Furious George: Chinese whispers

I'm an ardent defender of the Fourth Estate but a couple of recent stories have cause for some scrutiny. Firstly, the Silver Fern Farms deal with Chinese outfit Shanghai Maling and secondly the innuendo surrounding Fonterra boss Theo Spierings.

Let's deal with Spierings first. A recent article in The Australian suggested The CEO of the dairy giant is about to leave the role, with Air New Zealand's top man Christopher Luxon touted as a possible replacement. It's no secret the return to farmer shareholders and suppliers is less than adequate, with many wondering how they're going to survive the current trough; indeed many others have been forced out of the industry as a result of back-to-back seasons of poor results and another in the offing.

But are rumours of Spierings' departure accurate or is this merely idle speculation? One the one hand Fonterra has categorically denied the suggestion and claim the rumour is entirely without substance. That sounds like a full-stop on the issue. It's also worth noting Fonterra's half-year profit was up. It hasn't totally hidden from the issue either; Fonterra's Head of co-operative Affairs in Central Districts Dallen Olson addressed it when I asked him about it last week on The Country: Early Edition. Again, a categorical denial. However, the old adage of finding fire where there's smoke can't be ignored and there's also the issue of Luxon. The fact a possible successor has been touted is a potentially interesting facet of the story.

Mind you, it's not without precedent for media to conjure up something out of virtually nothing and sit back and watch as the story grows legs and becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. That's the kind of subterfuge and disingenuousness that draws me to the media and is a large part of the reason why I've been in the industry for over a decade. Morals? To be honest, they barely enter the frame. When all said and done, the news cycle keeps turning because human beings are prone to stupidity.

So what about the case of Silver Fern Farms? Were shareholders duped when deciding whether to sell half the company to the Chinese, or were all the facts clearly laid out on the table? Shareholder John Shrimpton believes they most certainly were and believes he has the evidence to prove it.

A special meeting will be held in July after disgruntled a small group of shareholders, led by Shrimpton, demanded another vote on the merger. The catch is the board of the co-op isn't bound by the result. It seems rather pointless as the only decision that really matters is the one by the Overseas Investment Office which is scheduled to be handed down at the end of the month which will in effect deliver the ultimate seal of approval.
The interesting aspect of this story is the story done by 'Story' last week. They've used Shrimpton's evidence; documents given to Shanghai Maling that forecast the company's performance for the next four years. The inherent disparity is at the same time they've told New Zealand shareholders the company is in a bad way and they don't have forward projections beyond one year. Someone's telling porky pies! A cynic might suggest throwing in a projection beyond a solitary year to the Chinese was a little deal sweetener - thankfully I'm not cynical.

This is a classic "he said, she said" kind of yarn, but I suspect even if the company projections angle did indeed hold some validity, not to mention the potential closure of two South Island plants, most suppliers would still vote for the Shanghai Maling deal to proceed. It's arguably a better deal than it was when first put to shareholders last year; a $260 million cash injection into an industry coming off another poor season.

But the nub of the issue from a media point of view will be how long they persist with the story beyond the end of the month when the OIO predictably give the deal the green light. It's been a good newsworthy stoush until this point - following it up to see what the results are down the track will be just as important.