Hubbard scans brain for SFO

Experts doubt what can be concluded from scans.

The saga of Allan Hubbard has taken a bizarre twist, with lawyers acting for the troubled financier submitting unsolicited brain scan images to the Serious Fraud Office.

But legal and medical specialists says they are astonished by that and suspect the use of an MRI brain scan is part of an attempt to prove Mr Hubbard is not fit to stand trial.

Both Serious Fraud Office director Adam Feeley and Mr Hubbard’s lawyer, Russell McVeagh partner Mike Heron, have indicated a decision on whether the Timaru accountant will face charges over Aorangi Securities is likely to be made late next week.

NBR understands the Serious Fraud Office has not requested any medical information about Mr Hubbard.

Asked if he was sending MRI scan images of Mr Hubbard to the SFO, Mr Heron said: “I wouldn’t be able to make any comment on that.”

Rumours of a brain scan being used by the defence, since confirmed through independent sources by the National Business Review, this week circulated among Mr Hubbard’s supporters.

Travelling salesman Paul Carruthers, who has appointed himself an unofficial spokesman for Mr Hubbard, said the move was “a slippery road that we do not want to go down under any circumstances” as it raised the prospect of an end-game.

“What if they say he is not fit for trial? Therefore he can’t run a company [and] it allows them to strike him off the companies register while bypassing the courts,” Mr Carruthers said.

Possible defence strategies
Otago University professor of law Kevin Dawkins said the use of MRI scans in a fraud defence was unusual.

“He’s getting on in years. It could be aimed at possibly proving his capacity to stand trial.”

Professor Dawkins said the Bill of Rights Act and the solicitor-general’s prosecution guidelines could be applicable.

The guidelines state that even if there is sufficient evidence likely to result in a conviction, a case should be less likely to be taken to trial if the defendant was suffering “significant mental or physical ill-health” at the time of the offending.

Mr Hubbard, 82, has suffered a brush with cancer and is on regular dialysis treatment for malfunctioning kidneys.

Hubbard conceding?
Professor Dawkins said the MRI scan could also be part of a negotiation with the SFO: “The only other place where it might be of relevance is a plea bargaining process They could be looking for reduced charges or fewer charges and asking ‘please don’t put it to trial.’ I’ve done this in my previous capacity as a barrister.”
But there were risks to this strategy, he said. Being unfit for trial would count against Mr Hubbard’s stated intention to exit statutory management and return to running his financial empire.

“Quite so but that’s water under the bridge now. From his perspective, he may be conceding his ability to be a director,” Professor Dawkins said.

MRI scans not enough
Otago University’s senior lecturer in neurology Dr Graeme Hammond-Tooke said MRI scans were unreliable if used in isolation. “Mostly MRIs show structure rather than function. As a rule it doesn’t tell you much how the brain is working,” he said.

Generally only severe problems like tumours showed up on MRI scans, he said: “I guess if somebody had something wrong on their brain scan it would certainly be a mitigating factor.”

Mr Hammond-Tooke said the use of an MRI scan by Mr Heron was probably only part of the defence: “As a medical person, if you want evidence that somebody’s not functioning well, rather than presenting an MRI a neuropsychology test would be better. That’s what I would do if I were a defence lawyer. The MRI, if it was abnormal, would be useful supporting evidence.”

When Mr Heron was told legal and medical experts had expressed astonishment at the dramatic turn of events he urged patience and said: “Wait and see, wait and see.”


62 · Got a question about this story? Leave it in Comments & Questions below.

This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags

Post Comment

62 Comments & Questions

Commenter icon key: Subscriber Verified

Come on Matt - Hardly a rumour. Hubbard went on record in Herald on Monday. Get with the play!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

To be honest Fran, I missed your snippet in the paper on Monday and chased the story up from an independent tip. I'm happy to acknowledge your piece, but believe we've been able to push the story along considerably.
Cheers,
Matt

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

What happens if the scan reveals nothing?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Hey Ken, Do you mean NOTHING.........or just no problems? I'd "Trade Me" the scans for charity.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Matt,

Will you be writing about the New York based investor who has links to European Royalty, who had the means to both save SCF and minimise taxpayer liability, as Fran has? Clearly this is significant and important information to all NZ taxpayers?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Still waiting for the truth! Why were SCF staff retained and some given cars?? Who's behind 30 August 2010 payouts? Leads you to question - who's looking after their mates and is insider trading going on???

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Love the Headline
"Hubbard scans brain for SFO" should read "Hubbard scans brain for UFO"

Which means he is having trouble finding the unidentified factual objects the SFO requested

I know you really meant "Hubbard's brain scans for SFO"

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Sandy Maier can answer most of your questions as he was on not both but all sides of the sale transaction last year.

Funny that the Government hasn't distanced itself from Maier considering he broke nearly every rule in the corporate and ethical rule book - surely Bill English wasn't aware of what Sandy maier was up to to crucify Hubbard and all his assets???

Surely not!!!!!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Matt it seems to me that you are a copywriter not a true journalist - not that there are many left in NZ.

Why don't you get off your posterior and research your articles before just copying information that you are fed by interested parties.

There are many angles to this Hubbard story that your readership deserves to know. And even worse we have to pay for this garbage journalism.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Hi So Confused, I can reassure you that we did fully research all the information in this article, as we do with all our stories. We listen to what any party tells us and then go and do our job by verifying information and gathering other opinions.
Why don't you tell me some of this other information you know and we can follow that up. Please feel free to email me at editor@nbr.co.nz.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Brain scan all of his advisors and how the hell were they able to outwit the Government Dept to convince them about a guarantee,when in fact they were in deep stook donkey deep.Maybe they should also xray the Govt Dept to see if there was or is any work ethic in them.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Thanks Editor,

Rather than email here's a few quick questions:

Why don't you start by investigating the fascinating questions you can find in todays commentary by Chris Lee (at http://www.chrislee.co.nz/index.php?page=taking-stock)

He raises some extremely interesting questions for Sandy Maier, Forsyth Barr (Paviour-Smith), Bill Baylis, Stuart McLauchlan and James Denham Shale for example.

And why don't you find out who authorised SCF to divert $900,000 of SCF funds (which were due to be paid to secured debenture investors on the 30th August 2010), to certain unsecured creditors and contractors instead?
Yep that was the day before receivership so effectively the crown has now picked up that bill. Why?

Find out who was paid and how much they were paid.

And are you still waiting for Bill English's communications between 15th August 2010 and 15th September, that he has refused to hand over to you?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Here's a better question for you ....
Who twisted Bollard's arm up his back that induced him to include the "Finance Companies" within the guarantee .. when no other country in the world did .. who was the influencer .. the patrone .. the power broker .. couldnt possibly have been AH could it?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Forsyth Barr is another day - they were worse than Maier considering they were originally Hubbards advisor and made millions out of the guy and SCF.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Editor - Please research the deal from Hubbards overseas investor, that Bill English is denying ever existed, that could have save the NZ taxpayer $1.7 billion dollars, and paid out all the SCF preferential shareholders,., plus Aorangi and HMF, and SCF could have remained trading.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The question which to me has not been answered.What and why the haste to pay out almost two billion dollars to investors when it seemed there was a lot of jiggery pokery in the company.The rules of the guarentee read,to qualify for guarentee payouts the company,any company under the rules of the guarentee payout have to be"SQUEAKY CLEAN".

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

I laugh when I read some of these comments. It is pretty plain to see any deal that was proposed prior to receivership would have had a serious due diligence hurdle to overcome. Any proposed "deal" that was supposed to "save" the NZ taxpayer would have fallen over. Once DD uncovered the state of the book, HFM, etc etc the deal would have been pulled or seriously renegotiated(down not up for those of you that are a little slow on the take!).

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The deal was submitted to the Govt more than once with changes to the preferential shareholder entiltements.
The final deal in the final hour would have left the govt liability to be no more than $400million dollars in the event that SCF should ever collapse in the future!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The point you miss is the deal was subject to DD and it wouldn't have got to the finishing post as it would have failed in DD.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The deal still would have been better than the deal the Government did - ie receivership and $1Billion loss which will be the final write off by the Government. Every day SCF and its subsidiary companies are in recivership, the company is devaluing and it becomes harder for a buyer to pay a good price.

The offer the Government got was a great price and was based on rebuilding SCF which would have kept a finance company still funding NZ businesses

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

This is all a game

And the end game is that Marac/ Heartland Bank will end up with SCF. The blue bloods have been planning this since at least September 2009 or thereabouts.

Mark my words either Heartland Bank or the backstop of Sandy Maier/ Ngai Tahu will end up with SCF. Don't forget the South Island number one blue blood, Bruce Irvine controls both Heartland Bank and Ngai Tahu Holdings and Sandy Maier was appointed a director of Ngai Tahu in early August 2010 - a month before the receivership and while he was CEO of SCF and running the sale process.

If this was a fair country it would be them on trial here and being victimised - not Hubbard

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Frankly Hubbard supporters - in my opinion the receivership was the best outcome in this situation. "Deals" that were put on the table by purchasers required the Govt to front up with cash, and then left the Govt exposed to further downside risk (ie SCF still falling over as confidence drops further). This I have gleaned from the media writeups.

Why should the Govt involve itself in a deal promoted by someone who has lost so much money up to that point is beyond me? So SCF could continue trading? Forget it - it was a lame duck that was surviving only due to the GG.

Also the nature the deals were presented - in the final hours!!! Joke sorry. Purchases of this nature are months in the making.

I am not close to this whole saga - but from the outside I think the Govt has behaved correctly in a bad situation.

Lets not blame the Govt for the losses, the blame lies solely with the management that was in charge of the entities during the time the bad loans were written.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Sorry to see all this about a fine man

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Major problem with elderly businesspersons holding on to their VIP jobs for too long....isn't there any possible successors at all, just plain ego.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Simpson Grierson were paid $200,000 for the due diligence on Mr X offer, which was promptly drawn down. Was there a barrier on dd due to the Gray/Botherway connections?

Also this offer was discussed at the book launch, 'Allan Hubbard: A Man Out of Time' as per Allan Hubbards speech, which the media attended, so there are no secrets here. Frankly, it's scandalous that it's taken so long for such information to get to the public.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Pointless arguing with Hubbard supporters, they are as deficient in the brain department as hubbards lawyers think he is. Hubbard supporters are traveling salesman, hippies, cult church followers and an out of work discredited property zealot.

To break it down for you stupid Hubbard supporters I have seen more deals fall over in dd than you have had hot dinners. Also the deal 'capped' government liability at 700 million and you think this is a good thing? Your god Hubbard screwed up his company so much that the beat case scenario was a 700 mill taxpayer liability. Piss off you scum sucking pigs and take that ungrateful senile man with you

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

exactly

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

One gets the sense that Hubbard's supporters are scared witless at the revelations to come out of court.

Hmmmmm ....wonder why?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Anon at 8.59am

You seem to know a lot about this deal for just an interested bystander.

Share more information with us and maybe disclose how you are connected to Sandy Maier or SCF or Treasury.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

At least people are now admitting there was an offer.

More than Bill English has done to date

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

What is most unfortunate about this issue is the false hope given to investors by Paul Carruthers, the self appointed spokesperson of the Hubbard supporters and traveling salesman. If reporters do not share his view on issues he gets angry, and aggressive.

A Timaru Herald reporter who has uncovered issues of importance in favor of Mr Hubbard is now effectively blacklisted by the traveling salesman because she has also reported facts that Carruthers disagrees with.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Someone mentioned Chris Lee? Remember this is the very same guru who had his own finance companies' ratings system and even whilst the shxt was hitting the fan, chose to continue to have belief in finance companies like Hanover, SCF, St Laurence etc.

Heck, he even claimed to have direct lines to the lines of Mark Hotchin and Allan Hubbard so was getting the real oil.

Turned out to be toxic degraded discarded oil.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

And he also backed Strategic very strongly

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Have a brain, probably need a scan if you read some of the comments. Look inwards. Greed and corruption now rife. People talk and sometimes overheard. Honestly eventually prevails but not before "slander" gets pushed off centre stage. Mr English should front up with whole truth. How long was a government rep spying on SCF etc - since June 2009?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Spying?

I jolly well hope so that someone was keeping a very close eye on SCF as we taxpayers were guaranteeing Hubbard's reckless and incompetent management of the company.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

'reckless and incompetent management of the company' is an interesting judgment when there has not been one charge against Hubbard to date?

Isn't it out of order to be selling assets under the circumstances?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

You will be interested to know that it took over 12 months of investigation to bring charges against Bridgecorp directors - just wait in the queue.

Charges are coming - there can be little doubts about that.

MRI brain scan! What next? Heart scan to show he indulged in the orgy of related party transactions because of a weak heart?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Paul Carruthers is not a travelling salesperson.

What is most unfortunate is media will not report on truth yet will work to discredit... in this case Hubbard supporters.

That fact does raise a number of questions about the integrity of a variety of NZ media, and their political associations.

Campaigns designed to attack and discredit are nothing new and to see Hubbard supporters attacked this way signals that there must be some truth to their points. (Have seen plenty of that in NBR, eg Penny Bright attacks in comments which come across as immature and vile and say more about the writer than about Penny.)

Ironically Anon 8.59 has done well to discredit himself with his own words and agression.

What would motivate a person to speak so abusively?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Eh, where has the media worked to discredit Hubbard's supporters?

If anything, the media has given the supporters plenty of air-space to voice their opinions.

Unfortunately, most have used the opportunity to hang themselves and shown themselves to be deluded and beyond human comprehension.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The people closest to Hubbard know more about this situation than anyone else in NZ due to fudged facts across many publications.

The 'travelling salesman' line is clearly there to antagonise Mr Carruthers,

The repeated undermining of Allan Hubbards mental health has no evidential foundations, nor do any fraud investigations, or even statutory management as far as I'm aware. Faith in NZs judicial process is seriously compromised on this matter, as are a variety of Codes of Ethics.

Saying that people are deluded does not make it true.

A lie detector test of National Party members, SCF staff, lawyers, media and regulators involved may be more interesting than the brain scans of Hubbard and the supporters.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Moses. I am a taxpayer! Govt paper's need to be questioned. What were they really doing? Where did the money go? Who was paid? Where are the real accounts? Who names are on them? Surprises still to come. Waiting!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Chris Lee has zero, zippo credibility when it comes to any kind of fundamental understanding of how things work in the financial world.

I have seen emails written by him boasting how well he knew the finance companies. Well, he sure cost his clients plenty.

Worse is when he tried to cover his backside by badmouthing the very same finance companies he had clients' monies in! After they fell over, that is!

Now he has the audacity to try and blame others!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Don't blame Chris Lee

Blame the perpetrators like Mark Hotchin of Hanover and Jock Hobbs and the Consultant from Strategic Finance.

They are the ones that blatantly lied about the state of their companies and the ones who took millions out of these companies before the market worked out what they had done.

Blame the MS Diplock at the Securities Commission for being so incompetent and letting it happen.

Don't blame Chris Lee - yeah sure he made mistakes by trusting people and taking them at their word - but he did not know or cause the blatant theft by these people

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Sure Chris Lee is not responsible for finance companies failing. What he is responsible for is presenting himself as an expert on the area and making proclamations on the safety of certain companies without any sound basis for doing so.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Chris Lee's behavior is disgraceful.

He is trying to shift the blame of his seriously flawed rating system (a marketing gimmick) to others.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

You do realise it is Mr Hubbards lawyers submitting the scan - not the SFO requesting it.

Surely the only conclusion is they are hoping for him to avoid prosecution by proving he was incompetent. I don't see any other reason?

I think he will be facing some pretty big charges - and frankly if he is guilty I don't see why he should get off just cos everyone says he's a nice man?
Seems like a lot of the money he gave away and invested wasn't really his to give?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Do you realise that Hubbards lawyers requested the brain scan? So if it wasn't the SFO requesting it, who was it and why? Please tell us where you got that information and when, Shocked-Still? Thanks.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The truth will be revealed. Allan Hubbard was such a big name in the finance industry and he attracted money big time!. The Heartland Bank would never be able to compete and attract money as long as AH remained in the money business. Lock him up in jail and discredit him, remove him from his assets, and the Heartland bank got the go ahead.
ALLAN HUBBARD GOT SHAFTED - BIG TIME!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The questions would have to be asked -

Are Allan Hubbards lawyers working for him in his best interest, given the fact that Mike Herron is know to work as a prosecutor for the SFO???
Has a deal been already been done behind the scenes????
There are rumours that Russell McVeay are pursuing Grant Thornton LTD for non payment this week in a Timaru Court???
There are also rumours that payment will be denied from the SM's. It is rumoured that Russell McVeay will not work for legal aid???
Allan Hubbard will then be forced to apply for Legal Aid for any defence if he is charged with anything???
Russell McVeay will then have an exit from any proceedings.

ALLAN HUBBARD GETS MORE SHAFTED BIG TIME!!!!!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

It is true that Russell McVeagh are seeking a court ruling on who will have to pay their bill, which is now a whopping $2.5M (for what, I have no idea - given that no-one has heard from them yet).

The statutory managers are saying that a) Al...lan is "insolvent" and therefore cannot pay it, and b) that they didn't appoint RMV anyway, Allan appointed RMV, so it's his responsibility to pay them.

Opinion is divided about whether RMV is conflicted here or not, however I will make the following observations:

1: Mike Heron has worked for the SFO and still does work for them.

2: RMV are widely known to work for the government on a regular basis.

3: Because of (2:) RMV stand to lose by defending Allan Hubbard properly, because it would involved challenging the government and the processe(s) it has applied in Hubbard's case, resulting in the possible/probable loss of lucrative government contract work.

4: RMV have indicated to Allan that they will not consider working for him on "legal aid" if the statutory managers refuse to pay their bill.

This much we know for sure, so everyone needs to see what happens and connect the dots now.

If RMV pull out and Allan is forced to seek legal aid, I would say that it was a pre-agreed deal between RMV and the government that this is how it would play out.

That way the govt gets to charge Allan with fraud, but avoids a court case with a judge ruling him unfit for trial, and tidies it up neatly for them, creating the perception that Allan is a criminal who deserved this while removing any opportunity for him to clear his name, other than by future civil court action on his part.

If RMV stand by him, then the people who doubt RMV's commitment to Allan were obviously wrong.

Either way, if Allan winds up being accused of fraud and struck off the Companies Register without a trial, the investors will then get to discover the government's true motives after this point.

If the statutory management remains in place, without an obvious and timely effort to return the investments to the investors via an appropriate management structure of the investor's choosing, then I would say "you've all been had".

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

You "Stand-by-Hubbard" supporters are absolutely losing the plot .

Your conspiracy theories are insulting to a normal persons intelligence, ridiculous and I have to say - are making it look more and more like Mr Huabbard has something to hide.
You jump at shadows that don't exist and seem to think that anyone in any kind of position of authority or responsiblity is incapable of making a non-corrupt decision or judgement.

Now his own lawyers are corrupt too???

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

If you need a govt bail out then you must explain yourself in full. If you can cover the bill then we all have no right to question you.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The comments about Mike Heron and RMV are total rubbish.

Heron is one of a number of lawyers who from time to time take briefs from the SFO. Equally these lawyers defend people who are prosecuted by the SFO.

Having taken on the role of defending Hubbard, Heron would represent his client to the best of his ability. End of story.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

It is not proper to dignify most of the characters writing as supporters of Hubbard as supporters.

They are causing him great harm by promoting the view that Hubbard actually needs their deluded help!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

I am disappointed to see the Lawyers now being drawn in to this attack from both sides....This is just one step too far for even me, wouldn't it be a welcome relief for some transparency and honesty.... and some real investigative journalism.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Truth anyone?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Heard the latest about aliens getting ready to intervene in the Hubbard's case? All to do with making sure that a person of Hubbard's undoubted financial acumen is not lost to posterity?

Got it from ome of Hubbard's supporters. All hush hush.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

So, there is no evidence against the man and he is stripped of the right to defend himself, and has been for 6 months?! What country is this again?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

I think evidence will come - I think though that it's taken 6 months to sort through the 30++ years of handwritten, semi-legal,
non computerised, non record-keeping style busines attitude that SCF seems to have run on.
I DO NOT blame Mr Hubbard 100% for this disaster. He has to shoulder a lot of the blame but certainly not all.
Once again - the Stand-by Hubbard group are doing more damage with their insane conspiracy theories than good. Hubbards legal team must be tearing their hair out seeing their rantings make poor Mr Hubbard look more like he has something to hide each day.

I think the reason you are getting a couple of thousand hits each day to facebook (to your group with all of 60 members) is that people actully enjoy having a good laugh.
I have looked a couple of times in the last week or so. It's REALLY funny how ignorant and paranoid some of the comments are.

It's also sad though as there seem to be some good people there - just caught up in a bad scenario.
Instead of offering support to Mr and Mrs Hubbard they are supporting Paul Carruthers - which is a different thing entirely.....

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The detail on Aorangi, HMF and Te Tua was tidy, and was published on NBR Raw Data some time ago. Well, at least, it was at the time of statutory management. Grant Thorntons recent veil of secrecy and claim that Hubbard is insolvent since needs explaining and the people of NZ need disclosure and transparency so the truth may emerge.

Your prejudice against the stand by hubbard group on facebook is obvious. Let people objectively consider the fact that we are now in the 8th month of statutory management and the views of Hubbard supporters has come from gathered evidence over that time. For some folks at least, I'm sure that is worth more than the opinion of someone looking through a window for a moment, potentially with an intent to undermine and attack them.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Let's get back to the law on statutory management. When you type statutory management NZ into Google, a paper by the Law Commission comes up with recommendations to change the law which date from 2005. None of those recommendations have ever been put into practice such as the power of the High Court to start the statutory management procedure rather than the government. Once the issue is before the High Court, that opens the path for a defence procedure, the very defence procedure which seems to have been sadly lacking in the case in hand. Who was in charge when those recommendations were made and why weren't they acted on?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

exactly

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Post New comment or question

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

NZ Market Snapshot

Forex

Sym Price Change
USD 0.7274 0.0000 0.00%
AUD 0.9621 0.0000 0.00%
EUR 0.6505 0.0000 0.00%
GBP 0.5725 0.0000 0.00%
HKD 5.6796 0.0000 0.00%
JPY 81.0120 0.0000 0.00%

Commods

Commodity Price Change Time
Gold Index 1256.4 6.570 2017-06-23T00:
Oil Brent 45.8 0.340 2017-06-23T00:
Oil Nymex 43.0 0.270 2017-06-23T00:
Silver Index 16.6 0.140 2017-06-23T00:

Indices

Symbol Open High Last %
NZX 50 7563.7 7568.8 7563.7 -0.13%
NASDAQ 6234.4 6269.4 6236.7 0.46%
DAX 12758.0 12787.2 12794.0 -0.47%
DJI 21380.9 21421.8 21397.3 -0.01%
FTSE 7439.3 7441.8 7439.3 -0.20%
HKSE 25724.3 25770.4 25674.5 -0.02%
NI225 20152.6 20152.6 20110.5 0.11%
ASX 5706.0 5723.3 5706.0 0.17%