Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

ARMOUR Residential REIT, Inc. Message Board

dar200 166 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 10, 2016 12:24 PM Member since: Nov 16, 1998
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • dar200 dar200 Feb 10, 2016 12:24 PM Flag

    First, ding #$%$, you are comparing Vanguard Group to Vanguard Specialized Funds. Notice different federal identification numbers? Vanguard Group reports holdings by all Vanguard funds. The REIT INDEX FUND reports only what the mutual fund and etf own of the index fund which replicates the RMZ index.

    Next, the 41 million shares you cite are from a 6/10/15 filing in its original form reporting 5/31/15 holdings by the entire group. These shares are as reported, NOT adjusted for the 1 for 2 at 10/31/15. For your edification, once a SC 13G is filed on any company, any subsequent 13G filing on the same company is a SC 13G/A (amended).

    So, 41,022,634 as of 5/31/15, (with no intervening Vanguard transactions including dividend drips) became 20,511,317 shares of NRF, 6,837,105 shares of NRE and a tiny bit of cash for NRE fractions at the close of business on 10/31/15.

    To enhance your limited comprehension further, Vanguard GROUP owned 25,662,028 shares of NRF as of 12/31/15. These are reported on a 13F-HR, not a 13G. Consequently, the Vanguard Group did NOT sell 27 million shares as per your opening post. Actually, they bought over 5 million post-reverse shares during the above time period.

    Too bad the facts rained on your parade.

  • Reply to

    New SC 13G

    by buk957 Feb 9, 2016 9:36 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 10, 2016 9:35 AM Flag

    Try the math for a 1 for 2 reverse split at the end of Oct, 2015.

  • Reply to

    Why?!

    by mysonchino Feb 9, 2016 2:53 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 9, 2016 4:40 PM Flag

    3.00 (cad or div) x 185 million shares = 555 million of common cad annually in front of 84 million of preferred dividends and preferred down about 13.5% today. That's how nutso irrational this market is and/or how much this market hates the stink of nrf management.

  • So, less than 3 weeks ago, KBW said this:

    "Investment Thesis
    While NRF?s strong historical performance includes its legacy returns pre-2008 and value creation
    from the NSAM spin-off in July 2014, we believe several factors warrant a valuation discount to Equity
    REITs including NRF's externally managed structure and above-peer financial leverage. Factoring in
    discounts for these attributes, we derive a $23 price target, which warrants an Outperform rating. We
    believe asset sales and selective share repurchases may drive upside."

    So in today's report, KBW increased the cap rates on all the properties (hotels, the biggest sector by 1.5%), thus driving down the value of the properties. Consequently, total property value is less than book value, a preposterous position given real estate appreciation the past two years.Then they increased the discount for external management to 35% to get to 13 as the new target.

    IMO, a hatched job to keep KBW from looking foolish with a 23 target three weeks ago. Just a rationalization job to lower target closer to market. Nothing about fundamentals. Just #$%$ -covering.

  • Reply to

    KBW

    by octopusink Feb 8, 2016 5:57 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 9, 2016 10:41 AM Flag

    They are allowed to "preannounce" an estimate of earnings. They are also allowed to announce the dividend.
    Both are exceptions to the "quiet period" rule.

  • Reply to

    KBW

    by octopusink Feb 8, 2016 5:57 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 9, 2016 10:32 AM Flag

    Much of that KBW blurb is, imo, baloney, a grasping for possible rationalizations to get off a 23 price target.

    We'll find out when the numbers come out. IMO, if the numbers are stable, NRF would be NUTS to reduce the dividend. If they want to show the market is wrong on price, they should present "business as usual" for a diversified equity reit. That includes "dividend as usual" for a stable equity reit.

  • Reply to

    KBW

    by octopusink Feb 8, 2016 5:57 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 9, 2016 10:22 AM Flag

    The same nrf/nsam clustermess has existed since 7/1/14. The same clustermess existed almost a year ago when both hit record highs. What has changed?

    The proxy statements showing obscenely excessive compensation.
    The Friday night filing of the previous Wednesday morning's shareholder vote on compensation.
    Mention by name in NYT and WSJ in the context of excessive compensation.
    Disclosing the Aerium writedowns of more than 50% in fine print footnotes in the 10-Qs without a word from management.
    August: Allowing one hour between two earnings releases and start of back to back CCs, so nobody can be prepared to ask hard questions.

    In short,imo, what has changed since the record highs is the market realization of a greedy, sneaky, conflicted management. The STINK of management got out of the jar and poisoned the air in the room.

  • Reply to

    KBW

    by octopusink Feb 8, 2016 5:57 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 9, 2016 9:39 AM Flag

    I asked the same question on the IV board and would like to see the report. After adjusting for nre leaving, what operational changes does KBW note or predict? Do we have the same cad adjusted for nre but a 10 dollar lower price target? If so, it's the STINK. Or, is this a set-up for Hamo's buddies to take nrf private at 13?

  • Reply to

    Thoughts on Preferreds

    by mysonchino Feb 7, 2016 7:06 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 8, 2016 4:12 PM Flag

    All of the factors cited as warranting a discount to the stock prices (nrf & nsam) are the same now as not quite a year ago when both hit record highs.

    Yeah, macro market factors have changed to the negative, so one would expect declines in line with peers.
    But both have declined far, far more than peers. Why the excessive decline? To me, it's the stink. Tutes are still voting with their feet, big time.

  • Reply to

    Thoughts on Preferreds

    by mysonchino Feb 7, 2016 7:06 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 8, 2016 1:49 PM Flag

    "Anyone have a credible explanation for such a drastic decline?"

    The stink.

  • Reply to

    hedgefunds

    by octopusink Feb 3, 2016 10:36 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 11:48 AM Flag

    Here's a clip from a Reuters article:

    W YORK (Reuters) - Orange Capital, the activist hedge fund firm led by New York-based real estate investment manager Daniel Lewis, is shutting down after a year of poor performance, according to people familiar with the situation.

    Its main hedge fund was down 7.4 percent net of fees in 2015 through November, according to investor information seen by Reuters. Performance for December and January was not available.
    A group of stocks in Orange’s portfolio, worth about $1.3 billion as of September 30, according to a public filing, declined substantially over 2015.
    Bellatrix Exploration, a Canadian oil and gas company where Lewis is a director and had pushed for change, saw its stock drop about 60 percent. NorthStar Asset Management Group, a New York-based real estate and investment manager, fell 46 percent. And Amaya Inc., a Canadian entertainment technology company, declined nearly 40 percent.

  • Reply to

    townsend closed

    by octopusink Feb 2, 2016 6:56 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 11:08 AM Flag

    The face of the 8-K does not disclose the 10 cent limitation. That comes from the loan agreement which is Exhibit 10.2 attached to the 8-K. I pasted the provision on the IV board this morning.

    The loan agreement also limits buybacks to 100 million worth for 2016 (post-loan) and 2017 combined. That too is pasted on the IV board as a reply to "NSAM 8-K"

  • Reply to

    NSAM 8-K

    by dar200 Feb 2, 2016 9:11 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 10:08 AM Flag

    Two follow-up posts on IV board with copy & pastes from loan agreement. This shows you can get useful info from reading documents filed with the SEC.

  • Reply to

    2015 Tax Info

    by empire29_lake Feb 2, 2016 10:52 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 9:43 AM Flag

    2015 common dividend = 99.923% ROC. Whoopee!!! I overpaid my estimated taxes. No estimated tax payment in April.

    Preferred dividends = 100% taxable, BUT 53.781% are qualified for special tax rate.

    Here is an example of why preferred stock is good for common stock tax-wise. Preferred carries out taxable income first. Preferred dividends are 100% taxable before the first penny of common dividend is taxable.

  • dar200 by dar200 Feb 2, 2016 9:11 PM Flag

    Preliminary tidbits on IV board.

  • Reply to

    VNQ up 4%, NRF down 3%

    by mattmateuchi Feb 1, 2016 1:43 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 1, 2016 3:07 PM Flag

    I think you misplaced a decimal point on VNQ.......now up .7% and near its hod. Happens to the best of us, including me a short while ago.

    Your point is valid though. NRF underperforms its peers again and again and again. It's the stink.

  • Reply to

    New Land and Buildings letter

    by dar200 Jan 29, 2016 9:13 AM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 29, 2016 2:01 PM Flag

    I think Land and Buildings is fishing for some greenmail. After their first letter I looked at the nasdaq site for their 9/30 holdings of nsam. They owned none. Now nsam says they recently acquired less than 1% of the stock. If 194 million outstanding is correct, L&B owns less than 1.94 million.

    Buybacks can be done in "privately negotiated transactions". This is what I think L&B is fishing for.
    "Take us out for a fast 25% (or whatever their target is) profit and we go away." Proxy fights are expensive. A fast profit to go away takes cost and risk out of the process.

    I suppose we'll see how this plays out.

  • 1/28 press release announcing paltry 3 cent dividend says scco 88.8% owned by grupo vs 87.5% in 10/22/15 press release announcing 3Q dividend. Grupo using dividend money to buy out non grupo shareholders without paying a take-out premium.

    I predict grupo forces all out before end of 2016 for no more than a 15% premium.

  • Posted on IV board where they allow a post to be comprised of nothing but a copy & paste.

  • Short interest at 1/15 settlement
    Short interest from 12/31/15 settlement date to 1/15/16 settlement (1/12 trade date)

    NRF.......8.139 million at 12/31 to 5.984 million at 1/15, down 26.5%

    NSAM.....6.263 to 7.154 million, up 14.2%

    NRE.....1.310 million to .558 million, down 57.4%


    Of course, during the first 7 trading days in Jan (thru 1/12) NRF and NRE got creamed much worse than NSAM.
    Shorts cashed in big profits in nrf and nre. It might be a sign that shorts sensed a bottom in both so they covered extensively.

ARR
17.67-0.50(-2.75%)Feb 11 4:02 PMEST