News

Michael Hill’s relatively subdued mood at today’s annual meeting was a realistic reflection of the state of the retail sector. Sales are depressed and most companies are hoping for, rather than forecasting, a good Christmas period.

Hill told shareholders - rather tongue in cheek - that he is optimistic about the next few months because he expected individuals to stop buying yachts and purchase jewellery instead.

Figures in the following table show that the listed retail sector is depressed, particularly as far as the New Zealand operations of NZX listed companies are concerned.

On Monday Briscoe reported that group sales for the quarter ended 26 October were down 11.2% compared with the same period in the previous year, with Homeware sales off 10.2% and Rebel Sports 13.3%. Managing Director Rod Duke said August and September were poor but October was a bit better.

On the same day Hallenstein reported an 8% fall in NZ sales for the 2 August to 31 October period and noted that “trading conditions in New Zealand have been more difficult than Australia”. Finally, The Warehouse told the NZX this morning that group sales for the quarter ended 26 October were down 2.1% with Red Sheds’ sales off 1.6% and Warehouse Stationery 5.6% lower. The company reaffirmed that it expected consumer spending and trading conditions to remain subdued for some time.

These year-on-year sales figures compare with the country’s 5% annual inflation rate. Retail sales are usually subdued during a general election campaign but this election has been exacerbated by wall-to-wall media coverage of the international credit crisis.

Most retailers are highly dependent on the Christmas period and this year will be particularly important because of the depressed trading throughout most of 2008. The retail sector, particularly small mom and pop outlets, will face serious financial difficulties next year unless consumers open their wallets between now and 25 December.

Recycler Metal Man is making hay out of old car parts.

The Auckland-based company, which compresses and re-sells scrap metal, has 64 staff throughout New Zealand and an annual turnover of about $40 million.

Metal Man picked up several prizes at the recent Westpac Manukau Business Excellence Awards, winning the business of the year supreme award, and awards for excellence in manufacturing and exporting.

General manager Clark Proctor said the company's scrap metal came from a range of suppliers including boat builders, sheet-metal workers and automotive repair garages.

Metal Man exports about 50 per cent of its recycled metal, mainly to countries throughout Asia but also to Europe. The "top-grade furnace-ready" metal is used to make a variety of products, such as pots and pans, engine components and aluminium plates for boats.

Mr Proctor said the boom in scrap metal prices this year - they have risen by about 140 per cent - was "unbelievable", but not the windfall some might think. "I'm actually happy when prices are low. Because it doesn't promote thieving [of scrap metal], and removes those people from the fringes of the industry who are bad practitioners and rear their heads when prices are high."

Metal Man operates out of Auckland, Hamilton and Christchurch.

Australia's OneSteel is planning to spend about $175 million to take over Wellington-based Steel & Tube Holdings.

OneSteel, which already owns 50.27 percent of Steel & Tube, is to offer $4 a share for the rest. This compares with a price of $3 on the market before the offer was announced this morning. The offer values the whole company at $353 million. The offer will be conditional on the Australian company achieving 90 percent acceptance. Also, and most unusually, the bid is conditional on the NZX 50 index not dropping below 2710 for three consecutive days prior to the bid being declared unconditional.

The NZX 50 is comfortably above that level at the moment - trading above 3200 early today. But the inclusion of such a condition demonstrates nervousness about the current global environment.

The bid comes at a time when Steel & Tube's profitability has taken a hit from the economic downturn. Its earnings slipped 19 percent to $22.5 million for the year to June.

The company said that its three Key market segments of construction, manufacturing and the rural sector, all suffered to a varying degree as the combination of exchange rate volatility, high interest rates and reduced growth in consumer spending slowed the economy. These conditions prevented businesses in general from recovering the increased cost of doing business resulting in a margin squeeze.

OneSteel managing director Geoff Plummer said the takeover would allow OneSteel to simplify its corporate structure and efficiently manage the Steel & Tube business as part of the OneSteel group.

"OneSteel's proposal confirms its commitment to the New Zealand market and to Steel & Tube’s business, employees, customers and suppliers. If OneSteel's offer proceeds, OneSteel intends to retain the Steel & Tube brand, grow the Steel & Tube business and maintain a quality product offering and high level of service."

Household power bills are set to rise across much of Auckland, in the latest of a string of price hikes by power companies.

In a move that will add between $5 and $6.50 to the average power bill, Mercury Energy will increase central Auckland power bills by 4 per cent on October 1. Customers in Manukau, Papakura and Franklin also face bigger bills, with rises of between 2.5 and 5.7 per cent on top of the average monthly bill of $165.

Mercury Energy said the rise was to cover "general increases in operating costs" including the cost of third-party suppliers. But consumer advocates said the latest round of price increases showed there was too little competition for our power bills.

Meridian Energy and Contact Energy have said they will raise prices by 6 per cent in coming months - an increase of around $10 a month for the average household.

And while energy analyst Molly Melhuish said the latest price hikes were no bigger than expected, there could be worse to come, as the effect of the winter's low lake levels continues trickling through into power bills.

Consumer New Zealand chief executive Sue Chetwin said households missed out on the benefits of competition in the power market. Most of the competition was for commercial and business users, she said. "The companies have this cosy arrangement where they don't really compete for new [household] customers," she said. Ms Chetwin said that since the power sector was deregulated, household power prices had risen while commercial and industrial power users had seen their bills flatline or even go down.

Ms Melhuish said New Zealand's power prices were high relative to the cost of making and distributing the power.

Ms Melhuish said the latest hikes would be too much for some people in Auckland. "It's a huge amount to people who cannot afford even the tiniest increase," she said.

Consumer New Zealand figures show household power bills rose between 7 and 10 per cent in the year to March.

The organisation runs a website where people can find which power company is the cheapest in their area: Powerswitch.

The prevailing Government policy of "internationalisation" presents the idea that New Zealand can develop a robust and growing economy, even if manufacturing companies send the "dirty bits" of their production process overseas. They promote the view that labour cost differences between New Zealand and low-cost countries make the relocation of the "dirty bits" (production) away from New Zealand inevitable, therefore we should focus on keeping the "shiny bits" (design, research and development, marketing and ownership) in New Zealand.

This message is clear in the Advancing Economic Transformation Cabinet paper released last year, which says: "The key challenges arising from international integration are for New Zealand to:

A. Position itself as an attractive location for investment and skills and for those parts of international supply chains that relate to high-value products and activities and that provide the greatest return (eg R&D and design). This includes an imperative to develop more and/or larger internationally successful New Zealand businesses, networks of businesses, and segments of the economy; and

B. Capture the best return through our businesses being part of international value chains offshore (return profits to New Zealand), through developing new business models of operating internationally (such as investing directly in offshore product and distribution chains), rather than transferring valuable activities offshore."

Few would have a problem with the document's objectives and the recommended actions appear deceptively rational. However, they are constructed around a fundamentally flawed concept that "valuable activities" can be separated without penalty. Internationalisation might work in theory, but the message from New Zealand's manufacturing sector is clear that at a practical level this will not work. For global businesses, the interaction between each of their "separate" components has a subtle and pervasive impact on their performance and effectiveness.

It is not only important to get all of the elements of the business system right, but also the interconnections between those elements. Much of the literature on internationalisation simply shows the different elements or activities of the business system. Diagrams show different components of the supply chain - customers, marketing research, development, production, etc - as different blocks. While it is obvious that a global business is not compelled to physically co-locate activities, a superficial analysis can form the view that individual blocks can be separated without penalty or risk. This view underestimates the importance of supporting interconnections between functions.

Good businesses will make decisions about the location of their activities based on suitability for the activity itself and the effectiveness of interconnections with other elements of the system. There will be tradeoffs. A firm may not seek lower labour costs because it is too important that they can produce new products rapidly, suggesting they should have all their functions in the same place. Alternatively, a company may locate R&D closer to its low-cost labour production site or locate product management closer to end markets.

This might compromise the quality of the R&D, but this affect can be outweighed by the importance of the low-cost production, the productive use of multiple time zones or some other component of the competitive landscape. The cost and reliability of the supply is also a critical factor of internationalisation. The disruption to supply chains may be a huge strategic risk, and the greater the international interdependence, the worse the effect of even short-term disruption.

In reality wage costs are a fairly minor component of the overall picture that controls the profitability of manufacturing. It is worth noting that a direct labour content of less than 5 per cent of sales is not unusual in high technology products, and exchange rate fluctuations could have five times the impact of the difference in labour rates. Many factors contribute to a country's international competitiveness so the priority for Government must be to maximise the advantages available in the policy framework. What does this mean for a country like New Zealand?

There is no one-size-fits-all solution regarding the location or value of business activities. What might suit garment manufacturing will not necessarily suit high technology electronics or other complex products. The strategy for each business will be different but there are some common themes for New Zealand, given the country's attributes of isolated geography and small population.

A number of our firms now compete globally at a micro level in small markets or in the post-processing of our "primary" outputs. Policies and assistance need to nurture the creation of entire businesses in these areas, rather than trying to prescribe which bits should be encouraged and which bits should be neglected. Even if some businesses do send production overseas, it would make sense for our policies to maintain a neutral or positive bias towards locally-based production.

Policy settings need to make it more attractive for innovative business to create wealth in New Zealand through personal incentives, company incentives and national infrastructure. Factors such as broadband, transportation networks and tax incentives for productive activity can encourage activity. This comprehensive approach to policy support will promote the retention of as many of the supply chain components as possible, rather than focusing on individual links of the supply chain. The Government must not seek to pick winners or favour particular supply chain activities, as businesses will determine the profitability of their activities themselves.

Effective policy must provide incentives, or at least no disadvantage, for winning behaviour. Investment in research, development, productive activity, skills and capability development and new ventures will all assist in increasing our international competitiveness. Incentives are best delivered through the tax code generally to encourage investment in productive activity rather than in static assets. The support of winning behaviours and monetary policy that secures a stable exchange rate will help mitigate disadvantages of the wage rates. Given such changes, perhaps more companies will keep more of their supply chain in New Zealand.

* John Walley is the chief executive of the Manufacturers and Exporters Association.

Grocery giant Foodstuffs' presence in liquor retailing could get a shot in the arm as it looks to swallow Liquorland.

The co-op, which controls around 56 per cent of the grocery retailing sector, is understood to be one of several parties interested in purchasing the 72 stores of DB Breweries' franchise retail chain. Besides supermarket wine and beer retailing, Foodstuffs also operates the large format liquor store Duffy & Finn's, and the smaller format Henry's.

Success in the Liquorland bid could add fuel to the already intense rivalry with Woolworths.

The Australian-owned supermarket firm is still pursuing Liquor Licensing Authority approval for store-within-store models selling spirits as well as beer and wine - despite being denied a bid to set up in a Christchurch Countdown in what was regarded as a test-case decision.

And success for Foodstuffs could spell trouble for independently owned stores, which cannot compete with the supermarkets' buying power. Large liquor chains have a slight edge in market share, controlling around 53 per cent, to the independents' 47 per cent.

Foodstuffs was not commenting on speculation of the bid, as was DB, citing confidentiality agreements. A DB spokeswoman said the company decided to review the option of selling the Liquorland franchise after several unsolicited expressions of interest. "We're not committed to a sale - we're investigating the possibility. "We just received a bit of interest and like any business, we evaluate opportunities as they arise. "Liquorland is a successful asset for DB Breweries, so while we are looking at the option to sell, we will only consider this if a suitable buyer is identified."

Cranleigh Merchant Bankers was appointed last month to evaluate bids and manage the sale process. Evaluation of a possible sale will take place over the next few months. The spokeswoman said any sale would ensure the future interests of franchisees and staff, and the continuation of the franchise as a whole. A sale would also need to ensure that DB retained "an excellent relationship" with the franchise, retaining placements for DB products within Liquorland outlets, the spokeswoman said.

The longstanding Arbuckles brand is about to fade into oblivion as the manchester chain's new owner, Jan Cameron, liquidates stock in preparation to close the stores.

Ms Cameron, the former Kathmandu owner, is expected to use the sites to launch a new chain of homeware stores called Dogs Breakfast Trading Company, which she has already set up in Australia.

Ms Cameron, who has a wealth of $320 million according to the 2008 National Business Review Rich List, bought Arbuckles two weeks ago for $4 million from Postie Plus Group. She took over 13 stores throughout New Zealand, bought all the stock and re-employed most of the staff. Those stores were now advertising closing down liquidation sales.

Arbuckles was founded 35 years ago by John Arbuckle, who started the chain out of a van in Christchurch. He and his wife Vicki sold it to Postie Plus in 2003 for $9.5 million.

Ms Cameron could not be reached directly, but a spokeswoman at Arbuckles' head office in Christchurch said she had told staff she did not want to comment.

Dogs Breakfast Trading Company sells furniture, homeware, crockery and premium pet food, according to the store's Australian website.

Ms Cameron owns a chain of five homeware stores in New Zealand, called Nood. It was not known if she would use some of the former Arbuckles stores to expand Nood.

Business groups have welcomed the National Party's election policy on benefits but advocacy groups say there's cause for concern.

Under the policy, those on the DPB will have to work or train for fifteen hours a week, once their youngest child turns six, and people on sickness and invalid benefits who have been assessed as being able to work part-time.

"When the children are at school and not during the holidays, I think they should be doing something for themselves," says National leader John Key.

Long-term unemployed people will also have to re-apply for their benefits if National wins the election.

However the party's policy is not popular with some, including a 31-year-old solo mother on the DPB. The solo parent, who wants to remain anonymous, says National's proposals may prove to be too harsh. "It's putting so much strain on the families, and the parents. And you want to be able to be a good parent, you want to be able to be there for them when they come home from their day at school," she says.

Social Development Minister Ruth Dyson says the National policy will take New Zealand backwards. She says the approach is punitive and last time a similar approach was tried it resulted in an unacceptable rise in child poverty. A National-led government last introduced a controversial work for the dole scheme for sole parents and other beneficiaries in the late 1990s.

The Ministry of Social Development did a review of that scheme. It found many single parents wanted to enter the workforce and more of them did go off the benefit.

But there was not enough administrative support and parents had trouble finding childcare. Critics are concerned those problems could arise again. Some people's advocacy groups echo similar sentiments. "You want failure, you introduce work-test sanctions for DHB and the only people that will suffer are the children," says Paul Blair, Rotorua's People's Advocacy Centre.

There are also concerns that solo parents will just end up in low paid jobs. "By forcing out mothers into minimum wage labour so they can provide cheap labour for John Key's big business round table mates. They won't earn much more on their benefit...and the kids get inferior childcare and supervision," says Blair.

Despite drawing criticism from some advocacy groups, businesses say it's a way to create a productive labour market. Several business and employment groups have welcomed the policy, saying they support the principal of getting able-bodied people back into the workforce.

They say there is a demand for workers in retail, banking, and the hospitality sectors. "Even if employment is easing somewhat, retail always needs a large pool of people to keep it ticking over," John Albertson, Retailers' Association.

Meanwhile political scientist Therese Arseneau says National's policy will attract some voters and send other voters back to Labour. She says that National has finally adopted an election strategy suited to winning an MMP election. "It has softened its rhetoric, moved towards the centre on several key policy issues and challenged Labour for the crucial centrist swing vote. In 2008 National's strategy is intended to grow its vote primarily at Labour's expense," she says.

The two-year battle for control of New Zealand's biggest retailer looks set to move to a new arena - the Supreme Court - after the Court of Appeal blocked Woolworths and Foodstuffs from making bids. The decision led to The Warehouse's share price plunging to a nine-year low of $3.01 before rebounding to close down 60 cents on $3.22.

Woolworths, of Australia, and Foodstuffs, owner of New Zealand's two largest supermarket chains, issued statements expressing disappointment and saying they were reviewing their options. They have 20 working days to decide whether to appeal to the Supreme Court. Stephen Tindall, The Warehouse founder whose interests control 52 per cent of the shares, was unavailable for comment.

The Commerce Commission, which blocked the two chains from bidding for The Warehouse last June and then had its ruling overturned by the High Court in November, hailed the decision as a victory for consumers. Despite The Warehouse having only three stores with grocery offerings, it could not be ruled out as a significant supermarket competitor, commission chairwoman Paula Rebstock said. "The commission considered the presence of an innovative third party, such as The Warehouse, had the potential to increase the level of competition in this important market."

Most analysts, fund managers and competition lawyers BusinessDay spoke to said they thought Woolworths and Foodstuffs would go to the Supreme Court. "I'd say there's an 80 per cent-plus chance of that happening," Tower portfolio manager Paul Robertshawe said. Buddle Findlay competition partner Tony Dellow said: "Given they have already spent a lot of money on this, the incremental cost of going to the Supreme Court is pretty low."

What chance the companies have in the Supreme Court will be hard to gauge till the Court of Appeal issues its judgment, probably early next week. "A lot is going to depend on how the Court of Appeal has framed its answer today," Chapman Tripp partner Andy Nicholls said. The two main questions would be about the likely performance of The Warehouse Extra stores (offering groceries) in the next few years and how speculative the commission could be in predicting whether the stores would challenge the existing supermarket duopoly. "The concern everybody will have is the extent to which the Court of Appeal has endorsed the commission taking quite a speculative approach when faced with a new entrant. I imagine the supermarkets will be looking hard at that, and that would be the question they would consider [testing] in the Supreme Court."

If they are unsuccessful, there are several other ownership scenarios for The Warehouse. Mr Tindall, who made a $5.75-a-share bid in partnership with Pacific Equity Partners in 2006, may have another go at privatisation. "Price-wise the timing would be better now than it was then," Forsyth Barr analyst Guy Hallwright said. "But raising debt would be a lot more difficult."

Deutsche Bank analyst Kristan Walker said Mr Tindall and PEP could well make an offer for the 20 percent held by the two supermarket players. "It could be quite an opportune time for Stephen Tindall to come out with a privatisation plan and literally offer something on the table and take the stock off their hands – that's an extra 20 percent that sits alongside his 50-odd percent, and then it's not so much of stretch to get to the compulsory acquirement level."

Market commentator Arthur Lim said funding such a move would not be an issue, with Mr Tindall's stakeholding and PEP among one of the most cashed-up private-equity funds around. Nothing was stopping Mr Tindall going ahead with another privatisation bid, but without knowing whether Foodstuffs or Woolworths would appeal, such a move would be premature.

Rival bidders may also emerge, with Australian conglomerate Wesfarmers seen as the most likely. However, after buying supermarket chain Coles last year, Wesfarmers was busy trying to turn that business around, ING senior analyst Craig Brown said. "I think you've got the two most logical bidders on the table right now."

The Warehouse may decide to scrap its grocery strategy, though it is unclear whether that would clear the way for a Woolworths or Foodstuffs bid. "One thing that hasn't changed in all this is that the key player is Stephen Tindall," Mr Brown said.

Foodstuffs and Woolworths have up to 20 days to decide on whether to appeal the court decision blocking any takeover bids for The Warehouse.

Legal experts were surprised at yesterday's Court of Appeal decision, having previously believed the Commerce Commission faced an uphill task overturning the High Court judgement granting the all clear to the two suitors. "These competition issues are difficult, and it's the hard cases that go to court," said Tony Dellow, competition lawyer at Buddle Findlay. To me I always thought that they would get the clearance. We've got to see the reasons I guess but to me, the High Court decision was very factually-based and they're hard to turn over, so I suppose the commission's done well in that sense. That being the case, there must be a fair prospect of an appeal."

The reasoning behind the decision has yet to be made public, as lawyers for Foodstuffs, Woolworths and The Warehouse are still to appear before the court again to be heard on what commercially sensitive information should be deleted from the judgment that is to be made publicly available.

Simpson Grierson senior associate James Craig said the parties also needed to work out if an appeal to the Supreme Court was an option.