IBJNews

Duke Realty reports massive third-quarter loss

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Big write-downs on raw land and projects under development led to a wide third-quarter loss for Duke Realty Corp.

The locally based company said Thursday morning it lost $1.02 per diluted share in funds from operations, a common yardstick for real estate investment trusts, for the period ended Sept. 30.

Excluding one-time items including a $297-million write-down, Duke would have reported FFO of 32 cents, beating consensus analyst expectations by a penny. The company reaffirmed expectations it will earn between $1.42 and $1.64 per share in 2009.

The write-downs include $132 million for land holdings now targeted for disposition (including properties in the Indianapolis area), $70 million for properties under development and more than $50 million on a joint-venture project in Atlanta. Duke decided to sell land holdings because it anticipates lower development demand.

Duke reported a net loss of $314 million on revenue of $325 million, compared to net income of $31 million on revenue of $309 million during the same span in 2008.

The company has raised $1.5 billion in capital this year, most of it available as part of a credit facility, to bolster its balance sheet. The company said it has enough cash on hand to pay off all unsecured debt that comes due through 2010.

"Our core operating portfolio has held up reasonably well the last 12 months,"  Chairman and CEO  Dennis D. Oklak said in a statement. "We are focused on leasing our recently placed in service development projects and strategically reducing our undeveloped land inventory."

Occupancy for Duke, which owns 136 million square feet of mostly office and industrial space in 20 U.S. cities, stood at 87 percent at the end of the third quarter, down slightly from the previous quarter.

The company said it will continue to pay a quarterly dividend of 17 cents per share. At the Wednesday close of $11.23, that's a 6-percent annual yield.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT