COMMERCIAL.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 4214, 22 September 1874, Page 2

COMMERCIAL.

INSURANCE. NEW ZEALAND AND SOUTH BRITISH COMPANIES. (Prom the Southern Cross, September 14.) Sir.,—ln your Saturday's issue, you published » comparatire statement to "show the advantages which are offered to the investor by the present prospectus" of the New Zealand Insurance Company, through the present market price of the South British being relatively higher than the price put upon the New Zealand now issue of shares. I take leave respectfully to say that the basis of the calculation is entirely erroneous ; the conclusions are not warranted by facts, and the supposed alleged advantages to investors are an entire delusion, so far as reference to the South British is concerned. The statement as to the relative value of the stock of the two companies is based not on their property, their assets, but on income from premiums received as shown by last balance-sheets. It would be as correct to estimate that a merchant or tradesman was worth his gross receipts in business for the last year without knowing or inquiring whether ho was worth anything* at all or not in the shape of property of ono kind or another, or whether his income in business had vanished in the shape of expenses and losses, buch results do occur sometimes in business ; and curiously enough, the half-yearly report of the New Zealand Insurance Company for November last, gives an illustration of this; and, as I maintain, helps to upset the table referred to. That report and balance-sheet states that premiums were £-14,420; the losses and management expenses, amounted to £40,910, or £2400 more than the premiums : yet this £44,420, paid away in losses and expenses, is included in the £107,000 in the calculations to show the better value to investors of the New Zealand new stock over the market price of the South British. Tills explanation will remove the idea that income and not property is the true basis of calculation in this question. The assets of the two companies divided among the shares of each show those of the New Zealand new stock to equal 48s. per share, those of the South British 425. Bd. per share. The following comparative statement puts the matter clearly, and, I think, correctly • Assets. Assets Sellg Pre- /on

Shares. £ per sh, price, mium. assets N Zealand 100,000 240,000 48s. Otl. 90s, 425. Od, 87 i S. British ~ 87,500 80,000 42a. Bd. 53a. 10s. 4d. 25 Tested by tho assets of tho companies, the South British at 535,, instead of being dearer stock than tho New Zealand new shares at 00s,, Is 02} per cent, cheaper. I shall feel obliged if you will ho good enough to insert this letter in Monday’s Cross, that the statement that might be injurious to the South British may be corrected at the earliest possible moment/ I need not say I should not have troubled you with any remarks on tho prospectus in question if the South British had not been referred to in connection with it, and I write only In self-defence.—l am &c A. Boardman, Manager South British V. and M. Insurance Company of jtfew Zealand.

BY TBLEOItABIL

CHEISTCHUBCn. Sept. 21. Mr Beßourbel reports Buyers—National Insurance, 20h.; National ißank, CBs.; South British, 605.; Shipping Company, 30a.; Standard Insurance, 11s.; CoJonialßank, ISs. Sellers—National Insurance, 80s.; National Bank, 705.; South British, 625.; Shipping Company, 165.; Colonial Bank, 165.; Standard Insurance, 12s.