CapitaLand Commercial Trust Q3 DPU falls 9.1% to S$0.02
CAPITALAND Commercial Trust's (CCT) distribution per unit (DPU) fell by 9.1 per cent to two Singapore cents for its third quarter ended Sept 30, from 2.20 Singapore cents a year ago.
Gross revenue was down 8.7 per cent to S$94.7 million for the quarter, from S$103.8 million a year earlier.
For the quarter under review, full-quarter contribution from Main Airport Center which was acquired in September 2019, as well as higher contributions from Gallileo and CapitaGreen were offset by reduced gross revenue from the other Singapore operating properties due to asset enhancement works, lower occupancies, lower non-rental revenue and rental waivers granted to tenants in view of Covid-19, the manager said on Wednesday.
Net property income fell 9.9 per cent on the year to S$73.1 million for the quarter, from S$81.1 million.
Distributable income declined 8.6 per cent year on year to S$77.5 million, from S$84.8 million.
CCT has suspended trading since Oct 19 and its merger with CapitaLand Mall Trust via a trust scheme of arrangement became effective on Wednesday.
A NEWSLETTER FOR YOU
Property Insights
Get an exclusive analysis of real estate and property news in Singapore and beyond.
The distribution for the third quarter, along with a clean-up distribution for the period from July 1 to Oct 20 is expected to be paid by Nov 30, the manager said. It added that further details on the clean-up distribution will be announced on Oct 30.
CCT will be delisted from the Singapore bourse with effect from 9am on Nov 3.
BT is now on Telegram!
For daily updates on weekdays and specially selected content for the weekend. Subscribe to t.me/BizTimes
Companies & Markets
China’s SenseTime soars 36% after unveiling beefier AI model
PBOC steps up rhetoric against long-end government bond rally
Texas Instruments gives solid forecast in sign of comeback
Cordlife customers push for legal action
China’s Noah to hire 50 to 100 wealth managers in Hong Kong, Singapore
Australian inflation boosts case for higher-for-longer rates