London & Associated Prop... Share Discussion Threads

[makingheaps] 30/3/2007 12:00

I think there are also concerns about the overspend at Windsor and whether the management can deliver projects on budget. Plus the market thinks the Bisichi holding is oddball!

[sammu] 29/3/2007 23:33

I don't think the market this IFRS NAV is more relevate, I just think it is applying too high a discount due to:
size
lack of market profile
very large management stake
no prospect of REIT status
concentration on currently unfashionable retail segment

The market doesn't seem to understand the signifiacnt management ability to generate value on top of market returns, or the significant opportunity over the next couple of years to obtain great value for shareholders from the london acquisition.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Simon Thompson give these a mention in the IC. He last gave them a positive write up in November.

Sam

[makingheaps] 29/3/2007 13:32

This is a great buy in my view. Hoping to see £1.70 but expect it to take some time

[makingheaps] 28/3/2007 20:19

But is IFRS NAV more relevant? The market seems to think so.

[sammu] 27/3/2007 12:24

Well great figures and really cheap. I haven't read the results yet, but I wasn't too far off with my NAV estimates.

Now trading on about 23% discount to historic NAV.

Sam

[sper] 27/3/2007 09:12

tick up so at least there is one someone taking notice!

[westcountryboy] 27/3/2007 09:09

An excellent, shrewd performance. They are now really cheap but unloved as usual. A classic steady as she goes share, run by a prudent family who know how to make money. Just a question of waiting for people to notice.

[sper] 27/3/2007 09:05

Preliminary results out, looks good and solid. Interesting to see whether the market already has them priced in and whether we go up or down as a result.

I know what I want!

[skyracer] 27/3/2007 07:39

What a little gem this investment has been. Tremendous results even after writing off £9m goodwill. Hats off to the LAS management team again.

[sammu] 26/3/2007 22:30

Actually the spread is still about 4p/4.5p.

I'll shut up about the spread now.

Sam

[sammu] 25/3/2007 23:53

Yes that makes sense.

I think the spead works out at a couple of pence at the moment, down from the 5p it was.

Sam

[sper] 22/3/2007 18:01

Depends - If they have a specific valuation at the balance sheet I would have thought they would use that but disclose the sale price as a post balance sheet event. That way the value in the balance sheet is consistent with any other valuations at the same date. Probably means their corporation tax would be slightly lower for the year as well.

If they did not have a valuation at the balance sheet they will either use a formulaic approach or the sale price, the former I would have thought giving rise to a disclosure.

Good to see the spread narrowing. Didn't think it was too tortuous anyway but the closer the better. Hope to see this move up as we close on the results date

S

[sammu] 22/3/2007 17:43

I wonder what they value Dagenham at in the year end results? Would they reference it to the sale price achived? I don't know.

They have got rid of that huge spread that has been preventing any volume over the last few days. It was 121-126, it now seems to be 126.75-127. (spread from 5p to 0.25p!)

Maybe that's not the real bid price, will find out tommorrow. Either way is seems the spread has reduced.

Sam

[sper] 22/3/2007 16:16

Nice to see the ticks up today on relatively small volumes - about time and hope to see more as we head round to results (I think end April)

[sper] 16/3/2007 10:18

Very big trade for LAS this morning, I tend to think it's a buy rather than sale

[sper] 09/3/2007 08:19

Nice turn around. It will fall into current year not the year we are waiting for results on. But hey, that's just a timing thing.

I'm not sure we will see that level of growth across the whole portfolio but cant wait the for the next figures.

[sammu] 08/3/2007 23:02

Just us two here at the moment then sper.

This sale of the DAGENHAM SHOPPING CENTRE highlights the value here. The sale price was 25% higher than the last valuation 14 months ago.

I now think my recent NAV forecasts were too conservative.

Sam

[sper] 08/3/2007 11:25

Bit better this morning!

[sammu] 07/3/2007 23:06

Results were 28.04.06, and 21.03.05 in the last two years. I think the 2006 results were delayed due to change to IFRS, so I think results will most likely be the end of March, but I'm not sure.

BLND up 3.3% CLI up 5.3%, lots of other larger property companies up by 2.5% to 4% today, yet LAS is down.

LAS is obviously a bit different to these large caps, but looks even better value.

I added this morning.

Sam

[sper] 07/3/2007 16:55

Last Year there was a NAV update in April and finals in May if I remember rightly.

[sammu] 07/3/2007 15:16

Yes the market isn't helping, but just another opportunity to top up as I see it.
British Land and similar have been hit hard by the market in this fall, although they are recovering strongly now.

Results will be soon, although I don't have a date.

Sam

[sper] 07/3/2007 14:47

Disappointed nobody agrees with you Sam! Market is surely not helping at the moment but disappointing when this seems to have so much to offer

[sammu] 25/2/2007 15:06

I'm impressed by the premium HTD obtained, thanks for highlighting that SKY. I've recently been slightly stung by JSRE an AIM property company recently taken out at a discount to the market price!!


In the financial highlights issued on the day of the preliminary results last year as a separate RNS the UK GAAP NAV was not quoted.
I feel that the UK GAAP NAV and IFRS NAV should be given equal prominence.

You have to drill a way down the preliminary results statement to find:

"The impact on LAP's net asset value per share is as follows: under IFRS,
diluted net assets per share rose by 18.1% to 115.9p against 98.1p, while under
UK GAAP the increase would have been a rise of 22.3% to 135.8p from 111.0p per
share."

However the UK GAAP NAV and IFRS NAV has been given equal prominence at the front of the 2005 annual report in the financial highlights.

The main difference is deferred tax.

Given that:
"The rate of tax payable has remained low due largely to capital allowances that have been successfully claimed."
So I think UK GAAP is the more relevant figure.

Or they could do what the big boys do:

British Land while a substantially larger company and now a REIT, issues its NAV as EPRA (European Public Real Estate Association) NAV.

"The European Public Real Estate Association (EPRA) issued Best
Practices Policy Recommendations in January 2006, which gives
guidelines for performance measures. The EPRA NAV per share includes
the external valuation surplus on trading properties but excludes the
fair value adjustments for debt and related derivatives and deferred
taxation on revaluations and capital allowances and is calculated on a
fully diluted basis."

What the difference between UK GAAP NAV and EPRA NAV is I'm not sure, but from the sounds of it not that much.

Anyway my *conservative* estimates for historic NAV set to be announced in the next couole of months is:
IFRS NAV: 135.6p
UK GAAP NAV: 158.9p

If this is the outturn I think the shares should be trading north of 155p.

Sam

[sper] 23/2/2007 14:52

wouldnt know

[sammu] 23/2/2007 13:38

Did it get a mention into the Investors Chronicle? Anybody?

Sam