(27-12-2016, 10:23 AM)specuvestor Wrote: [ -> ]Amazing. Resorting to these kind of Yuzoo announcements for their rights issue
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/20161227...eID=434151
Yuuzoo is so "well-known" on VB that it has its own word in VB dictionary now.
YUU-ZOO
Noun
1. A word used to describe excessive advertorial description of events, with the purpose to hip up excitement for the subject of interest.
2. Language used flamboyantly
source: VB dictionary
Actually what are they hoping to achieve with this annoucement ?
Maybe they are showing that they are doing work?
Just to put up a show that the potential is very great with CHINA OBOR project. 😁
Rare shareholder activism. I understand that Mr Low has gotten support from > 50 unitholders to convene the EGM:
REMOVAL OF THE MANAGER OF SABANA REIT
http://sabanareit.blogspot.sg/
(18-01-2017, 08:42 AM)lanoitar Wrote: [ -> ]Rare shareholder activism. I understand that Mr Low has gotten support from > 50 unitholders to convene the EGM:
REMOVAL OF THE MANAGER OF SABANA REIT
http://sabanareit.blogspot.sg/
i took this from the blog.
....
HOW DO WE DO IT?
The external manager may be removed by way of a resolution passed by a simple majority of participants present and voting at a general meeting. A general meeting may be convened at the request in writing of not less than 50 Unitholders (Appendix 6 of the Code on Collective Investment Schemes).
Is the above true? If it is, i dont mind buying some shares to show support
(18-01-2017, 10:12 AM)money Wrote: [ -> ] (18-01-2017, 08:42 AM)lanoitar Wrote: [ -> ]Rare shareholder activism. I understand that Mr Low has gotten support from > 50 unitholders to convene the EGM:
REMOVAL OF THE MANAGER OF SABANA REIT
http://sabanareit.blogspot.sg/
i took this from the blog.
....
HOW DO WE DO IT?
The external manager may be removed by way of a resolution passed by a simple majority of participants present and voting at a general meeting. A general meeting may be convened at the request in writing of not less than 50 Unitholders (Appendix 6 of the Code on Collective Investment Schemes).
Is the above true? If it is, i dont mind buying some shares to show support
For a long while, i think reit managers have been taking advantage of shareholders in many ways. Not just for this reit, but like capitalcommercial trust and keppel reit too
Remuneration packages of REIT manager are similar to fund managers. They get an annual fee for managing the portfolio (i.e if the fund is worth s$ 1 million, they may get 1% of s$1 million as management fee). They do get a performance fee for better DPU but in my view, it is more important to grow the size of the asset under your portfolio to earn more money; what better way than to keep buying more properties to increase this base.
It is a pretty stable business in which good/bad years, you still get quite a handsome sum of revenue. Of course, in good years you get even better revenue. This is why I love the business of REIT managers!
Moving to Sabana's case, it reminds me of Sing Holdings incident in which we here tried to mount a less garang attempt of sending email to their IR
<vested in ARA due to this biasness>
For this reit , the manager has gone too far , and the unitholders are no longer bearable . So many acquisitions were non accretive.
We are officially the worst performing REIT in Singapore registering a total return of -25.4% in 2016 (source: dollarandsense.sg). Compared to our peers, Viva Industrial Trust (+16.0%) and Cambridge Industrial Trust (+3.6%), it is obvious they are doing it right and we are doing it wrong.
We bought the Changi South Property from our sponsor, Vibrant Group Ltd for $23 million. Independent and separate valuation by Knight Frank and Savills also say it is worth exactly $23 million. This same property sat in Vibrant Group Ltd's books at $9.94 million. The work done by the Manager is merely administrative in nature but they want $200,000 for their effort.
Monetary Authority of Singapore has confirmed that internally managed REIT structures are allowed in Singapore (Section 9(A) Response to Feedback Received - Consultation on Enhancements to the Regulatory Regime governing REITS and REIT Manager on 9 Oct 2014). Croesus Retail Trust is now operating with an Internalised Manager. We do not need an External Manager who charges multiple fees at a rate they insist is "industry practice".
Go to SabanaREIT.blogspot.sg to join us in removing the manager
(19-01-2017, 08:33 AM)ACTIVIST SPEAKS Wrote: [ -> ]We are officially the worst performing REIT in Singapore registering a total return of -25.4% in 2016 (source: dollarandsense.sg). Compared to our peers, Viva Industrial Trust (+16.0%) and Cambridge Industrial Trust (+3.6%), it is obvious they are doing it right and we are doing it wrong.
We bought the Changi South Property from our sponsor, Vibrant Group Ltd for $23 million. Independent and separate valuation by Knight Frank and Savills also say it is worth exactly $23 million. This same property sat in Vibrant Group Ltd's books at $9.94 million. The work done by the Manager is merely administrative in nature but they want $200,000 for their effort.
Monetary Authority of Singapore has confirmed that internally managed REIT structures are allowed in Singapore (Section 9(A) Response to Feedback Received - Consultation on Enhancements to the Regulatory Regime governing REITS and REIT Manager on 9 Oct 2014). Croesus Retail Trust is now operating with an Internalised Manager. We do not need an External Manager who charges multiple fees at a rate they insist is "industry practice".
Go to SabanaREIT.blogspot.sg to join us in removing the manager
I'm not a unitholder, afraid cannot help
but I fully agree with what's being said here.
And that's the issue with many REITs.
It's just a vehicle for parent to offload and recycle their capital
Worse still, the managers get rewarded for buying stuff. Even when it's a stupid deal.
I hope this succeeds