ASX faces losing virtual monopoly as TPG bungle adds to a decade of woes
Just ask Helen Lofthouse, the chief executive of ASX Ltd, the company that operates the national stock and securities exchange.
Her job, and the future of the organisation is now under a cloud, after the events of the past week.
On Wednesday, the ASX confused a listed company with a similarly-named foreign owned private equity group that was engaged in a huge takeover.
The mistake resulted in TPG Telecom shares plummeting 5 per cent, wiping $400 million from its market value, even though it had nothing to do with the $645 million takeover of automotive software group Infomedia.
If the original mix-up was bad, the inability of the ASX to rectify the situation turned it into a debacle, as traders pounded TPG Telecom's stock for hours.
And it's unlikely to be the last the operator hears from TPG, with the telco understood to be considering its legal options.
As the disaster was unfolding, Treasurer Jim Chalmers was hosting a group of investment heavyweights in Canberra in the lead-up to the Economic Reform Roundtable in a fortnight.
Among those attending was Joe Longo, chair of the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC), a man whose patience with the ASX long ago reached an end.
Longo dropped a bombshell.
The regulator, he told the meeting, was "in the final stages" of allowing a competitor to enter the market and do away with the ASX's virtual monopoly over securities trading.
In particular, he told the gathering, it had been in talks with Cboe Australia, the local offshoot of the Chicago-based financial trading giant which already trades ASX-listed securities through its own market.
"As superannuation funds grow and investors seek opportunities, our actions will help keep our markets efficient, innovative and attractive, supporting economic growth for all Australians."
The timing may have been purely coincidental, but the intent had been brewing for years as investor anger and frustration with the ASX reached tipping point.
ASX Ltd, the operator of the ASX, is listed on its own exchange. As the news sank in on Thursday that it may be stripped of its monopoly, ASX shares tanked.
After a near-1 per cent fall on Wednesday as the TPG Telecom disaster unfolded, the stock dived almost 9 per cent on Thursday.
In a statement, chief executive Ms Lofthouse said the ASX "is supportive of competition that contributes to strong and effective capital markets in Australia" and talked up the interest it was receiving from companies considering a listing.
In 2015, the ASX began scouting for a replacement to the ageing technology it used to settle trades on the exchange.
Two years later, it created global headlines. In a market abuzz with talk of cryptocurrency and its open source ledger system, the ASX announced it would build the world's first industrial scale blockchain for financial services applications.
The timeline was always ambitious. It was supposed to be online by 2020.
But the project became ever-more complex as fights developed between various information providers about how they would interact with the new system.
Shares do not simply change hands between buyers and sellers — there are share registries, custodians and a host of other players, many of whom became concerned the new system would steal their business.
By the time the fifth delay to the rollout time was announced, it was obvious the project was on the rocks. At the end of 2022, it was canned, forcing the ASX to announce a $250 million write-off.
Brokers and investment houses had spent vast amounts too, replacing their systems to integrate with the blockchain dream that ultimately turned into a blocked drain.
Dominic Stevens, the ASX chief executive who commissioned the project, had left at the start of the year, leaving then chair Damian Roche to clean up the mess and to appoint Accenture to independently review what had gone wrong.
"On behalf of ASX, I apologise for the disruption experienced in relation to the CHESS replacement project over a number of years," he said at the time.
Given it is such a key component of Australia's financial infrastructure, the exchange is overseen by ASIC and the Reserve Bank of Australia.
Then-RBA governor Philip Lowe and ASIC's Joe Longo were both appalled at the ineptitude and made little attempt to disguise their feelings.
"The independent report has found significant gaps and deficiencies in ASX's program delivery capabilities and that there are significant challenges in the technology design," Mr Longo said shortly after the Accenture review was released.
The decision to abandon the new settlement program left the ASX with an even bigger headache.
The patched-up 25-year-old CHESS system was long past its use by date, and the ASX was back to square one on a replacement.
Despite all the talk about using bits and pieces of the abandoned blockchain system, there's no firm date on a replacement, even after repeated outages that have led to a series of embarrassing shutdowns.
The most recent, and among the worst on record, was on the Friday before Christmas last year when brokers couldn't settle trades, leading to this outburst from Mr Longo.
"I am very concerned about it. Very disappointed. And from a regulatory perspective, everything is on the table," he told the Australian Financial Review.
"We went after the ASX twice last year, and you know what? It's probably going to happen again this year," he told the Nine publication.
In March, the corporate regulator ASIC and the Reserve Bank issues a joint letter rebuking the exchange operator, describing "deep concerns".
By June, ASIC had launched a sweeping investigation, citing "ongoing concerns over ASX's ability to maintain stable, secure and resilient critical market infrastructure".
"ASIC's decision to initiate an Inquiry follows repeated and serious failures at ASX," Mr Longo said in the announcement.
He foreshadowed the regulator's drive to increase competition.
On Thursday, as ASX Ltd's shares languished on the news of ASIC's looming approval of Cboe, the company quantified the cost of the regulator's probe.
It forecast additional operating costs of between $25 million and $35 million in the financial year ahead, as a result of legal and other costs to manage its response.
This week's embarrassment is understood to have been caused by human error rather than creaking computer technology.
But the error was compounded by poor oversight and a series of management mistakes.
Around 9:20am on Wednesday morning, a little-known technology group Infomedia announced it had accepted a $640 million takeover from an unlisted private equity firm, TPG Capital.
Someone at the ASX linked the announcement to Australia's third-biggest telecommunications group, TPG Telecom.
While unacceptable, the mistake is understandable.
What happened next was inconceivable. Both TPG Telecom and Infomedia notified the ASX within minutes, offering themselves to correct the record.
The ASX refused, telling both parties it would handle the correction. Not only did it delay any correction, it lifted the trading pause in TPG at 9:47am without any clarification.
When the market opened 10 minutes later, TPG Telecom shares crashed.
TPG executives and staff repeatedly demanded urgent action but the stock trading wasn't halted until around 10:15am and the announcements remained in place until 11:15am. A formal correction wasn't issued until 11:31am.
ASX boss Helen Lofthouse has apologised. But she may be too late.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

ABC News
12 minutes ago
- ABC News
Why won't Musk let Tesla EVs power homes?
Sam Hawley: It's an idea Elon Musk hasn't fully embraced just yet, and he doesn't want Teslas used for it. Some electric vehicles are already being plugged in to provide power to homes and even to the grid. Today, energy reporter, Dan Mercer, on the revolutionary technology and why the world's richest man is wary of it. I'm Sam Hawley on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily. Dan, this idea that electric cars could power our homes is fascinating, really. So I just want you to explain this for us. And to do that, it's good to talk about a guy called Richard Chapman. He is a petrol head, or we call them rev heads, I think. Dan Mercer: Yeah, indeed. He's an English fella, Sam, and he lives in the port city of Fremantle in Perth in Western Australia. Richard Chapman, car enthusiast: Absolutely adored cars ever since I knew what a car was. Dan Mercer: He says he's always loved his muscle cars, but he's also not the discriminating sort. He loves electric vehicles too. Sam Hawley: Yeah, he's the sort of, in my head, he's the sort of person you don't associate with an electric car. Dan Mercer: No, but you know, it's kind of funny. He loves Top Gear, he loves the smell of petrol, he loves a car that makes a lot of noise. He equally loves these things, which are sort of the polar opposite of cars. The opposite of that in many ways. Richard Chapman, car enthusiast: I never thought I'd quite embrace the EV thing so fully, but for me now, and I've still got a three litre V6 sports car but I look at that as like a horse. Like it's expensive, it's loud, it's very inefficient. It actually doesn't go as quick as the EVs, but that's more about sort of the emotion and real passion of something like a horse. Dan Mercer: There's this popular conception that tends to have these two things in completely separate camps. But Richard really does swear by his EVs. He reckons they're just phenomenal to drive and the technology behind them is mind blowing. Yeah, the measure of it in his case is that he has three EVs, Sam. Sam Hawley: It sounds like a lot. All right, and he is, Dan, really well set up for charging all of these EVs that he has. Dan Mercer: He is. He's one of these guys who just loves getting things to work really well, taking them apart and building them back together again so he understands them intimately. So in his instance, he's got a lot of solar on his roof. He's got batteries in his house and he's got tariffs that are really cheap in the middle of the day when there's heaps of renewable energy sloshing around the grid. What he does is he tries to charge the cars during those daylight hours. That way the energy that's powering the cars is dirt cheap. Either it's coming straight from his solar panels or it's coming from the grid during a time when prices are at their lowest. And for the most part, it seems to work. Sam Hawley: Yeah, okay. So he also likes to have his cars basically fully charged most of the time. And while they're just sitting there at night and not being used, he would actually like to use some of their power, right? But not for driving around. Dan Mercer: Not for driving, no. He's got a couple of batteries fixed to the wall of his garage as flagged. He can get by most of the time fairly cheaply. There are occasions though when his solar and those batteries aren't enough. And that tends to be in winter and the shoulder seasons when there might not be that much sun around but his demand for power might be quite high. And there are times too in summer when he reckons he just needs that much power because it's so hot and he has to run the air conditioning around the clock and the batteries aren't enough. At those times, he currently has to buy the power from the grid in the evening when prices unfortunately cost a fortune. Needless to say, that's something he's pretty keen to avoid. And he says the answer to those problems should be right there in front of him in the form of the energy that's stored in his EV's batteries. Richard Chapman, car enthusiast: When the main house batteries have run out, I wanna then be able to draw off of the electric vehicles that I've got hundreds of kilowatt hours sitting there and I wanna be able to use that back again. Sam Hawley: Wow, yeah. So using the car's batteries to power his home. And the EV batteries, they're massive, aren't they? So that is a possibility, isn't it? Dan Mercer: They are huge batteries, yeah. I mean, an average household battery is probably around 10 kilowatt hours of storage. A big EV battery can be 80 kilowatt hours or more. And as Richard notes, if you've got a car with a battery with that much power, even thereabouts, that's enough to run a typical household for days at a time. Richard Chapman, car enthusiast: You could run your house for, God, completely off grid for probably a fortnight on that. Sam Hawley: Wow, okay. So it sounds like a great idea. Why doesn't he just do it? Dan Mercer: Basically because his carmaker won't let him. There are other reasons, but the biggest one is that his carmaker won't let him. Richard has a couple of Teslas and Tesla just doesn't, at this stage in Australia at least, support customers using their cars to run their homes. It's not the only business that's going on. There's a big EV brand that's cool on the idea, but it's arguably the biggest name. Richard told me, there are ways he can hook his car slash cars up to his house. The problem is those ways aren't legally kosher. So if you do it, you void the warranty on your car. And if your EV costs $100,000, say, you're just not gonna do it. Sam Hawley: So why, just explain further then, Dan, why it is that Tesla doesn't want it to happen. Dan Mercer: Yeah, look, to be fair to Tesla, there are legitimate reasons why the company might be reticent. For starters, it's a fledgling technology we're talking about. It seems to lack a broadly accepted industry standard. Then there's just the physical reality of it. If you're discharging and charging your EV battery a whole lot more than you would normally do, a lot more because you're using it as a quasi household system, then that has an effect on the longevity of the battery. Most batteries, including the ones typically used in EVs, degrade over time as they're used more and more. And so Tesla doesn't want to be held liable for a warranty if the battery is being cycled in a way that wasn't envisaged, that wasn't tested, that wasn't guaranteed by their own standards. There are suspicions though that maybe Tesla has ulterior motives. The company famously sells household batteries and consumers are much less likely to buy those household batteries if their car battery can do the same thing. The thing is, Sam, this argy-bargy has big implications because some people reckon the technology in question could change the energy system completely. It has a few different names, including bidirectional charging, two-way charging, reverse charging, vehicle to grid and others. Ultimately though, it boils down to a simple proposition, not only charging EVs so they can be driven around, but discharging them too. Sam Hawley: All right, well then let's now, Dan, step through how this actually works because there are three main ways of using a car's battery for power, for powering a home, for instance. So let's run through those. Dan Mercer: Yeah, indeed. Well, and apologies for this next bit because it's all quite jargony. Sam Hawley: All right, we've been warned. Go forth. Dan Mercer: The first is what's called vehicle to load or V2L. And that's simply using your car to run things like tools from a power outlet in the car. At a high level, there's so-called vehicle to home or V2H, which is where you use the battery in your EV to run your house. That's what Richard wants to do. And there's evidence some people are already doing it in Australia, for example, during blackouts. And then there's the biggest one of all, which is called vehicle to grid. As the name suggests, it involves selling electricity from your car's battery to the grid at times when it's needed. A flip side to that is not only just selling it, but you can also store electricity in the car's battery, take it from the grid when there's too much supply, which of course is a problem that we're dealing with these days with so much solar around. Vehicle to home and vehicle to grid, especially are not straightforward. And there's a mix of hardware, software and regulatory permissions that are required to turn the energy that's stored in the car battery into something that can be put into the grid and used safely. So there's a whole bunch of technical challenges involved. Sam Hawley: But if you could transfer the power from your EV to the grid, you could make money from that, right? Dan Mercer: You could. How much? There's a big question mark. Presumably there'd need to be strong financial incentives for you to wanna do it. But ultimately this is kind of about trying to entice you to provide energy from your EV to the system when the system needs it. You might reasonably wonder what possible difference a few EVs could make to something as big as the grid, right? But eventually there will be millions of EVs on our roads and collectively they'll represent an enormous amount of storage that sits idle most of the time. Being able to tap into that in an efficient way could drastically reduce our need to generate electricity from sources like coal and like gas. Sam Hawley: Okay, and there are some people that think this could be revolutionary. Dan Mercer: In theory, yes. I spoke to Ross De Rango who used to run energy and infrastructure at the Electric Vehicle Council, which is an industry body. He now works as a consultant and Ross says there's, in his words, a big golden pot at the end of the rainbow if Australia can make bidirectional charging work. Ross De Rango, EV industry consultant: So the opportunity is the earlier closure of coal and gas-fired power stations. The opportunity is lower cost electricity for all consumers in the country. The risk of absence of support for this technology is that those benefits will take many more years to materialise. Sam Hawley: All right, well, Dan, this does all sound pretty amazing actually, but as you mentioned, there are car companies like Tesla that aren't playing ball at the moment. I think a few are, but there's a few roadblocks here. Dan Mercer: I'll be fascinated to see what happens with two-way charging, Sam. Ross De Rango, the ex-EV Council guy, says governments will need to take the reins and corral automakers in particular into a position of support for this. Ditto for the poles and wires companies that control the grid. Ross De Rango, EV industry consultant: So the automakers hold one set of keys, the energy networks hold the other set of keys. In order for vehicle to grid to occur, both of those parties need to put the key in the ignition and turn it on. Dan Mercer: We spoke to Federal Climate Change and Energy Minister, Chris Bowen, for this story, and he's certainly keen to see it happen. He was very keen to stress that he would like to see car makers get on board. Chris Bowen, Energy minister: Well, I certainly encourage car manufacturers to get with the programme. Consumers will want this, and I think consumers will march with their feet. If every car in Australia was electric and people were using it to charge their house or their grid, that's equivalent to five snowy hydro schemes, for example. And it's great for consumers because, as I said, it puts consumers more in charge of their resources. The battery in your driveway will, on average, usually be about five times more powerful than the battery in your garage. Sam Hawley: So, Dan, how long do you think it will take before our cars are powering our homes? Dan Mercer: This is a classic example of an idea where there's a disconnect between the rhetoric and the reality. You know, I've been reporting on energy for a while now, and it always amazes me how often I hear people say bidirectional charging is going to solve so many of our problems, and it's a no-brainer, so it's just going to happen, wait and see. But that's a big assumption, and there are big assumptions right through energy and the transition we're going through right now. Of course, there are many seemingly great ideas that never come to fruition in energy and elsewhere because they get mugged by reality. If you listen to the likes of Ross De Rango and Chris Bowen, this is a revolution that's coming. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. It's just a matter of when. Others aren't convinced. They're just not convinced. Apart from the vested interests of some of these car makers, it's hard to imagine electricity retailers, for example, jumping out of their skins at the idea. Why would they want to pave the way for anything that involves them selling less electricity to you? While those poles and wires companies, they move notoriously slowly. They're heavily regulated. They are heavily bureaucratic. One way or another, there is a tidal wave of new storage that's coming to Australia as battery prices fall and as we get deeper into this transition. And a lot of that is going to be in the cars we drive, for sure. If we can figure out a way of tapping into that fairly and efficiently, then, in theory, everybody wins. Just don't know if you should hold your breath waiting for it, though. Sam Hawley: Dan Mercer is the ABC's energy reporter. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead and Sam Dunn. Audio production by Cinnamon Nippard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. Thanks for listening.

News.com.au
7 hours ago
- News.com.au
Relief in sight for homeowners as RBA poised for interest rate cut
The Reserve Bank of Australia is expected to announce its third cut in interest rates, after holding its rate in July despite the ongoing ease in inflation. According to a new Finder survey, 91 per cent of economists believe the RBA will cut the cash rate following its two-day meeting, which begins on Monday, with a 25 basis point cut bringing the cash rate down from 3.85 per cent to 3.60 per cent. The cash rate was held firm last month, with RBA governor Michele Bullock explaining the decision was about 'timing rather than direction', and was waiting on more data to confirm the decreasing inflation. At the end of July, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) published its quarterly inflation figures, which fell from 2.4 per cent to 2.1 per cent between March and June. Trimmed inflation, also known as underlying inflation, also dropped from 2.9 per cent to 2.7 per cent. Both headlining and underlying inflation rates are now within the RBA's 2-3 per cent target band, indicating inflation is low enough for the RBA to move forward. Mortgage holders are likely to be the biggest winners if the official cash rate is reduced on Tuesday. A homeowner with a $500,000 mortgage are set to save $2884 per year if the cash rate is passed on in full. Fnder head of consumer research Garahm Cooke said the RBA's failure to cut rates lash month was a disappointment for mortgage holders. 'If the RBA doesn't cut next week, they are risking an all-out attack on their legitimacy in the eyes of many homeowners,' he said. 'Last month's decision to hold shocked the market, and we are now seeing a 90 per cent plus certainty of a cut. With inflation well within the target range, there is no reason to hold. 'Banks will be under intense scrutiny to pass on a cut in full,' he said. Despite the overwhelming majority of economists predicting the fall in interest rates, University of Sydney's Stella Huangfu suggested the RBA should hold out for two reasons. 'First, June quarter trimmed mean annual CPI inflation is still 2.7 per cent, which is high within the 2–3 percentage target band and slightly above the RBA's forecast of 2.6 per cent,' she said.


Perth Now
10 hours ago
- Perth Now
‘Dirty bomb': Huge warning on AI
Artificial intelligence developed outside the West could teach Australians 'how to make a dirty bomb' and let authoritarian regimes push alternate realities, the country's leading cybersecurity expert says. Big tech is promising AI will revolutionise every aspect of modern life, from how people find information to how they do their jobs. The promise has been heard in capitals across the world, with governments scrambling to figure out how to reap the economic benefits of early adoption while also not knowing what they are dealing with. Jobs are top-of-mind, but the challenges stretch far beyond which roles could be stamped out in the relentless march of technological progress. Alastair MacGibbon is the chief strategy officer at CyberCX – a Canberra-based cybersecurity firm that helps government and businesses thwart threats from hostile states to private hackers. Among the biggest challenges of AI, according to Mr MacGibbon, is hostile governments waging informational warfare. CyberCX chief strategy officer Alastair MacGibbon says authoritarian regimes could push alternate realities on Western users. CyberCX Credit: Supplied 'The concept of AI models developed outside of the West being used in the West is highly problematic,' he told NewsWire. 'This is why I was so concerned about DeepSeek because with AI models, one can distort truth.' China's DeepSeek model wiped a trillion dollars in value off US tech titans when it launched in January. Nvidia alone suffered a $600bn blow. The disruption was largely because DeepSeek is free and open source, unlike its American rivals, meaning anyone with an internet connection can use it. While DeepSeek is backed by Chinese hedgefund High-Flyer, the platform is riddled with code linking it to the government. NewsWire earlier this year also confirmed DeepSeek had a deeply embedded bias that persisted even when the model was downloaded and run offline. China's DeepSeek wiped hundreds of billions in value off tech stocks when it launched in January. Nadir Kinani / NewsWire Credit: News Corp Australia It repeatedly refused to answer questions about the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. Mr MacGibbon said Beijing could tweak history and make it seem as though the massacre did not 'even happen'. 'Why wouldn't you ideologically want to poison the knowledge base of the world?' he said. 'More broadly, AI models are increasingly being trained on data that was AI generated, and you're sort of getting this weird sort of beigeness of truth that is being reflected in AI results. 'So imagine what an AI model that's trained by or developed in a totalitarian, revisionist regime will do for truth. 'It should scare people considering the role we see AI playing this generation.' Even Western models can get things wrong. Elon Musk's Grok repeatedly misidentified a photo of a severely emaciated girl in Gaza, telling users on X it was taken in Yemen in 2018. The photo was taken by a photographer for Agence France-Presse in August this year. The news agency swiftly corrected Grok, which conceded it was mistaken. But Western models have guardrails that block users from using them for harm, such as bomb-making. Mr MacGibbon said AI developed by non-Western countries could drop those safeguards, either by shoddy work or by design. 'It's easy enough to get around the guardrails of the semi-responsible Western AI companies, who vary from marginally responsible to marginally irresponsible in terms of their guardrails about social harm and their responsibility,' Mr MacGibbon said. 'Imagine people who want to cause harm and dissent. 'So the combination of truth no longer being the truth, and the ability to give you access to how to … throw sand in the gears of the West. 'I don't think that's at all beyond the realms of the madness of these regimes.'