Jump to content

Spreadsheet Ranger

Platinum Wealth Club Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Spreadsheet Ranger

  1. SA's new Finance Minister Tito Mboweni on Friday recounted the days leading up to his appointment, saying he initially did not want to take up the position. Speaking at a conference of the Association of Black Securities and Investment Professionals in Johannesburg, the former labour minister and SA Reserve Bank head said he was apprehensive about returning to government. On the day he was sworn in as minister, many observers pointed out his tweet in February that he turned the position down because he believed younger leaders should assume such positions. Mboweni recounted how he and his younger brother maneuvered in the private sector to land big deals while interacting with state-owned industrial development and financing agencies. He attended the event on Friday as a stand-in speaker, in the absence of President Cyril Ramaphosa who is ill. He said his adventures in the private sector taught him that South Africa could do more to make the finance sector more accessible to the broader South African population. “The big banks haven’t crossed the Rubicon. They haven’t crossed over to Israel. Whether there is a black executive or not, they have not crossed over. It’s as if when black executives get there they want to be seen as acceptable,” said Mboweni. Mboweni said in order to get the economy performing, government needed to create an environment which allowed small and medium enterprises to operate at an optimum level. “If we are serious about access to capital, we must think in particular about how to support small and medium enterprises. In Germany you have Mercedes Benz and BMW, that economy is driven be the hidden champions that are small and medium enterprises,” Mboweni said. Mboweni jokingly recalled his meetings with Ramaphosa where the position of finance minister was offered to him. He said he told Ramaphosa that he had no desire for the job, but that the president would not have a word of it. “I said I did not want to be minister. We need young people now. I began jotting down names of people he should think about. Then I was told that the mandate of the meeting was not to seek advice. So, advice was out of the question,” he said. Against the wisdom of my Team, please don’t tell them this. It’s between us, I am not available for Minister of https://t.co/VmeiQvrvu7 cannot recycle the same people all over again. It is time for young people. We are available for advisory roles. Not cabinet. We have done that. — Tito Mboweni (@tito_mboweni) February 18, 2018 Mboweni is due to table the medium-term budget policy statement in Parliament on Wednesday, a mere two weeks after saying “yes” to the job. source: Fin24
  2. Use the app whenever possible. (forum will be upgraded in the coming weeks.)
  3. So strange I see @jse_school_bus is also missing...
  4. Well, that is odd, I cannot find him either...
  5. Elon Musk will give up the role of Tesla Inc. chairman and pay a $20 million penalty to settle fraud charges brought by the US over his claims about taking the company private. Musk will get to keep his job as chief executive officer and remain on the company’s board, but must resign as chairman within 45 days and can’t be re-elected to the role for three years as part of the accord reached Saturday with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Tesla will also pay a $20 million fine. Neither Tesla nor Musk admitted wrongdoing under the settlement, which was reached two days after the regulator sued the billionaire over his tweeted claims to have had the funding and investor support to buy out stockholders at $420 a share. The deal eases uncertainty over Tesla’s future while removing Musk from a key role at the automaker he’s led to become one of the most valuable in the world. The SEC’s lawsuit had sought to bar Musk from serving as an officer or director of a public company, a prospect that rattled investors. Tesla shares plummeted 14% on Friday, the biggest drop in almost five years. “This is a good resolution for Tesla stakeholders,” Ben Kallo, an analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co. with the equivalent of a buy rating on the shares, said in an email. “I expect the stock to trade materially higher on this and into the quarter where we can focus on the fundamentals.” Musk will purchase $20 million worth of the company’s stock in the next trading opportunity, according to a person familiar with his plans. He’s Tesla’s largest shareholder, with a 20 percent stake. On the Verge While the 15-year-old company has never earned an annual profit, Tesla’s CEO has vowed it’s the verge of making money and stemming cash burn that’s exceeded more than $1 billion in recent quarters. He’s made these assurances in large part due to progress Tesla has made in producing more Model 3 sedans — the first electric vehicle Tesla has tried to mass-manufacture. The settlement requires that Tesla appoint two new independent directors and establish a committee of independent board members. Tesla had come under criticism for years prior to Musk’s take-private episode for lax governance, though shareholders sided with the board in June by voting against an independent chairman proposal and approving the re-election of three directors. Steven Peikin, co-director of the SEC’s Enforcement Division said the resolution is intended to prevent further market disruption and harm to Tesla investors. ‘Deep Breath’ “Both sides have pulled back, taken a deep breath and realized that in the interest of the company, its shareholders, they need to put this behind them,” said Stephen Crimmins, a former SEC enforcement lawyer who’s now a partner at Murphy & McGonigle. “Shareholders with Tesla will be able to go to sleep tonight knowing the Musk will remain at the helm of the company. At the same time, there will be appropriate restraints in place.” The SEC filed its lawsuit Thursday, less than two months after Musk tweeted — falsely, according to the agency — that he secured funding to take the company private. He arrived at the $420 a share figure by assuming a 20 percent premium on Tesla shares and rounding up one dollar because “he had recently learned about the number’s significance in marijuana culture,” and to impress his girlfriend, according to the SEC’s complaint. The settlement doesn’t resolve investors’ lawsuits, which were significantly strengthened by the SEC’s complaint. It revealed facts based on emails, documents and interviews that private lawyers haven’t gained access to yet, giving them a better chance of withstanding Tesla and Musk’s attempts to get the shareholder suits thrown out, legal experts said. Source: Bloomberg
  6. There have been sustained efforts to diversify Nigeria’s economy since the country returned to democratic civilian rule in 1999. Successive governments have made foreign direct investment a priority to achieve this aim. Originally, the organised private sector was intended as the primary driver of investment-led economic reforms. But, in the process, the policy space was inadvertently opened up for state governments. Nigeria has three constitutionally recognised levels of government. These are the federal government, 36 state governments and 774 local governments. Each level of government has defined powers under the constitution. States are not meant to engage in foreign economic relations. However, successive economic reforms have given impetus to Nigerian states to grow in stature as gatekeepers to foreign direct investment. It’s now common to hear of states introducing specialised agencies to facilitate and coordinate investment inflows. Examples include the Kaduna State Investment Promotion Agency, the Lagos Office of Overseas Affairs and Investment and the Anambra State Investment Promotion and Protection Agency. Some states have also floated development focused corporate entities in which they have controlling stakes. A recent example is the Development Agenda for Western Nigeria Commission. This was set up by the six state governments in Nigeria’s South-West. They are pursuing a regional economic integration strategy. All these initiatives invariably lead to foreign entities including diplomatic envoys, multinational companies and international organisations getting directly involved at state level. The emerging practice is an interesting example of bottom-up economic development. However, the current state of affairs isn’t optimal. This is because having states all pursuing separate deals and arrangements makes central coordination problematic. If coordination is weak, there’s the potential for unnecessary duplication of processes and institutions. This in turn would have a knock-on effect on the ease of doing business in Nigeria. There are also constitutional questions over the legality of agreements which Nigeria’s state governments have signed with foreign entities. If left unchecked, these could expose the Nigerian state to legal claims by foreign investors. And there’s a question mark over the constitutional status of states opening foreign offices, as Bayelsa state did in 2013. On the face of it, this was unconstitutional. States in Nigeria don’t have constitutional powers to operate quasi-diplomatic offices. The trend of decentralised economic development has striking similarities with how things worked in the first Nigerian Republic, from 1960 to 1966. Regional governments in this era had constitutional authority to participate in Nigeria’s foreign economic engagements. An example was the control of commodity boards by states (then regions). Surplus from levies imposed on export commodities was a vital source of funds for economic development in the respective regions. Given this history it’s not surprising that states today are keen to take control of foreign investment inflows to fund their economic development objectives. Why action is needed No constitutional disputes have been raised between the federal government and the states. This can be taken as tacit acceptance of these emerging practices by states. Alternatively, the federal government prefers to deal with any fall-out on an ad hoc basis. This would make sense, given the benefits that can accrue from the arrangements. But those responsible for Nigeria’s economic development policy coordination need to wake up to the changing realities of the times. Other federal systems have been proactive in restructuring the cooperation mechanisms for foreign relations. These include the US, Canada, Belgium, Argentina, Austria, and Germany. These countries have recognised the need to adjust their existing regime to catch up with an emerging reality about sub-national governments – like states. These groupings are critical stakeholders in the 21st-century global economy. In Nigeria, meanwhile, there’s little evidence that states going abroad is viewed as a matter of urgency. It’s time it was. Time to review The emergence of states as gatekeepers of Nigeria’s investment-led economic reforms demonstrates the dynamic nature of federalism. States have already carved out the autonomy they need to determine the pace of their economic development. And they have done so with no formal constitutional changes. Now the federal government must realise that it’s no longer the sole determinant of Nigeria’s foreign economic policy. It would be both impossible and undesirable to try and reverse the trend. Instead, there’s an urgent need to review existing arrangements for cooperation. These reviews must happen at the constitutional and institutional levels. The aim should be to maximise the benefits of the drive and impetus that states are bringing to the Nigerian economic reform agenda. Nigeria stands to benefit immensely if states drive economic development. But effective coordination is critical. Source: The Conversation
  7. LONDON — In the decade before leaving Moneyweb in 2012, I hosted the Ibandla – a group comprising mostly of JSE-listed CEOs with a smattering of carefully selected thought leaders from civil society. Among the latter was Ann Bernstein, a super-smart, straight-talking, fearless researcher and communicator of uncomfortable truths. Bernstein was often the much needed burr that ensured boardroom diplomacy was soon forgotten. Her independence and intellect give her the confidence to highlight “Uber Truths” other Ibandla members consciously steered clear of – often sparking seat squirming and occasional mutters, but also the occasional nodding from the right quarters. Bernstein runs the Johannesburg-based Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE), a fiercely independent think-tank which has been calling the South African scene in all its complex reality since 1995. As you’ll read from her op-ed below, Bernstein still doesn’t care for pulling punches. Thank goodness. Right now, politically-correct South Africa needs more Ann Bernsteins if it is to face the reality of its challenges. – Alec Hogg By Ann Bernstein* The ice beneath South Africans’ collective feet is getting thinner by the day. The country’s public finances are as precarious as they have ever been and, even before the economy began shrinking, hundreds of thousands of people were joining the unemployment queue every year. Confronted by the sheer misery of the status quo, the government has resorted to increasingly populist, fiscally unsustainable policies: higher public sector wages, fee-free higher education, uncosted proposals for national health insurance, and an unwarranted resort to amending constitutionally protected rights that has undermined investor confidence yet stands little chance of delivering what its advocates say they want. Add rising social tensions and increased emigration by skilled South Africans, and the challenges we face now seem deeper than any since 1994. In this context, it is appropriate to ask where SA’s business leaders and organisations are hiding. They appear to be missing in action. For most of the Jacob Zuma era business leaders refrained from publicly criticising the government. In the face of sustained attacks on the legitimacy of the business sector and the commercial imperative of doing business with a hostile state, business chose to minimise conflict. As the Centre for Development and Enterprise argued in 2015 and again in 2016, this was a bad strategy for a country in trouble. This “going along to get along” approach ended with “Nenegate”, ratings downgrades and business opposition to attacks on then finance minister Pravin Gordhan, which drew a comparatively fierce response from business leaders. The relaunch of Business Leadership SA in Alexandra in August 2017 reflected a new commitment to engagement from business leaders. The result: an all-hands-on-deck programme of action which, in helping secure Cyril Ramaphosa’s election as leader of the ANC and his subsequent appointment to the country’s presidency, was successful. Since then the president has taken important steps that have begun to roll back the worst excesses of state capture. In time, these should improve governance across the public and parastatal sectors. Unfortunately, this is not the full story of the past seven months. Much of what has happened on the policy front has been deeply troubling. That business has had little to say about it publicly, and has apparently had little influence over its trajectory, is a matter of deep concern. Business must stand up Organised business has said almost nothing about the failure to rein in spending growth in the 2018 budget as aggressively as was needed, or about the budget-busting wage deal reached with public servants and Eskom workers. Most surprising has been the subdued response to the ANC’s decision to amend a critical section of what the governing party’s leaders used to say was the “best constitution in the world”. This decision, taken in haste, is likely to be implemented badly. The government’s near total inability to support land reform beneficiaries or finalise the enormous backlog of conflicting, overlapping restitution claims is ignored as South Africans are asked to trust a mainly corrupt state to implement expropriation without compensation, restitution, redistribution and development effectively. Where will the expertise and funding be found? And where is the voice of business? Does business’s silence reflect a fading commitment to more active engagement with policy development? If so, it would suggest that business has (already) forgotten the key lesson of the past two decades — failure to remain fully engaged, with the government and in the public square, on public policy issues, usually ends badly. It also suggests that business leaders — who told the Centre for Development and Enterprise in a series of interviews conducted earlier this year that it was critically important that business not “demobilise” — have been unsure how to adapt to the new political realities of 2018. It is easy to understand why this might have happened. SA is, and always has been, a complex country to govern, making policy choices extremely difficult. The complexities of race and vast income inequality, as well as the suspicion and hostility many in government feel towards business, mean it is not easy for business to engage the government. Moreover, when it does there is always the risk of damaging political blowback. The path of least resistance The path of least resistance is, therefore, attractive to business even before you start thinking about the many issues about which there is disagreement within the business community. What is the best way to achieve black economic empowerment (BEE)? Should we protect our industries from imports? Do we want a stronger or weaker rand? Is a national minimum wage wise? Just because policy engagement is difficult for business, it does not follow that withdrawal to its default public silence or going-along-to-get-along position is the right response. This was obvious when the (still present) principal danger was that government officials would loot the fiscus. It should be obvious also when bad policy choices could have even more devastating effects on the country’s long-term prosperity. The major surprise about business’s response to the disappointments of recent policy developments is that it has failed to make the case — compellingly, publicly – for a much higher prioritisation of economic growth as a goal of policy. In the face of populist, dangerous demands made by other interests, business has failed to make the case for the institutional and policy reforms needed to accelerate growth, or even to make the case against policies that undermine growth. Politically, there is a great deal going on, far too much for business to engage meaningfully with everything. We would argue, however, that two issues require immediate, co-ordinated business leadership: limiting the damage being done by the debate about (and substance of) the amendment of section 25 of the constitution, and developing a business consensus on the best approach to the country’s deepening fiscal crisis. Land and fiscal policy Concerning land, business should be making the case in all possible forums that constitutional change is worse than unnecessary — it is a terrible idea. Land reform is not the most important or efficient vehicle for poverty reduction. All the evidence confirms that the failure to achieve more rapid, more successful reform has nothing to do with any constitutional impediments. Badly done, amending the property clause is bound to be enormously costly and disruptive for the economy and the country. SA needs an accelerated but realistic approach to restitution, redistribution and tenure security, and, most importantly, inclusive, efficiency-enhancing urban land reform. Business needs a co-ordinated proposal and public campaign on how SA deals with all aspects of land reform, including practical proposals on how commercial agriculture and other private institutions can help drive success. Regarding fiscal policy, business needs to stake out a clear, public position on how quickly sovereign debt levels have to stabilise, and the mix of spending cuts and tax policies needed for this. As importantly, it needs to make the case forcefully that stabilising debt is almost certainly impossible unless the economy grows again. Through engagement with the government and in its participation in the public square, organised business has to be the voice of growth. This is in its own and the national interest. If business does not make the case for growth — strongly, strategically, with all the resources it can muster — no-one else will. Its failure to do so in recent months represents a wasted opportunity; one it needs to address sooner rather than later. Ann Bernstein is Centre for Development and Enterprise executive director Source: Biznews
  8. I am going to feel rich, all my toys are priced in US Dollars. Luxury iPhone/Samsung gets paid with a rand-based salary. Going to suck for my US ETF though...
  9. South Africa’s rand is undervalued and there’s scope for the currency to strengthen to as much as 11 per dollar, said Colin Coleman, head of sub-Saharan Africa at Goldman Sachs Group. The currency fell to its weakest level in more than two years this month after data showing the economy entered a recession in the second quarter, raising the nation’s risk profile at a time when emerging-market assets are under pressure from a rising dollar and global trade tensions. It’s regained some lost ground since President Cyril Ramaphosa unveiled an economic plan last week to try to revive growth. The rand traded at 14.1617 per dollar by 6:12 p.m. in Johannesburg on Friday. The currency has weakened about 17 percent since February, when it rallied to a three-year high after Ramaphosa succeeded Jacob Zuma as president. “Anything weaker than 13 rand to the dollar we see as undervalued and we see scope up to 11 rand in terms of equilibrium of the rand,” Coleman said in an interview Friday with Bloomberg Television. “There is significant potential re-rating in a positive sense for the rand to go.” Coleman said Ramaphosa’s package of proposals announced last week, which the president billed as a stimulus programme, was a “stability and recovery plan” that shifts the budget emphasis away from consumption to more productive spending. The Goldman Sachs executive also said he’s optimistic Ramaphosa will secure victory for the ruling African National Congress in elections that are scheduled to take place in the first half of next year. The new administration is on the “right track,” he said. “We think that the elections will allow the president to effectively get a renewed mandate from the population which effectively will underpin the modernization program and structural reforms he wants to undertake,” Coleman said. At 18:42, the rand was trading at R14.17, 0.36% weaker. Source: News24
  10. I really hope long 4 life will finish strong this year. Feels like they are losing momentum.
  11. This is going to suck. I mailed this thread to them.
  12. A dark chapter and the reason why people should not listen to others on the internet without research
  13. Glad to see that she is back on Twitter! Sent from my SM-G920F using Platinum Wealth mobile app
  14. It sucks, cause I bought a lot of it... But the whole JSE is bad this year, I mean my favorite share, L4L had done very little. Sent from my SM-G920F using Platinum Wealth mobile app
  15. Tesla Inc. has received a subpoena from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission regarding Elon Musk’s effort to take the company private, indicating the regulatory scrutiny of his statements have reached a more serious stage. The demand for information, described by a person familiar with the matter, followed Musk’s tweet last week saying he was considering taking Tesla off the market and had “funding secured” for the deal. The electric-car maker’s shares dropped 2.6 percent to $338.69, closing at the lowest since the chief executive officer set off a firestorm last week. SEC spokeswoman Judith Burns and a Tesla spokesman declined to comment. Musk exposed himself to legal risk by tweeting Aug. 7 that he had the funding for a buyout. Almost a week later, the chief executive officer said the basis for his statement was conversations with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, which first expressed interest in helping take the company private in early 2017. Tesla’s board has since clarified that it hasn’t received a formal proposal from Musk, who’s also chairman, nor has it concluded whether going private would be advisable or feasible. “The whole format of his announcement was highly problematic and very unusual,” Harvey Pitt, a former SEC chairman who now leads advisory firm Kalorama Partners, said Wednesday on Bloomberg Television. “You can’t tell a lie.” Fox Business reported earlier that the SEC sent the subpoena. Musk also tweeted on Monday that Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Silver Lake would act as financial advisers, but neither had officially signed on at that point, people familiar with the matter said Tuesday. Goldman Sachs on Wednesday suspended its ratings and price target for Tesla stock, citing its role as an adviser. Tesla may face potential regulatory challenges beyond the SEC investigation. The company probably will need approval of U.S. national security officials if Saudi Arabia finances the effort to take the company private, and President Donald Trump’s administration has been stepping up scrutiny of foreign investment in American technology. Bloomberg Sent from my SM-G920F using Platinum Wealth mobile app
  16. Mark Minnie's book 'The Lost Boys of Bird Island' names three former National Party ministers, including Magnus Malan, as central figures in a paedophilia ring that operated during apartheid. https://www.google.co.za/amp/amp.ewn.co.za/2018/08/14/mark-minnie-co-author-of-magnus-malan-expose-found-dead Sent from my SM-G920F using Platinum Wealth mobile app
  17. Women pay more for cosmetics and clothing than men, says Use Your Voice (UYV), a non-profit organization that distributes sanitary pads across South Africa. In a Facebook post on Friday, since shared more than 6,600 times, UYV compared the prices of daily-use items such as razors, day cream, and clothes to show how much more women pay. It is estimated that women pay as much as 13% more for personal care products. “If you do feel the need to comment that this is fake, and that you do not agree, we highly recommend that you do the research yourself,” the organization said about the price comparison. So we did. Business Insider South Africa visited one grocery retailer, one clothing retailer, and one health and beauty retailer, to do our own comparison. Here are the differences in prices for similar products aimed at men and women we found: Women are expected to pay R25 more for similar razor blades. Women pay R20 for the same t-shirt, on promotion. Similar vitamins by the same label costs R16 more for women. Women's deodorant costs R2 more than for men at two different stores. And spray deodorant costs R10 more. Across our sample of products, women were expected to pay 18% more for what appears to be the same products for men. Source: BusinessInsider
  18. Check out GT247, they are the cheapest in South Africa.
  19. For the first time ever I think I bought a stock at its low. Steinhoff I took a gamble at 150 so far so good.
  20. Lucky bastard. I only have EasyEquities
  • Create New...