grass roots movement started here. sandeep seems like a nice guy and all. but we want performance.
i have a feeling ggp will take another plunge unless they announce something substantial, like a dividend hike. take a look at 1yr chart of peers like simon or taubman. their price did not tank last year like ggp. their dividend yield is 3% which is low amongst the reit universe. but it is price you pay for relative safety.
ggp's yield is even lower at 2.5% and yet has volitility equivalent to corner strip reit's that have 5% yield or higher. not impressed. i don't see how ggp will raise dividend unless they do (gasp) a stock dividend again.
just doing my duty Dabqs. like the bikini.
just think, what would happen if that bikini malfunctioned ? the fat chick's bits will be hanging out for the world to see. lifeguards go blind, kids screaming, dogs running away, pure pandemonium.
reitboom has to be kept in check. lest you and others get exposed to his hairy pendulous crevasse strewn mind.
uhm . . . not really. John was a really nice guy (as long as you agreed with him), and possibly a nicer guy than Mr. Sandeep.
But he wasn't actually very good at running the company. He turned his back on business fundamentals, took advice d'jour on how to motivate the employees from the Human Cattle department. He approved many initiatives, but failed to staff, equip, or support them so they could have a chance of success. GGP's climb from the 20's to the 60's in the decade before the collapse had very little to do with how the company was run, but happened in spite of it.
When things got really tough, John violated his espoused ethics and the terms of his family's trust fund, by backing his buddy Bernie's over-leveraged personal gamble on GGP stock. That may make for an interesting a TV drama, but it's bad business in the real world.
I also want "performance", but in the form of real growth of productivity and quality of assets. So nice as John is, he wouldn't be on my list of people to run any publicly-traded organization - not even a not-for-profit.
I think you're missing the point here. I do not want bucksbaum back. why would I want him back? the name bucksbaum was mentioned only for the effect.
we're stuck below 17 because I believe current management has not converted expectations into real value. we've come to a point where we may have to let somebody else give a go. not bucksbam but somebody who has proven track of performance.
It is about total return not dividend yield. So you would like to bring back the CEO who led GGP into bankruptcy? The dividend will not be raised for some time. GGP is going to grow its business and hopefully increase the share price. The CFO mentioned on the call yesterday that GGP actually will have negative cash flow after to paying current dividend but may make up the shortfall from asset sales. If you want a dividend increase you are in the wrong stock. If you believe that GGP will have a higher share price with its better quality portfolio and improved results you are in the right stock.
Dividend will likely get raised in 2013. They carefully split the contribution of RSE into 2011/2012 to satisfy distribution requirements that are not fully met by the $0.10 quarterly dividend. It was a bit over $0.20/year that was attributed, meaning we should expect a minimum of $0.60 in 2013.
what' more, i have reservations whether sandeep is capable of squeezing as much from the tenants and lenders. perhaps bucksbaum is not the best alternative but an alternative, nonetheless, may be what's needed.