Feeling they are trying to pull a fast one on us with the MANAGEMENT in CAHOOTS!

This sort of takeover is obviously orchestrated by management. Selling out the company to a private entity. They probably have some grand plans readied.

Was informed that they will relist in JPX with lower yield expectations, thus higher price of shares expected.

Depends what the rules for REITs are in Japan.

In SG, the company has to pay out 90%.

What I posted there is like this. Presently at 1.17 , the yield is around 7.3%

If the expections in Japan is only 5%, the shares can be priced at 1.70 !

Plus they can probably refinance the loans at lower Jap bonds, etc

I think they will drag to Oct.

Reasons:

a) Blackie is accumulating shares to vote

b) they will try to court some of the smaller share holders and maybe off market transactions will happen with some other sweetener

c) it is the bigger ones whom they face hurdles eg Blackrock, Value, Vanguard

This fella Goh sold at lower price in April



Is he gearing to oppose the scheme? 7.11% is pretty substantial

You can also note that the manager is taking this opportunity to profit. Meaning they are in Cahoots with Mr Blackie

This post has been edited by prophetjul: Jun 30 2017, 09:17 AM

http://preview.todayir.com.sg/croesusretai...33576360151.pdf

Seems the manager of Croseus is in conflct of interest?

Anyone?

Someone is satisfied with Blackie's offer....Malaysian. Who else?

http://www.theedgemarkets.com.sg/smr/?q=ar...302f99-87346249

SINGAPORE - The swing voter in Blackstone's bid to take Croesus Retail Trust private has raised its stake in the Japan-based retail business trust even as it remains undecided on whether to tender its units to Blackstone.

GKG Investment Holdings (GKGI), which holds the single largest stake in Croesus, scooped up about 9 million units for close to S$10.6 million at an average price of S$1.177 on Wednesday (June 28), filings to the Singapore Exchange late on Thursday showed.

On Wednesday, private equity firm Blackstone launched a cash offer to buy out Croesus at S$1.17 per unit via a scheme of arrangement, also known as an "all-or-nothing" deal.

Mr Goh Yew Lin, managing director of GK Goh Holdings, which controls GKGI, told The Straits Times: "We haven't decided whether to accept. We invested in Croesus because it has an excellent portfolio of assets in Japan, and the trust was for a long time trading at an exceptionally attractive yield."
"Although Blackstone's bid is at a premium to the undisturbed price, they're very smart investors who clearly expect further upside by buying at these levels. We'll wait to see what the independent advisers recommend before making a final decision.

"Meanwhile, if the bid price is revised upwards, or if someone else comes along with a higher bid, we wouldn't be unhappy. Even without that, the price differential from S$1.177 to an effective bid price of S$1.21 should give us a decent return over a 3 month holding period."


Croesus units were hovering between S$1.180 and S$1.185 early Friday.

On the face of things, the market seems to be pricing in a premium to Blackstone's S$1.17 cash offer. But Blackstone's offer effectively works out to S$1.21, if a four cent September dividend is priced in.

Blackstone had earlier said that unit holders who accept its offer will not be denied Croesus' September distribution of 4.06 cents per unit.

If competing offers do emerge, or if steps are taken by any party to block the scheme, Blackstone can use a "switch option" to proceed with its acquisition by way of a general cash offer at the same or better terms to the scheme.

GKGI would also be in a place to play kingmaker with its stake now at 7.11 per cent. Prior to Wednesday, GKGI's stake was 5.94 per cent.

Mr Goh said he has no knowledge of any rival bidders now, but "one can always hope."

He said: "Good assets with decent yields are not easy to come by, and perhaps this will draw the attention of another potential acquirer."

Separately, Croesus Retail Asset Management, which manages Croesus Retail Trust, said on Thursday that it had offloaded its entire 0.62 per cent stake in the trust for S$5.6 million, fetching S$1.80 for each unit.

These were units issued to the trust manager earlier this year as part of its management fees.

Also on Thursday, the brother of Mr Jeremy Yong, who is an executive director of Croesus, picked up 200,000 units at S$1.18, lifting his holdings in Croesus to 0.25 per cent.

Croesus has said that it will appoint an independent adviser in due course. This adviser's recommendations will be laid out to unit holders in the scheme document.

http://www.straitstimes.com/business/compa...s-why-it-raised

So we lose our Qtr1 DPU........

Meaning they are trying to shortchange us of our 2.05 DPU for Qtr Jan to March

Yeah.

They are trying to pull a fast one over the shareholders.
Do not think the Fund managers like Blackrock, Vanguard will be that stupid, nor Goh GK

ALL very good points.

Maybe I can answer one of the question on DPU payment. For a REit to be a Reit, the company has to pay out 90% of its income in a financial year. If it does not, the income is subjected to company tax as with any other company.

On the administration of a successful takeover, the payment point is a good one. How LONG before we receive our proceeds?

This?

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Joint%20Sc...t&FileID=459186

The 2.05 is not specifically mentioned in the doc AFAIK.

However, it does mention the 4.06 cents of DPU if the scheme is concluded by Oct 2017.

So we can only assume it is included in the 4.06 cents for Jan to Oct.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Investor%2...t&FileID=459188

This post has been edited by prophetjul: Jul 3 2017, 09:29 PM

Should the resolutions for the EGM be the same as the conditions of the offer? I think it should.

http://www.theedgesingapore.com/smr/?q=art...e31ad7-87424977

Lessons learnt from Croesus Retail Trust
By:
The Edge Singapore
SINGAPORE (July 3): There was little to suggest that Croesus Retail Trust would leave any significant mark on the local real estate investment trust sector when it listed in 2013. For starters, it is not even a REIT. It is a business trust that simply chose to behave like a REIT – notably by paying out all of its distributable income. CRT was also not backed by a major property development group with a pipeline of assets for it to acquire and grow. Also, all its properties were in Japan, making them unfamiliar to many investors in Singapore.

Reflecting these negative factors, CRT was trading at stubbornly high yields within months of its listing. Yet, it managed to develop a decent following among investors, including some institutional investors, by sticking to what it had set out to do. Over the last three years, CRT managed to steadily grow its revenue, net property income and distributable income. Its unitholders earned a good return despite its unit price remaining painfully depressed.

REITs are designed to deliver the bulk of their total return through their distributions. While some REITs trade at higher yields than others, what really matters is how much cash their underlying assets deliver. In short, the quality of a REIT’s assets and management count for more than anything else.

CRT is not, of course, the only well-run REIT in the local market. Its real claim to fame is that it chose to internalise its manager, abandoning the external management model that every other locally listed REIT has adopted. The external management model is widely said to be advantageous to REIT sponsors, and it is one reason some foreign REITs have chosen to list in Singapore. REITs in more developed markets such as the US and Australia are typically internally managed, which some observers say better aligns the interests of their managers with those of their unitholders.

The big question is how much a REIT should pay to achieve that alignment of interests. CRT acquired its manager last year for $50 million. The acquisition was part-financed by a 1-for-22 preferential offer of 27.7 million units at 79.7 cents a unit, which raised $22 million. The remaining $28 million was funded partly by $10 million that CRT had on hand, and partly by the proceeds of a $60 million bond issue in April last year.

The principal owners of the manager were Jim Chang and Jeremy Yong, currently CEO and managing director, respectively, of CRT. Chang and Yong provided assurances that they would not abandon CRT after selling it the manager. They also agreed to spend $16 million of the monies they received to purchase units in CRT in the market. Meanwhile, the whole internalisation exercise was presented as a transaction that would boost CRT’s distributions per unit. Yet, when it was put to a vote, it garnered just over 66% support. This was more than the simple majority needed to pass, but it suggested that a significant number of unitholders were not in favour of the deal.

Whatever the benefits of having an internalised management structure, the lesson from CRT’s experience is that internalising an external manager for a price has the potential to draw resistance from investors. If more REITs have an internalised structure in the future, it is likely to be because they came to market that way.

Now, as CRT prepares to be delisted and taken private, it is perhaps delivering its final and most important lesson to the REIT sector. On June 28, it said funds affiliated to Blackstone Real Estate had offered to acquire all its units at $1.17 each. This is 38% more than CRT’s volume weighted average price for the last 12 months. It is also a 24% premium to CRT’s last transacted price before trading was halted on June 27, ahead of the announcement of the deal with Blackstone’s funds. It is also a nearly 22% premium to CRT’s net asset value (NAV) as at March 31 of 96 cents a unit. In fact, the $1.17 offer price is more than CRT’s highest ever closing price of $1.09, set shortly after it listed in 2013.

Unitholders of CRT also stand to collect another payout before parting with their units. Under the terms of the offer from Blackstone’s funds, if the transaction is completed on or before Oct 31, unitholders may receive distributable income of about $31.3 million, representing 4.06 cents a unit.

CRT is not the only REIT to turn to private equity investors to obtain a valuation it could not get in the public market. Saizen REIT, which held Japanese residential properties, did something similar two years ago. On Oct 23, 2015, the manager of Saizen REIT said it had received a firm offer from Lone Star to acquire all the REIT’s properties at a price that was 3% above its reported NAV. At an EGM, 92% of its unitholders approved the sale of the assets and a return of the cash proceeds.

Clearly, other REITs trading at high yields and discounts to their NAV ought to do right by their unitholders and pursue similar monetisation initiatives.

So was I , a gold man in 2002. Well prepared for the 2008-09. We are getting to the 10 year anniversary. So any thing can happen!

My gold holdings have 'yielded' around average 23% p.a

about 10.5% CAGR

In MYR terms of course. Not too shabby. better than any FD returns.

This post has been edited by prophetjul: Jul 12 2017, 08:21 AM

Well. everyone has their own biases, especially when their livelihood depends on it!
I do think they go a bit over board. However, the fundamentals are there for all to see.
Bot gold in 2002. I got out of banking stocks in 2005-6.

once I had 40% of my portfolio in gold! That was because of the spike in price. Nowadays, I have about 10% in gold, out of which I trade 3% of it.
However, I may tweak it some what if I do not feel good about the financial world.

Started with physical.

Went into mining stocks for leverage.

Now having some of each..............physical for SHTF, ETF and miners for trading

I have both physical and ETF. Not interested in local paper. The premium is too high for trading.