RE:RE:lazy analysis Relooking at what I wrote, still feel pretty close.
Maybe on the $70m of impaired assets and low occupancy- it could be that he is rehab'ing the properties and is therefore unable to rent them.
I agree it is trading at a discount, and a takeout would, on paper realize that shareholders equity vs mkt. cap. difference at around $10ish ($110m).
BUT what I am getting at is things on paper don't always pan out or are profitable in execution.
Any "work" done on a asset, like window cleaning, re-painting, new carpet, general cleaning is allocated to capital and added to the asset value, this value is also adjusted using the NEW IFRS fair market value rule, WHICH does not rely on a 3rd party valuation, but rather a subjective management opinion on whether or not the asset increased or decreased in value, regardless of what the straight line devaluation is pegged at.
All public companies with assets, accounted for under IFRS rules do this (GAAP is different), if you had a 4% property lift per yr combined with “work” done, you could add 8-12% per yr. reasonably to the asset value even if no major work was completed (roof, boiler, elevator etc) or if the building is about to be condemned (needs roof, boiler, elevator, etc).
So my point is that the actual at market value of the assets, meaning for sale, today at a price that will sell is far different than asset values reported on the books.
Same w. O&G drilling, they drill a hole in moose pasture and they capitalize that labour into the asset value- doesn’t actually mean the asset will produce.
So the old, discount to nav is a super automatic screaming buy is not the discount it looks like.