Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Clarke who wrote (5018)	9/18/1998 12:02:00 PM
From: kahunabear	Respond to of 78476

BTW, I have gone with HOT over PAH. Two reasons. Excellent HOT management and I worry that PAH will have the IRS all over them since they have decided to stick with the paired share structure. I realize that they think it is grandfathered for their existing properties, but I think the intent of congress was to close the loophole. WS

To: James Clarke who wrote (5018)	9/18/1998 4:55:00 PM
From: Wallace Rivers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78476

Jim, Just read the Raymond James 9/16 LHO report, and I like it, even though numbers came down for this Q by FFO .03-.04. Analyst considers this a one time event because of disruption caused by NW pilot's strike at Bloomington, Mn. Radisson. '98 FFO estimate $2.14, '99 $2.40 (which would yield a div. of $1.68. assuming a payout of 70% of FFO). Upscale properties, not as subject to intense price competition as mid price (Hampton Inns, etc.) motels. NAV per this report $20.00. One downside is lack of diversity (only 12 properties) and that unlikely to increase unless LHO share price improves, whereby more shares could be issued to enable acquisitions.