CAD is a made up number. Simply look at how CAD is derived and you will see the components. The gist of the issue for NRF is whether it is made up with integrity, or is a lie. If NRF stopped acquiring properties, it would become clear which it is. I don't expect NRF to stop acquiring, even for a short while. So it may take longer to determine which it is.
Out of curiosity, what type of customer service problems are you experiencing?
Many if not most brokers have free ETF trading but from a limited menu of ETFs.
I use multiple brokerages, and find that each has customer support or operational weaknesses in particular areas. That is to say, matching the brokerage to your use is important. Bonds, mutual funds, ETFs, stocks, options, margin, shorting, commissions, reporting...
No, I did not say that (nor did I say dar every said it was a bad idea, nor did I expect Europe to be accretive) . I did say that doing deals that don't work in the long term absent a spin off or greater fool should be avoided. There are many things outside NRF's control to make such a deal work. European assets are getting to be a pretty good percentage of NRF's properties.
But, but, but...I thought Hamo was too smart to do deals that were not accretive?
Seriously, the concept of being a go-anywhere reit, then spinning off pieces when a valuation opportunity presents itself, is ripe with pitfalls. They should only do deals that work in the long term even if you hold them, because you never know when conditions will change and you will not be able to spin them off or find a greater fool.