what sort of trading is going on?, page-32

stevenjd and others,

It's great to get differing and opposing views. In enriches the forum in my view. Speaking of my view here it is:

I would look at interest rates as they pertain to Japan and by extension BJT with a degree of neutrality. At the end of the day you have either invested in BJT or not invested in BJT in correspondence with whether or not you believe in the business.

Not I said invested. I'm not referring in this case to traders who work the ebbs and flows of various stock prices. In this case obviously BJT is no exception here.

From an "investor" point of view (mine) I invested in the business because of a combination of factors:

1. Quality assets (reasonable at worst)
2. Interest cover (fantastic)
3. Occupancy (spectacular given the enconomic climate)
4. NTA (good to very good)
5. Reasonable debt covenants
6. Good cash position
7. Good distribution yield
8. Competetent management (but perhaps expensive)

The above factors will cyclically be affected by rises and falls in unemployment, interest rates, inflation, GDP etc etc. But this is true of any business. All of these things move in cycles. Some cycles last 5-7 years, some cycles last much, much longer. Nonetheless as an investor in BJT, whatever the cycle, I don't view the cycle as a determinent of whether BJT remains solvent/liquid. To me that is silly and if financiers thought the same then they would be silly too, which they are not. Thankfully they are greedy not silly.

PS: About "cycles" I have had the pleasure of hearing an Economist by the name of Dr. Don Stammer talk on a couple of occasions in Sydney at the Rainmaker Economists Forum that is held in February of each year (attended 2008 and 2009). In 2008 Dr. Stammer, in discussing the particular part of the cycle we were in at that time, brought up the Kondratieff Long Wave Cycle and that innevitably when things seem protracted someone always referred to it. I just had a sense of De Ja Vu because Japan's cycles (whatever they are) appear to be becoming rather protracted. If memory serves, he referred to the whole Kondratieff concept with a little disdain or contempt. It just stuck me because I had not heard the term in some 10 years prior to hearing Dr. Stammer speak.

You can read about the Kondratieff Long Wave Cycle here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kondratiev_wave

It's relatively interesting, if not slightly bollocks.

Cheers.