Hey norm, the guy said he liked buying stock which was trading near its 52-week lows. Sears and Radio Shack are perfect examples of the valid fundamental reasons behind their stock prices. He's welcome to load up on them so his newcomer mind will feel good.
Maybe he'll pay some "tuition" to learn a lesson.
Look at the August presentation slides.......management wants 6% yield which at 1.60 = 26.67. BUT, what management wants, so far, has not happened by a long shot which is why I think Hamo will do what he reasonably can to get the price up. Listen to today's presentation.
According to statements made on this board I am not the biggest holder.
By following what I say, the only thing you know is whatever happens to your nrf/nsam stock also happens to the largest position in my portfolio. I do not bat 1,000.
No, I didn't predict nrf would be in the 20s by year end. I said I believed the combined price would be between 40 and 50.
With a yield over 9% which I believe will be 100% roc, I think nrf is a screaming buy for the yield investor. Did I say a stinko rate on a 275 million loan was reason to not buy or to sell?
So, now you admit you were "maybe" referring to yield on leveraged equity, which is after subtracting the cost of debt, which means it is irrelevant to 4.6% being too high a rate. Again you refer to total return on stock which is also irrelevant to the relative cost of debt.
Last spring's healthcare buy was financed at 4.31% fixed for FIVE years, not 3 as here, but these were secured by mortgages. The recent unsecured DB loc floats at 3.5% over libor, which makes today's rate about 3.65%, almost 100 basis points less than the subject debt. For your information, 1% (4.6 vs 3.6) on 3:1 debt on property with a 7% cap rate means 3 percentage points on yield on leveraged equity. What would have been a 15.7% yield on leveraged equity after 1.5% to nsam becomes 12.7%. It's the difference between nicely accretive and marginally accretive.
You have a constitutional right to be wrong for any irrelevant facts you care to rely upon. It just results in a silly statement; one with no basis in relevant facts or logical reasoning.
The only problem is Hamo has not made a 16% investment in years. Hamo doesn't earn 16% or any way near it on gross money in. You can stand by pie in the sky all you want. It doesn't make 16% on gross any less silly.
You still have not cited one investment with a 16% return on the invested funds....not return on leveraged equity.....return on the gross amount invested, which is what your opening post referred to.
What properties has NRF purchased in the last two years at a 16% cap rate? You obviously don't know the difference between cap rate and yield on leveraged equity. I suggest you learn the difference so you don't make such silly statements.
Yup, newcomers like you get skinned by the pros on a daily basis. Has the thought ever crossed your newcomer mind that there are frequently valid reasons why a stock price is near its 52-week high or low?
Other bargains are Radio Shack and Sears. Help yourself to them also.
Learn this. No stock price makes new highs without making lower new highs. What makes you think that any new high is not a prelude to another new high followed by another and another?
The 8-K filed Friday after the close has proforma financial statements showing "what if" the acquisition had been completed earlier. For the 6 months ended 6/30, had nrf owned these hotels as of 1/1/14, excluding transaction costs, gaap loss would have been 10 cents per share less than historical.
I did not attempt to convert gaap loss into cad mainly because I am too lazy, but also because I think the increment on cad would only be a little bit higher on a per share basis.
In any event, nrf included this hotel group in its Aug presentation slides since they closed on the deal in June.
Sorry I was not clear with my question.
Did you establish your 10,000 share position at 17.42 with Friday morning buys? Your post was at 10:54 Friday morning.
Non deductible IRAs are good candidates for conversion to roths. To illustrate, assume the only IRA you own was funded with 60,000 of nondeductible contributions and is now worth 100,000. Any withdrawals with these numbers would be 60% non-taxable return of basis. Convert this to a roth and you have 100,000 in a roth by paying taxes on 40,000. It only works this way if you have no other regular IRAs.
Likewise, as long as you have no other regular IRAs, nondeductible contributions to a regular ira can beat being locked out of roth contributions because agi is too high. Suppose, to illustrate, your only retirement account is a 401(k) with your employer and your agi exceeds the limits to make contributions to a roth. There are no agi limits to make nondeductible contributions to a regular ira. So, open a regular ira and contribute the limit, say 5,000. This is not deductible because your agi also exceeds the limit to make deductible contributions to an ira. Two months later when the account is worth 5,025, convert it to a roth. You end up with 5,025 in a roth by paying tax on 25. There is no agi limitation on making roth conversions. This does NOT work if you have other regular iras because all iras must be aggregated to determine the basis of the amount converted to roth.
Very good, maverick. Even technically correct within the limited scope of the post.
There are always exceptions to general rules. The only way to do it properly is to extend a given set of circumstances into the future several times, each with differing assumptions about the variables. Pick the course which appears best and revisit the plan annually.
Another option, if the facts fit correctly, is to delay collecting social security while drawing down / converting taxable retirement accounts. This reduces MRDs when a higher social security is collected.
While tax free compounding is nice, it's hard to beat the wealth effect of 30 years worth of tax deferred compounding. While there are exceptions, most people would be better off by maximizing tax deferred accounts first.
You are correct........too complicated for a message board. Best advice I can offer here is to find a real expert on the subject. I suggest considering a CPA who is also a CFP.........credentials do matter. Spend the money for peace of mind. Then revisit the plan annually.
Hamo not making presentation. Tylis is lead presenter. He has sounded flat to me in the past....no fire in the belly....at least at the beginning....he warmed up later. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to hear what he has to say about yield too high.
As with Aug CC, I expect they will decline to speak for nsam at a nrf presentation, even to questions about nsam.
I hope somebody asks him the "whys" of the short sale of stock and why increase from 22.5 million announced to 30 million the next morning....."poor reception to offering" ???
From 8-K: NRF wants to be recognized as diversified equity reit.
"Based on our existing asset base and our strategic focus on increasing owned real estate, we believe that this is the appropriate time to change NorthStar Realty’s industry classification in the MSCI US REIT Index to a Diversified Equity REIT and to consider NorthStar Realty for inclusion in the MSCI US REIT Index. Furthermore, NorthStar Realty’s stockholder base is strongly supported with approximately 80% institutional ownership as of June 30, 2014. In addition, with a current common equity market capitalization of approximately $4.3 billion1, which is expected to increase by over $1 billion following the Griffin acquisition, we believe NorthStar Realty would be in the top quartile of the MSCI US REIT index, based on weighting."
I did not see any letters asking to be removed from mortgage reit indexes.
According to 8K, just rainwater with some mineral in it. From 8-K:
Mexico City, September 22, 2014, Buenavista del Cobre, S.A. de C.V. (the "Company"), a subsidiary of Southern Copper Corporation, reports that there was no second spill of acid copper sulfate solution at any of the reservoirs at the Buenavista del Cobre mine.
As a consequence of heavy rains triggered by Hurricane Odile, the Tinajas 1 and Tinajas 2 reservoirs at the mine were overflowing with rainwater. Such incident was timely communicated to the relevant authorities on September 18, 2014. The Mexican Environmental Protection Agency (PROFEPA) has announced that such discharge derives from the rainwater and contains some ferrous elements below hazardous levels, which are not considered a health hazard. (link deleted to get by yahoo police)
Water testing conducted through September 20th, 2014 by PROFEPA, CONAGUA and the Company reported normal acidity levels in the Bacanuchi and Sonora Rivers.
NLY is an agency reit. CIM is agency and non agency. Both pure mortgage reits. Should never be compared to NRF-NSAM.
My teeth are doing fine. Got a dinner trade out of nrf today. Crybabies forget that price was 26.90 (split adjusted) at 12/31/13 and today the combined close was 35.81. Price alone is up 33.12% ytd. . Add 1.50 cash dividend which is 5.58% of 26.90 and my teeth are feeling pretty good.