|
Riddle me this. An industry gets into trouble due to chasing fads, loading
up on debt and overpaying for property. Many participants in said industry
flirt with insolvency due to difficulty meeting debt service and asset values
that have dropped below liabilities. This industry has been gifted with a special
tax provision that allows them to pay no corporate taxes as long as they pay
out 90% of their income to their shareholders. By now I am sure you have guessed
the industry, but let's move on.
After special meetings with the IRS, who were told that the world would end
if these entities were forced to dump distressed real estate onto an already
distressed market (in reality, commercial real estate prices will simply return
to fundamentally supportable prices), these companies were given a special
reprieve on top of their already gifted special reprieve that allows them to
pay said dividends in stock rather than cash.
The need to conserve cash, as explained above, stems directly and primarily
from imprudently participating in bubble binging, and from a tertiary perspective,
the dwindling refinancing market - of which would not be such a big deal if
companies didn't overpay for, and overleverage properties in the first place.
The solution? Team up with the Wall Street banks that gave you the imprudent
loans that most should have known couldn't be paid back in an effort to shift
the losses to the retail investor. This is a win -win situation for the banks
that made the loans as well as for the REITs that took the loans. Here is the
playbook (for illustrative purposes only, of course):
Step #1: Pump the stock - Reference the upgrades, and notice they happen
to occur right before a secondary offering - From ZeroHedge: Merrill
Lynch In Full REIT Upgrade Mode - The Sequel. Notice that the upgrades
are made despite the fact that the CRE market is in total shambles with no
near to medium term improvement in sight.
Step #2: Dump the stock: Again from ZeroHedge: Bank
Of America Merrill Lynch Gets Paid To Pay Itself Back In Developers Diversified.
Today, Developers
Diversified Realty announced it was issuing $300 million in senior notes,
with lead underwriter "BofA Merrill Lynch"...
... The final deal terms were $300 million of 9.625% notes due March 2016,
priced at 99.42% to yield 9.75%. The syndicate, primarily BofA ML will pocket
$5 million in underwriting fees (oddly, less than the customary 3% for a HY
offering - are companies starting to demand more bang for their buck?).
And the ever crucial Use of Proceeds? Why paying back Bank of America's 2010
maturing credit facility, as if there was ever any surprise. More specifically:
We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering to repay debt, including,
without limitation, one or more of:
-
Borrowings under our $1.25 billion unsecured revolving credit
facility maturing June 29, 2010 (with a one-year extension at our option
subject to the satisfaction or waiver of customary closing conditions);
as of June 30, 2009, total borrowings under our $1.25 billion unsecured
revolving credit facility aggregated $1,169.5 million with a weighted average
interest rate of 1.5%;
-
Borrowings under our $75 million unsecured revolving credit facility
maturing June 29, 2010 (with a one-year extension at our option subject to
the satisfaction or waiver of customary closing conditions); as of June 30,
2009, there were no amounts outstanding under our $75 million unsecured revolving
credit facility;
-
A portion of our 4.625% Senior Notes due August 1, 2010; as of June
30, 2009, there was approximately $260.8 million aggregate principal amount
of our 4.625% Senior Notes due August 1, 2010 outstanding; and
-
A portion of our 5.000% Senior Notes due May 3, 2010; as of June
30, 2009, there was approximately $193.6 million aggregate principal amount
of our 5.000% Senior Notes due May 3, 2010 outstanding.
Not a bad deal: the company refinances BofA's 2010 bank facility, which
has a 1.5% interest rate with a 2016 term piece of paper, paying 9.625%.
Any way you look at it, it goes to show the "solid fundamentals" behind the
sector, where the cost of extending a maturity is 6 times the current interest
rate!
This excerpt was taken from the ZeroHedge posted linked above. What I think
they missed was that the yield on the secondary was much less relevant than
it appeared, since DDR was probably going to pay it in stock (that's right,
that funny stock split cum dividend thing).
Step #3: Shift the tax liabilities upon those who you dumped the stock
on... The last step in this new REIT game, after dumping the unpayable
debt converted into follow-on offering stock is to push the fake dividends
and shift the tax liabilities of said fake dividends from the entity that
generated the liability on to the investor. Normally, if the cash is not
paid out, the REIT would have to pay the taxes on it. Now the REIT can keep
the cash, dilute the stock by offering the pump and dump secondary, then
pass the tax liability off to the guys that were suckered into buying the
stuff, most likely by sell side brokers and analysts - as was exemplified
by the BofA Merrill Lynch excerpts above.If you feel as if I (actually, Zerohedge
since they broke the story) am being a little hard on the Merrill guys, check
out what their ex-REIT analyst head had to say as soon as he left the company
- More from Zerohedge: Some
Totally Unexpected REIT Lack Of Love From Merrill Lynch -
"From a financing standpoint things are far worse; from a fundamental
standpoint things are certainly getting worse."
As a matter of fact, this alleged "bait and switch" behavior was called out
by ZeroHedge in an open letter to the SEC: Open
Letter To The SEC Regarding Wall Street's REIT Bait-And-Switch:
Zero Hedge is well aware that our regulatory friends at the SEC and FINRA
enjoy going through our articles in search of the "next big scam." We are
always happy to make their lives a little easier and not only connect the
dots but give them everything they need on a silver platter so that even
a green securities lawyer, 4 hours fresh out of law school, would be able
to comprehend and litigate.
A few weeks ago I caught on a troubling trend whereby Merrill Lynch/Bank
of America embarked on an epic quest to underwrite equity follow on offerings
for a vast majority of the lowest quality REITs including Kimco, ProLogis, Duke
Realty and others. I say lowest quality, because Merrill's own analysts
had a Sell rating on these names as recently as March 31 (for Kimco) and
January 6 (for ProLogis). How the global economy has really changed for
the better of REITs since then is still a mystery to me. But I digress.
The following is the dividend payment history as gaken from DDR's website,
to help drive the point home on the dividend thing:
Historical Dividends Issued

| Declared |
Ex-Date |
Record |
Payable |
Amount |
Type |
| Sep 10, 2009 |
Sep 21, 2009 |
Sep 23, 2009 |
Oct 15, 2009 |
0.02 |
U.S. Currency |
| May 28, 2009 |
Jun 9, 2009 |
Jun 11, 2009 |
Jul 21, 2009 |
0.2 |
Optional dividend
(cash or stock) |
| Mar 2, 2009 |
Mar 10, 2009 |
Mar 12, 2009 |
Apr 21, 2009 |
0.2 |
Optional dividend
(cash or stock) |
| Oct 24, 2008 |
|
Jan 7, 2009 |
|
Dividend omitted |
| Total dividends paid in 2009: |
0.4200 |
| Aug 19, 2008 |
Sep 24, 2008 |
Sep 26, 2008 |
Oct 7, 2008 |
0.69 |
U.S. Currency |
| May 15, 2008 |
Jun 18, 2008 |
Jun 20, 2008 |
Jul 8, 2008 |
0.69 |
U.S. Currency |
| Jan 9, 2008 |
Mar 18, 2008 |
Mar 21, 2008 |
Apr 8, 2008 |
0.69 |
U.S. Currency |
| Nov 19, 2007 |
Dec 19, 2007 |
Dec 21, 2007 |
Jan 8, 2008 |
0.66 |
U.S. Currency |
| Total dividends paid in 2008: |
2.7300 |
| Aug 15, 2007 |
Sep 20, 2007 |
Sep 24, 2007 |
Oct 2, 2007 |
0.66 |
U.S. Currency |
| May 17, 2007 |
Jun 18, 2007 |
Jun 20, 2007 |
Jul 3, 2007 |
0.66 |
U.S. Currency |
| Feb 16, 2007 |
Mar 21, 2007 |
Mar 23, 2007 |
Apr 9, 2007 |
0.66 |
U.S. Currency |
| Nov 20, 2006 |
Dec 20, 2006 |
Dec 22, 2006 |
Jan 8, 2007 |
0.59 |
U.S. Currency |
| Total dividends paid in 2007: |
2.5700 |
| Aug 15, 2006 |
Sep 14, 2006 |
Sep 18, 2006 |
Oct 2, 2006 |
0.59 |
U.S. Currency |
| May 17, 2006 |
Jun 15, 2006 |
Jun 19, 2006 |
Jul 5, 2006 |
0.59 |
U.S. Currency |
| Feb 15, 2006 |
Mar 20, 2006 |
Mar 22, 2006 |
Apr 3, 2006 |
0.59 |
U.S. Currency |
| Nov 15, 2005 |
Dec 21, 2005 |
Dec 23, 2005 |
Jan 6, 2006 |
0.54 |
U.S. Currency |
| Total dividends paid in 2006: |
2.3100 |
I guess they consulted some of their financial engineers, and decided a couple
of pennies (literally) would do for now, though:
CLEVELAND, OH, Sep 10 (MARKET WIRE) --
Developers Diversified Realty (NYSE: DDR) today declared its third quarter
2009 common stock dividend of $0.02 per share. The common dividend is payable
October 15, 2009 to shareholders of record at the close of business on September
23, 2009.
The Company has elected to maintain a cash dividend comparable to prior quarters
but has elected to not pay the stock portion as the Company's most recent estimates
indicate that the payment of the stock portion is not required to maintain
REIT status. The Company will continue to review its dividend policy on a quarterly
basis and make payments sufficient to maintain REIT status, receive favorable
tax treatment and provide yield to shareholders while prudently assessing its
current liquidity and the state of the capital markets.
This does tend to make one wonder what the hell income investors are thinking
in buying a virtually income-less investment that has such potential for capital
loss! To attempt to drive this point home, let's take an individual investor
in the 34% tax bracket that has 10k shaes of Brand X REIT at $20 per share,
and receives $1 dividend, 90% of which was paid in stock. This equates to $9,000
stock (re)distribution and $1,000 in cash. He will end up paying (.34 * $9,000)
$3,332 in taxes on what amounts to a stock split, and will only have (.34 *
$1,000) $660 in cash to cover it from the balance of the dividend distribution.
In this scenario, the retail investor will be out of $2,672 in after tax cash
for every $10,000 of 90% stock dividend distribution. Will he ever see that
income again? Doubtful! Hey, what if Reggie Middleton is right (see "Boo!!!
Will Halloween Scare the Market into Respecting the Fundamentals?" and "Re:
Commerical Real Estate and REITs - It's About That Time, again...") and
the CRE market tanks even more in the future? Well, Mr. Investor will have
some capital losses with which he can try to convince his accountant to try
to use in some creative and imaginative fashion to offset that phantom income
(albeit attached to some quite corporeal taxes) that he never saw, touched,
nor even had a chance to spend!
It appears as if we have been catching REITs in all types of mischevious things
as of late. Remember GGP? In "If
only more rich heiresses read my blog" I made note of the big lawsuit filed
by the heiress to the ex-GGP's ex-fortune suing her law firm for misconduct.
If she read BoomBustBlog she, her lawyers and the SEC would have seen that
we practically laid out a roadmap of misconduct for all interested parties,
complete with pretty charts and everything (excerpted from "blog
readers chimed in with their expertise and opinions"):

I read your post on the redemption and share purchase with great interest.
I reviewed the 13D filing and there seems to be an exhibit missing. The section
summarizing the 500M loan facility, references the complete loan agreement
as an exhibit. It is no where to be found. Where is it?
The prohibition of personal loans under section 402 of Sarbanes-Oxley amended
section 13 of the 1934 SEC act, broadly prohibits public companies from making
or arranging many types of personal loans, directly or indirectly, to their
directors and executive officers.
As you aptly note, there are a boatload of questions. Not the least of which
is the question concerning the terms of the Citi loan. I think what you're
alluding to as the real purpose of these transactions follows: GGP issues
shares 22.8 m shares at $36 dollars a share (821M). MBCP III takes 10% of
the issue for $88M. MBCP III purchases division "B" interest from the Matthew
Bucksbaum Trust and General Growth Corporation, paying for the "interest
with GGP LP units the to Bucksbaum Trust.
Next up will be a list of REITs that didn't make my final shortlist, then
next week I will debut the first of my 4th quarter 2009 REIT short
candidates for subscribers.
|
Reggie
Middleton
Reggie Middleton, LLC
Perpetual Interests, LLCTM
http://boombustblog.com/
Who am I?
Well, I fancy myself the personification of the free thinking
maverick, the ultimate non-conformist as it applies to investment and analysis.
I am definitively outside the box - not your typical or stereotypical Wall
Street investor. I work out of my home, not a Manhattan office. I build my
own technology and perform my own research - in lieu of buying it or following
the crowd. I create and follow my own macro strategies and am by definition,
a contrarian to the nth degree.
Since I use my research as a tool for my own investing
to actually put food on my table, I can stand behind it as doing what it is
supposed too - educate, illustrate and elucidate. I do not sell advice, I am
not a reporter hence do not sell stories, and I do not sell research. I am
an entrepreneur who exists just outside of mainstream corporate America and
Wall Street. This allows me freedom to do things that many can not. For instance,
I pride myself on developing some of the highest quality research available,
regardless of price. No conflicts of interest, no corporate politics, no special
favors. Just the hard truth as I have found it - and believe me, my team and
I do find it! I welcome any and all to peruse my blog, use my custom hacked
collaborative social tools, read the articles, download the files, and make
a critical comparison of the opinion referencing the situation at hand and
the time stamp on the blog post to the reality both at the time of the post
and the present. Hopefully, you will be as impressed with the Boom Bust as
I am and our constituency.
I pay for significant information and data, and am well
aware of the value of quality research. I find most currently available research
lacking, in both quality and quantity. The reason why I had to create my own
research staff was due to my dissatisfaction with what was currently available
- to both individuals and institutions.
So here I am, creating my own research for my own investment
activity. What really sets my actions apart is that I offer much of what I
produce to the public without charge - free to distribute and redistribute,
as long as it is left unaltered and full attribution is given to the author
and owner. Why would I do such a thing when others easily charge 5 and 6 digits
annually for what some may consider a lesser product? It is akin to open
source analysis! My ideas and implementations are actually improved and
fine tuned when bounced off of the collective intellect of the many, in lieu
of that of the few - no matter how smart those few may believe themselves to
be.
Very recently, I have started charging for the forensics
portion of my work, which has freed up the resources to develop the site to
deliver even more research for free, particularly on the global macro and opinion
front. This move has allowed me to serve an more diverse constituency, which
now includes the institutional consumer (ie., investment turned consumer banks,
hedge funds, pensions, etc,) as well as the newbie individual investor who
is just getting started - basically the two polar opposites of the investing
spectrum. I am proud to announce major banks as paying clients, and brand new
investors who take my book recommendations and opinions on true wealth and
success to heart.
So, this is how I use my background and knowledge in new
media, distributed computing, risk management, insurance, financial engineering,
real estate, corporate valuation and financial analysis to pursue, analyze
and capitalize on global macroeconomic opportunities. I have included a more
in depth bio at the bottom of the page for those who really, really need to
know more about me.
Visit his blog Boom
Bust Blog.
Copyright © 2007-2009 Reggie Middleton
Image rendition and html coding Copyright © 2000-2009
SafeHaven.com
ADVERTISEMENTS
« Opinions expressed at SafeHaven are those of the
individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven
or its management. Articles are available via RSS/XML. Please
visit RSSHelp for instructions. »
|