tip off

Mayne: now’s not the time for Rinehart to be be saying ‘look at me’

Journalists love nothing more than speculating about the future of media companies, so Gina Rinehart has created an avalanche of commentary with her high-profile raid on Fairfax Media. We’ve had everything from Paul Barry saying she will almost certainly score a board seat to Michael West speculating she’ll swap her stock for the newspaper division and Alan Kohler saying she’ll end up frustrated and out of pocket.

Personally, I prefer the theory that Rinehart was so outraged by Jane Cadzow’s extremely tough Good Weekend cover story on January 21 that she’s out for revenge, not unlike the way Kerry Packer stalked Fairfax for years courtesy of the Goanna saga.

Having dropped more than $100 million on her previous $300 million bet on stakes in Fairfax and Network Ten, it is also significant that she has just inked a lucrative deal with South Korean steel giant Posco, which paid $1.5 billion for an additional 11.25% stake in Rinehart’s Roy Hill iron ore project south of Port Hedland

However, it is wrong to assume this constitutes cash in Rinehart’s pocket because Roy Hill is expected to cost $7 billion to develop with first production not scheduled until 2014. The valuation may also be inflated for tax reasons, with Posco clawing back value through a discounted supply agreement. I very much doubt Rinehart has the capacity or appetite to risk ploughing $4 billion of real cash into a full takeover of Fairfax.

But without full control, where does she go? Any Fairfax director, shareholder or journalist who read Gadzow’s Good Weekend profile would be horrified at the prospect Rinehart could influence the venerable publishing house as a director.

While conflicts of interest seemingly didn’t matter when the four billionaires — James Packer, Lachlan Murdoch (post-inheritance), Gina Rinehart and Bruce Gordon — swooped on Network Ten, a Fairfax board seat will be an entirely different proposition.

Once Ten’s executive chairman Nick Falloon was rolled and his non-executive successor, Brian Long, agreed that Packer and Murdoch could have two boards with their combined 20% stake, it was difficult to resist representation arguments from Rinehart and Gordon.

Incredibly, Gordon was allowed to appoint a lawyer to represent him even though he owns Channel Nine in Adelaide and Perth, which directly competes against Ten. Talk about being blind to conflict of interest.

Fairfax is in a different place after suffering the embarrassment of having ACMA force David Evans off its board in 2009 due to conflicts of interest and regulatory breaches from his status as a director of Village Roadshow, back when it still controlled Austereo.

Even former Fairfax chairman Ron Walker, who has navigated through numerous personal conflicts of interest over his career, saw red when deputy chairman Mark Burrows thought it was fine to advise Lachlan Murdoch on his proposed 2008 takeover of Consolidated Media Holdings. He resigned a few days later acknowledging the perception problems.

Given all this history, current Fairfax chairman Roger Corbett has the easy out by pointing to the obvious conflict of interest that the Ten directorship creates for Rinehart if she does indeed aspire to join the board.

A more likely scenario would be Rinehart attempting to engineer a merger between Ten and Fairfax in which she emerges as the largest shareholder with 20% and a board seat. But that would also be messy.

Another feasible alternative would be for Rinehart to trade her Fairfax stake for the company’s radio assets which can be easily separated from the newspaper and digital divisions and were recently on the market until 2GB owner John Singleton failed to come up with a realistic offer, despite rumours he tried to put together a joint bid with Rinehart.

Having developed close friendships with numerous conservative MPs, it is clear that Rinehart is pushing hard to help remove the Gillard government and receive greater regulatory, tax and infrastructure support for her West Australian resources projects.

The unions will fight this one to the death given her support for importing cheap foreign guest workers to build her projects.

As for whether the Fairfax raid will work, I think she’s made a big mistake by putting a giant target on her back. And with three of her children litigating to remove her from the family trust, now is not the time to be be saying, “look at me”.

With buffoons such as Clive Palmer, Twiggy Forrest and Rinehart now worth an estimated $40 billion and all throwing their eccentric weight around, Kevin Rudd could mount a very strong case for a return to the Lodge and a far more aggressive mining tax proposal than Gillard’s pathetic compromise.

After all, if Labor really wants to return to surplus next year and help fund pet projects such as wage rises for community workers, the mining industry could comfortably contribute at least $10 billion a year more in tax while still delivering for its largely foreign and billionaire owners.

CORRECTION: An original version of this story stated the Good Weekend profile on Gina Rinehart was written by Janet Hawley. It was in fact written by Jane Cadzow.

31
  • 1
    pintado
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

    Nice, but the author of the Good Weekend piece was Jane Cadzow, not Janet Hawley!

  • 2
    stephen Matthews
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    2corrections:
    Andrew Forrest is not a buffoon
    Gina Rhinehart is not worth $20billion

  • 3
    Mack the Knife
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    When I look at Gina, I see someone who is unloved and unlovely.

    Guarding her fortune has consumed her life, overtaken her relationships with her kids and judging by how massively corpulent she has become, my impression of her is that she is a bitter, self loathing creature who hates easily.

    Her fortune will always be her poison.

  • 4
    Edward James
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

    Kevin Rudd this and Kevin Rudd that. Kevin Rudd is still to answer questions about his part as Chief of Staff in the Wayne Goss government in relation to the Heiner Affair and Shreddergate. Also the woman who received the one hundred and forty thousand dollars awarded by the Bligh Labor government last year. Later identifed in the print media as hush money by the recipient, brings the process of governance under Labor into disrepute. Kevin Rudd is involved as a party member now and then. why is he getting a free ride from bought and paid for journalist? Edward James

  • 5
    davidk
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

    Gerard Henderson can’t see anything wrong with Gina joining Faifax board and neither does Joe Hockey, so it must be alright. I like the idea of bringing back the MSPT irrespective of who does it. Julia screwed Andrew Wilkie so why not Rio Tinto and BHP?

  • 6
    john2066
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    Edward, you have a classic conservative mindset:

    Gina and the miners rip billions a year out of resources owned by Australians while paying a pathetic 7.5% royalty, and you’re all steamed up about the ‘Heiner Affair’ and ‘Shreddergate’, oh and someone who got 140k apparently. The billions stolen from under our noses merit no comment, of course.

  • 7
    arnold ziffel
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    Re: Cadzow/Hawley mix-up, the piece needs another edit:
    ‘Any Fairfax director, shareholder or journalist who read Hawley’s Good Weekend profile …’

  • 8
    Toypoodle
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

    Kevin Rudd could mount a very strong case for a return to the Lodge and a far more aggressive mining tax proposal…” Don’t hold your breath waiting for this to happen. Rudd may knife Gillard but he won’t take on the miners.

  • 9
    SimsonMc
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 4:51 pm | Permalink

    DavidK - I suspect that the “cat who swallowed the canary” grin that Hockey had on his face last night when asked about the takeover indicates that the LNP think the only thing wrong with the deal is that it isn’t happening fast enough.

  • 10
    Coaltopia
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    I’m reminded of the inscription on Pieter van der Heyden’s “Avarita” engraving: “Scraping Avarice sees neither honour nor courtesy, shame nor divine admonition”.

    Arguably the protagonist in the engraving is not nearly large enough to be Gina, but the dystopian landscape seems to suit a mining camp. I wonder if the “poisonous toad” at her feet could represent her favourite radio/TV personality or climate change denier.

    http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/26.72.31

  • 11
    Edward James
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    John2066 My mindset is hardly classic conservative. I tend to be focussed on the details which I believe I understand. I name politicians and identify those political sins they commit or accommodate, because I don’t think people should forget. The politicians political sins open the door for constituents like you perhaps, to ask questions in public forums about the politicians personal values. And how their personal values translate into how they represent us. How can you be so comfortable supporting politicians and political activist who turn their backs on published allegations supported with photographs which identify crimes and cover ups? In another place consider this on going political farce surrounding Craig Thomson and involving the Labor Party from the top to the bottom. A matter getting a good airing in the peoples court of public opinion. You are accusing miners of ripping billions a year out of resources owned by Australians while paying a pathetic 7.5 %royalty. Are you accusing them of a crime? You are right I am steamed up about the shonky politicians who have oversight over the way in which we are governed. I pay first world taxes and get third world governance. I am busy doing what I can to bring about change and change again. In my local government area five members of my community died in a ditch at the bottom of Piles Creek Somersby. Because no least of all our politicians really cared that our council was malfeasant. Edward James http://bit.ly/EJ_PNewsAds

  • 12
    davidk
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    Simsonmc
    I think you’re probably right, I also noted the evident joy on his face as well as the shifty, sly look on Hendo’s. Makes me shudder.

  • 13
    johnward154@bigpond.com
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    She once told me that Her potential wealth was 100 times all the Arab Oil Sheik’s potential wealth put together. And at the rate the Iron ore was being dug up it would take a thousand years to be exhausted!
    That was on a flight around all the mining sites in Northern Australia to celebrate Lang Hancock’s seventieth birthday.

  • 14
    AR
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

    TAX them into the (ore rich) ground and let them take their (sic!) mining elsewhere.
    Anyone who does not shudder at Pureheart being in control of more than a chip shop is a suitable case for treatment. With a piece of 2x4.

  • 15
    Glen
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    Ms Rinehart’s wealth appears to derive, at least in part, from a certain Johannes Bjelke-Petersen, who lead the abolition of state and federal death duties in Australia - probably the most regressive taxation “reform” in our history. Dad and Joh were great mates.

  • 16
    Jan Forrester
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

    1. Tell us more about the guest workers Stephen? What visas are they being recruited under? And do we know anything about contracts, wages, conditions?
    2. Rudd tougher on a mining tax? He began the mess: his own minister in charge of mining seemed to find out about ‘negotiations’ in the media, so many things on burners he couldn’t swing them all. The miners had won PR, before Julia got to it, amazing…..

  • 17
    john2066
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

    Jan above, Gina’s proposal is to bring people out on 457 visas to work for her, min wage approx 55k if they are lucky. Quite hilarious that she campaigns against the mining tax saying it will affect jobs, and now she wont employ Australians!

    Incredible gall when she is Australia’s biggest welfare recipient- she (in fact her father) was given an exclusive lease on our minerals, where she gives us 7.5% of the value. They are our minerals, Gina, give them back!

  • 18
    john2066
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 9:33 pm | Permalink

    Ps because the original mining tax went down, howled down by the coalition and their moron supporters, my company has to pay extra companies tax!

    Thanks for nothing, conservative twits, you sure are useful idiots for billionaires!

  • 19
    outside left
    Posted Thursday, 2 February 2012 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

    Amazing, isn’t it. The most compassionate,generous and humble of the rich are lean, energetic and visionary[ Turner, Gates, Jobs et al. The greedy, spiteful and vindictive are FAT[ enter your favourite here]

  • 20
    Rob Dawson
    Posted Friday, 3 February 2012 at 8:14 am | Permalink

    Fairfax is a basket case. Rinehart is kicking it around. Palmer is toying with it. Mayne is, as usual, w-nking on as if he has a clue. It’s all down hill from here.

  • 21
    Posted Friday, 3 February 2012 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    Gina Reinhart’s grotesque fat is a concomitant of huge greed. Jane Gazow, in her excellent ‘Good Weekend’ article makes the point that Reinhart watches every dollar and cent. But doesn’t blink when it comes to watching a couple of hundred million go kerplunk.

    The thought of a female (right-wing fundamentalist) Rupert Murdoch owning the media which isn’t already owned by said Rupert Murdoch, is a thought too terrible to contemplate

  • 22
    Andrew McIntosh
    Posted Friday, 3 February 2012 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

    After reading the Good Weekend piece, I rather hope that a decent mini-series on the House Of Hancock will be due, in perhaps a few years time. Not that anyone would believe it.

  • 23
    Posted Friday, 3 February 2012 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

    ANDREW: I wonder how any director would get around the fact that his leading lady makes an elephant look undersized? Unless the leading lady could be in the Rose Porteous mould and have Herself’s part as the villain.

  • 24
    Brian62
    Posted Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    It would seem by her suppression requests Mrs Rhinoheart is a sensitive little flower.

  • 25
    Posted Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

    OUTSIDE LEFT: I’m sorry to spoil your party, but the crookedest, most totally corrupt politician in Oz’s history, Joh Bjelke-Petersen, was lean and hungry.

  • 26
    davidk
    Posted Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

    Re Brian62’s mention of suppression orders, I find it parting strange that the facility to leave a reply on Friday’s Gina story is not there but it is for every other article. Either my computer has decided I’ve said enough about her or Crikey has been suppressed. All I wanted to say is what a pity it is I had not posted anything nasty enough about her to make it into the evidence supporting said suppression orders. Missed my opportunity to make history. Darn!

  • 27
    Posted Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

    DAVIDK: Be fair. They’ve had technical problems this week.

  • 28
    davidk
    Posted Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

    @ Venise
    Sorry, I didn’t mean to impugn our host. I wasn’t aware of the technical problems and promise not to do it again.

  • 29
    Posted Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

    DAVIDK: I’m smiling. Cheers V

  • 30
    A. N. Onymus
    Posted Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

    Stephen Mayne,

    Is the link in the paragraph beginning “Even former Fairfax chairman Ron Walker” correct? It is the same as the “Good Weekend cover story” link (to theage.com.au etc) in the second paragraph, and that story has no reference to Ron Walker, Mark Burrows, or Lachlan Murdoch.

  • 31
    geomac
    Posted Sunday, 5 February 2012 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

    I,m watching the channel ten news on friday and Mal Walden says they are going to their political correspondent . Instead of Paul Bongiorno I see Bolt on my screen and so promptly switch to SBS and wait for letters and numbers. A face on the tv who spouts his opinions , doesn,t do professional research and gets his facts wrong is not a political correspondent . If thats what Gina and her ” mates ” want to promote channel ten can forget me for news and I have enjoyed watching it for many years . I stopped buying the Hun a few years after Rup bought because it was no longer a newspaper as in inform .Withoput the form guide , comics and sport no one would buy it . A saying that went around used to be if you want the headline get the Sun bit if you want the story get the Age .

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...