Australian property fund under pressure to place value on unlisted assets
Australian banks are putting increasing pressure on property groups to ascertain the value of unlisted properties held within investment portfolios.
Brookfield Multiplex Capital Management (Brookfield Multiplex CM) is one example of a property manager (as responsible entity for the Multiplex Acumen Property Fund) working with its bankers to pay down debt and retain value for investors in a difficult market.
The Multiplex Acumen Property Fund has 27 underlying unlisted investments as well as a listed real estate investment trust portfolio.
The group, with its lender, is undertaking a review of the fund, which has already seen it examine the financial and operational status of the fund’s 27 unlisted investments.
But the attention of the manager’s financier is now on the value of the properties. As a result, Brookfield Multiplex CM has appointed an independent third party to review the value of the fund’s unlisted investments.
This move comes in an environment of considerable questioning over the true value of unlisted property investments, an asset class many superannuation funds are highly exposed to.
The managers of the Multiplex Acumen Property Fund are embarking on asset sales in both the fund’s listed and unlisted investments to reduce the fund’s debt levels, as well as undertaking other capital management initiatives.
Recommended for you
Wealth managers who lack expertise in alternatives could find themselves at risk of losing clients, according to iCapital, with a shift towards evergreen funds already at play in their asset allocations.
The development of semi-liquid private equity funds is providing an easier way for wealth managers to access the asset class, according to a panel, while firms are substantially improving their valuation processes.
Generation Development Group has appointed former Evidentia chief executive Peter Smith as an executive director.
Equity Trustees has paid three infringement notices issued by ASIC in which the corporate regulator alleged it made misleading statement about investments in a sustainable bond fund.
