results for the first quarter ended 31 march 2011...stable and positive 1q 2011 results amount...
TRANSCRIPT
Results for the First
Quarter Ended
31 March 2011
Disclaimer
This Presentation is focused on comparing results for the three months ended31 March 2011 versus results achieved in the three months ended31 March 2010 and versus results achieved in the previous quarter ended 31December 2010. This shall be read in conjunction with Mapletree LogisticsTrust’s financial results for the three months ended 31 March 2011 in theSGXNET announcement.
This release may contain forward-looking statements that involve risks anduncertainties. Actual future performance, outcomes and results may differmaterially from those expressed in forward-looking statements as a result of anumber of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Representative examples ofthese factors include (without limitation) general industry and economicconditions, interest rate trends, cost of capital and capital availability,competition from similar developments, shifts in expected levels of propertyrental income, changes in operating expenses, including employee wages,benefits and training, property expenses and governmental and public policychanges and the continued availability of financing in the amounts and theterms necessary to support future business. You are cautioned not to placeundue reliance on these forward looking statements, which are based oncurrent view of management on future events.
1
Agenda
Key Highlights
Capital Management
Resilient Portfolio
Outlook
Summary
Appendix
2
Key Highlights
Stable and positive 1Q 2011 results
Amount Distributable increased by about 22% to S$37.5 million for 1Q 2011
Improvement in results attributed to contribution from acquisitions completed
in last 2 quarters
DPU for 1Q 2011 grew to 1.55 cents from 1.50 cents in 1Q 2010
Overall occupancy rate improved marginally
High occupancy rate of 98.3%; contributed by the increase in Singapore and
Hong Kong
No balance sheet risk
Comfortable gearing ratio of 39.4% as at 31 Mar 2011
Interest cover ratio increased to 6.7x as at 31 Mar 2011
Debt maturity profile improved with extension of HKD loans – 2012 debt
tower reduced to 33% from 53%
Key Highlights
4
Key Highlights (cont‟d) Yield + Growth strategy
Continued focus on yield optimisation and proactive portfolio management
Growth through acquisition pipeline in Singapore and rest of Asia
Disciplined approach in respect to acquisitions
2 accretive acquisitions in 1Q 2011 at initial NPI yield of 7% - 8%
Greenfield pipeline from Sponsor approximately S$300 million completed
or nearly completion; MapletreeLog has right of first refusal.
Portfolio rejuvenation initiatives
On-going effort to evaluate and identify properties for rejuvenation potential
create additional value and improve marketability
Asset enhancement initiatives:
Multi-Q Centre: S$4 mil to add 3-storey warehouse; increase GFA by
4,100 sqm
Divestment of two Singapore assets; proceeds to fund acquisition of
Jian Huang Building recycle capital for organic growth
Exploring potential redevelopment of existing asset to unlock value
5
Statement of Total Return – 1Q 2010 vs 1Q 2011
6
In S$ thousands 1Q 2010 1Q 2011 Variance
Gross Revenue 51,406 62,244 21%
Property Expenses (5,632) (7,571) 34%
Net Property Income (“NPI”) 45,774 54,673 19%
Amount Distributable 30,840 37,536 22%
Available DPU 1.50 1.55 3%
Property Expenses to Gross
Revenue Ratio11% 12% 1%
NPI to Gross Revenue Ratio 89% 88% 1%
Amount Distributable to
Gross Revenue Ratio60% 60% 0%
Statement of Total Return – 4Q 2010 vs 1Q 2011
7
In S$ thousands 4Q 2010 1Q 2011 Variance
Gross Revenue 61,006 62,244 2%
Property Expenses (7,164) (7,571) 6%
Net Property Income (“NPI”) 53,842 54,673 2%
Amount Distributable 36,844 37,536 2%
Available DPU 1.55 1.55 0%
Property Expenses to Gross
Revenue Ratio12% 12% 0%
NPI to Gross Revenue Ratio 88% 88% 0%
Amount Distributable to
Gross Revenue Ratio60% 60% 0%
Scorecard Since IPO (Amount Distributable)
1: Period for 3Q 2005 is from 28 Jul 2005 (Listing Date) to 30 Sep 2005
2: Decline in portfolio asset value is due to currency movements
3: Excludes the one-time consideration from Prima Limited to extend the leases and licenses with them at 201 Keppel
Road by 8 years. For details, please see SGXNET announcement dated 31 December 2009. Including this, amount
distributable is S$31.8 million for 4Q 2009 and S$ 117.9 million for FY 2009.
8
2011
Asset Value
(S$)422m 462m 715m 1.0b 1.1b 1.4b 1.5b 2.1b 2.4b 2.4b 2.5b 2.5b 2.7b 2.9b 3.0b 2.9b
2 2.9b 2.9b 3.0b 3.0b 3.4b 3.5b 3.6b
Lettable Area
(mil sqm)0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.5
20102005 2006 2007 2008 2009
15 18 24 2836 41
4958 61
70 72 76 79 81 81 81 81 82 84 86 91 96 98
4.36.0
8.39.6 10.7 11.8
15.317.7
19.1 19.721.0
22.6
25.4
28.3 28.6 28.7 28.8 29.53 30.8 30.9 31.5
36.9 37.5
0.0
4.0
8.0
12.0
16.0
20.0
24.0
28.0
32.0
36.0
40.0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
3Q05 4Q05 1Q06 2Q06 3Q06 4Q06 1Q07 2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3Q09 4Q09 1Q10 2Q10 3Q10 4Q10 1Q11
Am
ou
nt D
istrib
uta
ble
(S$
m)N
um
be
r o
f p
rop
ert
ies
1
FY06 Amt Dist = S$40.4m FY07 Amt Dist = S$71.8m FY08 Amt Dist = S$97.4m FY09 Amt Dist = S$115.5m FY10 Amt Dist = S$130.1m
31.8
CAGR = 48%
FY 11
Amount distributable (S$m) (RHS)
No. of properties (LHS)
Am
ou
nt d
istrib
uta
ble
(S$m
)
Scorecard Since IPO (DPU)
1: Period for 3Q 2005 is from 28 Jul 2005 (Listing Date) to 30 Sep 2005
2: Drop in DPU in 4Q 2008 is due to increase in number of units following the 3 for 4 rights issue in August 2008
which increased the number of units from 1,108 million to 1,939 million
3: Decline in portfolio asset value is due to currency movements
4: Excludes the one-time consideration from Prima to extend the leases and licenses with them at 201 Keppel
Road by 8 years. For details, please see SGXNET announcement dated 31 December 2009. Including this, DPU
is 1.59 cents for 4Q 2009 and 6.02 cents for FY 2009.9
SCORECARD SINCE IPO (DPU)
2011
Asset Value
(S$)422m 462m 715m 1.0b 1.1b 1.4b 1.5b 2.1b 2.4b 2.4b 2.5b 2.5b 2.7b 2.9b 3.0b 2.9b
3 2.9b 2.9b 3.0b 3.0b 3.4b 3.5b 3.6b
Lettable Area
(mil sqm)0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.5
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
15 1824 28
36 4149
58 6170 72 76 79 81 81 81 81 82 84
8691 96 98
0.80
1.051.10
1.19
1.32
1.45 1.48
1.59
1.721.78
1.90
2.04
1.84
1.46 1.47 1.48 1.48
1.484
1.50 1.501.54 1.55 1.55
0.50
0.70
0.90
1.10
1.30
1.50
1.70
1.90
2.10
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
3Q05 4Q05 1Q06 2Q06 3Q06 4Q06 1Q07 2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3Q09 4Q09 1Q10 2Q10 3Q10 4Q10 1Q11
Ac
tua
l DP
U (c
en
ts)
Nu
mb
er
of
pro
pe
rtie
s
1
2
FY06 DPU = 5.06 cents FY07 DPU = 6.57 cents FY08 DPU = 7.24 cents FY09 DPU = 5.91 cents FY10 DPU = 6.09 cents
1.59
CAGR = 13%
FY11
Actual DPU (cents) (RHS)
No. of properties (LHS)
2011
Asset Value
(S$)422m 462m 715m 1.0b 1.1b 1.4b 1.5b 2.1b 2.4b 2.4b 2.5b 2.5b 2.7b 2.9b 3.0b 2.9b
2 2.9b 2.9b 3.0b 3.0b 3.4b 3.5b 3.6b
Lettable Area
(mil sqm)0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.5
20102005 2006 2007 2008 2009
15 18 24 2836 41
4958 61
70 72 76 79 81 81 81 81 82 84 86 91 96 98
4.36.0
8.39.6 10.7 11.8
15.317.7
19.1 19.721.0
22.6
25.4
28.3 28.6 28.7 28.8 29.53 30.8 30.9 31.5
36.9 37.5
0.0
4.0
8.0
12.0
16.0
20.0
24.0
28.0
32.0
36.0
40.0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
3Q05 4Q05 1Q06 2Q06 3Q06 4Q06 1Q07 2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3Q09 4Q09 1Q10 2Q10 3Q10 4Q10 1Q11
Am
ou
nt D
istrib
uta
ble
(S$
m)N
um
be
r o
f p
rop
ert
ies
1
FY06 Amt Dist = S$40.4m FY07 Amt Dist = S$71.8m FY08 Amt Dist = S$97.4m FY09 Amt Dist = S$115.5m FY10 Amt Dist = S$130.1m
31.8
CAGR = 48%
FY 11
Ac
tua
l DP
U (c
en
ts)
Capital Management
Balance Sheet
11
31 Dec 2010 31 Mar 2011
Total Assets 3,614,277 3,708,621
Including
Investment Properties3,471,1821 3,575,5531
Total Liabilities2 1,539,1213 1,631,5854
Net Assets Attributable to
Unitholders2,072,775 2,073,164
NAV Per Unit S$0.855 S$0.856
Footnotes:
1. Includes S$12 million investment property held-for-sale (9 Tampines St 92) classified under current assets.
2. Total liabilities increased by S$92.5 million largely due to additional JPY borrowings taken to fund the
purchase of Hiroshima.
3. Includes derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$42.1 million.
4. Includes derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$35.5 million.
5. Includes net derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$35.8 million. Excluding this, the
NAV per unit would be S$0.87.
6. Includes net derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$24.3 million. Excluding this, the
NAV per unit would be S$0.86.
Capital Management
12
31 Dec 2010 31 Mar 2011
Aggregate Leverage Ratio 37.7% 39.4%
Total Debt S$1,354 million S$1,452 million
Weighted Average Annualised
Interest Rate 12.2% 2.2%
Average Duration 2.2 years 2.2 years
Interest Service Ratio 2 6.0 times 6.7 times
Footnote:
1. For the quarter ended.
2. Ratio of EBITDA over interest expense for period up to balance sheet date.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Maturing
in 2011
Maturing
in 2012
Maturing
in 2013
Maturing
in 2014
Maturing
in 2015
Maturing
in 2016
Maturing
in 2017
SGD HKD JPY MYR CNY KRW USD
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Maturing
in 2011
Maturing
in 2012
Maturing
in 2013
Maturing
in 2014
Maturing
in 2015
Maturing
in 2016
Maturing
in 2017
SGD HKD JPY MYR CNY KRW USD
Debt Profile as at 31 Mar 11
Debt
AmountSGD1,354 mil
Debts as at 31 Dec 10
Average Duration ~ 2.20 yearsSGD „mil
SGD1,452 mil
Average Duration ~ 2.22 yearsSGD „mil
Debts as at 31 Mar 11
SGD247mil
17%
33%
18%17%
3%
12%
SGD172mil
13%
18%
53%
3%
13%
13
Natural Hedge – Our Preferred Hedge Strategy
Local currency loans set up natural hedge against currency fluctuations
Gearing level – by country (as at 31 Mar 2011)
7%
42%
89%
45%
98%
39%
93%
58%
11%
55% 61%
2%
100%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Equity % 93% 58% 11% 55% 2% 61% 100%
Debt % 7% 42% 89% 45% 98% 39% 0%
Singapore Hong Kong Japan Malaysia China Korea Vietnam
14
SGD61%
Hedged (HKD, JPY,
MYR, KRW)28%
Unhedged 11%
FY2011
Approximately 89% of Amount Distributable
Hedged for FY 2011
15
Sufficient resources to meet 2011 debt obligations
Comfortable gearing ratio of 39.4%, which is lower than our medium-
term target range of 40%-50%
Healthy interest cover ratio of 6.7 times
Hedged / Fixed rate borrowings at approximately 65%
All loans are unsecured with minimal financial covenants
Credit rating of Baa2 with outlook upgraded to Positive by Moody’s
in October 2010
Prudent Capital Management
16
Resilient Portfolio
Resilient Portfolio
Occupancy rate high at about 98.3% Higher occupancy rates for Singapore, China and Hong Kong
Diversification in terms of geography, customers and end-
users Exposure to wide variety of stable end-users
Stability from long leases Weighted average lease term to expiry (“WALE”) maintained at about 6 years
Ample cushion from security deposits Equivalent to about 60% of FY 2011 annualized gross revenue, or average of
7.5 months coverage (Singapore only: 10.8 months)
Low arrears ratio Typically less than 1% of annualized gross revenue
18
In FY 2011, around 13.6% of leases (by NLA) are up for renewal – these are
mostly in Singapore, Hong Kong, China and Malaysia
Successfully renewed/replaced 94% of NLA due in 1Q 2011
Renewal/replacement at higher average rental
Successful Lease Renewals in 2011
NLA renewed/replaced in FY 2011 (in ’000 sqm)
19
Singapore Hong Kong China Malaysia Total Area1 % of 2011
renewals
Total renewable for
FY 2011
164 82 36 49 331
(13.6% of total portfolio)
100%
Spaces renewed/
replaced to date
41 30 23 15 109
(4.5% of total portfolio)
33%
Balance spaces
renewable for 2011
123 51 13 34 222
(9.1% of total portfolio)
67%
1 - Excludes about 7,500 sqm of a lease renewed in 1Q 2011 that is due in 4Q 2011. If we include this,
balance space renewable in 2011 is 229,000 sqm or 9.4% of portfolio NLA.
Successful Lease Renewals in FY 2011
20
% R
enew
ed t
o d
ate
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
By Gross Revenue By Lettable Area
32% 33%
68% 67%
Balance to be renewed Renewed to date
High Occupancy Levels Sustained31 Dec 10
(96 properties)
31 Mar 11
(98 properties )
Weighted Average Occupancy Rate 98.0% 98.3%
21
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
1.0%
4.1%3.9%
2.8%3.0%
2.8% 2.8% 2.8%2.5%
2.2%
4.2%
3.8% 3.6%
2.9%2.7% 2.7% 2.6% 2.6%
2.4%
2.0%
96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010
98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011
Marubeni Corp
Nippon
Access
TeckWahGroup
NEC Logistics
Nichirei
KyotoSH Cogent
TL
Logicom
Menlo
Group
Toshiba
Broup
Oji
Transportation
0%1%2%3%4%5%
Diversified Customer Mix Portfolio Stability
Multinational logistics operators
Singapore listed groups
Private groups
22
306 customers in portfolio; no single customer accounts for >5% of total revenue
Top 10 customers ~ approx 30% of total gross revenue
Group
Non-FTZ 3PL
46.5%
Distribution
Centre27.4%
Industrial
Warehousing13.6%
Food & Cold
Storage5.6%
Oil & Chemical
Logistics2.6%
FTZ 3PL
4.3%
Non-FTZ 3PL
44.5%
Distribution
Centre25.7%
Industrial
Warehousing14.3%
Food & Cold
Storage8.5%
Oil & Chemical
Logistics2.5%
FTZ 3PL
4.5%
Professional 3PLs Face Leasing Stickiness
Gross revenue contribution by trade sector(96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010)
Gross revenue contribution by trade sector(98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011)
23
FTZ 3PL + Non-FTZ = 50.8% FTZ 3PL + Non-FTZ = 49.0%
Inland52%
Mixture (Air/Sea/Inland)
26%
Sea11%
Air11%
Exposure To Stable End-users
Gross revenue contribution by
customers distribution channel1 (as at 31 Mar 2011)
Stable gross revenue contribution by
end-user industry (as at 31 Mar 2011)
1: Analysis is for customers who are 3PLs and distributors
24
Consumer Durables & Staples
29%
F&B18%
Materials, Construction& Engineering
9%Information Technology
8%
Industrials6%
Electrical & Electronics5%
Energy & Marine5%
Health Care4%
Commercial Printing4%
Utilities & Telecommunication
Services3%
Chemicals1%
Others8%
Single-user vs Multi-tenanted Buildings
(By Gross Revenue)
25
Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted
by gross revenue (as at 31 Mar 11)
Single-tenanted
63%
Multi-tenanted
37%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Expiring in 2011 Expiring in 2012 Expiring in 2013 Expiring in 2014 Expiring in 2015 Expiring after 2015
13.7%11.7%
5.8%8.2%
14.1%
43.8%
10.4% 10.7%
7.8%10.1%
13.1%
47.2%
% o
f p
ort
foli
o N
LA
96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010
98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011
Long Leases Provide Portfolio StabilityWeighted average lease term to expiry: ~ 6 years
Lease expiry profile by NLA
26
Long Leases Provide Portfolio StabilityLease expiry profile by NLA (by country)
27
5.3%
3.8% 4.
1%
7.7%
7.5%
30.9
%
3.2%
2.4%
1.0%
0.3%
0.1%
1.3%
0.5% 1.
4%
0.1%
2.0%
4.0%
1.2%
1.4% 2.
3%
2.2%
0.2%
0.3%
13.1
%
0.4%
0.0
%
0.0
% 1.2%
0.2%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 >2015
10.4% 10.7% 7.8% 10.1% 13.1% 47.2%
As
% o
f to
tal
po
rtfo
lio
NL
A
Lease expiry by year (entire portfolio)
Singapore Hong Kong China Malaysia Japan S. Korea Vietnam
0.8%
10.5%14.0%
30.8%
21.8%
5.5%
16.6%
0.5%
10.3%
12.2%
25.7%
21.3%
4.0%
25.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
0 - 20 yrs 21 - 30 yrs 31 - 40 yrs 41 - 50 yrs 51 - 60 yrs > 60 yrs (excluding
freehold land)
Freehold
% o
f To
tal L
etta
ble
Are
a
96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010 98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011
Long Land Leases Portfolio StabilityWeighted average of unexpired lease term of underlying land: approx 47 yrs1
1: Excluding freehold land
Remaining years to expiry of underlying land lease
28
Asset Rejuvenation
Proactive portfolio management to unlock values in
existing assets
Asset rejuvenation initiatives to better meet customers‟
needs
Retrofitting and/or enhancement add value through
maximising land use and/or structural efficiency
Redevelopment efforts unlock value through improving
prospects of properties with new, modern building specifications
or maximising plot ratio.
Disposal recycle capital to optimise yield and provide organic
growth through replacing less-performing assets for better
yielding properties
29
Outlook
Outlook & Strategy for 2011
Seizing Opportunities, Expanding Horizons
“Yield + Growth” strategy
Growth via
acquisitions and
development
• Actively pursue quality
assets via third-party
acquisitions
• Value proposition to
customers: Strategic
customer relationships;
“Follow-the-Client”
• Sponsor continues to
develop pipelines
Proactive capital
management strategy
• Sustainable long term
gearing levels
• Manage refinancing risks
through spreading out
debt maturities
• Active hedging to
manage interest rate and
foreign exchange
fluctuations
• Optimal capital structure
Yield Optimisation on
existing portfolio
• Active leasing &
marketing efforts - focus
on higher quality
tenancies
• Manage expenses
• Proactive asset
management to enhance
asset value with asset
enhancement and
redevelopment initiatives
Global economic conditions improve but remain vulnerable
to external shocks
31
Summary
In Summary
Amount distributable: Approx S$38 million in 1Q 2011; around 22%
higher than in 1Q 2010
DPU for 1Q 2011 increased to 1.55 cents from 1.50 cents in 1Q 2010
Existing portfolio continue to provide stability and organic growth
Announced acquisitions in 1Q 2011 will contribute fully to revenue and
DPU in 2Q 2011
Continue to focus on yield optimisation, managing occupancy and rates
Continue to seek out accretive acquisitions
Experienced team with proven track record
Maintain rigorous asset selection criteria
Maintain financial discipline: Acquisition accretion is tested against
WACC of debt and equity for fair pricing
Proactive capital mangement to back growth plans
33
Q&A Session
Thank You
Appendix
Distribution Details
Distribution Time Table
Last day of trading on “cum” basis 27 April 2011, 5:00pm
Ex-date 28 April 2011, 9:00am
Books closure date 3 May 2011, 5:00pm
Distribution payment date 30 May 2011
Counter Name Distribution PeriodDistribution per unit
(SGD)Payment Date
MapletreeLog1 Jan 2011 –
31 Mar 20111.55 cents 30 May 2011
37
Attractive Yield vs Other Investments
1: Based on MapletreeLog's closing price of S$0.90 per unit as at 31 Mar 11 and annualised 1Q 2011 DPU of 6.2 cents
2: Bloomberg
3: Average S$ 12-month fixed deposit savings rate as at 31 Mar 11
4: Prevailing CPF Ordinary Account interest rate
38
Geographical Diversification (by NPI)
39
4Q 20102
1Q 20113
1Q 20101
Foot note :
1)1Q 2010 started with 82 properties and ended with 84 properties.
2)4Q 2010 started with 91 properties and ended with 96 properties.
3)1Q 2011 started with 96 properties and ended with 98 properties.
Singapore50.0%
Japan23.0%
Hong Kong15.7%
China4.7%
Malaysia4.1%
South Korea2.0% Vietnam
0.5%
Singapore51.9%
Japan16.2%
Hong Kong20.8%
China6.0%
Malaysia4.5%
South Korea0.6%
Vietnam0.0%
Singapore49%
Japan23%
Hong Kong16%
China5%
Malaysia4%
South Korea2%
Vietnam1%
Single-tenanted vs Multi-tenanted Assets
(by Gross Revenue)
40
Country split by MTB Country split by SUA
Single-tenanted vs multi-
tenanted by gross revenue
(as at 31 Mar 11)
Singapore53.2%
Japan0.0%
Hong Kong33.0%
China10.7%
Malaysia1.8%
South Korea0.0%
Vietnam1.3%
Singapore49.2%Japan
39.9%
Hong Kong1.4%
China1.6%
Malaysia5.1%
South Korea2.7%
Vietnam0.0%
Single-tenanted
63%
Multi-tenanted
37%
Single-user vs Multi-tenanted Building
(By No. of Assets and NLA)
By No. of Assets as at 31 Mar 2011 By NLA as at 31 Mar 2011
41
Single-tenanted
75
Multi-tenanted
23
Single-tenanted
49.2%
Multi-tenanted
50.8%
Singapore Warehouse Oversupply Exaggerated About 64% of upcoming supply in Singapore has already been pre-leased or is being built
by end-users balance amount (243k sqm) is not a big threat
Source: URA 4Q 2010, Mapletree estimates
Upcoming Non-Committed supply of warehouses in Singapore
Upcoming Non-Committed supply of warehouses in
Singapore vs existing Stock
42
Non-Committed Supply
34%
Committed Supply64%
243k sqm
442k sqm
Total upcoming warehouse space of 685k sqm over the
next 3 yrsNon-
Committed Supply
3%
Committed Supply
6%
Existing Stock91%
6,958k sqm
243k sqm
Existing +
Upcoming Stock
7,643k sqm
442k sqm
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
1Q 9
6
3Q 9
6
1Q 9
7
3Q 9
7
1Q 9
8
3Q 9
8
1Q 9
9
3Q 9
9
1Q 0
0
3Q 0
0
1Q 0
1
3Q 0
1
1Q 0
2
3Q 0
2
1Q 0
3
3Q 0
3
1Q 0
4
3Q 0
4
1Q 0
5
3Q 0
5
1Q 0
6
3Q 0
6
1Q 0
7
3Q 0
7
1Q 0
8
3Q 0
8
1Q 0
9
3Q 0
9
1Q 1
0
3Q 1
0
Occu
pan
cy
('000 s
qm
)
Upcoming Supply Existing Stock Occupancy
SARS, Nov 02
Dot Com Burst,Mar 00
Asian Financial Crisis, Jul 97
Current Financial Crisis, Jul 07
Bali Bombing, Oct 05
91.4%
Singapore Warehouse Occupancy Trend
Source : URA 4Q 201043
Warehouse Sector is Less Volatile
Source: URA 3Q 2010, Singapore; Median Price & Rental of Multiple-user Warehouse
Capital values Rental values
Capital Retail Office Warehouse
Avd p.a.
ChgQtrs
Avd p.a.
ChgQtrs
Avd p.a.
ChgQtrs
Trough to Peak 9% 17 9% 17 8% 16
Rental Retail Office Warehouse
Avd p.a.
ChgQtrs
Avd p.a.
ChgQtrs
Avd p.a.
ChgQtrs
Trough to Peak 10% 17 37% 17 11% 16
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
19
98
Q4
19
99
Q2
19
99
Q4
20
00
Q2
20
00
Q4
20
01
Q2
20
01
Q4
20
02
Q2
20
02
Q4
20
03
Q2
20
03
Q4
20
04
Q2
20
04
Q4
20
05
Q2
20
05
Q4
20
06
Q2
20
06
Q4
20
07
Q2
20
07
Q4
20
08
Q2
20
08
Q4
20
09
Q2
20
09
Q4
20
10
Q2
S$
PS
M
Multiple User Warehouse (Average) Office (Average) Retail (Average)
Bottom:
2Q 2004 (warehouse, office)
3Q 2004 (retail)
Bottom:
3Q 2009
(all) Peak:
2Q 2008 (office, retail)
3Q 2008 (warehouse)
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1998Q
4
1999Q
2
1999Q
4
2000Q
2
2000Q
4
2001Q
2
2001Q
4
2002Q
2
2002Q
4
2003Q
2
2003Q
4
2004Q
2
2004Q
4
2005Q
2
2005Q
4
2006Q
2
2006Q
4
2007Q
2
2007Q
4
2008Q
2
2008Q
4
2009Q
2
2009Q
4
2010Q
2
S$ P
SM
per
mth
Multiple User Warehouse (Average) Office (Average) Retail (Average)
Peak: 2Q 2008Bottom: 1Q 2004
Bottom:
4Q 2009
44
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,0001
99
1
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
3Q
20
11
F
20
12
F
20
17
F
('0
00
sq
ft)
82%
84%
86%
88%
90%
92%
94%
96%
98%
100%
Oc
cu
pa
nc
y
Warehouse Supply Occupancy
Hand over of HK, Jul 97
Asian Financial Crisis, Jul 97
HK Influenza, Dec 97
Dot Com Burst, Mar 00
SARS, Nov 02
Bali Bombing, Oct 05
Current Financial Crisis, Jul 07
Lack of New Supply in HK is Supportive to Revenues
Source : Savills Research and Consultancy (HK), Sep 2010; Mapletree estimates
1: New World development located at Kwai Chung Container Port
2: Goodman development located at Tsing Yi
3: HK Government tendered for a development site in Tsing Yi Town
No New Supply
1
2
3
45
Outlook of
Asian Logistics Industry
Asian Logistics Market is Growing at ~
Double the Rate as the Rest of the World
Source: Datamonitor, August 2009
183 199 220 243 272 291 318 350387
432472
42%
43%
40%
38%
36%
35%
34%
32%
31%
30%
29%
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009F 2010F 2011F 2012F 2013F
Lo
gis
tic
s M
ark
et
Va
lue
US
$ b
illi
on
25%
27%
29%
31%
33%
35%
37%
39%
41%
43%
45%
Sh
are
of
As
ia-P
ac
ific
in
glo
ba
l lo
gis
tic
s
Asia-Pacific Rest of the World Asia-Pacific as % of Global Logistics
CAGR:
Rest of the World: 5.6%
Asia Pac: 10.1%
47
291
472
545
629
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2008 2013F 2008 2013FLo
gis
tic
s M
ark
et
Va
lue
in
US
$ B
illio
ns
… Due to Higher Growth Compared to
the Rest of the World
Source: Datamonitor, Aug 2009
Rest of the world logistics
marketAsia Pacific logistics
market
48
41
104
249
281
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2008 2013F 2008 2013FLo
gis
tics M
ark
et
Vo
lum
e in
SG
D$ b
illio
ns
…Within This, Contract Logistics Shows the
Most Significant Growth Potential
Source: Transport Intelligence, May 2009
Global contract logistics marketAsia Pacific contract logistics market
49
Contract Logistics - China, India & Vietnam are
the Fastest Growing Markets
Source: Transport Intelligence
Contract Logistics Markets in Asia
4.8%
20.6%
2.8%
15.2%
2.7%4.7%
6.5%
-0.4%
6.1% 6.4%
17.3%
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
Japan China South
Korea
India Taiwan Indonesia Thailand Hong
Kong
Malaysia Singapore Vietnam
Lo
gis
tics M
arket
Valu
e
in
SG
D$ M
illi
on
s
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Market Volume (2008) Forecasted Market Volume (2013) Forecasted CAGR (2008 to 2013)
50
Freight Forwarding – China, India & Vietnam
are the Fastest Growing Markets
Freight Forwarding Markets in Asia
6.1%
-2.1%-3.0%
-0.5%-1.5%
10.1%
-2.7%
0.3%1.7%
2.4%
14.0%
0.00
5,000.00
10,000.00
15,000.00
20,000.00
25,000.00
China Japan South
Korea
Singapore Hong
Kong
India Taiwan Thailand Malaysia Indonesia Vietnam
Lo
gis
tics M
ark
et
Vo
lum
e
in S
GD
$ M
illi
on
s
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
Market Volume (2008) Forecasted Market Volume (2012) Forecasted CAGR (2008 to 2012)
Source: Transport Intelligence51
1.0Suvarnabhumi Airport, Thailand20
1.1John F. Kennedy International Airport, USA19
1.2O'Hare International Airport, USA18
1.3Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, The Netherlands17
1.3London Heathrow Airport, UK16
1.4Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, Taiwan15
1.4Beijing Capital International Airport, China14
1.5Los Angeles International Airport, USA13
1.6Miami International Airport, USA12
1.7Singapore Changi Airport, Singapore11
1.8Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport, France10
1.9Narita International Airport, Japan9
1.9Frankfurt Airport, Germany8
1.9Dubai International Airport, UAE7
1.9Louisville International Airport, USA6
2.0
Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport,
USA5
2.3Incheon International Airport, South Korea4
2.5Shanghai Pudong International Airport, China3
3.4Hong Kong International Airport, Hong Kong2
3.7Memphis International Airport, USA1
2009SeaportRank
1.0Suvarnabhumi Airport, Thailand20
1.1John F. Kennedy International Airport, USA19
1.2O'Hare International Airport, USA18
1.3Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, The Netherlands17
1.3London Heathrow Airport, UK16
1.4Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, Taiwan15
1.4Beijing Capital International Airport, China14
1.5Los Angeles International Airport, USA13
1.6Miami International Airport, USA12
1.7Singapore Changi Airport, Singapore11
1.8Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport, France10
1.9Narita International Airport, Japan9
1.9Frankfurt Airport, Germany8
1.9Dubai International Airport, UAE7
1.9Louisville International Airport, USA6
2.0
Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport,
USA5
2.3Incheon International Airport, South Korea4
2.5Shanghai Pudong International Airport, China3
3.4Hong Kong International Airport, Hong Kong2
3.7Memphis International Airport, USA1
2009SeaportRank
The World‟s Busiest Seaports and Airports are in Asia
4.6Laem Chabang, Thailand20
4.7Xiamen, China19
5.1Long Beach, USA18
6.0Tanjung Pelepas, Malaysia17
6.7Los Angeles, USA16
7.0Hamburg, Germany15
7.3Antwerp, The Netherlands14
7.3Port Klang, Malaysia13
8.6Kaohsiung, Taiwan12
8.7Tianjin, China11
9.7Rotterdam, The Netherlands10
10.3Qingdao, China9
10.5Ningbo, China8
11.1Dubai, UAE7
11.2Guangzhou, China6
12.0Busan, South Korea5
18.3Shenzhen, China4
21.0Hong Kong3
25.0Shanghai, China2
25.9Singapore1
2009SeaportRank
4.6Laem Chabang, Thailand20
4.7Xiamen, China19
5.1Long Beach, USA18
6.0Tanjung Pelepas, Malaysia17
6.7Los Angeles, USA16
7.0Hamburg, Germany15
7.3Antwerp, The Netherlands14
7.3Port Klang, Malaysia13
8.6Kaohsiung, Taiwan12
8.7Tianjin, China11
9.7Rotterdam, The Netherlands10
10.3Qingdao, China9
10.5Ningbo, China8
11.1Dubai, UAE7
11.2Guangzhou, China6
12.0Busan, South Korea5
18.3Shenzhen, China4
21.0Hong Kong3
25.0Shanghai, China2
25.9Singapore1
2009SeaportRank
Source: Containerisation International; Airports Council International
% of Top 20 Volumes in Asia = 79% % of Top 20 Volumes in Asia = 42%
14 of the world‟s Top 20 busiest seaports
are in Asia
8 of the world‟s Top 20 busiest cargo-
handling airports are in AsiaContainer Throughput (Mil TEU) Total Cargo (Mil Metric Tonnes)
52
Rank Economy
Overall
LPI score
Customs
(Ranking)
Infrastructure
(Ranking)
International
Shipments
(Ranking)
Logistics
quality and
Competence
(Ranking)
Tracking
and
Tracing
(Ranking)
Timelines
(Ranking)
1 Germany 4.11 3 1 9 4 4 3
2 Singapore 4.09 2 4 1 6 6 14
3 Sweden 4.08 5 10 2 2 3 11
4 Netherlands 4.07 4 2 11 3 9 6
5 Luxemborg 3.98 1 9 7 21 19 1
6 Switzerland 3.97 12 6 25 1 1 15
7 Japan 3.97 10 5 12 7 8 13
8 United Kingdom 3.95 11 16 8 9 7 8
9 Belgium 3.94 9 12 26 5 2 12
10 Norway 3.93 6 3 24 13 10 10
11 Ireland 3.89 18 19 5 16 13 4
12 Finland 3.89 7 8 19 10 11 25
13 Hong Kong SAR 3.88 8 13 6 14 17 26
14 Canada 3.87 13 11 32 8 15 5
15 United States 3.86 15 7 36 11 5 16
Source: World Bank, 2010 Logistics Performance Index
Tier 1 Countries – Singapore, Japan & Hong Kong
are in Top 15 in Terms of LPI
53
Global logistics market (2008) in S$ dollars
Others
72%
Contract
logistics
16%Freight
forwarding
13%
Global 3PL
market = approx
29%
Note: Freight forwarding involves the
arrangement of cargo activity to an
international destination.
Note: Contract logistics involves the
outsourcing of supply chain
management operations in a
domestic context.
Source: Transport Intelligence, 2008
Contract Logistics and Freight Forwarding
Account for Approximately 30% of the Global
Logistics Market…
54
Within This, Contract Logistics and Freight
Forwarding Each Account for Approximately Half
of the Global 3PL Market
Contract logistics
55%
Freight forwarding
45%
Global 3PL market (2008) in S$ dollars
Note: Contract logistics
involves the outsourcing of
supply chain management
operations in a domestic
context.
Note: Freight forwarding
involves the arrangement
of cargo activity to an
international destination.
Source: Transport Intelligence, 2008.
3PL refers to freight forwarding and contract logistics sectors.
As at 2008, global total logistics size was worth approx S$455 billion.
55
Co
un
try d
evelo
pm
en
t in
dex
Emerging
Developed
Logistics market developmentLow High
Laos
Cambodia
India
China
Vietnam
Philippines
Indonesia
Thailand
Malaysia
TaiwanS. Korea
Hong Kong
Japan
Singapore
Australia* Poor facilities &
infrastructure
* Low IT penetration
* Industry partners limited
* Traditional channels
* Moderate infrastructure
* Medium IT penetration
* With no integration
* Excellent infrastructure
* Sophisticated capabilities
& technology
* Easier to attract quality
labour
* Supply chain partners
* Processes and
infrastructure that support
collaboration
Logistics Market DevelopmentMany Asian countries at lower end of development curve
Source: Edelweiss research56
Logistics Market DevelopmentLess developed economies have higher logistics costs as a % of their GDP
Source: Armstrong & Associates; State of Logistics Report (2010), Council of Supply Chain
Management Professionals; Saigon port news
25%
20%
18%
13%12%
9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9%8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Vie
tnam
Thaila
nd
Chin
a
India
UAE (D
ubai)
Sin
gapore
Euro
pe
Hong K
ong
S.K
orea
Taiwan
Japan
USA
Lo
gis
tics c
ost/
GD
P
High logistics costs
indicate inefficiences in
supply chainLower logistics costs in
more developed markets
57
MIPL‟s commitment in Development Projects
58
No Country Project nameGFA
(sqm)Status
1 China Mapletree Yangshan Bonded Logistics Park (Shanghai) 45,933 Completed/Leased: 12% of NLA
2 China Mapletree Wuxi Logistics Park (Wuxi) 45,309Completed/Leased: 98.4% of NLA;
Warehouse fully taken up.
3 China Mapletree Beijing EPZ Airport Logistics Park (Beijing) 41,100In progress to construct PH 1 (13,840
sqm) at approved construction budget of
~S$8.7million
4 China Mapletree Tianjin Airport Logistics Park (Tianjin) 64,200Completed/Leased: 36.4% of NLA, with
interest expressed for a further 33%
5 China Mapletree Tianjin Port HaiFeng Bonded Logistics Park (Tianjin) 177,882 Completed/Leased: 15% of NLA
Subtotal China 374,424
6 Malaysia Mapletree Shah Alam Logistics Park (Shah Alam) 60,000 Completed/Leased: 98.8% of NLA
Subtotal Malaysia 60,000
7 Vietnam Mapletree Logistics Park (Binh Duong) 440,000Phase 1 completed, Phase 2 in 2Q
11. Leasing underway.
8 Vietnam Mapletree Bac Ninh Logistics Park (Bac Ninh) 310,000
70% of first block (18,250 sqm)
completed as of end Mar 11. Completion
is expected in May 11.
Subtotal Vietnam 750,000
9 Japan Project Piranha Phase 1 (Odawara, Kanagawa) 136,560Construction is expected to start in Sep
11 and complete in Sep 12.
10 Japan Project Joso 27,277Construction is expected to start in Aug
11 and complete in Feb 12
Subtotal Japan 163,837
Total 1,348,261
As at 31 Mar 11
Note: 2Q11 refers to MIPL’s FY (1 Jul 11 to 30 Sep 11)
Important notice
The information contained in this presentation is for information purposes only and does not
constitute an offer to sell or any solicitation of an offer or invitation to purchase or subscribe for
units in Mapletree Logistics Trust (“MapletreeLog”, and units in MapletreeLog, “Units”) in
Singapore or any other jurisdiction, nor should it or any part of it form the basis of, or be relied
upon in any connection with, any contract or commitment whatsoever.
The past performance of the Units and Mapletree Logistics Trust Management Ltd. (the
“Manager”) is not indicative of the future performance of MapletreeLog and the Manager.
Predictions, projections or forecasts of the economy or economic trends of the markets which
are targeted by MapletreeLog are not necessarily indicative of the future or likely performance
of MapletreeLog.
The value of units in MapletreeLog (“Units”) and the income from them may fall as well as rise.
Units are not obligations of, deposits in, or guaranteed by, the Manager or any of its affiliates.
An investment in Units is subject to investment risks, including the possible loss of the
principal amount invested. Investors have no right to request the Manager to redeem their
Units while the Units are listed. It is intended that Unitholders may only deal in their Units
through trading on the SGX-ST. Listing of the Units on the SGX-ST does not guarantee a
liquid market for the Units. The past performance of MapletreeLog is not necessarily indicative
of its future performance.
59
Thank You