Milford Asset Management

Why Infinz awards are worthless

NBR reports on Infinz and their now suspect and dodgy awards:

Fund manager of the year awards won by Mark Warminger and Milford Asset Management will not be reviewed in the wake of High Court market manipulation findings, says the Institute of Finance Professionals.

After an investigation triggered by the NZX in mid-2014, the Financial Markets Authority sued Mr Warminger alleging he manipulated the market on 10 occasions that year.

Last week the High Court found the FMA had proved its case on two counts.

During the hearing, Mr Warminger told the court he had won fund manager of the year awards three years running, in 2012, 2013 and 2014.

The awards were from Infinz, which picked Milford as Equities Fund Manager of the Year in those years. ? Read more »

Court finds Mark Warminger from Milford Asset Management manipulated the market

The High Court has found that Mark Warminger from Milford Asset Management did, in fact, manipulate the markets despite the claims otherwise of Brian Gaynor.

Milford Asset Management’s Mark Warminger manipulated the market when trading two stocks, a High Court judge has ruled.

The Financial Markets Authority alleged that 10 instances of Warminger’s trading breached market manipulation rules during a four-week trial last year. ? Read more »

They should be opening champagne…

A solid year for Milford.

NBR exclaims their profit soared.

As fund manager Milford moves to change its performance fee structure, accounts filed this week show a 30% increase in fee income for the firm in the year to March.

Net profit for Milford Funds grew a healthy 43% to $15 million for the year as income from management and performance fees reached $44.6m, up from $34.2m a year earlier.

The company paid a dividend of $12m to its parent company Milford Asset Management.

The main owners of Milford Asset Management are its employees, including Brian Gaynor and Anthony Quirk. Read more »

Another lecture on ethics from the ethically challenged St. Brian Gaynor

You have to wonder how Brain Gaynor keeps his column in a shabby tabloid rag each week.

But there he is once again banging on about something that other people and companies should do but one that he himself isn’t doing.

Brian Gaynor is a weapons grade hypocrite.

The election of directors will be one of the most important issues during the upcoming annual meeting season.

Should our listed companies have more women directors? What is the appropriate mix of executive and non-executive directors? Should the chief executive be a director? Are New Zealand companies doing enough to find and develop new directors?

The Australian Council of Superannuation Investors (ACSI), whose members hold an average 10 per cent of the largest 200 ASX companies, launched a major initiative last week that “aims to lift the representation of women on the boards of ASX companies to at least 30 per cent of all directors by the end of 2017”.


[O]ne of the biggest issues facing New Zealand business is the recruitment and development of new directors.

The 16 companies in this survey have appointed only eight new directors in the past 12 months. This is a very low number, particularly as 72 new directors have been appointed to ASX 100 companies in the 12 months prior to the survey.

A number of observations can be made about these eight new NZX company directors including; ?? Read more »

Took eye off the ball?

Gee the Herald goes soft on their columnist today, suggesting that after copping a $1.5 million dollar fine from?the?FMA that Brian Gaynor’s Milford Asset Management merely took their eye off the ball..

Milford Asset Management’s directors have accepted they took their eye off the ball while a portfolio manager carried out alleged market manipulation that sparked a high-profile regulatory probe and a $1.5 million settlement with the Financial Markets Authority.

The FMA yesterday revealed the results of a lengthy investigation into trading activity at the Auckland-based investment firm, which has more than $3 billion under management, including KiwiSaver funds.

Milford has agreed to a $1.5 million settlement, $1.1 million of which will go to the Crown, with the balance covering the costs of the regulator’s probe.

The portfolio manager, whom the company and FMA will not name, is still facing enforcement action and was yesterday placed on extended leave.

Under the Financial Markets Conduct Act, someone convicted of market manipulation can be jailed or fined up to $500,000.

The?headline is an understatement!

Pity the regulator was so soft.?It should have been $15 million in fines.

If it comes out, as I expect it will, that the trader was skimming a margin to the house account, doing what is known in the trade as “bed & breakfast trading”, the Board will have known, as they will have seen the resulting profits.

It isn’t hard to work out who the “trader” is either…he is the only one missing from their web page and a quick check of cached copies of their website shows that. ? Read more »

Brian Gaynor’s Milford Asset Management slammed with $1.5M fine

The NZX has announced a massive fine of $1.5m against Brian Gaynor’s Milford Asset Management.

The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) has completed its investigation into certain trading activity between December 2013 and August 2014 by a trader employed by Milford Asset Management Limited (Milford). The FMA considers that the trading conduct breached the market manipulation prohibitions in s11B of the Securities Markets Act 1988. The FMA also concluded that the Milford Board failed to ensure that there was the requisite degree of monitoring of the trading activity.

The FMA considers that the conduct had, or was likely to have had, the effect of causing the creation of a false or
misleading appearance with respect to:
? the extent of active trading in the relevant securities; or
? the supply of, demand for, price for trading in, or value of those securities.

As Milford is the relevant trader?s employer, the FMA considers that Milford is liable for the trader?s alleged breaches of the Act. Milford denies that it is liable for any alleged breaches. The FMA acknowledges that its conclusions have not been tested in court. ?? Read more »

Does anyone else think that Brian Gaynor banging on about transparency is a sick joke?

Brian Gaynor still has column in the NZ Herald, despite his company being under investigation for manipulating markets, and despite the Guardians of the Superfund pulling their warrant, for want of a better term.

The Herald seems to think his columns are just fine, and NZME. thinks his continued pushing of Kiwisaver ads on NewstalkZB is fine to.

Today’s column though is just taking the piss. He is banging on about transparency.

One of the major issues raised by the Ports of Auckland wharf expansion controversy is whether Auckland ratepayers have greater transparency and more influence over the company than they did when it was listed on the NZX.

Similar transparency and influence issues can be raised regarding Air New Zealand, Genesis Energy, Meridian Energy and Mighty River Power, all NZX listed and more than 50 per cent owned by the Crown.

Read more »

Milford – understanding the problem

So then, the NZ Super Fund dropped a nuclear bomb on the NZ financial markets late last week, by suspending Milford Asset Management from overseeing funds on behalf of the NZ public. This can only been seen as bad news for Milford as the FMA is due to report back on their enquiries soon. Clearly, the NZ Super Fund are expecting bad news for Milford.

We have also been forwarded a ?panic stations? email from Milford to their clients, outlining how the allegations do not affect KiwiSaver funds. While this may be the case, there may yet be questions to answer on pumped up performance fees charged to Milford clients (which might also include their Kiwisaver clients), as the allegations over asset manipulation may have meant fund managers got extra money, paid for by their clients.

There are however, a number of things that need to be pointed out and deserve reinforcement.

Firstly Milford have claimed in a number of communications to the press that the investigations over asset manipulation relate to an ?individual trader? at Milford, over ?specific trades?.

This is misleading on Milford?s part. They do not employ anyone called a ?trader?. ?You can go see for yourself.?Click through the various divisions of Milford to see all their staff members. No-one is called a trader. They do have a ?dealer?, but this person only joined Milford in November of last year, well after the alleged manipulation took place.

What they are trying to mislead the public over is that the allegations may in fact apply to a Portfolio Manager, or perhaps a Private Wealth adviser. This changes the story materially. Portfolio managers or Private wealth advisers are big fish. They are the kinds of people who would give instructions on which shares, bonds and other financial products should belong in either an individual portfolio, or a large fund. They also stand to benefit from performance gains in portfolios with outperformance fees. ? Read more »

Herald continues to keeps Milford columnist when NZ Super suspends them


Yet again, Brian Gaynor of the besieged financial firm Milford Asset Management has his weekly column published in the NZ Herald, despite the NZ Super Fund taking the unprecedented step of suspending Milford from running any investment mandates for them.

You will recall the FMA is investigating Milford Asset Management staff and transactions for alleged manipulation of share prices for their fund and personal gain. ?? Read more »

Milford Asset Management are blaming “the web guy” – not taking responsibility

Milford Asset Management says it has contacted other KiwiSaver fund managers to explain an ?inadvertent breach of conventions? in Google search terms used for marketing purposes.

This comes after rival fund manager Fisher Funds lodged a complaint about Milford?s use of its brand in a so-called ?ambush marketing? campaign where it used?other KiwiSaver providers’ names to try to attract potential customers to its own website by paying for search words.

Hence, when someone typed ?Fisher kiwisaver? into Google, an ad for ?Milford Fisher KiwiSaver? topped the search list with a link to the Milford website.

?It has never been our intention to use such tactics in our marketing,” Milford managing director Anthony Quirk said today.

Except that you were. ? And this is yet another incident in?Milford Asset Management’s murky existence. ?You have to love it – a business that depends on trust more than most, and they simply don’t appear to care unless they’re caught. ? Read more »