Mighty River pre-registrations top 200,000
"I wonder how many of David Shearer's loyal supporters are in the 150,000? Plenty, I bet."
Featured commentMore than 200,000 people have pre-registered their interest in buying shares in state-owned Mighty River Power.
The 200,000 came up at 3.30pm today after pre-registrations hit 151,978 last night.
Strong demand saw the www.mightyrivershares.govt.nz website crash briefly on the opening day on Tuesday because of heavy traffic.
Pre-registrations of interest can be lodged until March 22, placing would-be small-scale investors in MRP in the queue to meet the government’s commitment to ensure 85% of the shares on offer are bought by New Zealand investors.
It is not known how many of the pre-registrations will turn into buyers. But those who do pre-register may be allocated up to 25% more shares than people who do not pre-register - if demand for shares exceeds shares available.
Chris Major, a marketing director at Treasury, says there's no advantage in pre-registering early.
The government has mounted a $1.1 million mass-market television, newspaper and internet advertising campaign to entice New Zealanders to invest in the 49% of state-owned electricity company being offered for sale.
The level of interest in the partial privatisation of MRP tops what Kiwis expressed for the last major state asset sell-off, Contact Energy - privatised in 1999.
Offer documents for the float will be released shortly after pre-registration closes on March 22, followed by the “book build” exercise to match demand for the shares with available supply.
The greater the excess of demand against supply, the higher the initial share price is likely to be.
The listing is expected by the time of the May 16 Budget.
MRP was independently valued at $3.6 billion in 2011, so the sale of 49 percent could raise close to $1.8 billion, which the government says it will invest in public infrastructure instead of borrowing.
Back to home
Back to top
Print
Latest
NBR SERVICES
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Sign up for NBR subscriber content or email alerts
Comments and questions22
Well, well, well. I wonder how many of David Shearer's loyal supporters are in the 150,000? Plenty, I bet.
How irrelevant. Just because you disagree with the policy should not preclude you from participating in it if it goes ahead.
Yes, plenty. And actually a bit of capitalism rubbing on to these folks might do them some good. The whole country should be run like a business, actually. We might actually be forced to balance the books properly for a change.
If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then there is nothing wrong with state-owned enterprises - government is investing in businesses where there is a profit to be made (as all businesses do), and the profits should offset any shortfall in revenue. Best example of this policy's effectiveness - Christchurch City Council, which had one of the lowest (if not the lowest) rates in the country pre-earthquake, because of the income it derived from its investments in businesses. And who is to blame for unbalanced books? The very gentlemen who have business background - Key, Joyce, English, et al. And who kept the books balanced? Academics like Helen Clark, Micheal Cullen, Steve Maharey, et al. And if someone's blind prejudice against Labour or Clark stops them from seeing the facts, look at Italy - a billionaire "successful" businessman Berlusconi ran the economy to the ground and the country then called in an academic Monti to bring it out of the quagmire. A simple unjaundiced look at the present NZ government is enough to show that it is indulging in redistribution of wealth - taking from majority of New Zealanders (through tax hikes like GST, ACC, petrol tax and all other options that squeeze every single New Zealander) to give to a few rich listers. Look at USA and where this policy has led that country.
That comment is like saying - gosh I lost my job so I'll go on the dole, even though as a Nat I don't believe in social assistance ...
I don't believe in social assistance so have never been on the dole - even when out of work. Also I pay "international" rates for health service and top up the kids school donations to the same level. It would be hypocritical to do otherwise.
How was it living on the streets. Or did you live off an inheritance or a golden handshake?
No, I save when working by making sure that I don't live beyond my means (so no holidays, only 2nd hand cars etc). It is called being responsible for your own life and not stealing money from your neighbours' pockets to fund your lifestyle.
Thankyou, "Anonymous", for telling us you've not made use of our public education system, hospitals, roads, bridges, telecommunications (oreiginally paid for by taxpayers); electricity supply (ditto), or any other myriad of things that society built up for you, to use.
Or the police force that protects you from looting mobs.
As for this bit of nonsense; "Also I pay "international" rates for health service and top up the kids school donations to the same level" - how is that not living beyond your means to fund your lifestyle?
If it weren't for the State, you'd have no "health service" and " kids schools" - all those professionals were educated in state-funded education systems.
Really, you have a strange view of the world. Do you really believe all the services you enjoy materialised out of thin air?
pffft, and how many of Labour's introduced policies have you taken advantage of over the years?
The Dominion Post cartoon this morning summed it up. The rich get rich and the poor get poorer. No wonder our illustrious leader is completely ballsing up his South American trip by not attending Hugo Chavez' funeral. He is fundamentally opposed to empowering the poor. Privatising our assets benefits only the rich and wannabe rich while the poor go on the dole or hold down three jobs. Social justice? What a joke.
"Well, well, well. I wonder how many of David Shearer's loyal supporters are in the 150,000? Plenty, I bet."
Do you feel clever, answering your own question?
You've no way of knowing where the 200,000 come from.
We shall sit on our hands and let the hype drop off, and cross our fingers for a price drop after the first month of listing just like Facebook perhaps, otherwise bad luck as we can't see the demand bringing in massive share price increases.
The public has had nearly two years to digest the true facts about the Mighty Power IPO. The significant interest now at pre-registering indicates that most see such an investment as a nice steady income earner. Better return than investing in cigarettes and alcohol, and a step away from socialist welfare dependency.
They are buying shares in an asset we all owned already. It was an asset developed and paid for by society through tax and returning a dividend to all of us. Now only the rich can benefit from the dividend. It's a transfer of wealth from all of us to the rich few. Welfare for the rich. Key calls himself a New Zealander! What happened to the egalitarian dream?
I'm a student and I am buying shares. I guess that makes me rich?
We should probably borrow more money as a country and then wait for a economy to collapse?
Me thinks you know little about the FB share offering and even less about investment in general.
Even my parents are into it and they are very financially conservative. They see it is a safe step into the sharemarket and the old man also said he we doing it to "keep the bloody Aussies from buying it up".
The nay-sayers are being ridiculous. As many New Zealanders as possible should get involved. The more Kiwis buy up the shares, the greater the proportion of the profits will stay in the country.
Any Kiwi who doesn't get involved is effectively opening the door for a foreigner to step in and buy up what isn't purchased within the country!
The Kiwi philosophy that owning shares is a foreign thing that is un-Kiwi needs to be eradicated.
Step up, buy in and own your own country, for heaven's sake!
It belonged to us all already. Now only those with disposable income will own it. Get rid of the party that's selling up (privatising) New Zealand for their rich mates.
Tiwai shuts soon with 14% excess capacity to collapse the market prices (unless the power companies are colluding?).
Power is like over-ripe produce - it spoils fast...
Perhaps before making drastic comments about the inevitability of the Tiwai smelter closing you could take a closer look of how difficult that would be for RIO/Pacific Aluminium to do. You could start with the fact that it would cost b/w $300-400m just to "make good" on the asset to close. Or the fact that there is a three year "ramp down" clause on a closure decision to do so. Just a little tit-bit for you to add to your knowledge of economic rationalisation for when such decisions are made.