In this section
Offers for readers
The comment stream
Recent comments
- 1 of 19105
- ››
Editors choice
- 1 of 276
- ››
Finance sector jobs
At NAB, it's all about our people reaching their full potential. And that means we drive t...more
Australia
Senior Financial Planning professional to join our Business Banking team in Bondi....more
Australia
At NAB, it's all about our people reaching their full potential. And in MLC and NAB Wealth...more
Australia
Successful applicants will have the opportunity to work with this leading Australian Advis...more
Australia

The news stream
Latest news
Most commented
- 90 seconds at 9 am with BNZ 116
- Wednesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint 78
- Friday's Top 10 with NZ Mint 28
- The problems with NZ's energy use 20
- Amanda's Take Five for Wednesday 19
- More bank mortgage rate cuts 16
- Govt lifts minimum wage 50 cts to $13.50 an hour 16
- Thursday's Top 10 with NZ Mint 15
- 90 seconds at 9 am with BNZ 14
- Full time jobs fall 13,000 in Dec qtr 14
Most viewed
Interest on Twitter
South Canterbury downgraded to BB; may be cut below guarantee threshold within 3 months
Standard and Poor's has downgraded South Canterbury Finance's credit rating from BB plus to BB and has warned of the potential for a further downgrade within 3 months that would stop the Timaru-based finance company's from being included in the government's extended deposit guarantee scheme from October. (Name corrected in fourth paragraph)
South Canterbury's credit rating is now at the bare minimum of BB needed for inclusion in the scheme, which would extend the guarantee until the end of 2011. The BB rating is on CreditWatch with negative implications, which means there is a risk of a further downgrade within 3 months.
The downgrade follows South Canterbury Finance's announcement of NZ$229 million of loan losses and writedowns for the six months to December 31 and the subsequent injection of capital by its founder Allan Hubbard. Standard and Poor's said the downgrade would have been bigger without the capital injection.
Standard and Poor's analyst Derryl D'silva told interest.co.nz that the reaction of South Canterbury's retail debenture holders would be a key factor in the ratings agency's considerations in the coming three months, as would the ability of South Canterbury Standard and Poor's to raise capital from other investors.
"The liquidity risk they will need to manage is the number one issue," D'silva said. "We've seen evidence of retail investors being loyal and we'd like to see that loyalty continue, and if it does continue it might lessen our concerns," he said.
Standard and Poor's was not necessarily looking for a specific reinvestment rate. "It's about seeing evidence that they can get new money coming in on a weekly basis."
Any further news of weaker loan quality or signs it could not raise further capital was likely to lead to a further downgrade, Standard and Poor's said.
Here is the full Standard and Poor's statement below.
Related Topics
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said today that it has lowered its long-term rating on New Zealand finance company, South Canterbury Finance Ltd. (SCF) to "˜BB' from "˜BB+', and affirmed the "˜B' short-term rating. At the same time, the "˜BB' long-term rating was placed on CreditWatch with negative implications.
"The downgrade reflects our view that SCF's asset quality experience has deteriorated to a level that is not consistent with the "˜BB+' rating level," Standard & Poor's credit analyst Derryl D'silva said. "Although the capital injection into SCF will help absorb these bad debt charges, it does not, by itself, restore financial strength to a level that we consider is consistent with the "˜BB+' rating. Further, SCF's financial flexibility and, in particular, further shareholder support of SCF, is diminished following the capital injection. That said, but for strong shareholder support evidenced in SCF's announcement concerning high loan-loss provisions of late yesterday, it is likely that the rating would have been downgraded by more than one notch."
Stakeholder reaction to SCF's asset quality difficulties will be integral to the resolution of the CreditWatch and forward direction of the rating. Liquidity is currently weaker than many New Zealand nonbank deposit takers' in the "˜BB' rating category, and should it deteriorate further it is likely to result in the rating being lowered. That said, debenture investors in SCF have remained relatively loyal to the company in recent times even considering the difficulties SCF has encountered prior to yesterday's announcement by the company. Should debenture investors and other liability stakeholders continue to show relative support for SCF it is likely that Standard & Poor's will become less concerned regarding SCF's liquidity, which could contribute to the rating being removed from CreditWatch Negative.
A further concern is that the announcement of high loan-loss provisions by SCF could retard or even scuttle further recapitalisation initiatives being considered by SCF. If further capital is not injected"”should liquidity or further asset quality pressures emerge"”it is likely to cause the rating to be lowered.
"The rating could be taken off CreditWatch Negative within a matter of months if liquidity concerns moderate such that SCF has sufficient excess cash to manage potential volatility given the confluence of negative developments affecting SCF, and, more generally, the continuing difficult market for New Zealand nonbank deposit takers," Mr. D'Silva said. Further, the rating could be taken off CreditWatch Negative if SCF is successful in further strengthening its capital base, and restructuring its business so that Standard & Poor's concerns regarding liquidity and other rating factors ameliorate. Initially, should Standard & Poor's concerns ameliorate, it is likely that the rating could be affirmed with a negative outlook.
Conversely, should liquidity deteriorate it is likely that the rating will be lowered"”and potentially by more than one notch"”depending on the severity of the deterioration. Further, should new asset quality concerns emerge, or recapitalisation strategies prove difficult to execute or insufficient to placate Standard & Poor's concerns at the "˜BB' rating level, the rating is likely to be lowered. A downgrade associated with either asset quality or capital difficulties, absent an intensification of liquidity concerns, is more likely to be limited to one notch.
18 Comments
Someone has had a chat
Someone has had a chat to S&P.
I think we can now say an extenision to the guarantee is now not likely.
@Editor: Possible typo at the
@Editor:
Possible typo at the end of para 4 - I think that should be SCF rather than S&P to read:
"... would the ability of South Canterbury Finance to raise capital from other investors."
Alan.
>>Possible typo at the end
>>Possible typo at the end of para 4
Haha! Good freudian slip there!
"South Canterbury Finance (SCF) says
"South Canterbury Finance (SCF) says having its credit rating downgraded a notch is not the end of the world." ( http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-20527250.html ).
Allan Hubbard says "We are making a few changes to make it more profitable and continuing on our merry way. So I would say stick with it."
I wonder if they're still so merry?
PeterR/Alan Thanks for the subediting.
PeterR/Alan
Thanks for the subediting. Sorry. It was late. Story corrected now.
cheers
Bernard
At least SCF's losses can
At least SCF's losses can be substantiated.
The legality of losses from Bernie Madoff is now being disputed:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/03/what-were-the-actual-losses-in-mado...
@David: That article you linked
@David:
That article you linked to is nine months old, and as such doesn't really have much relavence to the current situation - so much has changed since then.
Or did I miss another one that you meant?
Thanks,
Alan.
I'm just highlighting the low
I'm just highlighting the low level of corrective action that the company management has taken at the earlier stages of the company's difficulties.
'But the question is, how will South Canterbury Finance take advantage of this opportunity by moving aggressively? As I have argued before, the response planned by SCF and its owner is anything but aggressive, and could be described as feeble (previously I used the less derogatory term 'modest').
One relevant management lesson is called the control equation:
Need for Corrective Action = Planned Performance - Actual Performance
Perhaps Mr Hubbard slept through that lecture when he was at university back in the 1940s (?), or has since forgotten it. Or perhaps they planned to make a lot of losses and run low on cash this year? Go figure!'
(from my November post http://www.lostsoulblog.com/2009/11/fonterra-payout-increase-buys-time-f... )
See also http://www.lostsoulblog.com/2009/11/hubbard-flags-modest-capital-raising...
If SCF don't call on
If SCF don't call on the government guarantee and then trade past the current guarantee expiry date (without the extended guarantee in place), would not the trustee be liable for not protecting the investors position.
After all they keep telling us that they are there to protect the investor, the trustee should not allow the company to place the depositors at a disadvantage when they currently have a guarantee for the depositors funds.
gosh, david hillary above. you
gosh, david hillary above.
you get around...i see you're pushing the same line and the same links over at NBR etc.
wie gehst?
Well now... SCF gets away
Well now... SCF gets away with BB... talk about a get out of jail free card...
I've been through the SCF balance sheet and looked at it compared to the RB's new capital adequacy rules - it would seem that SCF needs at a minimum $300 million in extra equity and no more losses to sustain itself and meet the RB's capital adequacy rules - which come into force in September this year.
Now dear punters where do you think old Hubbard is going to get that from?? The only place is the share market...? But that would make an IPO of SCf the biggest in NZ in 10 years and to get it away old Hubbard would have to give away at least 75% of the company...
Now who wants to lay bets that it will be tax-payer that stumps up the equity?
Without fresh equity expect the credit rating to drift down towards the single B level by September. Credit ratings are entirely equity driven and the only way back fro SCF is to either bank some huge profits or get cash from new investors...
And who has $300 million to pump into this turd?
Weeeee dooooo.....get them printing presses
Weeeee dooooo.....get them printing presses going Bolly....Cabinet looks set to buy itself a rural turd for $300oooooo.
I really can't see how
I really can't see how SCf survives past mid Oct 2010 when the guarantee expires.
As many have pointed out, unless there are $1b of loan maturing, and being repaid - not rolled over - between now and Oct 2010, then SCF doesn't appear to have the liquidity to repay the debentures it owes on.
That would trigger the govt guarantee, but that only covers the debenture holders I think - all the bond holders, and pref shareholders would lose everything (along with Hubbard to be fair - but he should be able to survice on the last $10m he kept, and I still think he has done more than anyone could ask).
What is missing here, apart from a significant capital raising from third parties or an IPO?
Alan.
What Adrian Orr been up
What Adrian Orr been up to at the Super Fund recently? Maybe it's time for a new investment? Missing that golden opportunity down at Kawarau Falls has left him with a few bicccies in the tin to invest-about.
It was Dr Cullen who
It was Dr Cullen who opened this can of worms, and not a single MP in the house voted against the extension of this Dodgy Guarantee Scheme without so much as token consultation with the public and industry (see http://www.lostsoulblog.com/2009/09/government-and-parliament-bypass.html ). Even the MPs of the minor parties complained it was sprung on them without notice (I've no sympathy for them, they should have voted against it if they didn't like it).
Now that the can is opened, let's write the cheques necessary to pay off the guaranteed parties, take our losses, and change the law to make future bailouts illegal, even (especially?) in a crisis. Let's strengthen our constitution and the rule of law by taking away the ability of parliament to pass new laws without proper consultation and time for consideration of the issues.
Dr Cullen ignored good advice against the scheme 2 days before he introduced it. See http://www.lostsoulblog.com/search/label/Crown%20Deposit%20Guarantee%20S...
Even if no one else will stand up for the rule of law, I will. I used to think New Zealand was better than other countries overseas who meddled in their financial institutions affairs, but we're just throwing out what works and copying the errors of others. The new government does not represent any improvement on the previous one in this respect, sadly.
I'm going to start a
I'm going to start a Rating Agency business... and make lots of money .. here's my plan.
Step 1. Hire a bunch of utterly useless morons.
Step 2. Take bribes (of any sort) from company/organisation/government.
Step 3. Assign (totally meaningless) rating. More "bribes" = more A's....
Step 4. Profit.
Ooops, I hope I haven't stolen someone else's business model ?!?!?!
Matt S, a ponzy scheme
Matt S, a ponzy scheme might be an easier one to start up.
Better still become a politician and spend someone else money.
Wally - PGC raised $260M.
Wally - PGC raised $260M.
Alan - Secured bond holders get a go at the assets before debenture holders.