Yeah, over 600.000 at 9.76 at about 9:14. There was another big one at or just before the open because volume just after the open was about 830.000. I did not see second one.
No 2014 est before late Feb earnings, cc & new presentation slides, imo. However, as they have sometimes done in the past, an acquisition announcement might estimate an increment to 2014 cad. Alternatively, if return on leveraged equity is disclosed, as it usually is, if equity invested is disclosed an increment can be calculated.
My point is thru 8/1 they closed 2.580 B worth of new 2013 investments, an average of 368.57 million per month and they did not have 368 million of proceeds from the 8/9 common offering. Then, in the 3 months ending 11/1, they only closed 198 million of new investments, an average of 66 million per month. That's one helluva slowdown in my book.. Could just be a fluke of the calendar. As I posted earlier, I'd rather have good deals than rushed deals
NRF has not been a big announcer of closings (unlike GOOD which announces every one). The exceptions recently have been the private equity deals, the 865 million mfg hsg deal and the Milford Plaza deal, probably for their size and/or uniqueness. Nevertheless, the last on the record is a huge slowdown in closings between 8/1 and 11/1. Yeah, yeah, at the 11/1 cc they had 1.3 billion in serious pipeline. It would be nice if closings on any of them got a press release. Since they are presenting on 12/3, before then would be even better.
Otherwise, we wait until late Feb to find out what new deals are closed.
Shorts are still at it. Morning smackdowns to keep the price from getting away from them. It's relatively easy with low volume on the bid. Daily pattern is getting boring.
Hey, Hamo!! Give us some closing news before your 12/3 presentation. It will give you something to talk about other than the no new cad growth 11/1 presentation materials. Don't bother with a release on Friday as nobody will be around to read it.
Divide the dividend dollars you got by the shares you got = discounted price.
Fidelity "grosses-up" the cash distribution amount for tax lot accounting purposes. Fidelity divides the cash received by 95% for a deemed gross distribution with respect to the units you held to earn this distribution.
The grossed up distribution reduces the tax basis of the units you held. Then, the grossed up amount bought new units at a no-discount price. The result is the 5% discount lowers your tax basis of your prior units in exchange for a higher tax basis for the new units. The aggregate is a wash but if you do not sell all of your units at the same time, it makes a tax difference depending on which units you sell. Tax-wise, Fidelity is correct.
NRF had a good week, considering the beating reits took and that massive short attack on Tuesday.
For the week:
NRF down .03%
VNQ (equity reit index etf) down 2.1%
SUI (pure mfg housing) down 1.7%
AGNC (agency reit) down 4.9%
My total portfolio, down 1.52%
S&P 500 up .37%
Oh well, I collected all the dividends due me and no position I hold reduced its dividend, so the change in market means nothing except to my ego.
Time for gin & tonic pretty soon. Maybe two.
I will not cannot do not offer specific investment advice to any person I do not know inside and out.
That which may be perfect advice for Peter may be totally wrong for Paul, depending upon a multitude of individual circumstances.
BTW, the number of shares is not germane. The percentage of your total portfolio is the number to evaluate.
Weighted average is required gaap. It's perfectly proper and is used for all operating metrics (income, ffo, cad etc) per share. When it comes to the balance sheet, say book value, it's shares outstanding as of the balance sheet date, not weighted average.
And NRF's reference to a 75% payout ratio is also perfectly proper and is generally accepted disclosure for that kind of ratio.
I just wanted the non accountants to understand that the aggregate cash paid out with the 21 cent dividend (which was "with respect to" 3Q cad) was a lot more than 75% of the 3Q cad dollars. This happens when new shares are issued during a reporting period. Nothing shady about it. Just a fact.
Double major for BSBA....accounting and finance; then MBA.
As to uti, of course one needs to know. Company reports 1.29 per share of undistributed taxable income as of 9/30 and there is a 50 cent dividend pending when report is issued. Is 1.29 before or after the 50 cents pending?? With agnc, it's after because they declare their dividend before 9/30. On date of declaration, debit (reduce) retained earnings (equity section) and credit (increase) dividends payable, a liability. With respect to AGNC, IR confirmed to me in an email, it's after the pending dividend.
NRF does not report uti, but if they did report, say 80 cents as of 9/30, that's before the 21 cents they declared at the end of Oct.
Another thing to learn about dividends is when they are booked as a liability, the declaration date.
Assume a brand new business with 10 million shares outstanding. The business started with 50 million cash contributed (5 per share). Assume it earns 80 million, all cash and all bills are paid before the end of the year, which is 12/31.
Before a dividend is declared, the balance sheet looks like this:
Cash 130 (50 + 80)
Capital stock 50
Retained earnings 80
If they declare a 15 million dividend in January, above is the 12/31 balance sheet.
If they declare that dividend on 12/28, the balance sheet is:
Dividends payable 15
Capital stock 50
Retained earnings 65
NRF declares dividends after the end of the reporting period, so it has the first balance sheet. AGNC declares their dividends before the end of the reporting period, so they have the second balance sheet.
AGNC also reports undistributed taxable income per share as of the end of each quarter.......an important metric for a mreit, one which few disclose. It's useful to know that undistributed taxable income number is AFTER the pending dividend is subtracted.
End of Friday's lessons.
3Q cad was 28 cents per share. The declared dividend was 21 cents. So Hamo says at the cc the payout ratio was 75% (21/28).
What is not said is the quarter's cad of 64.690 million was divided by weighted average shares outstanding during the quarter which was 231.469 million. 64.690 / 231.469 = 27.9476 which rightfully rounds to 28.
However, on 8/9 40.25 million shares were issued. Since they were outstanding for only part of the quarter, some of the shared did not get included in the denominator in determining cad per share. But all of them got the Nov dividend.
At 9/30 there were 248.978 million shares and units outstanding. All of these got the 21 cent dividend.
So the dividend payout was 52.285 million (.21 x 248.978).
Hmmmm, 52.285 million = 80.8% of 64.690 3Q cad earned, NOT 75%.
Another thing about payout ratios to focus on is which ratio is being used. I usually use cash paid during a calendar year to that year's cad. NRF is one quarter behind. In other words, the 21 cents we just got in 4Q was WITH RESPECT TO 3Q, but it was paid in 4Q. NRF will report a 4Q payout ratio as the Feb dividend divided by 4Q cad per share. I count the Feb dividend as the first of 2014's payout.
Just be alert when insiders talk about payout ratios. They ain't always what you think they are.
Only 28.8%, lowest I can remember in a long time short. Only 97K out of 336K reported volume.
Very unlike Tuesday when over 80% was short. Hmmmm. Running short (no pun) of ammo?....or maybe the will to throw good money after bad?
Longs just need to be patient. Shorts desperately need a bad event inside NRF. While the macro interest rate environment will affect the price with nutso, lemming swings, 100 basis points has next to NO effect on cad which is what pays the dividends. The growth in cad and dividends is still rolling along absent a big internal negative event.
94 cents in 2014 (22+23+24+25) on 1.40 cad is already in the tea leaves, imo. Shorts need a bad event to upset this, as a 75% payout ratio only needs 1.25 to pay 94.
I think Monday's spike to 9.99 was a cascade of shorts getting stopped out beginning at about 9.85 with maybe 300,000 shares traded in the spike period. Just imagine about 1 million covering in a squeeze with over 30 million to go. The shorts may have more discipline than lemming retail longs, but fear is more powerful than greed. When the dam cracks it may shortly break, unleashing a massive flood of covering. I want to watch.
Interesting tidbit from the nasdaq institutional ownership schedule. Steve Cohen's SAC Capital bought 2.945 million shares of nrf during 3Q, raising holdings to 4.25 million.
If you remember, SAC sold something like 4 million in 2Q to fund June third party redemptions.
In 3Q SAC was charged criminally....eventually pleaded guilty and must get out of managing public money.
Talk is SAC is turning into a "family office", where Cohen can only manage Cohen money.
Sooo, it looks to me, at least as of 9/30, Cohen likes NRF for his own holding. I think the guilty plea came in 4Q, so the 12/31 reading (not disclosed until 2/15/14) will be more telling.
No, because my core position of 11,000 shares at a weighted average cost of a hair over 11.01 is enough for me at the current yield which I expect will continue to be low until the expansion projects are finished in a few years. The short version is no because I am a yield investor.
If I were much younger and much more interested in growth for later income, I'd be buying like crazy until somebody invents a better mousetrap for copper or scco does something stupid like buying into a business it knows nothing about.
Copper is cyclical as well as seasonal. Accept it and the volatility that goes with it or stay out. As long as copper is an essential metal with little competition in many applications, SCCO is well positioned as close to the lowest cost producer with the largest reserves. All copper miners produce all they can and sell all they produce. The price is set by the world market. The only thing left to differentiate the best from the worst is cost per pound. If you want to invest in copper for the long, long term, imo, scco is the place to be.
Only 34.5% of today's reported volume of 400K was short. No need to use ammo when nutso market freaks out over fed minutes.
Compared to the whack many reits took today (sui off 2.5%), nrf did very well on very low volume.
What will tomorrow bring?
Between pipelines and reits I've bought about 3 dozen over the past couple of years on the knee-jerk over a follow-on offering. I've made money on every one. Lemmings are lemmings. The dilution freaks are as reliable as the sun rising. They just can't or won't understand that 99% of these offerings are to fund accretive growth.
With respect to GOOD, they typically close on a new property with their line of credit. After this property is in service producing accretive cash flow, they issue stock to pay down the line so it has capacity for the next property, typically when a closing is near term.
GOOD brags in its press releases that it has never reduced, delayed or skipped a dividend. If this language is ever substantially modified or deleted, get the hell out. Otherwise, collect 12.5 cents per share per month, mostly tax deferred, for as far as I can see. This dividend won't increase in the next 5 years, imo, but starting at over 8% tax deferred is a good enough for me hedge against inflation.
Contrary to the dilution freaks knee-jerks, the reason for the offering is to buy more properties.
Gladstone simply would not issue stock unless pending deals were accretive with leverage. That's the way equity reits work.
Any price under 18 means more than 8.33% yield which is mostly tax deferred return of capital.
No home run here as vacant properties are expensive to carry and renting these will simply mean Gladstone forgives less in management fees. BUT, as he has demonstrated over the past couple of years, he will eat as much in fees as is necessary to maintain the 1.50 dividend.
Buy it for what it is.....a tax deferred annuity.
GOOD has another common offering today at 18.15 (from 18.75 close). IMO, any price under 18 = more than 8.33% yield, mostly tax deferred and a buck on the price.
No home run here, just safe yield if wrong, and a fast 3% to 5% if right.
Huge push by shorts, continuing the downward momo after yesterday's spike to 9.99.
1.882 million short out of 2.279 total volume on 3 reporting exchanges......82.6%. No wonder price went down significantly with that kind of pressure.
Oh well, chalk today up to the short side. Took a lot of ammo, but they won.
I don't care what you did for me yesterday, I demand you do something for me today. Gimmee-a-break!!
On 12/31/11 it closed at 4.77 and the last dividend was 12.5 cents.
Today it closed at 9.65 (up 102.3%) and the last dividend was 21 cents (up 68%).
I ain't frustrated. I'm thrilled. As long as the growth ball keeps rolling and the dividend keeps increasing, I am stuffed to the gills with patience.