Yes, no different at all.

1. I no count. You don't need rocket science to know that, right, just click the reit sector and see how many inside, be it from brokers online platform or KLSE website

2. If you want to keep reit 1-2 years, I advise this may not a place to be.
Dividend (the correct word is distribution) yield is ranged from 5.x% - 8.x% currently across.
It is far more enough to cover the brokerage.
Any capital appreciation is surplus, it is like fixed income instrument.

Reit shouldn't be up like ordinary stock, upside is capped by its yield.
While rental generally in at least 2-3 years lease, you won't see a sudden rise in rental/income of the reit generally, until rental market shoot up significant upon renewal, which generally unlikely to happen.

3. Wrong, It can fluctuate if there is problem in economy of properties market.
Axreit did fall to 1.00 when 2008 crisis on its height time, do did Qcap dropped to 0.8x.
Just in normal day, it generally won't fluctuate much, because its earning is highly predictable, just a little % difference.

Reit can go burst due to high leverage as well. There were a number of reit (overseas) went burst during 2008 when refinancing cannot be obtained.

The correct mindset of investing in reit is about owned a property and collect rental.

Ok, next week see you put 500k in it (CMMT).

Most reit has their own website which you can go through the details, including annual report.

CMMT - Sungai Wang, Gurney Plaza Penang.

---

Added on November 6, 2011, 12:12 pmLocal brokers general do offer such a service, you can ask them, it is different account generally.

Among the 2, I preferred Qcap instead of Pav, (sorry I may be bias, I owned Qcap), as it has better yield near 8%, discount on NAV as well.
Also Qcap is more diversified, compared to Pav.
I particular like Qcap's Tesco, its location is a golden/prime location, and value of land at there only will go up in the long term, as well as Tesco long term lease of more than 20 years.

Among three (TW, Star, Sun), I only owned Stareit, as it can provide steady long term yield, as all its properties already in long term lease already, most at least 15 years.
Although it has limited upside due to boring yield (as it won't improve further much as rental is fixed for long term already), it has little gearing, which is somehow very comfortable and reduce the risk of refinancing.
Low gearing, means they have room to leverage to have better yield, but personally view, it is better with low gearing.

Just my personal view, don't take it as advice as I may be little bias.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Nov 6 2011, 12:14 PM

Just my personal preference and advise.
It is better to use direct CDS account, instead using bank's nominee type one.

I don't see any pro on nominee account.

While nominee only can cause lot of inconvenience.
You buy a thing, you direct hold it, why use third party name to hold it?

Nominee -
-Dividend and dividend voucher you don't get it directly
And some said got charges for bank in for you (not sure on this, as I no use nominee)

- Not being sent financial report and circular on company issue.

- Share transfer can be problematic.
Unlike direct CDS, you have share in a xyz broker CDS account, you can sell it in any account of xyz (if you have more than 1 account in xyz).
or
even you mistakenly sold at abc broker, you can transfer from xyz to abc.

This is negligible as a 0.25% won't make the cost of borrowing differ too much.

The main concern on reit is always tenants issue.

Atrium price plunged to 0.7x, when one of tenants lease expired and not manage to fill in straight away resulted DPU plunge significantly during the period (which afterwards manage to get back the tenant).

Axreit plunged to Rm1.00 because of global financial crisis which people fear refinancing may become more difficult as well as tenants may move out, or facing difficulty in business due to global recession.

Almost every reit got its own website now.
KLSE website also got full details of its financial report.

You may try this website as well.
http://mreit.reitdata.com/

Personally I prefer Qcap due to its properties portfolio.

Just personal preference, not meant which is better.

There is no problem to find a stock that yield more than 3-4%, there are some good stocks out there, just risk exposure that one willing to take or not.
It is hard to compare directly as risk wise is different.

No reit can have more than 50% gearing based on its total net asset , this is stated in the reit regulation.

Yes, that's why some reit (particularly in overseas one) went under and need to fire-sale their asset to repay the borrowing, when credit market freeze time during 2008.
This is the risk of leveraging.
It has been talked before, reit needs to rely on more longer term borrowing instead short term roll over borrowing facilities, but still it depends on banks willingness to give as well.

Without leveraging, it is almost near impossible for any reit to have more than 5% yield across, and rental yield even commercial won't exceed more than 8-9%, while this not yet included the management fee and expenses incurred on the properties.
It is same with own owned properties, it is impossible for any property to get >8% yield currently if based on current valuation of properties.
It is near impossible to have a rental rate that can give more than 8% yield currently.

There is no need for private placement to pare down the borrowing if the borrowing doesn't exceed 50% of its total asset value.

---

Added on November 12, 2011, 1:52 pmIt is based on total asset which is about 800+ million.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Nov 12 2011, 02:19 PM

I won't call it as gearing ratio
but just a limiting factor for excessive borrowing based on asset it owns.

There are 2 type of gearing ratio out there, some using debt/equity, some using debt/asset.
We can't say which one is right, as both are right.

The more important thing to look at is the underlying of its properties portfolio.
The main risk come from its properties owned.

To answer your question, I would say MY reit mostly leverage is reasonable and yes, some a bit high leveraged,
But we have to consider some of them are giving about 7-8% yield.
So it is like reward vs risk.

The one low leveraged is Stareit, but some said not exciting, so there is always 2 front of opinion on leverage.

I use neither, 30% vs 50% in actual fact, sometimes, cannot conclude much out of it.
As long as they are not over-leveraged.

Why using debt/equity? But not asset?
Both set have their arguement, and both can be right as well.

The one over-leveraged one is individual owned properties.
Consider a person earn 3-4k month with little saving/asset, but can get a loan of 200k.
Don't know how many 100-200% leverage...

I more care about how they are financing, how the debt level is and vs their properties portfolio.
If they are using little borrowing to buy poor quality asset, this is not good as well.
While if they highly leverage but owning prime location properties, then it is better than above mentioned.

If refinancing freeze, properties sector crash, cannot get tenant, both crashed together, but the one with prime property has better chance of survive.

No.
Unrelated.
In fact, it may boost reit sector as a whole, as more people notice reit sector.

Qcap 1.09 also sold out.

Yup, a dividend voucher.

---

Added on November 18, 2011, 3:16 pmThere is no reit faq, as far as I remembered, but you can read through Reit V1, there are plenty of useful discussion going on previously.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Nov 18 2011, 03:16 PM

UOAreit volume sudden spike up.

That's why I preferred reit raised cash for new acquisition through private placement.
And most importantly, the new acquisition through private placement money, is not diluting any distribution while diversify the asset portfolio.

Reit is never safe, it is similar to equity.
Please do not have the wrong mindset reit is safe and can escape the market turbulence entirely.

Reit is not a safe heaven, so does ordinary bond, even sovereign bond is not safe heaven except a few really big one.

If the right issue is issued at above market price, then you can choose not to.

But if the right issue price is below, then when ex-right time, share price will be adjusted down, so you are losing the differences the between.

For eg. current share price is Rm1.00, they undergo 1: 1 right issue at RM0.80.
After ex-right, share price will be Rm0.90.
By not subscribing the right, you lose out RM0.10 straight away.

---

Added on November 29, 2011, 10:07 amWe invested in reit, the aim is for providing steady fixed income return to us.
Not continuously fork out money, and increase money inside.

They should look for private placement in the first hand before seeking shareholder money.

Right issue discount on current price won't make one any gain out of it.
Share price will be adjusted after right issue.


This post has been edited by cherroy: Nov 29 2011, 10:07 AM

Amfirst now is proposing.


Based on NAV.
Aka in % wise.

Result is always same as expectation lah.
There is no surprise on upside on income, as it just like you rent out a property with fixed rental rate already for x number of years, how to have surprise or outside of expectation?

Rental for factory is fixed already, until new lease term and new lease rate being agreed.