BHP confident of Potash takeover

[blueblood]

Brad wall had nothing to do with privatizing Potashcorp that was all Devine and Devine was a financial idiot the province was deep in debt when his government was kicked from office which proves contrary to popular belief conservatives are the worst money managers...Devine couldn't win an election as town dogcatcher if he were to run for office in sask, the conservative legacy was so bad that they had to chnage the name of the party...

potash gained profit more because the rise of value in hard commodities than privatization...

Brad Wall explained why privatization happened. Devine was a politician and politicians have one genetic code, and that is to get elected. Do you even know why Grant Devine had to run a large deficit?

Here's we go...

In the 1980's we had this thing called sky high interest rates. In the 1970's ag producers and oil producers enjoyed a run of strong commodity prices, and property prices. In the 1980's those prices fell and industry was right in the middle of expansion and crippled with high interest rates resulting in massive forclosures and property values being near worthless. Had Devine not offered those low interest government loans to those ag producers and other residents of Saskatchewan, he would have been voted out much earlier than he did.

If Grant Devine is such a financial Idiot, why is he on the board of directors of Agrium and makes more money in one year than you will in your entire life?

Edited November 7, 2010 by blueblood

[Smallc]

Do Saskatchewan citizens pay higher taxes now than when Potashcorp went private?

Saskatchewan and potash have both done well....and oil hasn't hurt either.

Why would Manitobans pay higher taxes if a private company is going to be giving the gov't more money than the crown corporation? The only thing going up is hydro rates, but that can be cut by our friends stock ownership and dividend payments.

What are you talking about? You have no proof that it would result in more money for the province. Hydro already pays dividends anyway - to all Manitobans.

You think crown corporations are the best at raising money, management, and results.

I do?

And management on the reserve is not going to be stupid enough to charge more than the cost of a small detour around the reserve (Not the massive detour across farmland that costs an extra approx billion dollars).

Yes, in fact they are...not stupid though, greedy.

Not enough to affect the company's bottom line and to justify a detour.

Proof? The east side route is out of the question, both because of land claims/profit issues and boreal forest issues.

Hooray debt with interest payments and raiding other provinces piggy banks for everybody!

That's how pretty much every company raises capital aside from an IPO.

Who am I going to listen too, scores of CEO's worth millions of dollars and BNN commentators or a young naive wage earner?

I don't really care who you listen to. It doesn't change the numbers.

If Brad Wall and Grant Devine are going to go on BNN and make the arguement why the privatized potashcorp and how much of a benefit it has been for the province, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. That's not ideology, that's fact. If Crown Corporations were such good money makers as you made them out to be, why would a government want to cook its golden goose and hike up taxes to make up for the lost revenue. Could it be perhaps that private companies are far more efficient at resource extraction, raising funds, management, making money than crown corporations?

Both private and public entities have various levels of management quality. Potash wasn't run well as a CC. Manitoba Hydro and Hydro Quebec seem to be.

I'm not quite sure you are familiar with the term opportunity cost. The inefficiencies, and slowness crown corporations take in raising capital and management compared to publically traded companies ends up costing tax payers in the end. This is why the oil sands are in publically traded company's hands and not in crown corp's hands.

Again, you have no profit that Crown Corporations are slow or inefficient. There are many businesses that are efficient, and many that aren't. The same goes for CCs

[Jack Weber]

Brad Wall explained why privatization happened. Devine was a politician and politicians have one genetic code, and that is to get elected. Do you even know why Grant Devine had to run a large deficit?

Here's we go...

In the 1980's we had this thing called sky high interest rates. In the 1970's ag producers and oil producers enjoyed a run of strong commodity prices, and property prices. In the 1980's those prices fell and industry was right in the middle of expansion and crippled with high interest rates resulting in massive forclosures and property values being near worthless. Had Devine not offered those interest free government loans to those ag producers and other residents of Saskatchewan, he would have been voted out much earlier than he did.

If Grant Devine is such a financial Idiot, why is he on the board of directors of Agrium and makes more money in one year than you will in your entire life?

I assume that,because Devine is a Con,he's connected to the corporate types in that province?

Kind of a quid pro quo for the political/corporate classes???

I doubt it has anything to do with his corporate "expertise"...

[Smallc]

potash gained profit more because the rise of value in hard commodities than privatization...

That is most likely the case.

[wyly]

Brad Wall explained why privatization happened. Devine was a politician and politicians have one genetic code, and that is to get elected. Do you even know why Grant Devine had to run a large deficit?

Here's we go...

In the 1980's we had this thing called sky high interest rates. In the 1970's ag producers and oil producers enjoyed a run of strong commodity prices, and property prices. In the 1980's those prices fell and industry was right in the middle of expansion and crippled with high interest rates resulting in massive forclosures and property values being near worthless. Had Devine not offered those low interest government loans to those ag producers and other residents of Saskatchewan, he would have been voted out much earlier than he did.

here we go is correct... I was voting in sask elections before you were born...Devine destroyed the province with incredibly stupid cash give aways, he bought his way into office with irresponsible financial promises which there was no money for, and the people rewarded him correctly by kicking his corrupt party to the curb...

If Grant Devine is such a financial Idiot, why is he on the board of directors of Agrium and makes more money in one year than you will in your entire life?

it isn't hard to look up board of director annual fee for Agrium $22,000 I made more than that when I was 20 and that was a very long time ago... Edited November 7, 2010 by wyly

[blueblood]

Saskatchewan and potash have both done well....and oil hasn't hurt either.

Your missing the point, the royalties and taxes paid by potashcorp to the SK government are more than the "profits" of the company than it was a crown. Had Potashcorp stayed a crown, the gov't would have enjoyed higher commodity prices, but at the expense of the efficiency, growth potential, and capital raising power of a publically traded companym, the opportunity cost is far too high for crown corps and you don't get that. The fact that Potashcorp is more profitable as a publically traded company than a crown corporation is utter proof that crown corporations are mismanaged gong shows. Prices have nothing to do with it.

What are you talking about? You have no proof that it would result in more money for the province. Hydro already pays dividends anyway - to all Manitobans.

You said taxes would go up if a crown corp went and made an IPO. Why would a gov't hike taxes if its making more money with a private company than a crown corp? If Hydro pays dividends, where is my cheque? Potashcorp pays taxes and royalties and writes me a cheque on a regular basis. Sask as a province is better off and so am I. With Hydro, only the province is better off.

Yes, in fact they are...not stupid though, greedy.

They are getting the market value for their land.

Proof? The east side route is out of the question, both because of land claims/profit issues and boreal forest issues.

Judging by poll numbers, that will change come election time. The old Kennedy family will have to learn to pound sand along with the rest of the hippies. The reserves are far more reasonable than you think. The tories are hanging their campaign on this promise, if they don't deliver they kiss their gov't goodbye.

That's how pretty much every company raises capital aside from an IPO.

By hiking taxes, and asking Alberta and other have provinces for more money?

I don't really care who you listen to. It doesn't change the numbers.

That's right it doesn't change the numbers that publically traded companies consistently outperform crown corporations. If crown corporations are so successful, why aren't they being set up to compete with and bury publically traded companies? Please answer that question.

Both private and public entities have various levels of management quality. Potash wasn't run well as a CC. Manitoba Hydro and Hydro Quebec seem to be.

And again you have the problem with opportunity cost and the greater accountability of a publically traded company. If a publically traded company doesn't perform, management gets whacked. If a crown corp doesn't perform nothing happens because the gov't won't let it fail. You think that MB Hydro is good enough, I think it can be better.

Again, you have no profit that Crown Corporations are slow or inefficient. There are many businesses that are efficient, and many that aren't. The same goes for CCs

They are slow and inefficient enough to be privatized. There is no incentive to perform because there is no leverage. If crown corps are as efficient as publically traded companies, why isn't Alberta firing them off to mine the oil sands?

[blueblood]

here we go is correct... I was voting in sask elections before you were born...Devine destroyed the province with incredibly stupid cash give aways, he bought his way into office with irresponsible financial promises which there was no money for, and the people rewarded him correctly by kicking his corrupt party to the curb...

He won a 2nd term in 1986 with people fighting sky high interest rates and bankruptcy. It was either he make the loans or get voted out of office. Any politician with a sense of self preservation would have made those loans.

lol: it isn't hard to look up board of director annual fee for Agrium $22,000 I made more than that when I was 20 and that was a very long time ago...

Then there is being chairman of Global Live Bid auction company, a board member of a junior Albertan oil company, and his massive farm. sorry bub, ol' Granty outearns wage earner wyly. Have you seen Grant Devine's farm, it is one of the slickest operations in Western Canada.

[wyly]

He won a 2nd term in 1986 with people fighting sky high interest rates and bankruptcy. It was either he make the loans or get voted out of office. Any politician with a sense of self preservation would have made those loans.

refresh my memory what other provincial governments of the time showed the same sense of self preservation, he was fucking disaster...the conservative party of canada declared him unelectable rejecting any future candidacy and finally kicked him out of the party...

Then there is being chairman of Global Live Bid auction company, a board member of a junior Albertan oil company, and his massive farm. sorry bub, ol' Granty outearns wage earner wyly. Have you seen Grant Devine's farm, it is one of the slickest operations in Western Canada.

my bro in law has been a board member on two junior oil companies and a partner in another I'm not impressed....sorry bubaloo old wyly ain't no wage earner, I'm the boss and have been for quite some time...semi retired since I was 45, the cash is good in the housing biz...

[Smallc]

Your missing the point, the royalties and taxes paid by potashcorp to the SK government are more than the "profits" of the company than it was a crown.

And what I'm saying is that there isn't the kind of money from hydro power that there is from potash.

You said taxes would go up if a crown corp went and made an IPO. Why would a gov't hike taxes if its making more money with a private company than a crown corp? If Hydro pays dividends, where is my cheque? Potashcorp pays taxes and royalties and writes me a cheque on a regular basis. Sask as a province is better off and so am I. With Hydro, only the province is better off.

You have no way of proving that Hydro would make more money as a private corporation. You have no way of knowing that the province would make more money. As for Hydro only benefiting the Province....Yes? But That doesn't mean what you think it does.

They are getting the market value for their land.

That's not how it works. They get a share of the business transaction, as they are supposed to.

Judging by poll numbers, that will change come election time. The old Kennedy family will have to learn to pound sand along with the rest of the hippies. The reserves are far more reasonable than you think. The tories are hanging their campaign on this promise, if they don't deliver they kiss their gov't goodbye.

By the time the campaign comes, when it is tome for a change of government (simply because 12 years is a long time, and new ideas are needed), it may be too late for change.

By hiking taxes, and asking Alberta and other have provinces for more money?

Manitoba hasn't raised taxes in years...in fact, they've gone down significantly since the 90s. Manitoba also doesn't ask for money. Equalization is an automatic program, and a very good one at that.

That's right it doesn't change the numbers that publically traded companies consistently outperform crown corporations. If crown corporations are so successful, why aren't they being set up to compete with and bury publically traded companies? Please answer that question.

Because the government isn't generally meant to be in competition with private business. Crown Corporations are set up when a profits aren't substantial enough for a private industry to set up shop, when it is determined that something should benefit all people in a jurisdiction through joint ownership, or when national or provincial security are at stake. Sometimes situations change, and it's a good idea to privatize. That isn't always the case though, and you've shown me nothing that makes me think it's the case with Hydro.

And again you have the problem with opportunity cost and the greater accountability of a publically traded company. If a publically traded company doesn't perform, management gets whacked. If a crown corp doesn't perform nothing happens because the gov't won't let it fail. You think that MB Hydro is good enough, I think it can be better.

Hydro isn't run the way you seem to think. The provincial government is accountable to the people, and that management of hydro is accountable to the board of directors. Right now, things are going well, as audit after audit has shown.

They are slow and inefficient enough to be privatized. There is no incentive to perform because there is no leverage. If crown corps are as efficient as publically traded companies, why isn't Alberta firing them off to mine the oil sands?

This is what I'm talking about when I say you're ideological. Hydro IS performing, and there are many examples of that through capital projects and power sales. As I've already said, this isn't the same king of giant money making resource as oil or potash. Now I already said I wasn't going further with this discussion. This time I'm serious.

[blueblood]

refresh my memory what other provincial governments of the time showed the same sense of self preservation, he was fucking disaster...the conservative party of canada declared him unelectable rejecting any future candidacy and finally kicked him out of the party...

Grant Devine only cared about winning the 1986 election. Had he not did what he did, he would have lost. Being a "disaster" is not the point. Brian Mulroney suffered the same fate. High interest rates when dealing with deficits and rapidly deteriorating land values are a recipe for disaster. Surely someone in the housing biz should know that. Winning an election to him was more important than being "smart" with money.

my bro in law has been a board member on two junior oil companies and a partner in another I'm not impressed....sorry bubaloo old wyly ain't no wage earner, I'm the boss and have been for quite some time...semi retired since I was 45, the cash is good in the housing biz...

That doesn't matter if your impressed, I'll take the word of shareholders of a company with a market cap of 13.37 Billion dollars over an individual in the housing biz. I'll even go as far to say as from the size of Grant Devine's farm, his income from farming will outperform anyone with a mom and pop housing biz. Unless you have a riding arena in your back yard and are on the board of directors at Potashcorp or Cameco, I think your in no position to comment on the financial skills of Grant Devine.

[blueblood]

And what I'm saying is that there isn't the kind of money from hydro power that there is from potash.

That doesn't matter. As long as the company turns a profit and gives a return to shareholders. There wasn't too much money in potash at the time of privatization either. That argument doesn't wash.

You have no way of proving that Hydro would make more money as a private corporation. You have no way of knowing that the province would make more money. As for Hydro only benefiting the Province....Yes? But That doesn't mean what you think it does.

Now your the one being ideological. You have no way of knowing a crown corporation outperforms a publically traded company. However I do have history on my side as crown corps that were privatized have been shown to make the government more money, case in point potashcorp.

That's not how it works. They get a share of the business transaction, as they are supposed to.

A royalty, and what the market value is for use of the land.

By the time the campaign comes, when it is tome for a change of government (simply because 12 years is a long time, and new ideas are needed), it may be too late for change.

That will be sometime next year. Notice the countdown to change signs popping up?

Manitoba hasn't raised taxes in years...in fact, they've gone down significantly since the 90s. Manitoba also doesn't ask for money. Equalization is an automatic program, and a very good one at that.

It's a good program if your the one benefitting from it.

Because the government isn't generally meant to be in competition with private business. Crown Corporations are set up when a profits aren't substantial enough for a private industry to set up shop, when it is determined that something should benefit all people in a jurisdiction through joint ownership, or when national or provincial security are at stake. Sometimes situations change, and it's a good idea to privatize. That isn't always the case though, and you've shown me nothing that makes me think it's the case with Hydro.

Poppycock. Why is Sasktel competing with private business? If Hydro doesn't make money, why do we have private companies popping up dams in BC and advertising shares on BNN in order to raise money? Seems like the electricity game is more profitable than you think.

Hydro isn't run the way you seem to think. The provincial government is accountable to the people, and that management of hydro is accountable to the board of directors. Right now, things are going well, as audit after audit has shown.

I'll give you this one. The PC party is polling at 49% right now. Looks like Running a wire down the west side of the lake is a bad idea, and it looks like the whacking stick is out for Selinger. Given the way that government's waste money, I'd say those audits of MB hydro are meaningless. Publically traded companies are "audited" every day on the stock market, and are required by law to release their financial figures. Had Hydro been a private company its board of directors would have been canned by shareholders for anemic growth, and proposing to waste all that money.

This is what I'm talking about when I say you're ideological. Hydro IS performing, and there are many examples of that through capital projects and power sales. As I've already said, this isn't the same king of giant money making resource as oil or potash. Now I already said I wasn't going further with this discussion. This time I'm serious.

The US economy is also performing now. It has positive GDP growth, but it can be better. The same goes for Hydro. It all boils down to this, we have CEO's and BNN analysts, and even a CBC personallity stating that crown corporations are not as efficient as publically traded companies. Since these people know how to make money and a lot of it, I'll go with what they say.

[dpwozney]

-Wall and clement had to block the sale, ...

There never ever was any sale in the first place with BHP buying POT shares at the bidded price of $US130 because POT shares were, and still are, trading above US$140 and POT shareholders were already not going to accept the bidded price of $US130.

Despite the mainstream media's efforts to make it seem like Clement blocked some sale, there was no sale yet to block. And BHP management or someone else can still make a higher bid.

So, in effect, Clement did not really do much of anything at all.

[blueblood]

There never ever was any sale in the first place with BHP buying POT shares at the bidded price of $US130 because POT shares were, and still are, trading above US$140 and POT shareholders were already not going to accept the bidded price of $US130.

Despite the mainstream media's efforts to make it seem like Clement blocked some sale, there was no sale yet to block. And BHP management or someone else can still make a higher bid.

So, in effect, Clement did not really do much of anything at all.

I know I voted no, because I thought BHP's valuation was insane. However, I don't know how Equity Funds and other shareholders would have voted. If they bought in when Potashcorp was at a much lower price, that would be quite a nice return on investment. There would be some shareholders liking that BHP has a mountain of cash and a desire to invest heavily in Potash projects to get 30-40% of the world market.

The CEO rejecting the sale is completely different than shareholders.

[dpwozney]

I know I voted no, because I thought BHP's valuation was insane.

What did you vote “no” to? Was there some kind of a vote? If so, when? What were the overall voting results?

Edited November 13, 2010 by dpwozney