http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11638732
Apparently Auckland City COuncil is $7.5 billion in debt ...
Why is that body unable to make money, only knows how to spend? Surely!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11638732
Apparently Auckland City COuncil is $7.5 billion in debt ...
Why is that body unable to make money, only knows how to spend? Surely!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Don't worry, the government will bail them out if that happens and find a way to tax us on it.
Michael Murphy | https://murfy.nz
Referral Links: Quic Broadband (use R122101E7CV7Q for free setup)
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by subscribing.
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.
What is the council's income? Debt to Income ratio?
What is the councils asset base? What proportion of assets cover the debts?
Whats the councils credit rating? Is it under creditwatch? Where is its debt trading, on a yield basis?
Key point is that a headline debt number is meaningless without putting in context.
Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"
ockel:
What is the council's income? Debt to Income ratio?
What is the councils asset base? What proportion of assets cover the debts?
Whats the councils credit rating? Is it under creditwatch? Where is its debt trading, on a yield basis?
Key point is that a headline debt number is meaningless without putting in context.
Does $5000 per head for every man woman and child put it in context?
Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5
The government will bail them out.
It's a bit like when they came up with the genius idea that NHS hospitals had to run themselves like businesses. So, Minister, if the Bristol General Hospital spends their 50 million and there are still six months of the year to go, will you instruct them to lock the doors and send everyone home. No, you won't since to do so would be political suicide - ergo the budgets are merely a pipe dream.
The council could go into receivership (s40a-s42, Receiverships Act 1993). The net effect of this is that a receiver could take ownership of and sell off any council property (with the exception of reserves, which can only be leased for nine years), or take control of rates collection (including the power to set the rate amount).
joker97:http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11638732
Apparently Auckland City COuncil is $7.5 billion in debt ...
Why is that body unable to make money, only knows how to spend? Surely!
Vicki Crone is running for Mayor, so this is just political sniping. She's presented as a high-flying business woman (which apparently means by definition she knows how to run a council better than anyone with actual experience) but imo she's all mouth and no trousers.
I don't understand why a city council needs to be in debt whether it's $1 or 10 billion?
You can tell I am not a businessman ...
joker97:I don't understand why a city council needs to be in debt whether it's $1 or 10 billion?
You can tell I am not a businessman ...
joker97:
I don't understand why a city council needs to be in debt whether it's $1 or 10 billion?
You can tell I am not a businessman ...
The debt for a council is generally used for capital works. Rather than paying for key projects out of rates (and never raising enough money to undertake the projects) councils generally borrow and then use the rates to pay the interest.
Laughably if there is a one-notch downgrade in the council debt (because its debt-to-income exceeds 2.7x) it'd result in an $11m increase in interest - on $7.5bn in debt. Thats a huge 0.14% increase in interest rates.
The council is rated AA and Aa2 which is well above investment grade. Its higher than any of NZ's trading banks (all AA-).
The council has about $40bn in assets - so its debt makes up less than 20% of its total assets. Plenty of headroom to borrow more and achieve an efficient capital structure. Its better to use someone elses money to grow your assets than your own - hence the use of borrowed money to increase property wealth in the NZ market.
Personally I'd like to see the council borrow more money, buy land, build houses and lease them to first-home buyers or for social housing. Its got plenty of scope to be a landlord in its own region.
Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"
ockel:
What is the council's income? Debt to Income ratio?
What is the councils asset base? What proportion of assets cover the debts?
Whats the councils credit rating? Is it under creditwatch? Where is its debt trading, on a yield basis?
Key point is that a headline debt number is meaningless without putting in context.
$3.5 billion income.
$1.5 billion from rates, the rest from user charges, fees, ROI.
So debt is > 2x income.
However when debt is used to finance investment, perhaps income from that investment should be the debt:income ratio they look at. (ie put income from rates and services and costs to provide those services aside) Then many of those assets will probably never generate an income - IIRC cost to operate the trains was something like $1 per user km - so unless they were charging more than that, then it's clearly not going to be servicing the debt. Same for parks, stadiums, cycle tracks etc. There's a lot of obfuscation IMO in the way information is presented.
I believe that they may be under "negative watch" for credit rating.
One way they argue that the debt is reasonable is that "it's like a mortgage for a house - where debt to income ratios are often much higher". They then talk about these investments being for long-term, with benefit for future generations. This would be a very nice analogy - only if there was evidence that they were paying down / reducing debt, which is what everybody with a mortgage should be doing.
Bail out from central government doesn't seem likely to me.
Blimey! Just found out that Dunedin CC debt is $600 million ... %$#@ me!
ockel:
The council has about $40bn in assets - so its debt makes up less than 20% of its total assets.
Heavily obfuscated valuations IMO. Some might be easily liquidated - ie those generating income, shares in ports and airports etc. Their value is only what someone else would pay for them, some can never be sold, others if they could be sold, well we've seen how governments dispose of loss making "assets" when they are under stress and want them off their books - they give them away.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |