HI Again Morley,There is an announcement dated 24th Feb. This is...

HI Again Morley,

There is an announcement dated 24th Feb. This is what was said:

As previously disclosed, AJAs interests in 15 of its 43 properties were revalued as at 31 December 2009, resulting in a decrease in fair value of the total portfolio of 4.8% to 119.5 billion (A$1.4 billion). A significant factor behind the portfolio devaluation was reduced asset cash flow assumptions used by the independent valuers for office properties. Marginal increases in the valuers capitalisation rates across the portfolio also contributed.
In accordance with AJAs valuation policy, the assessment of the fair value of all investment properties as at 31 December 2009 was conducted, requiring 15 of the 43 properties to be revalued. In comparison, all 43 properties were revalued as at 30 June 2009.

___________

So all of them were valued. Only 15 had to be "revalued" because there was a change in the fair value either up or down (in this case down). They are also saying as at 6 months earlier (ie end June 2009) all of the 43 were valued and all 43 had to be "revalued".

Really cumbersome language in my view which promots misunderstanding. They could have just used the words "change" or something like "all 43 properties were valued and there were changes to the fair values of only 15 of the 43". But alas I am not the boss.

Cheers hope this helps.