RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Masked $1.3 Billion Debt BOMB hidden under Equity Accounted That is not how it works. They are each their own investments with limited risk due to paid in capital and limited liability. It's an Equity Accounted
Investment. It's similar to MPCT buying shares in a stock. If one goes belly up, the risk to the REIT is minimal (some risk depending on partnership but limited). As example, if Forma goes bankrupt, MPCT won't go bankrupt, but we would lose the $50M in Net Asset Value we have in that project. That would bring our NAV from 23.XX to 20.XX.
The best part about this is the NAV of each of these investments are not fair market value adjusted until a sale is realized or a project comes close to completion/stabilization. Lots of upside. Forma net assets alone is worth 2/3rd of the entire trading Market Cap. And if you don't know what Forma is, you need to do your research on each investment at its own merrit.
Watch Maple House, Aalto II, Birch House and common at Zibi get Fair Market Value increases (NAV Up) the next 3-6 quarters.
Zibi will get a material Fair Market Value increase when the land sells (NAV Up)
Scarborough Junction will get a large FMV increase when it sells (NAV Up)
49 Ontario will not get a very large increase, if any, as it was adjusted to FMV at time of receiving a loan (NAV Neutral)
Predator2018 wrote: Maybe this is how developers report EAI but it is not right.
Basically, the Net Asset of the EAI is carried over to the Balance Sheet thereby masking the huge risk that the realized asset value may be below the reported value. The best approach and more transparent approach would be to report all the debt in the balace sheet and not the Net Asset of the EAI.