Well CJ you will be pleased to see the price is touching 80c this morning so it is heading in the right direction. Didn't they say that a discount may be offered as a part of the scheme?
Printable View
Well CJ you will be pleased to see the price is touching 80c this morning so it is heading in the right direction. Didn't they say that a discount may be offered as a part of the scheme?
I'm thinking about doing a trade here. Only thing holding me back right now is the slight lack of depth on the buyer side. Anyone serious traders have any thoughts?
Growth is about leveraging the real estate and the people, and about minimizing the average cost of each transaction. Having said that I am not concerned that Heartland did not grow their revenues year on year. IMO getting the chaff dealt with is the more important focus for management.
Agreed.Quote:
2. HNZ is doing it the right way - grow profitably and be patient. That is the correct strategy.
I would take a different lesson from the South Canterbury Finance collapse. Even large lenders can face a capital crunch, and the market conditions that claimed South Canterbury finance have not moved on that much IMO. Pre GFC, there were plenty of finance companies that appeared highly profitable, yet shareholders still lost all of their money.Quote:
3. Capital is not an issue when you are profitable and demonstrate disciplined and profitable growth. There is unlimited capital available out there for banks when they show they are well managed and disciplined.
South Canterbury Finance and the other finance companies provide ample proof that growth (and size) are not everything.
I would go as far as to say that for any finance outfit outside the big six banks, profit is largely irrelevant for the survival of the company. I don't care what profit HNZ makes or is projected to make. Until those bad loans are sorted out, HNZ is just too great a risk for me, although I accept others have a different risk reward balance. All I know is that I didn't lose any money in the finance company collapses (because I was out of that part of the market) and I don't intend to lose any money in finance companies (even those with bank stickers all over them) going forwards either.
What you call nitpicking, I call preserving capital.Quote:
As has been written before, you are missing the big picture, Snoopy, by nitpicking on numbers.
Agreed. There is also plenty of downside risk from principally property loans going bad. I realise that my escaping the 'bad' risk I also escape the 'good' risk. But that is the investment path I choose to take.Quote:
HNZ is on the move and there's plenty more potential ahead.
SNOOPY
Putting your head out of the trench on this thread requires you to wear a helmet Xerof! At least someone else on this thread recognises the risks in HNZ though. I would hope that those SCF staff who have jumped to Heartland have learned their lessons. But given what has happened in the whole finance company sector, I see it as prudent to wait for more proof of this.
Not saying HNZ is a bad investment. Have never said that. One day I see myself on the share register. But not just yet....
SNOOPY
PS See you have pulled the post I quoted from already! It is tough in the trenches!
Hehe, yeah, I thought better of it Snoopdog, but you've outed part of my longer post, preserved for ever:sleep:
To be fair Sparky, (and it was before your time here), I was very bearish towards both PGC and HNZ when Kerr had his hand on the till(er). Not many listened....60 to 25, 88 to 35 and now back to 80
I am then on record endorsing Balances view that once Kerr had been forced out, "the fog over HNZ has lifted", however, personally, I would not be buying HNZ.
good on all those who did buy under 55.
I have always found your posts very constructive.Usually made me think,and I have always learnt from them.You always have your facts right.
I am very keen to see Heartland expand in Timaru.
Crops,dairying,farming,service industries make up the very strong economy of South Canterbury.
I therefore see it as the ideal place for Heartland to expand.
I maybe wrong, but I think it was Alan Hubbard's lending outside South Canterbury area that was the cause of the defaults.
Yep, there is a HUGE opportunity for someone to fill the old 'finance' company void left by all the failed entities, but the funding models need to change. Mum and Dad won't be back to the mezzanine finance sector in any hurry, and prime lenders terms would be inhospitable. Notice all the 'standby facilities' provided by major banks have largely evaporated.
this I believe is the reason we haven't seen major expansions by the likes of HNZ et al since the implosion; one they are gunshy; two, raising funds is not all that easy for them, and three, noone is prepared to borrow much on the 'new' terms (first mort, gsa, personal guarantee)
agree re Hubbard lending, I understand that virtually all of the new money raised under the Crown guarantee basically went straight down the gurgler to property development shysters, and of course to various related parties