I imagine it must be due to comparatively much higher sales volume in Auckland, compared to rNZ, during the latest period too. With the NZ median sale for the latest period then settling closer to Auckland's higher prices.
Printable View
maybe there future market is state tenants ?
I cant see any better investment on the NZX than this one using a 5 yr time frame and I've been looking seriously hard, its not my biggest holding which is PAZ but thats not listed on the main board.
Maybe. When Tracey Martin was Minister for Seniors in the 2017 government she floated the idea of retirement villages being required to include affordable units (whatever that means) so that a wider sector of society has access to village amenities. The idea disappeared without trace, strange that. I expect the peals of laughter encouraged her to zip the lip.
Not long before year result
I'm looking to see whether they have managed to maintain gaining $100k plus on resales and the gain on new units ($) is starting to improve after declining over the last 4 reporting periods. No point at trying to assess how segments (Care and Villages) might be doing as essentially Underlying Earnings is the net gain on selling things
If not a YES to both then the result won't be that good
But then why worry just at the Comprehensive Income number and then see how much the March Book Value of $835 has increased by.
I thought we would've heard something about an acquisition by now, maybe we'll hear something on the 29th.
its tiring if they haven’t and they think they are undervalued they should do a buy back.
very upsetting watching this share with real estate cranking to a 12m high with this at a 12m low, like seriously what are they doing. I hope there’s better news in their convoluted financials and as I said previously 6m is way too long for updates to shareholders.
As a long term shareholder I really hope management have better things to do than managing the short term jitter of the share price with buybacks or whatever. Really, who cares.
Relevant is only the real underlying value which this company will generate over decades. Can't complain so far - SP from 80 cents to $1.40 roundabout in a bit more than 4 years, this would be a CAGR of 15% plus add the dividend, say nearly 20% added shareholder value per year.
Obviously - anybody who likes a bit of a gamble would have bought last year around 50 cents per share or below, and would have earned since than more than 100% p.a.
What exactly are you complaining about - 100% pa not enough return?