PaulPittman
Analyst · Janney. Please go ahead
Well, we look at our valuation internally, in sort of a handful of different ways. When we used to do a more detailed supplemental, you'll see those methodologies, I think, what we haven't done one now in a year or more, but I'm sure they're still in the public filings. You can see a description of the internal methodology we use. We look at book value as a sort of floor in terms of our valuation. We also look at book value adjusted for a couple of different things. We have what we call the IPO adjustment, and that is the properties that were in the original portfolio that I contributed to the company at the time of the IPO. Many of those properties have been known since the late 1990s so they are carried in our books at a book value well below -- fantastically below frankly, their true market value. If you make that adjustment, your book values would come up another $1 or so. If you look at the -- if you adjust that book value, yet again, for what we believe is about, as I said in the phone call about a 10% premium to what we've invested in these properties is what we think they're worth today, you start to get valuations that are up there in that $13 to $15 range. So that's kind of one method. The second method is what we view as a roll-forward of our purchase prices of these properties, and then we appreciate them or depreciate them through time based on the USDA land values survey. When we do those methodologies, we're again getting in that kind of $13 to $15 range, that is actually the methodology that we view as probably the most accurate. We do, from time to time have appraisals on certain properties that are required by lenders. We look at those appraisals. We're sometimes skeptical of appraisals as an institution because this is an asset class where under 2% of assets are sold in any given year. And so it's kind of hard to extrapolate from 2% of assets, the other 98%, purely, as a valuation metric. Then finally, we go to the cap rate model. This to me is the most unreliable model. As I said in the main comments, that's driving today about an $18 a share value and we don't frankly, think our stock is worth $18 a share. The reason it's driving that kind of value is it's based on a trailing 12 months view of our gross revenues and then it's viewed on the cap rates that we're seeing in the marketplace. This asset class, unlike many other real estate asset classes, does not see a decline in the underlying asset values when rents stagnate or even pull back. And so what you see happen is you see a compression, essentially of cap rates in the market temporarily and if you do a strict cap rate based valuation, you drive, as I said, I think unrealistic per share values. Today, the blended average of our cap rates across the country is in the kind of low 4% range is what we're seeing. That's a relatively historically low number. The cap rates in agriculture are largely related -- correlated with the 10-year, and the 10-year is at historically low numbers so it would make sense the cap rates are historically low numbers. When you get into the Corn Belt itself, you're seeing farms trade at 3%, sometimes even 2.5% cap rates kind of purchase price per acre looking at -- versus rent per acre. So that's kind of the background and a little more about our evaluation approach internally. Hope that helps.