Month: February 2008

 

CitySpring – BT

CitySpring’s Q3 DPU of 1.6cents beats projections

CITYSPRING Infrastructure Trust has beaten projections with its performance in its third financial quarter ended Dec 31, 2007.

It has declared a distribution per unit (DPU) of 1.6 cents for Q3 FY2008, 6.7 per cent or 0.1 cent above the projected DPU provided at the time of its IPO in February 2007.

Cash earnings of $20.5 million were also 92 per cent higher than projection, CitySpring said. It defined cash earnings as the aggregate of profit before income tax adjusted for non-cash income and expenses and lease receivable repayment, after deduction of capital expenditure and before principal repayment of debt.

‘The creditable financial performance came on the back of $97.0 million in revenue for the quarter, underpinned by robust contribution from City Gas Trust, SingSpring Trust (the initial assets) and Basslink,’ CitySpring Infrastructure Management Pte Ltd, the manager of the trust, said in a statement.

All three assets in the CitySpring portfolio turned in healthy performances during the quarter. City Gas Trust registered better than projected results, benefiting from an increase in gas tariffs which took effect on Nov 1, 2007. City Gas Trust has further raised its gas tariffs by 7.6 per cent from Feb 1, 2008, against the backdrop of higher fuel costs.

SingSpring Trust maintained its average dispatch volume of desalinated water to the Public Utilities Board during the period. It expects to remain a leading supplier of desalinated water in Singapore.

Basslink achieved total cumulative availability of 98.8 per cent for the full calendar year in 2007. It expects to achieve at least 97 per cent in availability for 2008. Basslink is the electricity interconnector linking Tasmania to mainland Australia.

Said CEO of CitySpring Infrastructure Management Fai Au Yeung: ‘We are continuing to actively identify initiatives that will enhance the value of our portfolio assets and improve cash earnings as well as returns.’

‘At the same time, we remain focused on seeking quality projects, across the region, which generate long-term, regular and predictable cashflows to further enhance our asset portfolio. There is a healthy flow of potential acquisition opportunities which is keeping the trustee manager busy. We are not facing any issues with regard to raising debt to fund these opportunities.’

JTC – BT

JTC’s choice of Reit manager raises questions

Mapletree is likely to engage a PR drive to dispel any notions of conflicts of interest in its stable

JTC Corp has finally announced its selection of manager for a proposed real estate investment trust (Reit) that will hold some high-rise, ready-built properties that JTC is divesting.

However its statement, issued earlier this month, announcing the appointment of Temasek subsidiary Mapletree Investments to set up and manage the new Reit begs several questions.

What happened to JTC’s supposed earlier choice of Australia’s Goodman group, which had been widely reported in the Australian media as having clinched the job of the new Reit’s manager – a piece of market talk which JTC had never denied? What brought about a change in JTC’s mind in the preceding few weeks before it made its decision public?

Did adverse equity-market conditions make it difficult for Goodman to proceed with the proposed acquisition of the assets with a view to listing a Reit within a stipulated timeframe, believed to be end-2008?

JTC has said that Mapletree was chosen ‘after a rigorous selection process’ and that ‘all proposals were evaluated based on individual merit against an objective set of criteria’.

But some market watchers would like to have more details of the reasons that led a Singapore government agency to select a fully-owned Temasek unit for the job of Reit manager after receiving ‘quality submissions from a wide range of international and local players’.

There’s also another interesting set of questions being raised: Will Mapletree’s appointment as the JTC Reit manager create conflicts of interest within the Mapletree stable, given that the group has a range of interests involving similar asset classes?

Going forward, to what extent will the various Mapletree or Mapletree-managed entities compete for acquisitions?

Ahead of the initial public offer for the new Reit – planned for mid-2008, depending on market conditions – Mapletree’s management will no doubt be tackling these issues and making clear to the market exactly how the group is delineating its various interests.

Broadly, there are two areas with potential conflict of interest. The first is between the group’s listed logistics Reit, Mapletree Logistics Trust, and the new JTC Reit.

The second is between the privately held Mapletree Industrial Fund and the new Reit.

Let’s take a look at the first. Technically, MapletreeLog invests in logistics assets whereas the new JTC Reit will hold industrial properties like flatted factories and a few business park buildings. The lay investor can be forgiven for thinking these all belong to broadly the same asset class – industrial properties.

Perhaps, what Mapletree will do is to draw a thicker line between the two asset classes, for instance, warehouses for MapletreeLog, and non-warehouse properties for JTC Reit.

Of course, some properties come with a mix of both warehouse and factory space. In that case, Mapletree will probably state upfront its criteria on defining such assets, for the purpose of deciding which Reit they will go to. Perhaps the definition will based on the predominant use of the property. Hence, if say 50 per cent or more of a property’s gross floor area (GFA) is for warehouse space, it will be classified as a warehouse property, and hence qualify for potential acquisition by MapletreeLog. But if half or more of a building’s GFA is for non-warehouse space, it can be considered for the new JTC Reit.

It will also be interesting to see how Mapletree handles the conflict between the new Reit and its existing private industrial fund. The latter currently holds about $300 million of industrial properties, not just in Singapore but also in Malaysia and China. It has the potential makings of a Pan-Asian industrial property fund. Like many private property funds these days, a natural exit for investors is to eventually float the fund as a Reit. Instead of floating this fund and having it compete with the JTC Reit, one option would be for Mapletree to roll the two into one. That is, the privately held Mapletree Industrial Fund and its assets could be folded into the new JTC Reit and the private fund’s investors be given units in the new JTC Reit in exchange. In other words, they become cornerstone investors in the JTC Reit.

Of course, this would require agreement of all parties, including JTC and the investors in the Mapletree Industrial Fund, on the pricing of assets and other issues. Because Mapletree had from the outset decided that its private industrial fund will hold only non-warehouse assets (to avoid conflict with the listed MapletreeLog), this will make it easier for Mapletree now to fold the private fund with the JTC Reit, in terms of clarity of asset class.

So moving forward, things could become clearer within the Mapletree portfolio. MapletreeLog will pursue warehouse buildings, while the new JTC Reit (or whatever it is eventually named), will hold non-warehouse properties.

Mapletree’s management will probably embark on a public and investor education programme to explain how it is delineating its various businesses to eliminate conflict of interest. Hopefully, it will be able to clear any misperceptions in the market.

CitySpring – BT

CitySpring eyes $370m in equity capital

But the trust would issue equity only ‘if it makes sense’, says its CEO

CITYSPRING Infrastructure Trust is seeking a mandate from its shareholders to raise a further $370 million in equity capital, but may not actually do so if market conditions remain poor, its chief executive Fai Au Yeung said on Feb 4.

‘At the prices today, we will not issue equity,’ said Mr Fai in an interview. ‘We want the mandate to issue equity, but we don’t have to issue equity if it’s not needed’.

The $370 million in proceeds would repay a bridge loan from DBS, which helped finance CitySpring’s $1.6 billion purchase of Australian energy asset Basslink last July.

At an EGM on Feb 19, the trust will seek shareholders’ approval to issue new equity to sponsor and controlling shareholder Temasek Holdings, as well as the trust’s own directors.

If the issuance is successful, CitySpring’s gearing – which it defines as the proportion of debt to total capital – would fall from about 94 per cent today to 62 per cent, said Mr Fai.

On a fully diluted basis, City-Spring’s distribution per unit would rise 16.7 per cent to seven cents for the year ended March 2008, up from the six cents projected in its IPO prospectus last January.

At recent closing prices of below 80 cents – down from $1.58 a year ago – this represents an annual yield of nearly 9 per cent.

The trust would issue equity only ‘if it makes sense’, Mr Fai said.

Debt remains very cheap in Asia, especially for high-quality infrastructure assets, he said; this is truer still for CitySpring, given its parentage and sponsorship from Temasek.

The management is still ‘very comfortable’ with current gearing levels, which gives the trust enough capacity to complete at least one more deal without equity issuance, Mr Fai said. As a trust, unlike a Reit, CitySpring has no regulatory limit on gearing.

But price is only one factor when considering equity issuance, which could help in other ways, said Mr Fai.

As a relatively small trust with a market value of below $400 million, certain investors cannot buy in, while poor liquidity means traders avoid CitySpring when markets are volatile, he said.

A rights issue could boost City-Spring’s market cap, shareholder base and trading volumes, thereby improving price performance, he said.

Despite increasing investor attention and funds getting poured into Asian infrastructure, good opportunities are still available, Mr Fai said.

While there are no more distressed sellers, unlike during the Asian financial crisis, there are still good-quality assets coming through, he said. And CitySpring’s managers have ‘been around infrastructure’ for 15 to 20 years, and ‘have relationships and a nose’ for good deals, he added.

With Basslink, for example, they identified the deal as early as December 2006, before CitySpring was even formed. At the time, the vendor, British utility National Grid, had completed a strategic review and concluded that Basslink was no longer a good fit as it wanted to focus on US and European assets.

CitySpring’s managers contacted the Tasmanian utility that buys power from Basslink, convincing them that it could be trusted with the assets and also add value.

It locked in financing via AAA-rated bonds – at between 3.6 and 5 per cent annual interest, plus cost of financial guarantee – and the DBS loan. Other bidders used syndicated bank loans, which fell out of favour in the subsequent sub-prime crisis, said Mr Fai.

‘We are performing much better than we projected at our IPO, and the poor price performance has been frustrating for management and shareholders, but not deserved’, he said.

Cambridge – SGX

Cambridge Industrial Trust Management Limited (the “Manager”), the Manager of Cambridge Industrial Trust (“CIT”), is pleased to announce that CIT’s trustee, on behalf of CIT, has entered into an interest rate swap (“IRS”) agreement with the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (“HSBC”) .

The details of the IRS are:
• Notional Amount : S$358 million
• Tenor : 5.5 years
• CIT Pays : 2.58% per annum
• CIT Receives : Singapore Dollar Swap Offered Rate (“SOR”)
• Current Debt Hedged : 100%

The swap will provide an all-in, fixed cost of borrowing of 3.32% per annum for CIT’s entire current outstanding debt from February 2008 until July 2013. This compares to an all-in cost of debt of 4.10% per annum forecast for 2008 in the Offering Circular dated 15 October 2007.

Mr Ang Poh Seong, Chief Executive Officer of the Manager, said “This transaction represents another milestone in CIT’s strategy of prudent capital management. We have taken advantage of the current low interest rate environment to lock in additional returns for unitholders.”

It is the intention of the Manager to fully hedge interest rates, subject to market conditions.

AllCo – DBS

Growing from within

Story: Allco reported a good set of FY07 results that are slightly above our expectations, gross revenues increased 115.7% yoy to S$75.2m. Net property income gained 113.6% yoy to S$61.4. DPU was 6.73 cts, +46.9% yoy.

Point: The results are mainly due to positive rental reversions from its assets in FY07 and contributions from its new acquisitions. Of the total increase in gross revenues, 59% was organic in nature. Moving forward, we expect growth to be more organic as Allco look to benefit from the buoyant demand for office in Singapore with 31% and 15.3% of its NLA expiring in FY08 and FY09. In addition, we expect contributions in FY08 from its withdrawal of 17.2% stake(8.2m units) in AWPF at A$1.1012 per unit, compared to A$1.0 p.u. at initial investment.

Relevance: Currently trading at more than 100% below its NTA of S$1.49 and at 10% dividend FY08 dividend yield, we continue to like Allco and maintain our BUY recommendation at a target price of S$1.56 based on DCF. (previously S$1.65)