Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
You gotta ask do shareholders have any rights?
As far as WPL is concerned it appears not.
You couldn't find a decision swayed more by the coming election than the actual nitty gritty of the shell/woodside merger & by a Liberal goverment no less.

I know a lot of people(mostly ignorant types ie Hansonites)rattle on about keeping assets Aussie owned, but give me a break how many shares do they own? I tell you one thing even if this deal went through no Aust would have in anyway lost any money in fact shareholders would have done alright or at least had the option to do alright.

Well I'll step down from my soapbox & as I do you'll hear me also muttering about the Governor Generals appointment....God help us


JR
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Jono, I'm a shareholder of Woodside and I have to take objection about your comments on this one. Fact is Shell stuffed the bid..it is their own stupid fault. They didn't target or have the interests in mind of small Woodside shareholders when they issued their offer..Why, because the rediculously complex options offer to buy back stock after selling..was only attractive to institions and O.S short term traders and NOT to small holders(it was only going to trigger a capital gain, at a price well below premium). As an example take a look at the Sing Tel offer for CWO..with the various non cap gain trigering options to own a dual listed Sing stock directly. This will consequently succeed. Shell just wasn't smart enough, nor prepared to pay the right premium to pull this one off. Consequently small shareholders backed by their Independant Directors, Charles Goode et al shunned the bid..this ill feeling got back to the Treasurer via local disinchanted Liberal members. There is no Hansonism in the decision at all. Shell simply wanted to buy control without doing their proper homework and paying the correct price. All the nonsense about Aussie dollar falling and foreign Investors deserting the coutry etc, one day on is all ready proved false..just the profitiers exiting the share register. Shell has got just deserve I reckon. Did you really expect the company or for that matter the Government to hand over such a great asset for a song? AB
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I think the shareholders should have been allowed to make the decision pure & simple.
It's a listed company not a national assett having worked up Burup I assure you that without Shell & the other joint partners no Woodside would exist.
I have a right as a shareholder to decide what price I will except why should the twats in goverment decide?
If the decision was really based on the complex offer & with the interest of smaller holders in mind why not put conditions on it?

No I'm sorry to me this is just electioneering if such a word exists.

JR


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It possibly is electioneering but for such a smarmy politician he looked as genuine as I have seen him.
It will be very interesting to see if Costello treats a bid from BHP by the same apparent rules that he applied to Shell.
IE they have significant other LPG assets that might be seen to be competeing with the North West Shelf.
If a bid from BHP/Billiton is forth coming at a more reasonable price, then I am tipping we might see a lot of political doublespeak.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Control of Woodside by a BHP or Santos is a completely different animal than control by Shell. Q/ What interest does a Dutch company have in improving the export earnings of Australia and maximizing shareholders returns in Woodside? A/ NONE. BHP/Billiton or Santos on the other hand could use Woodside to improve export returns of the Nth West shelf and most importantly keep the returns in Australia. I really don't understand cynics who canned this government decision(and I have canned a fair few others recently..BAS/Super levy/Republic/GST linked petrol levies to name a few) I mean I'm all for globalisation, but we are dealing with our potential no 1 export here. On the flip side Aussie companies even IF they had the capital just couldn't walk in and take over say the Dutch cheese Industry. Come on, there is no level playing field when it comes to "free trade" partic within the EEC. Hong Kong still imports all it's beef from Britain despite MadCow and F&M simply to appease an old trade agreement! We haven't had free market access to Europe or the U.S for our products for years..despite them being heaps cheaper and of obvious higher quality. The Woodside decision fights back. We are NOT a walk over. Crikies it's ANZAC day, where is your pride....
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Q/ What interest does a Dutch company have in improving the export earnings of Australia and maximizing shareholders returns in Woodside? Well you gotta look at it a tad dif they have a responsibilty to their shareholders I doubt if they intend to run down woodside they wouldn't buy it to do that. Look Aust will make money no matter who owns it everything that is exported is taxed by our Goverment.

Come on, there is no level playing field when it comes to "free trade" partic within the EEC.
What & us Aussie don't do the same thing to the countrys we can, Timor,
Papu New Guin, Phillipines etc? I can't see at all how you can rattle on about unfairness when we are the biggest exporter per capita in the FREE world. Bhp has raped many a poor country & currently has an extensive mix of foriegn mines, they are the number one income eaner& has a much better chance of maintaining that rating than WPL.

We haven't had free market access to Europe or the U.S for our products for years..despite them being heaps cheaper and of obvious higher quality
Huh, what are you talking about what products are much better & cheaper?

The Woodside decision fights back
IMO it just shows an ignorant public & pathetic Goverment.

We are NOT a walk over
Huh were talking about a take over nothing else.

Crikies it's ANZAC day, where is your pride....
I'm full of pride for the ANZAC's & I think that you are insulting those great soles by trying to use their deeds to prop up your opinion.
It's no war noone to fight no relation to the ANZAC spirit in anyway.


JR



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Q/ What interest does a Dutch company have in improving the export earnings of Australia and maximizing shareholders returns in Woodside? Well you gotta look at it a tad dif they have a responsibilty to their shareholders I doubt if they intend to run down woodside they wouldn't buy it to do that. Look Aust will make money no matter who owns it everything that is exported is taxed by our Goverment.

Tax is one thing, holding the earnings in Australian hands is completely different. It feeds back into everyones pocket, via direct holdings superfunds etc. Buy the way the offer offered nothing for Woodside shareholders to buy into Shell (as apposed to Sing Tel CWO offer) Go read the offer document..it was absolute C..p)

Come on, there is no level playing field when it comes to "free trade" partic within the EEC.
What & us Aussie don't do the same thing to the countrys we can, Timor,
Papu New Guin, Phillipines etc? I can't see at all how you can rattle on about unfairness when we are the biggest exporter per capita in the FREE world. Bhp has raped many a poor country & currently has an extensive mix of foriegn mines, they are the number one income eaner& has a much better chance of maintaining that rating than WPL.

Thsis isn't an argument for selling off the most luctrative potential export in terms of profit margin/potential earnings

We haven't had free market access to Europe or the U.S for our products for years..despite them being heaps cheaper and of obvious higher quality
Huh, what are you talking about what products are much better & cheaper?

Primary produce eg beef,cheese,lamb,fresh produce, wheat(US), timber(not woodchips, rice to Japan)

The Woodside decision fights back
IMO it just shows an ignorant public & pathetic Goverment.

If you lived in Melbourne, you'd know what it is like to have major corporations who have recently/likely to move in future, or even close down..eg Telstra, BHP, Pasminco, Orica, Pac Dun, Qantas, even NAB..admittently some have been interstate, but the general move is towards loss of jobs, Intellect and support for all the other ancillary skills. Loss of Woodside from Perth would have been a severe blow for WA

We are NOT a walk over
Huh were talking about a take over nothing else.

I think you'd appreciate from above, that I feel it is more than this!

Regards AB
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
AB
No doubt Wpl being sold of would cost some jobs but I don't
think that the impact would be huge you can jack around with
moving offices & elbowing management out the door but you can't
pick up Burup & move it over sea's.
Resources are a bit dif you got to suck it up, dig it up,
or grow it to a large extent the most important part is
the development it's self & not who put the capital up to
build or who owns the majority of the shares.
The mine etc has to be run, maintained etc

But the rest of those co's you mention that is a dif debate &
as a shareholder your guilty as we all are for the new economy.
Gee I remember my first mob PH cost me nearly $4000
& ringing oversea's a fortune,I remember inflation &
interest rates at 17%.
Thanks ERG & CWO for those contracts they helped me a lot.


Our largest export destination has always been & is even today
England(Europe is our largest export & import partner).
http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/[email protected]/94713ad445ff1425ca25682000192af2/2cd22a84525a8071ca2569de002a3030!OpenDocument

It's kinda surprising that we import more from Germany
then any one else but I suppose all those Beamers do add up.

JR





Print the post Back To Top