Since listing on the NZX in 2013 and 2014, these stocks have delivered to the taxpayer.
On top of the $4.668 billion in total the Government received for selling just under half its stock, the big three have paid their majority owner more than $4b in dividends.
Then there is the sheer capital gain.
The Crown’s 51 per cent stake is now worth several times more than the 100 per cent it had at the start.
These gains have not come at a cost to the consumer.
According to data from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, the real residential cost per kilowatt hour was 33.58 cents in 2013, compared with 31.47c today.
In addition, the big three – along with their peers in the power game – are investing heavily in the renewable energy field, which can hardly be a bad thing.
The fourth entity in the mixed-ownership model initiative, Air New Zealand, has not had the same unblemished earnings record - Covid has seen to that - but the principle remains sound.
Then there is the benefit of being listed on the NZX, so well-illustrated by Air NZ itself, allowing companies the ability to recapitalise at short notice when the going gets tough.
The big three, while not spectacular, offer the sharemarket a steady bedrock.
Many a KiwiSaver account will have them in their portfolios.
Overall, the market – dominated as it is by Fisher and Paykel Healthcare - would be thinner without them.
The fact they each now have many more shareholders, and that they are publicly listed entities, means they are exposed to the full glare of the investment community.
There are simply more people with more skin in the game involved, which makes these companies more transparent and accountable for the decisions they make.
Dud calls will always be made, but allowing outsiders on to the share register holds these entities closer to the light.
It exposes them to a broader range of critics – those who might question the company’s direction.
Then, of course, there are the pesky analysts who trawl through company accounts, highlighting potential spots of trouble as they go.
A deep and diversified shareholder base also offers some insurance against corporate misadventure.
Would the farmer-owned Fonterra’s ill-advised foray into China have happened if outside investors with skin in the game been involved?
Likewise, would the Auckland Council-owned Ports of Auckland’s ambitious but ill-fated multi-million-dollar container automation project gone ahead if it had a diverse ownership base, not to mention NZX-style discipline?
The mixed-ownership model, as evidenced by the power companies, has been a success. Other large, closed-off organisations should take note.
