Home Blog Page 3

South African M&A Analysis H1 2026

The increased momentum witnessed in the second half of 2025 was stalled in February 2026, with the outbreak of the latest Middle East conflict. Despite repeated efforts to broker a ceasefire, the conflict continues, adding further uncertainty to an already complex global environment. Against this backdrop, South Africa’s economic growth remains stubbornly low, with growth forecast by the IMF at just 1.1% for 2026. Unsurprisingly, corporates and investors, faced with a challenging geopolitical landscape and a difficult domestic operating environment, have adopted a wait-and-see approach.

Interestingly, the majority of the top 15 deals by value in H1 2026 were announced in Q1, with the three largest transactions involving companies with secondary listings in South Africa. Of the aggregate R271,9bn value represented by the top 10 deals, these three transactions accounted for 66% of the total – highlighting once again the extent to which a handful of large transactions can influence the headline numbers.

South Africa’s capital markets, however, have remained resilient. Accelerated bookbuilds by JSE-listed property companies increased in H1 2026, driven by strong institutional demand. Significant capital raises were undertaken by Spear REIT, Fairvest, Vukile Property Fund and Fortress Real Estate, which together raised R6,05bn over the period. Corporates also continued to return capital to shareholders through share repurchases, with a total value of R122,9bn recorded.

So, what can we expect in H2 2026? While advisory firms remain busy and the pipeline appears active, getting transactions across the line will remain challenging. The consequences of the Middle East conflict continue to reverberate across global markets, weighing on growth, disrupting supply chains, putting pressure on energy prices, and fuelling inflation.

Unless there is a meaningful resolution to the conflict and a corresponding improvement in global economic sentiment, it is unlikely that the momentum in deal activity seen in the second half of 2025 will be replicated in 2026. For now, caution remains the prevailing sentiment – and patience may well prove to be the defining characteristic of the M&A market in the months ahead.

DealMakers is SA’s M&A publication.
The latest magazine can be accessed as a free-to-read publication on the DealMakers’ website www.dealmakerssouthafrica.com

Who’s doing what this week in the South African M&A space?

0

NEPI Rockcastle is to acquire MegaPark Barakaldo, an c.81,000m² shopping destination located in Bilbao, Spain from Le Retail Hiper Ondara for a gross purchase consideration of €254 million. The acquisition will be funded from available cash resources and existing undrawn credit facilities.

Jubilee Metals has received two binding offers for the sale of its Zambian Large Waste Project at a substantial premium to its original acquisition price. Jubilee originally acquired the asset for c.US$18 million. To clear the outstanding $5 million (£3,8 million) owed to the original seller, Jubilee will issue 150,5 million new ordinary shares at 2.5 pence per share. The company plans to select a preferred bidder within the next two weeks. Funds received will be use towards accelerating its copper growth strategy in existing, lower-risk operations.

In the release of its interim results to end June 30, 2026, Resilient REIT advised shareholders that it had signed agreements to acquire the remaining 50% of Mams Mall and The Village Klerksdorp for undisclosed sums.

Zazi Capital has acquired the 20.82% stake in UsPlus held by Baleine Capital. The transaction was settled in cash and implies and equity value of c.R166 million for UsPlus. A developmental finance organisation, UsPlus specialises in the provision of flexible working capital solutions for SME partners throughout South Africa.

Local AI business intelligence platform Tennsa, has closed a raise of c.R1 million from Oakvale Invest. Cape-based Tennsa builds AI software aimed at small and medium-sized businesses. Tennsa OS is an operational intelligence layer that connects to the systems a business already runs, monitoring for issues needing attention and providing information to assist owners make faster operating decisions.

Weekly corporate finance activity by SA exchange-listed companies

0

MC Mining has secured further capital support from Kinetic Development Group (KDG). KDG will subscribe for 76,591,672 new shares in the company for an aggregate subscription amount of US$16 million to be subscribed for in two equal tranches at an issue price of $0.2089 per share. The new funding will, in part, be applied towards the business operations and working capital requirements including the continued development and commissioning of the Makhado project.

Brait successfully raised R2,5 billion via a renounceable rights offer to qualifying shareholders. As the offer was fully subscribed (taking into account the excess applications received), the underwriters were not required to subscribe to shares in terms of their commitments.

Novus has acquired an additional 3,495,226 Mustek shares at an average R15.25 per share on the open market (outside of the Mandatory Offer) for c.R53,25 million. The company now holds 29,87 million Mustek shares constituting 51.91% of the issued shares in Mustek. Together with concert parties this shareholding increases to c.72.20%.

Jubilee Metals will issue 150,5 million new ordinary shares at 2.5 pence per share to settle the £3,8 million (c.R82 million) owed on the acquisition by the company of the Large Waste Project in Zambia. The shares represent 4.5% of the enlarged issued share capital of the company.

This week the following companies announced the repurchase of shares:

Reinet Investments has commenced its proposed 7th share buyback programme. The company intends to purchase its ordinary shares at market value for an aggregate maximum amount of €250 million subject to a maximum of 8 million ordinary shares over a period commencing 18 August 2026 and ending on 15 December 2026 at the latest. The shares will not be cancelled.

Investec Ltd announced in November 2025 that it would commence the repurchase and cancellation of some of the non-redeemable, non-cumulative, non-participating preference shares. This week the company announced that over the period 19 March to 5 August 2026, a further 401,798 preference shares were repurchased at an average price per preference share of R96.28 for an aggregate R38,69 million.

In March 2026, Quilter commenced a £100 million share buyback programme, to reduce the share capital of the company and return capital to shareholders. The maximum aggregate purchase price payable by the company under Tranche 2 is up to C.£30 million. During the period 3 to 7 August 2026, Quilter repurchased 75,000 shares on the LSE with an aggregate value of £148,424 and 15,000 shares on the JSE with an aggregate value of R654,860.

In June 2026, Greencoat Renewables announced its intention to commence a second tranche of the repurchase programme to return a further €25 million of capital to shareholders. The second tranche repurchase will be complete by end-December 2026. This week 533,458 shares were repurchased for an aggregate €415,602.

Bytes Technology announced in May 2026 its intention to implement a new share repurchase programme to purchase the company’s shares for an aggregate value of up to £25,0 million. This week the company repurchased 345,000 shares at an average price per share of £3.32 for an aggregate £1,23 million.

British American Tobacco has again extended its share buyback to end on 12 October 2026. All shares repurchased will be cancelled. Over the period 3 to 7 August 2026, the company repurchased a further 710,000 shares at an average price of £44.30 per share for an aggregate £31,45 million.

Ninety One plc announced an increase in the repurchase programme from £30 million to £55 million. The shares, to be purchased on the open market, will be cancelled to reduce the Company’s ordinary share capital. On 3 August 2026, the company repurchased a further 102,335 ordinary shares at an average price 214 pence for an aggregate £219,506.

Anheuser-Busch InBev’s US$6 billion share buy-back programme continues. The shares acquired will be kept as treasury shares to fulfil future share delivery commitments under the group’s stock ownership plans. Over the two days of 6 and 7 August 2026, the group repurchased 196,030 shares for €14,45 million.

During the period 3 to 7 August 2026, Prosus repurchased a further 1,790,596 Prosus shares for an aggregate €74,52 million and Naspers, a further 641,547 Naspers shares for a total consideration of R577,02 million.

Eight companies issued profit warnings this week: Spur, Aveng, MTN, Italtile, Grindrod, Cilo Cybin, Sebata and Truworths International.

Two companies renewed cautionary notices: Trustco and Mantengu.

Who’s doing what in the African M&A and debt financing space?

0

e-Finance for Digital and Financial Investments has acquired Tamweely, a MSME and non-banking financial services provider in Egypt, from a consortium of investors comprising SPE PEF III (SPE Capital), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), Tanmiya Capital Ventures (TCV) and British International Investment (BII).

The International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private sector arm of the World Bank Group, is investing US$25 million in equity in Jumia Technologies AG (Jumia), a pan-African e-commerce platform, with operations across eight African countries.

Fortuna Mining Corp has announced the acquisition of the 190 km² Bambadji advanced gold exploration project in Senegal, through the purchase of certain Senegalese subsidiaries held by Barrick Mining Corporation and IAMGOLD Corporation. The US$200 million consideration was paid in cash and Fortuna has granted the sellers a 0.5% net smelter return royalty on the first 1,75 million ounces of gold produced from the Bambadji Nord property.

African Development Bank Group has approved a US$255 million loan from the African Development Fund and a $10 million grant from the Rome Process/Mattei Plan Financing Facility to support Zambia’s participation in the Lobito Corridor development initiative. The Lobito Corridor spans Southern and Central Africa, linking Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia from the Port of Lobito to the Copperbelt region.

Continental Holdings became the 17th company to list on the Malawi Stock Exchange on 10 August 2026 following the close of its IPO which had a 93% subscription rate. A total of 701,834,576 shares were allotted of the 753,308,604 on offer, raising MWK135,5 billion.

The Great Simplification

Why focus has become the new currency of value creation in consumer packaged goods

If you spend enough time in the boardrooms of consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies, you’ll notice that the conversation has changed.

A decade ago, strategy discussions centred on growth: new markets, broader diversification and bigger portfolios. Today, those same boards are asking different, more fundamental questions: “What should we own?” And more importantly, “What shouldn’t we own?”

This subtle shift reveals a massive transformation in where the global consumer sector is heading.

For decades, massive scale was regarded as the ultimate competitive advantage. Companies assembled sprawling portfolios spanning multiple categories, believing diversification would reduce earnings volatility and strengthen retailer relationships.

Today, investors are increasingly wary of businesses that are too diversified.

What was once celebrated as diversification is now penalised as dilution and unnecessary complexity. Portfolios that span categories with limited strategic overlap leave companies with fragmented equity stories, split management time, and a mosaic of reporting segments that few analysts fully understand.

Perhaps the biggest driver of this change has occurred within shareholder registers.

Institutional investors today have seamless access to virtually every listed market in the world. They can construct their own diversified portfolios across sectors and geographies with ease. If an investor wants exposure to both confectionery and pet food, they can simply buy specialist companies; they no longer need corporate management teams to diversify on their behalf.

The market is not subtle in its preference: it pays for focus, and discounts complexity. Category-leading, focused businesses consistently trade at higher multiples than diversified peers with comparable earnings. Shareholders can diversify their own portfolios, but they cannot outsource good capital allocation. Consequently, the value of a management team is now measured by the quality of their decisions about what to own, what to exit, and where to reinvest.

Viewed collectively, recent global corporate actions point towards a broader macroeconomic shift – The Great Simplification.

Consumer giants are sharpening their focus through a two-pronged approach: exiting non-core brands while doubling down on platforms where they possess a distinct competitive advantage.

  • Kellanova & WK Kellogg: Kellogg’s decision to separate its mature North American cereals from its fast-growing global snacking business proved that distinct operations no longer need to coexist under one corporate structure. This act of simplification unlocked substantial shareholder value, culminating in Mars acquiring Kellanova at a significant premium to deepen its existing global snacking leadership.
  • Unilever & ABF: Driven by sharpening shareholder scrutiny, Unilever recently completed the demerger of its ice cream business and combined its food division with McCormick & Company. This effectively positions Unilever as a pure-play home and personal care (HPC) business. Similarly, Associated British Foods (ABF) announced the demerger of its fashion retailer, Primark, to reposition ABF as a high-quality, pure-play food business.
  • Nestlé & Kraft Heinz: Nestlé has systematically reshaped its portfolio over the last decade, exiting slower-growth brands to direct capital toward high-margin pillars like coffee and pet care. Even Kraft Heinz, created through one of the largest consolidation mergers in consumer history, continues to evaluate portfolio optimisation, proving that scale alone is no longer enough.

Global themes have a habit of finding their way to South African boardrooms, and the local market is beginning the exact same journey.

Tiger Brands provides the clearest local case study.

In recent years, management has systematically restructured its portfolio by disposing of non-core assets. This has allowed the group to focus capital and resources squarely on categories where it holds dominant competitive positions, driving up returns on invested capital. Crucially, this strategy is not about becoming a smaller company; it is about becoming a better, more efficient one.

Similarly, Premier Group’s acquisition of Rhodes Food Group (RFG) highlights the secondary phase of M&A strategy.

While the transaction expands platform scale, it inevitably compels management to re-evaluate the newly merged portfolio. Transformational acquisitions naturally trigger critical questions about which businesses warrant incremental capital allocation and which assets have ultimately become non-core.

If this trend continues, the next decade of consumer M&A will look fundamentally different from the last.

While the previous cycle was characterised by consolidation, the next will be defined by rigorous portfolio optimisation, corporate carve-outs and strategic divestitures.

For corporate advisors and investment bankers, this fundamentally changes the nature of strategic dialogue. Historically, conversations began with a simple question: “What should we buy?” Today, the question gaining real traction in the market is: “What should we sell?” Often, the answer to this second question delivers far greater long-term value to shareholders.

The Great Simplification does not mean downsizing.

It means becoming targeted, intentional and disciplined. For those advising on these vital boardroom decisions, this trend will undoubtedly define the M&A landscape of the coming decade.

Cara Pardini is a Corporate Finance Transactor, Brendan Grundlingh a Sponsor Client Director and Gareth Armstrong a Corporate Finance Executive |RMB

This article first appeared in DealMakers, SA’s quarterly M&A publication.

Ghost Bites (Grindrod | Impala Platinum | Shoprite)

In this edition of Ghost Bites:

  • Grindrod’s HEPS falls flat for the six months to June 2026
  • Brace yourself for a wild move in Impala Platinum’s earnings
  • The market celebrated the latest Shoprite update

Still to come in a later edition of Ghost Bites: Resilient REIT and Weaver Fintech


Grindrod’s HEPS falls flat for the six months to June 2026 (JSE: GND)

And the market doesn’t like it

Grindrod’s trading statement for the interim period ended June tells a story that the market hasn’t appreciated.

The guidance for HEPS is a movement of between -4.2% and +4.3%. At the mid-point, that’s an almost perfectly flat performance. With the share price closing 11.4% lower on the day, it’s clearly not what the market wanted to see from a company that has pulled off quite the turnaround story.

There’s an old saying in the market that bulls take the stairs and bears ride the elevator. It means that share price gains are usually incremental in nature, while declines tend to be sharp. The Grindrod chart is literally a textbook example of this:

Ghost Bite: Detailed results are due for release on 25 August. That’s a chart that is light on support levels at anything close to the current price, so it could be a very choppy couple of weeks.


Brace yourself for a wild move in Impala Platinum’s earnings (JSE: IMP)

Even by PGM standards, this is a monster of a swing

Impala Platinum’s trading statement for the year ended June 2026 reflects an astonishing jump in HEPS. They expect to come in between R24.29 and R26.52 per share. In the comparable period, it was just R0.82 per share. That’s an increase of roughly 31x at the mid-point of the range!

There’s obviously a base effect here, particularly as the group was only marginally profitable in the prior year. But there’s also the impact of a far more favourable PGM market, which in turn drove a 51% improvement in achieved revenue per 6E ounce. Add on a 5% increase in refined and scalable production and you get fireworks.

The 8% increase in group unit costs per ounce was no match for the jump in revenue. This is why much of the benefit from higher pricing and production dropped to the bottom line.

Group EBITDA was R43.6 billion and free cash flow was R22 billion. It’s incredible to compare this to the EBITDA of R919 million and free cash flow of R2.35 billion in the comparable period.

Ghost Bite: This is perhaps the ultimate example of how earnings can swing in this sector.


The market celebrated the latest Shoprite update (JSE: SHP)

The JSE’s best retailer closed more than 8% higher on the day

Shoprite has given the market an operational update for the 52 weeks to 28 June 2026. It’s not a detailed set of audited results yet, but there’s plenty of information here for the market to consider. With HEPS up by between 9.7% and 14.7%, Shoprite is doing extremely well.

The company is so big that they don’t just highlight their percentage growth; they also note the incremental rand value of sales. In order to grow sales from continuing operations by 7.2%, they needed to find an additional R18.1 billion to put through the tills. The sheer scale of this thing is extraordinary.

Speaking of scale, Sixty60’s revenue is now up to R25.5 billion (having just grown by 34.5%). It might actually be time for me to retire from serious company analysis and just post revenue numbers on X, if the response to this post is anything to go by:

Momentum throughout the year was incredibly consistent. They grew sales by 7.2% in the first half and 7.1% in the second half. The one area to highlight is Supermarkets Non-RSA, where growth was 12.1% in the first half and 10.0% in the second half. I’m not sure we can read too much into it, but that’s a slowdown in the African countries where Shoprite operates.

Supermarkets RSA is the biggest segment by a country mile (almost 85% of the group), so we will focus there.

Within that segment, like-for-like sales grew by 2.0% vs. internal selling price inflation of 0.8%, so Supermarkets RSA as a whole achieved volumes growth of roughly 1.2%. Note that selling price inflation is way below official inflation, showing how Shoprite can put pressure on its supplier to keep costs down.

There’s also a mix effect here. As we saw at lower-LSM competitor Boxer (JSE: BOX), there’s actually been food deflation in the Shoprite and Usave banners. As the proportion of staples in the basket increases, the level of deflation gets worse (or better, depending whether you’re thinking about it as the retailer or the consumer). Usave’s deflation was -0.6% vs. -0.1% at Shoprite. On a combined basis, the banners achieved growth of 4.3%, with Shoprite LiquorShop’s 10.6% growth as another notable number.

At the other end of the LSM spectrum, Checkers and Checkers Hyper grew 10.0%. Internal selling price inflation was 2.0% for Checkers and 1.2% for Checkers Hyper, so they’ve achieved significant gains in volumes here. Checkers Liquorshop sales were up by a substantial 14.5%!

Off a very small base, the “adjacent businesses” (like Petshop Science) grew by 57.3%. Just wait until you can buy from UNIQ and Little Me as part of your Sixty60 order. It’s clear to me that the group is building a logistics fulfilment layer that will service all the brands over time.

I also wonder about whether medicine will be part of this one day, with Medirite and Medirite Plus growing sales by 12.3%. Transpharm, the wholesale business, was up 7.8%. Sixty60 scooters carrying your pills, anyone?

It can’t all be good news of course. OK Franchise saw the termination of a franchise agreement covering a whopping 51 stores, so the footprint fell from 615 stores to 573 stores. In that context, it’s actually impressive that sales to OK franchise increased by 0.6%.

In case you’re wondering, the disposal of the South African furniture business to Pepkor (JSE: PPH) remains subject to approval by the Competition Tribunal. If you’re a Pepkor shareholder like me, you’ll hope it goes through. If you’re a Lewis (JSE: LEW) shareholder, you’ll certainly be hoping that it gets blocked!

Ghost Bite: Detailed results are due for release on 1 September. I have a timeslot with Pieter Engelbrecht that day, so let me know what questions you would like me to ask.


Nibbles:

  • Director dealings:
    • A director of Richemont (JSE: CFR) sold shares worth around R42 million. As this is a Swiss company, we don’t know which director it was.
    • The CEO of Salungano Group (JSE: SLG) bought shares in the company worth R2.5 million.
    • With results out in the wild, Des de Beer is back on the bid at Lighthouse Properties (JSE: LTE). He’s bought shares worth R401k.
    • The CEO of Spear REIT (JSE: SEA) bought shares for himself and his family worth around R170k.
  • Vodacom (JSE: VOD) announced that chairman Saki Macozoma will retire from the board at the AGM in July 2027. He would’ve been on the board for 10 years by that stage! The current lead independent director, Khumo Shuenyane, will be appointed as chair. As part of other board changes, Vodacom has also announcement the appointment of ex-Airtel Africa CEO Segun Ogunsanya to the board as an independent non-executive director.
  • Powerfleet (JSE: PWR) has terminated the employment of CFO David Wilson with immediate effect. He’s being replaced with Paul Lalljie. Wilson will receive a payment equal to 26 weeks of his salary, plus a pro-rated bonus. Oddly enough, the company has also entered into a consultancy relationship with the CFO that they just terminated!
  • Sebata Holdings (JSE: SEB) released a trading statement for the year ended March 2026. They expect HEPS to drop by between 94.1% and 95.4%! They attribute this to non-recurring items. I guess shareholders will find out for sure on 14 August.
  • Cilo Cybin (JSE: CCC) also released a trading statement for the year ended March 2026. The numbers look crazy because the group recognised a share-based payment expense of R217 million on the reverse acquisition of CC Pharmaceutical. There’s almost no trade in the stock as well. File this one under “companies that probably regret listing”.

Ghost Stories #111: Global equities with 100% capital protection and geared upside (Japie Lubbe of Investec)

The award-winning Investec Structured Products team brings you the latest iteration of International Titans Basket Ltd. This product offers 100% capital protection and geared upside (with a cap), referencing a basket of underlying global equity indices.

Bringing decades of experience and passion to this discussion, Japie Lubbe walks us through exactly how the structure works.

In this podcast:

00:00 Intro
01:32 60-40 portfolios vs. structured products
04:04 Track record of Investec Structured Products
05:00 Overview of latest product: International Titans Basket Limited
09:30 Index exposure and valuations
11:21 Stats around trying to “time” the market
13:41 100% capital protection
19:00 Backtesting the upside cap and gearing
21:02 The underlying mechanics of the structure
23:50 Credit risk
27:41 Fees and access to product

Watch on YouTube for the full experience

If you choose YouTube for this podcast, you benefit from the accompanying slides in the Investec presentation alongside Japie’s explanations:

You can find all the information you need on the Investec website at this link.

Disclaimer

This podcast is for informational purposes only and does not constitute advice. You must speak to your independent financial advisor before investing in any product, and especially this one. Investec Corporate and Institutional Banking is a division of Investec Bank Ltd, an authorised financial services provider, a registered credit provider, an authorised over the counter derivatives provider and a member of the JSE. Ts and Cs apply to this product and you should refer to the Investec website for full details.

Transcript:

The Finance Ghost: Welcome to this episode of the Ghost Stories podcast. We come to you in August after a crazy month, actually, in the markets. We’ve seen all kinds of stuff going on out there.  

I’m grateful to be able to lean on the experience today (and so much experience it is) of Japie Lubbe. He is the stalwart, really, of the multiple-award-winning Investec Structured Products team.  

Japie, it’s always such a pleasure to do these with you. I really enjoy them. We are, of course, here to talk about one of your new products (as always), which is International Titans Basket Limited

I think what’s going to be particularly interesting in this one (and for our listeners on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, don’t worry – it’s okay if you can’t see the slides), but if you’re watching this on my new YouTube channel, then we’ll be able to put up some of the slides from the presentation and that will just help with your understanding of this.  

 So, if you have access to YouTube, you may want to switch to that. But don’t worry, you can also carry on because Japie will take us through everything without you needing to have the slides.  

 Japie, welcome. Lovely to do another one of these with you and thank you for your time. 

Japie Lubbe: Thank you! 

The Finance Ghost: Let’s jump into a conversation about conventional wisdom. You’ve been around in the markets for long enough to know that conventional wisdom can change over time, and there’s been plenty of debate around that 60/40 split equities and bonds.  

And it’s quite interesting because in the presentation for this particular product, you actually put a bit of effort into talking about this, to just set the scene in terms of how markets have actually behaved, whether this really still holds.  

So, particularly with you on the podcast and with how many years you’ve been doing this for, Japie, I’d love to get some insight from you, first and foremost, on whether that conventional wisdom still holds and why that’s relevant to the structured products that you release into the market. 

Japie Lubbe: Thank you. What we’ve done is we’ve had a look at market returns for different asset classes for the last 26 years. And in that period – this is now comparing the MSCI World (in dollars) in total return to bonds and cash and inflation. Very importantly, the 26-year average for equities, total return, was 7.1% per annum (p.a.). And the total return for bonds was 2.9% p.a., money market was 2.2% p.a. and inflation was 2.6% p.a. 

What this means is that any portfolio that has 60% equities and 40% money market or bonds is going to have quite a difficulty outperforming inflation, because inflation has been higher – for a 26-year average – than money market, and has only been 0.3% below what bonds returned.  

Now, I think that conventional wisdom probably worked very well in the years where interest rates were coming down, down, down all over the world. But of late, especially the period of 2021 to now, in the US, rates have kicked up a lot. 

What that means is that the investors have taken a big haircut in their bond valuations and the equities have done well, but together, balanced funds have had very mediocre returns, if anywhere reasonable. 

So our philosophy is that it’s probably better for the investor to allocate to equities, because they tend to have the stellar performance and ability to pass inflation through to the investor. 

But some of the equities have it in a hedged way, like we’re going to be talking about today. Because then, if the equities have a very bad period, you just avoid the very bad period.  

But in essence, over time, you’ve got more allocation to equities being the best asset class by some margin. 

The Finance Ghost: Yeah, it’s certainly very interesting. I’m going to just touch on the track record here of the team: 23 years, 136 public products, 104 of which have matured. 100 have delivered positive returns, and the other four have returned capital to investors. Losses: none!  

Japie, what a career. Well done. That is really, really impressive. Obviously that’s no losses on matured products, just to be clear, but still, a really good track record there.  

And obviously all the caveats apply here about past performance and future performance and all the normal stuff, but I think it’s worth just mentioning that track record because that talks to what you’re saying at the moment, which is, well, consider equities in a structured way, as an alternative to the very traditional thinking around equities and bonds and everything else.  

So, with that kind of track record behind you and people certainly paying attention to this, maybe give us just a broad overview of this new product, which is International Titans Basket Limited. I’ll give the floor to you to just walk us through what this thing is and what it does. 

Japie Lubbe: Yeah, sure. So, this is now the fourth roll of this company. There’s a Guernsey company that’s listed in Bermuda, and the company’s term is five years. After five years, the investors decide whether they’re going to keep or sell their shares.  

They do also have liquidity, which is because Investec makes a market in the shares during the five-year period. But this is now the fourth of these five-year periods. 

For this one, the assets are going to be denominated in US dollars. It’s a five-year-and-one-month period, and the exposure – which is the engine to the vehicle – is an allocation of 35% S&P, 25% to the Euro Stoxx 50, 20% to the Nikkei 225, and 10% each to the FTSE 100 in the UK and emerging markets. That combination is 93% the same thing as the MSCI All-Country World Index. That’s the underlying market exposure.  

The share comes with 100% capital protection if kept to maturity and on the basis that the banks pay, as you said have done in the last hundred that matured, there’s never been a bank or counterparty that’s not met their obligation.  

And then the return will be whatever that portfolio of indices in those percentages do – with a gearing of 125%, or we refer to as a participation of 125% up to a cap of 40%.  

So, keeping it simple, if the market does 20%, you get 20x 1.25. If the market does 40%, you get 40x 1.25, which would be 50%. And 50%, to put into perspective, equates to 8.3% p.a., as far as an internal rate of return – and that’s after all fees, costs and expenses.  

And because that is achievable with no capital at risk, the first thing an investor should consider is how much is it worth to have equity exposure but with no capital at risk?  

Well, that is simply like you take out insurance on your car or your medical aid. It’s called a put option. It’s the premium you pay to protect an asset. And in this context, for five years, world exposure to equities would cost you 12%. 

These investors don’t need to incur that 12%, because you would appreciate if you had $100 and you had to pay away $12 to protect the $100, this means you’d only get 88% of the total return (like on an ETF, say). And dividend yields, with the markets being so hard down, they’re probably at 1.7%, 1.8%. So, five years of dividends couldn’t buy a protection on $100. It’s not sufficient. 

So, the minimums here are $14,000. And this offering then is open until the 16th of October, then it closes. 

The Finance Ghost: Very, very interesting. I know for sure that 100% capital protection is music to the ears of any investment audience, that’s for sure. And I just want to confirm there – that up to 8.3% p.a., that’s in US dollars.  

Japie Lubbe: Yes. 

The Finance Ghost: So, that needs to be thought of as a hard currency return, right? When you hear a percentage like that, you shouldn’t immediately think, “Oh, rand, what can I get at the bank?” You need to think, “US dollars.” Right? I just want to confirm that. 

Japie Lubbe: Absolutely. And I think, to your point, what we’re seeing in the performance of the markets is that the MSCI World Total Return has done that 7.1% average for the 26 years. But the last period from September ’22 to now, it’s done 22.5% per year. 

So, you’ve got to say to yourself, “If something performed for 26 years at 7.1% p.a. total return, but just the last three-and-a-half years, it’s done 22.5% p.a., that should be ample proof that it’s time to be cautious.”  

And the caution should come from the fact that, firstly, the portfolios that have done very well – that’s fantastic. We’re very pleased about that.  

But if I’m allocating money to the market now, or if I’m thinking, “How do I capitalise on where the market is?” – it might not be a bad idea to cash in some of the very highly valued shares, but keep the shares if they carry on doing well.  

But in this case, you’re choosing the indices. Because, as we know, the indices from a passive perspective still pick up the shares that are doing very well. They dominate the index, and the ones that aren’t doing well fall out of the index.  

But if the entire market corrects massively, like in 2008/2009, then you just get your 100 back in dollars. So, that’s very valuable in the context of a portfolio. 

The Finance Ghost: Yeah, absolutely. It all comes down to risk/reward, right? I mean, that’s what investing is, and that’s certainly the way that these structured products are designed. So, let’s dig a little bit deeper into that equity exposure.  

You’ve mentioned five indices there, and you’ve also mentioned the correlation to the MSCI All Country World Index (or the ACWI as I’ve heard it referred to). 

Japie Lubbe: Yes. 

The Finance Ghost: Now, those who might be worried about equities at the moment, and I think you’ve given us a good reason, there, to be worried, which is the incredible run they’ve had for the past few years versus long-term average. They do seem expensive, relative to historical averages.  

I know that your presentation does go into some detail around average P/E ratio versus historical levels – again, if you’re on YouTube, you’re going to see some cool charts now. If you’re listening, just concentrate, because Japie will take you through it in a way where it’ll still make sense.  

So, Japie, maybe just walk us through your view on, firstly, the concept of timing the market (biggest debate ever) and why that can be dangerous, because you can miss some key trading days, and also just some thoughts around the valuation levels at the moment and how you think about this world when you’re putting these products together and how you think investors should consider it. 

Japie Lubbe: Yeah. So, firstly, coming to the valuations, at the moment, the MSCI World Total Return is trading at 23.5x. 

So, 23-and-a-half years of earnings are required to qualify for the current value of that share. The long-term average is 18.9x. In statistical terms, this means it’s trading at around one to two standard deviations above the long-term average. 

Obviously, an average is something that has been determined after mean reversion. After markets are over-expensive, they come back to the average. And if they’re too cheap one day, then they appreciate and they come back to the average. So, it is important to recognise that equity, as an asset class, has given 4.5% to 5.5% real return over the long term.  

If your entry date is now and this thing is at the high end of the valuation, you just have to be mindful about the downside risk of that, or the risk that it actually just goes sideways. 

Now, people may feel that, if it’s expensive, why don’t I just wait and then buy when it’s cheap? This is your point about trying to time the market.  

We’ve done some research on that and, interestingly, if an investor was invested for the last 20 years every day and got the total return, like an ETF, and they didn’t have costs (in other words, they weren’t managing the money in any way, they were just buying the passive), a 20-year exposure invested every day would have given them an 8% p.a. dollar return. 

But if they missed the best 10 days because they were trying to time it, and they so happened to not be in on the best 10 of the 20 years, that comes down to 4.7% from 8%. And if you miss the best 20 days, it comes to 2.5% from 8%. And if you miss the best 30 days, it comes to 0.8%.  

So effectively, it’s extremely hard to time the market. That’s why that old saying goes, “It’s time in the market, it’s not trying to time the market,” because it’s very difficult for professional investors – anybody – to actually get that consistently right.  

Another way to look at it is if you were to have put $100 into the market for the last 21 years once p.a. (if you put it into the money market, just kept it at the bank in the dollar money market), the $2,100 capital would have grown to $2,566.  

But if you put it into the MSCI World All-Country like we’re talking about here, total return, and you picked the worst day every time for 21 years, you still would have gone to $5,723. If you were lucky enough to pick the best day, you would have gone to $7,714.  

The point here is not to know when to pick the best or the worst, because you wouldn’t have known. But rather the gap between the $2,560 that the money-market-type yields would have given you, versus more than double and even treble that in equity exposure. 

The Finance Ghost: Yeah, it’s fascinating, right? There’s a real message of hope there for all investors. Obviously the very important point here is that this is money put in every single year into the market.  

So, dollar cost averaging is doing some wonders for you in this particular case, as opposed to taking your life savings and YOLOing them into memory stocks a couple of months ago. Probably not the kind of thing you want to be doing, but hopefully listeners to this podcast are not behaving like that – and if they are, they should be speaking to a financial advisor urgently for reasons beyond just this product. 

Japie, the good news here, though, is that even if things go really badly (and I’ll just refer back to the track record here where that’s only happened, what was it – I think four times out of 104?), you’ve merely returned capital. But it can happen, and there’s absolutely a chance. That’s where the 100% capital protection makes a lot of sense. 

I know that this is something that investors really do like, so perhaps you can just walk us through the example that you give in the slide pack around the impact it actually has when you’ve got that capital protection at maturity, and just how much better off you are than someone who doesn’t necessarily benefit from that. 

Japie Lubbe: Absolutely. Because most people are saving, let’s say for when they’re old one day or for their children or their grandchildren, for a legacy. So, you’ve got to think long-term when you’re investing your money – especially in equities, because equities you’ve got to give time, firstly, that’s why we like five years (unless you’re a day trader, but that’s not what this discussion is about).  

Now we’ve got this example where this is actually one of those four where we returned the capital. The specific company was called the Euro Asian. It was done, you know, 17 years ago, and effectively, it had two underlying indices: 50/50, half the Euro Stoxx 50 and half the Nikkei 225, okay? Half each.  

If you calibrated those two indices to the year 2000 and you started at 100, by the time 2002 came and you’d been through the dot-com bust, it would have been down to 50 (the 100). It then went back up to 100 when we started our company, which was a five-and-a-half year tenure and our investors went in at 100. Five-and-a-half years later those two indices were at 56. From 100 they’d gone back down to 56.  

Our investors, because they had 100% capital protection, got out their 100, so they didn’t lose the 44.  

And you see what happens in maths is we think of it as a 44 loss. What you should think of is the 44 on 56, where it is now, means it’s got to go up 85 to get back to where you were. Okay? You must look at the maths from where you are to where you needed to get back to where you’d originally been.  

Now if the investors stayed with those two indices, which were then worth 56, they would have potentially been quite happy, because it has grown back to 252. We know how the Nikkei and the Euro Stoxx have gone up. Your traditional investor would have been quite happy thinking, “My 56 has grown back to 252, like in a unit trust or an ETF.”  

Now what we demonstrate here to our actual investors (this is not a theory) is that by staying 50/50, they’re now at 468 versus 252 – same underlying indices, no change in the underlying indices, but just starting the date at 100 and not at 56. 

So, this is actually really important because what it means in a portfolio when you’ve got different assets – we would never recommend what we’re talking about today for all the money, maybe 20%, 25% of clients’ money – but that portion has a huge advantage if there is ever a big correction.  

And if you look at the 200-year track record of equities, you’ll see it’s just, “When does it come?” Assets tend to overextend themselves and get to too high a valuation and then, you know, there’s a mark of time why they come down or stay sideways.  

So, this is the value of the 100% protection. It’s the fact that downstream, the investor at the maturity, if it was bad, is getting into the market at the spot level of the market in future, but with 100 in their hand and the market’s price at 56.  

Ordinarily, your problem is your statement tells you you’re worth 56. And you can’t say, “I wish I wasn’t invested.” You are. And, unfortunately, you now have to wait until, one day, you get back to where you’d been or make money – and you can never catch up.  

It’s the same concept as why people on this podcast, I’m sure, all take out medical aid, life insurance, car insurance, household insurance. If you do not take out medical aid, and you might be young and fit and strong, but if you get very badly ill and you don’t have medical aid, you can never recover in life.  

Same as your car. You drive your car, you don’t have insurance, you drive into a Ferrari and you’re going to pay. You’ve to sell your assets, you’ve got to sell your house, to pay. The guy’s got insurance, he just phones Santam or OUTsurance, whoever, and says, “You guys pay for this car.”  

And now in investments, it’s also important to have a portion of your investments protected, in case (Heaven forbid), bad times come. 

The Finance Ghost: Yeah, I love that. It’s a bit like you’re getting ready to run a 100-meter race, you know? And if you’ve got the capital protection, you’re on the starting blocks, you’re ready to go again. And if you didn’t have the capital protection, you’re still tying your shoelaces when the gun goes off and you can work out for yourself who’s going to finish that race a lot better.  

So, it is a very powerful concept. And again, it’s managing the downside risk. You’ve got to give up some of the upside potentially. There’s no way of knowing for sure what the markets will do over the next few years. You might not be giving up anything – in fact, you might be better off because of the gearing – but there is a cap on the upside, and that’s the important thing that you might be giving away in order to get the 100% downside protection, right? 

Like everything in life, it’s a bit of yin and yang. You’ve got to give away and get some stuff on the other side. So, let’s talk about that, because that’s the participation of 125% with the index basket growth capped at 40%. In other words, you can get up to 50% total. 

And, as you gave us earlier over the period that works out to a compound annual growth rate of just over 8%. And you’ve obviously backtested this. So, I think (again, a really interesting chart for those listening on YouTube – there’s the payoff simulation in the presentation by Investec, and maybe we’ll put that up for this discussion), Japie, perhaps you can just walk us through the way you think about these payoffs and how you actually backtest this? 

Japie Lubbe: So, firstly we did a backtest on if you had had such a share that paid off between 0 and 50 in the past compared to having had these indices at those weightings on a five-year rolling return. Because in the case of this simulated share, you didn’t take losses – and losses happened (this is from 1988 to now) 22% of the time – because you had the geared upside up to 50% and no losses, you would have actually outperformed the physical exposure 54% of the time.  

That means that at world-level (so we’re not talking single shares here, we’re talking at world equity as an asset class), the cap we put at 40% is because we look at the history, even the most recent 26 years, 7.1% p.a. total return for five years compounds to 40%.  

That’s why we’re comfortable to say put a cap at 40% because if you’ve just had three-and-a-half years at 22.5%, the likelihood of it outperforming the average is probably quite limited. There’s more likelihood that you actually have a correction, or that it goes sideways.  

But I think another important thing just to add here for the listeners is, in this structure (which you don’t get in normal shares, ETFs and unit trusts), after five years, if it’s been positive, like we’ve got an example of one of our other shares in the pack where after five years you lock in the performance. In other words, if it’s been positive, your $100 now goes to $150 and that becomes the capital protection for the next five years.  

But simply because the investor owns a share in a company, they haven’t sold their shares and you only pay tax one day when you sell the shares in the company. And at that time you only pay tax on the profit in the foreign currency. These are all foreign shares. They’re not rand-denominated shares. That’s important.  

So, if we go to the actual makeup of, “How does such a share work?” – in other words, so that the listeners can understand, “How is it that Investec is going to offer them this thing?” – we have an example whereby on day one of the new phase, we’ll have $100. So, $100 will be the total capital, and we take $74 of that and we’re going to give that to Investec on a dollar-denominated credit link note. We’ll talk about that a bit more in due course. 

That $74 will grow to $75, $76 and mature in five years’ time at $100. This is inside this Guernsey company. And that’s just a formula according to a contract we signed with Investec, that’s what protects the capital. So, that’s got nothing to do with shares. It’s a bond, okay? It’s a fixed income instrument inside the company.  

Then we put aside, for five years of fees costs, expenses, auditors, lawyers – all the costs for the five years – that’s $7 and that amortises down to $6, $5, $4, $3, $2, $1, $0. 

So, at the end of five years, that money has been paid out, but as part of the $100; included in the $100. That means, on day one, you’ve got $19 left over. 

What we do is we go to the banks and we say, “What would a call option cost?” A call option is an asset that gives you, one-for-one, whatever the market’s doing, unlimited, okay? One-for-one. So, if the market does $10, they pay you out $10. And the premium you’ve got to pay on that now is $20. 

Because we’ve only got $19, what we do is we say to the bank, the counterparty bank (and we’ve got eight of them competing for the trade), “What would you pay us? What would you rebate us, if we sold your call option at $140, at a level of $140?”  

They say, “Okay, well then we’ll rebate you $4.8 for that because you stop participating if it goes above 40%.” Hence the $20 less the $4.8 is $15.2. And you simply take the $19 you have available and you divide it by $15.2. That’s how you get the 1.25 or the 125% gearing. 

So, in five years’ time, if the stock exchange has gone down $40, the options are worthless. They’re call options. They only pay if they go up and the fees and costs have been amortised. But the $74 still grew to $100. So, that’s how you then have the $100 to reimburse the investor.  

And as I said, then the stock exchange is now priced at $60. Very good time to come into it. 

If the market’s gone up, whatever it’s gone up by, you take that percentage and you times it by 1.25 until you hit 40%. And at 40% you then made the $50. 

So, it’s very simple, you know – obviously from where we’re sitting. But for a normal investor, if you said to me, “Can I do this myself?” It’s very, very difficult, because you can’t buy the same assets at the same pricing because this transaction is probably going to go out at $150 or $200 million. They’re a very big company. 

So, that’s how we actually construct the company to give the payoff we’re saying to the investor. 

Maybe the most important thing to consider here is: whose obligation is it to pay? In other words, “Who am I reliant on here, as an investor?” We refer to that as the credit risk, the risk on the options.  

In other words, the guys who sell us the call option structure can only be a bank with an S&P A or better rating. So, you’re talking JP Morgan, UBS, the biggest banks – and we get eight to ten of them to compete for the transaction, because our Guernsey company can place the assets with any one of them; we haven’t pre-selected. 

On the debt, that’s $74, which grows to $100. What we do is we’re going to buy that from Investec. So, senior debt of Investec, and we agree with Investec that they can take one fifth each. So, five names of international banks that are investment grade i.e. much higher rated than SA government debt), and one fifth each to the tier 2 debt, the debt that’s subordinate to the depositor. 

Now, the question arises, “How do I, as a man in the street or a lay person, how do I know? What must I look at before I put my money with any bank in the world? What are the things that I must rely on to make sure that I’m going to be fine?”  

Obviously, Investec is doing this for the investors. We’ve got the track record, as you’ve said, but essentially, the banks we can use (because we haven’t pre-selected, again – we want to use the best on the day) are Commerzbank, Deutsche Bank, Barclays, UBS, ING, Royal Bank of Canada, Lloyds, NatWest. These are massive, systemic banks of those countries.  

And the three things you look at are, firstly, the dividend yield, the ordinary share dividend yield. And if you look at the material, you’ll see that these banks have all been paying ordinary dividends for the last 10 years. 

Now, under the strict regulation that exists in the world, banks can’t pay dividends if they’ve got any question about their capital or their solvency or their liquidity or stress testing, you know – anything that the reserve bank checks, they check it quarterly.  

So, banks are highly regulated. They’ve got to provide all the numbers. And if there are any questions about any aspect, firstly the regulator says, “Get your shareholders, put more capital in.” And also, they don’t enable them to pay ordinary dividends. So, that’s the first thing.  

The second thing where an investor can see how solid a bank is, is what we refer to as the ‘credit spreads’. The credit spread is the amount of interest rate that you pay above the curve to get money from the market.  

And as we speak, credit spreads in the world (these banks, inclusive) are at, like, 26-year lows. So, banks have viewed the best that they’ve been in the market by capital markets, hedge funds, etcetera, because of this very strict set of rules, and regulation, and control, which happened after the GFC (Global Financial Crisis).  

There were problems (you remember Lehman Brothers). Consequently, they’ve tightened the noose and they’re really, really strict on them.  

And the last thing is the share prices – what has happened to the prices of the actual ordinary shares. We’ve just done an input which shows that if you started at 100 five years ago, all the banks we could potentially take exposure to here are at 200-plus starting at 100. So, they all doubled in price.  

Really, all that’s saying to us is that, with quite big moves in interest rates, up, down, as you know, the banks are sitting very solid, because banks are recognising that they’re highly regulated. The reserve banks push them to make sure that they look after their affairs very well.  

But, as you said, we don’t know what the future holds. But what we do know is, as Investec, doing this job, we’ve done this for 25 years. We obviously want to maintain our record – and we invest our own monies in these – so we’ll do our best to ensure that this is as solid as possible. 

And also, the investors have liquidity. So, let’s say I buy the shares and, one day, I don’t like one of the banks that was included. I sell my shares; I’m not compelled to hold the shares for the full five years. 

The Finance Ghost: Japie, thanks. Always good to understand the way you actually think through all of this; how you think about these banks, who the counterparties are, and everything else. We learn so much from doing these podcasts with you.  

And obviously, from an investor and potential investor perspective, people want to know about fees. That’s always a big talking point. So, let’s deal with that quickly and then I’m going to ask you to, straight after that, just deal with how people actually go about investing – what are the minimums; who do they contact? 

So, fees and access, and then we can bring this one to a close. Thank you. 

Japie Lubbe: Yeah, thanks. So, as we showed, we put aside (upfront on day one), roughly 7% for five years of fees and costs and expenses. Now, what the investors appreciate is they’re getting 100% capital protection from the Investec bond, but they don’t have to buy – like you have to buy yourself car insurance, medical aid – and pay a premium.  

If you had to do that yourself, it would cost you 12%. If you, today, phoned a bank and said, “I want to protect my $100 on the MSCI World for five years,” – this is not a problem, send me a cheque of $12. We only need $7. 

So, firstly, it’s a whole lot less than the vanilla alternative in the market, which is to buy your own insurance. 

Secondly, how that $7 works is we have distributors – people who sell this and give advice to the investors as to how much to put in; all the normal advice – they earn 0.6% p.a. We, as Investec Capital Markets (who structure it), and/or the promoters, we earn 0.6%.  

And then, we have the administrators. They offer the directors for the company and do all the share administration (because the company is highly regulated – it’s regulated under the Guernsey Financial Services Commission; it’s regulated in Bermuda as a listed share with Grant Thornton as the auditors; it’s regulated in South Africa under the Companies Act and registered prospectuses – all of that’s highly regulated). The important thing is they earn 0.11% p.a. 

And then there’s a once-off charge for the auditors and the lawyers, and that’s about 0.5%. But all told, together, it’s roughly $7.  

As I said, investors aren’t baulking at that because the alternative is to pay $12, and here you’re only paying $7. It’s built into the $100 that you gave. 

So, importantly, if markets are bad (let’s say they go down 40%), you don’t have a 40% market loss plus five years of fees. You get your $100 back, which means that the $7 was already provided for. That’s very beneficial, from a cost perspective. 

Also, if you think about it, you could buy unit trusts. Most international share unit trusts, equity unit trusts, probably cost you 1.7% to 2%, depending which one you take, but there’s no protection.  

In other words, if it goes down 40%, you’re going to be down 40%, roughly – maybe 38% or maybe 42%, but roughly 40%. So, there’s a big distinction. That’s the protective aspect.  

One other thing I’d just like to mention is that we started the conversation by saying we’ve done this for a long time. We gave the long-term track record of our team. This particular type of company, we’ve done. This is the 30th one.  

We’ve had 24 of these that have matured. Of the 24, we gave a profit. We beat the underlying index. 23 of the 24 – that’s 96%. 

We had a look on Morningstar (which is the information base that you can check all the unit trusts in the world) and the unit trusts trying to beat MSCI World – which is the biggest universe – over five years, 30% could beat it. Over 10 years, 33%. 

Then we had a look. Why is it that we beat these indices over that period by so much? And 30% of our outperformance came from not losing money. Not losing money is actually very, very valuable if you look at the composite impact of that on your total. 

Lastly, we outperformed those indices by an average of 2.49% p.a. in hard currency for five years across 24 companies, and the dividend yields on those markets was 2.38%. 

In summary, this way of managing money… you’re taking the risk on the banks, because of the credit risk, as we discussed, but the consequence has been that we’ve beaten the total return (now, the total return is the market plus the dividends), and we’ve applied no fees to the total return. We said, “Let’s say you get it for free – you can’t get it cheaper.” 

At this point, beating those markets, compared to the unit trust industry (again, it’s not unit trust A or B, it’s just the market), we found that 9.2% of unit trust managers could beat the total return, over 10 years. And this product range, over 23 years, has beaten it. 

And as I said, a big part of that is the construct. It’s the way it’s put together, and it’s the fact that the investors are happy to take on Investec risk or JP Morgan or the banks that promise to pay. Because those banks – being so highly regulated – it’s very hard for them not to pay, but it could happen that they don’t. Then you’d need a recovery rate on your debt. 

Your applications here have to be for at least $14,000. What we would recommend, if anybody’s interested, is that you just contact us.  

We’ll discuss with the investor or potential investor, whether they have an advisor (because we have many, many advisors that have got licences with us to market and sell the product), or whether they use an online platform, (like DMA), or they’re clients of Investec. Depending on the circumstance, we’ll put them onto the easiest route. 

Also, if they need advice, the important thing is: we’re not giving advice here. This is just a product which says what the product does.  

But the customer may feel, “I’m not sure how much would be appropriate for me or whether this would in any way be appropriate.” Then we could put them onto an advisor. That would be the easiest way to assist. 

It closes on the 16th of October, so there’s plenty of time. But what we’ve seen with all these things is there’s administration – you sometimes have to apply to get your money offshore. It’s a foreign share; it’s not a local rand share – and, consequently, following that up in good time is good advice. 

The Finance Ghost: Japie, thank you. Always such an absolute pleasure. I think this gives everyone a huge amount of information to work through. And if you’re interested, please do follow the advice there – contact the team or speak to your financial advisor. There are multiple ways to get into this. 

Japie, good luck with this raise. I’m sure it’ll be a success, as it always is. Your track record speaks for itself. Thank you for coming back to the Ghost Mail audience.  

I’m particularly stoked to be able to put one on YouTube for the first time with these supporting slides, so that listeners can actually go and check out the presentation as you would be delivering it to any of your big clients. I love the fact that we have this kind of access now in Ghost Mail.  

Thank you, Japie, for your time today, and all the best with this. 

Japie Lubbe: Thank you. 

This podcast is for informational purposes only and does not constitute advice. You must speak to your independent financial advisor before investing in any product, and especially this one. Investec Corporate and Institutional Banking is a division of Investec Bank Ltd, an authorised financial services provider, a registered credit provider, an authorised over the counter derivatives provider and a member of the JSE. Ts and Cs apply to this product and you should refer to the Investec website for full details.

Ghost Bites (AECI | Jubilee Metals | Lighthouse Properties | Merafe | Northam Platinum | Powerfleet | Sabvest)

In this edition of Ghost Bites:

  • The market didn’t like the AECI results
  • Jubilee Metals looks set to sell its Large Waste Project
  • Lighthouse shines in a great interim period
  • Merafe can thank chrome ore for saving the day
  • Records tumble at Northam Platinum
  • Powerfleet is still loss-making
  • Sabvest announces a bolt-on deal at ITL

The market didn’t like the AECI results (JSE: AFE)

Was it the free cash outflow that spooked investors?

AECI has reported results for the six months to June 2026. It wasn’t an easy time, with revenue from continuing operations down by 4%. Despite this, profit from continuing operations jumped by 20%!

By the time you reach the bottom of the income statement, you find HEPS growth of 8%. The interim dividend was even better, up by 16%.

The confidence to increase the dividend payout ratio was no doubt boosted by the decrease in net debt of roughly 40%. In absolute terms, net debt decreased by R1.2 billion, partially due to proceeds received from divestments.

And just to add to the confusing shape of this result, free cash moved from an inflow of R251 million in the prior period to an outflow of R952 million in this period. This was driven by a 19% increase in capital expenditure to R417 million, as well as as almost R600 million tied up in incremental working capital.

So, what actually happened here?

Looking at the segmentals, AECI Mining had an improved operational performance, with both revenue and EBITDA up by 6%. EBITDA margin held steady at 15%, driven by product mix and cost management. Both Asia Pacific and Southern Africa have been noted as highlights.

The AECI Chemicals business is hard to compare to the previous year due to disposals. If we just focus on this year, then the business could only manage an EBITDA margin of 7% – in line with the previous year. But below the EBITDA line, we find an impairment of R320 million due to the ongoing losses at Schirm.

AECI actually splits this segment in two, with “Chemicals Core” growing EBITDA by 14%, while “Schirm and other” fell by 70%. You can immediately spot the problem.

AECI Chemicals also ate up the free cash flow, with an outflow of R537 million for the period vs. a R661 million inflow in the comparable period. They attribute this to “strategic investment in working capital”.

The company expects improved free cash flow in the second half of the year. After the share price fell by nearly 10% in response to these numbers (and then dipped again the next day), management will need to tell a better cash flow story to get the share price back on track.

Ghost Bite: AECI has been fighting a tough battle for the past few years. Schirm is currently the major headache, serving as a good reminder that offshore isn’t always better.


Jubilee Metals looks set to sell its Large Waste Project (JSE: JBL)

This will free up capital for investment in other copper assets in Zambia

Jubilee Metals has announced the receipt of two binding offers for its Large Waste Project – and at a “substantial premium” to what they originally paid for it. They haven’t owned it for very long, as Jubilee still owes the final $5 million to the original seller of the asset!

This disposal would free up capital that Jubilee can then apply to its other projects in Zambia. One such example is the on-site copper processing facility at the expanded Molefe Mine operations. The original seller has thankfully agreed to be paid the $5 million in Jubilee shares, so that improves the situation even further in terms of Jubilee keeping cash available for other projects.

Together with the remaining proceeds of the exit of South African assets, Jubilee has indicated a war chest of nearly $100 million to play with. Be careful of the cash flow timing though – the disposal of the Large Waste Project would be structured as a deal with instalments of up to 3 years. It’s extremely rare to get paid everything up-front in these deals. In fact, that’s exactly why Jubilee still owes $5 million to the original seller of the asset!

To get the disposal of this asset across the line, Jubilee must now choose which of the two potential partners to dance with. The goal is to move quickly here, with definitive transaction agreements set to be concluded within the next two weeks.

Ghost Bite: Stretching a balance sheet and trying to take on too many projects isn’t a smart approach. I far prefer seeing sensible decisions like these.


Lighthouse shines in a great interim period (JSE: LTE)

This is a perfect example of why I invest in property stocks and ETFs on the JSE

Lighthouse Properties released results for the six months to June 2026. This property fund is focused on Western Europe – specifically Spain, Portugal and France. It’s a strategy that has been working beautifully, evidenced by growth that is well ahead of inflation in all three markets.

The group has achieved growth in distributable earnings per share of 9.7%. When the underlying exposure is hard currency markets, that’s really impressive.

The direct property portfolio grew net property income by 4.5% on a like-for-like basis. Despite the ongoing adoption of online shopping, footfall increased by 3.0%.

France led the way with 6.6% like-for-like growth, followed by Spain at 5.8% and Portugal at only 1.7%. Around 28.1% of the direct portfolio is found in Portugal (measured by fair value), so it would be good to see that number increase. It’s unfortunate that France is only 12.8% of the portfolio, as that has been the star performer.

The loan-to-value ratio sits at a health 35.9%, similar to 36% a year ago.

The full year guidance has been revised upwards to growth in distributable income per share of between 6.9% and 8.7%. It might be even better than that if they can keep up the performance seen in the first half!

Ghost Bite: This is one of many excellent property funds on the JSE.


Merafe can thank chrome ore for saving the day (JSE: MRF)

There’s more to this business than just the smelters

Merafe has added its name to the long list of company releasing results for the six months to June 2026. Despite the ferrochrome smelter sector being in disarray (with a 75% drop in ferrochrome production), Merafe still managed to somehow grow profit from R233 million to R512 million!

The heavy lifting was done by chrome ore sales volumes (up 75%), accompanied by better commodity prices. This drove a 36% increase in revenue and a 60% jump in EBITDA. HEPS was up by 64% to 20.7 cents.

Perhaps most importantly, cash from operating activities swung wildly from an outflow of R175 million to an inflow of R976 million. This would’ve given the board the confidence required to increase the interim dividend from 4 cents per share to 16 cents per share!

Of course, the outlook for the rest of the year is much better, as the special tariffs from Eskom have changed the game for the smelters. They do note the risks of market oversupply and cheap imports, but at least the smelters actually have a chance.

Ghost Bite: Those who took a risk on Merafe have been richly rewarded this year, with the share price up 35% year-to-date. Will the lifeline from Eskom be enough for the smelters in the second half of the year?


Records tumble at Northam Platinum (JSE: NPH)

They are looking to ramp up production in the coming years

Northam Platinum released a trading statement for the year ended June 2026. It’s incredibly detailed, so this is far more than just a standard trading statement.

Total equivalent refined PGM produced from own operations increased by 4.4% to a record level. Chrome concentrate also achieved a new record, up 17.4%. You’ll find the word “record” in a bunch of other places as well, all adding up to a wonderful 64.1% increase in sales revenue.

The biggest driver of this increase was a 57.4% jumped in the rand 4E basket price, along with an 8.0% improvement in total sales.

With unit cash costs per ounce only up by 6.4%, it was a bonanza by the time we reach operating profit. A 293.8% increase is a reminder of how lucrative things can be when mining goes well.

Here comes that word again: record HEPS of between R30.06 and R30.82. Compared to ~R3.81 in the prior period, that’s an incredible jump.

Notably, the board has changed the dividend policy as well. It used to be a minimum of 25% of headline earnings. In practice, the company has been paying around 42% of headline earnings out as a dividend, so they’ve now raised the policy to a minimum of 40%. It probably won’t have much of a practical effect, but it does set a new floor.

I’m quite sure that this change in policy is also designed to give investors comfort around “Vision 2031” – Northam’s plan to invest in existing operations to increase production. Alongside the push for production from owned mines, they also expect to double metal purchases from third parties over the next five years. The market will want to see a balance between capex and dividends, hence the new policy.

Northam goes so far as to describe this capex plan as “bullet-proofing” the business. It tells you how much things have improved in this sector that management teams are even willing to say something like that.

As part of supporting that plan, Northam also announced an increase in its revolving credit facility from R13.3 billion to R15.0 billion. This facility matures in August 2027, so they are probably thinking about the refinancing negotiations at this stage as well.

Ghost Bite: Despite the wild growth in earnings, the share price is only up 24% over 12 months (and down 20% year-to-date). The market is always nervous of the good times continuing in PGMs.


Powerfleet is still loss-making (JSE: PWR)

You may recall that this is the company that swallowed up MiX Telematics

Powerfleet’s financial reporting isn’t easy for South Africans to work with, as the company is listed in the US and reports based on the SEC format. They unfortunately don’t include the management commentary in the SENS announcement, so you have to go hunting for it.

The telematics group grew total revenue by 6.4%. There’s quite a change in mix though, as Services increased by 9.1% and Products fell by 6.7%. This is because product shipments were delayed for the quarter.

The change in mix was good for gross profit at least, which increased from 54.2% to 55.2%. As is usually the case, a services business model is more lucrative than selling products.

Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by 5.3%. That’s slower than revenue growth, which of course is very good for margins. A further boost came from the reduction in research and development costs by 10.2%.

Despite all the positive underlying momentum in the business, the net loss attribute to common stockholders was still $8.4 million. That’s an improvement on the net loss of $10.2 million, but it means that the company is still reporting significant losses.

Like all good US tech companies though, adjusted EBITDA has gone the right way – up from $20.1 million to $21.5 million. As usual, one of the important adjustments is stock-based compensation (effectively share awards to staff), which jumped from $1.8 million to $3.1 million. IFRS reporting doesn’t allow companies to pretend that this isn’t an expense.

Ghost Bite: There’s not much trade in this stock, but it’s certainly been a volatile year with a 52-week low of R44.01 and a 52-week high of R100.00! The current price is R65.00.


Sabvest announces a bolt-on deal at ITL (JSE: SBP)

This is a great example of how the group executes its strategy

Sabvest is seen as the best of the local investment holding companies. Don’t just take my word for it – you can look at the Price/Book of 0.84x, or a discount of only 16% to the book value. Companies in this sector tend to trade at discounts of 40% or more!

The market supports the Sabvest story because of the underlying assets that are otherwise impossible to reach. Rather than being a collection of listed stakes, Sabvest has built an extensive portfolio of private companies. Sabvest can then support those companies with capital and networks to unlock growth.

One such example is ITL Group, an apparel labelling and supply chain management business in which Sabvest has a 34% stake. This is where the latest bolt-on deal is housed, with ITL set to acquire 100% of Rudholm Group International, a Swedish packaging and labelling company serving markets across Europe, Asia and North America.

It’s a part-cash, part-share deal that will see the current Rudholm shareholders take an 11% stake in the ITL-Rudholm group. This will dilute Sabvest’s stake down to 30.5%. The transaction is expected to be value-accretive to Sabvest shareholders.

A transaction value for the deal hasn’t been disclosed.

Ghost Bite: Bolt-on deals are almost always a better idea than swashbuckling M&A that bets the farm on one specific trade.


Nibbles:

  • Spear REIT (JSE: SEA) has concluded an agreement with Mambos Storage & Home to develop their distribution centre in Cape Town. Mambos has grown to 22 stores nationwide and clearly has plans to grow further. This will add to Spear’s existing industrial property portfolio in the Western Cape. It’s not always easy to find good properties to acquire, so being able to do projects like these is important for Spear’s ongoing growth. The development cost is estimated to be R90 million, with work commencing in August 2026 and expected to conclude in mid-2027.
  • There’s still almost no trade in Aimia’s (JSE: AII) shares on the JSE, so I’ll just give the results for the second quarter a passing mention down here. Aimia is cash flush after the disposal of Bozzetto, which generated $270m in net proceeds. They’ve been using this to get rid of debt (over $131m in senior notes) and repurchase around 10% of shares outstanding. A further share buyback programme is underway. The continuing operations (mainly Cortland International) saw revenue decline by 3.7% this quarter, while adjusted EBITDA fell by roughly 18%.

Ghost Bites (Advtech | Gold Fields | Italtile | MTN | Southern Palladium)

In this edition of Ghost Bites:

  • Advtech shows that school is still cool – for investors, at least
  • Gold Fields doubled free cash flow in the interim period
  • Italtile’s business remains under pressure
  • MTN’s share price takes another knock
  • Southern Palladium has been granted a mining right

Advtech shows that school is still cool – for investors, at least (JSE: ADH)

Mid-teens growth is the order of the day

Advtech is due to release results on 24 August. In the meantime, they’ve given the market a voluntary trading statement to chew on.

The reason why this is voluntary is because the percentage movement in earnings is lower than 20%. If it was higher, then they would be forced to release a trading statement under JSE rules. Instead, Advtech’s approach just reflects a commitment to keeping investors informed – something that a lot of listed companies could learn from.

Speaking of learning, the education-focused group is doing very well. For the six months to June, they grew HEPS by between 13% and 18%. Normalised earnings per share grew by a similar range.

Ghost Bite: It’s a solid growth rate, but is it enough to justify the 46% increase in the share price in the past 12 months? Or the P/E of 20x, for that matter? We will see what the share price does after full results are released.


Gold Fields doubled free cash flow in the interim period (JSE: GFI)

But keep an eye on the inflationary pressures

Gold Fields has released a trading statement dealing with the six months to June. With an increase in both gold production and the average gold price, you can already guess the direction of travel here.

But just how much money did they make? Well, HEPS is expected to be between 72% and 90% higher than the comparable period. That’s a lot!

It gets even better at adjusted free cash flow level, which is a measure of how value is actually flowing to shareholders. This metric is up by between 91% and 111%. At the mid-point, that means that adjusted free cash flow doubled year-on-year.

Management can’t control the gold price, but they can control production. It’s important to see that production for the second half of the year is expected to be in line with the first half. This is part of a broader expectation of meeting 2026 production guidance.

If you dig into specific mines, you’ll see more volatility in expected production – Salares Norte is running ahead of guidance, while Gruyere and Tarkwa are at risk of not meeting guidance.

The other thing to watch will be the cost of production, as there are inflationary and other pressures that have increased the burden associated with getting the stuff out of the ground. All-in sustaining cost per ounce was 13% higher over the six-month period. That’s quite a hurdle rate for the gold price to overcome.

Ghost Bite: Mining share prices move based on current commodity prices, not the earnings that happened months ago. That’s why Gold Fields is down 26% year-to-date despite indicating such strong growth.


Italtile’s business remains under pressure (JSE: ITE)

Management has been incredibly transparent with the market about the issues being faced

Full marks to Italtile – the management team has been committed to keeping the market appraised of the substantial challenges that the business is dealing with. I hope that Brandon Wood, the CEO as of 1 July 2026, will keep that going.

He certainly isn’t taking the top job at a company that is having an easy time of things. A voluntary trading statement for the year ended June shows that HEPS is expected to decrease by between 7.5% and 12.4%. Aside from the obvious stuff like a soft SA consumer environment, there’s the overcapacity in the tile manufacturing segment that is crushing margins in that space.

The problem with manufacturing is the extent of fixed costs and operating leverage. If you lose even a modest portion of sales, it has a significant impact on the bottom line. When weak demand is combined with the proliferation of cheap imports, local manufacturing has a bad time.

There’s at least some relief there, with the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (ITAC) announcing provisional anti-dumping duties on various tiles in July 2026. Let’s see how much difference they really make.

Looking at the retail side of the business, system-wide turnover reported by CTM, Italtile and TopT was stable against the prior period. Italtile Retail (the more upmarket offering) performed well, while CTM (more affordable products) was flat. To be fair, CTM’s flat performance was achieved despite the franchising of four company-owned stores, a process that would naturally give revenue a knock.

The webstores registered increased traffic and sales, so people are buying more stuff online – even in discretionary categories like tiles!

The integrated supply chain business saw sales decline by 6% in this retail environment, but they managed to get margins higher due to the exchange rate and improved buying.

Then we get to the problematic manufacturing business, where sales were down by 1%. That may not sound terrible, but Italtile describes margins as being under “severe pressure” from market pricing and energy-related costs.

On the plus side, Italtile’s cash flow story remains strong despite the obvious underlying pressures.

Full details will be available on 24 August.

Ghost Bite: For reasons I truly struggle to understand, Italtile’s share price has somehow outperformed sector peer Cashbuild (JSE: CSB) over the past year – despite Cashbuild not having exposure to the manufacturing challenges that Italtile faces!


MTN’s share price takes another knock (JSE: MTN)

Sentiment has soured towards the African telco giant

MTN has already suffered significant selling pressure in the aftermath of the MTN Nigeria numbers that spooked the market. The debate is around how temporary the Q2 slowdown really was in that business.

The group has now added a trading statement for the six months to June into the mix, with a sharp deviation between HEPS and Adjusted HEPS. On the HEPS line, you’ll see an expected move for the period of between -10% and 0%, while adjusted HEPS is expected to increase by between 18% and 23%.

I don’t usually cover EPS because it can be so distorted by impairments and other moves, but it’s worth noting that impairments to operations in Iran (a 49% investment in Irancell) played a substantial role there.

The adjustments to HEPS relate to non-operational items, hyperinflation and a non-recurring deferred tax asset reversal.

The group also notes that total service revenue has grown in line with medium-term guidance, despite a difficult South African prepaid market and the pressures in Nigeria.

Ghost Bite: The market isn’t exactly receptive to the narrative about the broader six months. Instead, investors are focused on the deceleration from Q1 to Q2. This is why the share price has lost 15% of its value in August!


Southern Palladium has been granted a mining right (JSE: SDL)

Now the work really begins at Bengwenyama

Southern Palladium’s share price jumped 20% after announcing that the mining right has been granted for the Bengwenyama PGM-chrome project. This is the biggest milestone of them all when it comes to junior mining.

Early development work will take place before the end of 2026, while the Definitive Feasibility Study works programme is expected to be delivered in the first quarter of 2027. This delay is being driven by a desire to incorporate the recent metallurgical test results into the plant design and optimisation work.

Ghost Bite: I always chuckle at the fact that that project is owned by a subsidiary called Miracle Upon Miracle Investments. In junior mining, miracles are usually what you need to believe in. Here’s what the share price looks like when miracles happen:


Results of previous poll:


Nibbles:

  • Aveng (JSE: AEG) has released a trading statement ahead of full results scheduled for 24 August. For the year ended June 2026, the headline loss per share improved by between 93.5% and 96.4%. It came in at between 4.2 and 2.3 A$ cents, a minor loss compared to 64.6 A$ cents in the prior period. But it’s still a loss.
  • Brait (JSE: BAT) announced the results of the renounceable rights offer to raise R2.5 billion. Interestingly, Titan and the additional underwriters didn’t need to take up any shares at all. 95.3% of shares were spoken for based on normal rights, with the remaining 4.7% allocated via excess applications. Another useful point is that they received excess applications for 33.1% of the offer, so there was way more demand than supply of the shares!
  • NEPI Rockcastle (JSE: NRP) has signed a €250 million green term loan facility with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The proceeds will be directed to “eligible green projects” that focus on the climate transition objectives. In exchange for being a good corporate citizen, NEPI Rockcastle gets to lock in long-term debt (maturity in 2034) on favourable terms.
  • The Trustco (JSE: TTO) board is clearly rattled by the meeting requisitioned by Riskowitz Value Fund. The purpose of the meeting is to vote on a replacement of the current directors with new directors nominated by Riskowitz. In a clever step to cloud the situation, Trustco approached the Namibian Competition Commission and received an advisory opinion that such a change may contravene the Competition Act unless there is prior notification of such a deal. If you would like to read the opinion, you’ll find it here. So the soap opera continues!

The economy of a mean world

We’ve never had more access to information, and we’ve also never been more anxious. It turns out a frightened population is very good for business.

In the early 1970s, a man named George Gerbner became concerned about what television was doing to people’s perception of the world. So he used his experience as a communications scholar to establish the Cultural Indicators Project, a study aimed at documenting trends in television programming and how these trends changed or affected viewers’ ideas about society.

What he discovered was striking: people who watched large amounts of television were more inclined to believe that the world around them was dangerous, violent or hostile.

Regular TV watchers believed that strangers were threatening, so they didn’t interact with them. They believed that cities were unsafe, so they avoided them. They believed that the future was bleak, which steadily eroded their optimism until many started showing signs of cynicism.

Gerbner named the phenomenon “mean world syndrome”.

By the time he coined the term, Gerbner’s Cultural Indicators Project had catalogued over 3,000 television programmes and 35,000 characters. That was everything that could be found on a handful of channels on 1970s network television. Half a century later in 2026, what we watch and how we watch it would probably blow Gerbner’s mind. We now live in a media environment far more saturated than anything he could have imagined: on-demand streaming services, twenty-four-hour news cycles, ever-present social media. We have access to more entertainment and information than any generation before us.

We’re also more anxious than we’ve ever been. Coincidence?

Seeing is believing

Gerbner’s broader idea was called cultivation theory, and its premise was that media cultivates our worldview as much as it entertains us. Over time, the stories we absorb – whether works of fiction or real news – build a map of what we think reality looks like. Mean world syndrome is what happens when that map turns grim: steeped in violent and frightening stories, we come to believe the world itself must be dangerous. Cultivation theory is the mechanism, and mean world syndrome is one of its symptoms.

Part of why the cultivation theory mechanism works can be explained by the availability heuristic, a mental shortcut first described by psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in 1973. The availability heuristic means that we judge how common something is by how easily examples of it come to mind. The brain essentially takes a shortcut, and instead of calculating actual odds, it reaches for whatever it can recall most readily and treats that ease of recall as a rough measure of frequency.

It’s an efficient trick most of the time, but there’s a pretty big loophole in it, because how easily something comes to mind has less to do with how often it happens and more with how vivid, recent, or heavily repeated it was.

Say for instance you read a story of a shark attack, which is described in vivid detail. The next time you visit the beach, you may hesitate to get into the water. Even if there has never been a shark attack on that particular stretch of coast, the vividness of the story you read will push the image of a lurking shark to the front of your mind, where it can impact your decision-making.

If you’ve seen ten crime reports this week, break-ins are top of mind and robberies suddenly start to feel commonplace. This is true even if the break-ins were in other countries and your own town is safer than it’s ever been. The footage doesn’t have to be local, or recent, or even representative to shape your sense of the odds. It only has to be memorable.

Then there’s also negativity bias to take into account. Human beings are wired to notice and remember threats more readily than good news. That’s why the story of a neighbour’s kind deed may charm us for a moment, but a report of a violent attack can leave us feeling unsettled for days. This instinct no doubt helped our ancestors to stay alive. But in a saturated media environment, it means the frightening images are the ones that lodge deep and linger longer.

Mad world

Worldwide, an estimated 4.4% of the population lives with an anxiety disorder – around 359 million people as of 2021 (an outdated statistic), which makes it the most common mental disorder on the planet. Women are affected at roughly 1.5 to 2 times the rate of men, and only about 1 in 4 people who need treatment actually receive it. For most of the anxious, in other words, the condition simply goes unaddressed.

South Africa carries a heavier load than the global average. Between 16-20% of people here will experience an anxiety disorder at some point in their lives, and in under-resourced communities the treatment gap yawns wider still. 

Data from the Global Burden of Disease study, which tracks health trends across more than 200 countries, shows the number of people with anxiety disorders climbing steadily since 1990. Then came COVID-19, which sent anxiety and depression rates lurching upward across the world in the early 2020s. 

The steepest increases show up among the young: teenagers and adults under 30 now report anxiety at markedly higher rates than their elders. The median age of onset is just 11 years old.

Gerbner watched a mean world take shape on a handful of channels. The children of the feed grow up with it streaming, unfiltered and unending, from the moment they can focus on a screen.

The business of being afraid

A mean world is more than just a psychological condition. It’s also a market.

Anxiety, it turns out, is enormously good for business, because a frightened person is a motivated buyer. Fear creates a need, and where there’s a need, someone will build a product to meet it (or at least promise to). Entire industries have reorganised themselves around the management of our unease, and since 2020 they have been booming.

Start with the most obvious: the wellness apps. Calm, Headspace and their many imitators have turned meditation – a practice that is, strictly speaking, free – into a subscription economy worth billions. The Calm app alone was downloaded 7.3 million times in 2025. The broader mental-health app market sits north of $9 billion and is forecast to more than quadruple within a decade. The fastest-growing slice of it is “anxiety and depression management”. Therapy platforms like BetterHelp and Talkspace scaled just as fast, meeting a demand for therapy that in-person services could no longer absorb.

The pharmaceutical response followed the same curve. Prescriptions for anti-anxiety and antidepressant medication climbed, and a wave of investment poured into psychedelic therapy like ketamine clinics and companies racing to bring MDMA and psilocybin treatments to market.

But the truly telling growth is at the softer edges, in the vast grey zone of self-soothing where no diagnosis is required and anyone feeling a little frayed is a potential customer. Supplements – whether magnesium, ashwagandha or CBD – became a booming market on the strength of vague promises to take the edge off. So did weighted blankets, aromatherapy diffusers, sleep trackers and mattresses engineered against the insomnia that anxiety breeds.

South Africans know one version of this economy better than most. Private security is one of the country’s great growth industries: some 600,000 registered security officers now outnumber the police by roughly 3 to 1, and the market for smart home security – cameras, sensors, armed-response apps – was worth over $600 million in 2025. It is projected to nearly triple by 2033. 

Some of that spending answers a real and rational danger; after all, South Africa’s crime figures are not a media invention. But some of it answers the feeling of danger, which is a different and more elastic thing – the electric fence raised a little higher, the second camera, the security estate that scans every visitor’s license. Each one is an attempt to buy a peace of mind that never quite arrives, because the mean world always has one more threat to show you.

Even our pets are enlisted: enter the fast-growing market in calming supplements for anxious animals. Herbal and natural formulations now make up around 59% of that market, and roughly a third of pet-supplement buyers have reached for CBD to soothe their dog. We’ve become so fluent in the language of anxiety management that we have begun projecting it onto our animals, treating the family dog for a nervousness that probably says more about the household than the hound.

Flip the switch

No one sat in a boardroom and engineered a nervous planet. But the media environment that cultivates the mean world and the industries that sell relief from it are drinking from the same well. A culture that keeps its people mildly yet chronically afraid has, whether it intends to or not, built an industry that runs on that fear.

The uncomfortable truth is that the mean world is, in a narrow sense, accurate. There really are sharks, break-ins, catastrophes and cruelties, and every one of them really happened. The distortion isn’t in the individual facts but in the proportion – the sheer, relentless volume of frightening signals, delivered without context, absorbed by an ancient brain that treats the vivid as the likely and the memorable as the common. We are not being lied to, exactly. We’re just being shown a true thing so often that it becomes a false picture.

The way out isn’t cynicism, and it certainly isn’t pretending the world is gentle when it isn’t.

It’s perspective, and remembering that the shark story is a story, that the crime report is one event and not a climate, that the feed is a curation and not a census. It’s noticing when a product is selling us calm by first topping up our fear. And it’s occasionally, deliberately, doing the one thing the whole apparatus is built to prevent: looking up from the screen, and checking the map against the territory we can actually see.

About the author: Dominique Olivier

Dominique Olivier uses her love of storytelling and ideation to help brands solve problems.

Her first book, Lessons from Loss, has been published by Penguin Random House.

She is a weekly columnist in Ghost Mail and collaborates with The Finance Ghost on Ghost Mail Weekender, a Sunday publication designed to help you be more interesting.

You can learn more about her work at dominiqueolivier.com and she can be reached on LinkedIn here.