Up to 49% Public Share Offer (Preferred Option) Submitter ID Pg 8
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
All Submissions that Selected Option B B - Up to 49% public share offer (preferred option) Submitter ID pg 8 ........................................................................ 100 246 .................................................................... 110 564 .................................................................... 120 930 .................................................................... 130 1291 .................................................................. 140 1714 .................................................................. 150 2105 .................................................................. 160 2443 .................................................................. 170 2725 .................................................................. 180 3104 .................................................................. 190 No commentary ............................................... 200 Option Chosen B - Up to 49% public share offer (preferred option) Submitter Commentary Andrew Wallace i will happily help fund the proposed expansion as an local investor but want to have Submitter #8 some certainty that the expansion will go ahead and not stall due to being strongly To be heard? No opposed Bill Lowe Get local government out of business. belongs in the private sector managed by local Submitter #9 body rules and regulations To be heard? No Jeremy Riddell Having invested a small amount in Port of Tauranga many years ago I have watched it Submitter #13 grow, with good returns for the shareholders and the local council to what it is today. To be heard? No This is the only way forward for the Port to grow with local shareholders and the council, and not the debt that would be otherwise inflicted on all ratepayers, with many years before ratepayers would see a return, or if. Every ratepayer would get a return with option B Steve van der Linden I am in no doubt that listing on the share market is the best model. This option Submitter #15 provides a transparent, fair and accurate market value for Napier Port and is a proven To be heard? No win win solution. HBRC will be the cornerstone investor and it allows for local shareholders. Model it on Tauranga Port and can't go wrong. I am against a referendum. Council need to make a firm decision and then go for it. Rick Bower I believe the option to sell a minority shareholding via a public offer is the best option. Submitter #18 This achieves the Council's goal of diversifying its investment risk, allows the Port To be heard? No additional capital to pursue the required capital expenditure and allow ratepayers to financially benefit from the growth of the region. As a Hawkes Bay ratepayer we are all wanting the region to grow and prosper, so I hope ratepayers will be given preferential status to allocation of shares either through first priority or a market discount. This will allow ratepayers to financially benefit from the growth of the region which will likely be reinvested back into Hawkes Bay, rather than some big out of town funds buying up all the shares leaving us individual ratepayers to buy shares on the stock exchange in the secondary market. Finally, I appreciate all the work the HBRC is doing to involve public in its decision and I hope a lot of the public is providing their opinion as I believe this is a great opportunity for the Council, Port and ratepayers. Regards, Rick Craig Ford This is the best option in my opinion. Submitter #19 To be heard? No Chrissi Faber NO RATES increase for residents Submitter #21 To be heard? No Danny Eagleton As long as local residents or ratepayers receive preferential access to shares before Submitter #22 the general public - similar to the government's float of power companies a few years To be heard? No ago. Stuart Foote For all the reasons in the info booklet, but with the proviso that adequate provision is Submitter #23 made for HBRC ratepayers get some priority in share allocation, that the majority of To be heard? No shares floated are not allocated to “big business”. Anita Finnema we still want to have control but really needs some outside funds to expand Submitter #24 To be heard? No Option B pg. 100 Submitter Commentary Peter Walker No need to reinvent the wheel If it worked for Tauranga .... and the NZ market could Submitter #25 do with more investment options To be heard? No Antjedine Borchers - no increase in rates - anyone can purchase shares Submitter #28 To be heard? No Tim McKenzie I see this being a great opportunity to invest in our port as locals and not have to pay Submitter #29 more on our rates. I think all locals of hawkes bay should be given the option to To be heard? No invest. We should be sent a link via email t register for shares. Kathy Brunton I feel this is the best option as it frees up capital but still retains ownership Submitter #30 To be heard? No Pam Heays It seems like the best option from a taxpayers perspective Submitter #32 To be heard? No Jean Edney Control remains with the HBRC - there is no need to bring outsiders in to the Board of Submitter #36 Directors but the option is there to acquire expertise if required. To be heard? No Richard Morrish Yes selling 49% I believe is a good idea for the future enlargement of the Napier Port. Submitter #37 If we wish to stay competitive with other Ports we need to keep the Port of Napier in To be heard? No a position of strength so as not to have cargo and passengers ships pass us by. We do not want to become a exporting port like Timaru, to keep ahead we need more wharfs to cater for the extra cargo that is coming in the next few years. I will be purchasing shares in the new Port of Napier when the shares become available Tony Gray By getting investors, those who have the capital can invest. This will save those who Submitter #39 don't have spare capital to not have to fund this. Putting a cost onto rate payers is too To be heard? No tough. i would buy shares. Alexandra Gee I would like to have the opportunity to invest in my community, to assist economic Submitter #41 growth, with employment opportunities for locals. To be heard? No Gerard Sens So I can purchase shares in the ipo and have a stake in the growth of our region. Submitter #43 To be heard? No Peter Hunt I am of strong belief that the rate payers should not have to fork out the $$$$ I also Submitter #48 believe B to be the correct option (public shares), not overseas interested parties. To be heard? No Ownership is then retained in NZ. Tony Karantze In my opinion this is best for the ratepayers,I would invest ,good for HB Submitter #49 To be heard? No Richard Newson With the proviso that the funds raised be used for Port development within an agreed Submitter #51 timeframe. To be heard? No Rodger Burn This seems the most efficient way and acceptable to most ratepayers. It works very Submitter #53 well with Tauranga To be heard? No Graeme Sunderland In an ideal situation I would prefer option A, how ever to grow, and to mitigate the Submitter #56 financial cost of a natural disaster, option B looks the best. I lived in Tauranga for To be heard? No several years and watched that port develop very well. I would expect a clause somewhere that makes it impossible for public ownership to be less than 51%. Option B pg. 101 Submitter Commentary Garth Nimon Offer opportunity to local buyers first. Keep the asset value in the Bay. Submitter #57 To be heard? No Simon Walker 1) Sale of 49% will provide greater oversight of the running of the port due to Submitter #58 shareholder/fund manager interest. To be heard? No 2) Selling 49% is the simplest way of funding the Port expansion. 3) Selling 49% reduces the risk to the HBRC in case of a devastating natural disaster such as a earthquake that damages the port. 4) While selling 49% of the port means that the HBRC will retain a smaller proportion of any profits and dividends, in real dollar terms, the ports expansion will likely mean that dividend payouts and profits will increase. 5) In my view, retaining full control and ownership of the port via borrowing or rates is unfeasible as this will place a huge financial burden on many people within our community who are struggling. By contrast, offering 49% to the public means that those members of the local community who wish to purchase an interest in the port can, and those that don't want to (or can't) are not forced to via increases in rates. 6) The HBRC owns the port. Ratepayers do not (this is a distinction that some people in our community do not grasp). For this reason, leveraging councils stake in the port on the back of ratepayers is, in my view unfair. That is, if rates are used to fund the port, then ratepayers are effectively 'forced' to purchase shares in the port without yielding any real benefit from this purchase. That is, ratepayers receive no dividend and they cannot sell their stake. Likewise, if ratepayers move out of the area or pass away, their interest in the port simply vanishes. Again, selling 49% to the public would allow individuals/families to take an interest if they want to. In my view, this is the fairest outcome. 7) It is likely that a public offering of the Napier port would attract real interest from many investors in New Zealand, including Kiwisaver fund managers. For this reason, the HBRC may benefit from share-price increases, in addition to the annual dividends that they currently receive. Guy Wilson Good mixed model similar to the Port of Tauranaga. Residents can buy shares in the Submitter #62 company if they wish to stay connected.