Blogs

TakING two: How's Plan B stack up?

Friday 6th of March 2009
OK it’s time to give a view on the latest proposal from ING for investors in its distressed CDO funds DYF and RIF. A funny thing happened on the morning of the announcement. No one knew anything was going to be announced last Wednesday, including I hear people within ING itself. I was having a yarn that morning with one of its competitors about the problems ING faced (as you do) and how it was going to get out of this rather large hole. The view discussed was that it was unlikely ING’s shareholders, that is ING and ANZ, would be writing a big cheque. Thus the conclusion was that it was difficult to see an answer or a way out of the mess. Well that line of thinking was wrong. Several hours later the company came up with Plan B. That is a guaranteed minimum payment of 83c and 86c in five years time for DYF and RIF investors respectively, or a cash-out now price of 62c and 60c respectively. The first thing is that this offer is miles better than the previous one. The earlier one where there was to be a $100 million loan to give investors some cash was not particularly flash. So on that point ING have to be given credit for binning a dumb idea and coming up with something better. Also, and very importantly, advisers should take huge credit for pressuring the company into coming up with a better plan. As for the price. Well the view is that the actual return investors get is something less than the number the company talks about. I understand it could be considered that the investors who stay in for five year are getting in effect a 6.7% annual return over that time, based on the current unit price (if they could exit now). Trying to get a good handle on the offer is hard as we still await the full details. What is interesting is that ING still seem to have faith in these products. Its first offer was, I suspect, predicated on the funds recovering. Even the second one has that feel about it too. When asked if there was alternative if investors voted this proposal down Troup said no. There isn’t a Plan C. PS: The other thing which has been occupying my mind is how long will this ING/ANZ joint venture last in New Zealand? From memory the New Zealand side of the deal weren’t that happy about it in the first place. (Not like the Australian side). This CDO issue has clearly put huge stress on the relationship and I would bet that the JV’s days a numbered. Just don’t know if the number is days, weeks or months.
Comments (2)
Murray Weatherston
Hi Phil 1.I think the reason that Plan B appeared so fast was that ANZ needed to finalise their 1/2 year accounts - the amount of their provision $AUD 130 million was large enough to be material in the accounts - so finality on the RIF/DYF issue was required. 2. I don't think ING or ANZ actually have a clue as to what the funds will return over the next 5 years - nor does anyone else for that matter; we know ING at its last road show said the modelling was difficult and they wouldn't have an answer for months. 3. As I have said elsewhere, what ING NZ appears to have done is to say "how much would we have to pay out in 5 years time so that the cash an investor had got would be equal over time to the $1 the initial investors paid. I have been told by others that this calculation is based on gross (pre tax distributions) - of course investors would have paid tax on these but that might be being picky. But even a novice adviser would recognise that a $ paid out in 2003 was worth a lot more than a dollar in 2013 - if they don't know that, why are they advising? 4. Bluntly I think the shareholders of ING NZ are paying money to try to restore their reputations in the minds of investors; they know that they will probably lose a lot of money (unless miraculously the funds investmetns recover over teh next 5 years) since they will end up owning most if not all of the fund - see ANZ's provisions; we probably won't get to see INGs provision as they are not a listed entity in NZ; but as a foreign owned company, they are required to file annual accounts at the Companies office. 5. Investors are not getting a 6.7% p.a. return from the current price as you say above. Rather if you choose the 60/62 cents now vs the 83/86 cents in 5 years, you will have used a 6.54% p.a. or 6.60% p.a. respectively post tax discount rate based on quarterly interest payments. [I think most investors will take the money now even though the pre tax equivalent to the discount rate is a lot higher than current 5 year rates]. 6. There are some other possible adverse angles that I am looking at in the context of this offer and will keep you posted when I sort these out totally.
0 0
15 years ago

Philip Macalister
Hi I understand Steven G took redundancy, but then contracted back to ING. His role was split in two and one part of it, marketing I believe, remains unfufilled. I think you should note that Marc's role was filled by Helen Troup and that the company has appointed a head of funds management. P.
0 0
15 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.