The problem is did a bank licence improve Heartland's credit rating? The answer appears to be no. So it looks like the cost of funds is not related to becoming a bank!
SNOOPY
Printable View
I accept that it may be too early to tell but I think long term it should for two reasons. Having 'Bank' in their name will open them up to new markets (ie. large funds which can loan to banks but not finance companies) and will also give them more credibility in the NZ market with retail investors (ie. those stung by finance companies but still wanting term deposits etc).
I did see something this morning(on Twitter I think) that someone was thinking of dropping Heartlands credit rating. I was rushing to the gym so didn't open the link to see if it was a real threat.
[.
I did see something this morning(on Twitter I think) that someone was thinking of dropping Heartlands credit rating. I was rushing to the gym so didn't open the link to see if it was a real threat.[/QUOTE]
That would be Snoopy on twotter.!!! lol.
http://www.interest.co.nz/news/64508...-bank-and-5-cr is the article on the downgrade.
http://www.interest.co.nz/news/64508...-bank-and-5-cr
" However, The Co-operative Bank and Heartland Bank are already at the lowest rung of the investment grade ladder with BBB minus ratings. The Reserve Bank has previously said when granting bank licenses that it preferred an institution to have an investment grade rating. "
"We may lower the ratings on the eight New Zealand banks that are on negative outlook by one-to-two-notches within the next two years if economic vulnerabilities worsen," S&P said.
A lot of the talk in the article is about "increasing risk that a sharp correction in property prices".
As has been discussed in the thread, this is something that HNZ wants to get out of, so on overall I am not to concerned at all. Do realise that a correction will have a flow on effect to the rest of the market however (farmer having to sell / repay some of the mortgage on the house, delays payments on the machinery etc.).
Disc: Hold.
percy, this may well be the case, but I wouldn't be shouting that from the rooftops. You forget that a lot of loan facilities are based on a margin over cost of funds, and borrowers will also be renegotiating borrowing costs lower to get their share of the margin improvement HNZ has been gaining. It's never a one way street. Stephens won't readily admit this unless directly asked.Quote:
HNZ has gone from paying 130 basic points above what "the Aussie banks"pay to 30 basic points.
I guess the next set of results will show how much margin improvement is captured, but to say it's 1% on 2 billion is a brave call
BTW, the correct term is "basis points"
The article is inferring that a downgrade would leave the banking license in peril. I'm not sure that would be automatic. After all, it was granted in the knowledge that they were on the lowest rung.
I think the RBNZ would make their own minds up, and not 'rely' on rating agencies to determine the fate of a banking license
Keep calm and carry on chaps
The point being that return of capital to shareholders is not on the agenda due to the threat of a downgrade. This report could affect the share price, but that only provides more buying opportunities. The main part of the report, which has not had much comment, is that the rest of the NZ banking system escapes a downgrade because of the 'support' from its various owners. We all know that 'support' can easily vaporise in trying situations. Heartland seems to be adequately financed, but its long term loan interest rate could go up a notch or two. Steady as she goes. And dont sell!
Having worked "with" the RBNZ to gain a banking licence I am sure Heartland will continue to work with RBNZ.
Staying away from housing and concentrating on the productive/service/rural sectors will work to better NZ, and HNZ's shareholders in turn.
Strong depositor base will work in HNZ favour.
The strong NZ dollar means the rest of the world thinks NZ Inc is soundly based.