IN THE post-GFC world, where capital positions dictate market sentiment towards financial services stocks and structural changes are fast commoditising the $1.3 trillion sector, technology is becoming the game-changer.
It is this changing landscape that was behind AMP's decision to buy its arch rival AXA last year, its recent move into the highly fragmented and low-margin self-managed super fund segment and the complex sale of a 15 per cent stake in its subsidiary AMP Capital to Japanese Bank Mitsubishi UFJ Trust and Banking Corp (MUTB).
It also goes a long way to explaining its recent decision to relinquish its role as joint external manager of the $2.3 billion listed infrastructure fund Duet Group. By doing so it will get a nice one-off compensation payment of up to $50 million in cash and securities, which will boost its capital position in time for its year to December 31 profit results.
And it puts into context the rising speculation that the AMP board is considering a hybrid debt issue, similar to the ones issued by Tatts Group, ANZ, Westpac, Tabcorp, Woolworths and Origin Energy.
For now, the market will focus on its interim results, which are due out this Thursday. Investors will focus on two things: expenses and its capital position, or the ratio of net tangible assets (NTA) to the minimum capital requirement (MRR), which was a robust 2.1 times just before its acquisition of AXA and subsequently fell to 1.0 times. BBY analyst Brett Le Mesurier estimates the ratio of NTA to the minimum capital requirement will be 1.1 times at June 30. He calculates that the minor improvement in its capital position came from the MUTB deal, which added $425 million to its coffers, as did a dividend reinvestment plan, which raised $160 million.
AMP provided further important detail on the MUTB deal in its notice to shareholders for its upcoming AGM, which led him to suggest that AMP has adopted an "alert but not alarmed" strategy when it comes to capital. In item five of its notice to shareholders AMP explains that the sale of AMP Capital can be unwound at any time by either party. This means that AMP has the option to buy back the 15 per cent stake at any time and MUTB has a similar option to sell back its stake in AMP Capital. If either party exercises its option AMP will issue approximately 3.49 per cent of new shares in AMP. The company sought approval from shareholders in the event that one of the parties wants to back out of the deal.
What is interesting about this is that under ASX Listing Rule 7.1 companies can issue up to 15 per cent more shares without shareholder approval in any 12-month period. This means that without shareholder approval AMP could still have been able to raise $328 million in new shares, or $1.3 billion in fresh capital.
It suggests AMP is as nervous about its capital position as the rest of the market. The brutal reality is AMP may well have to improve its capital position in time for the introduction of tough new life and general insurance standards by the financial services regulator APRA on January 1 next year. These standards are expected to include a higher MRR.
AMP's capital is affected by movements in investment markets, including bonds and equities, changes in asset valuations and dividend payouts. Its earnings are affected by these issues but also the net cash outflows in the Australian Financial Services (AFS) business. In the first quarter of 2012, the net cash outflows were $292 million, which followed net cash outflows of $331 million in the last quarter of 2011. The weak investment markets and the better deal the banks are offering on term deposits are weighing on AMP's ability to achieve revenue growth.
Against this backdrop, AMP is trying to position itself in an industry that is undergoing structural change. The battle has begun between the banks, AMP, which would like to be a fifth pillar, and the industry super funds, for a growing army of disenchanted customers. AMP is positioning itself to be the player of choice. To this end it bought AXA last year to get its hands on a retail platform, improve its technology and boost its economies of scale by creating a network of 4100 financial advisers servicing 5 million retail customers across Australia and New Zealand and 350 institutional clients.
Its recent purchase of Cavendish Group, which is the largest SMSF administrator, was another bet on technology and scale. While SMSF is a highly fragmented, low-margin segment, it is growing like topsy. The latest data from APRA estimates there are 470,000 SMSFs, compared with 230,000 five years ago.
AMP is also trying to expand its footprint overseas. But it faces a lot of challenges. It has a high-margin legacy business that is being transformed into a low-margin business. This combination produces a business with little growth. It is a chilling reminder of a company that once had the best position in the only industry that the government legislated for decades of high growth.
AMP listed more than 10 years ago with hopes of having a $20 share price and rising. Now shareholders would be delighted if it could get to $5, but even that may take years.
aferguson@fairfaxmedia.com.au
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
Why did AMP buy AXA and what does the AXA acquisition mean for investors?
AMP bought AXA to gain a retail platform, improve its technology and build scale. The acquisition expanded AMP’s adviser network to about 4,100 financial advisers serving roughly 5 million retail customers across Australia and New Zealand and 350 institutional clients, which AMP says will help it compete with banks and industry super funds.
What was the deal between AMP and Mitsubishi UFJ Trust and Banking (MUTB) over AMP Capital, and how does it affect AMP’s capital position?
AMP sold a 15% stake in its subsidiary AMP Capital to MUTB, which added about $425 million to AMP’s coffers. The agreement can be unwound by either party, and AMP sought shareholder approval in case either side exercises the option. The MUTB deal was a key contributor to a modest improvement in AMP’s capital position.
What are investors focusing on in AMP’s interim results and why are those metrics important?
Investors are watching AMP’s expenses and its capital position—specifically the ratio of net tangible assets (NTA) to the minimum capital requirement (MRR). That ratio fell from 2.1 times before the AXA acquisition to about 1.0 times, with BBY analyst estimates putting it at 1.1 times at June 30. These measures indicate how well AMP can absorb losses and meet regulator capital standards.
Why did AMP give up its role as joint external manager of the Duet Group and what benefit did it receive?
AMP relinquished its joint external manager role of the $2.3 billion Duet Group to receive a one-off compensation payment of up to $50 million in cash and securities. The move was aimed at boosting AMP’s capital position ahead of its year to December 31 profit results.
What capital and regulatory risks does AMP face that everyday investors should know about?
AMP’s capital is sensitive to investment market movements (bonds and equities), asset valuation changes, dividend payouts and net cash outflows in its Australian Financial Services business (e.g., Q1 2012 outflows of $292 million). AMP may also need to strengthen its capital ahead of tougher life and general insurance standards from regulator APRA due January 1, which are expected to include a higher MRR.
How is AMP using technology and acquisitions like Cavendish to position itself in the growing SMSF market?
AMP bought Cavendish Group, the largest SMSF administrator, as a bet on technology and scale. The move targets the fast-growing but fragmented and low-margin self-managed super fund (SMSF) segment; APRA data cited in the article estimates around 470,000 SMSFs versus 230,000 five years earlier.
Could AMP raise new capital by issuing shares without shareholder approval, and what does that mean for investors?
Under ASX Listing Rule 7.1 companies can issue up to 15% more shares in any 12‑month period without shareholder approval. The article notes that, under this rule, AMP could have raised about $328 million in new shares, or up to $1.3 billion in fresh capital, which shows the company has avenues to strengthen its balance sheet if needed.
How is AMP positioning itself against banks and industry super funds, and what does that mean for its long‑term growth potential?
AMP is trying to be a 'fifth pillar' competing with banks and industry super funds for customers who are dissatisfied with incumbents. Through acquisitions (AXA, Cavendish), technology upgrades and scale in advisers and platforms, AMP aims to be the player of choice. However, the company faces the challenge of turning a high‑margin legacy business into a sustainable, lower‑margin model while finding growth.