• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

aunty jinx loses her purse again

leetahbar

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
15,744
Points
83
GIC could lost another 1/2 billion in NY Subscribe
From: BART (cfkm) 1:04 am
To: ALL (1 of 5)

22686.1

GIC could lost another 1/2 billion in NYC Property investment

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125547827547583747.html#printMode

OCTOBER 14, 2009 An Apartment Complex Teeters
High-Profile Tishman/BlackRock Property in New York in Danger of Default
By LINGLING WEI and CRAIG KARMIN

Brian Harkin for The Wall Street Journal

The giant Stuyvesant Town apartment complex on Manhattan's East Side, shown Tuesday, was developed by MetLife for World War II veterans.
One of the biggest, most high-profile deals of the commercial real-estate boom is in danger of imminent default, say people familiar with the matter, signaling the beginning of what is expected to be a wave of commercial-property failures.

The sprawling Manhattan apartment complex known as Peter Cooper Village and Stuyvesant Town -- acquired for $5.4 billion in 2006 by a venture of Tishman Speyer Properties and a unit of BlackRock Inc. -- is running out of cash. As of the end of September, it had $33.7 million left of the $400 million in interest reserves set up to service its debt, according to the people familiar with the matter. At its current burn rate of about $16 million per month, the reserve could be depleted before the end of the year, the people said. Others have said the venture could avoid default until February.

The spokesman for Tishman Speyer declined to comment on behalf of the partnership.

The ownership, which includes a roster of high-profile investors from the Church of England to the California Public Employees' Retirement System, has no current plans to inject more capital into the venture, according to the people. Lenders who financed the deal first projected the complex's net operating income would triple to $336 million in 2011 from $112 million in 2006, according to Deutsche Bank AG. But net income is projected to be $139 million this year, according to Realpoint LLC, a credit-rating agency.

Investors who bought into the deal were confident that real-estate manager Tishman Speyer would be able to greatly boost profits by raising rents in Manhattan's sizzling apartment market. But today, the 56-building, 11,000-apartment property is suffering from a slowing New York economy, a lawsuit that has hindered the owner's ability to convert rent-controlled units to market rentals, and the debt load.

Realpoint estimates that the property is worth only $2.1 billion now, less than half of the purchase price. By that measure, all the equity investors and many of the lenders, including Government of Singapore Investment Corp., or GIC; Gramercy Capital Corp.; and SL Green Realty Corp., are in danger of seeing most, if not all, of their investments wiped out. Hartford Financial Services Group, which bought $100 million of the debt tied to the property, said it has "sufficiently reserved for ths asset in the first half of this year."

Some of the nation's largest institutional investors already consider their investment a failure. The $133 billion Florida State Board of Administration committed $250 million to the equity partnership in 2007. It now counts the value as zero. A spokesman for the pension fund declined further comment.

The failure of the high-profile investment also would further rattle the market for apartments, offices, hotels and other commercial property. The market this year has seen increases in loan delinquencies and property foreclosures, stoking worries that it will drag down the nascent economic recovery.

Commercial mortgage-backed securities -- the kind that financed a chunk of the Peter Cooper-Stuyvesant deal -- are high on the list of concerns. Some $700 billion worth of CMBS were issued during the boom years but they have never been tested by a protracted downturn.

The apartment complex was developed by MetLife for returning World War II veterans and remained a middle-class bastion even as rents in other parts of Manhattan skyrocketed. New York's strict regulations prevented the owners from raising rents.

But New York rent rules were eased over the years. When the Tishman/BlackRock venture purchased the property from MetLife in late 2006, the new owners predicted they would be able to convert thousands of protected apartments to higher market rents.

Pedestrians on First Avenue in front of the Cooper Village apartments.
These projections convinced Calpers and the pension funds of several other states to make large equity investments in the deal. Meantime, the Tishman/BlackRock venture put a $3 billion first mortgage on the property and another $1.4 billion of so-called mezzanine debt.

The new owners ran into a slowing economy and resistance from tenants that battled to block rent increases. In one of their most successful challenges, tenants groups filed a lawsuit charging MetLife and the new owners with improperly converting rent-regulated units while receiving tax benefits from the city. The appellate division of the State Supreme Court in March ruled in the tenants' favor. The state's highest court is expected to rule on an appeal this month.

But even a victory by the Tishman/BlackRock partnership likely won't save the deal from a default. One indication: a "special servicer" is in the process of taking over the deal's CMBS debt, say people familiar with the matter. Special servicers are experts in dealing with troubled loans. The transfer to the special servicer, CW Capital, could occur as soon as this month, the people said.

Once that happens, the special servicer likely will try to negotiate with the partnership to restructure the debt.

Major players in these talks will likely be Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which together own more than $1.5 billion of the most highly rated, triple-A slices of the CMBS debt, according to people familiar with the matter. They would likely benefit from a fast foreclosure because, as senior lenders, they would be paid back first.

A Fannie representative declined to comment. A spokesman at Freddie confirmed its holding of the debt. "We don't expect to incur any losses on these securities," he said.

Another big player in the restructuring talks could be Singapore's GIC. The fund owns a $575 million mezzanine loan backed by the property, according to people familiar with the matter. Also, GIC owns about $100 million to $200 million in equity, the people said.

Both investments might be wiped out unless GIC maneuvers to have more influence in the loan workout process, possibly by buying more senior debt. GIC declined to comment.

:oIo:
 
maybe that's why GOODYEAR left as soon as his employment was confirmed. he smelled a rat or he had a premonition that he might be made that RAT!:eek:
 
maybe that's why GOODYEAR left as soon as his employment was confirmed. he smelled a rat or he had a premonition that he might be made that RAT!:eek:

No you're fat. He left because he was constantly harassed by ugly SPGs and the hot dogs and donuts aren't as good.
 
No you're fat. He left because he was constantly harassed by ugly SPGs and the hot dogs and donuts aren't as good.


That's a good one! :D
 
now she even has to pawn away some national assets vital to all peasants :oIo:


Published October 20, 2009

Power to the people at competitive bids
EMA may open part of vested consumer market to bidding by gencos in January


By RONNIE LIM

Email this article
Print article
Feedback

(SINGAPORE) Come January, Singapore's generating companies (gencos) will start vying for a slice of the domestic electricity market here, sources say. This area had not been touched by competition so far, but the government is taking interim steps to open it up to benefit small consumers. The move could start impacting electricity tariffs from the second quarter onward.


The three biggest gencos now have foreign owners and the thinking is that they may bid aggressively to supply to this market segment of 1.2 million consumers, comprising mainly households and some small businesses.

Some 55 per cent of the electricity demand here is currently 'vested' or price-controlled. The Energy Market Authority may allow five gencos here to bid for as much as 3 to 12 percentage points of this pie.

'It has to be sizeable enough to be meaningful,' a source said. EMA could also divide the tender bids into smaller tranches so as to allow the smaller gencos to participate.

This means that as much as one-fifth of the vesting volume - currently accounting for 55 per cent of the 3 million mega-watt/hours monthly total electricity supply here - will be open to competitive bidding.

EMA will also reserve the right to withhold awarding the tender if the bids are not competitive enough, the sources added.





Vesting contracts were first introduced by the EMA in January 2004 to curb abuse of market power by any single genco and to protect consumers from excessive price volatility. The vesting contracts capped prices on 65 per cent of total electricity supply here at the start of the scheme, with the vesting prices set at the long-run marginal cost of the most efficient generation technology in use (ie. combined cycle gas turbines).

The vesting volume has since been brought down to 55 per cent, with the entry of new players, like Keppel Merlimau Cogen and Sembcorp Cogen, to a market dominated by the three biggies - Senoko Power, PowerSeraya and Tuas Power. The bid boys are now owned by Japanese/French consortium Lion Power, Malaysia's YTL and China Huaneng respectively.

Under the vesting scheme, the three big gencos - who collectively account for some 80-90 per cent of electricity generation - have to sell about one-third of their installed capacity(of about 3,000 megawatts each) into the wholesale pool at the vesting contract price.

The latest move to open part of the vesting volume to competitive bidding comes after months of consultations between the EMA and power players here, the sources said.

S Iswaran, Senior Minister of State for Trade & Industry, first disclosed in Parliament in February this year that EMA was looking at ways to inject more competition into the electricity market.

The government's objective is to fully open up the market so that all consumers will be able to purchase electricity from a range of retail packages offered by different suppliers, he said, adding that it is in the midst of a pilot project, the Electricity Vending System, to try to achieve this.

The EVS pilot studies at Marine Parade and West Coast are expected to be completed next month, with EMA studying the feasibility of deploying it on a larger scale.

In the interim, Mr Iswaran said that EMA will tender out a portion of the electricity demand for bidding by the gencos.

The overall price of electricity for domestic consumers will then be determined as a weighted average of the tender price and the price from the tariff formula.
 
2laxwlt.jpg

Fucking pondan hiao cheebye two head snake Bob Sim Kheng Hwee aka leetahbar! One moment suck PAP cocks, next, condemn them. Attention seeking disorder is best cured by sticking to sucking cocks in Changi Village, you fucking bastard!:oIo::oIo::oIo:
 
now this is something the SDP should take up the challenge. but they won't cos they are losers and cowards who only love bullying peasants or pretending to be showing concern.

that's SDP, do not allow yourself to be CHEETED.;)
 
now this is something the SDP should take up the challenge. but they won't cos they are losers and cowards who only love bullying peasants or pretending to be showing concern.

that's SDP, do not allow yourself to be CHEETED.;)

Cheet Soon Juan (cheat soon to be don juan? - *vomits)
 
Even intensive plastic surgery won't get him close - the process would only make him poorer.

And his equally bestselling sequel would be Plastic Surgery Patients* Cheated.


* It has to be plural because he has to put the views and sufferings of the collective above his own at least in his presentation to gain support.
 
LTS_MIW.jpg


If anyone of u see Bob Sim in public please tell him to get a job and stop beating his father.
 
And his equally bestselling sequel would be Plastic Surgery Patients* Cheated.


* It has to be plural because he has to put the views and sufferings of the collective above his own at least in his presentation to gain support.

there are 2 groups of ardent fans for chee.

1 group worships him like their messiah.

the other knows he's the devil in disguise.;)
 
there are 2 groups of ardent fans for chee.

1 group worships him like their messiah.

the other knows he's the devil in disguise.;)

The young people are idealistic and well-intentioned generally it seems, but even if they want to throw their lot behind an opposition politician at least get a more credible and decent one before doing so.

They lack experience in life and in dealing with all sorts of people, so they may not know what this ACS black sheep is really up to.
 
Back
Top