STR - Stride Property [ex DNZ Property]

[Snapper]

Are you talking net yields or gross? 8.3 is DNZ's net yield at 0.82.

[fungus pudding]

Are you talking net yields or gross? 8.3 is DNZ's net yield at 0.82.

Net yields - they're all pies. What you get is what you get, and those figures are what you get.

[Snapper]

The figures in the PWC report are the forecasts for the 2011 financial year. Are the dividend figures you're using historical?

[fungus pudding]

The figures in the PWC report are the forecasts for the 2011 financial year. Are the dividend figures you're using historical?

They are taken from direct broking site - checked out with my receipts from last year, so historical. I don't see them changing much.

[bull....]

more suckers to the slaughter with this pup.

What happens when they revalue their properties down in 6mths and oh drop the dividend payout amount your lose halve your dough overnight good luck as others say far better property plays available.

[Snapper]

more suckers to the slaughter with this pup.

What happens when they revalue their properties down in 6mths and oh drop the dividend payout amount your lose halve your dough overnight good luck as others say far better property plays available.

Hmmm...what makes you say that? Are you making a comment here on the quality of the portfolio compared to others, I'd be interested to know?

[troyvdh]

...dear snapper..with all due respect...you are an example of what is wrong with our share market....this IPO ..is crap......everone knows this....there is little if not no chance that this will be a successful.....on the face of it 30 % of all monies forwarded are to for a management contract...in the past....bye the way...how many dollars have you in the "mkt"....

[macduffy]

I really don't think that the extent of anyone's exposure to the market is relevant, to this or any other thread although financial interest in a stock should be disclosed, at least initially.

All opinions should be welcome.

Just IMO.

[Dr_Who]

Van Schaardenburg said the DNZ deal was correct from a straight legal perspective "but morally wrong".

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10612394

This is what is wrong with our system. These geezers, like that of Blue Chip, Bridgecorp, Hanover, SCF etc, all understand the mechanics of the system and use it to the advantage and the detriment of the investing public. Even the advisors have been sucked into some of these scams.

We have not learnt from the past (1987) and these guys continue to take advantage of that. Greed indeed blinds us all.

It is legal but it is not moral and a large number of people suffered dearly as a result. Disgraceful really.

[paul29]

DNZ share issue upsets investors


Derek Button says shareholders were never consulted.Retired Auckland builder Derek Button knows property.

As an experienced listed real estate investor, he has confidence in the sector where he worked for decades.

Goodman Property Trust, ING Medical Properties Trust, Kiwi Income Property Trust and Property For Industry are businesses he thinks are well-run and in which he holds units and shares.

But he is one of a group unhappy with DNZ Property Fund's restructuring plan, which will see it list on December 17.

About four years ago, Button bought into DNZ, drawn to its syndication structure, the range of properties it offered and good returns being paid.

He complained that now the value of his investment would be reduced yet shareholders were never asked for their opinion.

"I'm very disappointed that it's been done without giving the existing shareholders good information and telling them it was going to be done," Button said.

David van Schaardenburg, a director of MMG Advisory Partners whose clients are DNZ shareholders, said thousands of existing shareholders would suffer financially.

"The share consolidation in itself causes no value loss. It is the new share issue and the purchase of the management contract which is dilutive for existing shareholders. This deal cuts the net tangible asset value of existing shareholders' investment by almost 40 per cent," he said.

Van Schaardenburg tried to force DNZ to change its constitution to make it seek permission from existing shareholders before it launched such a deal. He remains disappointed about the DNZ board's strong opposition to his motion.

Button is also disappointed.

"It seems we've had the rug pulled from underneath us. You can't stop this deal. It's a fait accompli. But I don't think the managers know how heavy the groundswell is against the way they have done this," he said.

He cannot see any way to recoup his original investment, which amounted to tens of thousands of dollars.

A sum of $43 million, a third of the $130 million raised via the new deal, goes to DNZ chief executive Paul Duffy and ex-chairman Alastair Hasell.

DNZ's prospectus out this month was more of a public relations exercise than a robust document which was clear about the negatives, Button said.

What worries him even more are indications from other businesses of management internalisation. ING Medical's board said at the annual meeting a few weeks ago it was investigating such a structure and AMP NZ Office Trust is also working on the concept. Button intends to keep his shareholding for some years in the hope the price will eventually recover and he can recoup some of his losses.

MMG is "strongly opposed" to the deal for its treatment of existing shareholders but DNZ chairman Tim Storey has defended it. Storey criticised MMG for saying the new deal would reduce the value of existing shareholdings.

Listing would benefit shareholders through attracting a wider investment pool, providing stronger governance, greater transparency and strengthening the balance sheet through debt reduction, he said.

Van Schaardenburg said the DNZ deal was correct from a straight legal perspective "but morally wrong".