Skip to navigationSkip to contentSkip to footerHelp using this website - Accessibility statement
Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Mark Bouris’ Yellow Brick Road has led investors nowhere

Mark Bouris says the “misunderstood nature” of the mortgage broking industry business is to blame for investors steering clear of his company, Yellow Brick Road (“‘Misunderstood’ Yellow Brick Road to delist”, September 18).

Yellow Brick Road founder Mark Bouris. David Rowe

I’d suggest there’s no misunderstanding. Yellow Brick Road incurred statutory losses in eight of the past 10 years, resulting in an aggregate loss of $58 million. During that period, Mr Bouris’ remuneration slightly exceeded $16 million, while the share price fell from 77¢ to 5¢ today – wealth destruction of 93.5 per cent.

Mr Bouris said the depressed share price was because there was a lack of understanding of its commission structure and liquidity challenges. Methinks it had more to do with the company’s woeful performance.

On his remuneration, Mr Bouris said he could earn twice that amount of money if he wasn’t at Yellow Brick Road. Many Yellow Brick shareholders probably wish he’d chosen that option. At least it’s pleasing to know Mr Bouris’ ego is in good health.

After deducting intangibles and future income tax benefits from the latest set of accounts, Yellow Brick Road has net tangible assets of $34.8 million. Mr Bouris is offering $18 million for those assets. Yes, he and his cohort own 62 per cent, but what about the 38 per cent who are being offered 51 per cent of the net tangible asset backing of their shares? Perhaps they might be better off if the company was wound up.

Advertisement

Mr Bouris said the delisting was the outcome of seven months of planning, which raises questions about the board’s continuous disclosure obligations. As recently as the investor presentation on August 29, the company’s executives were waxing lyrical about the company’s future.

The delisting of this company has more to do with its abysmal performance than any perceived shareholder misunderstanding.

Peter Ralph, Ashburton, Vic

Super solution to rail freight

Industry super funds are the majority owners of Sydney Airport, soon to be led by “infrastructure geek” Scott Charlton (“Charlton earns wings at Sydney Airport”, September 21).

Led by IFM Investors and UniSuper, these funds can expand into the rail freight business. Sydney Airport can take over the Port Botany container terminal site, which is 80 per cent owned by industry super funds. They can join forces with the Queensland industry super funds that own 50 per cent of the Port of Newcastle.

Advertisement

Together, the super funds can fund, build and operate a rail freight bypass of Sydney, between the Port of Newcastle, Badgerys Creek and Port Kembla. It can be paid for by railing all containers in NSW through the Port of Newcastle, rather than trucking them through Port Botany. Sydney Airport can profitably use the container terminal land.

An act of parliament can legislate pricing and return on investment to justify the long-term investment required in this new rail monopoly, while delivering huge systemic, social and economic benefit to the state. Removing freight from the metropolitan rail network makes valuable capacity available for passengers. It will facilitate “faster” rail between Newcastle, Sydney and Port Kembla, at no cost to government. The super funds can be a driving force in rail transport infrastructure. Sydney Airport is the key.

Greg Cameron, Wamboin, NSW

Not quite an Ikea flat pack

It is noteworthy that correspondents have turned their attention almost exclusively to the notion of small modular nuclear reactors (Letters, September 19, 21).

Implicit is an acknowledgement that conventional nuclear plants are no longer a viable option. In their place we have an imagined flat pack that arrives pre-assembled and can be thrown together with a few spanners, and produces in any case only a small proportion of the power of the conventional nuclear plant constructed from scratch on site.

Advertisement

Patrick Hockey, Clunes, Vic

Insiders don’t always get it right

Former Australian Reserve Bank governor Ian Macfarlane doesn’t want “outsiders” being able to outvote professional central bankers (“Bullock’s interest rate powers weakened”, September 21).

How could Mr Macfarlane forget that it was professional central bankers who failed see the risky subprime investment that caused the GFC, the effects of which we are still living with today?

He also seems to have forgotten that many professional bankers in Australia should hang their heads in shame for their banks’ unprofessional and corrupt behaviour.

Malcolm McDonald, Burwood, Vic

Advertisement

State debt assessment off track

Robert Carling has provided readers with a rather stark picture of the relative financial positions of Australia’s two largest state economies. (“Labor’s first test of budget repair needs a three-pronged approach”, September 19) In short, it is parlous. And the effects of these veritable mountains of debt will seriously hamstring the economies of both states for at least the remainder of this decade.

However, what did strike me as a little odd was Mr Carling pointing to Victoria as a relative basket case compared with NSW, or “a train wreck” as he chose to call it. Given NSW state debt is predicted to be 162 per cent of revenue in 2026 against Victoria’s 200 per cent, would it be reasonable to call NSW’s position a “serious derailment”?

Ralph McHenry, Brighton East, Vic

British climate backflip baffles

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak will indeed be in hot water should his government retreat from net zero ambition (“Sunak retreat on net zero a ‘car crash’ ”, September 21).

Advertisement

Britain has long been a member of the UN’s High Ambition Coalition that promotes climate solutions. Mr Sunak’s recent absence from the UN General Assembly’s High Ambition Coalition in New York, however, was disappointing and duly noted.

As heat records fall across the globe, costs from the impacts of climate change are increasingly outstripping the costs of decarbonisation. This is a time for leadership and ambition, not retraction and inertia.

Which countries will step up as leaders at COP28 later this year? Will Australia take the opportunity to show the ambition needed? Surely all countries must together become part of the solution to the world’s trickiest and most pressing problem?

Amy Hiller, Kew, Vic

It’s end game for the cheque, mate

Your Coopers Plains correspondent laments the decision of Macquarie Bank to go “cashless” yet has sprung to the defence of those who still use cheques (Letters, September 21).

Advertisement

The demise of the humble cheque has been progressing for years and overseas jurisdictions have been leading the way in phasing out the “unconditional order in writing” (Bills of Exchange Act definition). Our near neighbours New Zealand and Papua New Guinea have already taken the step.

Earlier this year the federal treasurer announced that cheques as a payment method would be phased out in this country by 2030. Old habits die hard, and although the cheque has served us well in the past, like revolutions of centuries past have changed the world, the technological revolution continues.

A final question: when did you last issue a cheque? I found my chequebook this morning and mine was December 12, 2019!

Allan Gibson, Cherrybrook, NSW

Letters to the Editor

  • We are always interested to hear your views on current topics. Guidelines here and please send your letter to edletters@afr.com.au

Read More

Latest In Federal

Fetching latest articles

Most Viewed In Politics