This evening, news from credible sources that NAMA has told sold Findlater House for just over €6m, 33% more than the guide price. The property was being marketed by estate agents BNP Paribas. It was previously owned by the Chicago Spire’s, Garret Kelleher’s Shelbourne Developments. It is presently part-let generating €420,000 per annum, indicating a 14% yield on a fully-let basis. The present tenants, the Office of Public Works, the private sector English Academy and the Living Room Bar are together paying €420,000 in rent with tenancies due to expire between 2014 and 2022. About 28,000sq ft of the 56,000 sq ft are let. We do not yet know the buyer.
Separately, it seems that the former Quinn Insurance building on Lower O’Connell Street has today gone “sale agreed”. It was being marketed by CB Richard Ellis. No further details of the sale at present.
NAMA Wine Lake 
On the face of it, an excellent result for NAMA – but based on what criteria?
NAMA obtains a price that is 33% more than the guide valuation, but it is from a property that with a little expertise, a small amount of capital, some work and marketing, a 14% return will be achieved.
So, did NAMA deliver a good deal for the Irish taxpayer?
With the structure and culture that exists at the Agency, it achieved the best that it could. All it can do within its current ethos is to sell. It shares no trust with its borrowers, therefore there is no real shared commercial platform with its borrowers that would allow NAMA to retain property, enhance it and obtain the 14% annual return plus the redevelopment upside that whoever has bought this asset will achieve. That is the taxpayers’ loss and NAMA’s shame.
Most borrowers have decided that NAMA may have their past, but they will not have their future – whether that eventually means bankruptcy or just a new “skin”. That the thinking exists demonstrates NAMA’s lack of commercial intelligence and failure of communication skills. NAMA utilises two different executives to interface with their borrowers. One is termed the “portfolio manager” the other is called the “asset recovery manager”. If you ask NAMA to define the titles you won’t get a straight answer, or indeed any answer, but there is nothing new in that – it is just indicative of the failure in communication and the undercurrent of mistrust and suspicion that has built the barrier that separates it from its borrowers.
If NAMA’s was working, it should have taken full advantage of the upside opportunity presented by Findlater House. It reflects very badly on the Agency that it could not do this and had to sell. It had to sell because it has no collaborative relationship with its borrowers based on mutual respect. Garret Kelleher (the borrower) was the obvious ally for them here in order to maximise the returns. NAMA’s relationship skills ensured that it would never happen….. with a consequent further cost to the taxpayer.
Shame on them.
(Just FYI, the portfolio managers liaise with borrowers on their overall portfolios, the assert recovery managers are more sinister and seek to seize any assets that borrowers may have that are unencumbered and outside NAMA’s security.)
What’s the betting that it is the Office of Public Works that has the 2022 lease (Upward Only of course)….and they,re probably not even there….all down in their lovely new facility in Trim…bussed to it every day!
@MP, You would lose the bet. The OPW’s lease has expired. They are there on a month to month basis.
@WSTT it’s a bit sweating the bricks,kinda small uninteresting too but best luck to buyer.
It’s the docklandsbig,shiny,new.Asset management or value add is quite complex and rather difficult to scale.
Bigger question is what clown at BNP did the valuation and why NAMA agreed to list it at that,a cunning plan to garner interest or a group of idiots who haven’t a clue!