Duke Realty reports first-quarter growth in FFO

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Duke Realty Corp. saw a smaller profit in the first quarter, but revenue and funds from operations were higher than a year ago, the Indianapolis-based real estate developer said late Wednesday afternoon.

Duke earned $18.7 million, or 6 cents per share, compared with $28 million, or 9 cents per share, in the first quarter of 2013. Last year's profit included a one-time gain of $49 million on sales of depreciable property.

FFO for the quarter hit 28 cents per share, compared with 24 cents per share in the year-ago period. FFO is a common measure of performance for real estate investment trusts.

Duke Realty’s quarterly revenue rose 14 percent, to $293.2 million. Rental income climbed more than $8 million, while general contracting and service-fee revenue increased almost $36 million.

Proceeds from property sales totaled $79 million, including two medical office buildings totaling 180,000 square feet, and nine buildings in Park 100 in Indianapolis totaling 439,000 square feet that Duke sold for $18 million.

Duke Realty said its portfolio occupancy rate remained stable, at about 94 percent, compared with the previous quarter.

The company started $108 million of new developments in the quarter, including industrial developments in Atlanta, Baltimore and Columbus, Ohio, all of which are fully pre-leased, Duke Realty said.

Company shares closed Wednesday at $17.52 each, up 15 cents on the day.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Why should citizens rates increase forever to basically reduce Dukes cost to operate in the future? They will have no meter readers, no connect/disconnect personnel and will need fewer lineman to handle the same number of customers. Add to that the ability to replace customer service by giving detailed information electronically. Why do we have to subsidize the cost cutting measures of a Public Utility?

  2. In response to Sassafras, I have to ask if you relocated directly from Bloomington to Carmel? First, as you point out, Carmel is 48 square miles. Do you think it’s possible that some areas are more densely developed than others? That might explain traffic density in some places while others are pretty free moving. Second, your comment “have you ever been to Chicago--or just about any city outside of Indiana?” belies your bias. I don’t know, Sassafras, have you never been to Nashville, Columbus, OH, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Kansas City, Denver, Phoenix? They’re not a lot different in density than Indy. One more thing…I understand these comment sections are for expressing opinions, so those of us just looking for facts have to be patient, but you mention “low-density” Indy. How many cities in the US comprise 400 square miles with about 10% of that still being agricultural? Those facts certainly can impact the statistics.

  3. With all the past shady actions of Duke with utility regulators, one wonders do they really need such a huge amount? Concerned regulators not protecting ratepayers from the aggressive Duke monolith.

  4. I thought that had to be the way it was but had to ask because I wasn't sure. Thanks Again!

  5. I could be wrong, but I don't think Butler views the new dorm as mere replacements for Schwitzer and or Ross.