Canada handed 300 of the world's biggest investors a pitchbook this week. Mines got the majority of the attention. Oil and gas almost none
- Thread starter DisobeyTyranny
- Start date
Bernardo
Well-Known Member
The adults have left the house. A trade fair is Guyana level stuff. Canadians should be asking themselves why a supposed G7 nation needs to hold such a festival. If there are undervalued assets in any market, buyers (investors) will find those opportunities.
All this will lead to is more "announcements". The smart money will be here looking at assets to pick over for pennies on the dollar after the the controlled decline is complete.
This shit is embarrassing and a joke. We are clowning ourselves.
All this will lead to is more "announcements". The smart money will be here looking at assets to pick over for pennies on the dollar after the the controlled decline is complete.
This shit is embarrassing and a joke. We are clowning ourselves.
ayn_rands_ghost
Commie Crusher
DisobeyTyranny
I do not know about rest of Canada but in BC the way it is set up is is a long grueling process as Injuns need to approve, get their 'ownership' cut and of course bribes and the threat the injuns can shut it down or change terms at any time.
I do not know about rest of Canada but in BC the way it is set up is is a long grueling process as Injuns need to approve, get their 'ownership' cut and of course bribes and the threat the injuns can shut it down or change terms at any time.
CaptainTrouble
Based Member
If I were an investor, my only question for the event would be: "how can you as the government guarantee my return on investment?"
Which is exactly what the public shouldn't want asked at such an event.
What is this the 1800s where we need a world fair to show off what we're capable of? Everyone has the internet. If there were investment opportunities in Canada, there would already be investment. The only opportunities that exist that weren't known already are ones that still need to be created and the only people capable of creating opportunities where the market cannot is the government. That means change of legislation, change of tax rates or subsidies. Every company will ask our government for a subsidy to entice them to invest where they already have 0 desire to invest. Nothing else can possibly come of this. I still don't understand what people think could possibly happen here. Some Chinese guy never heard of Canada before and had no clue Canada had investment opportunities before is now shown these investment opportunities? Do Canadians think the rest of the world lives under a rock? Most countries have Financial Institutions that employ Canadians in their own country to value Canadian equities specifically in O&G and Mining already in-case potential investment opportunities arise.
Edit - I just want to add how much stuff like this angers me. For those who don't know, I'm actually very qualified to comment on this (arguably more so than Carney himself) and the desire to invest is determined by expected cash flows over times from the investment, adjusted for the amount of risk of the cash flows have with cash flows further out being considered riskier than cash flows closer to the present (every type of business has an expected risk profile inherent in the business itself and every foreign investor ranks countries themselves with an additional adjustment given country risk) relative to the opportunity cost of said investment (if better investment opportunities exist then obviously it doesn't make sense to invest).
The drivers of investment are not and will never be some sort of leftist ideal. If the ideal is the selling factor of the investment, you'll only get the most die-hard of radical followers to invest. You can't just tell investors that "we're going not hurt the environment if you invest with us" and expect investors to invest. Most Canadians environmentalists don't even want to spend an extra $20/month on heating their homes, you think some rich Chinese or middle-eastern investor is going to take a hit on their investments to push a climate change ideal or whatever else? No investor cares that Canada is DEI-Forward except for Canadians themselves who don't have money to invest.
There's is a fundamental inescapable way of increasing investment. Lowering taxes. Lower taxes are literally built right into the formula for "desire to investment". Lower taxes lead to higher investment. To improve cash flows (profit) another method is to reduce regularly hurdles (costs) with investment. If for every 1 barrel of oil you extract, you pay roughly $20 in costs to meet regulatory hurdles (such as say carbon capture) that reduces cash flows by $20/barrel which reduces investment. So, reducing regulatory oversight will increase investment. Many people suggest the cost to society for eliminating the regulations is greater than $20/barrel but in the case of GHG Emissions and climate change if Canada spends $20/barrel to reduce emissions and the rest of the world doesn't (which they aren't) then despite paying $20/barrel in costs, the world will still hit catastrophic climate change (just 2-4 months slower assuming Canada has Net Zero emissions, according to the UN reports). You tell me if $20/barrel is worth 2-4 months before we inevitably hit catastrophic change. It's not. And especially not since we're the only ones paying for it. We'd be better off being $20/barrel richer and use those funds to finance technology to reduce GHG Emissions without negatively impacting investment because I can tell you right now, many other countries that benefit from this lack of $20/barrel hurdle aren't using the funds to improve society. You can though if you get an opportunity to benefit from a society without that $20/barrel hurdle.
Outside of regulations and taxes there's only 1 other major factor (there's some minor ones I won't get into) and that's country risk. Canada maintains a low country risk but rather than adjust the denominator, companies are adjusting the cash flows for country risk and pertaining it to specific industries as required (a more accurate methadology). Before the year 2000, no one made additional adjustments to investment in Canada but today many investors are adding a 1-2% denominator equivalent cash-flow adjustment (which is much higher than simply a 2% haircut to cashflows) to nearly all major projects in what's known as a "project execution premium". The Canadian government could reduce this to 0% if they could guarantee the execution of projects without additional costs outside of the global norm for the industry. As it stands, Canada is one of the most expensive places to execute major projects because of our governments inability to execute on major projects.
In short, to improve investment in Canada the Canadian government can lower taxes, reduce government regulations and expedite/ensure development (reduce the cost) of major projects. These 3 things are in the government's hands and they can do this and if they did this then investment would improve. No need for a giant conference.
There is one more way the government can create investment and that's by giving away tax payer dollars to investors to ensure they invest (improve their projected cash flows with tax payer funds). The issue with this strategy is then the project doesn't add value to Canadians because you're taking money from Canadians and giving it to an investor to investor. This strategy actually loses Canada money. All Canadians except the investor become poorer. In all the aforementioned other strategies, Canadians as a whole become richer.
I know everyone on here already gets it but I might as well say it anyway, even though I know I'm talking to a tree. Improving the wealth of Canadians is easy. If I had a majority government I could make everyone in Canada 30% richer in 5 years. It's not difficult. If you don't understand, that's fine. Trust me on this. Take whatever industry you're an expert in and think about something in that industry that you find easy and everyone else finds complicated. That's what this is. Economics is actually a solved problem and rather easy. The only reason we aren't richer is because our leaders don't want us to be.
Which is exactly what the public shouldn't want asked at such an event.
What is this the 1800s where we need a world fair to show off what we're capable of? Everyone has the internet. If there were investment opportunities in Canada, there would already be investment. The only opportunities that exist that weren't known already are ones that still need to be created and the only people capable of creating opportunities where the market cannot is the government. That means change of legislation, change of tax rates or subsidies. Every company will ask our government for a subsidy to entice them to invest where they already have 0 desire to invest. Nothing else can possibly come of this. I still don't understand what people think could possibly happen here. Some Chinese guy never heard of Canada before and had no clue Canada had investment opportunities before is now shown these investment opportunities? Do Canadians think the rest of the world lives under a rock? Most countries have Financial Institutions that employ Canadians in their own country to value Canadian equities specifically in O&G and Mining already in-case potential investment opportunities arise.
Edit - I just want to add how much stuff like this angers me. For those who don't know, I'm actually very qualified to comment on this (arguably more so than Carney himself) and the desire to invest is determined by expected cash flows over times from the investment, adjusted for the amount of risk of the cash flows have with cash flows further out being considered riskier than cash flows closer to the present (every type of business has an expected risk profile inherent in the business itself and every foreign investor ranks countries themselves with an additional adjustment given country risk) relative to the opportunity cost of said investment (if better investment opportunities exist then obviously it doesn't make sense to invest).
The drivers of investment are not and will never be some sort of leftist ideal. If the ideal is the selling factor of the investment, you'll only get the most die-hard of radical followers to invest. You can't just tell investors that "we're going not hurt the environment if you invest with us" and expect investors to invest. Most Canadians environmentalists don't even want to spend an extra $20/month on heating their homes, you think some rich Chinese or middle-eastern investor is going to take a hit on their investments to push a climate change ideal or whatever else? No investor cares that Canada is DEI-Forward except for Canadians themselves who don't have money to invest.
There's is a fundamental inescapable way of increasing investment. Lowering taxes. Lower taxes are literally built right into the formula for "desire to investment". Lower taxes lead to higher investment. To improve cash flows (profit) another method is to reduce regularly hurdles (costs) with investment. If for every 1 barrel of oil you extract, you pay roughly $20 in costs to meet regulatory hurdles (such as say carbon capture) that reduces cash flows by $20/barrel which reduces investment. So, reducing regulatory oversight will increase investment. Many people suggest the cost to society for eliminating the regulations is greater than $20/barrel but in the case of GHG Emissions and climate change if Canada spends $20/barrel to reduce emissions and the rest of the world doesn't (which they aren't) then despite paying $20/barrel in costs, the world will still hit catastrophic climate change (just 2-4 months slower assuming Canada has Net Zero emissions, according to the UN reports). You tell me if $20/barrel is worth 2-4 months before we inevitably hit catastrophic change. It's not. And especially not since we're the only ones paying for it. We'd be better off being $20/barrel richer and use those funds to finance technology to reduce GHG Emissions without negatively impacting investment because I can tell you right now, many other countries that benefit from this lack of $20/barrel hurdle aren't using the funds to improve society. You can though if you get an opportunity to benefit from a society without that $20/barrel hurdle.
Outside of regulations and taxes there's only 1 other major factor (there's some minor ones I won't get into) and that's country risk. Canada maintains a low country risk but rather than adjust the denominator, companies are adjusting the cash flows for country risk and pertaining it to specific industries as required (a more accurate methadology). Before the year 2000, no one made additional adjustments to investment in Canada but today many investors are adding a 1-2% denominator equivalent cash-flow adjustment (which is much higher than simply a 2% haircut to cashflows) to nearly all major projects in what's known as a "project execution premium". The Canadian government could reduce this to 0% if they could guarantee the execution of projects without additional costs outside of the global norm for the industry. As it stands, Canada is one of the most expensive places to execute major projects because of our governments inability to execute on major projects.
In short, to improve investment in Canada the Canadian government can lower taxes, reduce government regulations and expedite/ensure development (reduce the cost) of major projects. These 3 things are in the government's hands and they can do this and if they did this then investment would improve. No need for a giant conference.
There is one more way the government can create investment and that's by giving away tax payer dollars to investors to ensure they invest (improve their projected cash flows with tax payer funds). The issue with this strategy is then the project doesn't add value to Canadians because you're taking money from Canadians and giving it to an investor to investor. This strategy actually loses Canada money. All Canadians except the investor become poorer. In all the aforementioned other strategies, Canadians as a whole become richer.
I know everyone on here already gets it but I might as well say it anyway, even though I know I'm talking to a tree. Improving the wealth of Canadians is easy. If I had a majority government I could make everyone in Canada 30% richer in 5 years. It's not difficult. If you don't understand, that's fine. Trust me on this. Take whatever industry you're an expert in and think about something in that industry that you find easy and everyone else finds complicated. That's what this is. Economics is actually a solved problem and rather easy. The only reason we aren't richer is because our leaders don't want us to be.
Last edited: