I agree.The value of anything is not what someone "says" the...

I agree.

The value of anything is not what someone "says" the value is. The value is whatever someone will pay for it.

This being said, don't mistaken them not wanting to sell a property as no one wanting to buy it.

The best we can do is estimate what someone would pay based on historical values, current values and future predictions. A company can have no "tangible assets" i.e. they sell services and still be of value. Conversely a company can have no income or even operate at a loss, and again, be of value.

In my opinion, and yours I expect NTA is only a component of valuing a company, but when it comes to REITS, the weighting of NTA in its valuation increases. The reasons are as follows:

1) The earnings are not indicative of future earnings (especially recently) because devaluations of properties are written as a loss and can cause -ve EPS.

2) Other "non tangible" assets such as goodwill, are almost nonexistent in this sector.

This leaves NTA as the Major factor for valuation, with gearing, earnings and interest cover a close and equal second.

NTA should form a baseline, then add or subtract value for other attributes such as,

(in no particular order)
Gearing
Interest cover
Earnings
Management
Historical Performance
Future guidance and predictions

I always start with NTA in the reit sector as it makes the most sense to me.

Just my thoughts SS>