LL schreef op 23 december 2021 11:50:
[...]
In de cc voor analisten wordt er iets meer achtergrond info geschets
Amy SergeantMaybe if I could just -- maybe I didn't explain it quite right. Is there a risk of further impairment on the Panama asset itself? So is there still some assumption of improvements in the second half, for example, or could -- because this is the second impairment now. Could we then see 1/3, if something, of a change?
Gerard PaulidesYes. Regretfully, IFRS on impairment is a dynamic concept. So you can either, in future, if business conditions improve, reverse or if business conditions take a turn for the worse, obviously, the -- then you need to impair whatever is left on your books. We've taken a conservative view on the occupancy and the commercial rates that underpin the impairment. It is unfortunate that it happens like this. But IFRS is quite strict in what you do and what you don't to impair and the magnitude of it. You cannot sort of be overly conservative and built-in some buffer or on the opposite, be too optimistic.
So you have to accept that you may have reversals or further impairments. We've seen that in different assets in our portfolio. We had a movement in Panama that was reversed. We had a movement in China in 2019, which was material that was fully reversed and monetized. We had an impairment in Estonia, which was impaired and fully recovered to the value prior to the impairment. So our track record is that we timely take impairments. I don't like this feature of IFRS much, but it is the reality that is dynamic valuations from that point of view.
bron:
seekingalpha.com/article/4443670-roya...