Forum Archive Index - January 2000

["hugh webber" <hugh.webber@clear.net.nz>]

hmmm, general agreement Phil but one or two quibbles. I've already voted
with my feet from Contact with a modest profit.
One problem is that small shareholders are not treated equally on a pro
rata basis with large shareholders. 
Taking the first example that comes to mind when Kiwi Ppty jumped in
(grabbed 10% in a lightning strike) to spoil the party in the Capital
Properties takeover of Shortland Props they were then able to sell out for
immediate total cash while the other shareholders had to settle for a small
amount of cash and heaps of junk bonds. I'm sure other people can supply
more serious cases.

I think another thing that gets up small shareholders noses is the sight of
non executive directors with occasional cameo walk on parts and either none
or just tiny personal shareholdings in the company then vote themselves
huge salaries, options, share issues for effectively doing damn all. The
shareholders look at their own shareholdings and then look at the directors
interests at the back of the annual report which are so much smaller and
look at the attendance at directors meetings where they didn't bother
attending for a significant number and think wouldn't it be nice to score
just one symbolic victory once in 10 years over these drones many of whom
are not even as well or relevantly qualified as the small shareholder doing
the musing.

Never mind, as you say if its a quality company we all benefit and I guess
drones are as inevitable as death and taxes.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/          New Zealand's home for market investors
To remove yourself from this list, please us the form at
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/forum.html.