If burst, reit will have hard time as well, no doubt,
but so does banking stocks, and most stocks from construction to out there.

Property is one of biggest component in the economy.

Imagine you have 100 million to invest in reit, do you invest in a reit that has only 200 million unit?
You will have hard time to dispose, same with buying time.

Liquidity means you can dispose or buy in large quantity with ease.
It doesn't mean its price cannot swing more.

Low liquidity stock, buyer Q 1.20 with 50 lot, seller Q 1.35, you have 1000 lots, you will have difficulty to dispose in one shot.

---

Added on August 11, 2011, 1:35 pmReit and ordinary stocks are different class risk exposure.

Ordinary stocks, like financial, if recession hit, NPL sky-rocketing, it can bring down a banking stock even it is a super blue chip.

Reit
Recession hit, current tenants mostly still fulfill the lease contract signed until expired, then may be difficulty to get tenant when lease expired time.
If the reit is low in leverage, no leverage, just mean no income and expenses losses only.

Yes, if reit yield is the same with a super blue chips, the blue chip may be more attractive due to higher capital appreciation and growth when good time.
But risk wise is not the same.
Reit, you will know how much you make for this year already due to lease contract signed.
Ordinary business, the business is still on going, profit or loss not yet know.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Aug 11 2011, 01:35 PM

It depends what you want actually.

Ordinary stock income tax rate is 25%, reit 10% witholding tax.

So those ordinary stock generally has 5-6% yield, the net yield is around 4%,
reit 7.7-8% % net yield is 7%.
So there is still a gap of 3% net yield.

That's why I find difficulty to buy CMMT and Sunreit, despite quite like their properties portfolio, because it is better for me as retailers to buy those stocks that you mentioned at roughly comparable yield.

Reit is more like alternative to FD, instead compared head to head with ordinary stocks.
At least locally, because local reit is conservative in nature, as compared overseas reit with higher leverage.

Stareit, almost all are under long term lease already.
So it is like fixed income instrument, no major upside surprise nor fear about tenant issue, (if there is no further injection).
It has low gearing as well.

It one doesn't mind to collect about 7-8% yield for next for 5-10 years, and with some risk exposure, and never consider the capital appreciation, then it is probably very suitable target.

---

Added on August 12, 2011, 11:01 amThat's why do not rely solely on published data/figure, it can be distorting without knowing the real situation.
For every 3 years reit is under property revaluation, which you see the major spike in 2009.
It never crash on 2010.
It is just revaluation surplus/profit that send the figure abnormal than usual.
Operating income wise still rather steady across.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Aug 12 2011, 11:02 AM

The most BNM may do is hike another 0.25% then pause.
With current commodities price generally stall or sliding a bit, it at least temporarily relief the inflation pressure.
While economy generally is slowing down a bit, so a pause in interest rate movement is highly anticipated.

---

Added on August 13, 2011, 12:00 amDispose or not, it doesn't matter,
the 3 years revaluation already being booked into the account that showed increase in profit.


This post has been edited by cherroy: Aug 13 2011, 12:00 AM

Stareit dispose Lot 10 and its non-hospitality property is due to rationalise the group asset/reit structure, so that both SG reit and Stareit has different segment of properties.
Stareit did not dispose for the sake of raising cash.
The cash proceeded from the dispose to SGreit, was being used for acquisition/injection of new hospitality properties.

Selling off asset means realising the profit in valuation only.
Nothing to do good or bad.

If it is operating in Malaysia, please check with SC, every reit needs to have SC approval before can operate.
If it is in Sg, please check with MAS.

There is a list of licensed finance institution and company that can collect/use public money for investment purposes.
http://www.sc.com.my/sub.asp?menuid=242

http://www.sc.com.my/sub.asp?menuid=242

Already posted.

The list is about licensed financial institution, bank, investment bank or company that can collect public money for investment.

---

Added on August 14, 2011, 5:10 pmFor reit
http://www.sc.com.my/eng/html/resources/stats/REIT.pdf

---

Added on August 14, 2011, 5:13 pmMAS is equivalent to SC in Malaysia

MAS - Monetary Authority of Singapore
SC - Securities Commission.

---

Added on August 14, 2011, 5:16 pmFor MAS list
http://www.mas.gov.sg/fi_directory/index.html



This post has been edited by cherroy: Aug 14 2011, 05:16 PM

Currently Stareit doesn't generate much income, as regularisation/acquisition only completed on 3Q.

Those distribution is tax exempted can be mixture of be come from capital allowance, or capital gain realised distribution.

Any real earning/income if without any capital allowance, is subjected to 10% witholding tax.

3.199 is not its real earning/income for the Q.

This was known already, if not mistaken or as far as I remembered.

I have no problem with increase in Manager's fee if the Manager can perform and constantly seeking opportunity to increase the reit portfolio and income, as well as maintain existing property in good shape.

No point have a low manager fee while the manager doesn't look after well the property portfolio.

Most reit Manager fee is about 0.5-1%.

Same here.
Give another day or 2, may be due to weekend no business day for the transfer to go through.

Please do not include saving plan in the question.
Saving plan shouldn't be classified as investment in the first place.
It is an insurance.
Try not to pay the one year annual premium, or pre-mature cancellation, see how much you lose....
There is little flexibility in saving plan, you must pay up your premium on time each year until maturity which could be 6 years, 10 years or even more, disregard you are starving with money or not currently.

The one lower risk than reit is bond. You can get slight higher return than FD, but lower than reit generally, (excluded those junk or poor quality bond).
But personally, I won't recommend bond at current environment. Return/yield is not good enough, while risk is not low either.

Good boring dividend stock is seems better than bond while getting rather the same yield with bond, while has lot of upside potential, (yes for sure the risk is much higher than bond).

If it did (25%), I am sure reit industry will be 'hibernating".
Little people interested to set up new reit, nor list new reit.

Personally I don't see it will be, aka tax reit at 25%.

Totally removing, I rated chance like 5-10%, not very likely.

High possible I can guess is, it stays at the same.

---

Added on September 19, 2011, 2:16 pmCurrently, there are plenty of properties stock/company that holding properties for renting one aka similar to reit.
If tax at 25%, same with corporate tax.
Why is the purpose setting reit?
None.

While, it is better let the properties under ordinary property company, as you have all the flexibility in term of managing the properties, as well as access to the cashflow.



This post has been edited by cherroy: Sep 19 2011, 02:16 PM

Phone to the share registrar, tell them you didn't receive the cheque,
and they will re-issue a new cheque.

There is guideline set that reit cannot borrow more than 50% of its NAV, which is to prevent excessive leveraging, which can easily send the reit into problematic situation if market/economy or specifically property is not favourable time.
Check the earlier thread discussion.
http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1362442/+100

There is no such thing should or shouldn't.
It all depended on individual risk appetite, and risk and money management.

Even an old man 60, he can choose to have 90% in equities if the old man has a total 10 million,
as just merely 10%, already mean 1 million, enough to eat for a couple of year or ten plus year.
There is nothing wrong in this 90:10 allocation for this old man.

It all about money management.
A young people 20's but only have 20k, but it is not advisable to have 20% cash/FD, as 20% means 4k cash/FD, which it may not sufficient for emergence purpose fund.

Unit trust fund = equities = shares.

They are the same.

I do not why there are perception out there UT /= shares

You put money in UT, UT manager takes your money to buy shares.
UT = shares.

and charges you 5% + 1.5 annual management fee....

---

Added on September 30, 2011, 2:16 pmand bare zero risk of losing money....

This post has been edited by cherroy: Sep 30 2011, 02:16 PM

Income/profit made from property rental also need to pay personal income tax one.
It is not tax exempted.

Pool money with family members? wait until dispute happens time, it is worst and complicated than reit.
This is not new, we can see many many cases brother, sister, even parent dispute with joint name property. Under joint name property, either one refuse to sign, the property is doom, cannot do anything.

I bet you haven't deal with tenant before.
Sometimes, depended on luck what kind of tenants you meet.
It is not the like rent out, trouble free, every tenant pay on time one especially those low cost one.

Working profession want to rent your low cost properties?
Shouldn't go beyond 300k?
what kind properties you can get with below 300K nowadays.

You need to maintain the properties, you need to pay the maintenance fee, lot of stuff, it is almost impossible nowadays to get a residential property that can have a net yield 10%, based on current pricing of property.
Commercial yes, may be, but not residential.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mean reit is better than owning property yourself.
Both have its own advantage to the others.

Reit has one distinct advantage, you need money time, you straight away can get with 3 days, you don't need to do anything, sit back, wait pay check.
Owning property, has full control on the properties, but can be hassle.

---

Added on October 9, 2011, 10:35 amYou cannot avoid tax.
Rental income is not tax exempted.

Low cost 160k apartment can rent 2K per month? wow, this must buy then.

I only know 700k condo that rental is about 3-4k with fully furnished.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Oct 9 2011, 10:35 AM

Please forget about reit, if you can buy 160k and rent out 2k per month with prompt payment and hassle free. go ahead to buy. it is a good investment, extremely difficult to find.

I am serious too.

Both reit and self own, you don't sell property, you also not earn, little different.
Reit is about fixed income instrument, you aim for rental income, which is primary goal of the reit.
It depended on reit manager to sell or not sell. Some do sell, but majority didn't as pointed reason above.
Reit valuation is about market price, if they sell and register hefty gain, or can generate better yield, then generally higher reit price in the market will be.
By then you capital gain come from reit price increment, not actually or directly from selling property money, until reit manager decided to pay back in the form of special dividend or capital repayment (very rare).