Post Reply
3241-3260 of 3380
Is the Master Lessee the REIT (which is bad) or the Sponsor (which is good, provided that there is no indemnification by the REIT to the Sponsor for this).
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 14:45) Posted:
Only serious retail investors will be bothered to click the link and read its entirety and
make an informed choice to buy or sell.
Goldfinger ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 14:02) Posted:
| If this is factual - should share with the blogging community. |
|
|
|
Selling pressure may have abated. laksaman57 ( Date: 27-Sep-2019 11:12) Posted:
@66.5cts, yield for
2019 - 9.62%
2020 - 9.85%
laksaman57 ( Date: 26-Sep-2019 08:56) Posted:
Gentle Reminder of article takeaway
" The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements ....
....even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs."
|
|
|
|
@66.5cts, yield for
2019 - 9.62%
2020 - 9.85%
laksaman57 ( Date: 26-Sep-2019 08:56) Posted:
Gentle Reminder of article takeaway
" The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements ....
....even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs."
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:29) Posted:
| https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
|
|
|
|
laksaman how much you stuck at ? what is your price ?
@66 cts, the indicative annualised yield for
2019 -
9.69%
2020 -
9.92%laksaman57 ( Date: 26-Sep-2019 08:56) Posted:
Gentle Reminder of article takeaway
" The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements ....
....even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs."
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:29) Posted:
| https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
|
|
|
|
This stock is literally at 10% yield, based on their projections. And the portfolio is of such a high quality. Quite strange to see it trading at this price for so long. The Queen Mary is revenue generating too - not a cumbersome, useless asset. Those pricing this in are throwing the baby out with the bath water. Only question to me is how they will raise funds for their next leg of growth. But low interest rate environment should provide some relief for them.
Gentle Reminder of article takeaway
" The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements ....
....even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs."
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:29) Posted:
| https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
|
|
Yield 9.76% @65.5cts
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:29) Posted:
| https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
|
|
Week of 16th Sep
Top 10 institution net sell (S$11.9M)
Top 10 retail net buy (S$11.5M)
To share rom Investment Moat -
" Support for the Trust
- Howard Wu and Taylor Woods, who owned the Sponsor, which managed USHI Portfolio, will roll their equity into Eagle Hospitality Trust and would own at 15.2% stake
- Howard Wu 7.6%
- Taylor Woods 7.6%
- Salvatore G Takoushian 1.2%
- If the REIT manager cease to be the REIT manager for EHT, they will lose the rights of first refusal for the properties by the Sponsor granted by Howard Wu
- DBS Bank, Wealthy clients in DBS, Gold Pot Developments and Ji Qi will own 16.7%
- Ji Qi is founder and executive chairman of hotel chain Huazhu Group. He owns 37% of the hotel chain. Huazhu Group is listed on Nasdaq"
In short - the sponsor owns 15.2% prior to IPO. DBS Banks should own more with the buy-backs and IPO undersubscription. :)
http://www.gazettes.com/entertainment/arts/catalina-film-festival-starts-ends-in-long-beach/article_80133a3a-d8ca-11e9-a776-6fece9d39202.html
"Catalina Island's ninth annual Catalina Film Festival will open and close aboard the Queen Mary this year....."
Only serious retail investors will be bothered to click the link and read its entirety and
make an informed choice to buy or sell.
Goldfinger ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 14:02) Posted:
If this is factual - should share with the blogging community.
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:29) Posted:
| https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
|
|
|
|
If this is factual - should share with the blogging community.
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:29) Posted:
| https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
|
|
As the haze clears, QM isn' t a drag.
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:29) Posted:
| https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
|
|
" The sponsor will own 18.3% of the stapled security with a lock-up agreement 12 months after the listing date" .
18.3% - Which is quite a small ownership.Goldfinger ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 13:20) Posted:
The Queen Mary is a horrible drag on Eagle. Smart
of sponsor to offload. If they dump the QM, Eagle
May soar. Until then - it will always be the Elephant squatting over Eagle. Taking it out for a massive overhaul will hit both the revenues and incur debt and equity fundraising.
Vested long. |
|
https://risknreturns.com/2019/06/20/follow-up-on-eagle-hospitality-trust/
" There was a lot of smoke surrounding the Queen Mary and I wanted to know what was relevant and what was noise.
The main issue that needed clarity on was who&rsquo s responsible for the Queen Mary&rsquo s repairs &ndash the REIT or the Sponsor.
On re-review of the prospectus, this part ended up being rather clear cut as it can be directly referenced from the prospectus amid a wall of text.
The Sponsor is responsible for the capital budget and major capital improvements
This is kind of implied from the fact that the lease on the Queen Mary was on a triple-net basis. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it was actually spelt out in a line at the top of Page 377 of the Prospectus.
Source: Pg 377 of EHT' s Prospectus
Major capital improvement definition on Pg 375 of EHT' s Prospectus
As such, even if the repair costs turn out to be massive, the REIT is not on the hook for the costs. "
The Queen Mary is a horrible drag on Eagle. Smart
of sponsor to offload. If they dump the QM, Eagle
May soar. Until then - it will always be the Elephant squatting over Eagle. Taking it out for a massive overhaul will hit both the revenues and incur debt and equity fundraising.
Vested long.
Highly possible that more letting go by Wealthy Fountain down the road !!!
Results of the next new quarters is vital.
Let' s wait for the story to unfold......
laksaman57 ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 12:34) Posted:
Nah...his remaining 43+ millions shares holding still substantial to me.
Many retail investors sold when his 127 millions share in ireit was sold but ireit was fundamentally strong.
CheeryVGoh ( Date: 22-Sep-2019 12:26) Posted:
Wealthy Fountain' s first substantial sale : sold 3mil for USD2,040,000 on 30/08/2019, not 10mil units.
Temasek had ceased to be substaintial unitholder as of 27/06. Can check out Eagle website under Invetsor relations where the annoucement was made.
Institution had smelt rats. Still don' t realize that the situation is far from good?. |
|
|
|
" It is also seeking views on whether it is appropriate for a Reit that has demonstrated good financial discipline, such as having a higher ICR threshold, to be allowed a higher leverage, say 55 per cent. "
Interesting article
By ProButterfly' s
The History of The Queen Mary
The RMS Queen Mary is a retired British ocean liner that sailed from 1936 to 1967 under the Cunard-White Star Line banner when it entered service. Cunard-White Star formed as an operating company to control the joint shipping assets of both Cunard Lines and White Star Lines when both companies experienced financial difficulties during the Great Depression. You will remember White Star Lines as being the owner and operator of the infamous RMS Titanic and that of HMHS Britannic.
The Queen Mary was the flagship of the Cunard Line from May 1936 until October 1946 when she was replaced by The Queen Elizabeth. She was officially retired from service in 1967 and made its last voyage to Long Beach, California, United States, where it now remains permanently moored. Its two engine rooms, three of the four propellers, and all of the boilers have been removed. The ship is now deemed as a building as it is permanently immovable. Currently the ship serves as a tourist attraction featuring restaurants, a museum and a hotel with 347 rooms.
In April 2016, UC assumed a 66-year master lease of The Queen Mary at an estimated cost of US$143m. UC spent US$23.5mil on repurposing of unutilised spaces and structural works on The Queen Mary and this was finally completed in December 2018. According to the valuation in Eagle&rsquo s IPO prospectus, The Queen Mary has been valued at US$159.4mil and has an occupancy rate of 69.8% as of FY2018.
UC originally revealed a US$250mil plan in early-2016 to redevelop the adjacent 45 acres of parking with a boutique hotel, restaurants, a marina, an amphitheater, jogging trails, bike paths and possibly a huge Ferris wheel. However, it seems like these plans are on-hold as we are not able to find any progress on them. Here are some of the links found online with regards to UC&rsquo s original plans for The Queen Mary:
During the time that UC reveal their plans, a 396-page marine survey of the ship surfaced and specifies that &ldquo urgent&rdquo repair work is needed an will cost as much as £ 235 million. The summary of these marine survey can be found in the article entitled
Years of neglect could imperil the Queen Mary&rsquo s future, experts say and
Queen Mary: Mayday for a Scottish monument. I quote some of the excerpts from the 2 articles above:
- One veteran naval architect has told Scotland on Sunday that the ship&rsquo s condition is so perilous that she could sink if attempts were made to tow her
- After years of neglect, the historic vessel could face some internal structural collapse within the next decade unless major action is taken soon
- The ship&rsquo s hull is corroded so severely from the inside that certain areas, including the ship&rsquo s engine room, could be prone to flooding
- &ldquo poorly planned&rdquo and &ldquo poorly executed&rdquo conversion has exacerbated corrosion in the ship&rsquo s underbelly and jeopardized its structural integrity
The point on the 396-page marine survey of the ship has not specifically mentioned in the IPO prospectus, but the prospectus specifically singles out The Queen Mary as an asset that is subjected to damages due to wear and tear.
The Queen Mary is on a triple-net-lease basis and therefore tenants are responsible for the maintenance, property tax and insurance of the asset. However, structural works and capital expenditure is still the liability of the owners.
Source: Eagle Hospitality Trust IPO Prospectus
