13 May 2009 07:00
ο»Ώ
PreliminaryΒ results for theΒ year endedΒ 31 MarchΒ 2009
"OurΒ full year results reflect the unprecedented market conditions experienced in theΒ propertyΒ industry. The year saw some of the mostΒ rapidΒ falls in values seen on record with the second half of the year characterised by theΒ dramaticΒ reaction to the worseningΒ financial andΒ economic conditions."
ResultsΒ Summary(1)
|
2009 |
2008 |
Change |
|
|
Valuation deficitΒ |
Β£(4,743.7)m |
Β£(1,292.6)mΒ |
n/a |
|
Basic NAV |
639p |
1862p |
DownΒ 65.7% |
|
Adjusted diluted NAV(2) |
593p |
1763p |
DownΒ 66.4% |
|
Pre-tax loss(3) |
Β£(4,773.2)m |
Β£(988.0)m |
n/a |
|
Revenue profitΒ |
Β£314.9m |
Β£284.8m |
Up 10.6% |
|
Basic EPS(4)Β |
(918.04)p |
(188.43)p |
n/a |
|
Adjusted diluted EPS(4)Β |
62.57p |
60.79p |
UpΒ 2.9% |
|
Dividend |
56.5p |
64.0p |
Down 11.7% |
|
Dividend restated(4) |
51.1p |
57.0p |
Down 10.4% |
(1)ContinuingΒ activitiesΒ (2)Our key valuation measureΒ (3)Includes revaluation deficitΒ andΒ profits/loss on disposalsΒ (4)Β RestatedΒ for the Rights Issue
2008/09 Key Points
Unprecedented market conditions leading to 34.2% valuation fall
Over Β£1.1Β billion ofΒ disposals
SuccessfulΒ Β£756m RightsΒ Issue and recapitalisation of the balance sheet
Performance
Revenue profit increased by 10.6% due to reduced interest payments
Β£527.5m of property investment sales at 18.5% below March 2008 valuation (before disposal costs)
1.2Β million sq ft of development space completed andΒ 72%Β let
Net debt down Β£1,460.9m orΒ 27.1%Β to Β£3,923.6mΒ
SmallΒ increase inΒ like-for-likeΒ voidsΒ toΒ 4.6% (3.5%Β in 2008)
Exposure to administrations stands at a moderateΒ 3.8% ofΒ income
60.1% still trading and 15.4% still paying rent
Resilience of income in our London office portfolio counterbalancing rising administrations in the retail sector
London Portfolio
Gross rental income up Β£10.3mΒ (3.0%)
Property sales of Β£349.6m at an average ofΒ 16.6% below March 2008 valuation (before disposal costs)
10 Eastbourne Terrace, W2,Β completed and 100% let. Dashwood House, EC2 completed andΒ 9%Β let
Retail Portfolio
Gross rental incomeΒ up Β£4.0m (1.1%)
Voids across the like-for-like portfolioΒ atΒ 5.2% (4.2% at March 2008)
Cabot Circus, Bristol and The Elements, LivingstonΒ openΒ andΒ 91%Β andΒ 80%Β let respectively
Outlet centres seeing rise in customer numbers as value proposition drives footfall
Commenting on the results, Francis Salway, Chief Executive said:
"This year the UK commercial property sector saw the sharpest fall in capital values on recordΒ asΒ the full severity of the economic downturn hit theΒ sector. Our portfolio was not immune to the market correction and we moved quickly to take the necessary actions to strengthen our balance sheet and createΒ resilience in a difficult and deteriorating environment.Β
"While the market may see some pockets of stabilisationΒ for certain asset types,Β we expect conditions to remain challengingΒ in a weak economic environment,Β with vacancy rates rising and rental values weakening,Β putting pressure on rental income. For all these reasons we continue to be patient and focus on those matters within our control such as balance sheet strengthΒ and maximisingΒ income.
"This has been an exceptionally turbulent period in our market, but ourΒ actions have given us protection from the downside of further significant falls in values and,Β with our beliefΒ that out of adversity comes opportunity,Β we have the flexibilityΒ to react to market opportunities."
Our Chairman's message
We have seen 12 months of high drama in the global economy, the financial markets and the UK business environment. Property asset values suffered steep falls and this trend has continued into the new financial year. As a shareholder you have seen the tangible effects of these straitened conditions - a rapid decline in the share price and a reduced dividend.Β
Demanding and unpredictable circumstances reveal character. Some in our industry have fallen prey to gloom and passivity. Others conduct a feverish search for green shoots. Land Securities has taken a different approach, responding with decisive, pragmatic actions today while positioning the business for growth tomorrow. We believe the current period of transformation will generate attractive opportunities and we will be ready to take advantage.Β
The very positive support shown for our recentΒ Rights IssueΒ speaks volumes for the inherent strength of the company and its relationship with investors. Our lastΒ Rights IssueΒ was 29 years ago, and shareholders recognised this year's initiative as a common sense response to exceptional times.Β
Before, during and since theΒ Rights IssueΒ the company has continued to do everything necessary toΒ create a resilient balance sheet,Β minimise costs and maximise income. From the sale of Trillium to the pause in development at Ebbsfleet, we have seized every opportunity to strengthen our position. We also cancelled plans to separate the Retail and London Portfolios. Land Securities is, and will remain, a diversified property company. We will use the flexibility of our funding structure and broad portfolio of prime assets to ensure we emerge from this downturn in excellent shape.
While the company's long-established qualities of stability and integrity remain widely recognised, I alsoΒ welcome the openness and creativity I have found. Ultimately, our strengths flow from two sources - first, our clear understanding of how to manage our business mix and skills to add value for shareholders; and second, our truly excellent people. Life has been demanding, and I am very disappointed that market dynamics required us to make redundancies, but the robust spirit within this company is inspiring. I thank our employees for their positive attitude and commitment this year.
In difficult times the rationale for extensive investment in corporate responsibility comes under sharp scrutiny. The value of our approach is clear.Β Β By developing a leadership position in areas such as sustainability, community relations and employee development, we ensure we are the sort of company people prefer to work with and for. Put simply, our investment in corporate responsibility makes us a more successful and sustainable business, and it will continue.
During the year our previous Chairman, Paul Myners, left the Board, as did Rick Haythornthwaite and Trillium Chief Executive Ian Ellis. I thank them for their contribution to the Board and the business as a whole. The Board is now smaller and well balanced. The non-executives are playing an active role in all aspects of strategy, performance and oversight. TheΒ ExecutiveΒ team, led by Francis Salway, has shown its mettle in the face of the formidable challenges affecting the company and our industry.Β Β However, the dedication and hard work of the Executive team has not been reflected in the results and therefore as a Board we decided not to pay bonuses or grant salary increases for the Executive directors this year.
The next 12 months will continue to make great demands on us all. The economic outlook remains murky. While there is little we can do about the wider environment, there is an enormous amount we can and will do to strengthen our own position. We will continue to focus on income and lettings to protect asset values.Β WeΒ will sell assets to reposition the portfolio ready for the resumption of economic growth. We will time our developments with precision. And we will be alive to opportunities where we can use our cash, banking support and terrific industry relationships to make astute acquisitions.
This company is not fixed to conventional ways of doing things and we will take all necessary measures to deliver exceptional value for investors over time. I thank shareholders, customers, suppliers and colleagues for their tremendous support during a tumultuous year, and I look forward to reporting back to you in 12 months' time.
Alison Carnwath
Chief Executive'sΒ Statement
This year the UK commercial property sector saw the sharpest fall in capital values on record. Occupiers and property investors were affected by wider economic, financial and commercial dynamics, and this impacted property values profoundly. We have not been immune to these exceptional conditions,Β experiencing aΒ write down on the valuation of ourΒ investment properties of 34.2% which created a very substantial pre-tax loss.Β
The reduction in property values was driven largely by yield re-pricing. However, as the economy moved into recession in the secondΒ half of the year, we also saw weaker demand from occupiers and pressure on rental values. Rental values were down 9.3% across our portfolio, ranging fromΒ a reduction ofΒ 3.8% on our retail assets to 19.8% on our London offices.Β
Our portfolio underperformed our benchmark, the IPD Quarterly Universe,Β in terms of ungeared total property returns (-29.7% versus -25.5%).Β However,Β some four-fifths of this underperformance was attributable to our portfolio mix, as shoppingΒ centres, retail warehouses and London offices have been theΒ weakestΒ performing segments of the UK market.Β Our relative performance wasΒ alsoΒ affected by our development projects and pre-development sitesΒ which have been hardest hit by the downturn.
Our responseΒ to the downturnΒ was guided by two clear priorities - to protect shareholder value today while ensuring we are well positioned to compete and thrive tomorrow. Our actions were decisive and pragmatic. We made an early decision to defer key developments. We continued to make disposals, achievingΒ overΒ Β£500mΒ ofΒ propertyΒ sales in a deteriorating market. And we moved quickly to reduce the company'sΒ administrativeΒ cost base by some 10%. We were not afraid to stop our proposed demerger and we made the tough but correct decision to sell Trillium. At the same time, we used our exceptional asset management skills to maintain revenue, we successfully opened two major retail developments and we laid the foundations for future opportunities as the economy recovers.
The tough decisionsΒ thatΒ we have taken over theΒ yearΒ haveΒ strengthenedΒ our balance sheet andΒ created resilience in a difficult and deteriorating environment. As in previous downturns, the company sought to navigate a clear and decisive line through the turbulence and we are in sound shape as a result.Β
Rapidly evolving market
We had anticipated some degree of slowdown in the commercial property market in spring 2007 and, in response, sold Β£1.56bn of assetsΒ in the year to March 2008. These sales assisted us as conditions weakened further in 2008. In September 2008 we saw an extraordinary acceleration of the decline in theΒ propertyΒ market andΒ inΒ the economy, and this brought our earlier actions into sharp focus. We recognised that we needed to respond further and we did.Β
First, we continued to make sales despite fewer buyers and anxiety around pricing. These disposals helped to strengthen our balance sheet. Long-term success in our market requires a steady nerve through all points of the cycle, but particularly when selling in a downturn. We will continue to make disposals and recycle our capital effectively, both to maintain balance sheet strength and to ensure that our portfolio is positioned for growth as the market turns and recovers.Β
In January weΒ alsoΒ sold Trillium for Β£444m, to generate total income and capital receipts from this business since April 2008 of Β£750mΒ (including theΒ buyer'sΒ assumption of Trillium's debt). Trillium has played a tremendous role in the evolution of Land Securities over recent years, but it was clear that the capital we could realise from the disposal of this specialist business would prove invaluable in current conditions. Relatively few disposals of property businesses went through during the year so this successful transaction again underlines our ability to complete sales in a challenging environment. Under our management Trillium produced a return on capital materially better than conventional investment property, and I would like to thank the employees of Trillium for their dedication and contribution.Β
SuccessfulΒ Rights Issue
Early in 2009 we made the decision to strengthen our financial position further through a Rights Issue. Our effective actions during the year meant we were able to minimise our call on shareholders' resources, and the issue closed on 24 March 2009 having raised the targeted Β£756m. This fresh capital has helped to restore the balance of our equity and debt capital, and it will help mitigate the effect on shareholders' funds of any further falls in property values. It will also ensure we are ready and able to react quickly when we identify opportunities beneficial to shareholders.
Given the Rights Issue, the sale of Trillium and the challenging market conditions facing the Group, the Board took the decision to reset the dividend and the final quarterly dividend has been proposed at 7.0p per share. This was done to ensure that our dividend remains realistic and sustainable in light of the factors which will affect our future earnings. We believe the new level will provide a secure platform from which we can work to deliver future growth in dividends over time.Β
Spreading risk through a diverse tenant mix
The long-term nature of our contracts with customers provides us with resilience of income even at a time when rental values are falling.Β Β This is reflected in our revenue profit for the year ofΒ Β£314.9m, which isΒ upΒ 10.6%Β with broadly stable income and lower interest payments.
It is always regrettable when retailers go out of business and this year proved extremely demanding for many. Like other property owners, we have suffered from retailer insolvencies but,Β across the Group as a whole,Β onlyΒ 3.8% of our total incomeΒ is inΒ administration. WeΒ have beenΒ proactive in response, working hard to support our tenants and protect our own position. We have continuing income from approximatelyΒ 15%Β of the unitsΒ currently inΒ administration.Β
For some time we have mitigated risk by developing a diverse mix of customers. Our largest retail customer, Arcadia Group, represents just 1.7% of our total investment portfolio income. Our only substantial exposure to a single occupier is to the counter-party of choice, Central Government, who account forΒ 9.5%Β of our total portfolio income.Β Β By maintaining close relationships with this diverse mix of tenants we kept the increase inΒ underlyingΒ voids across our like-for-like investmentΒ portfolio toΒ justΒ 1.1% (from 3.5%Β to 4.6%)Β -Β another strong relative performance.Β
Pragmatic timing on development
In line with our medium-term planning, we entered the year with a significantly lower level of developments due for completion than at the peak of the market cycle in 2007. However, it was vital to achieve lettings success on the two principal developments completed in the year - the shopping centres in Bristol and Livingston. Here we achieved occupancy levels ofΒ 91% andΒ 80% respectively at year-end, which confirms the attractive qualities of the two schemes. Quality was again recognised when Cabot Circus won The British Council of Shopping Centres' Supreme Gold Award and was named Best Shopping Centre of the Year in the MAPIC EG Retail Awards.Β
Leasing prospects for the developments coming through now - Dashwood House in the City and our St David's 2 joint venture with LibertyΒ InternationalΒ in Cardiff - have proved more challenging. These were respectivelyΒ 9% andΒ 47% let or in solicitors' hands at year-end. It is helpful to put this in context. The projected income on unlet space at Dashwood House represents justΒ 2.1%Β of our total London office portfolio income.Β And our share of the projected income on the remaining vacant space at St David's 2 representsΒ 2.3%Β of the Retail Portfolio's total income.Β Β The pace of lettingsΒ at St David's 2 isΒ increasing as we move towards opening in the autumn.
Our history shows that we are not afraid to take tough development decisions. In summer 2002, for example, we deferred New Street Square by 12 to 18 months and this proved enormously beneficialΒ in terms of the total returns on the project. This year we again took bold decisions on timing, opting to defer the start dates for our schemesΒ such asΒ 20 Fenchurch Street, EC3, Trinity Quarter, LeedsΒ and Ebbsfleet ValleyΒ inΒ Kent. We remain ready to take further similar decisions as appropriate, despite their potential impact on earnings in the short term.
While we are cautious on timing today, we continue to create excellent opportunities for tomorrow. This year we secured planning consent for substantial schemes in the West End, including the landmark Victoria Transport Interchange plan (VTI2), together with Selborne House and Wellington House in Victoria, SW1. The short-term outlook for the London office market remains challenging, but we expect tight development supply constraints in the West EndΒ to drive a resumption ofΒ growth in the medium term. The success of our office and retail development at Cardinal Place, SW1 confirms our ability to understand and lead the Victoria office market transformation.
Adding value for customersΒ
Throughout the year we worked proactively to support our tenants and ensure our products are designed to meet the changing needs of businesses. ToΒ assistΒ this, we moved our property management teams into the London and Retail Portfolios so they could work in closer partnership with customers and colleagues.Β
In London, we helped existing and prospective tenants respond to tough market conditions by offering flexible lease terms, addressing service charge costs, engaging in discussionsΒ on rate levels and offering some short-term cost-effective space opportunities. In Retail, we were one of the first organisations toΒ propose a basis for switching toΒ monthly rents for retailers and we worked in partnership with tenants to reduce service charges.Β
Of course, we want to do even more, and we continue to focus on removing unnecessary cost for tenants to help them in the current climate. I am pleased that all our efforts on customer service were recognised when we were named Retail Landlord of the Year 2008 in the Property Managers Association awards. Recent independent customer satisfaction surveys have confirmed our standing, with oneΒ measureΒ recording a 97% 'willingness to recommend' Land Securities as a shopping centre landlord.Β
Sustainability remains a priority
We see no conflict between sustainability and profitability. Quite the reverse. Good practice makes us a stronger business. By combining a long-term view with innovative action today we are able to meet the changing needs and expectations of tenants, local authorities, our employees and the general public. This approach produces clear commercial benefits;Β helping us gain permission for new developments,Β reducing property running costs, attracting new tenants and mitigating risks around future environmental legislation.
Our work has earned widespread recognition. We have been included in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index each year since its launch in 2000 and are now the global leader for sustainability in the Real Estate sector. This year Cabot Circus became the first major shopping centre to be awarded an 'Excellent' rating in the BREEAM environmental assessment scheme, and The Elements in Livingston was the first enclosed shopping centre in the UK to achieve this accolade. We believe the ground breaking work on energy generation and distribution planned for our new developments, such as the Victoria Transport Interchange scheme, will underline our position as a leader on sustainability.
OutlookΒ
We expect property market conditions to remain challenging, with vacancy rates risingΒ as businesses fail or contractΒ and,Β as a result,Β rental values weaken. These trends will put downward pressure on our rental income.Β Β Occupational markets willΒ displayΒ the full impact of economic conditions relatively late in the cycle, so we expect the period of recovery in our sector to be extended. Investment property pricingΒ mayΒ reach a turning point ahead of the rental markets, and the yield gap between property yields and gilts or cash on depositΒ can be expected toΒ stimulateΒ someΒ buying interest.Β Β Indeed, this is just beginning to become apparent for well-let prime properties. Whether the market cycle changes quickly or slowly, we will remain patient, making well-timed transactions that fit with our strategy, skills and strengths.
In the meantime, we will continue to take a positive and pragmatic approach to managing through the downturn - acting decisively, protecting value and planning for the future. We will respond to changing conditions quickly. We will take difficult decisions as and when required. And we will use our strengthened balance sheet to address future growth opportunities at the right point in the cycle.Β
This has been an exceptionally turbulent period in our market, but our experience tells us that out of adversity comes opportunity, and that the companies who manage successfully through the downturn emerge even stronger in the upturn. I believe Land Securities' ability to react to the challenges of today while maintaining a long-term perspective on value generation for tomorrow stands us in good stead.Β
Francis Salway
Business Unit Review - Retail Portfolio
Key objectivesΒ for 2008/09
Apply skills to support retailers and protect revenues
Use strong customer relationships to fill voids left by insolvencies
Make sales and recycle capital
Expand Harvest joint venture with J. Sainsbury through acquisition or development
OpenΒ and let Cabot Circus, Bristol, and The Elements, Livingston
Bring forward key development opportunitiesΒ
Achieve IPD outperformanceΒ
How we create value
WeΒ aim toΒ deliver attractive rental income streams, higher investment values and future development opportunities by:
Identifying, acquiring and enhancing shopping centre and retail park assets with growth potential
Using our asset management expertise to make locations more attractive to shoppers and retailers
Developing major new shopping and leisure assets that can transform under-valued areas into thriving destinations
Forming close relationships with retailers and local authorities, so we can respond to people's changing needs and ensure our portfolio fits the market
Recycling our capital and applying our skills to reposition assets higher up the value hierarchy
Our market
The long-term strength of the retail property market has been based on the historic trend of retail sales growth, together with relatively tight planning controls and the need for retailers to improve store locations to meet changing consumer demand. This year, however, wider economic, financial and commercial pressures hit the retail sector hard. This flowed through to the retail property market, with a particularly rapid decline in values andΒ pressure onΒ income from September 2008 onwards.
The investment market saw a greatly reduced number of transactions. The low level of debt available led to fewer buyers and continuous downward pressure on values. Investors found it easier to raise smaller amounts of debt, so smaller lot sizes attractedΒ theΒ most buying interest.Β
The occupational market was also impacted. While many retailers continued to trade profitably, and shopping centre openings across the UK in 2008 generally let up well, conditions worsened considerably in the second half of the year. Most retailers suffered declining like-for-like sales and trading conditions proved difficult for all retail businesses. As a result, we lost income through insolvencies and tenants not renewing their leases.Β At year-end we saw higher void levels than in the downturn of the 1990sΒ andΒ potential purchasers began to build in assumptions about occupiers going into administration.Β Β These dynamics had a considerable negative effect on values.Β
Market outlook
We expect to see continuing difficulties for retailers in the occupational markets while the economy is still in recession and the rate of unemployment is rising.Β In the investment market we have seen early signs that buyers are returningΒ for certain types and sizes of asset.
We believe the present tough market dynamics will produce some cushioning effects. For example, it is natural that the viability of a retailer is improved when a competitor goes into administration. As we lose names from the high street some retailers will benefit. Our recent reviews of sales data also revealed that many value and discount retailers have been able to maintain or increase levels of trade as more customers have become value conscious. This trend also applies to our factory outlet centres and looks set to continue, as the discount proposition will remain compelling for consumers.
Overview
We recognised the early indications of a slowdown in our market some time ago and adjusted our portfolio and development pipeline in response.Β In our 2007/08 financial year, for example, we sold Β£835m of assets at 3.1% above valuation. We also achieved 97% occupancy on our three developmentsΒ opened in 2007Β - Exeter, Corby and Cambridge.Β
This meant we went into the year focused on two clear priorities:Β first, applying our asset management expertise and customer relationships to support retailers and protect revenue;Β second, opening and letting our two new developmentsΒ completingΒ in 2008Β - Cabot Circus in Bristol and The Elements in Livingston.Β
At year-end,Β occupation levels at Cabot Circus and The Elements wereΒ 91% andΒ 80% respectively - a respectable performance in aΒ challengingΒ climate. However, difficult market conditions impacted occupiers across the portfolio. AlthoughΒ we were hit by insolvencies,Β we moved quickly to support occupiers and mitigate voids, and saw aΒ 1.1%Β increase in income from the portfolio. Valuations wereΒ hit hard, andΒ our Retail PortfolioΒ recorded aΒ 37.3% valuation deficitΒ for the year.Β Β TheΒ valuationΒ deficit for shopping centres wasΒ 4.1%Β greater thanΒ forΒ retail warehousing, reversing the trend of the previous year.Β In terms ofΒ rentalΒ values, we saw a 4.6% decline for shopping centres and shops, and 4.9% for retail warehouses.
Our Retail Portfolio underperformed its IPD Quarterly Universe sector benchmark in relative terms by 4.7% overall. For shopping centres most of this was attributable to our development and pre-development sites in Cardiff and Leeds, and for retail warehouses to some retail parks where occupancy is restriced to bulky goods users. This was offset in part by the stronger relative performance of the Accor hotel portfolio.
Sales and acquisitions
We continued to sell assets during the year. Our strategy is to manage assets proactively, soΒ we looked to sell assets and partnership interests where we were not responsible for asset management or where we saw limited potential for long-term growth.
Although a lack of available credit for buyers restricted sales activity in the market, we once again met our objective of being a net seller with total disposals of Β£177.9m at an average of 21.9% below March 2008 valuations. This means that since April 2007, when we anticipated more challenging conditions, we have sold overΒ Β£1bn of assets from the RetailΒ Portfolio.
At just Β£82.7m, acquisitions have been limited to properties with key strategic relevance. These included a parade of shops in Exeter, which may form the basis of another phase of development, and a Sainsbury's store in Lincoln, which we have added to The Harvest Limited Partnership with J Sainsbury. We have raised debt to fund further potential acquisitions for Harvest, and we are looking for additional ways to extend our convenience retail activity.
Asset management
This year we concentrated on addressing voids andΒ supportingΒ retailersΒ in difficult market conditions. We listened carefully to suggestions from tenants and took a lead on responding to their concerns. We were one of the first landlords to offer a monthly rent proposal for retailers. We introduced greater flexibility in a number of agreements,Β andΒ wherever possible, we reduced service charges. At the White Rose shopping centre in Leeds we achieved a 13% reduction on the charges - on top of a reduction last year - and we know this has helped tenants significantly.Β
Our efforts were recognised in December 2008 when we won the Property Managers Association Landlord of the Year 2008 Award. The judges praised us for our approachability, willingness to listen toΒ retailers'Β needs and overall efforts to collaborate in current difficult trading conditions. We believe landlords and retailers must continue to be open-minded and realistic, responding to each other's position and working together for mutual benefit.
Looking at specific asset management initiatives, we executed major change at the Bon Accord centre in Aberdeen, our joint venture with British Land. The Woolworths unit was taken back and re-let to TopShop/TopMan and River Island. Simultaneously, four units have been let to the Mosaic brands Karen Millen, Oasis, Coast and Warehouse,Β a commitmentΒ that the new parent company, Aurora, has agreed to honour. These new fashion stores will open in 2009, along with a 5,000m2Β Next and a refurbished central atrium. We also saw further advances in Corby this year, with Primark opening a 4,460m2Β store within the Willow Place shopping centre in April 2008 and a new rail connection with London opened in February 2009.Β
In retail warehousing, we made good progress at Edmonton, where we let the last of five redeveloped units.Β Β At Bracknell we completed a 4,000m2Β letting to Tesco Home, which is the first stage of a very substantial improvement to the park. We did see significant problems in the established furniture sector, with both MFI and Land of Leather going into administration, but by acting quickly we were able to re-let a number of MFI's units. We also negotiated aΒ substantialΒ payment from Galiform releasing it from guarantees related to MFI. Through our good relationships with retailers we have been able to offsetΒ much of the negative news in this sector and,Β since the year end,Β have let a major unit at the Commerce Centre, Poole to John Lewis for the first ofΒ theirΒ new concept of out of town stores.Β
Development
Given deteriorating market conditions it was critical that we opened our two new developments on time, achieved good levels of lettings at both, and made progress on our future pipeline projects. In overview:
Cabot Circus, Bristol
Created as part of our 50:50 Bristol Alliance joint venture with Hammerson, this innovative, mixed-use, large-scale development opened on 25 September 2008 and quickly established a dominant position in one of the UK's most important cities. It was 91% let or in solicitors' hands on opening and, even with the outward yield movement prior to opening, it delivered a profit on cost of approximately 14%Β at thatΒ date.Β
Integrated seamlessly with the surrounding streetsΒ andΒ buildingsΒ - many of which are also owned by the Bristol Alliance - the centre boasts retail, leisure, restaurants, offices, car parking, student accommodation and a hotel. With a wide range of brands represented in the House of Fraser and Harvey Nichols anchor stores, and more than 100 other shops now open, this is the greatest range of fashion retailing we have yet developed. The quality of the scheme was recognised in its BCSC Supreme Gold Award and MAPIC EG's Best Shopping Centre of the Year award.
The Elements, Livingston
This high quality extension to the existing centre opened on 16 October 2008 andΒ is nowΒ 80%Β let.Β Β It has increased Livingston's catchment area in the central belt and moved the town up the retail hierarchy to the benefit of our other substantial holdings at this location. The new centre provides stunning new M&S and Debenhams department stores andΒ 46Β other shops, leisure facilities and restaurants, all with good parking and easy access to the motorway. The attractive food and drink offer is proving popular with shoppers and encourages longer stays at the centre.Β
St David's 2, Cardiff
St David's 2 isΒ a development project being undertakenΒ by St David'sΒ LimitedΒ Partnership - our joint venture withΒ Liberty International. The scheme will create a John Lewis department store - the largest outside London's West End - together with more than 100 new shops, 25 new cafΓ©s and restaurants, and luxury apartments, all in the heart of Cardiff. Initial letting progress on this schemeΒ has beenΒ slow, reflecting both the tough environment for the retail sector and theΒ substantialΒ amount of space taken up by retailers inΒ otherΒ schemesΒ thatΒ openedΒ in 2008. At year-end, however, the scheme wasΒ 46% let or in solicitors' hands and we expect the pace of lettings to quicken as we move towards opening in autumn 2009. The scheme will open during a very difficult time for the retail market but we believe St David's 2 has excellent prospects over the long term.Β
We also have a number of proposed developmentsΒ whichΒ are affected by weaker occupier demand.Β Β Our response has been to reschedule the programme for our TrinityΒ QuarterΒ developmentΒ in Leeds, deferringΒ the aimedΒ completion of this 92,000m2Β scheme, depending on letting progress,Β to autumn 2012.
In October,Β The Buchanan PartnershipΒ -Β our joint venture with Henderson Global InvestorsΒ -Β received permission to increase the size of the Buchanan Galleries shopping centreΒ in Glasgow. And in June we securedΒ planning permission for aΒ refurbishment and partial reconstructionΒ of the St John's centre in Liverpool. These and other developments provide us with a strong foundation for when the economy turns. As ever, our priority is to time our activity in line with the market cycle to maximise returns.
Looking ahead
With market conditions expected to be difficult for some time, we will focus on applying our proven strengths and capabilities. We will continue to strengthen our well-established relationships with occupiers. We will look to acquire and transform distressed assets. And we will work to enhance our reputation for creating excellent and successful developments. The value of our reputation was confirmed in February 2009 when Chester City Council and ING Real Estate selected us to become their preferred development partner on the potentialΒ futureΒ regeneration of Chester city centre.
We expect to see further insolvencies amongst retailers, so it is important to recognise the quality and diversity of our tenants. Our largest single customer, Arcadia Group, represents just 3.4% of the Retail Portfolio rent roll, and our top ten tenants areΒ well-knownΒ retail brands. We intend to maintain the breadth, depth and quality of our tenant base and work hard to support our occupiers.
Internet retailing accounted for the entire growth inΒ UKΒ retail sales in 2008 and looks set to perform relatively well over time. However, we believe people will continue to see going to the shops as an attractive leisure activity and a convenient way to buy goods, as this year's successful openings in Bristol and Livingston are now demonstrating. For this reason we will pursue our strategy of investing in mixed-use urban regeneration schemes and convenience-based schemes with good access. However,Β asΒ the market evolves over the next 12 months, we willΒ continueΒ taking the tough tactical decisions required in a fast-changing environment while positioningΒ the businessΒ to take advantage of long-term opportunities.
Key objectives forΒ 2009/10
Protect income through proactive asset management
Continue to make sales asΒ appropriate
Identify acquisition andΒ upliftΒ opportunities
Maintain position as best-in-class for development and customer serviceΒ
Complete and maximise lettings at current developments
We outline our development pipeline inΒ Table 1.
TableΒ 1: Retail development pipeline at 31 March 2009
|
Property |
Description of use |
Ownership interest % |
Size sq m |
Planning status |
Letting status |
Net income / ERV Β£m |
Estimated/ actual completion date |
Total development costs to date Β£m |
ForecastΒ total development cost Β£m |
|
SHOPPING CENTRES AND SHOPS |
|||||||||
|
Developments completed |
|||||||||
|
Willow Place, Corby |
Retail |
100 |
16,260 |
83 |
2 |
Oct 2007 |
42 |
42 |
|
|
Cabot Circus, Bristol - The Bristol Alliance - a limited partnership with HammersonΒ |
Retail |
50 |
83,610 |
91 |
17 |
Sep 2008 |
257 |
257 |
|
|
Leisure |
9,000 |
||||||||
|
Residential |
18,740 |
||||||||
|
The Elements, Livingston |
Retail |
100 |
32,000 |
80 |
8 |
Oct 2008 |
166 |
166 |
|
|
Leisure |
5,670 |
||||||||
|
Developments approved and those in progress |
|||||||||
|
St David's, Cardiff - St David's Partnership - a limited partnership withΒ Liberty International |
Retail/leisure |
50 |
89,900 |
28 |
17 |
Oct 2009 |
240 |
347 |
|
|
Residential |
16,500 |
||||||||
|
Proposed development |
|||||||||
|
Trinity Quarter, Leeds |
RetailΒ |
75 |
92,000 |
PR |
n/a |
n/a |
2012 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
RETAIL WAREHOUSES |
|||||||||
|
Developments, let and transferred or sold |
|||||||||
|
Angel Road Retail Park, Edmonton |
Retail |
100 |
3,480 |
100 |
1 |
MarΒ 2009 |
19 |
19 |
|
Floor areas shown above represent the full scheme whereas the cost represents our share of costs. Letting % is measured by ERV and shows letting status at 31 March 2009. Trading property development schemes are excluded from the development pipeline. Cost figures for proposed schemes are not given as these couldΒ stillΒ be subject to material change prior to final approval.
Planning status for proposed developments
PR - Planning Received
Total development cost (Β£m)
Total development cost refers to the book value of theΒ landΒ at the commencement of the project,Β the estimated capital expenditure required to develop the scheme from the start of the financial year in which the property is added to our developmentΒ programme, together with finance charges.
Net income/ERV
Net income/ERV represents headline annual rent payable on let units plus ERV atΒ 31 March 2009Β on unlet units.
Business Unit Review - London Portfolio
Key objectivesΒ for 2008/09
Preserve income by applying asset management skillsΒ
Complete asset sales and recycle capital
Let completed developments successfully
Adjust development pipeline in line with market
Achieve planning success, especially around Victoria
Spot opportunities to create value through the cycleΒ
Make progress on development at Ebbsfleet Valley
Achieve IPD outperformance
How we create value
WeΒ aim toΒ deliver attractive rental income streams, higher investment values and future development opportunities over the long term by:
Investing in and disposing of assets early in the cycle to maximise returns and minimise riskΒ
Ensuring we understand our customers' changing circumstances, so we can adapt and evolve our products to meet their needs
Using a mixed-use, high-quality approach to mitigate risk, generate strong demand and achieve improved rental performanceΒ
Focusing on major development projects located in central locations to ensure we attract strong demand from tenants
Clustering properties so our existing assets gain from our development work on new schemes
Our market
This year the London commercial property market experienced a structural correction driven by a rapid weakening in UK and global debt markets and deteriorating economic conditions.Β
With low levels of available debt reducing the number of buyers, the investment market declined sharply. Equity buyers bided their time and waited for values to settle. Good transactions could still be made, but prices were unpredictable and weakened over the year. By year-end, values across the sector had reduced dramaticallyΒ and are nowΒ over 40% below theΒ peakΒ in 2007. Assets in the City suffered the greatest falls, and this underlined the value of our strategy to spread the portfolio geographically across the City, Midtown, central West End, Victoria, the South Bank and other key London villages.Β
Wider market dynamics also impacted the occupier market. Relatively little demand came through around lease expiries and lease events, such as break options, with occupiers reluctant or unable to commit to relocation in such an uncertain environment. London's diverse mix of tenants offered partial mitigation to the widespread downturn, with some law, accountancy and compliance organisations providing potential for counter cyclical demand.
Retail in London proved relatively robust. Prime West End shopping streets outperformed the UK average significantly. As a result, our strategy of creating mixed-use developments proved well founded. We saw negative pressure on values for London retail properties, but there was a reasonably consistent level of demand from occupiers for prime assets in prime streets.Β
Market outlook
On the investment side, relatively few buyers will re-enterΒ the marketΒ until they feel values have settled, although a degree ofΒ stabilisation has begun to feed through at the end of the financial year at the prime end of the market. However, we continue to see opportunities to achieve sales andΒ position ourselves for future acquisitions.Β Β In the occupational market, we are matching developments to demand for high quality space in attractive locations. Mitigating voids will remain a priority and we will work closely with occupiers to support each other through these tough conditions. There is a substantial over-supply of office space in London, but, by combining flexibility on terms with good quality product, we are well placed to compete for new tenants for the limited space we have available.Β
We have always responded early to market cycles and we willΒ continue toΒ do the same, recycling capital to strengthen our position and maximise potential future returns for shareholders. By taking tough decisionsΒ earlyΒ weΒ areΒ able to evolve with the market as it moves into the next phase of the cycle.Β
Overview
We did not predict the global financial crisis but we did recognise the early signs of a slowdown in the London market some time ago and adjusted our portfolio and development pipeline accordingly. This strengthened our position as we went into more severe conditions from September 2008 onwards. As the environment worsened, we accelerated the completion of developments due in the year and adjusted the timing of some future developments.Β
At year-end, headline void levels in the London portfolio were atΒ 6.8% - a strong performance in an exceptionally difficult environment. Valuations in our sector have been impacted heavily, however, and we have not escapedΒ generalΒ marketΒ movements.Β Β Our London PortfolioΒ saw aΒ 31.2% valuation deficit overall, with aΒ 35.6% deficit on office holdings and aΒ 10.6% deficit on London retail.Β In terms of rental values, London retail saw a 3.2% rise in rental values largely driven by our asset management initiatives, but weakness in occupier demand resulted in rental values for our London offices falling by 19.8%.
We are pleased that, despite falling values, our London Portfolio overperformed its IPD Universe sector benchmarks with London offices outperforming by 1.4% and London retail by as much as 5.8%. Our London office performance was helped byΒ theΒ resilience of some of our assets in Victoria, particularly those let on long leases to the Government. Our London retail assets benefited from the positive growth in rental valuesΒ createdΒ by some of our asset management initiatives.
In recent years, growth in the financial services sector proved very attractive to developers. We took advantage of this opportunity, but we also recognised that growth in this area could not be sustained. As a result, we adjusted our portfolio, moving quickly to reduce our exposureΒ to City offices which now represent only 14.4% of our London Portfolio.Β Β In the meantime, we continued to attract a broad mix of occupiers across a number of London's premier villages. This diversity gave us resilience during the year, with retail proving robust and West End assets holding up better than those in the City.Β
While 16% of our occupiers were in the very hard-hit financial services sector, Central Government remained our largest occupier, representing 21% of the London Portfolio rent roll. We also had a substantial number of occupiers from professional services organisations. This balanced base enabled us to generateΒ increasedΒ incomeΒ in the yearΒ ofΒ Β£10.3mΒ at Β£352.8m. WhileΒ we would prefer to reportΒ significantΒ growth, this represents aΒ soundΒ performance.
Despite uncertainty and demanding conditions, our employees achieved much this year. From working closely with hard-pressed occupiers to closing transactions and achieving milestone planning approvals in Victoria,Β we acted as a close-knit and highly effective team.Β
SalesΒ andΒ acquisitions
Our rationale for selling a particular asset is simple - we look to make a disposal if we can recycle the capital into other assets with greater growth potential. This year we sold Β£349.6mΒ of propertiesΒ at an average ofΒ 16.6% below March 2008 valuation (before disposal costs), as compared to the market-wide fall in value for London offices over the year ofΒ over 30%.Β
Important sales this year included:
Turnstile House, WC1
We completed this sale in May 2008. The property had produced good returns for us since its conversion to an apart-hotel but it no longer fits our main focus of activity.
Empress State Building, SW6, 50% shareΒ
In August we completed the sale of our holding to a 50:50 joint venture with Liberty International. We have held the asset for a number of years but saw limited asset management opportunities in the near future. The joint venture with LibertyΒ InternationalΒ reduces our stake while enabling us to realiseΒ furtherΒ value over time.
New Scotland Yard, SW1
In December we sold our freehold interest to the Metropolitan Police Authority. As there was limited potential for us to add value to this property over the next few years, and no further rent reviews until 2028, a release of capital offered good value.
Fleet Street Estate, EC4
In January 2009 weΒ exchanged contracts forΒ the sale ofΒ the majority of the estate with the rest to completeΒ late 2009.Β Β A substantial part of the site is occupied by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and we recently added value with the extension of the OFT lease.Β
In terms of acquisitions, we purchased just Β£39.1mΒ of investment properties. These were strategic acquisitions required for site assembly and other purposes around potential development sites.
Asset management
We pursued three clear asset management priorities this year. First, we focused on addressing and minimising voids. Second, we worked to maximise short-term income on assets targeted for redevelopment in the next cycle. Third, we continued our work to enhance the performance of our Central London retail assets. Our operations at the east end of Oxford Street through our joint venture with FrogmoreΒ and our work with Piccadilly LightsΒ were particularly effective.Β Β With Piccadilly Lights, we have increased income by upgrading advertising signage systems and working closely with BarclaysΒ Bank to introduce a flagship branch. Where it proved difficult to achieve lettings, as at Thomas More Square, E1, we quickly reviewed our existing plans and provided attractive, flexible options for potential occupiers.Β
Development
Having completed a number of large projects in 2007 and spring 2008, our current development pipeline is well matched to the current economic cycle. The balance of expenditureΒ committed toΒ currentΒ schemes isΒ Β£258m.Β Β We haveΒ 244,950mΒ²Β of development potential available to us over timeΒ through consented planning applications.Β
During the year we completed development work and achieved 100% occupancy at 10 Eastbourne Terrace, W2. This success was due to our ability to respond quickly to the worsening market. We accelerated work, dedicated considerable efforts to lettings and completed the scheme early.
At Dashwood House, EC2, we had planned to complete the refurbishment in December 2008 but, again, responded to worsening market conditions by accelerating work and achieving completion early, in October. Dashwood House is not a big liability relative to the size of our portfolio and it is our only developmentΒ completedΒ asset with significant space to letΒ (13,290mΒ²Β orΒ 2.1%Β of our total London office income).Β
While much current work has been focused on protecting our capital, we have one major development and two smaller development projects with committed completion dates:Β
One New Change, EC4
Due to open in late 2010, this project will bring excellent office, retail and public space to an historic site opposite St. Paul's Cathedral. We have already pre-letΒ 38% of the office space to K&L Gates for a minimum term of 15.5 years and we have let orΒ instructed solicitors onΒ 25%Β of the retail spaceΒ (by income), with M&S and Topshop committing to the scheme. The unique location, quality of space and views make us confident of securing further lettings, although the office component may reflect weaker pricing trends in the short term.
Wilton Plaza, SW1
Expected to completeΒ in May 2009, Wilton Plaza provides a vibrant mix of market, student and affordable housing, together with ground floorΒ retail space. The scheme isΒ 93% let.Β
30 Eastbourne Terrace, W2
Another completionΒ expectedΒ in May 2009,Β this scheme is part of our extensive holdings opposite Paddington Station and has been refurbished to provide 4,470m2Β of prime office space.
There are two further projects where demolition work has commenced on site and for which plans for developments are agreed and in place:
Park House, W1
This scheme will offer some of the largest office floor plates in the West End, together with premium retail space and residential units. Demolition was completed inΒ December 2008. The uncertainty regarding planning permission was finally removed inΒ FebruaryΒ 2009 when a High Court ruling approved Westminster City Council's planning consents, following a legal challenge. Work is now taking place to assess the timescales for delivery of the scheme which is set to be the biggest development on Oxford Street in 40 years and the biggest office development in Mayfair in the last decade.
20 Fenchurch Street, EC3
This development will offer office accommodation and retail space in a landmarkΒ towerΒ building in the heart of the City. Demolition and ground worksΒ are due toΒ complete inΒ JuneΒ 2009. We have deferred the start of construction work in line with market dynamics.Β
Planning
While this year's development and asset management activity reflected the current economic reality, we did not stop preparing for substantial future opportunities. We have a proven track record in design and planning, and we continued this during the year by achieving very significant progress onΒ planningΒ consents.Β
Our VTI2 scheme received a resolution to grant permission in February 2009, giving us the go-ahead to create someΒ 83,200mΒ² of space in six buildings next to Victoria Station, SW1. Our 'Vision for Victoria' is to replace outdated pockets of post-war buildings with new offices, shops, restaurants, public amenities, open spaces and homes. In March 2009 we received permission for two further schemes in Victoria - Selborne House and Wellington House. Our success in Victoria is particularlyΒ excitingΒ as we believe this is one of the areas likely toΒ recoverΒ quickly as we move into the next phase of the cycle.
This year we also received a resolution to grant planning consent for the redevelopment of 30 Old Bailey, EC4,Β forΒ office accommodation and retail space. Our proposals for Arundel Great Court, WC2, in Midtown were refused planning consent andΒ we have now submitted an appeal.
Strategic land portfolio
With the housing market in the southeast hit hard this year,Β reflected in the write-down of ourΒ developmentΒ land holdings,Β we have adopted a measured approach to the development of our strategic land portfolio. The pace of works has been slowed and we will wait for an improved lending environment before considering a start on further construction.Β
Our biggest project in this sector is the urban regeneration programme at Ebbsfleet Valley, Kent. This will ultimately transform 420 hectares of land into a vibrant mix of residential, business, retail, leisure and public space over 25 years. Outline planning permissions have been granted for the whole of the project. The completed development will provide 10,000 new homes,Β over 640,000m2Β of offices andΒ overΒ 320,000m2Β of mixed-use space in total.Β Β This is a scheme with immense potential but, for now, the pragmatic decision hasΒ beenΒ taken toΒ pauseΒ work. The economic environment has hit the housing and leasing markets hard and we have had to adjust our targets and expectations accordingly. We have progressed infrastructure work in preparation for the next cycle, but we will wait forΒ signs ofΒ better economic conditions before starting on detailed design. We remain confident that the general lack of supply in the southeast means demand for housing willΒ remain strong and,Β as and when finance is available for homebuyers,Β will begin to translate to active purchasing.Β
Looking ahead
In the investment market, activity will increase when buyers believe prices have stabilised.Β Β We have seen some evidence of this recently in prime stockΒ atΒ smaller lot sizes. In the occupational market, we expect that most occupiers willΒ restrict new activityΒ in response to the operating environment for their businesses.Β We will keep focusing on our strengths - the quality of our portfolio, our diverse tenant mix and our skilled and experienced people. We will continue to protect our position while preparing to take advantage when the cycle changes.
London remains a world-class city with great qualities in terms of geography, range of property assets, skills base, culture and living conditions. This gives it an enduring appeal toΒ bothΒ investors and future occupiers.Β
The tight supply of prime assets in the West End may prove beneficial given our extensive portfolio. We see remarkable potential around SW1, and our 'Vision for Victoria' is a particularly exciting prospect. The successful Cardinal Place scheme demonstrates our ability to revitalise this area. With VTI2 and other development schemes approved, we have the opportunity to establish Victoria as a powerful and vibrant part of London's West End. We will time our developments here carefully.
Across the business, we will continue to make tough decisions and take pragmatic action while looking to the long term. We will keep making disposals and acquisitions as and when attractive opportunities arise. We will be flexible on terms with occupiers while protecting our income. And we will use our strengths to identify and exploit new opportunities. Although we are facing exceptionally demanding conditions, our strategy has always been to address a cyclical market, and we will act decisively to ensure we emerge in good shape from current volatilities.
Key objectives forΒ 2009/10
Protect income throughΒ active asset management
Maintain strong brand visibility to attract occupiers, partners and investorsΒ
Continue to make sales asΒ appropriate
Time development progress in line with market cycle
Act on opportunities to create value through the cycleΒ
We outline our development pipeline inΒ Table 2.
|
Property |
Description of use |
Ownership interest % |
Size sq m |
Planning status |
Letting statusΒ % |
Net income/Β ERV Β£m |
Estimated/ actual completion date |
Total development costs to date Β£m |
ForecastΒ total development cost Β Β£m |
|
TableΒ 2: London development pipeline at 31 March 2009 |
|||||||||
|
Property |
Description of use |
Ownership interest % |
Size sq m |
Planning status |
Letting statusΒ % |
Net income/Β ERV Β£m |
Estimated/ actual completion date |
Total development costs to date Β£m |
ForecastΒ total development cost Β Β£m |
|
Developments, let and transferred or sold |
|||||||||
|
10 Eastbourne Terrace, W2 |
Office |
100 |
6,150 |
100 |
3 |
July 2008 |
41 |
41 |
|
|
50 Queen Anne's Gate, SW1 |
Office |
100 |
30,140 |
100 |
14 |
May 2008 |
143 |
143 |
|
|
DevelopmentsΒ completed |
|||||||||
|
New Street Square, EC4 |
Office |
100 |
62,340 |
93 |
33 |
May 2008 |
379 |
379 |
|
|
Retail |
2,980 |
82 |
|||||||
|
Dashwood House, EC2 |
Office |
100 |
14,110 |
6 |
7 |
Oct 2008 |
113 |
113 |
|
|
Retail |
710 |
100 |
|||||||
|
Developments approved andΒ in progress |
|||||||||
|
30 Eastbourne Terrace, W2 |
Office |
100 |
4,470 |
- |
2 |
May 2009 |
29 |
35 |
|
|
One New Change, EC4 |
Office |
100 |
30,840 |
38 |
31 |
Sept 2010 |
291 |
543 |
|
|
Retail |
19,900 |
17 |
|||||||
|
Park House, W1 |
Office |
100 |
15,430 |
- |
22 |
July 2013 |
247 |
387 |
|
|
Retail |
8,140 |
- |
|||||||
|
Residential |
5,380 |
- |
|||||||
|
Proposed developments |
|||||||||
|
Selborne House, SW1 |
Office |
100 |
23,450 |
PR |
n/a |
n/a |
2013 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Retail |
1,540 |
||||||||
|
Arundel Great Court & Howard Hotel, WC2 |
Office |
100 |
36,750 |
PA |
n/a |
n/a |
2014 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Retail |
2,470 |
||||||||
|
Residential |
22,670 |
||||||||
|
20 Fenchurch Street, EC3 |
Office |
100 |
61,660 |
PR |
n/a |
n/a |
2014 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Retail |
2,130 |
||||||||
|
Wellington House, SW1 |
Retail |
100 |
250 |
PR |
n/a |
n/a |
2014 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Residential |
5,650 |
||||||||
Floor areas shown above represent the full scheme whereas the cost represents our share of costs. Letting % is measured by ERV andΒ showsΒ letting status atΒ 31 March 2009. Trading property development schemes are excluded from the development pipeline. Cost figures for proposed schemes are not given as these could still be subject to material change prior to final approval.
Planning status for proposed developments
PR - Planning Received
PAΒ - PlanningΒ AppealΒ
Total development cost (Β£m)
Total development cost refers to the book value of theΒ landΒ at the commencement of the project,Β the estimated capital expenditure required to develop the scheme from the start of the financial year in which the property is added to our developmentΒ programme, together with finance chargesΒ less residential costsΒ (totallingΒ Β£109mΒ across all categories of development).
Net income/ERV
Net income/ERV represents headline annual rent payable on let units plus ERV atΒ 31 March 2009Β on unlet units.
Our risks and how we manage them
The tables below show the principal risks we face.
|
Risk description |
Impact |
Mitigation |
|
Financial risks |
||
|
Capital Structure Pace of valuation decline continues to exceed the pace at which assets can be sold.Β |
Unable to counteract the impact of falling values on the Group's balance sheet. Unable to progress investment opportunities. |
The Rights issue strengthened the Group's balanceΒ sheet andΒ willΒ reduce theΒ potentialΒ impact of prolonged fallsin property values and positionΒ the GroupΒ toΒ respondΒ quickly to the turning point in the cycle. Rights Issue strengthened the Group's position inΒ refinancing its debt facilities. Liquidity and gearing kept under constant review. Wide variety of assets and knowledge of investorΒ appetite ensure best possibility of achieving disposals.Development commitments matched to sales. |
|
Credit risk Investment Counterparty Risk Failure of bank and financial institution counterparties. |
Loss of cash and deposits. |
Only use independently-rated banks and financialΒ institutions with a minimum rating of A.Β Weekly review of credit ratings of all financialΒ institution counterparties. Group Treasury ensures that funds deposited withΒ Β a single financial institution remain within the Group'sΒ policy limits. |
|
Liquidity risk Restrictive covenant regime.Β
Limited market debt capacity. |
Inability to fund operations and capital expenditure programme.
Inability to raise sufficient new funding. |
At 31 March 2009, Β£1.6bn of cash and short-termΒ deposits were held outside the Security Group.Β This balance is available to be injected into the SecurityΒ Group to maintain its LTV at lessΒ thanΒ 80% to avoidΒ entering Final Tier 3 with its additionalΒ financial andΒ operational restrictions. No financial covenant default is triggered until theΒ applicable LTV ratio exceeds 100% or the ICR is lessthan 1.0. Assets available within the Security Group to sell/raiseΒ new debt. Ongoing monitoring and management of the forecastΒ cash position. Commitments are not taken on if funding is not available. |
|
Market risk Market risk exposure through interest rates, currency fluctuations and availability of credit. |
Increased borrowing costs. |
GroupΒ Treasury monitorsΒ compliance with theΒ GroupΒ hedging policy. Specific hedges used in geared joint ventures to fixΒ theΒ interest exposure on limited recourse debt. Forward purchases of foreign currency to fix the Sterling value for any construction works not priced in Sterling. |
|
Tax risk Compliance with the Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) taxation regimeΒ |
Increased tax payable. |
Ongoing monitoring and management of theΒ criteriaΒ toΒ meet REIT status. |
|
Property investment risks |
Β
|
Occupier market conditionsΒ Prolonged downturn in tenant demand.
Reduced consumer spending leading to lower retail sales. |
Threat of voids in the portfolio.
Cutbacks in retailer opening programme. |
Committed development exposure limited to remainingΒ space in St David's 2 in Cardiff together with One NewΒ Change (due to complete in 2010) and Dashwood Housein London. Other proposed developments are notΒ committed and will only commence when market conditionsΒ are favourable or aΒ pre-let of part is in place. Void management through temporary lettings and voidΒ mitigation strategies. Large portfolio allows portfolio leasingΒ deals and flexibility to further reduce voids. Pre-letting of key units before committing to development.Limited development pipeline concentrated primarily inΒ Cardiff; most other schemes completed and substantiallyΒ let already. Ongoing sales programme to divest schemes and locationsmost likely to suffer adverse impact. |
|
Market cycles Property markets are cyclical. |
Risk of negative interaction between falling property values and balance sheet gearing. |
Target ranges for balance sheet gearing. Secure income flows under UK lease structure. |
|
Property risk Asset value concentration.
Increased cost exposure on voids. |
Poor performance of a single asset having material impact on overall performance. Increase in void costs. |
Large multi-asset portfolio. Largest property (Cardinal Place) represents only 5.8%of combined portfolio.Β Average investment property lot size of Β£44.6m.Β Retail assets combine a range of highly diversified incomeΒ streams in all major sub-sectors of retail property. Void management and empty rates mitigation. |
|
Tenant risk Tenant concentration and failures. |
Impact on revenue if a major occupier fails or does not renew leases. |
Diversified tenant base. Strong established locations and relationships withΒ occupiers. Government largest single customer representing 9.5%Β ofΒ gross rents, the next largest represents 4.2%.Of our income, 72% is derived from tenants who makeΒ lessΒ than a 1% contribution to rent roll.Regular credit review of major tenants. |
|
Health, safety and environmental risk Responsibility for the safety of visitors to our properties and our environmental performance. |
Impact on reputation or potential criminal proceedings resulting in financial impact. |
Annual cycle of health and safety audits. Quarterly Board reporting. Dedicated specialist personnel for environment andΒ health and safety. Established policy and procedures including award-winningΒ health and safety system and ISO 14001 certifiedenvironmental system. Active environmentalΒ programme addressing key areas ofΒ impact (energy and waste). |
|
Property development risks |
||
|
Site assembly risk Third-party interests in part of site cannot be acquired. |
Unable to progress development either in time, at all, or in budget. |
Policy of buying into all or part of future development sitesearly as income-producing investments. Experience of Compulsory Purchase Order procedures. |
|
Planning risk Development proposals fail to gain sufficient support and, therefore, planning consent. |
Unable to progress developments in a timely manner. |
Development expertise including: Skilled development management teams. Public consultation capabilities. Long-standing relationships with key developmentΒ stakeholders. Reputation. |
|
Construction risk Construction cost overruns or poor management of construction. New and different procurement methodologies and contract forms for London. Supplier capacity, capability and financial stability. |
Returns are eroded by cost overruns or project completion is delayed. Different risk profiles and unfamiliar terms and conditions. Cost in excess of assumptions in appraisal. Lack of competition in tendering process. Poor supplier performance. |
Transfer of risk to specialist contractors. Skilled in-house project management teams. Use of specialist advisers. Contingency provision in appraisals. Forward purchase of high inflation risk items. Closer, more open relationship with the supply chain.Β |
|
Letting risk Development remains unlet after completion or fails to meet lettings target. Tenant requirement for incentive packages, including capital increasing. |
Impact on income and valuation. |
Experienced and skilled in-house leasing teams. Risk evaluation model toΒ assess earnings impact of developments remaining unlet. |
An overview fromΒ the Group Finance Director
As we all know, this has been an exceptionally turbulent year for the global economy and the business environment as a whole. The UK commercial property market has certainly endured its share of very tough conditions and our financial results have been impacted significantly as a result, with a loss after tax of Β£5.2bnΒ largely due toΒ a revaluation deficit of Β£4.7bn. With property values suffering sharp falls, we saw our adjusted net assets decline and our gearing rise. We ended the yearΒ withΒ adjustedΒ dilutedΒ net assetsΒ per shareΒ of 593p, downΒ 66.4%.Β
While our numbers demonstrate the challenging year we have had, they also reflect a strong and decisive response from management. Rapidly deteriorating market conditions required us to take tough decisions, and by acting quickly we mitigated the very worst effects of the current market. These actions included: the drawing down of our bank facilities, which ensured that funds remained available to us even if property values continued to fall; the disposal of Trillium, which, although at a loss, raised additional cash at a critical time; and the re-basing of our quarterly dividend fromΒ 14.7pΒ per share (restated)Β to a final proposed dividend of 7.0pΒ per share, reflectingΒ a realistic view of the pressureΒ on incomeΒ ahead.
Through these and other actions we have achieved a substantial reduction in net debt, down 27% over the year.
The numbers also reflect theΒ supportΒ provided by our shareholders, with the Β£755.7mΒ of cash generated from theΒ RightsΒ Issue helping to strengthen our balance sheet.
Despite very difficult operating conditions, we increased revenue profit by 10.6% in the year. This is a positiveΒ achievement, but it isΒ unlikely to beΒ maintained. This year's figure was driven, in part, by lower interest rates on our floatingΒ rateΒ debt. Interest rates will not remain at current levels indefinitely and margins will rise as and when we renew ourΒ bankingΒ facilities. Rental income is also likely to come underΒ downwardΒ pressure from falling rental values and voids from tenant insolvencies, lease expiries,Β partially letΒ developments and pre-development properties. And some of our actions to maintain liquidity and a sound capital base may also have a negative impact on our income statement. An example of this might be the sale of properties to fund our existing committed capital expenditure. Nevertheless, ensuring we have sufficient capital and liquidity will enable us to capitalise on opportunities which will undoubtedly arise in the coming years.
The pages that follow provide you with a detailed review of our figures. Given the scale of events during the year, this overviewΒ isΒ intended to help put the results in context and convey a clear picture of current financial dynamics.
Martin Greenslade
FinancialΒ review
WeΒ completedΒ the sale of Trillium, our outsourcing businessΒ on 12 January 2009. The transaction included all of Trillium'sΒ operationsΒ with the exception of the Accor hotel portfolio, which is now included within our Retail Portfolio.Β As Trillium represented a separate major line of business for the Group, it hasΒ been treated asΒ aΒ discontinued operation for the year ended 31 March 2009. The income statementΒ andΒ the relevant notes for the prior period have been restatedΒ to assist comparison.
Additionally,Β all financial information on a "per share" basis including last year's comparatives has been adjusted to reflect the Rights Issue which completed in March 2009. Further details are given below.
Headline results
The Group's loss before taxΒ fromΒ continuing activitiesΒ wasΒ Β£4,773.2m, compared to a loss of Β£988.0m for the year ended 31 March 2008. Revenue profit, our measure of underlying profit beforeΒ tax, increased byΒ 10.6% fromΒ Β£284.8m to Β£314.9m.
The basic lossΒ per shareΒ fromΒ continuing activitiesΒ increasedΒ fromΒ a loss of 188.43p last year restated for theΒ RightsΒ IssueΒ and the reclassification of Trillium to discontinued operationsΒ to a loss per shareΒ ofΒ 918.04p, withΒ adjusted diluted earnings per share showingΒ aΒ 2.9% increase on theΒ comparableΒ period toΒ 62.57p (2008:Β 60.79p).
The loss from discontinued operations for the year all relates to Trillium and amounted to Β£420.9m, which reflects the loss for the current year of Β£87.3m and a loss on disposal of Β£333.6m. The loss for the current year included a goodwill impairment charge of Β£148.6m and a deficit on revaluation of investment properties of Β£10.0m,Β partiallyΒ offsetΒ byΒ underlying profit from the Trillium business.
The combined investment portfolio (including joint ventures)Β decreasedΒ in value fromΒ Β£14.1bnΒ to Β£9.4bn onΒ the back ofΒ a valuation deficitΒ of Β£4,743.7m orΒ 34.2%.Β Net assets per shareΒ decreasedΒ by 1223p from 1862pΒ at the end of March 2008 (restated for theΒ Rights Issue) to 639p in March 2009, with adjusted diluted net assets per share decreasing from 1763p at March 2008 to 593p at March 2009.
Loss before taxΒ
The mainΒ drivers of our loss before taxΒ from continuing activitiesΒ were the change in value of our investment portfolio (including any profits or losses on disposal of properties), impairment of our trading propertiesΒ and theΒ impact of interest-rate swaps. The degree to which movement on these and other items led to theΒ increase in our loss before tax from Β£988.0m last year to a loss of Β£4,773.2m thisΒ year, is explained inΒ Table 3Β below.
|
TableΒ 3: Principal changes in loss before taxΒ from continuing activitiesΒ and revenue profit |
||
|
Loss before tax Β£m |
Revenue profit Β£m |
|
|
YearΒ endedΒ 31 March 2008 |
(988.0) |
284.8 |
|
Valuation deficit |
(3,451.1) |
- |
|
Impairment of trading properties |
(104.6) |
- |
|
LossΒ on disposal of non-current properties |
(178.1) |
- |
|
Interest-rate swaps |
(95.6) |
- |
|
Indirect costs |
0.8 |
0.8 |
|
InterestΒ on debt and bank borrowingsΒ |
28.8 |
32.6 |
|
JV net liabilities adjustments |
17.7 |
- |
|
Other |
(3.1) |
(3.3) |
|
YearΒ endedΒ 31 March 2009 |
(4,773.2) |
314.9 |
Valuation deficit
The largest driver behind the increase in theΒ year-on-yearΒ loss before tax wasΒ the revaluation deficitΒ on our combined investment portfolio (including joint ventures)Β of Β£4,743.7mΒ (2008: Β£1,292.6m).Β TheΒ 34.2%Β reduction in the market valuesΒ of our propertiesΒ is driven by a number of external factors including the overall economic environment and investor demand.
Impairment of trading properties
Our trading properties are carried at the lower of cost and net realisable value.Β In accordance with our normal practice,Β aΒ valuation exercise was undertaken by Knight Frank LLP at 31 March 2009Β to review the net realisable values of our trading propertiesΒ and this resulted in a Β£92.3m impairment (Β£104.6m including joint ventures). The impairment primarily applied to development land and infrastructure programmes, mainlyΒ atΒ Ebbsfleet Valley in Kent.Β
Interest-rate swaps
We use interest-rate swaps to manage our interest-rate exposureΒ as described in the paragraph on hedging below.Β Β The significant fall in interest rates this year has resulted in a charge to the income statement of Β£102.1m, representing the change in market valueΒ ofΒ these swapsΒ over the yearΒ (Β£117.5m including joint ventures).
Revenue profit
Revenue profit is our measure of the underlying pre-tax profit of the Group, which we use internally to assess our performance. It includes the pre-tax results of our joint ventures but excludes capital and other one-off items.Β Β
Table 4Β shows the composition of our revenue profit including theΒ contributionsΒ from London and Retail.
TableΒ 4:Β Revenue profitΒ
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Retail Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
31 March 2009
|
Retail
Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
31 March 2008
|
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
|
Gross rental income(1)
|
Β
|
374.6
|
352.8
|
727.4
|
370.6
|
342.5
|
713.1
|
|
|
Ground rents
|
(12.1)
|
(4.6)
|
(16.7)
|
(11.3)
|
(5.3)
|
(16.6)
|
||
|
Net service charge and property costs
|
(44.0)
|
(18.6)
|
(62.6)
|
(25.3)
|
(19.8)
|
(45.1)
|
||
|
Indirect costs
|
Β
|
Β
|
(38.9)
|
(35.8)
|
(74.7)
|
(40.7)
|
(36.0)
|
(76.7)
|
|
Combined segment profit
|
Β
|
279.6
|
293.8
|
573.4
|
293.3
|
281.4
|
574.7
|
|
|
Unallocated expenses
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
(14.2)
|
Β
|
Β
|
(13.0)
|
|
Net interest β Group
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
(217.9)
|
Β
|
Β
|
(255.9)
|
|
Net interest β joint ventures
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
(26.4)
|
Β
|
Β
|
(21.0)
|
|
|
Revenue profit
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
314.9
|
Β
|
Β
|
284.8
|
(1)Β Includes finance lease interest.
Gross rental income increased by Β£14.3m over last year, whichΒ was mainly due to purchases since 1 April 2007 and development properties, such as our schemes at Exeter, Bristol, Bankside and New Street Square.Β ThisΒ wasΒ partiallyΒ offsetΒ byΒ a reduction in rental incomeΒ fromΒ net sales of investment properties. The increase in net service charge and property costs of Β£17.5m reflected the tougher climate facing ourΒ retail customers,Β with higher void costs and empty rates as well asΒ anΒ increase in our bad debt provisionsΒ andΒ write off of pre-development costs.
Net interest expense was Β£32.6m lower than last year, reflecting lower average net debt over the period following disposals and lower interest rates particularly in the second half of the year.
(Loss) /Β earnings per share
The basic lossΒ per shareΒ from continuingΒ activitiesΒ was 918.0p, compared to a loss per share of 188.4p last year, the change being predominantly due to the revaluation deficit on the investment property portfolio (791.7pΒ per share).
In the same way that we adjust profit before tax to remove capital and one-off items to give revenue profit, we also report an adjusted earnings per share figure.Β Β Adjusted diluted earnings per share fromΒ continuing activitiesΒ increasedΒ by 2.9%Β fromΒ 60.8pΒ per share for the year ended 31 March 2008 toΒ 62.6p per share in the current period.Β Β This increaseΒ was largelyΒ attributable toΒ reduced interest on borrowingsΒ but was lower than the increase in revenue profit due to a prior year tax benefit in last year's results.
Total dividend
We are recommending a final dividend payment of 7.0p per share.Β Taken together with theΒ threeΒ quarterly dividendsΒ ofΒ 14.7p,Β our full year dividend will beΒ 51.1pΒ per share (2008:Β 57.0p) which represents aΒ 10.4%Β reduction.Β These amountsΒ have been restated to include the bonus factor inherent in the Rights Issue. Table 5Β shows the dividend per share at the time of payment as well as the restated amount.
Our final proposed dividend of 7.0p is the amount we indicated at the time of our Rights Issue, when we explained that weΒ wereΒ re-setting our dividend to a lower base. It is also the amount we anticipate paying as our quarterly dividendΒ forΒ the next financial year. OnΒ anΒ annualised basis, thisΒ wouldΒ reduce our dividend from around Β£307m to Β£212m.
The table below sets out the percentage of dividends paid and payable which comprise Property Income Distributions (PID) from REIT qualifying activities.Β Β The PID element is subject to 20% withholding tax for relevant shareholders. Taking into account the proposed final dividend, the GroupΒ is expected to haveΒ satisfied its minimum PID requirement for 2008/09.
The Company offers shareholdersΒ the option to participate in a Dividend Reinvestment Plan (DRIP). For further details,Β please refer to the Shareholder centre within the Investor section of our corporate websiteΒ www.landsecurities.com.Β
|
TableΒ 5: Dividends |
||||
|
Property income distribution (PID) pence |
Non-property income distribution pence |
Total pence |
Total penceΒ restated |
|
|
First quarterly dividend (paid on 24 October 2008) |
14.85 |
1.65 |
16.50 |
14.69 |
|
Second quarterly dividend (paidΒ onΒ 12Β January 2009) |
16.50 |
- |
16.50 |
14.69 |
|
ThirdΒ quarterly dividend (paidΒ onΒ 24 AprilΒ 2009) |
16.50 |
- |
16.50 |
14.69 |
|
FinalΒ dividend (payable onΒ 24 JulyΒ 2009) |
7.00 |
- |
7.00 |
7.00 |
|
Total |
54.85 |
1.65 |
56.50 |
51.07 |
Net assets
AtΒ 31 March 2009, net assets per shareΒ wereΒ 639p, aΒ decrease ofΒ 1223pΒ compared toΒ theΒ yearΒ ended 31 March 2008. The reduction in our net assetsΒ was primarily driven by the lower value of our investment property portfolio, the impairment of trading propertiesΒ and the loss on disposal of Trillium.
In common with other property companies, we calculate an adjusted measure of net assets which we believe better reflects the underlying net assets attributable to shareholders. Our adjusted net assets are lower than our reported netΒ assets primarily due to anΒ adjustmentΒ to our debt. Under IFRSΒ we do not show our debt at its nominal value, although we believe it would be more appropriate to do so,Β and we therefore adjust our net assets accordingly. At 31Β MarchΒ 2009, adjusted diluted net assets per share wereΒ 593p per share, aΒ decrease of 1170p orΒ 66.4% from 31 March 2008.Β
Table 6Β summarises the main differences between net assets and our adjusted measure together with the key movements over theΒ year.
|
TableΒ 6:Β Net assetsΒ attributable to equity shareholders |
|||
|
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
||
|
Β Net assets at the beginning of theΒ year |
Β 9,582.9 |
10,791.3 |
|
|
Β Adjusted earnings |
Β 325.0 |
314.6 |
|
|
Β Revaluation deficits on investment propertiesΒ |
(4,743.7) |
(1,292.6) |
|
|
Β Impairment ofΒ development land and infrastructure |
Β (104.3) |
- |
|
|
Β (Losses) / profits on non-current asset disposalsΒ |
Β (127.9) |
50.2 |
|
|
Β Other |
Β (119.5) |
(45.1) |
|
|
Β LossΒ after taxΒ attributable to equity holders of the Company |
Β (4,770.4) |
(972.9) |
|
|
Β (Loss) / profit on discontinued operations |
Β (420.9) |
142.1 |
|
|
Β Dividends paid |
Β (302.4) |
(308.4) |
|
|
Β RightsΒ Issue |
Β 755.7 |
- |
|
|
Β OtherΒ reserve movements |
Β (21.4) |
(69.2) |
|
|
Β Net assets at the end of theΒ year |
Β 4,823.5 |
9,582.9 |
|
|
Β Mark-to-market on interest-rate swaps |
Β 150.2 |
12.7 |
|
|
Β Debt adjusted to nominal value |
Β (499.8) |
(511.5) |
|
|
Β Adjusted net assets at the end of theΒ year |
Β 4,473.9 |
9,084.1 |
|
To the extent tax is payable, all items are shown post-tax.
Net pensionΒ surplus
The Group operates a defined benefit pension schemeΒ which is closed to new members.Β Β At 31 March 2009 the net surplus was Β£3.0m.Β Β This was Β£8.0m lower than the surplus recognised at 31 March 2008, primarily due to lower than expected returns on scheme assets.
Cash flow, net debt and gearing
During the year, net debt decreased by Β£1,460.9m to Β£3,923.6m.Β Β This was primarily driven by proceeds fromΒ theΒ disposal of investment properties (Β£823.0m), the disposal of Trillium (Β£492.6m) and proceeds of Β£755.7m from the Rights Issue.Β Β Capital expenditure in the year was Β£515.9m, which was Β£895.9m below last year,Β reflectingΒ a decrease in expenditure on developments and very few investment property acquisitions followingΒ the slowdown in the commercial property market.
We invested a net Β£117.0m in our joint ventures, mainly on shopping centre developments in Bristol and Cardiff.Β Β The development in Bristol was completed and opened in September 2008. The Cardiff development is scheduled to complete inΒ October 2009.
|
TableΒ 7: Cash flow and net debt |
|||
|
Year ended 31 March 2009 Β£m |
Year ended 31 March 2008 Β£m |
||
|
Operating cashΒ inflow after interest and taxΒ (excluding REIT conversion charge) |
Β 367.2 |
315.4 |
|
|
REIT conversion charge |
Β - |
(316.2) |
|
|
Dividends paid |
Β (302.4) |
(308.4) |
|
|
Non-current assets: |
|||
|
AcquisitionsΒ |
Β (86.1) |
(1,192.1) |
|
|
Disposals |
Β 823.0 |
1,080.7 |
|
|
Investment in finance leases |
Β - |
(82.1) |
|
|
Capital expenditure |
Β (429.8) |
(545.7) |
|
|
Β 307.1 |
(739.2) |
||
|
Trillium disposal: |
|||
|
Gross proceeds |
Β 444.0 |
- |
|
|
Net debt divested |
Β 48.6 |
- |
|
|
Β 492.6 |
- |
||
|
Loans advanced to third parties |
Β (50.0) |
- |
|
|
Receipts from discontinued activities |
Β - |
424.9 |
|
|
Receipts from the disposal groupΒ (part of Trillium's PPP activities) |
Β 113.5 |
441.0 |
|
|
Joint venturesΒ and associates |
Β (117.0) |
(0.2) |
|
|
Purchase ofΒ ownΒ share capital |
Β - |
(87.6) |
|
|
Proceeds from the Rights Issue |
Β 755.7 |
- |
|
|
Fair value of interest-rate swaps |
Β (105.6) |
(21.0) |
|
|
Other movements |
Β (0.2) |
(5.3) |
|
|
Decrease / (increase)Β in net debt |
Β 1,460.9 |
(296.6) |
|
|
Opening net debt |
Β (5,384.5) |
(5,087.9) |
|
|
Closing net debt |
Β (3,923.6) |
(5,384.5) |
|
Our interest cover, excluding our share of joint ventures, hasΒ increasedΒ fromΒ 1.65Β times in 2008 toΒ 1.91Β times in 2009. Under the rules of the REIT regime, we need to maintain an interest cover in the exempt business of at least 1.25 times to avoid paying tax. As calculated under the REIT regulations, ourΒ interest cover of the exempt business for the year to 31 March 2009 was 1.62 times.Β
Although net debt has decreased, gearingΒ hasΒ increased,Β principally due to the impact of falling property values on our equity. Details of the Group's gearing are set out inΒ Table 8, which also shows the impact of joint venture debt, although the lenders to our joint ventures have no recourse to the Group for repayment.
Adjusted gearing, which recognises the nominal value of our debt,Β increasedΒ fromΒ 64.9%Β at 31 March 2008Β toΒ 96.4%Β at 31 March 2009. Adjusted gearing including our share of joint venturesΒ increased from 67.6%Β toΒ 105.9%Β over the same period. In common with other property companies, we also show our Group LTV ratio.
|
TableΒ 8: Gearing |
||
|
31 March 2009 % |
31 March 2008 % |
|
|
Gearing - on book value of balance sheet debt |
81.4 |
56.2 |
|
Adjusted gearingΒ *Β |
96.4 |
64.9 |
|
Adjusted gearingΒ *Β - as above plus notional shareΒ of joint venture debt |
105.9 |
67.6 |
|
Group LTV |
52.0 |
42.6 |
* Book value of balance sheet debt increased to recognise nominal value of debt on refinancing in 2004 divided by adjusted net asset value.Β
Financing strategy
The Group monitors and adjusts its capital structure with a view to promoting the long-term success of the business and maintaining sustainable returns for shareholders.Β A key element of the Group's capital structure is that the majority ofΒ itsΒ borrowings areΒ secured against a large pool of our assets (the Security Group).Β Our secured debt structure provides for different operating environments which apply in "tiers" determined by levels of LTV and Interest Cover Ratios (ICR), although it is LTV which is the more likely determinant of which operating environment applies. These ratios do not trigger an event of default until LTV exceeds 100% orΒ historic orΒ projected ICR is less than 1.0 times. However, our operating environment becomes more restrictive at higher levels of LTV / lower levels of ICR. There are minimal operational restrictions on the Group in Tier 1 (LTV below 55%) and Tier 2 (LTV: 55% to 65%). The main additional operating restriction in Tier 2 is the requirement to maintain a level of prescribed liquidity or prepay debt by amortisation (includes actual repayment and collateralisation), calculated on a 25-year mortgage annuity basis. In Initial Tier 3 (LTV: 65% to 80%),Β our operating environment would be more restrictive with provisions designed to encourage a reduction in gearing including mandatory debt amortisation. Furthermore, none of the Group's credit facilities permit the drawing of additional funds if the Group is in Initial Tier 3. As there was a risk of our moving into Initial Tier 3 if property values continuedΒ to decline rapidly, we took the decision to draw down our available facilities in early 2009 as outlined in more detail below.
The last two years have seen an unprecedented period of instability in the financial markets which has severely impacted investor confidence, the availability and pricing of credit, and the pricing of property investments.Β Β During the last quarter of 2008, the pace of valuation declineΒ exceeded the pace at which assetsΒ couldΒ be sold to counteract the impact of falling values on the Group's balance sheet position. This deterioration had anΒ adverse effect on theΒ Group's LTV ratiosΒ and lay behind the decision to raise Β£755.7m through a Rights Issue.Β
RightsΒ Issue
On 19 February 2009, the Group announced its intention to raise Β£755.7m (net of expenses) by way of a rights issue of 290,773,925 new ordinary shares at 270 pence per share on the basis ofΒ fiveΒ new ordinary shares for everyΒ eightΒ existing ordinary shares.
The Rights Issue was approved by shareholders inΒ aΒ General Meeting on 9 March 2009, nil-paid rights began trading the following day and proceeds were received shortly before the year end.
As the Land Securities closing share price on 9 March (380p) exceeded the subscription price of 270p, the Rights Issue is deemed to include a bonus element of 11.0%. As a result, all "per share" information which pre-dates the rights issue is reduced by 9.9% (ignoring the restatement of the 2008 results due to the disposal of Trillium).
FinancingΒ and capital
Over the lastΒ 12Β months,Β we continued to focus on our cash flows, the level of available bank credit facilities and the maturity of our debt.Β During theΒ year,Β weΒ refinanced and extendedΒ ourΒ three existing committed bilateral facilities totalling Β£825m and established threeΒ new committed bilateral facilities totalling Β£115m. All the bilateralΒ facilities, with the exception of a Β£40m facility, mature in the period from July to December 2010, with an option to extend the maturity for a further year. The ability to refinance existing facilities and negotiate new facilities against the current financial and economic backdrop, owes much to the quality and level of assets withinΒ the Security GroupΒ against which these facilities and Group bonds are secured,Β as well asΒ the importance we place on our bank relationships.Β The average duration of the Group's debt isΒ 9.7Β yearsΒ with aΒ weightedΒ averageΒ cost of debtΒ ofΒ 4.1%.
In January 2009 the Group drew down Β£1.1bn of available credit facilities to ensure liquidity and provide operational flexibilityΒ by holding the funds outside the Security Group. At 31 March 2009 our net borrowings (including joint ventures) amounted toΒ Β£4,732.6m ofΒ whichΒ Β£2,298.6mΒ was drawn under our syndicated and bilateral bank facilities andΒ Β£57.8m relatedΒ to finance leases. Committed but undrawn facilities amountedΒ to Β£489.2mΒ of which Β£300m cannot be drawn if we are operating in Initial Tier 3.Β Β In the Security Group, Β£5,720m of debt was secured against Β£7,453.3m of assets, giving aΒ Security GroupΒ Β LTV ratio of 76.7%, up from 50.5% at 31 March 2008. As a result, we will enter Initial Tier 3 when the SecurityΒ GroupΒ valuation reportΒ for 31 March 2009Β is submitted.Β
Although the March valuation report shows aΒ sharpΒ decline in property values,Β it was the decision to draw downΒ existing bank facilities and to hold high levels of cash outside the Security GroupΒ for liquidity reasons,Β which willΒ result in this tier change.Β At 31 March 2009, the Group had cash and short-term instruments of Β£1,596.5mΒ outside the Security Group. This cash is available toΒ beΒ injectedΒ into the Security Group to maintain its LTV at less than 80% to prevent it entering Final Tier 3.Β Β Our current cash holdingΒ provides the Group with protectionΒ against further valuation declines andΒ the option to deploy capital should suitable opportunities arise.Β Β If all our cash and cash equivalents at 31 March 2009 had been injected into the Security Group, the Security Group LTV would have beenΒ 55.3% (TierΒ 2Β regime). It is our intention to migrate back to a Tier 1 or 2 covenant regime in the medium term.
Hedging
We use derivative products to manage our interest-rate exposure, and have a hedging policy which requires at least 80% of our existing debt plus our net committed capital expenditure to be at fixed interest rates for the coming five years. Specific hedges are also used in gearedΒ developments orΒ joint ventures to fix the interest exposure on limited-recourse debt. AtΒ 31 March 2009,Β we hadΒ Β£2,672.0mΒ ofΒ hedges in place.Β Β Our debtΒ (net of cash and cash equivalentsΒ andΒ including joint ventures)Β wasΒ 107%Β fixed. The slightly over-hedged positionΒ at the year end arose due to the receiptΒ in March 2009Β ofΒ the Rights Issue proceeds ofΒ Β£755.7m. Without the Rights Issue proceeds, we would have beenΒ 93.0% hedged.
TaxationΒ
As a consequence of the Group's conversion to REIT status, income and capital gains from our qualifying property rental business are now exempt from UK corporation tax. The tax charge for theΒ year of Β£0.5mΒ (2008:Β Β£15.1mΒ credit)Β comprisesΒ a prior year corporationΒ taxΒ charge of Β£0.3m and a net deferred tax charge of Β£0.2m. The tax loss arising onΒ theΒ write down of trading properties below cost has eliminated taxable profitsΒ onΒ allΒ residualΒ taxable activitiesΒ in the period. No tax charge arose in respect ofΒ the disposal ofΒ Trillium.
Statement of directors' responsibilities in respect of the annual report and the financial statements
The Annual Report 2009 contains the following statements regarding responsibility for the financial statements and business review included in the Annual Report 2009.
TheΒ Directors are responsible for preparing the annual report, theΒ Directors' RemunerationΒ Report and the financial statements in accordance with applicable law and regulations.
Company law requires the Directors to prepare financial statements for each financial year. Under that law theΒ Directors have prepared the Group and parent company financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) as adopted by the European Union. In preparing these financial statements, theΒ Directors have also elected to comply with IFRSs issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). The financial statements are required by law to give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the Company and of the Group as at the end of the financial year and of the profit or loss of the Group for that period.
In preparing those financial statements theΒ Directors are required to:
select suitable accounting policies and then apply them consistently;
make judgements and estimates that are reasonable and prudent;
state that the financial statements comply with IFRSs as adopted by the European Union; and
prepare the financial statements onΒ aΒ going concern basis, unless it is inappropriate to presume that theΒ Group will continue in business, in which case there should be supporting assumptions or qualifications as necessary.
TheΒ Directors are responsible for keeping proper accounting records that disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the Company and the Group and to enable them to ensure that the financial statements and the Directors' Remuneration Report comply with the Companies Act 1985 and, as regards the Group financial statements, Article 4 of the IAS Regulation. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the Company and the Group and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.
TheΒ Directors are responsible for the maintenance and integrity of the Company's websiteΒ www.landsecurities.com. Legislation in the United Kingdom governing the preparation and dissemination of financial statements may differ from legislation in other jurisdictions.
Directors' responsibility statementΒ
Each of the directors,Β whose names are listed below confirmΒ that, to the best of their knowledge:
the financial statements, prepared in accordance with IFRSs as adopted by the EU, give a true and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and loss of the Company and the undertakings included in the consolidation as a whole; and
the adoption ofΒ aΒ going concern basis for the preparation of the financial statementsΒ continues to be appropriate basedΒ on the foregoing and having reviewed the forecast financial positionΒ of the Group; and
the management reports (which are incorporated into the directors' report) contained in the Annual Report include a fair review of the development and performance of the business and the position of the Company and the undertakings included in the consolidation as a whole, together with a description of the principal risks and uncertainties that they face.
The Directors of Land Securities Group PLC as at the date of this announcement are as set out below:
|
The Board of Directors |
|
|
Alison Carnwath*, Chairman |
Francis Salway, Chief Executive |
|
David Rough* |
Martin Greenslade |
|
Bo Lerenius* |
Mike Hussey |
|
Sir Stuart Rose* |
Richard Akers |
|
Sir Christopher Bland* |
|
|
Kevin O'Byrne* |
|
|
*Β Non-executive Directors |
|
By order of the Board
PΒ M Dudgeon
Secretary
12 MayΒ 2009
Financial StatementsΒ
Income statementΒ for the year ended 31 March 2009Β
|
Group |
Notes |
2009 Β£m |
2008 restated(1) Β£m |
|
Continuing activitiesΒ |
|||
|
Group revenue(2) |
2 |
821.2 |
818.0 |
|
Costs |
(326.4) |
(317.4) |
|
|
494.8 |
500.6 |
||
|
(Loss) / profit on disposal of non-current properties |
2 |
(130.8) |
57.3 |
|
Net deficit on revaluation of investment properties |
2 |
(4,113.4) |
(1,158.4) |
|
Impairment of trading properties |
2 |
(92.3) |
- |
|
OperatingΒ loss |
(3,841.7) |
(600.5) |
|
|
Interest expense |
3 |
(365.0) |
(312.3) |
|
Interest income |
3 |
32.5 |
25.9 |
|
(4,174.2) |
(886.9) |
||
|
Share of the loss of joint ventures (post-tax) |
10 |
(599.0) |
(101.1) |
|
Loss before tax |
(4,773.2) |
(988.0) |
|
|
Income taxΒ |
4 |
(0.5) |
15.1 |
|
LossΒ for the financialΒ yearΒ from continuing activities |
(4,773.7) |
(972.9) |
|
|
Discontinued operations |
20 |
(420.9) |
142.1 |
|
Loss for the financialΒ yearΒ |
(5,194.6) |
(830.8) |
|
|
Attributable to: |
|||||||
|
Equity holders of the Company |
Β 16 |
(5,191.3) |
(830.8) |
||||
|
Minority interestsΒ |
(3.3) |
- |
|||||
|
Loss for the financial year |
(5,194.6) |
(830.8) |
|||||
|
(Loss) / earnings per share attributable to the equity holders of the Company (pence)(3)(4)
|
|||||
|
Basic (loss) / earnings per share
|
Β
|
Β
|
6
|
(999.04)
|
(160.90)
|
|
of which from: continuing activities
|
Β
|
Β
|
6
|
(918.04)
|
(188.43)
|
|
of which from: discontinued operations
|
Β
|
Β
|
6
|
(81.00)
|
27.53
|
|
Diluted (loss) / earnings per share
|
Β
|
Β
|
6
|
(999.04)
|
(160.90)
|
|
of which from: continuing activities
|
Β
|
Β
|
6
|
(918.04)
|
(188.43)
|
|
of which from: discontinued operations
|
Β
|
Β
|
6
|
(81.00)
|
27.53
|
|
(1) Restated to reclassify the results of Trillium from continuing activities to discontinued operations.
(2) Group revenue excludes the share of joint venturesβ income of Β£103.3m (2008: Β£111.6m) (see note 10).
(3) Adjusted earnings per share from continuing activities is given in note 6.
(4) The (loss) / earnings per share figures for the year ended 31 March 2008 have been restated to reflect the bonus share element inherent in the Rights Issue that was approved on 9 March 2009.
|
|||||
Β
Statement of recognised income and expenseΒ for the year ended 31 March 2009Β
|
Group |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
ActuarialΒ (losses) / gainsΒ on defined benefit pension schemes |
(11.1) |
15.8 |
|
|
Deferred taxΒ credit /Β (charge)Β on actuarialΒ losses / (gains)Β on defined benefit pension schemes |
0.6 |
(0.9) |
|
|
Fair value movement on cash flow hedges taken to equity - Group |
(0.2) |
(3.2) |
|
|
Β Β - joint ventures |
(21.3) |
(3.5) |
|
|
NetΒ (expense) /Β incomeΒ recognised directly in equity |
(32.0) |
8.2 |
|
|
LossΒ for the financialΒ year |
(5,194.6) |
(830.8) |
|
|
Total recognisedΒ income and expenseΒ for the year |
(5,226.6) |
(822.6) |
|
Attributable to: |
|||||||
|
Equity holders of the Company |
(5,223.3) |
(822.6) |
|||||
|
Minority interestsΒ |
(3.3) |
- |
|||||
|
Total recognisedΒ income and expense for the year |
(5,226.6) |
(822.6) |
|||||
Balance sheets at 31 March 2009Β
|
Group |
NotesΒ |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
Non-current assets |
||||
|
Investment properties |
8 |
7,929.4 |
12,296.7 |
|
|
OperatingΒ properties |
- |
544.8 |
||
|
Other property, plant and equipment |
14.3 |
73.6 |
||
|
Net investment in finance leases |
9 |
116.3 |
333.7 |
|
|
Goodwill |
- |
148.6 |
||
|
Investments in Public Private Partnerships |
- |
25.4 |
||
|
Investment in an associate undertaking |
- |
42.9 |
||
|
LoansΒ to third parties |
50.0 |
- |
||
|
Investments in joint ventures |
10 |
930.8 |
1,410.6 |
|
|
PensionΒ surplus |
14 |
3.0 |
11.0 |
|
|
Deferred tax assets |
1.9 |
0.9 |
||
|
Total non-current assets |
9,045.7 |
14,888.2 |
||
|
Current assets |
||||
|
Trading properties and long-term development contracts |
11 |
94.9 |
173.0 |
|
|
Derivative financial instruments |
13 |
- |
4.3 |
|
|
Trade and other receivables |
392.1 |
838.0 |
||
|
Cash andΒ cash equivalents |
1,639.0 |
48.4 |
||
|
Total current assets (excluding non-current assets classified as held for sale) |
2,126.0 |
1,063.7 |
||
|
Non-current assets classified as held for sale |
- |
664.1 |
||
|
Total current assets |
2,126.0 |
1,727.8 |
||
|
Total assets |
11,171.7 |
16,616.0 |
||
|
Current liabilities |
||||
|
Short-term borrowings and overdrafts |
12 |
(1.1) |
(794.0) |
|
|
Derivative financial instruments |
13Β |
(112.0) |
(10.7) |
|
|
Trade and other payables |
(625.8) |
(927.2) |
||
|
Provisions |
- |
(40.9) |
||
|
Current tax liabilities |
(161.5) |
(161.0) |
||
|
TotalΒ current liabilitiesΒ (excludingΒ liabilities directly associated with non-current assets classified as held for sale) |
(900.4) |
(1,933.8) |
||
|
Liabilities directly associated with non-current assets classified as held for sale |
Β |
- |
(427.7) |
|
|
Total current liabilities |
(900.4) |
(2,361.5) |
||
|
Non-current liabilities |
||||
|
ProvisionsΒ |
- |
(36.7) |
||
|
BorrowingsΒ |
12 |
(5,449.5) |
(4,632.5) |
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities |
15 |
(1.6) |
(2.4) |
|
|
Total non-current liabilitiesΒ |
(5,451.1) |
(4,671.6) |
||
|
Total liabilities |
(6,351.5) |
(7,033.1) |
||
|
Net assets |
4,820.2 |
9,582.9 |
||
|
Equity |
||||
|
Capital and reserves attributable to equity holders of the Company |
||||
|
Ordinary shares |
16 |
76.2 |
47.1 |
|
|
Share premium |
16 |
785.2 |
56.6 |
|
|
Capital redemption reserve |
16 |
30.5 |
30.5 |
|
|
Share-based payments |
16 |
8.1 |
11.3 |
|
|
Retained earnings |
16 |
3,935.9 |
9,459.7 |
|
|
Own sharesΒ |
(12.4) |
(22.3) |
||
|
EquityΒ attributable to equity holders of the Company |
4,823.5 |
9,582.9 |
||
|
Minority interest in equity |
(3.3) |
- |
||
|
Total equity |
4,820.2 |
9,582.9 |
||
TheΒ financial statements on pagesΒ 37 to 61Β were approvedΒ by the Board of Directors onΒ 12Β May 2009Β and were signed on its behalf by:Β
F W Salway, Director M F Greenslade, Director
CashΒ flow statements for the year ended 31 March 2009Β
|
Group |
2009 |
2008 |
|||||
|
Notes |
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
|||
|
Net cash generatedΒ from operations |
|||||||
|
Cash generated from operations |
18 |
651.3 |
696.5 |
||||
|
Interest paid |
(283.6) |
(338.3) |
|||||
|
Interest received |
10.4 |
10.7 |
|||||
|
Employer contributions to pension scheme |
14 |
(4.2) |
(2.0) |
||||
|
Corporation taxΒ paid |
(6.7) |
(367.7) |
|||||
|
Net cashΒ inflowΒ /Β (outflow)Β from operations |
367.2 |
(0.8) |
|||||
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|||||||
|
Investment property development expenditure |
(208.6) |
(415.3) |
|||||
|
Acquisition of investment properties |
(85.3) |
(722.6) |
|||||
|
Other investment property related expenditure |
(174.1) |
(80.0) |
|||||
|
Acquisition of properties byΒ Trillium |
(0.8) |
(158.3) |
|||||
|
Capital expenditure byΒ Trillium |
(46.5) |
(35.0) |
|||||
|
Capital expenditure on properties |
(515.3) |
(1,411.2) |
|||||
|
Disposal of non-current investment properties |
792.7 |
1,047.0 |
|||||
|
Disposal of non-current operating properties |
30.3 |
33.7 |
|||||
|
NetΒ proceeds / (expenditure)Β on properties |
307.7 |
(330.5) |
|||||
|
Net expenditure on non-property related non-current assets |
(0.6) |
(15.4) |
|||||
|
Net cashΒ inflow / (outflow)Β from capital expenditure |
307.1 |
(345.9) |
|||||
|
Receivable finance leases acquired |
- |
(82.1) |
|||||
|
Receipts in respect of receivable finance leases |
11.7 |
0.8 |
|||||
|
Receipts from the disposal of discontinued activities |
- |
424.9 |
|||||
|
Loans advanced to third partiesΒ |
(50.0) |
- |
|||||
|
Investment in joint ventures |
(21.1) |
- |
|||||
|
Net loansΒ toΒ joint ventures and cash contributed |
(117.5) |
(75.3) |
|||||
|
Distributions from joint venturesΒ |
21.6 |
75.1 |
|||||
|
Acquisition of PPP investments |
- |
(8.2) |
|||||
|
Net cashΒ received fromΒ disposal group |
113.5 |
296.5 |
|||||
|
Cash proceeds from disposal of Trillium (net of cash divested) |
20 |
392.7 |
- |
||||
|
Acquisitions of Group undertakings (net of cash acquired) |
- |
(158.5) |
|||||
|
Net cashΒ received fromΒ investing activities |
658.0 |
127.3 |
|||||
|
CashΒ flows from financing activities |
|||||||
|
Proceeds from Rights Issue |
16 |
755.7 |
- |
||||
|
Issue of shares arising from exercise of share options |
16 |
2.0 |
5.2 |
||||
|
Purchase of own share capital |
- |
(87.6) |
|||||
|
Increase in debt |
12 |
120.6 |
260.6 |
||||
|
Increase in monies held in restricted accounts and deposits |
(29.9) |
- |
|||||
|
Decrease in finance leases payable |
(9.4) |
(2.0) |
|||||
|
Dividends paid to ordinary shareholders |
5 |
(302.4) |
(308.4) |
||||
|
Net cashΒ inflow / (outflow)Β from financing activities |
536.6 |
(132.2) |
|||||
|
Increase / (decrease)Β in cashΒ and cash equivalents for theΒ year(1) |
1,561.8 |
(5.7) |
|||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year(1) |
47.0 |
52.7 |
|||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the year(1) |
1,608.8 |
47.0 |
|||||
(1)Β Cash and cash equivalents for the purposes of the cash flow statement excludes monies held in restricted accounts and depositsΒ and includes overdrafts.
|
Group |
2009 |
2008 |
|||||
|
Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents |
Β£m |
Β£m |
|||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents (Cash flow statement) |
1,608.8 |
47.0 |
|||||
|
Overdrafts |
0.3 |
1.4 |
|||||
|
Monies held in restricted accounts and deposits |
29.9 |
- |
|||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents (Balance sheet) |
1,639.0 |
48.4 |
|||||
The cash flow includes the cash flows relating toΒ theΒ Trillium discontinued operations up to the date of disposal on 12 January 2009. Further details are included in noteΒ 20.
Notes to the Financial Statements
|
1.Β BasisΒ of preparation |
The financial information is abridged and does not constitute the Group's full Financial Statements for the years ended 31 March 2009Β and 31 March 2008, and has been prepared under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).Β
Full Financial Statements for the year ended 31 March 2009, which were prepared under IFRS, received an unqualified auditors' report and did not contain a statement under Section 237 (2) or (3) of the CompaniesΒ Act 1985,Β have been filed with the Registrar of Companies.
Financial Statements for the year ended 31 March 2009Β will be presented to the Members at the forthcoming Annual General Meeting; the auditors'Β report on these Financial StatementsΒ isΒ unqualified.
|
2. Segmental information |
||||||||||
|
2009 |
2008 restated* |
|||||||||
|
Group Income statements |
RetailΒ Portfolio Β£m |
London Portfolio Β£m |
Total Β£m |
RetailΒ Portfolio Β£m |
London Portfolio Β£m |
Total Β£m |
||||
|
Rental income |
302.8 |
338.9 |
641.7 |
302.9 |
335.2 |
638.1 |
||||
|
Service charge income |
48.6 |
64.8 |
113.4 |
47.5 |
53.7 |
101.2 |
||||
|
Trading property saleΒ proceeds |
8.8 |
0.4 |
9.2 |
1.3 |
42.3 |
43.6 |
||||
|
Long-term development contract income |
- |
48.9 |
48.9 |
- |
26.3 |
26.3 |
||||
|
Finance lease interestΒ |
2.7 |
5.3 |
8.0 |
2.9 |
5.9 |
8.8 |
||||
|
Revenue |
362.9 |
458.3 |
821.2 |
354.6 |
463.4 |
818.0 |
||||
|
Rents payable |
(11.6) |
(4.6) |
(16.2) |
(11.0) |
(5.3) |
(16.3) |
||||
|
Other direct property or contract expenditure |
(79.9) |
(83.2) |
(163.1) |
(65.9) |
(73.5) |
(139.4) |
||||
|
Indirect property or contract expenditure |
(33.8) |
(30.4) |
(64.2) |
(35.7) |
(30.3) |
(66.0) |
||||
|
Long-term development contract expenditure |
- |
(45.1) |
(45.1) |
- |
(24.3) |
(24.3) |
||||
|
Cost of sales of trading properties |
(6.6) |
(0.1) |
(6.7) |
(0.9) |
(39.9) |
(40.8) |
||||
|
DepreciationΒ |
(1.9) |
(4.8) |
(6.7) |
(2.3) |
(5.5) |
(7.8) |
||||
|
UnderlyingΒ segmentΒ operating profit |
229.1 |
290.1 |
519.2 |
238.8 |
284.6 |
523.4 |
||||
|
(Loss) / profit on disposal of non-current properties |
(54.8) |
(76.0) |
(130.8) |
16.4 |
40.9 |
57.3 |
||||
|
Net deficit on revaluation of investment properties |
(1,923.1) |
(2,190.3) |
(4,113.4) |
(693.7) |
(464.7) |
(1,158.4) |
||||
|
Impairment of trading properties |
- |
(92.3) |
(92.3) |
- |
- |
- |
||||
|
Segment result |
(1,748.8) |
(2,068.5) |
(3,817.3) |
(438.5) |
(139.2) |
(577.7) |
||||
|
Demerger costs |
(10.2) |
(9.8) |
||||||||
|
Unallocated expenses |
(14.2) |
(13.0) |
||||||||
|
OperatingΒ loss |
(3,841.7) |
(600.5) |
||||||||
|
Net interest expense (note 3) |
(332.5) |
(286.4) |
||||||||
|
(4,174.2) |
(886.9) |
|||||||||
|
Share of the loss of joint ventures (post-tax) |
||||||||||
|
- Retail Portfolio |
(554.7) |
(86.7) |
||||||||
|
- London Portfolio |
(44.3) |
(14.4) |
||||||||
|
(599.0) |
(101.1) |
|||||||||
|
Loss before tax from continuing activities |
(4,773.2) |
(988.0) |
||||||||
*Β In compliance with IFRS5, the 2008 Group comparatives have been restatedΒ asΒ theΒ TrilliumΒ discontinued operationsΒ have been removed fromΒ continuing activitiesΒ and the operations of the AccorΒ hotels contract has been included within Retail Portfolio. In addition, following a review of the Group's management structure theΒ Other Investment Portfolio segment has been reallocated to Retail Portfolio and London Portfolio on the basis of how they are managed.
Included within rents payable is finance lease interest payable ofΒ Β£2.5mΒ (2008: Β£2.0m) andΒ Β£1.8mΒ (2008: Β£2.8m) respectively for Retail Portfolio and London Portfolio.
|
2. Segmental informationΒ continued |
||||||||||
|
2009 |
2008 restated* |
|||||||||
|
Group Balance sheets |
RetailΒ Portfolio Β£m |
London Portfolio Β£m |
Total Β£m |
RetailΒ Portfolio Β£m |
London Portfolio Β£m |
Discontinued Β operations Β£m |
Total Β£m |
|||
|
Investment properties |
3,205.4 |
4,724.0 |
7,929.4 |
5,100.6 |
7,069.6 |
126.5 |
12,296.7 |
|||
|
Operating properties |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
544.8 |
544.8 |
|||
|
Other property, plant and equipment |
4.7 |
9.6 |
14.3 |
8.0 |
11.7 |
53.9 |
73.6 |
|||
|
Net investment in finance leases |
48.5 |
67.8 |
116.3 |
53.2 |
104.8 |
175.7 |
333.7 |
|||
|
Goodwill |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
148.6 |
148.6 |
|||
|
Investments in Public Private Partnerships |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
25.4 |
25.4 |
|||
|
Investment in an associateΒ undertaking |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
42.9 |
42.9 |
|||
|
Investments in joint ventures |
906.9 |
23.9 |
930.8 |
1,377.4 |
28.1 |
5.1 |
1,410.6 |
|||
|
Trading properties and long-term development contracts |
10.0 |
84.9 |
94.9 |
16.5 |
152.5 |
4.0 |
173.0 |
|||
|
Trade and other receivables |
201.4 |
190.7 |
392.1 |
215.0 |
411.2 |
211.5 |
837.7 |
|||
|
Non-current assets classified as held for sale |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
664.1 |
664.1 |
|||
|
Segment assets |
4,376.9 |
5,100.9 |
9,477.8 |
6,770.7 |
7,777.9 |
2,002.5 |
16,551.1 |
|||
|
Unallocated assets |
1,693.9 |
64.9 |
||||||||
|
Total assets |
11,171.7 |
16,616.0 |
||||||||
|
Trade and other payables |
(335.9) |
(241.3) |
(577.2) |
(286.7) |
(243.9) |
(334.1) |
(864.7) |
|||
|
Provisions |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(77.6) |
(77.6) |
|||
|
Liabilities directly associated with non-current assets classified as held for sale |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(427.7) |
(427.7) |
|||
|
Segment liabilities |
(335.9) |
(241.3) |
(577.2) |
(286.7) |
(243.9) |
(839.4) |
(1,370.0) |
|||
|
Unallocated liabilities |
(5,774.3) |
(5,663.1) |
||||||||
|
Total liabilities |
(6,351.5) |
(7,033.1) |
||||||||
|
Other segment items |
||||||||||
|
Capital expenditure |
147.6 |
272.0 |
419.6 |
220.1 |
368.5 |
51.7 |
640.3 |
|||
*Β The 2008 Group comparatives have been restated toΒ include theΒ Accor hotels contract within the Retail Portfolio following the disposal of theΒ Trillium discontinued operations.
All the Group's operations are in the UK and, following the disposal of TrilliumΒ on 12 January 2009,Β are organised intoΒ twoΒ main business segments against which the Group reports its primary segmentalΒ information, beingΒ Retail PortfolioΒ andΒ London Portfolio.
|
3. NetΒ interestΒ expense |
2009 Β£m |
2008 restated* Β£m |
|
|
Interest expense |
|||
|
Bond and debenture debtΒ |
(191.1) |
(195.1) |
|
|
Bank borrowings |
(95.4) |
(127.1) |
|
|
Other interest payable |
(0.9) |
(2.0) |
|
|
Fair value lossesΒ on interest-rate swaps |
(102.1) |
(21.9) |
|
|
Amortisation of bondΒ exchange de-recognitionΒ |
(11.7) |
(7.6) |
|
|
Interest on pension scheme liabilities |
(7.5) |
(7.1) |
|
|
(408.7) |
(360.8) |
||
|
Interest capitalised in relation to properties under development |
43.7 |
48.5 |
|
|
Total interestΒ expense |
(365.0) |
(312.3) |
|
|
Interest income |
|||
|
Short-term deposits |
2.7 |
1.6 |
|
|
Long-term investment loans |
0.7 |
- |
|
|
Gain on disposal of foreign-exchange contract |
2.7 |
- |
|
|
Other interest receivable |
1.5 |
1.3 |
|
|
Interest receivable from joint ventures |
16.8 |
15.0 |
|
|
Expected return on pension scheme assets |
8.1 |
8.0 |
|
|
Total interestΒ income |
32.5 |
25.9 |
|
|
NetΒ interest expense |
(332.5) |
(286.4) |
|
*Β In compliance with IFRS5, the 2008 Group comparatives have been restated to remove theΒ net interestΒ expenseΒ inΒ relationΒ toΒ theΒ Trillium discontinued operations.
Included within rents payable (note 2) is finance lease interest payable ofΒ Β£4.3mΒ (2008: Β£4.8m).
|
4. Income taxΒ |
2009 Β£m |
2008 restated* Β£m |
|
|
Current tax |
|||
|
Corporation taxΒ creditΒ for theΒ year |
- |
(14.9) |
|
|
Adjustment in respect of priorΒ years |
0.3 |
(0.6) |
|
|
Corporation tax in respect of property disposalsΒ |
- |
0.5 |
|
|
Total current taxΒ expense /Β (credit)Β |
0.3 |
(15.0) |
|
|
Deferred taxΒ |
|||
|
Origination and reversal of timing differences |
0.2 |
(0.1) |
|
|
Total deferred taxΒ expenseΒ /Β (credit) |
0.2 |
(0.1) |
|
|
Total income tax expense / (credit) in the income statement |
0.5 |
(15.1) |
|
|
|
|||
|
The tax for theΒ yearΒ is lower than the standard rateΒ of corporation tax in the UKΒ ofΒ 28%Β (2008: 30%). The differences are explained below: |
|||
|
LossΒ on activities before taxation |
(4,773.2) |
(988.0) |
|
|
LossΒ on activities multiplied by rate of corporation tax inΒ the UK ofΒ 28%Β (2008: 30%) |
(1,336.5) |
(296.4) |
|
|
Effects of:Β |
|||
|
Corporation tax on disposal of non-current assets |
- |
5.1 |
|
|
Joint venture accounting adjustments |
- |
0.9 |
|
|
PriorΒ yearΒ corporation tax adjustments |
0.3 |
(0.6) |
|
|
PriorΒ yearΒ deferred tax adjustments |
(1.1) |
(0.4) |
|
|
Non-allowable expenses and non-taxable items |
4.5 |
12.0 |
|
|
Losses carried forward |
25.7 |
- |
|
|
Exempt property rental profitsΒ and revaluations in the year |
1,343.1 |
283.5 |
|
|
Exempt property gains in theΒ year |
(35.5) |
(19.2) |
|
|
Total income tax expense / (credit) in the income statement (as above) |
0.5 |
(15.1) |
|
*Β In compliance with IFRS5, the 2008 Group comparatives have been restated to remove the taxes which related toΒ theΒ Trillium discontinued operations.
Land Securities Group PLC elected for group Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) status with effect from 1 January 2007. As a result theΒ Group no longer pays UK corporation tax on the profits and gains from qualifying rental business in the UK provided it meets certain conditions. Non-qualifying profits and gains of the Group continue to be subject to corporation tax as normal.
The calculation of the Group's tax expense and liability necessarily involves a degree of estimation and judgement in respect of certain items whose tax treatment cannot be finally determined until a formal resolution has been reached with the relevant tax authorities. If all such issues are resolved in the Group's favour, provisions established in previousΒ periods of up toΒ Β£211.0mΒ (2008: Β£216.0m)Β could be released in the future.
|
5. Dividends |
Payment date |
Restated* per shareΒ PenceΒ |
ActualΒ per share Pence |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
Ordinary dividends paidΒ |
|||||
|
For the year ended 31 March 2007: |
|||||
|
Final dividend |
23 July 2007 |
30.3 |
34.0 |
- |
159.5 |
|
For the year ended 31 March 2008: |
|||||
|
First quarter |
26 October 2007 |
14.2 |
16.0 |
- |
74.5 |
|
Second quarter |
7 January 2008 |
14.2 |
16.0 |
- |
74.4 |
|
Third quarter |
25 April 2008 |
14.2 |
16.0 |
74.4 |
- |
|
Final quarter |
28 July 2008 |
14.2 |
16.0 |
74.4 |
- |
|
For the year ended 31 March 2009: |
|||||
|
First quarter |
24 October 2008 |
14.7 |
16.5 |
76.8 |
- |
|
Second quarter |
12 January 2009 |
14.7 |
16.5 |
76.8 |
- |
|
302.4 |
308.4 |
||||
*Β TheΒ restated dividend per share represents the theoretical dividend per share that would have been paid had the bonus share element inherent in the Rights Issue been in existence at the dividend dates.
The Board has proposed aΒ finalΒ quarterlyΒ dividendΒ for the year ended 31 March 2009Β ofΒ 7.0pΒ per shareΒ (2008:Β 16.0p) which will result in aΒ further distributionΒ ofΒ Β£53.3mΒ (2008:Β Β£74.4m). It will be paid on 24 JulyΒ 2009Β to shareholders who are on the Register of Members onΒ 17 June 2009. The final dividend is in addition to the third quarterly dividend ofΒ 16.5pΒ orΒ Β£76.8mΒ paid onΒ 24 AprilΒ 2009Β (2008:Β 16.0p or Β£74.4m). The total dividend paid and proposed in respect of the year ended 31 March 2009 isΒ 56.5pΒ (2008: 64.0p).
|
6.Β (Loss) / earnings per share |
2009 Β£m |
2008 restated* Β£m |
||
|
(Loss) / profit for theΒ financialΒ yearΒ attributable to the equity holders of the Company |
(5,191.3) |
(830.8) |
||
|
of which from: continuingΒ activitiesΒ attributable to the equity holders of the Company |
(4,770.4) |
(972.9) |
||
|
of which from: discontinued operationsΒ attributable to the equity holders of the Company |
(420.9) |
142.1 |
||
*Β In compliance with IFRS5, the 2008 Group comparatives have been restated toΒ reclassify the profitΒ arising from the Trillium discontinued operationsΒ asΒ discontinuedΒ operations.
Management hasΒ chosen to disclose adjusted earnings per shareΒ from continuing activitiesΒ in order to provide an indication of the Group's underlying business performance. Accordingly, it excludes the effect of all exceptional items, debt and other restructuring charges,Β and other items of a capital nature (other than trading properties and long-term contract profits) as indicated above. An EPRA measure has been included to assist comparison between European property companies. We believe our measure of adjusted diluted earnings per share is more appropriate than the EPRA measure in the context of our business.
|
2009 Β£m |
2008 restated* Β£m |
|||
|
Loss for the financial year from continuingΒ activitiesΒ attributable to equity holders of the Company |
(4,770.4) |
(972.9) |
||
|
Revaluation deficits - GroupΒ |
4,113.4 |
1,158.4 |
||
|
- joint venturesΒ |
630.3 |
134.2 |
||
|
Loss / (profit) on non-current property disposals after current and deferred taxΒ |
127.9 |
(49.7) |
||
|
Impairment of development land and infrastructure^- Group |
92.0 |
- |
||
|
- joint ventures |
12.3 |
- |
||
|
Mark-to-market adjustment on interest-rate swapsΒ -Β Group |
102.1 |
21.9 |
||
|
-Β joint ventures |
15.4 |
7.2 |
||
|
Adjustment due to net liabilities on joint ventures# |
(17.7) |
- |
||
|
Demerger costs (net of taxation) |
7.2 |
6.9 |
||
|
EPRA adjusted earningsΒ from continuingΒ activitiesΒ attributable toΒ theΒ equity holders of the Company |
312.5 |
306.0 |
||
|
Eliminate effect of debt restructuring charges (net of taxation) |
0.8 |
1.0 |
||
|
Eliminate effect of bond exchange de-recognitionΒ |
11.7 |
7.6 |
||
|
Adjusted earningsΒ from continuingΒ activitiesΒ attributable toΒ theΒ equity holders of the Company |
325.0 |
314.6 |
||
* In compliance with IFRS5, the 2008 Group comparatives have been restated to remove the elements arising from the Trillium discontinued operations from continuing activities. ^ The impairment in relation to the development land and infrastructure programmes within trading properties has been removed from both our and EPRA's adjusted earnings due to the long-term nature of these programmes. # The adjustment to net liabilities on joint ventures is the results of valuation deficits and as such restricts the recognition of the full valuation deficit. Hence, this adjustment is required to reflect that the valuation deficit has not been recognised in full in the Group's income statement.
|
2009Β No. m |
2008 restated# No. m |
||
|
Weighted average number of ordinary shares |
526.7 |
521.8 |
|
|
Effect of own shares and treasury shares |
(7.1) |
(5.5) |
|
|
Weighted average number of ordinary sharesΒ for calculatingΒ basicΒ andΒ diluted earnings per share |
519.6 |
516.3 |
|
|
Effect of share options which are dilutive for adjusted diluted earnings per share |
0.3 |
1.2 |
|
|
Weighted average number of ordinary sharesΒ for calculating adjusted diluted earnings per share |
519.9 |
517.5 |
#Β The weighted average number of ordinary shares for the year ended 31 March 2008 has been adjusted for the bonus element inherent in theΒ Rights IssueΒ thatΒ was approvedΒ on 9 March 2009 in compliance with IAS 33Β 'Earnings per Share'.
|
2009 pence |
2008 restated^ pence |
||
|
Basic (loss) / earnings per share |
(999.04) |
(160.90) |
|
|
of which from:Β continuingΒ activities |
(918.04) |
(188.43) |
|
|
of which from:Β discontinued operations |
(81.00) |
27.53 |
|
|
Diluted (loss) / earnings per shareΒ |
(999.04) |
(160.90) |
|
|
of which from: continuingΒ activities |
(918.04) |
(188.43) |
|
|
of which from: discontinued operations |
(81.00) |
27.53 |
|
|
Adjusted earnings per shareΒ from continuingΒ activities |
62.60 |
60.93 |
|
|
Adjusted diluted earnings per shareΒ from continuingΒ activities |
62.57 |
60.79 |
|
|
EPRA adjusted earnings perΒ share from continuingΒ activities |
60.20 |
59.26 |
^Β The loss per share for the year ended 31Β March 2008Β has been adjusted for the bonus element inherent in theΒ Rights IssueΒ thatΒ was approved on 9 March 2009 and for the reclassification of the Trillium discontinued operations fromΒ continuing activitiesΒ to discontinued operations.
|
7.Β Net assetsΒ per share |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
Net assets attributable to equityΒ holders of the Company |
4,823.5 |
9,582.9 |
|
|
Cumulative mark-to-market adjustment on interest-rate swapsΒ -Β Group |
112.0 |
10.7 |
|
|
-Β joint ventures |
38.2 |
1.5 |
|
|
-Β an associate undertaking |
- |
0.5 |
|
|
EPRA adjusted net assets |
4,973.7 |
9,595.6 |
|
|
Reverse bond exchange de-recognition adjustmentΒ |
(499.8) |
(511.5) |
|
|
Adjusted net assets attributable to equityΒ holders of the Company |
4,473.9 |
9,084.1 |
|
|
Reinstate bond exchange de-recognition adjustmentΒ |
499.8 |
511.5 |
|
|
Cumulative mark-to-market adjustment on interest-rate swapsΒ -Β Group |
(112.0) |
(10.7) |
|
|
-Β joint ventures |
(38.2) |
(1.5) |
|
|
-Β an associate undertaking |
- |
(0.5) |
|
|
Excess of fair value of debtΒ over book value (noteΒ 12) |
(13.4) |
(208.7) |
|
|
EPRA triple net assets |
4,810.1 |
9,374.2 |
|
2009 No. m |
2008 restated(1) No. m |
||
|
Number of ordinary sharesΒ in issue |
761.9 |
470.9 |
|
|
Bonus share element inherent in theΒ Rights IssueΒ that was approvedΒ on 9 March 2009 |
- |
51.1 |
|
|
Number of ordinary sharesΒ in issueΒ adjustedΒ forΒ bonusΒ shares |
761.9 |
522.0 |
|
|
NumberΒ of treasury shares |
(5.9) |
(5.9) |
|
|
NumberΒ of own shares(1) |
(0.9) |
(1.5) |
|
|
Number of ordinary shares used for calculating basic net assets per share |
755.1 |
514.6 |
|
|
Dilutive effect of share options(1) |
- |
0.8 |
|
|
Number of ordinary shares used for calculating diluted net assets per share |
755.1 |
515.4 |
(1)Β The number ofΒ ownΒ shares and dilutive effect of share options for the year ended 31 March 2008 haveΒ been restated to reflect the bonus element inherent in theΒ Rights IssueΒ thatΒ was approvedΒ onΒ 9Β March 2009.
|
2009 pence |
2008 restated(2) pence |
||
|
Net assets per share |
639 |
1862 |
|
|
Diluted net assets per share |
639 |
1859 |
|
|
Adjusted net assets per share |
593 |
1765 |
|
|
Adjusted diluted net assets per share |
593 |
1763 |
|
|
EPRA measure - adjusted diluted net assets per share |
659 |
1862 |
|
|
-Β dilutedΒ tripleΒ net assets per share |
637 |
1819 |
(2)Β The net assetsΒ per shareΒ as at 31 March 2008 has been adjusted to reflect the bonus share element inherent in theΒ Rights IssueΒ thatΒ was approvedΒ onΒ 9Β March 2009.
Adjusted net assets per share excludes mark-to-market adjustments on financial instruments used for hedging purposes and the bond exchange de-recognition adjustment as management consider that this better represents the expected future cash flows of the Group. EPRA measures have been included to assist comparison between European property companies. We believe our measure of adjusted net assets attributable to equityΒ holders of the CompanyΒ is more indicative of underlying performance.
|
8.Β Investment properties |
|||||||
|
Portfolio management Β£m |
Development programmeΒ Β£m |
Trillium Β£m |
Total Β£m |
||||
|
Net book value at 1Β AprilΒ 2007 |
10,607.4 |
2,284.3 |
427.6 |
13,319.3 |
|||
|
Properties transferred from portfolio management into the development programmeΒ |
(218.7) |
218.7 |
- |
- |
|||
|
Developments transferred from the development programme into portfolio managementΒ |
1,491.5 |
(1,491.5) |
- |
- |
|||
|
Property acquisitions |
714.2 |
0.2 |
149.4 |
863.8 |
|||
|
Capital expenditure |
117.5 |
467.3 |
6.8 |
591.6 |
|||
|
Capitalised interest |
1.4 |
43.7 |
- |
45.1 |
|||
|
Disposals |
(1,099.4) |
(2.2) |
(0.6) |
(1,102.2) |
|||
|
TransfersΒ to joint ventures |
(228.2) |
- |
- |
(228.2) |
|||
|
Transfers toΒ trading properties |
- |
(17.4) |
- |
(17.4) |
|||
|
Transfer from operating properties |
- |
- |
4.1 |
4.1 |
|||
|
Surrender premiums received |
(6.2) |
- |
- |
(6.2) |
|||
|
Depreciation |
(2.9) |
- |
- |
(2.9) |
|||
|
DeficitΒ on revaluationΒ - continuing activities |
(1,038.3) |
(107.1) |
(13.0) |
(1,158.4) |
|||
|
- discontinued operations |
- |
- |
(11.9) |
(11.9) |
|||
|
Net book value at 31 March 2008 |
10,338.3 |
1,396.0 |
562.4 |
12,296.7 |
|||
|
Developments transferred from the development programme into portfolio management |
410.3 |
(410.3) |
- |
- |
|||
|
Accor hotel properties transferred from Trillium to portfolio management |
435.9 |
- |
(435.9) |
- |
|||
|
Property acquisitions |
101.9 |
1.3 |
- |
103.2 |
|||
|
Capital expenditure |
174.1 |
245.5 |
6.0 |
425.6 |
|||
|
Capitalised interest |
14.0 |
23.1 |
- |
37.1 |
|||
|
Disposals |
(681.9) |
(1.3) |
(41.4) |
(724.6) |
|||
|
TransferΒ from operatingΒ properties |
- |
- |
11.9 |
11.9 |
|||
|
Surrender premiums received |
(2.0) |
- |
- |
(2.0) |
|||
|
Depreciation |
(2.1) |
- |
- |
(2.1) |
|||
|
DeficitΒ on revaluationΒ - continuing activities |
(3,573.1) |
(540.3) |
- |
(4,113.4) |
|||
|
- discontinued operations |
- |
- |
(10.0) |
(10.0) |
|||
|
Disposals included as part of the disposal of Trillium |
- |
- |
(93.0) |
(93.0) |
|||
|
Net book value atΒ 31 March 2009 |
7,215.4 |
714.0 |
- |
7,929.4 |
|||
The following table reconciles the net book value of the investment properties to the market value. The components of the reconciliation are included within their relevant balance sheet headings.
|
Portfolio management Β£m |
Development programme Β Β£m |
Trillium Β Β£m |
Total investment properties Β£m |
||
|
Net book value at 31 March 2008 |
10,338.3 |
1,396.0 |
562.4 |
12,296.7 |
|
|
Plus: amount included in prepayments in respect of lease incentivesΒ |
156.3 |
24.3 |
- |
180.6 |
|
|
Less: head leases capitalisedΒ |
(65.3) |
(2.0) |
- |
(67.3) |
|
|
Plus: properties treated as finance leases |
149.2 |
- |
- |
149.2 |
|
|
Market value at 31 March 2008Β - Group |
10,578.5 |
1,418.3 |
562.4 |
12,559.2 |
|
|
-Β plus: share of joint ventures (note 10) |
1,216.5 |
373.4 |
- |
1,589.9 |
|
|
Market valueΒ at 31 March 2008Β - Group and share of joint ventures |
11,795.0 |
1,791.7 |
562.4 |
14,149.1 |
|
|
Net book value at 31 March 2009 |
7,215.4 |
714.0 |
- |
7,929.4 |
|
|
Plus: amount included in prepayments in respect of lease incentivesΒ |
148.8 |
40.5 |
- |
189.3 |
|
|
Less: head leases capitalisedΒ |
(56.5) |
(1.4) |
- |
(57.9) |
|
|
Plus: properties treated as finance leases |
104.7 |
- |
- |
104.7 |
|
|
Market value at 31 March 2009Β - Group |
7,412.4 |
753.1 |
- |
8,165.5 |
|
|
-Β plus: share of joint ventures (note 10) |
950.0 |
291.5 |
- |
1,241.5 |
|
|
Market valueΒ at 31 March 2009Β - Group and share of joint ventures |
8,362.4 |
1,044.6 |
- |
9,407.0 |
|
Included in investment properties are leasehold properties with a net book value ofΒ Β£994.0mΒ (2008:Β Β£1,368.1m).
The fair value of the Group's investment properties atΒ 31 March 2009Β has been arrived at on the basis of a valuation carried out at that date by Knight Frank LLP, external valuers. The valuation by Knight Frank LLP, which conforms to Appraisal and Valuation Standards of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and with IVA 1 of the International Valuation Standards, was arrived at by reference to market evidence of transaction prices for similar properties. Fixed asset properties include capitalised interest ofΒ Β£181.1mΒ (2008: Β£211.7m). The average rate of capitalisationΒ isΒ 5.5%Β (2008: 5.5%). The historical cost of investment properties isΒ Β£7,721.8mΒ (2008: Β£7,813.2m).
The current value of investment properties in respect of proposed developments isΒ Β£524.8mΒ (2008: Β£639.6m). Developments are transferred out of the development programme when physically complete and 95% let. The schemes completed during theΒ yearΒ wereΒ Queen Anne'sΒ Mansions,Β London,Β SW1,Β 10 Eastbourne Terrace,Β London,Β W2Β and Angel Road, Edmonton, N18.
|
9.Β Net investment in finance leases |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
Non-current |
|||
|
Finance leases - gross receivables |
277.7 |
692.8 |
|
|
Unearned finance income |
(187.1) |
(385.6) |
|
|
Unguaranteed residual value |
25.7 |
26.5 |
|
|
116.3 |
333.7 |
||
|
Current |
|||
|
Finance leases - gross receivables |
7.0 |
27.4 |
|
|
Unearned finance income |
(6.2) |
(20.3) |
|
|
0.8 |
7.1 |
||
|
Total net investment in finance leases |
117.1 |
340.8 |
|
|
10. Investments in joint venturesΒ |
||||||||||
|
YearΒ endedΒ 31 March 2009Β and atΒ 31 March 2009 |
||||||||||
|
Summary financial information of Group's share of joint ventures |
TheΒ Scottish Retail Property Limited Partnership Β£m |
MetroΒ Shopping Fund Limited Partnership Β£m |
Buchanan Partnership Β£m |
St.Β David's Limited Partnership Β£m |
The Bull Ring Limited Partnership Β£m |
Bristol AllianceΒ Limited Partnership Β£m |
TheΒ Harvest Limited Partnership Β£m |
TheΒ Oriana Limited Partnership Β£m |
Other (1) Β£m |
TotalΒ Β£m |
|
Income statement |
||||||||||
|
Rental income |
9.1 |
12.9 |
9.2 |
5.0 |
15.5 |
10.8 |
4.4 |
4.3 |
6.5 |
77.7 |
|
Service chargeΒ income |
1.5 |
2.5 |
1.8 |
0.7 |
2.5 |
- |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.1 |
9.6 |
|
Property services income |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
Trading property sale proceeds |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
16.0 |
16.0 |
|
Revenue |
10.6 |
15.4 |
11.0 |
5.7 |
18.0 |
10.8 |
4.6 |
4.6 |
22.6 |
103.3 |
|
Rents payable |
(0.2) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(0.2) |
- |
- |
(0.1) |
(0.5) |
|
Other direct property expenditureΒ |
(3.6) |
(4.0) |
(2.9) |
(1.2) |
(5.1) |
(3.8) |
(0.3) |
(0.5) |
(1.1) |
(22.5) |
|
Indirect property expenditure |
(0.4) |
(1.2) |
(0.1) |
(0.3) |
(0.3) |
(0.1) |
(0.4) |
(0.6) |
(0.4) |
(3.8) |
|
Impairment of trading properties |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(12.3) |
(12.3) |
|
Cost of sales of trading properties |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(10.5) |
(10.5) |
|
6.4 |
10.2 |
8.0 |
4.2 |
12.6 |
6.7 |
3.9 |
3.5 |
(1.8) |
53.7 |
|
|
(Loss) / profit on disposal of non-current properties |
(0.1) |
0.2 |
- |
- |
0.4 |
1.7 |
- |
- |
0.7 |
2.9 |
|
NetΒ deficitΒ on revaluation of investment properties |
(54.0) |
(78.1) |
(66.5) |
(184.6) |
(87.8) |
(106.3) |
(11.5) |
(4.8) |
(36.7) |
(630.3) |
|
Operating loss |
(47.7) |
(67.7) |
(58.5) |
(180.4) |
(74.8) |
(97.9) |
(7.6) |
(1.3) |
(37.8) |
(573.7) |
|
NetΒ interestΒ (expense) / income |
(3.2) |
(10.6) |
(3.8) |
0.3 |
- |
0.3 |
(1.4) |
(11.7) |
(11.6) |
(41.7) |
|
LossΒ before tax |
(50.9) |
(78.3) |
(62.3) |
(180.1) |
(74.8) |
(97.6) |
(9.0) |
(13.0) |
(49.4) |
(615.4) |
|
Income tax |
(0.2) |
(0.8) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(0.3) |
(1.3) |
|
(51.1) |
(79.1) |
(62.3) |
(180.1) |
(74.8) |
(97.6) |
(9.0) |
(13.0) |
(49.7) |
(616.7) |
|
|
Adjustment due to net liabilities(3) |
- |
16.5 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1.2 |
17.7 |
|
Share of losses of joint venturesΒ after tax |
(51.1) |
(62.6) |
(62.3) |
(180.1) |
(74.8) |
(97.6) |
(9.0) |
(13.0) |
(48.5) |
(599.0) |
|
Balance sheet |
||||||||||
|
Investment propertiesΒ (2) |
82.3 |
171.5 |
112.3 |
147.6 |
200.0 |
230.8 |
69.5 |
83.9 |
110.1 |
1,208.0 |
|
Current assets |
6.4 |
7.5 |
6.0 |
119.0 |
12.2 |
33.6 |
44.3 |
3.1 |
55.7 |
287.8 |
|
88.7 |
179.0 |
118.3 |
266.6 |
212.2 |
264.4 |
113.8 |
87.0 |
165.8 |
1,495.8 |
|
|
Current liabilities |
(3.1) |
(5.6) |
(3.9) |
(25.6) |
(9.4) |
(17.3) |
(1.0) |
(4.3) |
(29.0) |
(99.2) |
|
Non-current liabilities |
(68.1) |
(189.9) |
- |
(0.4) |
- |
(2.9) |
(46.9) |
(75.6) |
(99.7) |
(483.5) |
|
(71.2) |
(195.5) |
(3.9) |
(26.0) |
(9.4) |
(20.2) |
(47.9) |
(79.9) |
(128.7) |
(582.7) |
|
|
Adjustment due to net liabilities(3) |
- |
16.5 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1.2 |
17.7 |
|
Net assets |
17.5 |
- |
114.4 |
240.6 |
202.8 |
244.2 |
65.9 |
7.1 |
38.3 |
930.8 |
|
Capital commitments |
1.6 |
0.7 |
0.4 |
53.1 |
- |
12.9 |
- |
- |
1.9 |
70.6 |
|
Market value of investment propertiesΒ (2) |
83.8 |
172.6 |
115.0 |
147.5 |
205.0 |
253.4 |
70.0 |
84.0 |
110.2 |
1,241.5 |
|
Net (debt) / cash |
(63.3) |
(185.1) |
1.9 |
2.7 |
2.8 |
1.9 |
(46.1) |
(74.8) |
(99.4) |
(459.4) |
|
Net investment |
||||||||||
|
At 1 April 2008 |
73.0 |
69.9 |
179.6 |
346.7 |
289.3 |
284.4 |
64.5 |
9.0 |
94.2 |
1,410.6 |
|
Properties contributed |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
27.3 |
27.3 |
|
Cash contributed |
0.4 |
5.8 |
1.4 |
- |
- |
- |
17.6 |
11.2 |
4.1 |
40.5 |
|
Distributions |
- |
(1.1) |
(4.3) |
- |
- |
- |
(3.0) |
(0.1) |
(13.1) |
(21.6) |
|
Fair value movement on cash-flow hedges taken to equity |
(4.8) |
(12.0) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(4.2) |
- |
(0.3) |
(21.3) |
|
Disposals |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(17.9) |
(17.9) |
|
Loan advances |
- |
- |
- |
74.0 |
0.3 |
61.1 |
- |
- |
0.2 |
135.6 |
|
Loan repayments |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(12.0) |
(3.7) |
- |
- |
(2.4) |
(18.1) |
|
Disposals included as part of the disposal of Trillium |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(5.3) |
(5.3) |
|
Share of losses of joint ventures after taxΒ |
(51.1) |
(62.6) |
(62.3) |
(180.1) |
(74.8) |
(97.6) |
(9.0) |
(13.0) |
(48.5) |
(599.0) |
|
At 31 March 2009 |
17.5 |
- |
114.4 |
240.6 |
202.8 |
244.2 |
65.9 |
7.1 |
38.3 |
930.8 |
(1)Β Other principally includesΒ TheΒ MartineauΒ GalleriesΒ Limited Partnership,Β Β The Ebbsfleet Limited PartnershipΒ and Millshaw Property Co. Limited.
(2)Β The difference between the book value and the market value is the amount included in prepayments in respect of lease incentives, head leases capitalised and properties treated as finance leases.
(3)Β Join t ventures with net liabilities are carried at zero value in the balance sheet where there is no commitment to fund the deficit and any distributions are included in the consolidated income statement for the year.
|
Year ended 31 March 2008 and at 31 March 2008 |
||||||||||
|
Summary financial information of Group's share of joint ventures |
TheΒ Scottish Retail Property Limited Partnership Β£m |
MetroΒ Shopping Fund Limited Partnership Β£m |
Buchanan Β Partnership Β£m |
St.Β David's Limited Partnership Β£m |
The Bull Ring Limited Partnership Β£m |
Bristol AllianceΒ Limited Partnership Β£m |
TheΒ Harvest Limited Partnership Β£m |
TheΒ Oriana Limited Partnership Β£m |
OtherΒ Β£m |
TotalΒ Β£m |
|
Income statement |
||||||||||
|
Rental income |
12.5 |
14.0 |
9.9 |
5.4 |
14.7 |
3.4 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
3.4 |
66.1 |
|
Service charge income |
2.5 |
3.0 |
0.7 |
0.7 |
2.7 |
- |
- |
- |
0.7 |
10.3 |
|
Property services income |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
0.1 |
0.1 |
|
Trading property sale proceeds |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
35.1 |
35.1 |
|
Revenue |
15.0 |
17.0 |
10.6 |
6.1 |
17.4 |
3.4 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
39.3 |
111.6 |
|
Rents payable |
(0.2) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(0.1) |
(0.3) |
|
Other direct property expenditureΒ |
(4.6) |
(3.8) |
(1.9) |
(1.2) |
(4.1) |
(0.2) |
- |
- |
(1.4) |
(17.2) |
|
Indirect property expenditure |
(0.6) |
(1.1) |
(0.1) |
(0.3) |
(0.2) |
(0.2) |
(0.1) |
(0.2) |
(0.1) |
(2.9) |
|
Cost of sales of trading properties |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(26.8) |
(26.8) |
|
9.6 |
12.1 |
8.6 |
4.6 |
13.1 |
3.0 |
1.3 |
1.2 |
10.9 |
64.4 |
|
|
(Loss) / profit on disposal of non-current properties |
(7.6) |
0.6 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(0.1) |
(7.1) |
|
Net (deficit) / surplus on revaluation of investment properties |
(28.4) |
(12.1) |
(11.5) |
(21.8) |
(31.5) |
6.3 |
(9.7) |
(15.6) |
(9.9) |
(134.2) |
|
Operating (loss) / profit |
(26.4) |
0.6 |
(2.9) |
(17.2) |
(18.4) |
9.3 |
(8.4) |
(14.4) |
0.9 |
(76.9) |
|
Net interest (expense) / income |
(5.6) |
(12.5) |
(3.5) |
0.4 |
0.1 |
0.4 |
- |
- |
(0.3) |
(21.0) |
|
(Loss) / profit before tax |
(32.0) |
(11.9) |
(6.4) |
(16.8) |
(18.3) |
9.7 |
(8.4) |
(14.4) |
0.6 |
(97.9) |
|
Income taxΒ |
(0.1) |
(0.6) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(2.4) |
(3.1) |
|
Share of (losses) / profits of joint ventures after tax |
||||||||||
|
-continuing activities |
(32.1) |
(12.5) |
(6.4) |
(16.8) |
(18.3) |
9.7 |
(8.4) |
(14.4) |
(1.9) |
(101.1) |
|
-discontinued operations |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
0.1 |
0.1 |
|
Balance sheet |
||||||||||
|
Investment properties |
126.7 |
246.4 |
176.0 |
244.1 |
288.4 |
291.5 |
62.7 |
87.3 |
55.9 |
1,579.0 |
|
Current assets |
11.2 |
38.3 |
6.1 |
118.7 |
9.1 |
12.4 |
2.3 |
1.5 |
73.7 |
273.3 |
|
137.9 |
284.7 |
182.1 |
362.8 |
297.5 |
303.9 |
65.0 |
88.8 |
129.6 |
1,852.3 |
|
|
Current liabilities |
(2.9) |
(4.9) |
(2.5) |
(15.7) |
(8.2) |
(17.2) |
(0.5) |
(79.7) |
(10.7) |
(142.3) |
|
Non-current liabilities |
(62.0) |
(209.9) |
- |
(0.4) |
- |
(2.3) |
- |
(0.1) |
(24.7) |
(299.4) |
|
(64.9) |
(214.8) |
(2.5) |
(16.1) |
(8.2) |
(19.5) |
(0.5) |
(79.8) |
(35.4) |
(441.7) |
|
|
Net assets |
73.0 |
69.9 |
179.6 |
346.7 |
289.3 |
284.4 |
64.5 |
9.0 |
94.2 |
1,410.6 |
|
Capital commitments |
2.9 |
0.6 |
2.9 |
127.4 |
- |
27.7 |
- |
- |
8.3 |
169.8 |
|
Market value of investment propertiesΒ |
125.9 |
246.6 |
180.0 |
244.0 |
293.3 |
294.5 |
62.8 |
87.3 |
55.5 |
1,589.9 |
|
Net (debt) / cash |
(53.1) |
(205.6) |
0.7 |
5.3 |
3.1 |
(0.3) |
1.5 |
1.4 |
(6.5) |
(253.5) |
|
Net investment |
||||||||||
|
At 1 April 2007 |
145.8 |
95.3 |
188.6 |
308.1 |
321.1 |
198.6 |
- |
- |
81.3 |
1,338.8 |
|
Properties contributed |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
39.7 |
205.8 |
- |
245.5 |
|
Cash contributed |
- |
6.6 |
3.4 |
- |
- |
- |
33.2 |
- |
26.3 |
69.5 |
|
Distributions |
(42.5) |
(14.2) |
(6.0) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(0.8) |
(11.6) |
(75.1) |
|
Fair value movement on cashΒ flow hedges taken to equity |
1.8 |
(5.3) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(3.5) |
|
Loan advances |
- |
- |
- |
55.4 |
- |
79.5 |
- |
- |
- |
134.9 |
|
Loan repayments |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(13.5) |
(3.4) |
- |
(181.6) |
- |
(198.5) |
|
Share of post-tax results: |
- |
|||||||||
|
-continuing activities |
(32.1) |
(12.5) |
(6.4) |
(16.8) |
(18.3) |
9.7 |
(8.4) |
(14.4) |
(1.9) |
(101.1) |
|
-discontinued operations |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
0.1 |
0.1 |
|
At 31 March 2008 |
73.0 |
69.9 |
179.6 |
346.7 |
289.3 |
284.4 |
64.5 |
9.0 |
94.2 |
1,410.6 |
|
11. Trading properties and long-term development contracts |
||||||
|
2009 |
2008 |
|||||
|
Cost |
Impairment provision |
Β Realisable value |
Cost |
Impairment provision |
Realisable value |
|
|
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
|
|
Trading properties: |
||||||
|
Development land andΒ infrastructureΒ |
159.1 |
(92.0) |
67.1 |
128.2 |
- |
128.2 |
|
Other trading properties |
26.0 |
(0.3) |
25.7 |
44.8 |
- |
44.8 |
|
Long-term development contracts |
2.1 |
- |
2.1 |
- |
- |
- |
|
187.2 |
(92.3) |
94.9 |
173.0 |
- |
173.0 |
|
The realisable value of the Group's trading properties at 31 March 2009 has been arrived at on the basis of a valuation carried out at that date by Knight Frank LLP, external valuers.
|
Long-term development contracts |
2009 |
2008 |
|
|
Β£m |
Β£m |
||
|
Income statement: |
|||
|
Contract revenue recognised as revenue in the year |
48.9 |
26.3 |
|
|
Balance sheet: |
|||
|
Contract costs incurred and recognised profits (less recognised losses) to date |
383.8 |
332.8 |
|
|
Advances received from customers |
(390.8) |
(346.0) |
|
|
(7.0) |
(13.2) |
||
|
Plus: gross amount due to customers for contract work (included in accruals and deferred income) |
9.1 |
13.2 |
|
|
Balance at the end of the year |
2.1 |
- |
|
12. Borrowings |
|||||||||
|
2009 |
|||||||||
|
Secured / unsecured |
Fixed / floatingΒ |
Effective interest rate % |
NominalΒ / notional value Β£m |
Fair valueΒ Β£m |
Book value Β£m |
||||
|
Short-term borrowings and overdrafts |
|||||||||
|
Sterling |
|||||||||
|
Bank overdrafts |
Unsecured |
Floating |
- |
0.3 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
|||
|
Amounts payable under finance leases |
Fixed |
5.5 |
0.8 |
0.8 |
0.8 |
||||
|
Total short-term borrowingsΒ and overdraftsΒ |
1.1 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
||||||
|
Non-current borrowings |
|||||||||
|
Sterling |
|||||||||
|
4.625 per cent MTN due 2013Β |
Secured |
Fixed |
4.7 |
300.0 |
294.3 |
299.8 |
|||
|
5.292 per cent MTN due 2015 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.3 |
391.5 |
383.4 |
391.0 |
|||
|
4.875 per cent MTN due 2019 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.0 |
400.0 |
370.0 |
396.5 |
|||
|
5.425 per cent MTN due 2022 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.5 |
255.3 |
230.9 |
254.6 |
|||
|
4.875 per cent MTN due 2025 |
Secured |
Fixed |
4.9 |
300.0 |
237.2 |
297.2 |
|||
|
5.391 per cent MTN due 2026 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
210.7 |
175.9 |
209.9 |
|||
|
5.391 per cent MTN due 2027 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
611.1 |
509.6 |
608.5 |
|||
|
5.376 per cent MTN due 2029 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
317.9 |
256.1 |
316.4 |
|||
|
5.396 per cent MTN due 2032 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
322.9 |
258.6 |
321.1 |
|||
|
5.125 per cent MTN due 2036 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.1 |
500.0 |
376.1 |
498.6 |
|||
|
Bond exchange de-recognitionΒ adjustment |
Secured |
Fixed |
- |
- |
(499.8) |
||||
|
3,609.4 |
3,092.1 |
3,093.8 |
|||||||
|
Syndicated bank debtΒ |
SecuredΒ |
Floating |
LIBOR + margin |
1,662.8 |
1,662.8 |
1,658.6 |
|||
|
Bilateral facility |
SecuredΒ |
Floating |
LIBOR + margin |
640.0 |
640.0 |
640.0 |
|||
|
Amounts payable under finance leases |
Fixed |
5.5 |
57.1 |
68.0 |
57.1 |
||||
|
Total non-current borrowings |
5,969.3 |
5,462.9 |
5,449.5 |
||||||
|
Total borrowings |
5,970.4 |
5,464.0 |
5,450.6 |
||||||
Medium term notes (MTN)
The MTN are secured onΒ theΒ fixed and floating pool of assetsΒ of theΒ Security Group. Debt investors benefit from security over a pool of investment properties valuedΒ atΒ Β£7.5bnΒ at 31 March 2009Β (2008: Β£11.0bn). The secured debt structure has a tiered operating covenant regime which gives the Group substantial flexibility when the loanΒ to value and interest cover in the Security Group are less than 65% and more than 1.45 times respectively. If these limits are exceeded the operating environment becomes more restrictive with provisions to encourage the reduction in gearingΒ (see note 13). The interest rate is fixed untilΒ the expected maturity, beingΒ two years before the legal maturity date for each MTN, whereupon the interest rate for the last two years is LIBOR plus a step-up margin. The effective interest rateΒ includesΒ theΒ amortisationΒ of issue costs. TheΒ MTNΒ are listed on the Irish Stock Exchange and their fair values are based on their respective market prices.
Syndicated bank debt
At 31 March 2009 the Group had two syndicated bank facilities:
(1) Β£1.5bn authorised credit facility with a maturity of August 2013,Β whichΒ has beenΒ fully drawn. This facility is committed and is secured on the assets of the Security Group. The interest rates are floating at LIBOR plus a marginΒ ofΒ between 0.15% and 0.25%; and
(2) Β£352.0m committed development facility with a maturity of May 2013. This facility was taken out to fund the development of Leeds Trinity Quarter and is secured on this property; this facility is currently Β£162.8m drawn. The interest rates are floating at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.35%. There are Β£5.0m of issue costs which are being written off over the life of this facility.
Bilateral facilities
CommittedΒ bilateral facilities totalling Β£940.0m are available to the Group and are secured on the assets of the Security Group. These facilities mature between July and December 2011, with the exception of one facility for Β£40m which matures in September 2009. The Group has the option to extend any drawings for a further year past maturity, or two years in the case of the Β£40m facility. The interest rates are floating at LIBOR plus a margin of between 0.25% and 0.75%.Β
Bond exchange de-recognition
On 3 November 2004, a debt refinancing was completed resulting in the Group exchanging all of its outstanding bond and debenture debt for new MTN with higher nominal values. The new MTN did not meet the IAS 39 requirement to be substantially different from the debt that it replaced. Consequently the book value of the new debt is reduced to the book value of the original debt by the 'bond exchange de-recognition' adjustment which is then amortised to zero over the life of the new MTN. The amortisation is charged to net finance expenses in the income statement.
Fair values
The fair values of any floating rate financial liabilities areΒ assumed to beΒ equal to their nominal value.
|
2008 |
|||||||||
|
SecuredΒ /Β unsecured |
Fixed / floatingΒ |
Effective interest rate % |
NominalΒ / notional value Β£m |
Fair valueΒ Β£m |
Book value Β£m |
||||
|
Short-term borrowings and overdrafts |
|||||||||
|
Sterling |
|||||||||
|
Acquisition loan notes |
Unsecured |
Floating |
5.4 |
106.4 |
106.4 |
106.4 |
|||
|
EuroΒ Commercial Paper |
Unsecured |
Floating |
5.8 |
19.8 |
19.8 |
19.8 |
|||
|
Money-market borrowings |
Unsecured |
Floating |
5.7 |
45.0 |
45.0 |
45.0 |
|||
|
Bank overdrafts |
Unsecured |
Floating |
- |
1.4 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
|||
|
DWP term loan |
Secured |
Floating |
6.4 |
30.0 |
30.0 |
30.0 |
|||
|
Bilateral facility |
Secured |
Floating |
5.9 |
565.4 |
565.4 |
565.4 |
|||
|
Amounts payable under finance leases |
Fixed |
5.5 |
2.2 |
- |
2.2 |
||||
|
Bond exchange de-recognition adjustment |
Secured |
Fixed |
- |
- |
- |
(11.7) |
|||
|
Euro |
|||||||||
|
Commercial Paper |
Unsecured |
Floating |
4.7 |
35.5 |
35.5 |
35.5 |
|||
|
Total short-term borrowingsΒ and overdraftsΒ |
805.7 |
803.5 |
794.0 |
||||||
|
Non-current borrowings |
|||||||||
|
Sterling |
|||||||||
|
4.625 per cent MTN due 2013Β |
Secured |
Fixed |
4.7 |
300.0 |
292.9 |
299.7 |
|||
|
5.292 per cent MTN due 2015 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.3 |
391.5 |
384.0 |
390.9 |
|||
|
4.875 per cent MTN due 2019 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.0 |
400.0 |
369.9 |
396.1 |
|||
|
5.425 per cent MTN due 2022 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.5 |
255.3 |
240.0 |
254.5 |
|||
|
4.875 per cent MTN due 2025 |
Secured |
Fixed |
4.9 |
300.0 |
257.2 |
297.0 |
|||
|
5.391 per cent MTN due 2026 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
210.7 |
190.5 |
209.8 |
|||
|
5.391 per cent MTN due 2027 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
611.2 |
547.6 |
608.5 |
|||
|
5.376 per cent MTN due 2029 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
317.9 |
283.4 |
316.3 |
|||
|
5.396 per cent MTN due 2032 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.4 |
322.9 |
285.2 |
321.0 |
|||
|
5.125 per cent MTN due 2036 |
Secured |
Fixed |
5.1 |
500.0 |
426.6 |
498.5 |
|||
|
Bond exchange de-recognitionΒ adjustment |
Secured |
Fixed |
- |
- |
(499.8) |
||||
|
3,609.5 |
3,277.3 |
3,092.5 |
|||||||
|
Bank facility due 2010Β |
SecuredΒ |
Floating |
6.4 |
15.5 |
15.5 |
15.5 |
|||
|
DWP term loan |
SecuredΒ |
Floating |
6.4 |
94.4 |
94.4 |
94.4 |
|||
|
Syndicated bank debt |
SecuredΒ |
Floating |
5.8 |
865.0 |
865.0 |
865.0 |
|||
|
Bilateral facility |
SecuredΒ |
Floating |
5.9 |
500.0 |
500.0 |
500.0 |
|||
|
Amounts payable under finance leases |
Fixed |
5.5 |
65.1 |
79.5 |
65.1 |
||||
|
Total non-current borrowings |
5,149.5 |
4,831.7 |
4,632.5 |
||||||
|
Total borrowings |
5,955.2 |
5,635.2 |
5,426.5 |
||||||
|
Reconciliation of the movement in borrowings |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
At the beginning of the year |
5,426.5 |
5,155.2 |
|
|
(Decrease) / increase in overdrafts |
(1.1) |
1.4 |
|
|
Repayment of loans |
(1,612.0) |
(1,485.0) |
|
|
Proceeds from new loans |
1,737.6 |
1,748.9 |
|
|
Capitalisation of finance fees |
(5.0) |
- |
|
|
Amortisation of finance fees |
2.2 |
2.1 |
|
|
Amortisation on bond exchange de-recognition adjustment |
11.7 |
7.6 |
|
|
Net movement in financeΒ lease obligations |
(9.4) |
(3.7) |
|
|
Borrowings included within the disposal of Trillium |
(99.9) |
- |
|
|
At the end of the year |
5,450.6 |
5,426.5 |
|
13.Β FinancialΒ risk management |
Introduction
A review of the Group's objectives, policies and processes for managing and monitoring risk is set out in the "Financial review". This note provides further detail on financial risk management and includes quantitative information on specific financial risks.
The Group is exposed to a variety of financial risks: market risks (principally interest-rate risk), credit risk and liquidity risk. The Group's overall risk management strategy seeks to minimise the potential adverse effects on the Group's financial performance, which includes the use of derivative financial instruments to hedge certain risk exposures.
Risk management is carried out by Group Treasury under policies approved by the Board of Directors.
Capital structure
The capital structure of the Group consists ofΒ shareholders' equity andΒ netΒ borrowings, including cash held on deposit. The type and maturity of the Group's borrowings are analysed further in noteΒ 12Β and the Group's equity is analysed into its various components in noteΒ 16. Capital is managed so as toΒ promoteΒ the long-term success of the business andΒ toΒ maintain sustainable returns for shareholders.Β The Group's objective is to navigate a prudent course through the current downturn and market volatility.
Whilst theΒ GroupΒ is maintaining a strong focus on the business actions which are within itsΒ influence, a number of factors affecting the market in whichΒ the GroupΒ operates are beyond theΒ Group's control. The pace of valuation decline has, in recent months, exceeded the pace at which assets can be sold to counteract the impact of falling values on the Group's balance sheet position, and this represents an ongoing risk.
Given theΒ prevailingΒ market conditions and the Group's financing arrangements, theΒ Group undertook aΒ Rights IssueΒ in March 2009 toΒ improveΒ the Group'sΒ ability to preserve and create shareholder value through the downturn and into the next cycle byΒ strengthening the Group's balance sheet and providingΒ flexibility to react quickly to pricing and timing opportunities.Β
The additional capital raised by theΒ Rights IssueΒ reduces theΒ impact of the risk of prolonged falls in property values.Β Furthermore, the Group is now in a positionΒ to respond quickly to the turning point in the cycle, particularly in relation to the acquisition of assets and the commencement of development opportunities, and that flexibility on the timing is key to the creation of value.Β The Rights Issue also strengthened the Group'sΒ position in refinancing its debt facilities.
The Group's strategy is to maintain an appropriate net debt toΒ totalΒ equity ratio (gearing) to ensure that asset level performance is translated into enhanced returns for shareholders whilst maintaining an appropriate risk reward balance to accommodate changing financial and operating market cycles. The following table details the Group'sΒ adjustedΒ gearing,Β whichΒ includesΒ the effects of our share of our joint ventures' net debt.
|
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|||
|
AdjustedΒ netΒ debt |
||||
|
Borrowings (note 12) |
5,450.6 |
5,426.5 |
||
|
Cash and cash equivalentsΒ |
(1,639.0) |
(48.4) |
||
|
Cumulative mark-to-market adjustment on financial derivativesΒ - Group |
112.0 |
6.4 |
||
|
Net debt |
3,923.6 |
5,384.5 |
||
|
Share ofΒ joint ventures' net debt (note 10) |
459.4 |
253.5 |
||
|
Less: Cumulative mark-to-market adjustment on financial derivativesΒ -Β Group |
(112.0) |
(6.4) |
||
|
Β -Β joint ventures |
(38.2) |
(2.0) |
||
|
ReverseΒ bondΒ exchange de-recognition (note 12) |
499.8 |
511.5 |
||
|
4,732.6 |
6,141.1 |
|||
|
AdjustedΒ total equity |
||||
|
Total equity |
4,820.2 |
9,582.9 |
||
|
Cumulative mark-to-market adjustment on financial derivativesΒ -Β Group |
112.0 |
6.4 |
||
|
-Β joint ventures |
38.2 |
2.0 |
||
|
ReverseΒ bondΒ exchange de-recognition (noteΒ 12) |
(499.8) |
(511.5) |
||
|
4,470.6 |
9,079.8 |
|||
|
Gearing |
81.4% |
56.2% |
||
|
Adjusted gearing |
105.9% |
67.6% |
The Group is not subject to any externally imposed capital requirements.
FinancialΒ risk factors
(i) Credit risk
The Group's principal financial assets are cashΒ and cash equivalents, trade and other receivables, finance lease receivables andΒ loans to joint ventures and other third parties.
Bank and financial institutions
One of the principal credit risks of the Group arises from cash and cash equivalents, financial derivative instruments and deposits with banks and financial institutions. In line with the policy approved by the Board of Directors, only independently-rated banks and financial institutions with a minimum rating of A are accepted. In light of market conditions, Group Treasury currently performs a weekly review of the credit ratings ofΒ all its financial institution counterparties. Furthermore, Group Treasury ensures that funds deposited with a single financial institution remainΒ within the Group's policy limits.
Trade and other receivables
Trade receivables
Trade receivables areΒ presented in the balance sheet net of allowances for doubtful receivables. Impairment is made where there is objective evidence that the Group will not be able to collect all amounts due according to the original terms of the receivables concerned. The balance is low relative to the scale of the balance sheetΒ andΒ owing to the long-term nature and diversity of its tenancy arrangements, with central government beingΒ theΒ largest single tenant,Β the credit risk of trade receivablesΒ isΒ consideredΒ to beΒ low.Β Furthermore, a credit report is obtainedΒ from an independent rating agency prior to the inception of a lease with a new counterparty. This report is used to determine the size of the deposit that is required from the tenant at inception. In general these deposits represent between three and six months rent.
Property sales
Property sales receivables primarily relate to the saleΒ of five properties,Β for which all payments to date have been received when due.Β The credit riskΒ on outstanding amountsΒ is considered low.
Finance lease receivablesΒ
This balanceΒ relatesΒ to amounts receivable from tenants in respect of tenant finance leases. This is not considered a significant credit risk as the tenants are generally of good financial standing.Β
Loans to third parties
A loan maturing in 2035 was made to Semperian PPP (formerly Trillium Investment Partners LP) as part of the disposal of the Trillium business. This loan is not considered a significant credit risk as it is repayable from dividends from investments in government infrastructure projects.
(ii)Β Liquidity risk
The Group actively maintains a mixture ofΒ Notes with final maturities between 2013 and 2036, andΒ long-term and short-term committedΒ bankΒ facilities that are designed to ensure that the Group has sufficient available funds forΒ itsΒ operations andΒ its committedΒ capital-expenditure programme. The Group's core financing structure is in the Security Group, although the remaining Non-Restricted Group may also secure independent funding.
Security Group
The Group'sΒ principal financing arrangements utilise the credit support of a ring-fenced group of assets (theΒ Security Group) that comprises the majority of the Group's investment property portfolio. These arrangements operate in ''tiers'' determined by Loan-to-valueΒ ratioΒ (LTV) and Interest-coverΒ ratio (ICR). This structure is flexibleΒ at lower tiers (withΒ aΒ lower LTV andΒ aΒ higherΒ ICR)Β and allows property acquisitions, disposals and developments to occur with relative freedom. In higher tiers, the requirements become more prescriptive. No financial covenant default is triggered until the applicable LTV exceeds 100% or the ICR is less than 1.0.Β
As at 31 March 2008,Β the reported LTV for the Security Group wasΒ 50.5%,Β meaning that the Group was operating in Tier 1 and benefited from maximum operational flexibility. In January 2009, theΒ GroupΒ borrowed a further Β£1,130.0mΒ from its existing committed general corporate facilitiesΒ to preserve operational flexibilityΒ and currently holds the majority of the funds outside the Security Group. As a result, the Security GroupΒ moved intoΒ Tier 2 which imposes limited additional restrictions,Β such asΒ liquidity requirements which require liquidity facilities or cash reserves to be put in place, or debt to be prepaid over an agreed amortisation period.Β After 31 March 2009, the Group expectsΒ to operate within Initial Tier 3 in the short to mediumΒ term, a more restrictive covenant regime which restricts, for example, paymentsΒ being made from the SecurityΒ Group to members of the wider Group.Β
Management monitors the key covenants attached to the Security Group on a monthly basis, includingΒ LTV,Β ICR, sector and regional concentration and disposals.
Non-RestrictedΒ Group
The Non-Restricted Group obtains funding when required from a combination of Inter-company loans from the Security Group and external bank debt. Bespoke credit facilities are established with banks when required for the Non-Restricted GroupΒ projects andΒ joint ventures, usually on aΒ limited-recourse basis.
The Group'sΒ objective is to navigate a prudent course through the current downturn and market volatility to avoid the Security Group moving into Final Tier 3 (80% LTV). As at 31 March 2009, as a result of the above decision to increase borrowings and fall in property values, the LTV was 76.7%. However, Β£1,596.5m of cash and cash equivalents was held in the Non-Restricted Group, and is available to be applied within the business, including being injected into the Security Group to maintain its LTV at less than 80% if further falls in property values are experienced. The Security Group would thus avoid entering Final Tier 3 and the significant additional financial and operational restrictions that would be imposed. The Group's aim in the medium term is to return to Tier 1 or Tier 2 to allow greater access to the debt marketsΒ and avoid the restrictions imposed in Tier 3.
The table below analyses the Group's financial liabilities into relevant maturity groupings based on the remaining period at the balance sheet date to theΒ expectedΒ maturity date. The amounts disclosed in the table are the contractual undiscounted cash flows.
|
2009 |
||||
|
Less than 1 year |
Between 1 and 2 years |
Between 2 and 5 years |
Over 5 years |
|
|
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
|
|
Borrowings (excluding finance lease liabilities) |
0.3 |
640.0 |
1,962.8 |
3,309.4 |
|
Finance lease liabilities |
0.8 |
0.5 |
0.7 |
55.9 |
|
Derivative financial instruments |
40.0 |
480.0 |
1,705.0 |
- |
|
TradeΒ payables |
2.7 |
- |
- |
- |
|
CapitalΒ payables |
129.7 |
- |
- |
- |
|
173.5 |
1,120.5 |
3,668.5 |
3,365.3 |
|
2008 |
||||
|
Less than 1 year |
Between 1 and 2 years |
Between 2 and 5 years |
Over 5 years |
|
|
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
Β£m |
|
|
Borrowings (excluding finance lease liabilities) |
803.5 |
500.0 |
315.5 |
4,268.9 |
|
Finance lease liabilities |
2.2 |
2.4 |
6.4 |
56.3 |
|
Derivative financial instruments |
214.4 |
46.7 |
1,721.9 |
78.2 |
|
TradeΒ payables |
28.5 |
- |
- |
- |
|
CapitalΒ payables |
116.8 |
- |
- |
- |
|
1,165.4 |
549.1 |
2,043.8 |
4,403.4 |
(iii)Β Market risk
The Group is exposed to marketΒ risk through interest rates, currency fluctuations and availability of credit.
Interest rates
The Group uses interest-rate swaps and similar instruments to manage its interest-rate exposure. With property and interest-rate cycles typically of four to seven years duration, the Group's target is to have a minimum of 80% of anticipated debt at fixed rates of interest over this timeframe. Due to a combination of factors, principally the high level of certainty required under IAS 39 'Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement', hedging instruments used in this context do not qualify for hedge accounting. Where specific hedges are used in geared joint ventures to fix the interest exposure on limited-recourse debt these qualify for hedge accounting.
At 31 March 2009,Β the Group (including joint ventures) hadΒ Β£2.7bnΒ (2008:Β Β£2.3bn)Β of hedges in place, and its debt wasΒ 107%Β fixed (2008: 80%). Consequently, based on year-end balances, a 1% increase in interest rates would decrease the net interest payable in the income statement byΒ Β£3.5mΒ (2008:Β increase byΒ Β£12.4m), and if interest rates fall by 1%Β thenΒ the reverse occurs. The sensitivity has been calculated by applying the interest rate change to the variable rate borrowings, net of interest-rate swapsΒ and cashΒ and cashΒ equivalents.Β
Foreign exchange
Foreign-exchange risk arises when future commercial transactions or recognised assets or liabilities are denominated in a currency that is not the Group's functional currency.
The Group does not normally enter into any foreign-currency transactionsΒ as it is UK based. However,Β where committed expenditure in foreign currencies is identified, it is the Group's policyΒ to hedge 100% ofΒ thatΒ exposure by enteringΒ into forward purchases of foreign currency to fix the Sterling value. Therefore the Group's foreign-exchange risk is low.
The Group had no foreign-currency exposure at 31 March 2009 and was fully hedgedΒ at 31 March 2008.
|
14. Net pensionΒ surplus |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
Analysis of the movement in the balance sheetΒ surplusΒ / (deficit) |
|||
|
At the beginning of theΒ year |
11.0 |
(5.6) |
|
|
Charge to operating profit |
(1.3) |
(2.1) |
|
|
Expected return on plan assets |
8.1 |
9.0 |
|
|
Interest on schemes' liabilities |
(7.5) |
(8.1) |
|
|
Employer contributions |
4.2 |
2.0 |
|
|
ActuarialΒ (losses) /Β gains |
(11.1) |
15.8 |
|
|
Transfer of defined-benefit pension scheme on the disposal of Trillium |
(0.4) |
- |
|
|
AtΒ theΒ end ofΒ theΒ year |
3.0 |
11.0 |
|
15.Β Deferred taxation |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
Deferred tax is provided as follows: |
|||
|
Excess / (deficit)Β of capital allowances over depreciation - operating properties |
1.9 |
(0.7) |
|
|
Capitalised interest - operating properties |
- |
(0.9) |
|
|
Pension surplus |
(1.6) |
(0.8) |
|
|
Other temporary differences |
- |
0.9 |
|
|
Total deferred taxΒ asset / (liability) |
0.3 |
(1.5) |
|
16.Β Equity attributable to equity holders of the Company |
Ordinary shares Β£m |
Share premiumΒ Β£m |
Capital redemption reserve Β£m |
Share-based payments Β£m |
Retained earnings * Β£m |
Own Β shares Β£m |
Total Β£m |
|
At 1 April 2007 |
47.0 |
51.5 |
30.5 |
7.9 |
10,668.9 |
(14.5) |
10,791.3 |
|
Exercise of options |
0.1 |
5.1 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
5.2 |
|
Fair-value movement on cash flow hedges Β - Group |
Β - |
Β - |
Β - |
Β - |
(3.2) |
- |
(3.2) |
|
Β - joint ventures |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(3.5) |
- |
(3.5) |
|
FairΒ value of share-based payments |
- |
- |
- |
5.0 |
- |
- |
5.0 |
|
Release on exercise / forfeiture of share options |
Β - |
- |
Β - |
Β (1.6) |
Β 1.6 |
- |
- |
|
Treasury shares acquired |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(78.2) |
- |
(78.2) |
|
ActuarialΒ gainsΒ on defined-benefit pension schemesΒ (net) |
Β - |
- |
Β - |
Β - |
Β 14.9 |
- |
14.9 |
|
Loss for the financial year |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(830.8) |
- |
(830.8) |
|
DividendsΒ paid (noteΒ 5) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(308.4) |
- |
(308.4) |
|
Own shares acquired |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(9.4) |
(9.4) |
|
Transfer of shares to employees on exercise of share schemes |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(1.6) |
1.6 |
- |
|
At 31 March 2008 |
47.1 |
56.6 |
30.5 |
11.3 |
9,459.7 |
(22.3) |
9,582.9 |
|
Rights Issue |
29.1 |
726.6 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
755.7 |
|
Exercise of options |
- |
2.0 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
2.0 |
|
Fair-value movement on cash flow hedges Β - Group |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(0.2) |
- |
(0.2) |
|
Β - joint ventures |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(21.3) |
- |
(21.3) |
|
FairΒ value of share-based payments |
- |
- |
- |
8.6 |
- |
- |
8.6 |
|
Release on exercise / forfeiture of share options |
- |
- |
- |
(11.8) |
11.8 |
- |
- |
|
Actuarial losses on defined-benefit pension schemesΒ (net) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(10.5) |
- |
(10.5) |
|
LossΒ for the financialΒ year |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(5,191.3) |
- |
(5,191.3) |
|
DividendsΒ paid (noteΒ 5) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(302.4) |
- |
(302.4) |
|
Transfer of shares to employees on exercise of share schemes |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(9.9) |
9.9 |
- |
|
At 31 March 2009 |
76.2 |
785.2 |
30.5 |
8.1 |
3,935.9 |
(12.4) |
4,823.5 |
* Included within retained earnings are cumulativeΒ lossesΒ in respect of cashΒ flow hedges (interest rate swaps) ofΒ Β£17.1mΒ (2008:Β gains ofΒ Β£4.4m).
|
17. Own shares |
||||
|
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|||
|
Cost at the beginning of the year |
22.3 |
14.5 |
||
|
Acquisition of ordinary shares |
- |
9.4 |
||
|
Transfer of shares to employees on exercise of share schemes |
(9.9) |
(1.6) |
||
|
Cost at the end of the year |
12.4 |
22.3 |
||
Own shares consist of shares in Land Securities Group PLC held by the Employee Share Ownership Plan (ESOP) which is operated by the Group in respect of its commitment to the Deferred Bonus Shares Scheme.
The number of shares held by the ESOP at 31 March 2009 wasΒ 887,914Β (2008:Β 1,336,275). The market valueΒ ofΒ these shares at 31 March 2009 wasΒ Β£3.8mΒ (2008:Β Β£20.2m).
|
18. Cash flow from operating activities |
|||
|
Reconciliation of operating profit to net cash inflow from operating activities: |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
Cash generated from operations |
|||
|
LossΒ for the financialΒ yearΒ from continuing activities |
(4,773.7) |
(972.9) |
|
|
Income taxΒ |
0.5 |
(15.1) |
|
|
LossΒ before tax |
(4,773.2) |
(988.0) |
|
|
Share of lossesΒ of joint ventures (post-tax) |
599.0 |
101.1 |
|
|
(4,174.2) |
(886.9) |
||
|
Interest income |
(32.5) |
(25.9) |
|
|
Interest expense |
365.0 |
312.3 |
|
|
OperatingΒ lossΒ fromΒ continuing activities |
(3,841.7) |
(600.5) |
|
|
Operating (loss) / profit from discontinued operations |
(79.0) |
108.2 |
|
|
(3,920.7) |
(492.3) |
||
|
AdjustmentsΒ on continuing and discontinued operationsΒ for: |
|||
|
Depreciation |
24.3 |
45.8 |
|
|
Loss / (profit)Β on disposal of non-current properties |
129.1 |
(75.4) |
|
|
NetΒ deficitΒ on revaluation of investment properties |
4,123.4 |
1,170.3 |
|
|
Goodwill impairment |
148.6 |
- |
|
|
Impairment of trading properties |
92.3 |
- |
|
|
Share-based payment charge |
8.6 |
5.0 |
|
|
Pension scheme chargeΒ |
1.3 |
2.1 |
|
|
606.9 |
655.5 |
||
|
Changes in working capital: |
|||
|
(Increase) / decreaseΒ in trading properties and long-term development contracts |
(34.0) |
0.2 |
|
|
Decrease / (increase)Β in receivables |
69.5 |
(26.3) |
|
|
Increase /Β (decrease)Β in payables and provisions |
8.9 |
67.1 |
|
|
Net cash generated from operations |
651.3 |
696.5 |
|
|
19.Β Related party transactions |
Subsidiaries
In accordance with IAS 27 'Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements', transactions between the Company and its subsidiaries, which are related parties of the Company, have been eliminated on consolidation and are not disclosed in this note.
Joint ventures
As disclosed in note 10, the Group has investments in a number of joint ventures. Details of transactions and balances between the Group and its joint ventures are disclosed as follows:
|
YearΒ endedΒ 31 March 2009Β and atΒ 31 March 2009 |
Year ended 31 March 2008Β and at 31 March 2008 |
|||||||
|
Revenues Β£m |
Net investmentsΒ into joint ventures Β£m |
Loans toΒ joint venturesΒ Β£m |
Amounts owed to joint ventures Β£m |
Revenues Β£m |
Net investments into joint ventures Β£m |
Loans toΒ joint venturesΒ Β£m |
Amounts owed to joint ventures Β£m |
|
|
TheΒ Scottish Retail Property Limited Partnership |
0.5 |
0.4 |
0.3 |
(0.1) |
0.6 |
(42.5) |
0.9 |
(3.9) |
|
Metro Shopping Fund Limited Partnership |
0.8 |
4.7 |
- |
- |
0.9 |
(7.6) |
0.7 |
(2.0) |
|
Buchanan Partnership |
5.3 |
(2.9) |
1.6 |
- |
3.7 |
(2.6) |
0.5 |
- |
|
St.Β David's Limited Partnership |
8.0 |
74.0 |
12.3 |
(115.1) |
5.4 |
55.4 |
4.3 |
(116.9) |
|
The Martineau Galleries Limited Partnership |
0.2 |
(5.9) |
0.4 |
- |
0.2 |
3.1 |
0.3 |
- |
|
The Bull Ring Limited Partnership |
- |
(11.7) |
- |
- |
- |
(13.5) |
- |
- |
|
Bristol Alliance Limited Partnership |
7.0 |
57.4 |
14.2 |
- |
9.0 |
76.1 |
11.7 |
- |
|
The Martineau Limited Partnership |
0.1 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(0.1) |
|
A2 Limited Partnership |
- |
(3.7) |
- |
- |
- |
(2.8) |
- |
- |
|
Parc TaweΒ IΒ Unit Trust |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
(1.4) |
- |
- |
|
Hungate (York) Regeneration Limited |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1.7 |
- |
- |
|
Countryside Land Securities (Springhead) Limited |
- |
0.9 |
0.6 |
- |
- |
5.5 |
- |
- |
|
Investors in the Community |
- |
0.2 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
TheΒ Ebbsfleet Limited Partnership |
- |
- |
0.2 |
- |
- |
- |
0.2 |
- |
|
The Harvest Limited Partnership |
0.6 |
14.6 |
0.6 |
(43.0) |
0.1 |
72.9 |
0.1 |
(0.2) |
|
The Oriana Limited Partnership |
0.4 |
11.1 |
2.5 |
- |
- |
23.4 |
78.7 |
(0.3) |
|
Millshaw Property Co. Limited |
- |
- |
- |
(10.4) |
- |
14.2 |
- |
(10.8) |
|
Fen Farm Developments Limited |
0.1 |
(3.5) |
11.1 |
- |
0.1 |
(5.6) |
13.7 |
- |
|
The Empress State Limited Partnership |
- |
28.1 |
0.1 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
HNJV Limited |
- |
- |
0.7 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
23.0 |
163.7 |
44.6 |
(168.6) |
20.0 |
176.3 |
111.1 |
(134.2) |
|
Further detail of the above transactions and balances can be seen in note 10.
Remuneration of key management personnel
The remuneration of the Directors, who are the key management personnel of the Group, is set out below in aggregate for each of the applicable categories specified in IAS 24 'Related PartyΒ Disclosures'.
|
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
||
|
Short-term employee benefits |
3.2 |
7.7 |
|
|
Post-employment benefits |
0.6 |
0.6 |
|
|
Share-based payments |
2.6 |
3.2 |
|
|
6.4 |
11.5 |
|
20. Discontinued operations |
On 8 January 2009Β Land Securities announcedΒ the sale of Trillium, its property outsourcing business, to Telereal. The sale was completedΒ on 12 January 2009. The transaction included all of Trillium's contracts with the exception ofΒ theΒ Accor hotelΒ portfolio, which is now includedΒ within the RetailΒ PortfolioΒ business segment.
The Trillium operations represented a separate major line of business forΒ Land Securities. As a result of the saleΒ and in accordanceΒ with IFRS 5,Β these operations have been treated as discontinued operations for the year ended 31 March 2009. A single amount is shown on the face of the income statement comprising the post-tax result of discontinued operations and the post-tax lossΒ arising on theΒ disposal of the discontinued operation. As a result,Β the income and expenses of Trillium are reported separately from the continuingΒ activitiesΒ of the Land SecuritiesΒ Group. The table below provides further details of the amount shown on the income statement. The income statement, and relevant notes,Β for the priorΒ yearΒ haveΒ been restated to conformΒ withΒ this style of presentation.
|
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£mΒ |
||
|
(Loss)Β /Β profit for the financial year from discontinued operations |
(87.3) |
142.1 |
|
|
Loss on disposal |
(333.6) |
- |
|
|
(420.9) |
142.1 |
|
Income statement of Trillium discontinued operations |
2009(1) Β£m |
2008 Β£m |
|
|
Revenue |
558.1 |
743.2 |
|
|
Costs |
(480.2) |
(641.2) |
|
|
77.9 |
102.0 |
||
|
Goodwill impairment |
(148.6) |
- |
|
|
Profit on disposal of non-current properties |
1.7 |
18.1 |
|
|
Net deficit on revaluation of investment properties |
(10.0) |
(11.9) |
|
|
OperatingΒ (loss) / profit |
(79.0) |
108.2 |
|
|
Interest expense |
(6.1) |
(12.1) |
|
|
Interest income |
2.1 |
3.5 |
|
|
(83.0) |
99.6 |
||
|
Share of the loss ofΒ an associate undertakingΒ (post-tax) |
(16.6) |
(0.5) |
|
|
Share of theΒ (loss) / profitΒ of joint ventures (post-tax) |
- |
0.1 |
|
|
(Loss) / profitΒ before tax |
(99.6) |
99.2 |
|
|
Income taxΒ |
(7.9) |
(4.6) |
|
|
(Loss) / profitΒ for the financialΒ yearΒ |
(107.5) |
94.6 |
|
|
Discontinued operations within Trillium |
20.2 |
47.5 |
|
|
(Loss) / profitΒ for the financialΒ yearΒ from discontinued operations |
(87.3) |
142.1 |
|
(1)Β TheΒ 2009 income statement is for the period from 1 April 2008 to 12 January 2009, the date ofΒ the disposal of Trillium.
|
Loss on disposal |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£mΒ |
|
|
Consideration received or receivable: |
|||
|
CashΒ |
444.0 |
- |
|
|
Present value of deferred sales proceeds |
25.0 |
- |
|
|
Total disposal consideration |
469.0 |
- |
|
|
Less:Β carrying amounts of net assets divested |
(792.8) |
- |
|
|
Less: cost of disposal |
(9.8) |
- |
|
|
Loss on sale before related income tax benefit |
(333.6) |
- |
|
|
Income tax benefit |
- |
- |
|
|
Loss onΒ disposal |
(333.6) |
- |
|
|
Net cash inflow on disposal |
2009 Β£m |
2008 Β£mΒ |
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents consideration |
444.0 |
- |
|
|
Less:Β cash and cash equivalents balanceΒ divested |
(51.3) |
- |
|
|
Reported in the cash flow statement |
392.7 |
- |
The cash consideration includes the repayment of inter-company balances of Β£435.8m that were outstanding between the Group and Trillium at 12 January 2009.
The Group cash flow statement contains the cash flows from the Trillium discontinued operations. The cash flows attributable to the operating activities of the Trillium discontinued operations are detailed in the following table:
|
2009 |
2008Β |
||||||
|
Β£m |
Β£m |
||||||
|
Operating cash flows |
138.7 |
102.8 |
|||||
|
Investing cash flows |
106.9 |
(195.5) |
|||||
|
Financing cash flows |
(24.4) |
(48.8) |
|||||
|
Total cash flows |
221.2 |
(141.5) |
Business AnalysisΒ
Investment Portfolio
The investment properties in our Retail Portfolio and London Portfolio business units make up our Investment Portfolio. The Investment Portfolio includes a pro-rata share of our property joint ventures.
The market value of the investment property interests in the Investment Portfolio totalled Β£9,407.0m at 31 March 2009 (31 March 2008: Β£14,022.6m excluding Trillium). The aggregate of the market values of those investment properties held by the Group, excluding joint ventures, as at 31 March 2009 was Β£8,165.5m (31 March 2008: Β£12,432.7m excluding Trillium).
The valuation of the freehold and leasehold investment properties in the Investment Portfolio at 31 March 2009 was undertaken by Knight Frank LLP as External Valuer. The valuations were in accordance with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Appraisal and Valuation Standards and the International Valuation Standards. The valuation of each property was on the basis of market value, subject to the assumptions that investment properties would be sold subject to any existing leases and that properties held for development would be sold with vacant possession in existing condition. The External Valuer's opinion of market value was primarily derived using recent comparable market transactions on arm's length terms.Β
There follows a number of tables which give further detail of the underlying performance of the combined portfolio:Β
|
TableΒ 9:Β Top 10 property holdings |
|||||||
|
TotalΒ value Β£2.9bn (30.8% of combined portfolio) Values in excess of Β£185m |
|||||||
|
Name |
Principal occupiers |
Ownership interest (%) |
Floor area (000 sq ft) |
Passing rent (Β£m) |
Let by income Β (%) |
Weighted average unexpired lease term (yrs) |
|
|
Cardinal Place, SW1 |
Microsoft, Wellington Management |
100 |
Retail: 57 Offices: 454 |
30 |
99.5 |
8.1 |
|
|
New Street Square, EC4 |
Deloitte, Taylor Wessing |
100 |
Retail:Β 22 Offices: 685 |
14 |
92.7 |
14.7 |
|
|
Queen Anne's Gate, SW1 |
Government |
100 |
Offices:Β 324 |
26 |
100.0 |
17.7 |
|
|
White Rose Centre, Leeds |
Sainsbury's, Debenhams, Arcadia |
100 |
Retail:Β 680 |
27 |
97.4 |
8.3 |
|
|
Cabot Circus, Bristol (and adjoining properties) |
House of Fraser, Harvey Nichols, H&M |
50 |
Retail / Leisure:Β 1,200 |
12 |
91.6 |
9.1 |
|
|
Bankside 2&3, SE1 |
Royal Bank of Scotland |
100 |
Retail:Β 26 Offices: 391 |
1 |
99.8 |
18.3 |
|
|
Almondvale Centre, Livingston |
Debenhams, M&S,Β BHS |
100 |
Retail:Β 925 |
14 |
87.0 |
8.5 |
|
|
Piccadilly Lights, W1 |
Boots, Barclays |
100 |
RetailΒ / Leisure:Β 66 Offices: 16 |
11 |
91.4 |
3.4 |
|
|
Bullring, Birmingham |
Debenhams, Next, Selfridges |
33 |
Retail:Β 1,184 |
16 |
93.7 |
9.4 |
|
|
Gunwharf Quays, Portsmouth |
Vue Cinema, M&S, Boots |
100 |
Retail:Β 444 |
19 |
97.7 |
7.9 |
|
|
TableΒ 10: Top 12 occupiers |
|
|
Current gross rent roll % |
|
|
Central Government |
9.5 |
|
Accor Hotels |
4.2 |
|
Royal Bank of Scotland |
2.7 |
|
Deloitte |
2.3 |
|
Arcadia Group |
1.7 |
|
Boots |
1.4 |
|
DSGΒ |
1.4 |
|
Mellon Bank |
1.3 |
|
MarksΒ &Β SpencerΒ |
1.2 |
|
JΒ Sainsbury |
1.2 |
|
EvershedsΒ |
1.1 |
|
NextΒ |
1.1 |
|
Total |
29.1 |
Includes share of joint venture properties.
|
TableΒ 11: % Portfolio by value and number of property holdings at 31 March 2009 |
||
|
Β£m |
Value % |
Number of properties |
|
0 - 9.99 |
3.6 |
87 |
|
10 - 24.99 |
5.8 |
34 |
|
25 - 49.99Β |
13.2 |
36 |
|
50 - 99.99 |
18.8 |
26 |
|
100 - 149.99 |
17.0 |
13 |
|
150 - 199.99 |
12.7 |
7 |
|
Β 200 + |
28.9 |
9 |
|
Total |
100.0 |
212 |
Includes share of joint venture properties.
|
TableΒ 12: Combined portfolio value by location |
|||||
|
Shopping centres and shops % |
Retail warehouses % |
Offices % |
Other % |
Total % |
|
|
Central inner and outer London |
13.5 |
0.8 |
42.3 |
4.5 |
61.1 |
|
South East and Eastern |
3.7 |
3.7 |
- |
1.3 |
8.7 |
|
Midlands |
3.1 |
1.1 |
0.1 |
0.5 |
4.8 |
|
Wales and South West |
6.6 |
0.9 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
7.7 |
|
North, North West, Yorkshire and Humberside |
6.5 |
4.1 |
0.2 |
0.8 |
11.6 |
|
Scotland and Northern Ireland |
4.5 |
1.3 |
- |
0.3 |
6.1 |
|
Total |
37.9 |
11.9 |
42.7 |
7.5 |
100.0 |
% figures calculated by reference to the combined portfolio valueΒ of Β£9.4bn.
|
TableΒ 13: Average rents at 31 March 2009 |
||
|
Average rent Β£/sqΒ m |
Average ERV Β£/sqΒ m |
|
|
Retail |
||
|
Shopping centres and shops |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Retail warehousesΒ and food stores |
203 |
207 |
|
Offices |
||
|
London office portfolio |
373 |
342 |
Average rent and estimated rental value have not been provided where it is considered that the figures would be potentially misleading (i.e. where there is a combination of analysis on rents on an overall and Zone A basis in the retail sector or where there is a combination of uses, or small sample sizes). This is not a like-for-like analysis with the previous year. Excludes properties in the development programme and voids.
|
TableΒ 14: Like-for-like reversionary potential at 31 March 2009 |
||
|
Reversionary potential |
31 March 2009 % of rent roll |
31 March 2008 % of rent roll |
|
Gross reversions |
7.0 |
15.5 |
|
Over-rented |
(4.8) |
(1.1) |
|
Net reversionary potential |
2.2 |
14.4 |
The reversion is calculated with reference to the gross secure rent roll after the expiry of rent free periods on those properties which fall under the like-for-like definition as set out in the notes to the combined portfolio analysis. Reversionary potential excludes additional income from the letting of voids. Of the over-rented income, Β£14.4mΒ is subjectΒ to a lease expiry or break clause in the next five years.
|
TableΒ 15: One year performance relative to IPD Ungeared total returns -Β yearΒ toΒ 31 March 2009 |
||
|
Land Securities % pa |
IPD Β % pa |
|
|
Retail - Shopping centresΒ and shops |
(34.8) |
(29.8) |
|
Retail warehouses |
(30.6) |
(27.9) |
|
Central London offices |
(28.2) |
(29.2) |
|
Total portfolio |
(29.7) |
(25.5) |
IPD Quarterly UniverseΒ
TableΒ 16: Combined portfolio analysis
The like-for-likeΒ portfolio
|
Β
|
Open market value(8)
|
Valuation deficit(1)
|
Gross rental income
|
Annual net rent(9)
|
Annual net estimated rental value(10)
|
|||||
|
Β
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
|
Β
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
%
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
1,883.8
|
2,951.1
|
(1,089.2)
|
(36.8)
|
192.1
|
192.0
|
168.2
|
170.3
|
182.9
|
191.4
|
|
Central London shops
|
622.3
|
693.7
|
(77.8)
|
(11.1)
|
35.0
|
32.2
|
35.9
|
30.2
|
39.5
|
38.2
|
|
Β
|
2,506.1
|
3,644.8
|
(1,167.0)
|
(31.9)
|
227.1
|
224.2
|
204.1
|
200.5
|
222.4
|
229.6
|
|
Retail Warehouses
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Retail warehouses and food stores
|
1,018.2
|
1,538.1
|
(543.5)
|
(35.5)
|
79.5
|
76.6
|
81.3
|
80.1
|
87.1
|
91.5
|
|
Total retail
|
3,524.3
|
5,182.9
|
(1,710.5)
|
(33.0)
|
306.6
|
300.8
|
285.4
|
280.6
|
309.5
|
321.1
|
|
London Offices
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
West End
|
999.3
|
1,500.0
|
(511.4)
|
(34.3)
|
85.7
|
84.9
|
80.8
|
80.8
|
79.0
|
104.6
|
|
City
|
414.9
|
670.9
|
(263.8)
|
(38.9)
|
36.7
|
36.3
|
37.6
|
37.1
|
33.3
|
40.0
|
|
Mid-town
|
306.5
|
462.3
|
(147.4)
|
(37.8)
|
25.5
|
24.1
|
26.2
|
25.5
|
25.5
|
31.4
|
|
Inner London
|
197.0
|
289.3
|
(92.5)
|
(32.0)
|
16.8
|
15.8
|
17.2
|
16.2
|
17.5
|
18.8
|
|
Total London offices
|
1,917.7
|
2,922.5
|
(1,015.1)
|
(35.6)
|
164.7
|
161.1
|
161.8
|
159.6
|
155.3
|
194.8
|
|
Rest of UK
|
42.1
|
67.1
|
(25.3)
|
(37.4)
|
1.4
|
1.4
|
4.2
|
3.6
|
4.8
|
5.0
|
|
Total offices
|
1,959.8
|
2,989.6
|
(1,040.4)
|
(35.7)
|
166.1
|
162.5
|
166.0
|
163.2
|
160.1
|
199.8
|
|
Other
|
223.8
|
295.2
|
(77.9)
|
(26.1)
|
11.0
|
10.5
|
15.2
|
14.4
|
16.9
|
16.3
|
|
Like-for-like portfolio(2)
|
5,707.9
|
8,467.7
|
(2,828.8)
|
(33.7)
|
483.7
|
473.8
|
466.6
|
458.2
|
486.5
|
537.2
|
|
Proposed developments(3)
|
361.8
|
662.7
|
(390.0)
|
(52.3)
|
18.2
|
28.4
|
16.0
|
29.7
|
26.7
|
37.6
|
|
Completed developments(4)
|
1,340.5
|
1,772.0
|
(454.3)
|
(26.3)
|
95.9
|
59.1
|
77.3
|
57.1
|
87.9
|
102.0
|
|
Acquisitions(5)
|
777.0
|
863.4
|
(322.5)
|
(29.2)
|
66.3
|
46.5
|
63.3
|
55.2
|
69.9
|
68.2
|
|
Sales and restructured interests(6)
|
-
|
723.3
|
-
|
-
|
23.2
|
80.9
|
-
|
41.1
|
-
|
46.4
|
|
Total development programme(7)
|
1,219.8
|
1,533.5
|
(748.1)
|
(39.2)
|
40.1
|
24.4
|
32.4
|
9.6
|
141.4
|
137.5
|
|
Combined portfolio
|
9,407.0
|
14,022.6
|
(4,743.7)
|
(34.2)
|
727.4
|
713.1
|
655.6
|
650.9
|
812.4
|
928.9
|
|
Properties treated as finance leases
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
(8.0)
|
(8.8)
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Combined portfolio
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
719.4
|
704.3
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
Total portfolio analysis
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
2,587.6
|
3,987.3
|
(1,675.0)
|
(39.7)
|
233.8
|
229.3
|
212.4
|
196.7
|
256.5
|
257.0
|
|
Central London shops
|
976.1
|
1,060.8
|
(125.9)
|
(11.4)
|
45.7
|
48.0
|
47.4
|
40.4
|
86.6
|
73.0
|
|
Β
|
3,563.7
|
5,048.1
|
(1,800.9)
|
(33.9)
|
279.5
|
277.3
|
259.8
|
237.1
|
343.1
|
330.0
|
|
Retail Warehouses
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Retail warehouses and food stores
|
1,123.6
|
1,803.8
|
(603.7)
|
(35.6)
|
95.0
|
96.2
|
87.7
|
93.9
|
96.1
|
108.1
|
|
Total retail
|
4,687.3
|
6,851.9
|
(2,404.6)
|
(34.3)
|
374.5
|
373.5
|
347.5
|
331.0
|
439.2
|
438.1
|
|
London Offices
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
West End
|
1,841.7
|
2,745.6
|
(849.9)
|
(32.2)
|
141.0
|
126.5
|
132.7
|
124.0
|
126.7
|
185.8
|
|
City
|
732.7
|
1,155.5
|
(516.7)
|
(41.7)
|
53.9
|
52.5
|
51.5
|
51.8
|
76.0
|
87.3
|
|
Mid-town
|
783.2
|
1,272.0
|
(463.2)
|
(40.5)
|
62.4
|
52.1
|
40.6
|
50.4
|
66.5
|
88.9
|
|
Inner London
|
611.4
|
950.9
|
(267.7)
|
(31.3)
|
48.8
|
51.0
|
30.3
|
35.1
|
50.5
|
65.5
|
|
Total London offices
|
3,969.0
|
6,124.0
|
(2,097.5)
|
(35.7)
|
306.1
|
282.1
|
255.1
|
261.3
|
319.7
|
427.5
|
|
Rest of UK
|
51.1
|
79.6
|
(28.6)
|
(34.4)
|
1.7
|
2.3
|
4.2
|
3.9
|
4.9
|
5.5
|
|
Total offices
|
4,020.1
|
6,203.6
|
(2,126.1)
|
(35.7)
|
307.8
|
284.4
|
259.3
|
265.2
|
324.6
|
433.0
|
|
Other
|
699.6
|
967.1
|
(213.0)
|
(23.4)
|
45.1
|
55.2
|
48.8
|
54.7
|
48.6
|
57.8
|
|
Combined portfolio
|
9,407.0
|
14,022.6
|
(4,743.7)
|
(34.2)
|
727.4
|
713.1
|
655.6
|
650.9
|
812.4
|
928.9
|
|
Properties treated as finance leases
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
(8.0)
|
(8.8)
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Combined portfolio
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
719.4
|
704.3
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Represented by:
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Investment portfolio
|
8,165.5
|
12,432.7
|
(4,113.4)
|
(34.2)
|
649.7
|
646.9
|
549.0
|
530.9
|
671.5
|
530.9
|
|
Share of joint ventures
|
1,241.5
|
1,589.9
|
(630.3)
|
(34.3)
|
77.7
|
66.2
|
106.6
|
120.0
|
140.9
|
398.0
|
|
Combined portfolio
|
9,407.0
|
14,022.6
|
(4,743.7)
|
(34.2)
|
727.4
|
713.1
|
655.6
|
650.9
|
812.4
|
928.9
|
Β
TableΒ 17: Combined portfolio analysis continued
The like-for-like portfolioΒ
|
Β
|
Gross income yield(11)
|
Equivalent yield(12)
|
Annual gross estimated rental value(13)
|
Voids (by ERV)(14)
|
Lease length at 31 March 2009(15)
|
|||||
|
Β
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
31 March 2009
|
31 March 2008
|
Median years (i)
|
Mean years (ii)
|
|
Β
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
%
|
%
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
8.9
|
5.8
|
8.1
|
5.7
|
193.3
|
202.6
|
7.0
|
4.8
|
6.5
|
7.6
|
|
Central London shops
|
5.8
|
4.4
|
5.8
|
5.0
|
39.7
|
38.5
|
0.8
|
7.0
|
4.3
|
5.8
|
|
Β
|
8.1
|
5.5
|
7.5
|
5.5
|
233.0
|
241.1
|
6.0
|
5.1
|
5.9
|
7.3
|
|
Retail Warehouses
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
Retail warehouses and food stores
|
8.0
|
5.2
|
8.1
|
5.5
|
87.8
|
92.3
|
0.9
|
2.7
|
11.2
|
11.6
|
|
Total retail
|
8.1
|
5.4
|
7.7
|
5.5
|
320.8
|
333.4
|
4.6
|
4.5
|
7.5
|
8.6
|
|
London Offices
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
|
West End
|
8.1
|
5.4
|
7.5
|
6.1
|
79.4
|
105.0
|
7.2
|
1.4
|
5.3
|
7.1
|
|
City
|
9.1
|
5.5
|
8.0
|
6.3
|
35.4
|
42.1
|
3.0
|
2.9
|
1.8
|
3.6
|
|
Mid-town
|
8.5
|
5.5
|
7.6
|
6.0
|
26.2
|
31.8
|
0.5
|
0.9
|
3.8
|
7.4
|
|
Inner London
|
8.7
|
5.6
|
8.4
|
7.6
|
17.5
|
18.8
|
1.9
|
1.5
|
4.9
|
5.7
|
|
Total London offices
|
8.4
|
5.5
|
7.7
|
6.1
|
158.5
|
197.7
|
4.6
|
1.7
|
4.0
|
6.2
|
|
Rest of UK
|
10.0
|
5.4
|
9.8
|
7.0
|
4.9
|
5.1
|
12.6
|
12.6
|
3.3
|
3.8
|
|
Total offices
|
8.5
|
5.5
|
7.8
|
6.2
|
163.4
|
202.8
|
4.8
|
1.9
|
4.0
|
6.1
|
|
Other
|
6.8
|
4.9
|
7.8
|
5.8
|
16.9
|
16.3
|
2.1
|
2.6
|
12.9
|
12.5
|
|
Like-for-like portfolio(2)
|
8.2
|
5.4
|
7.7
|
5.8
|
501.1
|
552.5
|
4.6
|
3.5
|
5.8
|
7.8
|
|
Proposed developments(3)
|
3.0
|
4.5
|
5.3
|
6.1
|
26.7
|
37.6
|
44.1
|
9.1
|
0.8
|
7.1
|
|
Completed developments(4)
|
5.8
|
3.2
|
6.7
|
5.9
|
89.8
|
103.0
|
1.0
|
3.6
|
12.5
|
12.9
|
|
Acquisitions(5)
|
8.1
|
6.4
|
7.2
|
6.2
|
70.4
|
68.5
|
7.3
|
6.1
|
9.6
|
9.8
|
|
Sales and restructured interests(6)
|
-
|
5.7
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
46.7
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
|
Total development programme(7)
|
3.1
|
0.6
|
7.5
|
5.4
|
146.7
|
138.4
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
|
Combined portfolio
|
7.0
|
4.6
|
7.5
|
5.7
|
834.7
|
946.7
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Β
Total portfolio analysis
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Notes
1. The valuation deficit is stated after adjusting forΒ the effect of SIC 15 under IFRS, but before restating for finance leases.
2. The like-for-like portfolio includes all properties which have been in the portfolio since 1 April 2007 but excluding those which were acquired, sold or included in the development programme at any time during that period.Β Capital expenditure on refurbishments, acquisitions of headleases and similar capital expenditure has been allocated to the like-for-like portfolio in preparing this table.Β Changes in valuation from period-to-period reflect this capital expenditure as well as the disclosed valuation deficits.
3. Proposed developments are properties
which have not yet received final Board
approval or are still subject to main
planning conditions being satisfied.
4. Completed developments represent those properties previously included in the development programme, which have been completed, let and removed from the development programme since 1 April 2007.
5. Includes all properties acquired in the period since 1 April 2007.
6. Includes all properties sold (other than directly out of the development programme), or where the ownership interest has been restructured, in the period since 1 April 2007.
7. Ongoing developments are properties in the development programme.Β They exclude completed developments as defined in note 3 above.
8. The open market value figures include the Groupβs share of the various joint ventures.
Β
|
9. Annual net rent is annual cash rents at 31 March 2009 (including units in administration where leases have not yet been disclaimed) after deduction of ground rents.Β It excludes the value of voids and current rent free periods.
10. Annual net estimated rental value includes vacant space, rent-frees and future estimated rental values for properties in the development programme and is calculated afterΒ deducting expected ground rents.
11. The gross income yield represents the annual cash net rent (including units in administration where leases have not yet been disclaimed) expressed as a percentage of the market value ignoring costs of purchase or sale.
12. The net nominal equivalent yield has been calculated on the gross outlays for a purchase of the property (including purchase costs) and assuming that rent is received annually in arrears.
13. AnnualΒ gross estimated rental value is calculated in the same way as net estimated rental value before the deduction of ground rents.
14. Voids represent all unlet space in the properties, including voids where refurbishment work is being carried out and voids in respect of pre-development properties.Β Voids are calculated based on their gross estimated rental value as defined in 12 above.
15. The definition for the figures in each column is:
i. Median is the number of years until half of income is subject to lease expiry/break clauses.
ii. Mean is the rent-weighted average remaining term on leases subject to lease expiry/break clauses.
iii.
Β
Β
Β
|
|
Shopping centres and shops
|
8.2
|
4.9
|
7.9
|
5.6
|
||
|
Central London shops
|
4.9
|
3.8
|
5.8
|
5.0
|
||
|
Β
|
7.3
|
4.7
|
7.4
|
5.5
|
||
|
Retail Warehouses
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
||
|
Retail warehouses and food stores
|
7.8
|
5.2
|
8.0
|
5.5
|
||
|
Total retail
|
7.4
|
4.8
|
7.5
|
5.5
|
||
|
London Offices
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
Β
|
||
|
West End
|
7.2
|
4.5
|
7.2
|
5.9
|
||
|
City
|
7.0
|
4.5
|
7.8
|
6.2
|
||
|
Mid-town
|
5.2
|
4.0
|
7.4
|
5.8
|
||
|
Inner London
|
5.0
|
3.7
|
7.7
|
7.6
|
||
|
Total London offices
|
6.4
|
4.3
|
7.4
|
6.0
|
||
|
Rest of UK
|
8.2
|
4.9
|
9.6
|
7.0
|
||
|
Total offices
|
6.5
|
4.3
|
7.4
|
6.0
|
||
|
Other
|
7.0
|
5.7
|
7.1
|
5.9
|
||
|
Combined portfolio
|
7.0
|
4.6
|
7.5
|
5.7
|
||
|
Represented by:
Investment portfolio
|
6.7
|
4.3
|
7.5
|
5.8
|
||
|
Share of joint ventures
|
8.6
|
7.5
|
7.2
|
5.4
|
||
|
Combined portfolio
|
7.0
|
4.6
|
7.5
|
5.7
|
TableΒ 18: Income statement - gross rental income reconciliation
|
Β
|
Retail Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
Other
|
31 March 2009
|
Retail
Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
Other
|
31 March 2008
|
|
Β
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
|
Combined portfolio (per Table 16)
|
374.5
|
306.1
|
46.8
|
727.4
|
373.5
|
282.1
|
57.5
|
713.1
|
|
Central London shopsΒ (excluding Metro Shopping Fund LP)
|
(42.8)
|
42.8
|
-
|
-
|
(45.4)
|
45.4
|
-
|
-
|
|
Inner London offices
in Metro Shopping Fund LP
|
0.8
|
(0.8)
|
-
|
-
|
0.8
|
(0.8)
|
-
|
-
|
|
Rest of UK offices
|
1.5
|
0.2
|
(1.7)
|
-
|
2.3
|
-
|
(2.3)
|
-
|
|
Other
|
40.6
|
4.5
|
(45.1)
|
-
|
39.4
|
15.8
|
(55.2)
|
-
|
|
Β
|
374.6
|
352.8
|
-
|
727.4
|
370.6
|
342.5
|
-
|
713.1
|
|
Less finance lease adjustment
|
(2.7)
|
(5.3)
|
-
|
(8.0)
|
(2.9)
|
(5.9)
|
-
|
(8.8)
|
|
Total rental income for combined portfolio
|
371.9
|
347.5
|
-
|
719.4
|
367.7
|
336.6
|
-
|
704.3
|
TableΒ 19:Β Open market value reconciliation
|
Β
|
Retail Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
Other
|
31 March 2009
|
Retail
Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
Other
|
31 March 2008
|
|
Β
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
|
Combined portfolio (per Table 16)
|
4,687.3
|
3,969.0
|
750.7
|
9,407.0
|
6,851.9
|
6,124.0
|
1,046.7
|
14,022.6
|
|
Central London shops (excluding Metro Shopping Fund LP)
|
(939.2)
|
939.2
|
-
|
-
|
(1,008.0)
|
1,008.0
|
-
|
-
|
|
Inner London offices
in Metro Shopping Fund LP
|
9.8
|
(9.8)
|
-
|
-
|
18.0
|
(18.0)
|
-
|
-
|
|
Rest of UK offices
|
51.1
|
-
|
(51.1)
|
-
|
79.6
|
-
|
(79.6)
|
-
|
|
Other
|
508.6
|
191.0
|
(699.6)
|
-
|
731.8
|
235.3
|
(967.1)
|
-
|
|
Per business unit
|
4,317.6
|
5,089.4
|
-
|
9,407.0
|
6,673.3
|
7,349.3
|
-
|
14,022.6
|
Β
TableΒ 20:Β Gross estimated rental value reconciliation
|
Β
|
Retail Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
Other
|
31 March 2009
|
Retail
Portfolio
|
London Portfolio
|
Other
|
31 March 2008
|
|
Β
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
Β£m
|
|
Combined portfolio
|
455.5
|
325.6
|
53.6
|
834.7
|
451.6
|
431.6
|
63.5
|
946.7
|
|
Central London shops (excluding Metro Shopping Fund LP)
|
(85.7)
|
85.7
|
-
|
-
|
(70.1)
|
70.1
|
-
|
-
|
|
Inner London offices
in Metro Shopping Fund LP
|
0.9
|
(0.9)
|
-
|
-
|
1.0
|
(1.0)
|
-
|
-
|
|
Rest of UK offices
|
5.0
|
-
|
(5.0)
|
-
|
5.7
|
-
|
(5.7)
|
-
|
|
Other
|
40.1
|
8.5
|
(48.6)
|
-
|
46.3
|
11.5
|
(57.8)
|
-
|
|
Per business unit
|
415.8
|
418.9
|
-
|
834.7
|
434.5
|
512.2
|
-
|
946.7
|
Table 21: Development pipeline financial summary
This table can be found in full on our website -Β www.landsecurities.com/prelims2009
Glossary
Adjusted earnings per share (EPS)
Earnings per share based on revenue profit plus profitsΒ / (losses)Β on trading properties and long-term development contracts all after tax.
Adjusted net asset value (NAV) per share
NAV per share adjusted to add back the adjustment arising from the de-recognition of the bond exchange, together with cumulative mark-to-market adjustment arising on interest swaps and similar instruments used for hedging purposes.
Book value
The amount at which assets and liabilities are reported in the financial statements.
BREEAM
Building Research Establishment's Environmental Assessment Method.
Combined portfolio
The combined portfolio is our wholly-owned investment property portfolio combined with our share of the value of properties held in joint ventures. Unless stated these are the pro-forma numbers we use when discussing the investment property business.
Development pipeline
The Group's development programme together withΒ anyΒ proposed schemes that are not yet included in the development programme but which are more likely to proceed than not.
Development programme
The Group's development programme comprises projects which are completed but less than 95% let; developments on site; committed developments (being projects which are approved and theΒ buildingΒ contract let); and authorised developments (those projects approved by the Board for which the building contract has not yet been let). For reporting purposes we retain properties in the programmeΒ untilΒ they are 95% let.
Development surplus
Excess of latest valuation over the total development cost (TDC).
Diluted figures
Reported amount adjusted to include the effects of potentialΒ dilutiveΒ shares issuable under employee share schemes.
Earnings per share (EPS)
Profit after taxation attributable toΒ ordinaryΒ shareholders divided by the weighted average number of ordinary shares in issue during theΒ year.
EPRA
European Public Real Estate Association.Β
Equivalent yield
The internal rate of return from an investment property, based on the gross outlays for the purchase of a property (including purchase costs), reflecting reversions to current market rent, and such items as voids and expenditures but disregarding potential changes in market rents and reflecting the actual cash flow rents.
Estimated rental value (ERV)
The estimated market rental value of lettable space asΒ determinedΒ biannually by theΒ Group'sΒ valuers. This will normally be different to the rent being paid.
Exceptional item
An item of income or expense that is deemed to be sufficiently material, either by its size or nature, to require separate disclosure.
Finance lease
A lease that transfers substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership from the lessor to the lessee.
Gearing (net)
Total borrowings, including bank overdrafts, less short-term deposits, corporate bonds and cash, at book value, plusΒ cumulative mark-to-market adjustment on financial derivativesΒ as a percentage of total equity.
Gross income yield
The annualΒ cashΒ net rent on investment propertiesΒ (including those tenants in administration)Β expressed as a percentage of the valuation ignoring costs of purchase or sale.
Head lease
A lease under which the Group holds an investment property.
Initial yieldΒ
Annualised net rents on investment propertiesΒ expressed as a percentage of theΒ acquisition cost.
Interest-rate swap
A financial instrument where two parties agree to exchange an interestΒ rateΒ obligation for a predetermined amount of time. These are used by the Group to convert floating rate debt to fixed rates.
Investment portfolio
The investment portfolio comprisesΒ the Group'sΒ wholly-owned investment properties together with the propertiesΒ heldΒ for development.
Joint venture
An entity in which the Group holds an interest on a long-term basis and is jointly controlled by the Group and one or more venturersΒ under a contractual arrangement whereby decisions on financial and operating policies essential to the operation, performance and financial position of the venture require each venturer's consent.
Lease incentivesΒ
Any incentive offered to occupiers to enter into a lease. Typically the incentive will be an initial rent-free period, or a cash contribution to fit-out or similar costs. For accounting purposes, under IFRS, the value of the rent-free period is spread over the non-cancellable life of the lease.Β
LIBOR
The London Interbank Offered Rate, the interest rate charged by one bank to another for lending money.
Like-for-like portfolio
Properties that have been in the investment or combined portfolio for the whole of the current and previous financial year.
Loan-to-value (LTV)
GroupΒ LTVΒ is the ratio ofΒ the sum of investment properties, netΒ investment in finance leases and trading propertiesΒ of both the Group and joint ventures to net debt, including joint ventures, expressed as a percentage. For the Security Group, LTV is the ratio of debt lent to the Security Group divided by the value of secured assets.
London Portfolio
This business includes all London offices andΒ CentralΒ London retail, but excludes those assets held in the Metro Shopping Fund LP.
Mark-to-market adjustment
An accounting adjustment to change the bookΒ valueΒ ofΒ anΒ asset or liability to its market value.
Net asset value (NAV) per share
EquityΒ attributable to equity holders of the CompanyΒ divided by the number of ordinary shares in issue at the period end.
Open market valueΒ
Open market value is an opinion of the best price at which the sale of an interest in the property would complete unconditionally for cash consideration on the date of valuation (asΒ determinedΒ by the Group's external valuers). In accordance with usual practice, the Group's external valuers report valuations net, after the deduction of the prospective purchaser's costs, including stamp duty, agentΒ and legal fees.
Outline planning consent
This gives consent in principle for a development, and covers matters such as use andΒ buildingΒ mass. FullΒ detailsΒ of the development scheme must be provided in an application for full planning consent, including detailed design, external appearance and landscaping before a project can proceed. An outline planning permission will lapse if full planning permission is not granted within three years.
Property income distribution (PID)
A PID is a distribution by a REIT to its shareholders paid out of qualifying profits. A REIT is required to distribute atΒ leastΒ 90% of its qualifying profits as a PID to itsΒ shareholders.
Proposed developments
Proposed developmentsΒ areΒ schemes that are not yet included in the development programme but which are more likely to proceed than not.
Qualifying activitiesΒ /Β QualifyingΒ assets
The ownership (activity) of property (assets) which is held to earn rental income and qualifies for tax-exempt treatment (income and capital gains) under UK REIT legislation.
Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)
A REIT must be aΒ publiclyΒ quoted company with at least three quarters of its profits and assets derived from a qualifying property rental business. Income and capital gains from the property rental business are exempt from tax but the REIT is required to distribute at least 90% of thoseΒ profitsΒ to shareholders. Corporation tax is payable on non-qualifyingΒ activities in the normal way.
Retail Portfolio
ThisΒ business includes our shopping centres, shops, retail warehouse properties and assets held in retail joint ventures but notΒ CentralΒ London retail.
ReturnΒ on average capital employed
Group profit before interest, plus joint venture profit before tax, divided by the average capital employed (defined as shareholders' funds plus net debt).
Return on average equity
Group profit before taxΒ plusΒ joint venture tax divided by the average equity shareholders' funds.
Revenue profit
Profit before tax, excluding profits on the sale of non-current assetsΒ and trading properties, profits on long-term development contracts, revaluation surpluses, mark-to-market adjustments on interest rate swaps and similar instruments used for hedging purposes, the adjustment to interest payable resulting from the amortisation of the bondΒ exchangeΒ de-recognition, debtΒ restructuringΒ charges and any exceptional items.
Reversionary or under-rented
Space where the passing rent is below the ERV.
Reversionary yield
The anticipated yield to which the initial yield will rise once the rent reaches the ERV.
Total business return
Dividend per share, plus the increase in adjusted diluted net asset value per share,Β dividedΒ by the adjusted diluted net asset value per share at the beginning of theΒ year.
Total development cost (TDC)
All capital expenditure on a project including the opening book value of the property on commencement of development, together with all finance costs less residential costs.
Total property return
Valuation surplus, profitΒ /Β (loss) on property sales and net rental income in respect of investment propertiesΒ expressedΒ as a percentage of opening bookΒ value,Β together with the time weighted value for capital expenditure incurred during the currentΒ year,Β onΒ the investment property portfolio.
Total shareholder return
The growth in value of a shareholding over a specifiedΒ year, assumingΒ thatΒ dividends are reinvested to purchase additional units of the stock.
Trading properties
Properties held for trading purposes and shown as current assets in the balance sheet.
Turnover rent
Rental income which is related to an occupier's turnover.
Underlying operating profit
Operating profit before profit on disposal of non-current properties, revaluation of investment properties, and exceptional items stated within operating profit.
Voids
The area in a property or portfolio, excluding developments, whichΒ isΒ currently available for letting.
Weighted average cost of capital (WACC)
Weighted average cost of debt and notional cost of equity, used as a benchmark to assess investment returns.
YieldΒ shift
A movement (negative or positive) in the equivalent yield of a property asset.
Zone A
A means of analysingΒ and comparing the rental value of retail space by dividing it into zonesΒ parallelΒ with the main frontage. The most valuable zone, Zone A, is at the front of the unit. Each successive zone is valued at half the rate of the zone in front of it.
Forward-looking statements
This document may contain certain "forward-looking statements" with respect to Land Securities Group PLC's financial condition, results of operations and business, and certain of Land Securities Group PLC's plans and objectives with respect to these items.
Forward-looking statements are sometimes, but not always, identified by their use of a date in the future or such words as "anticipates", "aims", "due", "could", "may", "should", "expects", "believes", "intends", "plans", "targets", "goal" or "estimates". By their very nature forward-looking statements are inherently unpredictable, speculative and involve risk and uncertainty because they relate to events and depend on circumstances that will occur in the future.
There are a number of factors that could cause actual results and developments to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to, changes in the economies and markets in which the Group operates; changes in the regulatory and competition frameworks in which the Group operates; changes in the markets from which the Group raises finance; the impact of legal or other proceedings against or which affect the Group; and changes in interest and exchange rates.
Any written or verbal forward-looking statements, made in this document or made subsequently, which are attributable to Land Securities Group PLC or any other member of the Group or persons acting on their behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the factors referred to above. Land Securities Group PLC does not intend to update any forward-looking statements.
Follow the stocks