On the Edge: http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/in-the-financial-daily/197658-rights-issues-by-reits-a-tough-sell.html
- Rights issues by REITs a tough sell?
Written by Chua Sue-Ann
Monday, 12 December 2011 11:26
KUALA LUMPUR: It remains to see whether investors will warm up to recent proposals by Malaysian real estate investment trusts (REITs) to embark on rights issues for fundraising.
This comes as Hektar REIT and AmFirst REIT separately proposed rights issues in recent months. The former is doing so to fund new asset acquisition while the latter is seeking to reduce its bank borrowings. CapitaMalls Malaysia Trust (CMT) also recently told The Edge Financial Daily that it is considering a rights issue to raise fresh capital.
Analysts and market observers said it is generally undesirable for REITs to embark on rights issues as investors expect dividends from REITs instead of having to plough in more capital.
“Effectively, they are asking investors to spend more on their stock in these uncertain market conditions,” said a property analyst.
However, judging from the price performance of both Hektar REIT and AmFirst REIT, investors have not reacted negatively to the news. This, surprisingly, is in contrast to investors’ harsh treatment of Singapore-listed REITs that embarked on rights issues.
According to analysts, the reason why Malaysian REITs are now turning to rights issues to raise funds, instead of the usual way of borrowing or unit placement, could be because their gearing is already near the 50% threshold (of total asset value) permitted for a REIT to borrow, or that the capital they seek to raise is larger than what can be achieved with a placement exercise.
In Hektar REIT’s case, its gearing ratio is 43.4%, just below the 50% limit, based on its total debt of RM347 million and total assets of RM799.47 million as at Sept 30. AmFirst’s REIT’s gearing as at Sept 30 was 39.8% based on total borrowings of RM419.6 million and total assets of RM1.053 billion.
On Dec 8, Hektar REIT proposed a renounceable rights issue to raise gross proceeds of about RM98.4 million. Proceeds from the rights issue will be used to partially fund the acquisition of two shopping malls in Kedah for RM181 million cash.
Hektar REIT added that it would also obtain bank borrowings of up to RM87.1 million to purchase the assets. Note that it held cash and cash equivalents of RM21.3 million as at Sept 30.
The REIT has yet to finalise the actual number of rights units and entitlement basis will be determined later based on the final issue price of the rights unit.
Hektar REIT added that it will procure a written irrevocable undertaking from its substantial unitholders to fully subscribe for their entitlements, failing which underwriting arrangements would be made.
AmFirst REIT’s proposed rights issue, set on a three-for-five basis, is expected to raise gross proceeds of about RM218.8 million, based on an illustrative issue price of 85 sen per unit. The proceeds are to be used to pare down borrowings.
CapitalMalls Malaysia Trust, which also manages The Mines shopping mall, recently said it is also considering a rights issue to raise fresh capital.
AmFirst said the rights unit issue price is expected to be fixed at a discount of no more than 20% to the theoretical ex-rights price of the unit. “The discount on the issue price of the rights unit is intended to reward unitholders for their continuous support of the fund,” AmFirst said.
Thus far, investors have not reacted negatively to the REITs proposal to conduct rights issues. The unit prices of both Hektar REIT and AmFirst REIT are still traded near their peaks.
“It could be because the unit prices are currently near historical highs, and more interestingly, at the current high prices they still offer rather good yields as well [Hektar REIT at 7.6% and AmFirst at 8.6% historical yield], so unitholders are happy,” said a market observer.
Other than that, he explained that there is still strong demand for REITS in times of market volatility, especially among institutional shareholders.
“Pavilion REIT has gained 13.6% since last week’s IPO to RM1, and the yield is now only 5.7%. So, the management of REITs thought maybe a rights issue is a good idea,” he said.
The scenario is different in Singapore.
K-REIT Asia, a unit of the Keppel Land group, saw its unit priced plunge 9.7% to S$0.857 sen on Oct 18 after it announced plans to raise S$976.3 million (RM2.4 billion) through a 17-for-20 rights issue. Most of the funds raised by the REIT will be used to buy a 87.5% stake in Ocean Financial Centre (OFC) from its parent Keppel Land Ltd.
It was reported that investors didn’t like the pricing for the OFC deal, and the fact that it was a related party deal. It wasn’t entirely because K-REIT Asia had proposed to acquire it via rights issue funding.
“At the end of the day, REIT managements have to justify why they have to do a rights issue to ask for more money from the unitholders. While institutional shareholders are okay with a rights issue, it could be a turn-off for minority shareholders,” said a market observer.
Posts
2 comments:
Investors should just forget about the "attractive yields" provided by REITS that are in reality, non-existent. Something must be done to the manager's pay structure, IMHO.
Heineken Pilsener said...
Investors should just forget about the "attractive yields" provided by REITS that are in reality, non-existent. Something must be done to the manager's pay structure, IMHO.
===>>
Well said!
I've seen many such investors scuff at others who punts on a stock. They (rightly) point out that those stocks have zero fundamentals and that they are just gambling. Well, how is it different than some of these REITS?
Do they know where the money (used to pay the 'attractive yields') is coming from?
Rather important question, IMO. Cause if they don't know this answer, how will they know if their 'attractive yields' is sustainable or not?
And for some REITS, why are there constant 'revaluation of properties' included in their profits each year? Yeah, why is it so important that all their properties is revalued every year? Who really profits from such 'paper' profits?
Post a Comment