VEREIT (ex American Realty Capital Properties) : immobilier triple net aux USA…

Ca pousse sur VER

https://www.thecerbatgem.com/2016/12/16 … se-co.html

Nicolas

VEREIT a fait un bilan rapide de ses cessions et acquisitions en 2016 :
VEREIT® Reports 2016 Disposition and Acquisition Activity and Sets Earnings Call for Thursday, February 23, 2017 | Seeking Alpha

VEREIT a écrit :

During the year, VEREIT sold approximately $1.14 billion of properties at an average cash cap rate of 6.9%, including $246.5 million in net sales of Red Lobster restaurants. The Company sold $394.9 million of assets in the fourth quarter. During 2016, VEREIT also acquired $100.2 million of properties at an average cash cap rate of 6.8%, excluding build-to-suit and development activity which totaled $22.0 million at an average cash cap rate of 8.7%. The Company purchased $80.2 million of assets in the fourth quarter of 2016.

A la louche, si on valorise la totalité de l’immobilier à un taux de capitalisation de 6,85% et la filiale Cole Capital autour de $350 M (11 fois son EBITDA), on  arrive à un ANR de $9,6 par action.

Si au dernier trimestre, VEREIT n’est toujours pas acquéreur net, on voit une nette accélération par rapport au reste de l’année, qui devrait je suppose persister en 2017.

Je ne reviens pas sur les deux ans que nous auront fait perdre la "fraude" comptable de l’ancien management, mais c’est bien l’ordre de grandeur. Deux ans de perdu.

VER a sous performé en 2016 sans raison valable à mon sens.

La vente d’actif à fait baissé l’AFFO/Share mais cela aurait du être en théorie transparent pour le titre.

Je vois bien VER repasser acheteur net en 2017 et maintenir sont AFFO/Share pour ensuite pouvoir progresser d’année en année.

Je pense que ce qui bloque un peu VER, c’est son cours bas, ce qui l’empêche de croître par émission de capital. Qu’a cela ne tienne, si le cours reste si bas et si la foncière est peu/moins endettée, elle n’aura qu’à racheter 1 ou 2 % de son capital, ce qui sera tout aussi relutif.

AleaJactaEst a écrit :

VER a sous performé en 2016 sans raison valable à mon sens.
La vente d’actif à fait baissé l’AFFO/Share .

Je vois 2 raisons valable : 
1/ rotation sectorielle qui fait que le marché vend les reits
2/ Fly to quality et la baisse de l’Affo n’est pas pour rassurer le marché

En fait, on a dans l’ensemble une décote sur les foncières de commerce aux USA à l’heure actuelle.

Dans le cas des foncières triple-net, l’anomalie c’est Realty Income, qui surcote d’environ 30% sur son estimation de NAV.

Avec une NAV à $9,5-10, VEREIT décote légèrement, mais pas de façon monstrueuse non plus dans un contexte de possible remontée des taux et étant légèrement plus endettée que ses paires.

Les grosses décotes, on les trouve sur les foncières de centres commerciaux. CBL & Associates et Washington Prime Group battent des records bien entendu, avec 40-50% de décote.

Mais surtout, même des crèmes comme Simon Properties Group, Macerich, Taubman Centers, Weingarten Realty, etc. décotent de 10-25%.

Source pour les consensus de NAV : un pdf de BMO que l’on m’a aimablement fait passé et qui s’est avéré en phase avec mes estimations grossières.

AleaJactaEst a écrit :

Pour moi acheter ces foncières c’est parier sur une forte croissance des revenus de leur mall plutôt que sur une éventuelle décote par rapport à une NAV.

Il y a du vrai. La "vérité" est sans doute entre les deux (NAV ou croissance des revenus du mall) selon la taille de la décote.

Lakewood capital est investi dans VEREIT.
Ils évoquent le sujet dans leur dernière lettre:

Lakewood Capital Q4 2016.pdf

With a portfolio characterized by long-term leases, minimal near-term lease expirations
and strong tenant quality, we believe VEREIT represents a cheap and predictable bond-
like cash flow stream with significant upside optionality from a re-rating to peer group
multiples.  At the current price of $8.50, VEREIT trades at a 6.5% dividend yield and just
11x AFFO.  Close peers Realty Income and National Retail Properties trade at dividend
yields of 4% and 18x to 20x AFFO.  Even assuming that VEREIT trades at a discounted
valuation  of  15x  AFFO,  the  stock  would  be  worth  $12  per  share  over  the  next  year
inclusive of dividends, a total return of 40% from the current share price.

Les peer group retenus sont peut être discutables… (O et NNN)

C’est au tour de VEREIT de publier.

Le récapitulatif annuel (que l’on connaissait déjà dans les grandes lignes) :

VEREIT a écrit :

2016 Highlights
    Net Loss of $200.8 million and Net Loss per diluted share of $0.29
    Achieved $0.78 AFFO per diluted share, within the 2016 guidance range of $0.75 - $0.78
    Completed $1.14 billion in dispositions and $100.2 million of acquisitions
    Decreased Debt from $8.1 billion to $6.4 billion and Net Debt from $8.0 billion to $6.1 billion
    Reduced Net Debt to Normalized EBITDA from 7.0x to 5.7x since the beginning of 2016
    Issued $1.0 billion of senior notes and completed $702.5 million common stock offering; prepaid the Company’s senior notes due February 2017
    Credit rating updates:
        S&P raised its corporate credit rating of VEREIT to ’BB+’ and the rating on corporate debt to ’BBB-’
        Fitch issued VEREIT a first time investment grade rating of ’BBB-’
        Moody’s affirmed the ’Ba1’ credit rating of VEREIT and revised the outlook to ’positive’
    Cole Capital® raised $487.2 million of new equity capital

Et surtout, la guidance 2017 :

VEREIT a écrit :

2017 Guidance

The Company expects its 2017 AFFO per diluted share to be in a range between $0.70 and $0.73. This guidance assumes dispositions and acquisitions each totaling $450 million to $600 million at an average cash cap rate of 6.5% to 7.5%, real estate operations with average occupancy of approximately 98.0% and same-store rental growth approximating 0.5%. The guidance range also assumes Cole Capital will contribute $0.02 to $0.03 of AFFO per diluted share, including 2017 capital raise of $400 million to $500 million, excluding the Cole REITs’ distribution reinvestment plans ("DRIP") proceeds, and Cole acquisitions of $800 million to $1.0 billion.

The Company also expects to target balance sheet net debt to normalized EBITDA between 5.7x and 6.0x.

C’est une déception : malgré son statut retrouvé d’Investment Grade, VEREIT ne prévoit toujours pas d’être "acheteur net" en 2017 et va continuer à ajuster son portefeuille d’actifs. L’AFFO va encore baisser et il n’est manifestement prévu aucune augmentation du dividende.

Il faudra donc encore attendre… :’-(

Les résultats du T1-2017 :

VEREIT a écrit :

First Quarter 2017 Highlights

    Net Income of $14.8 million and Net Loss per diluted share of $(0.00)
    Achieved $0.19 AFFO per diluted share including $0.01 from Cole Capital
    Completed $101.5 million of acquisitions and $199.2 million of dispositions
    Decreased Debt from $6.4 billion to $6.3 billion and Net Debt from $6.1 billion to $6.0 billion
    Reduced Net Debt to Normalized EBITDA from 5.7x to 5.5x
    Cole Capital® raised $66.7 million of new equity capital

Credit Rating Updates

    Moody’s upgraded the credit rating of VEREIT from ’Ba1’ to an investment grade rating of ’Baa3’
    S&P raised its corporate credit rating of VEREIT from ’BB+’ to an investment grade rating of ’BBB-’, matching the bond rating
    Fitch continues with an investment grade rating of ’BBB-’

Source : https://seekingalpha.com/pr/16821049-ve … ng-results

Absolument aucune surprise, VEREIT est toujours vendeur net et réduit son endettement.

La seule bonne surprise pourrait venir de la collecte de la filiale pour compte de tiers, Cole Capital, sauf que :

SeekingAlpha a écrit :

Investment Management Capital Raise
During the quarter, Cole Capital raised $102.7 million of capital on behalf of its sponsored non-listed REITs (the "Cole REITs"), including $36.0 million through the Cole REITs’ distribution reinvestment plans ("DRIP"), compared to $179.0 million, including $34.4 million of DRIP proceeds, in the first quarter of 2016.

Moins bien que l’année dernière !

RDV au T2-2017 ! :-)

Les triples nettes non premium sont secouées par les résultats de SRC (Spirit Realty), qui est actuellement à -20%, sous les 7 usd.

Je n’en sais pas plus, mais outre une petite révision à la baisse de la guidance, la solidité des locataires est en question.

Je pense que tout ça est aussi lié aux tensions sur les taux.

Il y a globalement un gros sell off sur les REIT et le pétrole en ce jeudi.

Dernière modification par AleaJactaEst (04/05/2017 17h57)

Sacré Brad Thomas, voici ce qu’il disait sur Spirit Realty Capital en octobre 2016 :

SeekingAlpha a écrit :

I’m not going to trick you, my goal is to serve up a REIT treat.

SRC has much more financial flexibility today (reduced secured debt and CMBS debt) and the de-leveraging initiatives have resulted in an improved cost of capital.

We are increasing our Fair Value price (target Buy Price) to $12.50 and moving shares from a HOLD to a BUY.

Source : https://seekingalpha.com/article/401046 … ger-spooks

Ce "mec" est une vraie farce. Mais bon, pas pire que de nombreux autres cabinets ou économistes qui retournent leur veste au gré du vent, comme le montre votre excellent récapitulatif des notations.

Sinon, voici la petite phrase du CEO de Spirit Realty Capital qui a contribué à la panique (justifiée ?) :

SeekingAlpha a écrit :

CEO COMMENTS

Thomas H. Nolan, Jr., Chairman and Chief Executive Officer stated, "Over the past few years the Company has significantly strengthened its balance sheet, improved its access to the capital markets and enhanced its portfolio quality through non-core asset dispositions and targeted acquisitions.  Despite our proactive portfolio management, a confluence of issues impacted a number of our credit watch list tenants in the first quarter resulting in an abnormally high credit loss.  Furthermore, given the record number of bankruptcies in consumer and retail related companies thus far in 2017, and given that Shopko is our largest tenant, we are adjusting our outlook and approach for the balance of the year, including significantly reducing our acquisition activity.  These issues notwithstanding, we remain confident that the Company’s portfolio remains financially strong." Mr. Nolan continued, "As we look ahead, we remain committed to supporting vigilant balance sheet management, along with disciplined capital allocation that focuses on investing in proven industries and e-commerce resistant asset classes."

Les points forts de la conférence des analystes :

Sur Cole Capital, il y a peut-être à espérer, avec l’ouverture d’une nouvelle "SCPI" :

Conférence T1-2017 a écrit :

During the quarter Cole Capital raised 66.7 million of new equity, an average of 22.2 million a month with a 25% monthly increase in March compared to February. Additionally, 18 new selling agreements were signed in Q1 representing more than 4,500 financial advisors. In April, Advisory Group one of Cole’s historically large broker dealer partners approved CCPT5 and initiated sales efforts. So Tara began INEP earlier this year and launched the CCPT5 last month. New equity for April was 24.7 million.

Peut-être un spin-off ou une cession de Cole Capital l’année prochaine ?

Conférence T1-2017 a écrit :

We were happy to announce that advisory group came on, which was one of our larger broker dealers in the ’13 to ’14 era. And we did announce last quarter at the end of the year that Cetera came on. So the progress we’ve made with the larger advisors, larger broker dealers has been very helpful for us to establish the brand value of Cole. We’re getting there that progress means a lot to us. We will make a decision relative to the value of Cole and how the public market sees it. It may be later on this year, it may be the beginning of next year, but what we care about is establishing and maintaining that value.

Sur les murs de magasins et la possible mutation en cours :

Conférence T1-2017 a écrit :

Well, of all the disruptors that are on top of mind today Mitch, it’s certainly the disruptors related to retail. So, let me start there. Capitalism is a hard system. Retail has to be one of the most capitalist business there is. You either fail or win and that’s been that way for many, many years. Today, if we look at the disruptors, we have to think about omnichannel and the different method of merchandising. We have tenants that don’t embrace omnichannel. We have tenants that can’t afford omnichannel and then we have tenants who can embrace and afford it. The first two, we’re not interested in.

The third one, we really care about and how that disruptor affects our tenants. But the second very important part in retail and in disruptors is just true retail value. Put omnichannel aside, for a very long time, we’ve talked about a retailer having to provide value and that’s merchandise, price and service. What we care about here is we’ll be looking at categories and tenants that both can service omnichannel distribution, but as important, can provide value to the clientele.

When we look at our merchandise groups, we’re comfortable with our merchandise groups that we’re focused on and we have dominance in, discount, grocer, pharmacy, Home and Garden, convenience and within each one, we want the tenants that can afford to pay for omnichannel distribution and provide value. So that would be the number one disruptor that we talked about and that concept is extremely important in both dispositions in what we’re selling, we want to dispose, the tenants cannot provide the services and we want to acquire the tenants that can provide those services.

Sur les restaurants Red Lobster et la diversification du portefeuille d’actifs :

Conférence T1-2017 a écrit :

We like what’s going on at Red Lobster in that right now and need to tell you, but we are going to be committed to diversification. We don’t really want tenants over 5% and so we will bring it down. We will bring it down, we’d like to get it down to 6% by the end of the year. We sold 132 million. Our goal this year was 200 to 250. So you can see we’re well on our way.

We’ve sold $805 million dollars of Red Lobsters of the 1.6 billion. We will have by the end of this year gotten close to $1 billion in sales. Once we get to that 5% plus or minus, then we’ll hold Red Lobster and we’ll watch it every day, but we’ll hold it, but we’re not -- we’re going to conform to our general concepts of diversification just because we’re not smart enough to know who’s good and who’s bad five years from now.

Sur la possible vente de VEREIT à un tiers (la réponse est vague, mais pas éludée) :

Conférence T1-2017 a écrit :

So no, that’s fine. I mean the first thing I’d say is we will always care about the value of the company and if someone were to come along and want to buy the company at a price that we thought was a very good price, there’s no social issues around that and it’s a board decision, it’s not my decision, but I’m sure our board would look favorably upon real good value for this company if it could be achieved. In terms of acquiring an enterprise like this relative to the debt, it would be just the normal covenants and restrictions that any company would go through. We wouldn’t have anything here that’s any different or special.

VEREIT a maintenant la possibilité de faire des rachats d’action : VEREIT, Inc. Announces $200 Million Share Repurchase Program

Une bonne chose vu la décote actuelle et que la société dispose d’une marge entre son FFO et son dividende.