Forum Archive Index - August 2003

["Shayne King" <shayne_king1@hotmail.com>]

So based on what you have said, im assuming you think GPG's tactics 
regarding TWR are bewildering to you?

>From: "tennyson@caverock.net.nz" <tennyson@caverock.net.nz>
>Reply-To: sharechat@sharechat.co.nz
>To: sharechat@sharechat.co.nz
>Subject: [sharechat]  TWR, AMP fundamentals and Wealth Management
>Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 11:56:21 +1200
>
>Earlier in the week someone asked if Tower was a good buy.
>
>Here is what my broker said about TWR last week:
>
>"The risk with this stock is that we are looking for a recovery
>situation *and only time will tell*.  BUY for anticipated recovery and
>possible takeover."
>
>(Note the emphasis between the asterisks is mine)
>
>Then yesterday Morgy made the following comment on AMP.
>
>"The problem with fundamental analysis is you can be right but it still
>doesn't help if the share slides, ask anyone who was still buying into
>AMP when the analysts were recommending it as an undervalued
>stock and fundamentally a buy, by the time you get the numbers they
>are so old and manipulated that they are almost worthless"
>
>It's not too often that I am 'on side' with Morgy but in this case I would
>go even further than him.     From an investment perspective IMO the
>previous results of AMP are completely worthless.    The AMP
>business has changed so much (they are in full retreat from the UK
>market) and public perceptions of fund managers have changed so
>much (many conservative traditional 'do nothing' investors are
>questioning their fund management commitment, after past 5-7 year
>performance has shown sticking money in the bank would have been a
>far better option than using managed funds) that forecasting future
>results from any past 'fundamentals' is virtually impossible.
>
>Switching back to Tower, I think that professional analysts and spotters
>of situation shares, GPG, must be ruing the day they bought 5% of
>Tower at some $4 per share.    The best my broker can come up with
>as a longer term recommendation for Tower is:
>
>"and only time will tell"
>
>In my view, Tower, AMP and all the other big player wealth
>management companies listed on the stock exchanges absolutely stink
>- as *investments*.  This is not to say you cannot make money if you
>buy into this industry.  Indeed I am sure some will do very well.     My
>argument is that you cannot make a sensible *investment* decision
>without having some reliable model of business cashflow forecasts.
>The future of AMP and TWR will depend on the net proceeds that
>people put into them and people's perception of where the listed
>investment markets will go relative to other investment classes.
>
>Can you look at how much people will invest in the sharemarkets by
>considering what happened over the last ten or so years?   I think not.
>Will future investment performance of the markets relate in any way to
>the boom and bust NASDAQ bubble behaviour of the last ten years?   I
>think not.   From an investment point of view investors in this industry
>are flying blind IMO.     Buying shares in AMP or TWR cannot even be
>classified as investing, by my definition of investing.
>
>Personally I think the outlook for the sharemarkets is quite good.
>Perversely because the bulk of investors 'get it wrong' my view is that
>we will see the whole wealth management industry underperform, while
>unsophisticated investors chase yesterday's winners like residential
>housing and high risk term deposits from finance companies.    In my
>view people will not put their money into the sharemarkets when they
>are cheap which means that both TWR and AMP will continue to
>struggle.    Investors will continue to pull money out of these
>companies forcing them to sell fundamentally sound underlying
>investments at poor prices, leading to further poor returns and another
>wave of fund management withdrawals.
>
>In my view, the winners in this market will be the boutique fund
>managers who are not weighed down by the millstone of bad
>investment history, and those dealing with the least sophisticated
>investors of all and are least likely to change ships in mid stream- the
>banks (who deal with those who invest their funds only with the bank
>they know).
>
>IMO, AMP and TWR are strictly for the punters. Yuk yuk!
>
>SNOOPY
>
>discl: no AMP or TWR shares held
>
>
>
>--
>Message sent by Snoopy
>on Pegasus Mail version 4.02
>----------------------------------
>"Q: If you call a dog tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?"
>"A: Four.  Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at
>http://www.sharechat.co.nz/chat/forum/
>

_________________________________________________________________
Download MSN Messenger @  http://messenger.xtramsn.co.nz   - talk to family 
and friends overseas!


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/chat/forum/