Americold Realty Trust Announces Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2019 Results

Americold Realty Trust (NYSE: COLD) (the "Company"), the worlds largest publicly traded REIT focused on the ownership, operation, acquisition and development of temperature-controlled warehouses, today announced financial and operating results for the fourth quarter and year ended December 31, 2019.

Fred Boehler, President and Chief Executive Officer of Americold Realty Trust, stated, "Our full year 2019 results reflect the continued execution of our strategy to drive long-term cash flow growth and shareholder value. We did this in three ways: by organically growing our core business, by completing and integrating strategic acquisitions, and by developing advanced temperature-controlled warehouses. We drove organic growth in our same store portfolio and realized total revenue growth and NOI growth of 3.5% and 5.1%, respectively, on a constant currency basis by leveraging the Americold Operating System. We completed $1.4 billion of strategic acquisitions during 2019 and delivered advanced temperature-controlled expansions in Chicago, Chesapeake and North Little Rock, while making significant progress at our ongoing development projects in Savannah and Atlanta. Through these actions, we grew the portfolio by 17% in 2019, to over one billion refrigerated cubic feet, while maintaining a low leveraged, flexible balance sheet. We also earned industry-leading recognition for the energy efficiency of our portfolio."

Mr. Boehler continued, "We are off to a strong start in 2020, having completed our previously announced platform acquisition of Nova Cold in Canada, and enhanced our market position in the upper midwest through the acquisition of Newport Cold Storage. We are excited to announce two additional growth projects including our customer driven expansion in Auckland, NZ and our investment in SuperFrio, a leading temperature-controlled operator in Brazil, via a strategic joint venture with Patria. These investments, combined with the Americold operating platform will enhance our ability to serve our customers, drive stable cash flow growth, and create long term value for our shareholders."

Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2019 Highlights

• Total revenue increased 16.9% to $486.0 million for the fourth quarter 2019; Total revenue increased 11.2% to $1.78 billion for the full year 2019.
• Total NOI increased 26.8% to $137.8 million for the fourth quarter 2019; Total NOI increased 17.9% to $478.3 million for the full year 2019.
• Core EBITDA increased 28.8% to $109.1 million, or 29.6% on a constant currency basis, for the fourth quarter 2019; Core EBITDA increased 19.7% to $367.1 million, or 21.0% on a constant currency basis, for the full year 2019.
• Net income of $20.8 million, or $0.10 per diluted common share for the fourth quarter 2019; Net income of $48.2 million, or $0.26 per diluted common share for the full year 2019.
• Core FFO of $64.6 million, or $0.33 per diluted common share for the fourth quarter 2019; Core FFO of $219.7 million, or $1.19 per diluted common share for the full year 2019.
• AFFO of $59.7 million, or $0.30 per diluted common share for the fourth quarter 2019; AFFO of $214.5 million, or $1.17 per diluted common share for the full year 2019.
• Global Warehouse segment revenue increased 25.6% to $383.8 million for the fourth quarter 2019; Global Warehouse segment revenue increased 17.0% to $1.38 billion for the full year 2019.
• Global Warehouse segment NOI increased 28.9% to $129.5 million for the fourth quarter 2019; Global Warehouse segment NOI increased 19.5% to $447.6 million for the full year 2019.
• Global Warehouse segment same store revenue grew 3.4%, or 4.5% on a constant currency basis, with same store segment NOI improving 9.1%, or 10.0% on a constant currency basis for the fourth quarter 2019. Global Warehouse segment same store revenue grew 1.9%, or 3.5% on a constant currency basis, with same store segment NOI improving 3.9%, or 5.1% on a constant currency basis, in each case, for the full year 2019.
• Completed the acquisition of MHW Group on November 19, 2019 for a total purchase price $54.2 million, consisting of two facilities in Pennsylvania and Maryland.
• Announced the acquisition of Nova Cold for CAD $337 million, which subsequently closed on January 2, 2020.

Fourth Quarter 2019 Total Company Financial Results

Total revenue for the fourth quarter of 2019 was $486.0 million, a 16.9% increase from the same quarter of the prior year. This growth was driven by the incremental revenue from the 2019 acquisitions, contractual rate escalations and growth in fixed commitment storage contracts. Additionally, the launch of the Chicago expansion and the stabilization of the Middleboro, MA facility also contributed to this growth. These factors were partially offset by the translation impact of the strengthening US dollar.

For the fourth quarter of 2019, the Company reported net income of $20.8 million, or $0.10 per diluted share, compared to $2.7 million for the same quarter of the prior year.

Total NOI for the fourth quarter of 2019 was $137.8 million, an increase of 26.8% from the same quarter of the prior year.

Core EBITDA was $109.1 million for the fourth quarter of 2019, compared to $84.7 million for the same quarter of the prior year. This reflects a 28.8% increase over prior year, or 29.6% on a constant currency basis, largely impacted by increased Core EBITDA from acquisitions and organic growth. Core EBITDA margin increased by 208 basis points to 22.4%. This growth and margin improvement was driven by the previously discussed items combined with disciplined cost controls through the Americold Operating System of power and facility related costs, partially offset by the translation impact of the strengthening US dollar, and startup costs related to the Chicago development project.

For the fourth quarter of 2019, Core FFO was $64.6 million, or $0.33 per diluted share, compared to $53.2 million for same quarter of the prior year. The year-over-year increase is driven primarily by increased FFO as a result of acquisitions.

For the fourth quarter of 2019, AFFO was $59.7 million, or $0.30 per diluted share, compared to $49.3 million for same quarter of the prior year. AFFO excludes certain expenses and income items that do not represent core expenses and income streams.

Please see the Companys supplemental financial information for the definitions and reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures.

Florida poll tax for ex-felons struck down in court

Florida voters approved a measure restoring voting rights to former felons in 2018, but the GOP legislature attempted to undermine it by imposing an unconstitutional poll tax. The Florida Supreme Court upheld this poll tax, but a federal appeals court just intervened with an injunction.   This isn’t the first victory for voting rights in court this year, though.   In Arizona, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared that Republicans’ efforts to commit voter suppression was motivated by racism. According to Slate, “The court invalidated a law that was plainly designed to stop Native American, Hispanic, and black voters from casting a ballot -- not just because it happened to burden minorities more than whites, but because it is flat-out racist.”   We can continue this series of wins, but we need EVERY Democrat to do this. We’re up against the entire GOP-led, dark money-funded voter suppression machine -- we need to know now.         Thank you for your response, WDTO Team

Paid for by When Democrats Turn Out PAC PO Box 15320 Washington, DC 20003

A progressive majority

Right now, all eyes are on the presidential election. Public attention is at the top of the ballot, especially as the critical Super Tuesday contests get closer.

But underneath that is another major priority: A progressive in the White House must have a progressive majority in Congress to pass Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, end mass incarceration, and build an economy that works for all.

Courage to Change, Alexandria’s new PAC, is building that progressive majority in Congress. Today, we announced our first slate of endorsed candidates. Can we count on your donation to that progressive slate?

Donate $15

Alexandria spoke to each and every one of these candidates and personally signed off on this endorsement. Their progressive ideas and community spirit are exactly what Congress needs in this era.

If we’re going to win the fight for racial, social, economic, and environmental justice, Alexandria can’t be standing alone. We need a full progressive majority in the House to fight for the working people of this country.

But electing these new endorsees will mean we have to overcome an entrenched political system. Can you make a donation of whatever you can spare to bolster their progressive movements today?

Across the country, down-ballot progressives are mired in a fight for the soul of our democracy. We need to have their backs.

Thanks for taking action today,

Team AOC

Donate $15

 

Donate

Paid for by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for Congress

To contribute via check, please address to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for Congress, PO Box 680080, Corona, NY 11368.

Email us: us@ocasiocortez.com

NPR vs. Bernie Sanders... 'Our' Protests & 'Theirs'... Environmental Justice....

Weekly Alert: February 21, 2020 Here are the stories FAIR has been working on this week. Please help us spread the word by forwarding this email to friends and by sharing our stories on social media like Facebook and Twitter.   Cop-Hating Vandals or Pro-Democracy Activists? Factchecking NPR’s Attempted Takedown of Bernie Sanders This week's episode of FAIR's radio show CounterSpin: Paul Paz y Miño, Saqib Bhatti & Beverly Bell on Environmental Justice & Cross-National Solidarity Latest CounterSpin Transcripts: 'What Does Criminalizing People Get Us, and What Does It Get Them?' 'Corporate Media Are Not Observers of the Electoral Process; They Are Participants' FAIR’s ad-free, content-rich site is supported by contributions from our loyal band of media activists. Please donate today! FAIR's Website     FAIR/Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting 124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201 New York NY 10001 USA

FOCUS: Matt Taibbi | The Bloomberg Myth Explodes on Live TV

21 February 20

---

Fundraising Is Never Pleasant, Neither Is Oligarchy

“Oligarchy (from Greek (oligarkhía); from (olígos), meaning "few," and (arkho), meaning "to rule or to command") is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, education, corporate, or military control.”

In contrast RSN is something you control through your contributions.

Think about it.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

---

Update My Monthly Donation

---

If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611

21 February 20

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

IF THE NEED FOR FUNDING WERE NOT SERIOUS WE WOULD NOT SAY SO - Funding is in fact critically lacking and the situation is now quite serious. Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

---

FOCUS: Matt Taibbi | The Bloomberg Myth Explodes on Live TV

Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone
Taibbi writes: "What a catastrophe Wednesday night was for Mike Bloomberg. The New York plutocrat was kicked in the teeth by Elizabeth Warren in the first minutes - she denounced him as a Trump-like 'arrogant billionaire' who called women 'horse-faced lesbians' - and never made it back to his feet."

The Nevada debate offered voters vital information — including the exposure of Michael Bloomberg’s reputation for “electability”

Bloomberg stood in mute fury as his $400 million campaign investment went up in smoke. His contempt for democracy and sense of entitlement surpass even Donald Trump, who at least likes crowds — Bloomberg’s joyless imperiousness makes Trump seem like Robin Williams.

That Bloomberg has been touted as a potential Democratic Party savior across the top ranks of politics and media is an extraordinary indictment of that group of people.

Some endorsements were straight cash transactions, in which politicians who owe their careers to Bloomberg’s largess repaid him with whatever compliments they could muster. How much does a man who radiates impatience with the idea of having to pretend to equal status with anyone have to spend to get someone to say something nice?

California Congressman Harley Rouda called him a “legendary businessman”: Bloomie gave her more than $4 million. New Jersey’s Mikie Sherrill got more than $2 million from Bloomberg’s Independence USA Super PAC, and in return the Navy vet said Bloomberg embodies “the integrity we need.”

Georgia’s Lucy McBath, a member of the congressional black caucus, got $4 million from Bloomberg PACs, and she endorsed him just as an audio clip was coming out of the ex-mayor talking about putting black men up “against the wall” in stop-and-frisk. News accounts of the endorsement frequently left out the financial ties.

That’s fine. If you give a politician $2 million or $4 million, it must be expected that he or she will say you approximate a human being.

But how does New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman excuse writing “Paging Michael Bloomberg”? (Well, Bloomberg philanthropies donated to Planet Word, “the museum my wife is building,” says Friedman, so there’s that.) How about Jonathan Chait at New York, who wrote, “Winning the election is starting to look hard. How about buying it instead?” Or John Ellis in The Washington Post, who declared Bloomberg the “dream candidate”?

These pundits clung to a triumvirate of delusions: Bloomberg “gets things done,” he’s more electable than a Bernie Sanders or an Elizabeth Warren because he can spend unlimited amounts, and he has the “toughness” to take on Trump.

Far from showing “toughness,” Bloomberg on Wednesday wilted under attacks from his five Democratic opponents. He was unprepared throughout and seemed to be ad-libbing the most important exchanges. When Warren asked him with how many women he’d had sign non-disclosure agreements, Bloomberg muttered:

Warren: How many is that?
Bloomberg: None of them accuse me of doing anything, other than maybe s— they didn’t like a joke I told.

The answer drew groans. Any political consultant could have told Bloomberg “they didn’t like a joke I told” would go over like a dead flounder. Either Bloomberg is a lousy campaigner who doesn’t understand the need for preparation, or he thinks he doesn’t need to prepare for live performances because he’ll just buy PR elsewhere.

Both explanations bode badly for a theoretical general-election campaign against Trump, an expert at ad-libbing cruelties and generating free media in amounts exceeding even what Bloomberg can buy. If Bloomberg can’t handle being asked by Warren how many NDAs he’s had signed, just imagine when Trump offers him a box to stand on and asks him how it feels to have to spend $4 million per friend.

Bloomberg’s entire argument for office is that he’s better than Trump, but where exactly is he better? The biggest argument against a Trump presidency involves his racial attitudes. Bloomberg’s record is worse.

His defense Wednesday of stop-and-frisk — that it was a widely used policy that got “out of control” because “too many” African Americans were stopped — showed that even after all this time, he still doesn’t get the problem, i.e., that the mass-profiling policy was fundamentally discriminatory. Trump is a crude circus nationalist, but Bloomberg’s policing policies were profoundly, intellectually racist, and he proved in Nevada that his only growth has been to recognize their political inexpediency.

Trump is worse on the environment and on guns. Bloomberg supported George Bush at the height of the Iraq War effort, and says he still doesn’t regret supporting that invasion. Bloomberg also has an awful record when it comes to Wall Street. In the debate Wednesday, he said this about 2008:

The financial crisis came about because the people that took the mortgages, packaged them, and other people bought them, those were—that’s where all the disaster was.

That’s in the ballpark of true, although Bloomberg stopped well short of denouncing the “people that took the mortgages,” by which one presumes he means banks. This is unsurprising, because when Bloomberg was not running for president as a Democrat, he ridiculed Occupy Wall Street and regularly spouted bogus Wall Street talking points deflecting blame from banks. This is what he said in November 2011:

It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp. 

Bloomberg then went on to say it was “entertaining” and “cathartic” for Occupy Protesters to “vilify” banks, a “let them eat cake” take on the financial crisis.

It would be impossible to find someone less believable as a reformer of Wall Street and an opponent of wealth inequality. Even Hillary Clinton was less of a guaranteed disaster on this issue. A vote for Bloomberg — a billionaire ex-Republican media executive, for God’s sake — would mean conceding the populist argument to Republicans again.

Trump has clear authoritarian tendencies and has wrapped his hands around autocrats, but for all the fretting about him perhaps not leaving office in 2020 if voted out, it’s Bloomberg who has already tossed term limits aside, and it’s Bloomberg who is openly trying to buy an election. There is zero evidence he will be any less of a threat to democracy or an agent for rapacious corporate interests than Trump.

Even assuming one could cross into believing that Bloomberg is somehow less revolting or dangerous than the current president — I don’t, but let’s say — Wednesday exploded the idea that he would have a superior chance at beating him than Sanders or a conventional, non-plutocrat politician like Warren or Pete Buttigieg. Bloomberg was a total zero charisma-wise, had trouble thinking on his feet, and failed to find even one issue where he sounded confident and convincing. His only distinguishing characteristic is his money, and fuck his money.

One revealing moment in the debate came at the end, when Chuck Todd asked all the candidates, “Should the person with the most delegates at the end of this primary season be the nominee?”

Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Warren, Joe Biden, and Amy Klobuchar all punted this question, deferring variously to the “rules” or the “process.” Only Sanders said, “The people should prevail.” This makes the endgame clear: All five non-Sanders candidates are placing hopes for the nomination in a backroom convention horse trade.

While the establishment Democrats like Warren and Buttigieg beat up on Bloomberg onstage last night, treating him like the interloper he is, the major question is, would they do the same in the privacy of that smoke-filled room this summer?

That’s the question that should have everyone worried. Sanders could lose, but a vote for Bloomberg would be a complete surrender to cynicism, and would probably fail besides. If that’s the plan, God help us.

READ MORE

---

Contribute to RSN 

Update My Monthly Donation