<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Some Thoughts - Peter Salmon&#039;s Website</title>
	<atom:link href="http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Peter Salmon&#039;s reflections on business, consultancy and life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 18:15:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Floating South Canterbury Finance by David Hillary</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/12/06/floating-south-canterbury-finance/#comment-316</link>
		<dc:creator>David Hillary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 18:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1101#comment-316</guid>
		<description>It seems like SCF might not be floated, and Southbury might not be either. I think Scales and HelicoptersNZ might be spun off and floated, and the proceeds used to recapitalise SCF.

I don&#039;t think there is demand in the market for SCF or any of its dairy farms or Southbury as a whole, and Hubbard won&#039;t want to exit either of those businesses as a steep discount.

The next big thing for Hubbard and his empire is SCF credit rating review, which is due in the coming weeks, and if it is bad news on that front, who knows what might happen next?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems like SCF might not be floated, and Southbury might not be either. I think Scales and HelicoptersNZ might be spun off and floated, and the proceeds used to recapitalise SCF.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think there is demand in the market for SCF or any of its dairy farms or Southbury as a whole, and Hubbard won&#8217;t want to exit either of those businesses as a steep discount.</p>
<p>The next big thing for Hubbard and his empire is SCF credit rating review, which is due in the coming weeks, and if it is bad news on that front, who knows what might happen next?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lost Soul looks at South Canterbury Finance by niken</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/lost-soul-looks-at-south-canterbury-finance/#comment-315</link>
		<dc:creator>niken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:26:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1022#comment-315</guid>
		<description>Nice article. Thanks for share.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice article. Thanks for share.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lost Soul looks at South Canterbury Finance by David Hillary</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/lost-soul-looks-at-south-canterbury-finance/#comment-313</link>
		<dc:creator>David Hillary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 23:36:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1022#comment-313</guid>
		<description>A couple more recent postings on SCF:
South Canterbury Finance: New Losses Reported
http://davidhillary.blogspot.com/2009/11/south-canterbury-finance-new-losses.html

Seven Ugly Gaunt Cows That Could Swallow South Canterbury Finance
http://davidhillary.blogspot.com/2009/11/seven-ugly-gaunt-cows-that-could.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A couple more recent postings on SCF:<br />
South Canterbury Finance: New Losses Reported<br />
<a href="http://davidhillary.blogspot.com/2009/11/south-canterbury-finance-new-losses.html" rel="nofollow">http://davidhillary.blogspot.com/2009/11/south-canterbury-finance-new-losses.html</a></p>
<p>Seven Ugly Gaunt Cows That Could Swallow South Canterbury Finance<br />
<a href="http://davidhillary.blogspot.com/2009/11/seven-ugly-gaunt-cows-that-could.html" rel="nofollow">http://davidhillary.blogspot.com/2009/11/seven-ugly-gaunt-cows-that-could.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Basic Client Account Plan by petermsalmon</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/a-basic-client-account-plan/#comment-310</link>
		<dc:creator>petermsalmon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 05:45:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1040#comment-310</guid>
		<description>You can do that, you can also use one of the available software packages, but as an example of basic data collection I have found that this works quite well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can do that, you can also use one of the available software packages, but as an example of basic data collection I have found that this works quite well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Basic Client Account Plan by David Hillary</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/a-basic-client-account-plan/#comment-309</link>
		<dc:creator>David Hillary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:17:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1040#comment-309</guid>
		<description>Hi Peter, wouldn&#039;t this be something that should be in a relational database?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Peter, wouldn&#8217;t this be something that should be in a relational database?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lost Soul looks at South Canterbury Finance by Randy Al FAhrezy</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/lost-soul-looks-at-south-canterbury-finance/#comment-308</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy Al FAhrezy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1022#comment-308</guid>
		<description>finance tips and consulting contact me</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>finance tips and consulting contact me</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Nine-tenths shtick and one-tenth Excel by petermsalmon</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/11/nine-tenths-shtick-and-one-tenth-excel/#comment-307</link>
		<dc:creator>petermsalmon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:51:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1002#comment-307</guid>
		<description>Received the book from Amazon earlier today, looking forward to reading it</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Received the book from Amazon earlier today, looking forward to reading it</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lost Soul looks at South Canterbury Finance by David Hillary</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/lost-soul-looks-at-south-canterbury-finance/#comment-306</link>
		<dc:creator>David Hillary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:45:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1022#comment-306</guid>
		<description>Anon, thanks for your comments, it is good to have some comment from someone with a contrary view.

Regarding the poll, actually the last option on the poll is &#039;not before 2012&#039; which is available for those who don&#039;t think it will fail in the foreseeable future (1 vote for that so far, if that&#039;s not yours, please vote!).

I have to question your claim that the vast majority think SCF is not in significant jeopardy. Preference shares are presently trading at about 35c in the dollar -- the market appears to think they have about a 1 in 3 chance of pulling through the present distress --  and you can try out your contrarian views with your own money and make a handsome profit if you&#039;re right.

The longer dated debentures are trading at a yield of about 20% p.a. but note that if SCF fails just before the end of the guarantee, those debentures are covered by the guarantee, and investors only lose money if SCF survives the end of the guarantee and fails afterwards. However, for SCF to survive past the guarantee, it must be successful in recapitalising and addressing its other problems. So, if you take this into account, it appears that this is also consistent with a 1 in 3 chance of survival. (e.g. say 1 in 3 chance of failure covered by the guarantee (no loss), 1 in 3 chance of failure not covered by the guarantee with a 50% loss, and 1 in 3 chance of no failure, for an expected loss of 1/6th (16.7%, with the remaining yield representing risk free interest rate)).

As for me, the more I study the financial statements and the prospectus, and the chatter about SCF the more trouble I see. It appears that few have confidence in SCF&#039;s future survival, let alone its future prospects. On one article with a lot of comments, someone said something to the effect that if it wasn&#039;t obvious, that one was supposed to post something derogatory about Hubbard or SCF.

Anyway, thanks for posting something in support of SCF, it is always good to hear from someone with a contrary view.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anon, thanks for your comments, it is good to have some comment from someone with a contrary view.</p>
<p>Regarding the poll, actually the last option on the poll is &#8216;not before 2012&#8242; which is available for those who don&#8217;t think it will fail in the foreseeable future (1 vote for that so far, if that&#8217;s not yours, please vote!).</p>
<p>I have to question your claim that the vast majority think SCF is not in significant jeopardy. Preference shares are presently trading at about 35c in the dollar &#8212; the market appears to think they have about a 1 in 3 chance of pulling through the present distress &#8212;  and you can try out your contrarian views with your own money and make a handsome profit if you&#8217;re right.</p>
<p>The longer dated debentures are trading at a yield of about 20% p.a. but note that if SCF fails just before the end of the guarantee, those debentures are covered by the guarantee, and investors only lose money if SCF survives the end of the guarantee and fails afterwards. However, for SCF to survive past the guarantee, it must be successful in recapitalising and addressing its other problems. So, if you take this into account, it appears that this is also consistent with a 1 in 3 chance of survival. (e.g. say 1 in 3 chance of failure covered by the guarantee (no loss), 1 in 3 chance of failure not covered by the guarantee with a 50% loss, and 1 in 3 chance of no failure, for an expected loss of 1/6th (16.7%, with the remaining yield representing risk free interest rate)).</p>
<p>As for me, the more I study the financial statements and the prospectus, and the chatter about SCF the more trouble I see. It appears that few have confidence in SCF&#8217;s future survival, let alone its future prospects. On one article with a lot of comments, someone said something to the effect that if it wasn&#8217;t obvious, that one was supposed to post something derogatory about Hubbard or SCF.</p>
<p>Anyway, thanks for posting something in support of SCF, it is always good to hear from someone with a contrary view.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lost Soul looks at South Canterbury Finance by Anon</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/lost-soul-looks-at-south-canterbury-finance/#comment-305</link>
		<dc:creator>Anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:16:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1022#comment-305</guid>
		<description>@David - Your poll is premised on the fact that they will go into receivership.  You have no option for the vast majority who don&#039;t think it will ever happen, except to say &#039;sometime after 2012&#039;.  That&#039;s just crap and either you know it, and you are being deliberately awkward, or you don&#039;t and you are being incredibly stupid.  I would imagine its the former?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@David &#8211; Your poll is premised on the fact that they will go into receivership.  You have no option for the vast majority who don&#8217;t think it will ever happen, except to say &#8217;sometime after 2012&#8242;.  That&#8217;s just crap and either you know it, and you are being deliberately awkward, or you don&#8217;t and you are being incredibly stupid.  I would imagine its the former?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lost Soul looks at South Canterbury Finance by David Hillary</title>
		<link>http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/lost-soul-looks-at-south-canterbury-finance/#comment-304</link>
		<dc:creator>David Hillary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:57:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petermsalmon.wordpress.com/?p=1022#comment-304</guid>
		<description>Thanks Peter, and everyone please be sure to vote in the poll on when (if at all), they&#039;ll go into receivership.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Peter, and everyone please be sure to vote in the poll on when (if at all), they&#8217;ll go into receivership.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
