Referendum on Asset Sales

[Oscar]

Answer questions. Oh wait you can't, or won't. My money is on can't.

You have established that there is a connection between Rio Tinto, Solid Energy and Asset Sales.
Congratulations. You have now caught up with the rest of us.

You still haven't explained how crippling Southland's economy is good for NZ.

You seem to be of the same ilk as Mashbrain - post a whole lot of semi - related stuff (that is probably connected in your reality), and when challenged about it, throw some more drivel out there.

[husaberg]

You have established that there is a connection between Rio Tinto, Solid Energy and Asset Sales.
Congratulations. You have now caught up with the rest of us.

You still haven't explained how crippling Southland's economy is good for NZ.

You seem to be of the same ilk as Mashbrain - post a whole lot of semi - related stuff (that is probably connected in your reality), and when challenged about it, throw some more drivel out there.

You have not read you will not read.
You said they were not related i showed you they were, Now you insinuate that you knew it all along, you are a first class dyed in the wool idiot.
For the Record in 2011 Rio Tinto employed 700 workers they have layed off quite a few since then.
they also had 100 contractors.
They have substantial tax incentives plus pay literally nothing for their power. They were just going to have to pay something near what they should have when the shit hit the fan. Rio Tinto had negotiated the increase and had signed the contract.

Solid energy which National wouldn't bail out return about 250 million a year (Carbon tax plus profits) (not including wages taxs and other stuff either BTW)

Key bailed out the smelter with a sweetener deal that all of NZ have to pay.
because it threatened the sale of the generator SOE's.

Yet refused to let Solid energy operate. they shed far more jobs than RIO TInto actually have in NZ, and far more revenue that actually belongs and goes to NZ. why?
because not bailing them out suited the National asset sale strategy. Oh is there a pattern. I wonder if you can see it?

Shutting the RIO Tinto smelter and releasing its energy requirement or refusing to prop up RIO Tinto would benefit the whole of NZ.
Callas sounding but, unfortunately true.
Just the same as allowing Solid energy to actually mine would have been.

The National led goverment chose to prop up private enterpises and bailout their Mates SCF and Hanover etc all at a cost to the Whole of NZ.
They also chose to leave an SOE high and dry, Yet at the same time help a Massive Corperation who contributes 2/3d's of F-all to NZ.

[Oscar]

You have not read you will not read.
You said they were not related i showed you they were, Now you insinuate that you knew it all along, you are a first class dyed in the wool idiot.
For the Record in 2011 Rio Tinto employed 700 workers they have layed off quite a few since then.
they also had 100 contractors.
They have substantial tax incentives plus pay literally nothing for their power. They were just going to have to pay something near what they should have when the shit hit the fan. Rio Tinto had negotiated the increase and had signed the contract.

Solid energy which National wouldn't bail out return about 250 million a year (Carbon tax plus profits) (not including wages taxs and other stuff either BTW)

Key bailed out the smelter with a sweetener deal that all of NZ have to pay.
because it threatened the sale of the generator SOE's.

Yet refused to let Solid energy operate. they shed far more jobs than RIO TInto actually have in NZ, and far more revenue that actually belongs and goes to NZ. why?
because not bailing them out suited the National asset sale strategy. Oh is there a pattern. I wonder if you can see it?

Shutting the RIO Tinto smelter and releasing its energy requirement or refusing to prop up RIO Tinto would benefit the whole of NZ.
Callas sounding but, unfortunately true.
Just the same as allowing Solid energy to actually mine would have been.

The National led goverment chose to prop up private enterpises and bailout their Mates SCF and Hanover etc all at a cost to the Whole of NZ.
They also chose to leave an SOE high and dry, Yet at the same time help a Massive Corperation who contributes 2/3d's of F-all to NZ.

Callas was an opera singer.

Of course there is a connection between two companies who are getting Govt subsidies - it's the Govt.

Face with your combination of slogans and gibberish I told you I would take one issue at a time, and started with Tiwai.

So the Govt. gave money to Rio Tinto to save Southland, so what?
This helped it's sale of Meridian, so what?
Based on what was at stake $30m was a drop in the bucket and if you think saving that many jobs was silly so you get cheaper power you are a moron.

Solid Energy is another matter entirely.
It has no chance of returning any profit, and it's the banks (both foreign and domestic) that are being asked to bail it out.
Were you not aware of that?

Ps. Get your story straight - you said the return was $70m and then $250m.
You haven't got a clue, have you?

[bogan]

You seem to be of the same ilk as Mashbrain - post a whole lot of semi - related stuff (that is probably connected in your reality), and when challenged about it, throw some more drivel out there.

As an on the fence reader (but referendum paper making its way closer to the bin with each post read), you aren't coming off any better.

[husaberg]

Of course there is a connection between two companies who are getting Govt subsidies - it's the Govt.

Which two companies are you saying are getting government subsidies?
RIo TInto is, And that 's a large overseas owned Multinational that posts huge profits the power generating SOE Meridien are not getting subsidies, they are getting told what they can charge Rio Tinto. but yet will need to make huge profits for their "investors"but from where? LOL

Face with your combination of slogans and gibberish I told you I would take one issue at a time, and started with Tiwai.

No you didn't and this sentence makes no sense

So the Govt. gave money to Rio Tinto to save Southland, so what?

It is at the cost of the tax payers of all NZ to benefit a Large multinational and a Goverment agenda to push through assets sales whatever the outcome

This helped it's sale of Meridian, so what?

As above

Based on what was at stake $30m was a drop in the bucket

so is the short term "saving" of only 800 jobs muppertard. Have you read the deal. Don't answer i have you haven't.

and if you think saving that many jobs was silly so you get cheaper power you are a moron.

THIS "MORRON" WORKS IN THE ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION INDUSTRY SO i might know a little more about it than you do.

Solid Energy is another matter entirely.
It has no chance of returning any profit, and it's the banks (both foreign and domestic) that are being asked to bail it out.
Were you not aware of that?

You should have have a look at Solid Energy's books. I have as i said, their "Loss" is a Paper loss attributed to a massive writedown of the value of their coal reserves.
Other factors to consider is they were not able to mine after Pike they were forced by the Government to buy the Pike Mine. they also returned 125 million in Carbon tax and 70 million in dividends. They asked National if they as a one off could not post a dividend to meet their short term problems, National said NO.....LOL.
Solid energy is a sustainable business, Employing far more people and generating far more income to NZ than Rio Tinto contributes.
NZ has the second largest coal reserves in the world per capita.

[mashman]

You seem to be of the same ilk as Mashbrain - post a whole lot of semi - related stuff (that is probably connected in your reality), and when challenged about it, throw some more drivel out there.

Ain't our fault you're a dumb fat kid.

[Oscar]

Ain't our fault you're a dumb fat kid.

And that's the best you got.
What an idjut.

[husaberg]

And that's the best you got.
What an idjut.

The best you have is ignoring facts that are presented in front of you,Then calling anyone who had an opinion that is more researched than your own, an idiot. While i may not agree with Mashy very often. I do agree with him above.(don't know about the Fat but you sure seem pretty "Dumb" in both senses of the word.

[Oscar]

Which two companies are you saying are getting government subsidies?
No you didn't and this sentence makes no sense


It is at the cost of the tax payers of all NZ to benefit a Large multinational and a Goverment agenda to push through assets sales whatever the outcome
As above
so is the short term "saving" of only 800 jobs muppertard. Have you read the deal. Don't answer i have you haven't.

THIS "MORRON" WORKS IN THE ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION INDUSTRY SO i might know a little more about it than you do.


You should have have a look at Solid Energy's books. I have as i said, their "Loss" is a Paper loss attributed to a massive writedown of the value of their coal reserves.
Other factors to consider is they were not able to mine after Pike they were forced by the Government to buy the Pike Mine. they also returned 125 million in Carbon tax and 70 million in dividends. They asked National if they as a one off could not post a dividend to meet their short term problems, National said NO.....LOL.
Solid energy is a sustainable business, Employing far more people and generating far more income to NZ than Rio Tinto contributes.
NZ has the second largest coal reserves in the world per capita.

What's "MORRON", Maria Callas?
And just because you sweep the floors somewhere don't make you an expert in that industry.

And while you're exercising that big brain, would you like to tell us about the price of coal on the international market?

Aside from that, you're boring me.
I think the Govt. did the right thing at Tiwai, and you don't .
You seem to think that the Govt. should save Solid Energy and that is somehow linked to Rio Tinto and Asset Sales.
Good for you, snug down that tinfoil hat and keep up the good work.

[Oscar]

The best you have is ignoring facts that are presented in front of you,Then calling anyone who had an opinion that is more researched than your own, an idiot. While i may not agree with Mashy very often. I do agree with him above.(don't know about the Fat but you sure seem pretty "Dumb" in both senses of the word.

You haven't research squat.
Which banks are suing the Govt. over the Solid Energy deal?

[husaberg]

You haven't research squat.
Which banks are suing the Govt. over the Solid Energy deal?

What's "MORRON", Maria Callas?
And just because you sweep the floors somewhere don't make you an expert in that industry.

would you like to tell us about the price of coal on the international market?


I think the Govt. did the right thing at Tiwai, and you don't .
You seem to think that the Govt. should save Solid Energy and that is somehow linked to Rio Tinto and Asset Sales.

How many times do you need to be told What is in the referendum.
Why do you think Solid Energy is in the Referendum?
Why was Rio Tinto Bailed out
Why wasn't Solid Energy.
Why are the whole of New Zealand subsidising a Multinational at the cost of SOE's and the ultimate cost of all electricity users and tax payers in NZ.
Like i said Solid Energy is still profitable, when it is allowed to mine and return an reasonable dividend that allows it to retain cash reserves ride out market fluctuations and is not forced to buy assets.National used it as a cash cow.

The government did the wrong thing at Tiwai for all the wrong reasons. Tiwai point is not economic nor is it the best use of resources.
It was done to save face and under pressure from a multinational and because it so so wanted to push ahead fast with the asset sales.

Solid Energy is easier to sell as the owner of the coal reserves that way the buyer can mine it or chose to sit on it.

http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opin...s-over-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html
AS you are unable to follow links

In 1963, Consolidated Zinc/Comalco decided it could not afford to build the power station. The New Zealand government took over. Electricity generated by the plant was sold to Consolidated Zinc/Comalco at basement prices, with no provision for inflation.

omalco has repeatedly manipulated and interfered with New Zealand politics - and politicians - to preserve its special arrangement with the Manapouri plant. Rosenberg says that, in 1970, Comalco "issued shares to influential New Zealanders at a cheap rate before offering them to the public. These included prominent journalists, politicians, judges and newspaper executives."

Fighting hard against a rate increase of 650 percent proposed in 1977 by the Muldoon (National) government, Comalco contacted its parent companies in Japan, the UK and the United States [Kaiser Aluminum used to be in the smelter consortium] and asked them to persuade the U.S. and UK governments to "take action" against the New Zealand government, according to internal company documents leaked to CAFCA. The documents reveal that Comalco asked its Japanese associates to organize Japanese industrialists to act against New Zealand and directly asked Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser to intervene in the price dispute. Comalco eventually agreed to a 350 percent rate increase, and the government managed to cut the length of the contract from 99 years to 30 years, so that it will now expire in 2007.

In 1986, with the Labour government trying to increase Comalco's rate from 1.5 cents to 3.5 cents a unit, Comalco attempted to pressure top government officials, including Minister of Energy Bob Tizard, to be more sympathetic toward the company. Comalco also unsuccessfully took the government to court to try to prevent a rate increase from being legislated.

The National government at least had some success in increasing the power price in the 1970s; Labour failed completely in the 1980s. Comalco dragged out negotiations, took court action and complained publicly about its power price. But the company was hardly suffering under the new arrangement, as Electricorp CEO Rod Deane revealed in leaked 1987 documents: "With corporatization, electricity consumers will now have to meet the full cost of running the electricity system. Under the existing agreements, without any explicit Government subsidy, all other electricity consumers will be subsidizing the smelter. Comalco is benefiting by [NZ]$1-1.5 million per week as a result of the present agreements." But the Rogernauts running Electricorp had no stomach to legislate a price increase (which would signal a return to discredited Muldoonism), and the negotiations disappeared into the realm of "commercial confidentiality," where they remain.

[Oscar]

How many times do you need to be told What is in the referendum.
Why do you think Solid Energy is in the Referendum?
Why was Rio Tinto Bailed out
Why wasn't Solid Energy.
Why are the whole of New Zealand subsidising a Multinational at the cost of SOE's and the ultimate cost of all electricity users and tax payers in NZ.
Like i said Solid Energy is still profitable, when it is allowed to mine and return an reasonable dividend that allows it to retain cash reserves ride out market fluctuations and is not forced to buy assets.National used it as a cash cow.

The government did the wrong thing at Tiwai for all the wrong reasons. Tiwai point is not economic nor is it the best use of resources.
It was done to save face and under pressure from a multinational and because it so so wanted to push ahead fast with the asset sales.

Solid Energy is easier to sell as the owner of the coal reserves that way the buyer can mine it or chose to sit on it.

http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opin...s-over-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html

Solid Energy is insolvent.
Its banks are being asked to exchange debt for shares.

[husaberg]

Solid Energy is insolvent.
Its banks are being asked to exchange debt for shares.

And Why is that? why are they "NOW" insolvent
Congratulations for ignoring everything in the actual post.
Seeing as you missed it.

What's "MORRON", Maria Callas?
And just because you sweep the floors somewhere don't make you an expert in that industry.

would you like to tell us about the price of coal on the international market?


I think the Govt. did the right thing at Tiwai, and you don't .
You seem to think that the Govt. should save Solid Energy and that is somehow linked to Rio Tinto and Asset Sales.

How many times do you need to be told What is in the referendum.
Why do you think Solid Energy is in the Referendum?
Why was Rio Tinto Bailed out
Why wasn't Solid Energy.
Why are the whole of New Zealand subsidising a Multinational at the cost of SOE's and the ultimate cost of all electricity users and tax payers in NZ.
Like i said Solid Energy is still profitable, when it is allowed to mine and return an reasonable dividend that allows it to retain cash reserves ride out market fluctuations and is not forced to buy assets.National used it as a cash cow.

The government did the wrong thing at Tiwai for all the wrong reasons. Tiwai point is not economic nor is it the best use of resources.
It was done to save face and under pressure from a multinational and because it so so wanted to push ahead fast with the asset sales.

Solid Energy is easier to sell as the owner of the coal reserves that way the buyer can mine it or chose to sit on it.

http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opin...s-over-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html
AS you are unable to follow links

In 1963, Consolidated Zinc/Comalco decided it could not afford to build the power station. The New Zealand government took over. Electricity generated by the plant was sold to Consolidated Zinc/Comalco at basement prices, with no provision for inflation.

omalco has repeatedly manipulated and interfered with New Zealand politics - and politicians - to preserve its special arrangement with the Manapouri plant. Rosenberg says that, in 1970, Comalco "issued shares to influential New Zealanders at a cheap rate before offering them to the public. These included prominent journalists, politicians, judges and newspaper executives."

Fighting hard against a rate increase of 650 percent proposed in 1977 by the Muldoon (National) government, Comalco contacted its parent companies in Japan, the UK and the United States [Kaiser Aluminum used to be in the smelter consortium] and asked them to persuade the U.S. and UK governments to "take action" against the New Zealand government, according to internal company documents leaked to CAFCA. The documents reveal that Comalco asked its Japanese associates to organize Japanese industrialists to act against New Zealand and directly asked Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser to intervene in the price dispute. Comalco eventually agreed to a 350 percent rate increase, and the government managed to cut the length of the contract from 99 years to 30 years, so that it will now expire in 2007.

In 1986, with the Labour government trying to increase Comalco's rate from 1.5 cents to 3.5 cents a unit, Comalco attempted to pressure top government officials, including Minister of Energy Bob Tizard, to be more sympathetic toward the company. Comalco also unsuccessfully took the government to court to try to prevent a rate increase from being legislated.

The National government at least had some success in increasing the power price in the 1970s; Labour failed completely in the 1980s. Comalco dragged out negotiations, took court action and complained publicly about its power price. But the company was hardly suffering under the new arrangement, as Electricorp CEO Rod Deane revealed in leaked 1987 documents: "With corporatization, electricity consumers will now have to meet the full cost of running the electricity system. Under the existing agreements, without any explicit Government subsidy, all other electricity consumers will be subsidizing the smelter. Comalco is benefiting by [NZ]$1-1.5 million per week as a result of the present agreements." But the Rogernauts running Electricorp had no stomach to legislate a price increase (which would signal a return to discredited Muldoonism), and the negotiations disappeared into the realm of "commercial confidentiality," where they remain.

[Oscar]

And Why is that? why are they "NOW" insolvent
Congratulations for ignoring everything in the actual post.
Seeing as you missed it.



How many times do you need to be told What is in the referendum.
Why do you think Solid Energy is in the Referendum?
Why was Rio Tinto Bailed out
Why wasn't Solid Energy.
Why are the whole of New Zealand subsidising a Multinational at the cost of SOE's and the ultimate cost of all electricity users and tax payers in NZ.
Like i said Solid Energy is still profitable, when it is allowed to mine and return an reasonable dividend that allows it to retain cash reserves ride out market fluctuations and is not forced to buy assets.National used it as a cash cow.

The government did the wrong thing at Tiwai for all the wrong reasons. Tiwai point is not economic nor is it the best use of resources.
It was done to save face and under pressure from a multinational and because it so so wanted to push ahead fast with the asset sales.

Solid Energy is easier to sell as the owner of the coal reserves that way the buyer can mine it or chose to sit on it.

http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opin...s-over-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...-point-smelter
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.nzaluminium.co.nz/index.php?pageLoad=30
http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/...mm0692_07.html
AS you are unable to follow links

All your links are quite old.
Try some newer ones: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/busine...d-to-negotiate
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...id-Energy-Govt

The Government now says it has set aside some money from the proceeds of asset sales to help out State-owned coal miner Solid Energy if needed.

Labour MP Clayton Cosgrove yesterday released Treasury papers showing the Government was looking to use $100 million from the sale of Mighty River Power shares for "Solid Energy recovery facilities" after the company got into financial strife.

You do know what insolvent means, don't you?

And why are they insolvent?
Because the price of coal crashed.
Because the Chinese economy contracted.

[husaberg]

All your links are quite old.
Try some newer ones: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/busine...d-to-negotiate
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...id-Energy-Govt



You do know what insolvent means, don't you?

And why are they insolvent?
Because the price of coal crashed.
Because the Chinese economy contracted.

But why were they not able to stay solvent Oscar why? Why was the cupboard bare? why was there no cash reserves? Why were they forced to buy Pike, Why were they unable to mine for 12 months? Why were the company paying out huge redundancies to the people that earned revenue, yet keeping all the admin on.
Why did the Government not bail out there own company, That earns revenue year in year out employs NZ's with all the profits being returned to NZ, Why when it would help out a Multinational that has an unprofitable smelter. One that sends its profits overseas and employs less people.


That's right the smelter is unprofitable and will not stay open in the long term without a massive increase in price and still then it is using a outdated inefficient process.
The links predate the deal thats how far ahead of you i are.
I said this stuff probably over7 months ago, Catch up
The historical information doesn't change by the way