(16-01-2011, 12:34 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ] (15-01-2011, 09:41 PM)Nick Wrote: [ -> ] (15-01-2011, 09:24 PM)Contrarian Wrote: [ -> ]> I think it is pretty commendable considering it did not once turn to unit-holders for fund raising through a rights issue !
They did a placement twice in last 2 years - to external players. So there was dilution.
If the DPU remains similar, then I don't think any dilution would have occurred.
(Not Vested)
the assumption here is that it can last for ever and pay similar dividend for ever.
if suntec reit is to go under tomorrow, how could you justify any return?
The returns computed is based on the latest closing price of Suntec REIT since returns are only computed when an investment is realized ie selling it on Friday.
(16-01-2011, 12:43 AM)Nick Wrote: [ -> ] (16-01-2011, 12:34 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ] (15-01-2011, 09:41 PM)Nick Wrote: [ -> ] (15-01-2011, 09:24 PM)Contrarian Wrote: [ -> ]> I think it is pretty commendable considering it did not once turn to unit-holders for fund raising through a rights issue !
They did a placement twice in last 2 years - to external players. So there was dilution.
If the DPU remains similar, then I don't think any dilution would have occurred.
(Not Vested)
the assumption here is that it can last for ever and pay similar dividend for ever.
if suntec reit is to go under tomorrow, how could you justify any return?
The returns computed is based on the latest closing price of Suntec REIT since returns are only computed when an investment is realized ie selling it on Friday.
return til last Friday is historical return already. not reliable for future projection any more.
(16-01-2011, 12:48 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ] (16-01-2011, 12:43 AM)Nick Wrote: [ -> ] (16-01-2011, 12:34 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ] (15-01-2011, 09:41 PM)Nick Wrote: [ -> ] (15-01-2011, 09:24 PM)Contrarian Wrote: [ -> ]> I think it is pretty commendable considering it did not once turn to unit-holders for fund raising through a rights issue !
They did a placement twice in last 2 years - to external players. So there was dilution.
If the DPU remains similar, then I don't think any dilution would have occurred.
(Not Vested)
the assumption here is that it can last for ever and pay similar dividend for ever.
if suntec reit is to go under tomorrow, how could you justify any return?
The returns computed is based on the latest closing price of Suntec REIT since returns are only computed when an investment is realized ie selling it on Friday.
return til last Friday is historical return already. not reliable for future projection any more.
No projection was implied in the computation.
Though, I intend to study the total return REITs (with at least 4 years of history) have presented to their IPO unit-holders. In the previous thread, it was proven that 9 out of 10 business trust has failed to out-perform fixed deposits.
Hi Nick,
IPO price is not a good baseline for return. The timing of IPO also matters a lot. Any IPO in 2003, should be a huge winner today. most IPO in 2007 - 2008 should not have good return.
maybe should consider removal of timing factor in IPO using indice?
Nick, I probably missed the previous thread that you mentioned but I am surprise to learn that 90% (sounds like a certainty to me) of business trust failed to outperform FD.
(16-01-2011, 10:49 AM)egghead Wrote: [ -> ]Nick, I probably missed the previous thread that you mentioned but I am surprise to learn that 90% (sounds like a certainty to me) of business trust failed to outperform FD.
I compiled some info here on the fate of IPO unit-holders -
http://www.valuebuddies.com/thread-385-p...ml#pid4457
Freedom is right to point out the timing of the IPO crucial.
(16-01-2011, 10:49 AM)egghead Wrote: [ -> ]Nick, I probably missed the previous thread that you mentioned but I am surprise to learn that 90% (sounds like a certainty to me) of business trust failed to outperform FD.
That one is business trust like PST and Rickmers, not really applicable to REITS i guess...
Business Times - 22 Jan 2011
Suntec Reit fourth-quarter DPU slides
Payout hurt by a higher interest expense from loans, convertible bonds
By FELDA CHAY
SUNTEC Real Estate Investment Trust (Suntec Reit) ended a lacklustre year with a 19.8 per cent year-on-year drop in its payout to unitholders for the fourth quarter - impacted by a higher interest expense from its bank loans and convertible bonds.
ARA Trust Management (Suntec) Ltd, the manager of Suntec Reit, said yesterday after the market closed that distribution per unit (DPU) fell to 2.316 cents from 2.886 cents a year before. Income available for distribution slipped 6 per cent to $44.9 million.
Gross revenue dipped 0.6 per cent to $61.4 million on a drop in revenue from both its retail and office properties. Earnings per unit, however, stood at 7.708 cents compared to a loss of 12.051 cents a year ago. This was helped by a net surplus from the revaluation of its investment properties.
ARA Trust Management said in a statement that it expects ongoing challenges within the retail sector in 2011, notwithstanding signs of a recovery in retail rents. Still, it remained upbeat, saying that: 'Nonetheless, Suntec Reit's strong 2.4 million sq feet office portfolio and 1.1 million sq ft retail portfolio strategically located in the heart of Singapore's central business district is well-positioned to meet the challenges.'
Gross retail revenue for the quarter was 0.9 per cent lower than a year ago at $32.7 million, mainly because of lower rental income from its Chijmes property, while gross office revenue was $28.7 million, 0.2 per cent lower than the year-ago period.
Overall, net property income was little changed from a year ago at $47.2 million for the October-December period.
One bright spot was overall committed occupancy for the Reit's office portfolio, which stood at 98.8 per cent as at Dec 31, 2010. At the end of 2009, the committed occupancy for its office portfolio was 96.8 per cent. In particular, its jointly controlled entity, One Raffles Quay, achieved full committed occupancy, while the committed occupancy for the Marina Bay Financial Centre properties stood at 96.5 per cent at the end of 2010.
For the retail component, committed occupancy was 98 per cent, as compared to 98.1 per cent at end 2009.
Said ARA Trust Management's chief executive Yeo See Kiat: 'Committed occupancy for Suntec City office has recorded six straight quarters of growth. With the steady recovery of the Singapore office market and our strong committed occupancy, we expect the negative rental reversions of our office portfolio to bottom out by end 2011.'
For the full year, DPU fell 15.8 per cent to 9.859 cents. Gross sales were down 1.4 per cent to $249.5 million. EPU was 20.337 cents, as compared with a loss of 6.867 cents per unit in FY2009.
Suntec Reit's shares closed up 1.9 per cent at $1.58.
Note: I am vested.
Business Times
Business Briefing
April 22, 2011
Suntec Reit's Q1 DPU falls 5%
SUNTEC Real Estate Investment Trust (Suntec Reit) reported that its distribution per unit (DPU) for the first quarter ended March 31, 2011, fell 5 per cent from a year ago to 2.388 Singapore cents. Suntec Reit said this translates to an annualised distribution yield of 6.4 per cent. Distributable income was $52.9 million, up 16.5 per cent from a year ago. For the first quarter, Suntec Reit achieved gross revenue of $61 million, and net property income of $46.7 million.
Business Times - 22 Jul 2011
Suntec Reit DPU for Q2 edges up
Income available for distribution jumps 22.3% to $56.2m
By MICHELLE TAN
SUNTEC Real Estate Investment Trust's income available for distribution rose 22.3 per cent to $56.2 million for the second quarter ended June 30.
However, distribution per unit (DPU) for Q2 2011 came in only marginally higher at 2.532 cents as compared with the 2.528 cents recorded during the same period a year ago. This gives an annualised yield of 6.6 per cent based on yesterday's closing price of $1.535.
Coupled with distributions in the first quarter of 2011, Suntec Reit's H1 2011 DPU now stands at 4.92 cents.
ARA Trust Management (Suntec) Ltd, the manager of Suntec Reit, said yesterday that the gross revenue for the second quarter of $61.3 million came in 1.8 per cent lower year on year due to weaker office and retail revenues.
Gross revenue for H1 2011 stands at $122.3 million, down about 2 per cent year on year.
Correspondingly, Q2 2011 and H1 2011 net property income for the Reit came in 1.1 per cent and 1.7 per cent lower year on year at $46.9 million and $93.6 million respectively.
But overall committed occupancy remains stellar as at end June. The committed occupancy of Suntec City Office Towers stood at a high of 99.5 per cent while the Park Mall office maintained full occupancy take-up.
Similarly, amongst the Reit's retail properties, committed occupancy stayed stable at 97.1 per cent for Suntec City Mall and 100 per cent for both Park Mall and Chijmes.
For jointly controlled properties, One Raffles Quay attained full occupancy status while MBFC Properties' committed occupancy numbers came in at 97.4 per cent.
The overall committed occupancy for Suntec Reit's office and retail portfolio stood at 99.1 per cent and 97.7 per cent respectively as at June 30.
Suntec Reit's shares were last traded at $1.535.
(Vested)