RE:RE:RE:RE:Port Moody update I don't think the book value is that low Stonks - they triggered the tax transaction pre- capital gains increase. The taxes on the gain were only $4 million which implies a gain under $20 million. I can't believe when they rolled the land down they pegged a price other than fair value.
Anyway, if you google the address it looks that whatever business is renting the land has been doing so for a very long time. This goes to the issue i was raising, it isn't the valuation disclosure that is wrong, it is the nature of the asset.
It is described by them as non-core and add to that it looks to be a piece of real estate held to earn passive rental income - i can see them burying the rental income as not significant, but the underlying asset is clearly not an operational piece and is probably a decent chunk of the $41 million of book value land. At least add someting to the capital asset notes for the last year end - they were half way through the dang rezoning process. What more did PWC need to see???
Stonksonlyup90 wrote: @Puma1back
This APL land in Port Moody has been held for decades. It would be on the books at Book Value, can't write it up to Fair Market Value per accounting standards. Therefore it's extremely trivial as to value on the statements, value/gain will be recognized when sale occurs.