$11.5 million of net income attributable to common stockholders ($0.09 per diluted share) $36.7 million in Funds From Operations (FFO)(1) ($0.28 per diluted share) FFO guidance for 2022 raised ($1.08 - $1.12 per diluted share) $120.2 million of acquisitions lined up ($60.0 million closed, $60.2 million under contract) $37.1 million property disposition under contract 714,380 square feet of leases executed during first six months of ‘22 (record activity) 97.6% portfolio lease rate at 6/30/22 (vs. 97.2% at 3/31/22 and 96.9% at 6/30/21) 16.7% increase in same-space cash base rents on 2Q‘22 new leases (10.5% renewal increase) 3.7% increase in same-center cash net operating income (2Q‘22 vs. 2Q‘21) 5.6% increase in same-center cash net operating income (first six months ‘22 vs. ‘21) $25.2 million of common equity raised through ATM program during first six months 6.7x net principal debt-to-annualized EBITDA ratio for 2Q‘22 Awarded 2022 Green Lease Leader in recognition of ESG initiatives $0.15 per share cash dividend declared
The new annual dividend is now $0.60, a 15% increase! All metrics look good, if not great.
ROIC was a recommendation of more than one of the now deceased Motley Fool premium services including the old Income Investor service.
I’d trade most of the new services for the old ones. It’s been a fluttering of new… but shallow… services (for the most part) that mostly replicate each other’s recommendations at high prices. But the old ones were pretty good. Their biggest problem… apparently… was that they were too inexpensive.
Rob
Former RB and BL Home Fool, Supernova Portfolio Contributor & Maintenance Fool
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.
I’d trade most of the new services for the old ones.
Hi Rob!
My sentiments, too. The old Fool premium services (Income Investor and Inside Value, to name just two) made some excellent to very good recommendations. I still own many of those recommendations which have performed nicely over the long-term.
My results with Income Investor and Hidden Gems were GREAT. I do agree that when Matthew left Income Investor the results went downhill. Rule Breakers was also great for some picks I had.
Now that I am retired and actually living off my past investments, I find nothing they sell has an interest to me. Sometimes it seems that all they are focusing on is new technology stocks that pay no dividends. Not what I want.Their focus in on the 1990’s market again. I’m retired and too old to go back to that. Great when it happened but a different life today.
My results with Income Investor and Inside Value were quite good, too. On the other hand, I did not invest in every recommendation those services made.
And my understanding is that those services along with others, including Hidden Gems, were terminated because the Fool was not making money on them like they are with all of the new services started in the past 5 or so years.
James Early who took over Income Investor from Matthew Emmert did a pretty good job especially with his recommendation in 2013 of Apple. I invested in Apple in 2013 because of his recommendation, and have an average annual return of 100% since then. But some of his recommendations did not pan out very well.
“I invested in Apple in 2013 because of his recommendation, and have an average annual return of 100% since then.”
You’ve done very well with your Apple investment, but your calculation of your average annual return is incorrect. The share price of Apple has not appreciated anywhere close to 100% per year since 2013, and that’s true even if you had the good fortune to buy it at the lowest price of that year. Adjusted for dividends and stock splits, the lowest closing share price of Apple was $12.10 on April 19 (approximately 9.25 years ago). If Apple’s stock price had risen an average of 100% annually over the past 9.25 years, the current share price would be well over $7000. Presently, it’s about $162.
Thanks for your thoughts. What I did in calculating my return since 2013 is to take the total unrealized gain so far of 1009.06% and I divided that by 9 years since 2013 which gives me an 112.1% annual return. What am I doing wrong?
You are used the wrong term to describe your return in your initial post. You initially said I invested in Apple in 2013 because of his recommendation, and have an average annual return of 100% since then. but now you are saying What I did in calculating my return since 2013 is to take the total unrealized gain so far of 1009.06% and I divided that by 9 years since 2013 which gives me an 112.1% annual return.
What you calculated is an “average return”. It is NOT an “average annual return”. “Average returns” don’t consider the impacts of compounding, while “average annual returns” do. To get an “average annual return”, you should use a CAGR (compound annual growth rate) calculator or Excel, rather than doing the simple average calculation that you did. From the Investopedia page on “average return” https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/averagereturn.asp
The average return is not the same as an annualized return, as it ignores compounding.
Based on your statement that you have 1009.06% unrealized gain and the current price of $162.51, that would indicate that you paid $16.11 for AAPL, after adjusting for stock splits. Not knowing exactly when during 2013 you purchased, the range of the timeframe is 8 years 5 months to 9 years 7 months, so an average of 9 years 1 month, or 9.08 years. Plugging those figures into this CAGR calculator https://www.omnicalculator.com/finance/cagr gives a CAGR of 28.99% Impressive, yes - but certainly not over 100%
Note: This is just the CAGR of the stock price, and does not account for dividends, so it is not providing your total return.
Thanks, AJ, for your thoughts and suggestions. At 70, I am always learning. My calculations were too simplistic.
I purchased the AAPL shares at a split-adjusted price of $14.65 in 2013 shortly after AAPL was recommended by James Early of the TMF Income Investor service. And the share price return does not include the dividends paid since 2013.