Croesus Retail Trust, HPH Trust, NBN Trust and SingTel.

Reader on HPH Trust, its decreasing NAV and distributions:
Thanks for your reply. I knew a lot of readers were asking you to talk to yourself on may things so definitely appreciate your time on this topic.

AK:
HPH Trust's land leases are decaying rapidly. I blogged about the Trust a few times before and why I avoided it.
(They were holding back much needed CAPEX to maintain DPU for a while but CAPEX could not be held back indefinitely.)

Reader:
As u know, we received the CRT scheme document and the suggestion is for us to accept.
At current price, we are looking at yield of 6.6% or slightly higher if the scheme went through. But there isn't any obvious choices (trots or trust) in the market that would match or beat that. Would like to understand what are the top few choices you would have redeploy the capital return.

AK:
If you are looking for 6.6% yield, I think it is not difficult to find but I would say yield isn't everything and it is obvious from the fact that I bought into SingTel instead of NBN Trust recently. 
See: Avoiding the instant gratification of yield.

Wondering to vote for or against the sale of Croesus Retail Trust? See related post #1 below for some of my thoughts.

Related posts:
1. Croesus Retail Trust.
2. HPH Trust.
3. SingTel or NBN Trust?

Is Keppel DC REIT an attractive investment for income?

I have been asked on various occasions what do I think of Keppel DC REIT and my usual reply was it was still something very new to me. 

I didn't know what to make of it but just looking at the prospective distribution yield was surely the wrong way to value the REIT although as income investors it would be the first thing that drew our attention.

In the latest copy of The EDGE, we would find a well written article on page 27 on Keppel DC REIT. The title is attention grabbing as it included the phrase "solid DPU growth". 

Read the article carefully and we would learn why data centre REITs are so different from other industrial property REITs.

I would draw attention to the following:

"For Keppel DC REIT, depreciable infrastructure accounts for approximately 70% of the development cost, with the building shell accounting for the remaining 30%."

This is an important bit of information, an eye opener, and it is just one line in a full page article. It could be quite easily missed or even dismissed.

Citadel 100. Land lease expiring in 2041.

Even for seasoned income investors in S-REITs, we would think industrial property REITs are just landlords. Buy or develop an industrial property and find a tenant or tenants. 

The tenants do their business while the REIT manages and maintains the property (if the building does not have a Master Tenant) and, of course, collects rent.

When we think of asset value, we think of the value of the buildings a REIT holds. We think mostly of brick and mortar. In the case of a data centre REIT, the asset value is not just the building but significantly the high tech infrastructure in the building. 

Of course, what the high tech infrastructure is exactly will remain Greek to me. I only need to know that it has to do with IT and it is very costly.

By now, most of us would have realised why listing the REIT at a premium to NAV was a very good deal for Keppel T&T. IPO price was 93c a unit while NAV was 86.6c a unit.

For those of us who still don't get it, remember why there is a preference for properties which are freehold instead of properties which are leasehold? It has to do with depreciation. 

Freehold properties (and Keppel DC REIT has 3 of them at IPO), theoretically, do not depreciate.

T25. Land lease expiring in 2021. Option to extend for 30 yrs.

However, if a data centre REIT should own a freehold property, it would also depreciate since "depreciable infrastructure accounts for approximately 70% of the development cost". 

To be able to sell a depreciating asset at a premium to valuation is a wonderful thing. It is like selling a used family car at a premium to market price.


Understanding Keppel DC REIT better now, we want to remember that as a REIT pays out most of its income to unit holders as dividends, it won't be wrong for us to question if the current income distribution from the REIT, all else remaining equal, is sustainable. 

After all, the high tech infrastructure has to be maintained regularly or even replaced periodically. Where is the money going to come from?


We could, of course, argue that because Keppel DC REIT's gearing, post latest acquisition, is 29.9% and, so, it has ample debt headroom to borrow more funds to maintain or replace ageing high tech infrastructure. 

However, if its NAV is formed mostly of depreciable assets, would gearing increase without any additional borrowings, given time? I am not IT savvy but I hear that IT infrastructure suffers from rapid obsolescence.


So, I went online and searched for the cost of maintaining and even replacing the high tech infrastructure in data centres. 

It seems that the costs are usually less than 10% of the revenue generated but in certain years the costs could spike. 

For anyone who is investing in Keppel DC REIT, this is something very important to bear in mind.

S25. Land lease expiring in 2025. Option to extend by 30 yrs.

With an estimated DPU of 7c, post latest acquisition, and a closing price of $1.095 a unit, we are looking at a distribution yield of 6.39%. I would argue that, realistically, this is not a sustainable distribution yield, all else remaining equal.


It might sound totally unrelated but it could be useful to bring up the case of HPH Trust which maintained a higher DPU than it should for a while by delaying much needed CAPEX. 

I believe that was a move to support its unit price and to keep investors happy. The Trust could not delay those CAPEX forever.


When we invest in any business or business trust that requires regular and relatively high CAPEX, we must be ready for it. 

If these entities should pay out all their income to investors as dividends, we must be realistic enough to understand that something must give.


I would demand a higher distribution yield, free of any financial engineering, before investing in Keppel DC REIT, if ever. How much higher? I have yet to decide.

Related posts:
1. The instant gratification of yield.
2. Overpaid for our investments in biz trusts?

Overpaid for our investments in business trusts?

As investors, we do our best to look ahead but because we have imperfect knowledge, what we can see is probably just our best guess. Things are usually clearer on hindsight.

As income investors, we can be too concerned with yields sometimes and it does not help that certain consultants also put their focus on yields. To be fair, this is a common pitfall and I fell into such pits in my early days as well. However, consultants are professionals and, as a consequence, sometimes, they have a bit more reach. We should be more wary.

I do not have perfect knowledge. I am not a professional. I am just your average retail investor who has opened his fair share of cans of worms. I just share my thoughts and experience here in my blog but, remember, that they are not sacred in any way.

On 20 June 2014, I wrote a piece in response to a report which quoted a consultant as saying "If you want to invest in business trusts, you shouldn't be looking so much at capital gain... your objective is more dividend yield. Prices do come down, but you actually still get your dividend yield."

I took issue with that statement and listed 5 reminders to myself:

1. Dividend yield is a key factor, not the only key factor.

2. Keep an eye on possible capital gain or loss.

3. Look at yield on investment based on current price.

4. Could it be that we are taking back our own money?

5. Does the yield sufficiently compensate us for the risk?

To read the complete blog, refer to related post number 1 at the end of this blog.

Over the weekend, an article in The EDGE said:

"There is no doubt now that investors who bought shares in Hutchison Port Holdings Trust (HPH Trust) at its IPO four years ago paid Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-shing's corporate stable far too much."

I did not apply for shares in HPH Trust's IPO.

Actually, I have not applied for shares in any IPO for many years. I think avoiding IPOs has generally been more rewarding for me than not. So, this might be a good rule of thumb for me to stick to.

Similarly for Croesus Retail Trust's IPO, I avoided although I was interested and watched in disbelief as the unit price was chased to a high of $1.18. Its yield was being compressed so much as its price shot through the roof and some people still said it was attractive enough to buy. Did they know something I didn't? I wondered to myself, self-doubt settling in.

Well, this is just a short blog post to remind myself that REITs and business trusts are relevant tools for income investors and that there are many things to look out for, not just their distribution yields. Look at yields only and I could end up overpaying.

Related posts:
1. High yielding business trusts: A discussion.
2. HPH Trust: Storm clouds over a safe harbour.
3. Croesus Retail Trust: Motivations and risks.

HPH Trust: Storm clouds over a safe harbour?

The last time I blogged about HPH Trust was in August 2011 or almost two years ago. I was not really keen on the Trust primarily because I felt that the distribution yield was not high enough compared to the alternative investments available.

Now, I think all of us must have read or heard of the strike by port workers that is going on in Hong Kong. It has been going on for a month or so by now. There doesn't seem to be an end in sight.

I was told by a friend in Hong Kong that she sympathises with these workers because apparently their salaries are kept really low to help the port operations keep cost levels almost unchanged in the last 10 years! That is truly amazing.

I thought she could be exaggerating but reading the weekend edition of The Business Times this morning gave her account credence. Ideally, a raise of some meaningful magnitude has to be given.

The port workers are asking for a 20% increase in salary but have been offered only 7%. This explains the gridlock.

The strike is costing the port millions in losses every day and if the port were to give in to the request for a 20% increase in salary, unit holders of HPH Trust could see DPU reduce some 5 to 7%.

Honestly, if I were a unit holder of HPH Trust, I would vote to give these workers the raise they are asking for even if it means having less income distributions for myself. 10 years without a raise is pretty bad.

Then, the question of whether HPH Trust is a good investment comes to mind again. Why would Li Ka Shing spin off his port assets? He is a savvy businessman, an old ginger. If a business is very lucrative and growing, why would he list it?

Well, some might sell a fantastic asset because they need money but definitely not Li Ka Shing. So, why?

In the article today, it was reported that Hutchison's market share of Hong Kong port operations has grown to 53% by 2012 although container volume has been shrinking.

"The port has been in a slow decline despite the double digit growth in China's trade over the last decade; falling victim to competition from Chinese ports and Singapore. The fast-rising costs of living at home in recent years could worsen the crunch. Last year, total throughput volume decreased by 5.3% year on year."
The Business Times, 27 April 2013.

This seems like a business that is fiercely competitive and HPH was already losing out to competition even before the strike by port workers. Could things get any worse?

At US$1.01 a unit, the IPO of HPH Trust was definitely a good deal for the issuer.
Added (1 Feb 17):

http://www.hphtrust.com/distribution.html

Related posts:
1. HPH Trust: Interim Financial Results.
2. HPH Trust: A weak debut.

HPH Trust: 2011 Interim Financial Results.

On and off, I would look at HPH Trust because there seems to be so much interest in this business trust from readers. Anyway, as I invest primarily for income these days, HPH Trust fits into my strategy but is it attractive enough for me?

Before I continue, I will say that  I do not like the fact that it is denominated in a foreign currency and in US$ to boot. On my investment journey, I have only once bought a non S$ denominated stock, TCIL, and that was in HK$. It is a bit messy having to take into consideration exchange rates.

These days, with the S$ strengthening against the US$, chances of exchange rate losses are even higher. So, for me to be strongly interested in HPH Trust, there must be a bigger margin of safety. This, fundamentally, would take the form of a higher distribution yield at the most basic level.

HPH Trust released 2011 Interim Financial Results recently and declared a DPU of HK 14.3cents. It has a NAV/unit of HK$ 7.80.

Closing price on 3 August was US 73.5cents.

Now, isn't this one confusing counter? We have to contend with US$ and HK$. Of course, being in Singapore, we have to convert everything to S$. Wah, I am getting a bit giddy already!

US$1.00 = S$1.174
HK$1.00 = S$ 0.15056
(Source: UOB, 4 August 2011)

Unit price:
US 73.5cents = S$ 0.853

DPU:
HK$ 0.143 = S$ 0.0215

Well, let us see if HPH Trust is able to deliver the full year DPU of US 5.9c as per their forecast. This would be a DPU of S$ 0.0693 or a distribution yield of 8.12% at the unit price of US 73.5c.

If we were to believe that HPH Trust would deliver as per forecast, I would not enter at the current price either. Why? Well, I can get more than 9% distribution yield from Sabana REIT and AIMS AMP Capital Industrial Trust without all the messy foreign exchange calculations now anyway. A 8.12% yield from HPH Trust does not even come close.

Then, fundamentally, would I ever be interested in HPH Trust? If it were to offer a 10% distribution yield, why not? That would give me the larger margin of safety I am looking for. Everything else remaining equal, it would mean a unit price of US 59c before I get my feet wet. Wishful thinking? Well, I shall wait and see.

See financial statement here.
Added (1 Feb 17):

http://www.hphtrust.com/distribution.html

Hutchison Port Holdings Trust: 86c.

Hutchison Port Holdings Trust (HPH) saw its unit price sinking lower today to close at 86c per unit. This is almost 15% lower than its IPO price of US$1.01 per unit not too long ago.

Just like what I did with Sabana REIT when it was newly listed, I used Fibo lines to estimate where are the critical supports for HPH and 86c is where we find the 161.8% Fibo line.

If 86c breaks, we could see price hitting 81c as the next strong support using the high of US$1.02 as 0%.

At 81c, it could be too tempting to refuse even though it is denominated in US$.

Related post:
Hutchison Port Holdings Trust: A weak debut.

Hutchison Port Holdings Trust: A weak debut.

Many were expecting HPH to open underwater and that was exactly what it did. I have not tried my hands at IPOs in years, taking to heart what Warren Buffet said about how IPOs are never undervalued and never good for investors. Of course, we could make money from IPOs in very bullish circumstances but Warren Buffet was referring to value and not price.

HPH touched a low of 94c before closing the session at 95c today.

Hutchison Port Holdings Trust not the cheapest container port play - CLSA. The house says based on the IPO range of US$0.91-US$1.08, “we are borderline buyers at US$0.91, (which would represent 28% upside to its target valuation at US$1.16)...at any pricing level higher than that we would rather buy China Merchants (0144.HK), rated Buy, as it has greater upside with added hinterland exposure.”  
Friday, 18 March 2011

© 2011 - The Edge Singapore

Hutchison Port traded below IPO in gray market, BTIG says. Units of the container-terminal owner were sold for 98 cents yesterday in deals brokered by BTIG Hong Kong, Managing Director Christian Kielland said by e-mail. The trust, which holds assets from Li Ka-shing’s Hutchison Whampoa, priced units in its IPO at US$1.01.
Friday, 18 March 2011

© 2011 - The Edge Singapore