Yes, Nordnet is really messing up even in these “interpretations”.
But, from this and e.g. BEP, normal corporate counterparts can be found, i.e., the same tickers + the letter C.
Regarding O’s expansion, there have been no problems even with the purchase of pure alternative asset managers at Nordnet.
Hi! How would you, as Nordnet, organize these partnership trades for non-professional clients?
Did you ask me? Well, for example, regarding those mentioned, Brookfield announced that they are not subject to the regulations interpreted by Nordnet. Nevertheless, they had to be forcibly sold from the portfolio, incurring large capital gains taxes.
So, as Nordnet, I would investigate and take a clearly more neutral stance on interpretations than the current strict “NO” stance.
And a bit off-topic here, but regarding the same issue, i.e., BDC and other companies already in the portfolio, they could allow additional purchase opportunities for them.
ARE has taken a hard hit after the Q3 earnings report. A dividend cut is expected, but the Funds From Operations forecast for the current year
The consensus expects FFO per share of ~$9 for 2025. One shouldn’t just focus on the share price with REITs because dilution is an essential part of the business. However, the share price has fallen to 2010 levels, when FFO per share was ~$4.6, meaning FFO has roughly doubled since then.
There has also been significant fluctuation in valuation. The current valuation is about 1/3 of the historical P/FFO.
The 2010 asset base was estimated to be in the $6–$7 billion range compared to the current $39-40 billion range.
The portfolio has grown 5×+ in value and scale since 2010, reflecting Alexandria’s evolution from a niche REIT to a dominant life science landlord.
I crunched the numbers with AI for a bit and ended up buying a bit more. 2025 is definitely my worst investment, but I still believe that in the long run, it will turn into a joy 
ARE cut its dividend as expected, but quite significantly in percentage terms (45%). It remains to be seen how the share price reacts today and in the coming weeks, as the air has been let out for quite some time now.
Cibus has recently dropped again quite close to 150 SEK/share. Does the esteemed council have any current opinions on the company? The dividend yield is again approaching 7%>
Does anyone here have bullish or bearish views on VICI Properties? Dividend around 6.5%. I’m thinking of a replacement for Citycon in my portfolio. I want to keep perhaps a small exposure to real estate in my portfolio, even though it’s not a necessity. A few percentage points slice…
Las Vegas baby or not?
Investing.com – SL Green Realty Corp (NYSE:SLG) stock dropped 2.3% Friday after the New York-focused real estate investment trust provided 2026 earnings guidance that fell short of analyst expectations.
During its annual investor conference, SL Green projected funds from operations (FFO) per share of $4.40 to $4.70 for 2026, significantly below the analyst consensus estimate of $5.13. The company also forecast net income per share ranging from a loss of $0.27 to a gain of $0.03 for the year ending December 31, 2026.
The FFO guidance includes several adjustments to net income, including $2.58 per share in depreciation and amortization, $3.29 per share in joint ventures depreciation and noncontrolling interests adjustments, and a $0.12 per share net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests.
SL Green’s forecast also incorporates a $0.80 per share loss on sale of real estate and $1.82 per share in equity gains on sale of interest in unconsolidated joint ventures or real estate.
Additionally, the REIT announced a change to its dividend policy starting in fiscal year 2026. The company will shift from monthly to quarterly dividend payments while maintaining its cash payment structure.
SLG guided FFO of $4.4-4.7 for 2026 and plans to change monthly dividends to quarterly dividends. On top of this, there are all sorts of risks due to New York’s new mayor, and the casino project permit falling through, meaning the stock has been kicked hard to the ground in recent months.
For me, this has been in my portfolio precisely as a good monthly dividend payer, so now I’m considering an exit and perhaps moving to Realty Income.
There have been some speculations that Caesars Place is in trouble and could theoretically cause VICI (which owns the building) some gray hairs. But VICI did raise its dividend this autumn, for the seventh year in a row.
I own it, but I’m following the situation with some concern.
Although VIC has diversification across the USA, there’s a large concentration in Las Vegas. The number of tourists has been declining this year, and I don’t immediately identify drivers that could reverse the trend. And I assume that the decline in Las Vegas tourism correlates with a general decline in tourism.
Las Vegas Tourism Performance Statistics 2025 | Updated Monthly - tourismanalytics.com
As a counter-argument, one could state that the landlord is paid even if the tenant hotel/casino’s customer flows are declining, but in my opinion, this argument only works for a while. So, I’m monitoring the situation and, if necessary, I will sell this and hotelliReitit.
Trump’s replacement 
Canadians are one very large group who have stayed away precisely because of Trump’s hostility.
Exited the portfolio in the spring as part of a larger real estate market cleanup, but it was already on the chopping block due to its own merits. If the company had remained a pure net lease, I probably wouldn’t have sold it even during the spring cleanup, but the company’s management has been given short-term incentive programs that aim to increase AFFO/share metrics. There are also long-term incentives, but management probably understands that long-term incentives are useless if they miss the short-term targets and get fired.
The need to increase the AFFO/share figure has been met by increasing risk and investing in loans backed by properties for which it is difficult to find tenants in a potential economic downturn. As a pure net lease, VICI would be in a good position to benefit from forced sales, but for some reason, they have now themselves taken positions that carry the risk of forced fire sales.