IBJNews

Duke Realty reports strong quarterly results

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The sale of several properties helped Duke Realty Corp. record strong earnings in the first quarter, the Indianapolis-based real estate investment trust announced Thursday morning.

Duke reported a profit in the three-month period of $47.6 million, or 19 cents a share, compared with a loss of $15.3 million, or 7 cents a share, in the same quarter a year earlier.

Revenue increased 19 percent, to $386.9 million.

Sales of properties totaling 2 million square feet generated $456 million overall and gains of $79.5 million, the company said. Nearly $275 million was generated by the sale of 13 office buildings located mostly in the Midwest to an existing joint venture with Los Angeles-based CB Richard Ellis.

“These dispositions in combination with our industrial acquisitions over the last few quarters are a major step in achieving our asset strategy,” Duke Realty CEO Dennis D. Oklak said in a prepared statement.

The company has undertaken a strategy to shed a slew of office space within its portfolio of properties in favor of industrial investments.

Duke Realty reported first-quarter funds from operations, a key measure for REITs, of $71.8 million, or 27 cents a share, compared with FFO of $63.9 million, or 28 cents a share, in the prior-year period.

Adjusted for preferred share buybacks, FFO for the quarter was 28 cents a share, the company said.

The company reaffirmed its 2011 FFO of between $1.06 and $1.18.

The occupancy rate for Duke Realty’s portfolio of projects, including those under development, was 88.9 percent at the end of March, down slightly from 89.1 percent at the end of December.

The price of company shares has increased nearly 50 percent since they hit a 52-week low of $10.19 in December. Shares opened trading Thursday morning at $15.21, down slightly from a 52-week high of $15.26 reached on Monday.
 

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. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT