Member log in

Metlifecare directors don't deserve another $200,000: shareholder

Metlifecare directors do not deserve an extra $200,000, pharmacist and Waitemata district health board member Warren Flaunty says.

At today's annual meeting of the retirement village operator, held in Auckland, it was proposed to increase the directors' fees pool from $300,000 to $500,000.

The last rise was in 2004 and chairman Peter Brown says the increase reflects the addition of two independent directors and allows payments to directors associated with 43% shareholder Retirement Villages Group.

But Mr Flaunty told the directors they should prove themselves first.

"For three years I've come to meetings and each year the dividend is deferred."

Unlike all other votes at the meeting, decided by a show of hands, the proposal to increase directors' fees went to a poll and will be announced on the NZX.

Metlifecare, one of the country's biggest retirement village operators, posted a $141.7 million loss, or $1.04 a share, for the year ended June 30.

At the time it said a dividend would be considered at today's meeting.

Today, Mr Brown told the meeting will be revisited at the end of the year, although he says the company is bent on reducing its $193 million bank debt.

"I'll believe it when I see it," says Mr Flaunty, who was Metlifecare's seventh-largest shareholder before its merger with major shareholders Vision Senior Living and Private Life Care.

Ceo and managing director Alan Edwards says there has been "strong uplift" in unit sales in 2012, without providing figures.

He says post-merger cost savings has led to "immediate and significant benefits" for operating cashflow.

Further cost savings can be achieved, he says, and post-merger bank debt of $193 million will be reduced following the recent sale of a village in Nelson.

Metlifecare runs 24 retirement villages, including nine with care facilities, with 5000 residents cared for by 1200 staff.

Metlifecare shares (NZX: MET) are down almost 1% today to $3.17, after starting the year at $2.27.

More by David Williams

Comments and questions
4

Why do they need two additional directors, given their size?

Metlife is only a quarter the size of Ryman Healthcare (a far better performer), yet Ryman has fees of $675,000 for its directors.

Summerset, a slightly smaller company, run on only 5 directors.

Maybe Metlife should be changing out their existing directors instead of adding new ones.

Brokers keep saying MET is cheap, but is it cheap for a reason?

having just had an eldery relative nearly die in a resthome, in no small part due to a lack of care arising from evident cost cutting, it is a bit rough seeing such a massive proposed increase.
are these two new independent directors part of the existing ones 'old boys network'? would put money on it...

Follow the trail to Marlin and see what one of the MET independent directors has signed off on as an independent director of Marlin!

Mmmm, no good at all.

Was it a Metlifecare village? I would be surprised if this was the case because the big boys tend to have protocols and compliance systems in place to maintain standards. The overall industry trends tend to favour Ryman/Metlifesummerset/Oceanic/Bupa because they are big enough to maintain internal audit systems for healthcare.

The little operators tend to be the ones who let standards slip.