REITS in Singapore generally are highly geared, some are facing cashflow problems at current moment.

Investors dump, hence share prices drop.

So returns look attractive as compared to low share prices.

On the other hand , the risk of going under is equally high.

That reminds me those days where the co-operatives gave 10% int for FD , much higher than the banks.

That attracted a lot of investors to park their hard earned money with them, subsequently all went bust.

Our REITS as I understand are of low gearings, with higher capital base.

So knowing your own risk profile is important. besides the returns.

Just my opinion only.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Jul 25 2009, 03:34 PM

I agree with you.


That is why in my own opinion , REITS are attractive than to invest directly into properties. These are are lumpy and usually involving more personal borrowings.

Liquidity is a major issue, besides the properties are taken care of by the REIT management.

To sell reit shares may just need an overnight decision . Wrongly bought, can switch to next one easily.

Again, my personal thinking only.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Jul 25 2009, 01:28 PM

Thanks for sharing with me.

No doubt, on paper CHHB looks good, but past experience urge me to invest in higher liquidity investments.

Cutting loss is one option that i have to consider, than the attractive numbers appeared on the proposals.

I have one timeshare investment with CHHB ( 18k ) for more than 10 years , even if i want to at sell at a discount, hard to get any buyer.

Liquidity is still my preference. An Exit plan/door if i am not happy with it.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Jul 25 2009, 04:07 PM

Sometimes it is quite tricky when you interpret the word " returns " in REITs or in Unit Trusts investment.

First of all , DPU could mean Distribution Per Unit that could include Capital Repayments. Like the case of shipping trust the DPU as mentioned by the MOD clearly include an element of capital repayment ( out of timing different from dep ). It is diff from Dividend Per Share ( out of profit ).

For example, Although you might dep a big portion of a ship, you might be able to sell the ship at 200% of the original cost early last year , resulting a realised profit. But this depends on the economy at that moment. Maybulk was doing that.

REITS in Singapore could play on the DPU , might include some capital repayments, to show a good return as you say. ( the Shipping Trust was doing that , and in my opinion involves a bit of Creative Accounting ) A high DPU may cause NAV to drop if it involves cap repayments. A common practice for UT companies.


Low NAV in Singapore, as I understand factored in a big drop of prop value in Singapore . Singapore also depends a lot on foreigners as tourists. So yields could become attractive if share price trade lower in that sense.
And the sensible or senseless dumping of REITS by investors of cashflow fear could create a deep discount. Tenant In Arrears also going up.

The other thing you need to consider is the tax issue, 10% withholding tax for Malaysia, I have no idea for Singapore REITS .

Personally I think it is better to be prudent unless you have examined all the facts , and decide it is a good one.

The final decision is yours.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Jul 26 2009, 09:16 PM

Too slow for people from HK or China.

Depend on which stock exchange you want to refer to.

Buy put warrants if you think market is coming down.

Ya, stick to what you know best.

Whether Islamic or non islamic is not an issue, the fundamentals are more important.

ASM is more islamic, but got a lot non -islamic buyers.

Investors are more concerned with yields, RPT, gearings and cashflow of REITS.

They have to address the issues carefully.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 7 2009, 05:52 PM

I do not think REITs would produce more profits just by changing the packaging without enhancing the contexts.

Earnings and better earnings are the long term solutions.

If not , they ( investors ) just dump at one go , REITS would sink.

If they can buy today , they can sell too, if no DPU.

Who is stopping them ?

Do not be fooled by the new packaging if any.



This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 7 2009, 07:00 PM

if that is the case, a lot of people would Q up to buy I REITS ( I ATRIUM . maybe be the first in the world ) that come with 1sen DPU/Q.

I have no say, their earned money concern, not me.

Malaysia Boleh

---

Added on August 7, 2009, 7:40 pmIn the absence of the above in red, you can boost your earnings by 3X ( through creating accounting ) by adding a special code to it. AAA for example.

Like the case of US , sub prime products were packaged as " AAA" products by bankers, people just bought simply bcos of AAA labeling, but not now.

What is KPI for ? just change every dept to ACE DEPT will do.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 7 2009, 07:59 PM

Mind to share more please .

What does the law say about Related Party Transactions .

And the Expert's Opinion on the absence of Unifomed Laws


http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?f...52&sec=business


This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 7 2009, 08:22 PM

Ok lah, I OT too much.

Sori Lah

P/S : I just wonder how Public Islamic Funds going to invest. ( I have some PIDF )

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 7 2009, 09:06 PM

I do not think Private Placement should be counted as Improvement to the bottom of the company automatically , not at this stage yet.

Nor shall we take NAV of REIT at face value. I mean we should examine whether the assets are income producing or not, and comparing the yields of the assets per se. If assets consist of expensive cars for the use of the magenment team, then I would say it is not that productive.

If extra money from private placement goes to rescue or bail out the majority shareholder with so called Related Party Transaction with very low yields, then it is harmful to the minority. As I said before, the investors should make an effort to attend their AGM, at least you voice out your concerns if any. Exercise your right and voting power.

For the case of Axreit, the new property is RPT but transacted with a 10% discount to the fair market price. And part of the money is used to repay bank loan and to cut down gearing, and saving in interest. On that ground, I say it is good. Moreover, the new yield is quite attractive, compared to the existing properties.

So the moral of the story, do not judge the book by its cover ( NAV or what so ever ).

Do your homework , and if you have any doubts, ask the experts like the MOD and Jordy.

Happy Investing.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 8 2009, 10:44 AM

For any property involves Islamic loan, basically needs 2 sets of Sales and Purchase agreements, instead of one for traditional one.

Like this case may involve 4 sets , 2 by KPJ and 2 by REIT.

The cost incurred is quite shocking.

Correct me if I am wrong.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 9 2009, 06:13 PM

As far as I know, it do away with " Interest ", so the bank is effectively buying and selling the property back to you.
Of course ,interest ( replaced by other suitable words ) would be added.

The computations of interest is more or less the same.

But the fees ( legal and so on )

If acquisitions at below the market value would be good for small investors. Many other listed companies ( other than reits ) often acquire companies by paying Super premiums ( termed as Goodwill ). Also the external auditors are not serious to order the companies concerned to trim down ( impairments to ) the Goodwill during the bad times. The goodwill stay in the books likes a time bomb. Compugates or Maybank are facing such problems ( just to give some examples only ). Maybank also went against the advice given by our BNM .

So a good and efficient management team is equally important . Acquisitions might only benefit their own pockets first.

Not accusing anyone but it is a common practice in Malaysia.

Happy Investing.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 23 2009, 09:40 AM

101% agreed.

My broker gave a higher fair value of rm 2.41.

It is up to you to believe.


Attached File(s)
 AXRB_090721_RN2Q09.pdf ( 55.4k ) Number of downloads: 46

EPU is dropping from 26.6 to 16.6 ( 2009 ) bocs of revaluation of some assets in 2007/2008.

Realised EPU jumped from 11sen ( 2007 ) to 15.8 ( 2009 ) bos of higher rental incomes in 2009 . Higher DPU of about 15 to 16sen in Year 2009.

Which EPU are you talking about ?



Check annoucement dated on 21/8/2009 . Private placement and purchase of asset still under the proposed state, how to factor in the Income and number of new shares in Year 2009 ?

BTW , the analysis is talking about fair value , and not " renewed" on private placements. There is one more coming on the way in year 2010, and the yield is unknown ?

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 23 2009, 10:08 PM

If placement come in Dec09 let say, you cannot account the whole 51m new shares for year 2009, distorted . pro rated maybe ( my thinking only )

Then the rental income come in at diff timing let say Jan 2010 ? , and some distortions again. let assume full payment of building after collecting cash from placement.

But anyway, the analyst is quite sure , somewhere around RM 2.41, not too far off.

A better judgment is year 2010, if both income and placement are matching on fairer basis.

The assumption is based on DDM of 8.7%

Just my opinion.

This post has been edited by SKY 1809: Aug 23 2009, 10:54 PM