We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phoenix Spree Deutschland Limited | PSDL | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.00 | 1.35% | 150.00 | 16:35:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 148.00 | 145.00 | 148.00 | 150.00 | 148.00 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| EQUITY INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 22/3/2024 16:13 by davebowler MIGO commentary-Despite strong demand for rental housing in the German capital the shares continue to drift. There is little demand for this asset class amongst UK investors and it seems likely that the trust will lose next year’s continuation vote. |
Posted at 08/2/2024 17:00 by davebowler Phoenix Spree talks to lenders over ramping up profitable condo salesBerlin residential property fund Phoenix Spree Deutschland wants to ‘significantly Michelle McGagh Berlin residential property fund Phoenix Spree Deutschland (PSDL) is in talks with its lenders to ‘significantly The £166m investment company said it was also ‘examining other strategic options’ to increase condo sales in a bid to repay debts, resume its dividend suspended last year and return capital to shareholders frustrated by its 55% share price discount. The company said it had seen a ‘material upturn’ in sales of condos in the second half of last year as buyers returned to the market, encouraged by ‘greater visibility in forward bank lending rates’. Last year, 25 condos were notarised for sale at a total value of €7.2m, representing a 53% increase on the €4.7m worth of sales in 2022. Mike Hilton, chief executive of QSix which manages Phoenix Spree, said that the condos sold at an average of €3,976 per square metre, a 4.1% premium to their carrying value at the end of 2022, but below the historical average. Hilton hopes to capture huge upside for shareholders as the fund’s share price only implies a valuation of €2,750 per square metre after a 45% fall in the past three years. Only 4% of the portfolio is currently valued as condos, although the company has another 73% of assets in units that are legally split into condos but not yet valued as such. Bringing them to market ought ‘to materially increase sales volumes’, the firm said. Since listing in 2015, Phoenix Spree has set about splitting multi-occupied buildings into condos and has increased the number of properties that have been legally split, even as new legislation was introduced in 2021 that limited the ability of landlords to divide buildings into single dwellings. While the legislation was not retrospective and did not impact the buildings Phoenix Spree had already split, Hilton said it ‘inevitably ‘With over 1,900 units, representing 77% of the portfolio, now split as condos, Phoenix Spree is uniquely placed in the listed market to benefit from this trend,’ Hilton said. Offloading properties has been a key focus for the company, which last year agreed to pay a 1% disposal fee to QSix in order to incentivise sales and return cash to shareholders. However, Hilton noted that attempts to sell whole buildings had not been successful as market conditions were ‘not conducive to achieving sales’ at a fair value. ‘The few transactions that were agreed generally failed to proceed to sales,’ he said. While the value of rental apartments may lag the sales value, rental strength remained strong in the second half of last year as inward migration and higher homeownership costs forced more people into rented accommodation at the same time as higher borrowing and construction costs squeezed housebuilding. This pushed market rents to record levels, with rents signed at a 31% uplift to passing rents, or €13.70 per square meter – a 5.9% increase on 2022. Although Berlin rents are subject to the ‘Mietspiegel&# While a new index will be released in mid-2024, Hilton said it is expected that it will ‘provide scope for further permissible rent increases to qualifying tenants, supporting rental growth from the third quarter of 2024 onwards’. The fund reported a 5.3% slide in the valuation of its assets to €675.6m in the second half of last year as all but one asset experienced valuation declines driven by yield expansion. The exception to this was Donaustrasse, which was the trust’s latest acquisition and rose 26% over the period. Hilton said the investment market remains ‘fragile’ |
Posted at 07/1/2024 20:55 by cerrito Here is the Citywire articlequote Berlin property investor Phoenix Spree Deutschland is left with a £4.7m compensation bill after pulling out of a deal to buy 34 homes to avoid increasing its debt. Berlin residential property fund Phoenix Spree Deutschland (PSDL) has pulled out of a deal to buy a development in the Brandenberg forest, saddling it with a €5.55m (£4.7m) compensation bill. The £155m London-listed fund cancelled its contract with The Grounds Real Estate Development for the sale of its Terra Homes project in Erkner on the south-eastern edge of Berlin. The trust had been due to purchase the 34 homes in a contract worth €18.5m but the contract was terminated by mutual agreement at PSDL’s request, according to reports in German newspapers. According to Justin Bell of Deutsche Numis, PSDL has confirmed the cancellation of the contract and the subsequent €5.5m payment it has to make will have ‘no material impact on net asset value (NAV)’ and the decision to pull out of the deal ‘avoids drawing down further on debt to fund completion of the project and taking market risk on valuations’. The property trust has been trying to offload properties over the past six months in a bid to raise cash to reinstate its dividend and hopefully narrow its persistently wide discount, which currently stands at 44%. The fund even agreed to pay its fund manager, QSix Residential, a 1% disposal fee to increase sales of its condominiums in the German capital. The new fee was combined with a €5m cap on QSix’s annual management fee in the next 12 months, down from the €7m the fund manager earned in the previous year. Shares in the Jersey investment company have slid 32.5% in the past year, mystifying shareholders such as MIGO Opportunities (MIGO) manager Nick Greenwood who believes that the closed-end fund deserves a much higher rating given the shortage of residential property in Berlin. At 168p yesterday the shares languished on a 58% discount to NAV of 399p, although the valuation is out of date as it relates to the 30 June figure released in the half-year results in September. unquote |
Posted at 20/12/2023 20:19 by davebowler Migo Opps report...Disappointm |
Posted at 05/12/2023 15:41 by cwebb1 Interesting.Just got back from Germany, some points of interest: - Prices of these apartment buildings in Berlin are at around 2700 euros. “Give it take”. “Condominium&# - qsix has a new investor from Switzerland who they are buying property for. Everyone in the city is talking about this given how little activity there is. They have already closed on deals. So PSDL shareholders are footing the bill for infrastructure, staff etc through the exorbitant management fees charged - that were supposed to be for the benefit of PSDL properties - but qsix is now focussed on catching new fish for new money. Another kick in the teeth for shareholders. Frankly these guys get paid whatever the weather, what ever their performance. Unbelievable really. They deserve to get kicked out. Every action they take is self serving and not for the benefit of the shareholders. Conflict of interest??? Great to see the board acquiescing along. The disaster train rattles on. What a terrible “manager” |
Posted at 03/12/2023 21:46 by smithie6 Can't argue with that.European Convergence (ticker was ?, ecdc ?) was another dubious company. Founders had the management done by company X, which not surpringly was them ! So little desire/pressure to minimise the annual payment! The founders (read managers ) got to own the assets since their high pay was not paid. Overall money put in by investors was a few hundred million £ if my memory is correct. Complete wipe out for shareholders while the founders made money I think. (Or did they buy any shares during a fund raise & lose money on that ?) Probus was another dodgy one, a wipe out for shareholders I think. Was it Probs that used it's cash & perhaps new loans to buy building land in Spain. That moved cash/assets out of the company. The company then declared that the land bought did not in fact have building permission & hence it was pretty worthless. And that the money would not be recouped. Was it an intentional con ? We're directors involved ? (Seems difficult to buy land with building permission that turns out not to have permission (& the company's money has been syphoned off), unless you are in on it). One property company had apartments in Eastern Europe. Now, an agency/manager would normally charge ~10% of the monthly rental price to act as the manager. At the listed co. it was much higher. And some apartments were apparently sold without the manger or the listed company knowing anything about it !! Sounds impossible to believe. |
Posted at 27/11/2023 13:52 by smithie6 "QED why the management changed the comp metric as they are focussed now on disposals and want their share."Would it be fair to say that property managers for listed companies are less honourable than used car salesmen ??!! I could reel off a list of companies where the conduct of the property managers has been pretty disgraceful. FPO- arguably wildly excessive options for the boss; & breaking the overall guideline for all options of 10% over 10 years - Convergence. Was it European Convergence. Property managers put the co. in their pockets for their high unpaid fees. At a few pence per share when investors had funded the same ppl at 100p/share ! >£200million smoked ! - Dolphin. Lse:dci Now renamed Property manager/director recently sacked due to perceived/documented fraud. >£100million reduction in value imo - SPDI or similar name. Been a disaster - Blacksea. Been a disaster - Probus ?. Have I got the name right ? Wipe out. A fraud imo ...invested in building land in Spain, that moved millions of £ out of the company...turned out it had no permission as building land !! Then administration!! - Property investment co. with flats in Hungary. A scandal since some flats were sold without the company apparently knowing anything about it ! ======= I guess that bigger property companies or those operating only in the UK are much more honest but the % with property outside the UK that have been frauds is frightening!! |
Posted at 19/8/2023 10:42 by cwebb1 Thank you, davebowler, for speaking with the corporate broker. You had more out of them than I ever had out of the QSIX investor relations person; what a hopeless endeavour. Where did they find him? Yet another nail in the coffin.While it is certainly reassuring that Numis is providing assurances that they have 'no doubt that the board is independent' and not taking every lead from QSIX, there is one straightforward question that can help explain whether there is a slither of fiduciary duty towards its shareholders: Has there ever been an arms-length, independent tender of the management agreement between PSDL and QSIX? As cerrito points out below, the latest fee proposal was passed through ‘North Korea style’ with seemingly little scrutiny or level of shareholder participation that one would expect. This is not about a 1% fee on a couple of condominium sales. This is a 1% fee to replace a performance fee that QSIX would now not be entitled to. The previous fee was 1,000. This new arrangement is potentially more than 7 million. After years of serious underperformance. What a kick in the teeth to long-term shareholders. Though there always seems to be time for one last drink at the trough rodders! Of course, If this was not the board’s intention, then this new fee should be capped at a level far below this (something which was oddly omitted). If QSIX is unable to provide its services at a sensible rate, why doesn’t the board find someone that can. If someone had said ‘they got paid 40m over 7 or 8 years,’ even that would seem far higher than necessary to manage some flats. Here we have a level that is more than double this, and as calculated below, potentially more than 90 million over the period. There is also the bigger question about how Robert Hingley was appointed to the board and whether this was a ‘hand-chosen&# |
Posted at 14/8/2023 18:15 by cwebb1 I have followed this thread for some time, and its refreshing to see others investigating this fund more deeply before piling in. I invested in PSDL several years ago, and after losing close to £20,000 of my money as the share price plummeted, I called it a day. Before I sold out, I spent a long night of the soul looking at the facts, something I should have done at the outset.As many of you point out, the cashflow characteristics have been problematic for many years. The only way PSDL can sustain a payout is selling more and more property. The rental income is swallowed up by the adviser "QSIX". This is because they are paid as a percentage of the asset value and not the rental income. The annual fees they charge are almost twice those of similar investment funds. In addition, they have gotten away with charging a performance fee. This is a work of art for a public company and almost unheard of. I, too, read the article in the investor's chronicle last week. I don't believe for one second that they voted to pay themselves less, or this was a sign of the board of directors cracking the whip on the advisor. No one votes to pay themselves less unless they are up against the wall: in this case, they were trying to prevent an even bigger failure of the business model i.e., going cashflow negative (with all the warranted attention that would attract). Reading about this new 1% fee to 'incentivise the adviser to dispose of property' made me laugh. Why do they need an incentive if they are already being paid handsomely to do the right thing for the investors? CAROLPIG1 has it right on the new 1% fee: QSIX must think that they have come to the end of the road and want another 'pay-day': a sale of the fund would mean they would get paid another 5/6/7/8 million (depending on what you believe the valuation to be). I shouldn't need to point out this is additional shareholder value going to the "property adviser", QSIX. So now that there is no chance of getting a performance fee, they have introduced this new fee to take its place. I didn't calculate the cumulative fees since listing. Still, if its 80 million euros and 50% of the gross revenue, it is excessive and unbelievable that they have gotten away with it for so long. The condominium strategy is absurd: as LOOKHERE1 points out, 8 flats sold in 2022 out of maybe 2000 odd that are owned. QSIX must have seen cash flow was tightening and could have sold flats more to generate cash before the year-end, leaving some chance of maintaining the dividend. They didn't sell more. This is worrying on many fronts: 1) either they couldn't sell them because they were overvalued in their books and didn't want to sell them for much less, in which case the valuations don't stand up when extrapolated, or 2) there is no market for them, either because of the cost or location or quality, but we are constantly led to believe its the strongest housing market in Europe. or 3) they didn't know or notice and were asleep at the wheel. Either way, a disaster. The cash from sales this year will no doubt be used to pay down debt before returning any money to investors. There is an odd narrative that they should sell assets for below NAV. Indeed then, the NAV doesn't reflect reality, and the actual price of the properties is much lower. I am highly skeptical about the 10% drop in value. I suspect this is just the start (and possibly captured by the share price). The problem is there are few comparisons as the sales markets are stalling. Given how interest rates have multiplied, 10% seems like an overly optimistic decline. Also, JLL has been the valuer since the listing. Once again, everyone is very cozy here. There is no one to challenge these values. Indeed, just like auditors, boards etc., there should be a rotation to ensure we're not all marking our homework with gold stars and a pat on the back. The share buyback scheme was an unmitigated disaster and a complete failure. PSDL guided higher in their last RNS on rent inflation. I'm looking forward to seeing the magnitude and the total rent increase over the past four years. I know it won't be very reassuring once you get into it. The independent board is nothing of the kind. Many of these funds use a PO BOX board in the Channel Islands. The idea of proper governance is utter pretense and make-believe. Many of the board members are employees of the fund administrators. Everyone is taking a fee or salary that relies on keeping the 'show on the road' using LOOKHERE1's analogy. I called the administrator years ago to enquire about the adviser and how they were selected. They told me that the advisor had managed the fund before it was listed and was the best placed to do so. I asked what consultation or review was regularly done to see if the fees were competitive. The answer was: "None that I know of". I asked if the 'independent board' has ever considered an alternative manager. The answer was: "not that I know of". She also didn't know or think there was ever a process to consider an alternative advisor. So QSIX gets waved through every time a vote has come along. The board must surely be compelled to run a regular 'beauty contest' or re-tender these agreements. Unbelievable, lazy, and inept conduct of the "independent" board. I have given up reading about the industry, but the new environmental standards will be problematic. Buyers want grade "A" property. Anything less is a problem (PSDL mainly owns old, 100-year+ old property) and the anti-landlord rhetoric. Why bother? All in all, abysmal governance. I strongly suspect QSIX will look to string out their contract for as long as possible. The 1% is a payday to replace a performance fee they would never get. The reduction in fees this year is where I suspect they would partly end up anyway after the new valuation. As you mention below: there is no capital growth, not enough top-line income growth, no dividend, not enough cash flow, just vested incumbents running it for fees. I agree with CARLOPIG1 that this may be a buy-out candidate - but PE's will want to double their money in four years: I don't think that is possible here with so much to unwind. Fundamentally, the yield is just too low, growth too slow, and costs too high. The only reason to make a new investment is if you think someone will make an offer for it. There are much better investments out there. Whatever you do, don't get swallowed in by the rhetoric of too many tenants chasing too few flats. LOOKHERE1 is exactly right in their description - this is a classic example of a zombie fund that has been undetected for too long. Good luck. |
Posted at 14/8/2023 16:14 by carlopig1 As I said a few months ago QSIX are realigning their payday away from ongoing fees which are crimping cash flow to an exit bonus. Good luck on seeing a reinstated divi or significant uplift in the rental revenue. They will try to keep selling the odd condo to balance the books. I'm still predicting a cheeky PE bid sometime over the next year or so c £2.50 as the LTV starts to bite around 50+%. At this stage most exhausted investors will bail. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
