Getting a Better Understanding of Syndicated Investment Properties

Getting a Better Understanding of Syndicated Investment Properties

Intro

Syndicated investment Properties seem very popular at the minute and here I would like to write this report to 1) get a better understanding of its make up, 2) get other advice from other more intelligent/experienced investors on how to analyse such investments. The syndicate investment I am looking at is provided by Augusta, marketed by Bayleys. Initially this started as some notes, or a kind of report on its details. But I hope to use it for future reference, for my benefit alone if anything. In future I would hope to look back on this and would hope that it would act as some barometer of how well the investment done or did not do. Otherwise, without this, I will be looking back and will be relying on my memory and going by my memory it wont be that reliable!! I would also hope that this might act as a template for any future offerings that become available. Whilst I am trying to keep it as general as possible, I am using a recent syndicated opportunity as an example to help provide more context. The example I am using is here (Sherbrook Road, Australia)[links to relevant documents are provided below].

Don't Invest 

I have done alot of research on this and I get alot of "I Would not touch with a Barge Pole read the fine print very carefully", "My understanding is most of these syndication deals are just set up to earn fees for the managers", "theres a sweetener at the end of all you blind mum and dad investors","What about the serious downside with these; ie. valuations; single lease, high and multiple fees, very very poor liquidity...just off the top of my head."Other things i have heard are sometimes the buildings are priced high because they know they are being sold to a syndicate. Or sometimes the lease favours the tenant. 

While I respect all these opinions I would like to have some concrete reasons why, and be able to quantify them. Here I hope to achieve that at least. 

One positive comment I did find was this "The fact that they're clipping the ticket on the way doesn't bother me. You can't really expect them to do it for free, and there's nothing wrong with people naking a dollar". This seems like a fair enough comment, I mean, if every body is getting a fair share of the pie, then what could be fairer?

2 Articles 

Here are 2 articles - one takes a negative perspective on these types of investments and the other take the opposite perspective.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10575349

- Brian Gaynor: Property syndicates not for faint of heart

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10576746

- Mark Francis: Property syndicates let investors choose - A Reply to Brian Gaynor

Some Numbers

Here are some very initial numbers, in Table.1,  I put together after a first look. This was a very quick first look with the aim to give me an idea of the investment. 

TABLE.1 - A quick look at the numbers:

Name	Price	Comment
Purchase Price	$10,660,000
# of interests	135
cost per interest	$50,000
total Interests	$6,750,000	135 interests at 50K
Amount to borrow	$3,910,000
8% return per investor	$4,000
Rental per annum	$760,725
8% return all investors	$540,000
Mortgage repayment	$181,965	assuming interest only at 3.5% for 1 year
this to run property	$38,760
This would give me an LVR of	37%	=(3,910,000/10,660,000)
Gives a Gross Yield Of	7.14%	=(760,725/10,660,000)

NOTE: In the investment statement 8.14% projected pre-tax cash return the first  full year ending 30 June 2017, so my estimates are close enough. I think the rental return figure I use is slightly off.

Below in Table.2 is a look at the actual numbers and the actual set-up costs involved. 

TABLE.2 - A more detailed look at the numbers:

Name	Price	Comment
Purchase Price	$10,660,000
Stamp duty	$593,475
Other Issue Expenses (establishment costs - cost of raising capital, acquiring the Property and obtaining loan finance)	$864,245
Total	$12,117,720
Stamp duty % of PurchasePrice	5.57%	=(593,475/10,660,000)*100
OtherExpenses % of PurchasePrice	8.11%	=(864,245/10,660,000)*100
Total % on top of PurchasePrice	13.67%	=(8.11%+5.57%)*100
To be funded by:
Number of interests	135
Interest per Investor	$50,000
Subscriptions from Investors (135 Interests at AU$50,000)	$6,750,000	=(135*50,000)
Bank Loan	$5,367,720	=(12,117,720-6,750,000)
Total Price	$12,117,720	=(10,660,000+593,475+864,245)
Rental per annum	$760,725
This would give me an LVR of	50.4%	=(5,367,720/10,660,000)
Alt LVR	44.3%	=(5,367,720/12,117,720)
Gives a Gross Yield Of	7.14%	=(760,725/10,660,000)
Alt Gross Yield Of	6.28%	=(760,725/12,117,720)

NOTE: page 13 of the investment statement gives a breakdown of the Other Issue Expenses. 

Now based on Table.2, for me to get my money back, disregarding the yearly % return ,this building will have to be sold for 13.67% higher than $10,660,000 which is $12,117,720 at some later date, and that is just to break even(I am assuming any potential purchaser would pay the stamp duty on top of this.) Whilst in the long-term this may be possible, it is very well worth highlighting!!! Is this just the price you pay for this type of investment? Are you better of to buy shares in a property listed trust, where you own pieces of multiple buildings? Would the same, if not similar fees be associated with that property listed trust? While the fees here might seem expensive, at least it comes across as transparent.

A look at the LVR and gross yield here, one could argue that there is an alternative here. 

The 50.4 LVR is based on the loan/purchase price but why does this not include the stamp-duty and fees? Surely this should be considered from investment point of view? Maybe it is just purely from a banks perspective the LVR is calculated this way, but again it is worth highlighting the fees and stamp duty. 

The same applies to the gross yield if you take into account the fess and stamp duty the gross yield is reduced from 7.14% to 6.28%. Again the 6.28% yield is more real to me, but I would be interested to hear other thoughts on this? And is this still a good yield in this day and age? 

Costs

While the setup costs of $864,245(8.11% of the Purchase price) is expensive I would like to concentrate on other costs here first.

Some Assumptions on the Table.3 below:

• The management costs are set out as below with a 3% increase from year 4.
• The rental per annum is set to increase by 3.5%, consequently I have set the Purchase Price to reflect this(RentalperAnum/GrossReturn=PurchasePrice).  
• The GrossReturn I have as the RentalperAnum/PurchasePrice that was giving a GrossReturn of 7.14%.
• The 8 year lease from 16 June 2015 to Akzo Nobel, 2 options for the Tenant to renew the lease for further terms of 5 years each is indicated in red.

TABLE.3 - A look at rental income and increases, Purchase and Mgmt Fees

Year	YearX	Rental per anum	GrossReturn	Value-PurchasePrice	Mgmt Fees$	MGMT % of Rental Income
2016	year1	$760,725	7.14%	$10,660,000	$20,700	2.7%
2017	year2	$787,351	7.14%	$11,033,100	$31,050	3.9%
2018	year3	$814,908	7.14%	$11,419,259	$41,400	5.1%
2019	year4	$843,430	7.14%	$11,818,933	$42,642	5.1%
2020	year5	$872,950	7.14%	$12,232,595	$43,921	5.0%
2021	year6	$903,503	7.14%	$12,660,736	$45,239	5.0%
2022	year7	$935,126	7.14%	$13,103,862	$46,596	5.0%
2023	year8	$967,855	7.14%	$13,562,497	$47,994	5.0%
2024	year9	$1,001,730	7.14%	$14,037,184	$49,434	4.9%
2025	year10	$1,036,791	7.14%	$14,528,486	$50,917	4.9%
2026	year11	$1,073,078	7.14%	$15,036,983	$52,444	4.9%
2027	year12	$1,110,636	7.14%	$15,563,277	$54,018	4.9%
2028	year13	$1,149,508	7.14%	$16,107,992	$55,638	4.8%
2029	year14	$1,189,741	7.14%	$16,671,772	$57,307	4.8%
2030	year15	$1,231,382	7.14%	$17,255,284	$59,027	4.8%
2031	year16	$1,274,480	7.14%	$17,859,219	$60,797	4.8%
2032	year17	$1,319,087	7.14%	$18,484,291	$62,621	4.7%
2033	year18	$1,365,255	7.14%	$19,131,241	$64,500	4.7%
2034	year19	$1,413,039	7.14%	$19,800,835	$66,435	4.7%

NOTE: The lease provides for annual growth with rent reviews to the greater of CPI (Brisbane) or 3.5% p.a from the previous year’s rental for the first 8 year term of the lease. I have just used 3.5% for this model.

Based on these assumptions,in Table.3, what can I say? The management fee does not seem that expensive at 5.1% max for any of the years. This compares with 7.5%/9.5% for residential property management that I am aware of. Or is it only right that the management fee is less because the rental fee is much greater than residential property?   

In order to get to a purchase price to be at least break even arrives in year 5, with a potential purchase/sale price of $12,232,595, which would mean an investor gets their money back and would have had the yearly returns. But wait there would be sale fees with this $12,232,595 so it might need to be a bit higher. 

If you take the potential purchase price of $19,800,835 in year 19 this would give a 186% increase on the purchase price of $10,660,000 but only 164% on the purchase price(plus setup fees) of $12,117,720. So for any investor that put $50K in they would stand to receive $92,874(186%) or  $81,701(163%). I believe the latter to be the more realistic in this forecast. Of this profit, one would also incur capital gains tax, the manager would be entitled 1% of the sale price, commission for the sale at 2%, other legal fees and or bank fees. So it seems with this simple model, any profits might be eaten away. But is this the norm? These fees would exist with other similar investments? Its worth adding that this model would have been interest only the entire time, not sure if that is possible, but in theory you would still be getting your ~7% return per year(but this would obviously depend on interest rates).

If however the mortgage was paid off, and some of that ~7% return per year was forfeited, then one could make $146,672($19,800,835/135)(293%) on their initial $50K invested. One would still have to deduct the necessary fees/expenses from this as above. I'm not sure if that is a good rate of return over 19 years?

NOTE: This model is very simplistic and is really just to create the discussion. 

In the below Table.4 we look at the setup fees. 

TABLE.4 - A look at the setup fees 

In addition to stamp duty of A$593,475 payable on the purchase of the property, the issue expenses are comprised of:	Price	Comment
Legal – property (Australia)	$60,000
Legal - capital raising	$82,800*
Statutory Supervisor	$5,175*
Accountancy	$5,175*
Audit	$15,500
Printing and advertising	$90,045*
Valuation	$6,365
Property Inspections	$4,900
Bank Fee	$13,500
Depreciation Report	$4,290
FMA Exemption Application Fee	$7,245*
Offeror’s Fee	$414,000
Brokerage on equity raised	$155,250
Total	$864,245
Offeror’s Fee% of Building Purchase price	3.88%	=(414,000/10,660,000)
Purchase Price	$10,660,000
Stamp duty	$593,475
Fees	$12,117,720

* These amounts will be invoiced to the LLP in New Zealand dollars. They have been converted to Australian dollars at an NZD/AUD exchange rate of 0.90 so that the above amounts can be presented in one currency.

In Table.4 we look at the actual fees for setting up the syndicate. One could argue that these fees are just plucked out of the air but one has to take them at face value, and it is audited so that should give some assurance. One fee that I've heard complaints on before is the Offeror's fee. Here it stands at $414K(3.88% of the purchase price). On the one hand this fee would be deserved in that the building was found and everything was setup to give investors the opportunity to invest. On the other hand, one might feel that it is creaming it a bit as the Offeror gets this fee and then also gets the management fee for management of the building. It seems like they are onto a good thing. They get paid to set it up, they get paid to run it and they get paid when it is disbanded/sold. They are winning all the way. Maybe this is the same with other investments? There is some risk for the Offeror in that they might not sell all interests and they will have to pay the balance. However you look at it, it may seem very favourable for the Offeror.  

Exit Strategies

Here I would like to do some analysis on when would be a good time to exit using NPV. Considering I am a novice with NPV I will put this in the appendix so if your could refer to Table.6 in the Appendix. I would also like to do some ROI return on Investment) analysis, but for now I will put this on my to do list. 

Below in Table.5 we look at the possible repayment options alongside the yearly rental income. Here I want to get an idea of how much the interest rates can rise before the rental per annum will not cover the interest only repayments. For instance in year 1 the rental per annum will be ~760K so the interest can afford to go up to 11.5%+. This is not what you would want obviously but it is good to know these limits. Having said that there is a covenant that net rental income be at a level not less than 2.50 times the actual interest cost, so interest rates would not be allowed to raise that much without factoring this in(I somewhat address this with some basic analysis in the Appendix, see Table.7).From an investor point of view, one would hope that there was enough money to get some return, and pay off some of the principal. Obviously this is more achievable if interest rates stay low but becomes more difficult as rates go higher. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. 

TABLE. 5 - A look at the possible repayment options alongside the yearly rental income:

		3.5% Increase			Interest only yearly payments	P&I Yearly repayments
Year	Years	Rental per anum		Rate	5,400,000	5,400,000
2016	year1	$760,725		2.5%	$135,000	$343,377.07
2017	year2	$787,351		3.0%	$162,000	$359,379.24
2018	year3	$814,908		3.5%	$189,000	$375,813.90
2019	year4	$843,430		4.0%	$216,000	$392,675.25
2020	year5	$872,950		4.5%	$243,000	$409,956.80
2021	year6	$903,503		5%	$270,000	$427,651.32
2022	year7	$935,126		5.5%	$297,000	$445,750.98
2023	year8	$967,855		6.0%	$324,000	$464,247.33
2024	year9	$1,001,730		6.5%	$351,000	$483,131.39
2025	year10	$1,036,791		7.0%	$378,000	$502,393.71
2026	year11	$1,073,078		7.5%	$405,000	$522,024.39
2027	year12	$1,110,636		8.0%	$432,000	$542,013.16
2028	year13	$1,149,508		8.5%	$459,000	$562,349.46
2029	year14	$1,189,741		9.0%	$486,000	$583,022.42
2030	year15	$1,231,382		9.5%	$513,000	$604,021.01
2031	year16	$1,274,480		10.0%	$540,000	$625,334.03
2032	year17	$1,319,087		10.5%	$567,000	$646,950.17
2033	year18	$1,365,255		11.0%	$594,000	$668,858.08
2034	year19	$1,413,039		11.5%	$621,000	$691,046.40

NOTE: I have another table that looks at how the covenant that net rental income be at a level not less than 2.50 times the actual interest cost.See Table.7 in the Appendix

Pros/Cons

Here are some pros and cons as I see it and some possible mitigation's.

Pros: 

• Opportunity to invest in commercial property that you would not normally have(some would say the high fees would cancel this out)
• Good source of income at ~6/7+% return (will be interesting to see how long these high rates can last) 
• Diversification 
• Other

Cons:

• Liquidation (maybe very hard to find buyers in secondary market to sell your interests. This could be mitigated be being strict and not wanting/needing to liquidate it in future, or at least to do it in the very long-term)
• Fees (Fees seem very high. It would to compare these with likewise products offered from other offerrors.) 
• Exchange Rate (Because this is offered in New Zealand, and the building is in Australia, this would present some exchange rate risk)
• In this particular case - single Tenant (but that is probably the nature of the building)
• Other

Tax 

As taken from the investment statement, Income tax will be paid in Australia on the LLP’s taxable income

at a 30% tax rate prior to any distributions. There may be more tax to pay on this depending on your tax rates in New Zealand. 

What if/Start with the end in mind  

Here I would like to do an example here of a possible outcome, and maybe compare it with other options, e.g. deposit, shares, residential. And do some more analysis using NPV and IRR. Again this will go on the to do list. For now I have done some brief analysis in the appendix, see Table.6

Authors Comment: It would be good if anyone could offer advice in this area, and examples would be even more appreciated!!

Links to files

Link to Investment Statement

Link to Valuation

Link to Excel File of Tables Used in This Report

Corrections: Please let me know of any corrections or anything I have missed, or anything I could add in the comments below.

A Note on Augusta

Augusta Capital Limited is the main company that own properties of its own. It also has a  subsidiary Augusta Funds Management Limited, which offers the syndications and also property manages these

There are other similar companies that do these types of offerings, e.g. Oyster, and more can be found here.

Summary

It seems this investment does have high fees, although maybe this is the norm for these types of investments. The author would like to compare the fees of this offerror with that of another offerer. The outcome of this investment will be highly dependent on interest rates. The longer they remain low the more likely this investment is to do well although there are other factors at play. This investment type does offer some cash flow for the investor(interests paid monthly), and might be of value to investors looking for this type of investment. I am not  overly enamoured with this type of investment, in some ways it just sounds to good to be true. But as with all investments I feel this could form part of an investment portfolio, I would only let it represent a small portion of that portfolio because of some of the issues I have outlined in this report. The proof really will be in the pudding!!

Appendix 

Below in Table.6, I take a look at some NPV analysis. This is an NPV of 50K invested with a 3K(6%) return per year, at a rate of 3.5%. Assuming that the numbers work out something like this then this is a good model to give an indication if it is a good investment.

I do not have a full grasp of how to use NPV yet, but if my understanding is correct, as the rate increases from 3.5% it pushes the year out for when It might be a good investment, but if the rate reduces it brings the year forward. For instance, at 3.5% it is a good investment in year19 when you get your original 50K back, at 0.25% it is a good investment in year18 before your 50K back, at 7.5% it is considered a good investment if I receive 90K back instead of 50K.

The theory is that if the NPV is greater than 0 then it is a good investment else it is not. Obviously that is the theory but it is very hard to apply it as obviously interest rates will fluctuate 

TABLE.6 - An NPV analysis on when/whether it is a good investment

Year	-$50,000	NPV	NPV formula used	NPV	NPV formula used	NPV	NPV formula used
Year1	$3,000	-$45,508.65		-$46,890.26		-$43,915.63
Year2	$3,000	-$42,802.82	E.G. NPV(3.5%,$B$1:$B3)	-$43,912.64	E.G. NPV(0.25%,$B$1:$B3)	-$41,500.75	E.G. NPV(7.5%,$B$1:$B3)
Year3	$3,000	-$40,188.49		-$40,942.46		-$39,254.35
Year4	$3,000	-$37,662.57		-$37,979.68		-$37,164.67
Year5	$3,000	-$35,222.07		-$35,024.29		-$35,220.79
Year6	$3,000	-$32,864.10		-$32,076.27		-$33,412.52
Year7	$3,000	-$30,585.86		-$29,135.60		-$31,730.41
Year8	$3,000	-$28,384.67		-$26,202.26		-$30,165.66
Year9	$3,000	-$26,257.91		-$23,276.24		-$28,710.08
Year10	$3,000	-$24,203.08		-$20,357.51		-$27,356.05
Year11	$3,000	-$22,217.73		-$17,446.07		-$26,096.49
Year12	$3,000	-$20,299.51		-$14,541.88		-$24,924.80
Year13	$3,000	-$18,446.17		-$11,644.94		-$23,834.86
Year14	$3,000	-$16,655.50		-$8,755.22		-$22,820.97
Year15	$3,000	-$14,925.38		-$5,872.71		-$21,877.81
Year16	$3,000	-$13,253.77		-$2,997.39		-$21,000.45
Year17	$3,000	-$11,638.68		-$129.23		-$20,184.30
Year18	$3,000	-$10,078.22		$2,731.77		-$19,425.09
Year19	$50,000	$15,050.08	NPV(3.5%,$B$1:$B20)	$50,296.21	NPV(0.25%,$B$1:$B20)	-$7,654.43	NPV(7.5%,$B$1:$B20)

TABLE.7 - A look at how the Interest payment against the rental income to see how it will achieve the covenant  that net rental income be at a level not less than 2.50 times the actual interest cost.

	Rate	3.5%	4.0%	4.5%	5%	5.5%	6.0%	6.5%	7.0%	7.5%	8.0%	8.5%	9.0%	9.5%	10.0%
Year	Rent/InterestPayment	$189,000	$216,000	$243,000	$270,000	$297,000	$324,000	$351,000	$378,000	$405,000	$432,000	$459,000	$486,000	$513,000	$540,000
year1	$760,725	4.03	3.52	3.13	2.82	2.56	2.35	2.17	2.01	1.88	1.76	1.66	1.57	1.48	1.41
year2	$787,351	4.17	3.65	3.24	2.92	2.65	2.43	2.24	2.08	1.94	1.82	1.72	1.62	1.53	1.46
year3	$814,908	4.31	3.77	3.35	3.02	2.74	2.52	2.32	2.16	2.01	1.89	1.78	1.68	1.59	1.51
year4	$843,430	4.46	3.90	3.47	3.12	2.84	2.60	2.40	2.23	2.08	1.95	1.84	1.74	1.64	1.56
year5	$872,950	4.62	4.04	3.59	3.23	2.94	2.69	2.49	2.31	2.16	2.02	1.90	1.80	1.70	1.62
year6	$903,503	4.78	4.18	3.72	3.35	3.04	2.79	2.57	2.39	2.23	2.09	1.97	1.86	1.76	1.67
year7	$935,126	4.95	4.33	3.85	3.46	3.15	2.89	2.66	2.47	2.31	2.16	2.04	1.92	1.82	1.73
year8	$967,855	5.12	4.48	3.98	3.58	3.26	2.99	2.76	2.56	2.39	2.24	2.11	1.99	1.89	1.79
year9	$1,001,730	5.30	4.64	4.12	3.71	3.37	3.09	2.85	2.65	2.47	2.32	2.18	2.06	1.95	1.86
year10	$1,036,791	5.49	4.80	4.27	3.84	3.49	3.20	2.95	2.74	2.56	2.40	2.26	2.13	2.02	1.92
year11	$1,073,078	5.68	4.97	4.42	3.97	3.61	3.31	3.06	2.84	2.65	2.48	2.34	2.21	2.09	1.99
year12	$1,110,636	5.88	5.14	4.57	4.11	3.74	3.43	3.16	2.94	2.74	2.57	2.42	2.29	2.16	2.06
year13	$1,149,508	6.08	5.32	4.73	4.26	3.87	3.55	3.27	3.04	2.84	2.66	2.50	2.37	2.24	2.13
year14	$1,189,741	6.29	5.51	4.90	4.41	4.01	3.67	3.39	3.15	2.94	2.75	2.59	2.45	2.32	2.20
year15	$1,231,382	6.52	5.70	5.07	4.56	4.15	3.80	3.51	3.26	3.04	2.85	2.68	2.53	2.40	2.28
year16	$1,274,480	6.74	5.90	5.24	4.72	4.29	3.93	3.63	3.37	3.15	2.95	2.78	2.62	2.48	2.36
year17	$1,319,087	6.98	6.11	5.43	4.89	4.44	4.07	3.76	3.49	3.26	3.05	2.87	2.71	2.57	2.44
year18	$1,365,255	7.22	6.32	5.62	5.06	4.60	4.21	3.89	3.61	3.37	3.16	2.97	2.81	2.66	2.53
year19	$1,413,039	7.48	6.54	5.81	5.23	4.76	4.36	4.03	3.74	3.49	3.27	3.08	2.91	2.75	2.62

In Table.7 you can see that with a rental of ~$760K, in the first year, the interest rate can afford to go up to 5.5% before it gets close to the 2.50 times the actual interest cost.

In year 8, with a rental income of ~$967K, interest rates can afford to go up to 7% before it gets close to the 2.50 times the actual interest cost.

In year 19, with a rental income of ~$1.413million, interest rates can afford to go up to 10% before it gets close to the 2.50 times the actual interest cost.

To sum this up, the rental rate increase, in some way protects the investment from the possible scenario of interest rate rises. This stresses how critical low interest rates are to making this a more successful investment. Indeed, if interest rates remain low, this investment could be very good indeed. If interest rates remain low and the rent keeps going up, surely this is of great benefit to the investment. But this is just one way it can go!!  

Links 

Here are some links I have used in this research: 

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?8743-Supermarket-investment-via-bayleys&highlight=Augusta

- Some commentary on Augusta

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?9880-Goodman-Property-Trust&p=495915&viewfull=1#post495915 

- this post in particular (also search for Augusta in the rest of the forum)

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?2157-MGP-ING-CHP-PFI-KIP-APT-Property-Trusts&p=370165&viewfull=1#post370165 

- not much here although this particular post hints at unfavourable behaviour by Augusta(i think)

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?9717-August-capital-limited&highlight=Augusta 

- August-capital-limited - this is not favourable on Augusta but no clear evidence why 

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?4543-Augusta-(AUG)-Was-Kermadec-Property-(KPT)&highlight=Augusta

- Augusta (AUG) - Was Kermadec Property (KPT)

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10587963

- Kermadec Related - Shareholder attacks Kermadec decisions

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10575349

- Brian Gaynor: Property syndicates not for faint of heart

- Google search this for more "Brian Gaynor's opinion on property syndicates"

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10576746

- Mark Francis: Property syndicates let investors choose - A Reply to Brian Gaynor

http://www.propertytalk.com/forum/showthread.php?35970-Augusta-s-offer-of-Telecom-House&highlight=augusta

- Augusta's offer of Telecom House 

http://www.propertytalk.com/forum/showthread.php?35970-Augusta-s-offer-of-Telecom-House&p=343649#post343649

- this particular comment does not paint a nice picture of these types of investments 

http://www.duganotherhole.com/?p=1236

- $2 MILLION TO PUT TOGETHER A SYNDICATE - high offerers fee

http://www.interest.co.nz/property/71215/augusta-launches-king-sized-syndicate-princely-fees-match/

- Augusta launches a king sized syndicate with princely fees to match

http://www.interest.co.nz/property/53894/serious-fraud-office-financial-markets-authority-investigate-proportionate-ownership-

- Serious Fraud Office, Financial Markets Authority investigate proportionate ownership schemes as investors look for secure property investments (need to read)

http://www.propertytalk.com/forum/showthread.php?38530-New-to-PI&p=376657#post376657

- Augusta or Oyster being recommended here

http://www.nbr.co.nz/tags/augusta-capital

- some articles on Augusta can be found here

http://www.rateinflation.com/consumer-price-index/australia-historical-cpi

- see here for the consumer price index  for Australia and inflation to see how much the rent might increase by.