Annual report looks very confusing to me. The new board is...

Annual report looks very confusing to me. The new board is looking at a strategic review and listing what I think I interpret -

Plan is to establish a seperately listed Australian Office Assets which will be managed by Cromwell
Sell Seniors Living
Sell Polish assets
Sell Italian DHL assets

Looks like keeping Cromwell European REIT (CEREIT)
Continue with projects across ten different countries - A total of 29 projects across ten different countries have been identified, 19 of which were undergoing an initial assessment with six in planning or approval stages and four currently already underway.

To me this seems to be churning assets over and replacing with much the same and then set up a new listed company focusing on Australian Office Assets which seems to be in competition with CMW own assets.

I expected they might break up the assets into streams (seperately listed companies) a bit like Centuria or Charter Hall which to me would make sense. But to go the the Centuria or Charter Hall structures would make it more difficult for someone to take over the business.

Then I interpret the dividend will most likely fall, maybe that is one way to sort out the debt issues as we know interest rates are on the way up.

The new board took over the old board when the share price was aroung $1. We seen the hostile takeover push the share price to 90c. Since then it has dropped to 80c and dividend reduced. Then we see a churn of assets being sold and new one developed.

I thought they were going to save us. But I suppose the ARA infuence has dragged CMW back to ARA assets own performance.

Maybe I have this wrong but does seem confusing to me about making the company better? Unless you want to push the share price lower to get someone like ARA to take it over at a lower price. But arent directors obliged to operate in the best interests of all shareholders, not just the ARA bit??

Interested to see what other shareholders think.

And would be nice to see the strategy justified, as to why the churn is required. Is it get rid of poor quality assets and replace with high quality assets??

George