IBJNews

Simon quarterly results improve as sales increase at malls

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Simon Property Group Inc., the largest U.S. shopping-mall owner, reported a 6.3-percent gain in fourth-quarter funds from operations as income from rents rose.

FFO, which gauges a property company’s ability to generate cash, rose to $678.9 million, or $1.91 a share, from $638.7 million, or $1.80, a year earlier, the Indianapolis-based real estate investment trust said Friday morning. Analysts expected FFO of $1.90 a share, the average of 18 estimates in a Bloomberg survey.

The company increased its dividend to 95 cents a share, up from from 90 cents..

Simon is benefiting from a focus on regional shopping malls and outlet centers, which tend to perform better than the broader retail market. The company, which owns or holds stakes in more than 380 retail properties in North America, Europe and Asia, is raising rents and boosting occupancy rates as sales by its tenants rise and retailer demand for space grows.

“They’re arguably in the two best areas in retail,” Craig Guttenplan, an analyst at CreditSights Inc. in London, said before the results were released. “Outside of multifamily, they’re probably in the best shape of any REIT out there.”

Occupancy at Simon’s U.S. properties was little changed in the fourth quarter, at 94.8 percent. Average rent increased 4.4 percent, to $39.42 a square foot. Tenant sales climbed 10.7 percent, to $536 a square foot from $484 a year earlier.

Simon estimated FFO for the year in the range of $7.20 to $7.30 a share. Analysts estimate the company’s FFO will be $7.29 a share, according to a Bloomberg survey.

Revenue rose 4.6 percent, to $1.17 billion from $1.12 billion a year earlier. Net income rose to $363 million from $218 million a year earlier on a bigger gain from acquisitions and disposals.

Simon has reduced its holdings in Europe, selling its stake in a venture that owns 46 Italian shopping centers for an undisclosed amount to its partner, French supermarket chain Auchan’s property arm. Groupe Auchan SA’s Immochan unit acquired Simon’s 49-percent stake in the venture, the French property company said last month.

Simon's results were released before the start of regular U.S. trading. Simon shares rose 0.7 percent, to $137.45 each Thursday. The shares have advanced 34 percent in the past year, compared with an 8.2-percent gain in the Bloomberg REIT Index.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • SPG
    These guys on fire! Whoever thought the internet would destroy their business model is a smuck!

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. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT