
SNOOPY
'ripper offers' ................lol.
It was a bit tongue in cheek BP, re the jeans thing hence the :)!
Mind you I'm not 25 any longer so not my style in any event, plus I want to keep my knees warm!
Hallensteins may do well if people see what Liam is wearing, perhaps he could ask them for a few dollars from therm as well!
• With P9 for AlphaTauri, Liam Lawson secured his maiden points-finish in Formula 1 – it was also the first time this chassis has scored points in 2023 (neither Nyck de Vries nor Daniel Ricciardo scored with it).
• In his first three F1 starts, Lawson has finished 13th, 11th and ninth.
• Lawson becomes the 350th driver to score points in a Formula 1 world championship event.
Speaking to Sky Sports Germany, AlphaTauri chief executive Peter Bayer confirmed Lawson will continue in Formula One and will race in the Japanese Grand Prix at Suzuka this weekend.
Excellent news.
I heard on the radio yesterday he drives for free. it's only (us) sponsors keeping him going. Apparently it's common practice in the industry.
anyone think turners be added to nz50 soon
Agree. I joined at end July at $3.57 with that thesis in mind. TRA share price has been solid since while most in the market have not, with competitor 2CC the real exception.
Not sure when the next index rebalance is announced but TRA seems the best chance for inclusion.
TRA in NZX50 ……..share price will get close to 5 bucks I reckon
That would be new all time high
Performance warrants 5 bucks now anyway ….even more so with a good outlook
Only risk is 2 Cheap Cars takes over as #1 and preferred stock in this sector
Would strengthen their supply logistics for Japanese cars their customers want,including good used EVs and Hybrids.
Keep 2CC brand for under $14,000 buyers.
Would give Turners more finance and insurance customers too.
Bit like WHS when they bought Leemings to get quality brand suppliers.
ps W69.Perhaps we better be more careful what we post.Don't want to set off the dog...lol
Too late for TRA to takeover 2CC without offering a huge premium. They had their chance and decided not to take it or could of had them supplying them hybrids and been a market leader in that category. 2CC’s supply chain would have been valuable for TRA.
That Mondiale VGP IPO if it eventuates could upset speculation around index inclusion …they apparently automatically go in
not much risk of that. 2CC has less than 1% of the market compared to Turners 9%. Plus, 2CC closed their Hawke’s bay outlet while Turners are opening more and bigger outlets. Plus, 2CC outlets are mostly small, 6 outlets, only 1 with more than 50 cars on stock. Even their EV ratio is usually similar to Turners.
ie they have little advantage and a single major owner with the float dangerously low
2CC is too small to be of interest. The Japan 2nd hand market is about to go through turbulent waters after the Japanese government recently banned exports to Russia. Prices for imports are going to plummet. A bias towards high import stock will make 2CC vulnerable to losses on sale, Turners could hasten that by discounting.
further, I doubt anyone would want to dilute the Turners and Tina brand with a secondary brand.
interesting.. https://www.reuters.com/business/aut...car%20exports.
TOKYO, Oct 2 (Reuters) - Japan's move to bar most used-car sales to Russia slammed the brakes on a trade nearing $2 billion annually that had boomed in the shadow of sanctions over Ukraine elsewhere, according to trade data and market participants.
In early August, Japan's government banned exports of all but subcompact cars to Russia, cutting off a lucrative backchannel in trade in used Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans for a network of brokers and smaller ports, especially Fushiki, an export hub on the Sea of Japan.
While wiping out Russia's biggest source of used cars, the sanctions have driven down prices for second-hand cars in Japan and left brokers scrambling to send vehicles to other regions, especially right-hand drive markets in New Zealand, Southeast Asia and Africa.
Russia's demand for second-hand cars from Japan jumped sharply after global automakers, including Toyota, pulled back from operations following Moscow's invasion of Ukraine.
By last year, with sanctions elsewhere tightening, Russia was buying more than a quarter of Japan's used-car exports for an average price of almost $8,200. That was more than double the price in 2020, when Russia took about 15% of Japan's used-car exports.
Those sales had been on track to top $1.9 billion for all of 2023 before Japan imposed its own tougher sanctions, trade data show.
More than half of the 303,000 used cars imported by Russia in the first eight months of the year came from Japan, according to figures from Russian analytical agency Autostat
And Switzerland going to ban the use of EVs when there’s an energy shortage
I wondered that too, but trusted Reuters. Maybe I should have checked but I have now and there is an interesting special reason. Vladivostok is close to Japan and they buy RHD cars
https://www.neatorama.com/2019/07/10...he-Wrong-Side/
Apologies for the previous outburst. No excuses.
I clearly got it wrong regarding the Japan export ban to Russia. I was aware of the ban previously, Of course my assumption was incorrect so I didn't look into it further.
How I see it used vehicles are commodity, therefore a commodity business.
Regardless of happens to supply, they simply adjust the pricing/margin accordingly.
We are small country. We have no influence therefore we are price takers. Every other used car dealer is in the same boat so to speak.
Personally the I don't think the supply issue will impact them as they will adjust their approach accordingly.
But I do question a couple things or what figures you were relying on. 2CC sold about 6 to 7% of NZ new used imports.
40% of 2CC listings are hybrids/ EVs but 52% of their sales to date have been hybrids/ EVs. This suggest they turning over hybrids/ EVs much quicker than ICE. 15% of TRA current listing are hybrids/ EVs.
TRA is essentially two businesses. Vehicle dealership and finance arm.
As I recall just over half of the NP is from the finance arm.
2CC is one tenth TRA market cap. But I find it to be abit misleading. 2CC vehicle sales make up about 25% of TRA vehicle sales.
I don't think 2CC have ruled out setting up a finance arm again. Personally I would like them to acquire an existing finance operation as opposed setting it up internally.
Probably not the right time as the current providers have been exceptional to help 2CC reestablish themselves.
But if they do I can see 2CC payoff an acquisition within 4 to 5 years and still maintain 50% dividend payout. In effect double their market cap (share price growth). But this is speculation of course.
But I fully support their strategy of creating mega sites in the main centres and satellite sites. 54K used vehicles sold in Auckland alone. This makes alot of sense.
Personally I think TRA will not be interested in 2CC, vice versa David Sena would not be interested in selling.
If anything theres probably consolidation and removal of other less established used vehicle dealers.
Very solid 5-day chart for this stock. Perhaps the narrative around forthcoming NZX50 Index inclusion is taking hold. And some further impetus may be coming from the market rerate of 2CC.
The low to middle priced used car market isn't much affected by wider economy considerations as these vehicles are essential purchases for many, even if the price of fuel acts to influence the extent of use.
I expect TRA will be included in NZX50 Index. Directors and management have done an extremely good job navigating the market over the past few years.Car sales,finance,insurance and very clever property deals.
Also pleased that the market is rerating 2CC.
Both have earnt good reputations, which will see them both enjoy good growth.,
https://www.nzx.com/announcements/419682
Happy days.
Nice update, should sail past 4 easily and 2CC past a buck hopefully.
great update , still surprised by the strenght in used cars.
they should aggressively aim to be the dominaNT NZ player in the space
My daughter doesn't understand much about shares and has little interest in ETF's etc.
But she understand Tina from Turners, and is 15% of her Sharesies portfolio (and growing).
Beep beep!! :p
Jeez, 5 bucks here we come
Hope Todd keeps pumping out those raves …does the trick eh
It is nice to see Turners get some appreciation from the market. Todd and the team have done an excellent job over the last few years. Congratulations to those who showed some patience and a long-term mindset. I think TRA still has a lot of upside.
Good stuff. Glad i voted for the board to get a pay rise :cool:
Well done to everyone. Solid result.
And remember the boost in share price escalates the market cap, hence increases the probability of NZX 50 inclusion.
Given the number of shares offered for sale at any time is generally not large any index fund seeking to build a holding will need to bid the market up further in my opinion. So price is a positive indicator for momentum here.
Ex dividend today as well.
Market share growth on track to exceed 10% in the near-term
The highlight of the period has been the sustained market share growth in Auto Retail, which now exceeds 9%, a more than doubling of Turners retail market share over 5 years.
quicker growth is possible i reckon
Todd Hunter will be speaking at 11 am today on
NZX Virtual Investor Event | 11 October 2023
whats the talk from the webinar
As always Todd Hunter presents well.
Auto retail growing both number of branches and market share.
Timaru new branch looks the goods, and will open shortly.More branches in Christchurch too.
All divisions operating well.Lower interest rates will benefit their Oxford finance.Dividend growth continues.
NZX 50 inclusion looks close.
In the meantime, up another 3% today.