Results for the First Quarter Ended 31 March 2011

DisclaimerThis Presentation is focused on comparing results for the three months ended 31 March 2011 versus results achieved in the three months ended 31 March 2010 and versus results achieved in the previous quarter ended 31 December 2010. This shall be read in conjunction with Mapletree Logistics Trust’s financial results for the three months ended 31 March 2011 in the SGXNET announcement.

This release may contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Actual future performance, outcomes and results may differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements as a result of a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Representative examples of these factors include (without limitation) general industry and economic conditions, interest rate trends, cost of capital and capital availability, competition from similar developments, shifts in expected levels of property rental income, changes in operating expenses, including employee wages, benefits and training, property expenses and governmental and public policy changes and the continued availability of financing in the amounts and the terms necessary to support future business. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward looking statements, which are based on current view of management on future events.

2

Agenda

Key Highlights

Capital Management

Resilient Portfolio

Outlook

Summary

Appendix

3

Key Highlights

Stable and positive 1Q 2011 results Amount Distributable increased by about 22% to S$37.5 million for 1Q 2011 Improvement in results attributed to contribution from acquisitions completed

in last 2 quarters DPU for 1Q 2011 grew to 1.55 cents from 1.50 cents in 1Q 2010

Overall occupancy rate improved marginally High occupancy rate of 98.3%; contributed by the increase in Singapore and

Hong Kong

No balance sheet risk Comfortable gearing ratio of 39.4% as at 31 Mar 2011 Interest cover ratio increased to 6.7x as at 31 Mar 2011 Debt maturity profile improved with extension of HKD loans – 2012 debt

tower reduced to 33% from 53%

Key Highlights

5

Key Highlights (cont’d) Yield + Growth strategy

Continued focus on yield optimisation and proactive portfolio management

Growth through acquisition pipeline in Singapore and rest of Asia

Disciplined approach in respect to acquisitions

2 accretive acquisitions in 1Q2011 at initial NPI yield of 7% - 8%

Greenfield pipeline from Sponsor approximately S$300 million completed or nearly completion; MapletreeLog has right of first refusal.

Portfolio rejuvenation initiatives

On-going effort to evaluate and identify properties for rejuvenation potential create additional value and improve marketability

Asset enhancement initiatives:

Multi-Q Centre: S$4 mil to add 3-storey warehouse; increase GFA by 4,100 sqm

Divestment of two Singapore assets; proceeds to fund acquisition of Jian Huang Building recycle capital for organic growth

Exploring potential redevelopment of existing asset to unlock value

6

Statement of Total Return – 1Q 2010 vs 1Q 2011

7

In S$ thousands 1Q 2010 1Q 2011 Variance

Gross Revenue 51,406 62,244 21%

Property Expenses (5,632) (7,571) 34%

Net Property Income (“NPI”) 45,774 54,673 19%

Amount Distributable 30,840 37,536 22%

Available DPU 1.50 1.55 3%

Property Expenses to Gross Revenue Ratio

11% 12% 1%

NPI to Gross Revenue Ratio 89% 88% 1%

Amount Distributable to Gross Revenue Ratio

60% 60% 0%

Statement of Total Return – 4Q 2010 vs 1Q 2011

8

In S$ thousands 4Q 2010 1Q 2011 Variance

Gross Revenue 61,006 62,244 2%

Property Expenses (7,164) (7,571) 6%

Net Property Income (“NPI”) 53,842 54,673 2%

Amount Distributable 36,844 37,536 2%

Available DPU 1.55 1.55 0%

Property Expenses to Gross Revenue Ratio

12% 12% 0%

NPI to Gross Revenue Ratio 88% 88% 0%

Amount Distributable to Gross Revenue Ratio

60% 60% 0%

Scorecard Since IPO (Amount Distributable)

1: Period for 3Q 2005 is from 28 Jul 2005 (Listing Date) to 30 Sep 20052: Decline in portfolio asset value is due to currency movements3: Excludes the one-time consideration from Prima Limited to extend the leases and licenses with them at 201 Keppel Road by 8 years. For details, please see SGXNET announcement dated 31 December 2009. Including this, amount distributable is S$31.8 million for 4Q 2009 and S$ 117.9 million for FY 2009.

9

2011Asset Value

(S$)422m 462m 715m 1.0b 1.1b 1.4b 1.5b 2.1b 2.4b 2.4b 2.5b 2.5b 2.7b 2.9b 3.0b 2.9b2 2.9b 2.9b 3.0b 3.0b 3.4b 3.5b 3.6b

Lettable Area (mil sqm)

0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.5

20102005 2006 2007 2008 2009

1518

2428

3641

49

58 61

70 7276 79 81 81 81 81 82

84 86 91 96 98

4.36.0

8.3 9.6 10.7 11.815.3

17.719.1 19.7 21.0

22.6

25.428.3 28.6 28.7 28.8

29.53

30.8 30.9 31.5

36.9 37.5

0.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

32.0

36.0

40.0

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

3Q05 4Q05 1Q06 2Q06 3Q06 4Q06 1Q07 2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3Q09 4Q09 1Q10 2Q10 3Q10 4Q10 1Q11

Am

ou

nt D

istrib

uta

ble

(S$

m)

Nu

mb

er

of

pro

pe

rtie

s

1

FY06 Amt Dist = S$40.4m FY07 Amt Dist = S$71.8m FY08 Amt Dist = S$97.4m FY09 Amt Dist = S$115.5m FY10 Amt Dist = S$130.1m

31.8

CAGR = 48%

FY 11

Scorecard Since IPO (DPU)

1: Period for 3Q 2005 is from 28 Jul 2005 (Listing Date) to 30 Sep 20052: Drop in DPU in 4Q 2008 is due to increase in number of units following the 3 for 4 rights issue in August 2008 which increased the number of units from 1,108 million to 1,939 million3: Decline in portfolio asset value is due to currency movements4: Excludes the one-time consideration from Prima to extend the leases and licenses with them at 201 Keppel Road by 8 years. For details, please see SGXNET announcement dated 31 December 2009. Including this, DPU is 1.59 cents for 4Q 2009 and 6.02 cents for FY 2009.

10

2011Asset Value

(S$)422m 462m 715m 1.0b 1.1b 1.4b 1.5b 2.1b 2.4b 2.4b 2.5b 2.5b 2.7b 2.9b 3.0b 2.9b3 2.9b 2.9b 3.0b 3.0b 3.4b 3.5b 3.6b

Lettable Area

(mil sqm)0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.5

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

15 18 24 2836 41

4958 61

70 72 76 79 81 81 81 81 82 84

8691 96 98

0.80

1.051.10

1.19

1.32

1.45 1.481.59

1.721.78

1.902.04

1.84

1.46 1.47 1.48 1.48

1.484

1.50 1.50 1.54 1.55 1.55

0.50

0.70

0.90

1.10

1.30

1.50

1.70

1.90

2.10

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

3Q05 4Q05 1Q06 2Q06 3Q06 4Q06 1Q07 2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3Q09 4Q09 1Q10 2Q10 3Q10 4Q10 1Q11

Actu

al DP

U (cen

ts)N

um

ber

of p

rop

ertie

s

1

2

FY06 DPU = 5.06 cents FY07 DPU = 6.57 cents FY08 DPU = 7.24 cents FY09 DPU = 5.91 cents FY10 DPU = 6.09 cents

1.59

CAGR = 13%

FY11

Capital Management

Balance Sheet

12

31 Dec 2010 31 Mar 2011

Total Assets 3,614,277 3,708,621

Including Investment Properties

3,471,1821 3,575,5531

Total Liabilities2 1,539,1213 1,631,5854

Net Assets Attributable to Unitholders

2,072,775 2,073,164

NAV Per Unit S$0.855 S$0.856

Footnotes:1. Includes S$12 million investment property held-for-sale (9 Tampines St 92) classified under current

assets.2. Total liabilities increased by S$92.5 million largely due to additional JPY borrowings taken to fund the

purchase of Hiroshima. 3. Includes derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$42.1 million.4. Includes derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$35.5 million.5. Includes net derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$35.8 million. Excluding this, the

NAV per unit would be S$0.87.6. Includes net derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$24.3 million. Excluding this, the

NAV per unit would be S$0.86.

Capital Management

13

31 Mar 2010 31 Mar 2011

Aggregate Leverage Ratio 37.7% 39.4%

Total Debt S$1,354 million S$1,452 million

Weighted Average Annualised Interest Rate 1 2.2% 2.2%

Average Duration 2.2 years 2.2 years

Interest Service Ratio 2 6.0 times 6.7 times

Footnote:1. For the quarter ended.2. Ratio of EBITDA over interest expense for period up to balance sheet date.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Maturingin 2011

Maturingin 2012

Maturingin 2013

Maturingin 2014

Maturingin 2015

Maturingin 2016

Maturingin 2017

SGD HKD JPY MYR CNY KRW USD

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Maturingin 2011

Maturingin 2012

Maturingin 2013

Maturingin 2014

Maturingin 2015

Maturingin 2016

Maturingin 2017

SGD HKD JPY MYR CNY KRW USD

Debt Profile as at 31 Mar 11

Debt Amount SGD1,354 mil

Debts as at 31 Dec 10

Average Duration ~ 2.20 yearsSGD ‘mil

SGD1,452 mil

Average Duration ~ 2.22 yearsSGD ‘mil

Debts as at 31 Mar 11

SGD247mil

17%

33%

18%17%

3%

12%

SGD172mil

13%

18%

53%

3%

13%

14

Natural Hedge – Our Preferred Hedge StrategyLocal currency loans set up natural hedge against currency fluctuations

Gearing level – by country (as at 31 Mar 2011)

7%

42%

89%

45%

98%

39%

93%

58%

11%

55% 61%

2%

100%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Equity % 93% 58% 11% 55% 2% 61% 100%

Debt % 7% 42% 89% 45% 98% 39% 0%

Singapore Hong Kong Japan Malaysia China Korea Vietnam

15

SGD61%

Hedged (HKD, JPY, MYR, KRW)

28%

Unhedged 11%

FY2011

Approximately 89% of Amount Distributable Hedged for FY 2011

16

Sufficient resources to meet 2011 debt obligations

Comfortable gearing ratio of 39.4%, which is lower than our medium-term target range of 40%-50%

Healthy interest cover ratio of 6.7 times

Hedged / Fixed rate borrowings at approximately 65%

All loans are unsecured with minimal financial covenants

Credit rating of Baa2 with outlook upgraded to Positive by Moody’s in October 2010

Prudent Capital Management

17

Resilient Portfolio

Resilient Portfolio

Occupancy rate high at about 98.3% Higher occupancy rates for Singapore, China and Hong Kong

Diversification in terms of geography, customers and end-users Exposure to wide variety of stable end-users

Stability from long leases Weighted average lease term to expiry (“WALE”) maintained at about 6 years

Ample cushion from security deposits Equivalent to about 60% of FY 2011 annualized gross revenue, or average of

7.5 months coverage (Singapore only: 10.8 months)

Low arrears ratio Typically less than 1% of annualized gross revenue

19

In FY 2011, around 13.6% of leases (by NLA) are up for renewal – these are mostly in Singapore, Hong Kong, China and Malaysia

Successfully renewed/replaced 94% of NLA due in 1Q 2011Renewal/replacement at higher average rental

Successful Lease Renewals in 2011

NLA renewed/replaced in FY 2011 (in ’000 sqm)

20

Singapore Hong Kong China Malaysia Total Area1 % of 2011 renewals

Total renewable for FY 2011

164 82 36 49 331(13.6% of total portfolio)

100%

Spaces renewed/ replaced to date

41 30 23 15 109(4.5% of total portfolio)

33%

Balance spaces renewable for 2011

123 51 13 34 222(9.1% of total portfolio)

67%

1 - Excludes about 7,500 sqm of a lease renewed in 1Q 2011 that is due in 4Q 2011. If we include this, balance space renewable in 2011 is 229,000 sqm or 9.4% of portfolio NLA.

Successful Lease Renewals in FY 2011

21

% R

enew

ed t

o d

ate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

By Gross Revenue By Lettable Area

32% 33%

68% 67%

Balance to be renewed Renewed to date

High Occupancy Levels Sustained  31 Dec 10

(96 properties)31 Mar 11

(98 properties )

Weighted Average Occupancy Rate 98.0% 98.3%

22

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

1.0%

4.1%3.9%

2.8%3.0% 2.8% 2.8% 2.8%

2.5%2.2%

4.2%

3.8% 3.6%

2.9% 2.7% 2.7% 2.6% 2.6% 2.4%2.0%

96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010

98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011

Marubeni Corp

Nippon

Access

TeckWahGroup

NEC Logistics

Nichirei Kyoto

SH Cogent TL

Logicom

Menlo

Group

Toshiba

Broup

Oji Transportation

Diversified Customer Mix Portfolio Stability

Multinational logistics operators

Singapore listed groups

Private groups

23

306 customers in portfolio; no single customer accounts for >5% of total revenue

Top 10 customers ~ approx 30% of total gross revenue

Non-FTZ 3PL46.5%

Distribution Centre27.4%

Industrial Warehousing

13.6%

Food & Cold Storage

5.6%

Oil & Chemical Logistics

2.6%

FTZ 3PL4.3%

Non-FTZ 3PL44.5%

Distribution Centre25.7%

Industrial Warehousing

14.3%

Food & Cold Storage

8.5%

Oil & Chemical Logistics

2.5%

FTZ 3PL4.5%

Professional 3PLs Face Leasing StickinessGross revenue contribution by trade sector

(96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010)Gross revenue contribution by trade sector

(98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011)

24

FTZ 3PL + Non-FTZ = 50.8% FTZ 3PL + Non-FTZ = 49.0%

Inland52%

Mixture (Air/Sea/In-land)26%

Sea11%

Air11%

Exposure To Stable End-users

Gross revenue contribution by customers distribution channel1 (as at 31 Mar 2011)

Stable gross revenue contribution by end-user industry (as at 31 Mar 2011)

1: Analysis is for customers who are 3PLs and distributors

25

Consumer Durables & Staples

29%

F&B18%

Materials, Construction

& Engineering9%

Information Technology

8%

Industrials6%

Electrical & Electronics5%

Energy & Marine5%

Health Care4%

Commercial Printing4%

Utilities & Telecommunication Services

3%Chemicals

1%

Others7%

Single-user vs Multi-tenanted Buildings (By Gross Revenue)

26

Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted by gross revenue (as at 31 Mar 11)

Single-tenanted

63%

Multi-tenanted

37%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Expiring in 2011 Expiring in 2012 Expiring in 2013 Expiring in 2014 Expiring in 2015 Expiring after 2015

13.7%11.7%

5.8%8.2%

14.1%

43.8%

10.4% 10.7%7.8%

10.1%13.1%

47.2%

% o

f p

ort

foli

o N

LA

96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010

98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011

Long Leases Provide Portfolio StabilityWeighted average lease term to expiry: ~ 6 years

Lease expiry profile by NLA

27

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 > 2016

5.3%

3.8%

4.1%

7.7%

7.5%

30.9

%

3.2%

2.4%

1.0%

0.3%

0.1% 1.

3%

0.5% 1.

4%

0.1% 2.

0%

4.0%

1.2%

1.4% 2.

3%

2.2%

0.0%

0.0% 0.6%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.2%

0.3%

13.1

%

0.0% 0.4%

0.6%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.4%

0.0%

0.0% 1.

2%

0.2%

Singapore Japan Hong KongChina Malaysia South KoreaVietnam

Long Leases Provide Portfolio StabilityLease expiry profile by NLA (by country)

28

Lease expiry by year (entire portfolio)

As

% o

f to

tal

po

rtfo

lio

NL

A

10.4% 10.7% 7.8% 10.1% 13.1% 47.2%

Long Land Leases Portfolio StabilityWeighted average of unexpired lease term of underlying land: approx 47 yrs1

1: Excluding freehold land

Remaining years to expiry of underlying land lease

29

0.8%

10.5% 14.0%

30.8%

21.8%

5.5%

16.6%

0.5%

10.3%

12.2%

25.7%

21.3%

4.0%

25.9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

0 - 20 yrs 21 - 30 yrs 31 - 40 yrs 41 - 50 yrs 51 - 60 yrs > 60 yrs (excluding freehold land)

Freehold

% o

f Tot

al L

etta

ble

Are

a

96 properties as at 31 Dec 2010 98 properties as at 31 Mar 2011

Asset Rejuvenation

Proactive portfolio management to unlock values in

existing assets

Asset rejuvenation initiatives to better meet customers’

needs Retrofitting and/or enhancement add value through maximising

land use and/or structural efficiency

Redevelopment efforts unlock value through improving

prospects of properties with new, modern building specifications

or maximising plot ratio.

Disposal recycle capital to optimise yield and provide organic

growth through replacing less-performing assets for better

yielding properties

30

Outlook

Outlook & Strategy for 2011

Seizing Opportunities, Expanding Horizons

“Yield + Growth” strategy

Growth via acquisitions and development

• Actively pursue quality assets via third-party acquisitions

• Value proposition to customers: Strategic customer relationships; “Follow-the-Client”

• Sponsor continues to develop pipelines

Proactive capital management strategy

• Sustainable long term gearing levels

• Manage refinancing risks through spreading out debt maturities

• Active hedging to manage interest rate and foreign exchange fluctuations

• Optimal capital structure

Yield Optimisation on existing portfolio

• Active leasing & marketing efforts - focus on higher quality tenancies

• Manage expenses• Proactive asset

management to enhance asset value with asset enhancement and redevelopment initiatives

Global economic conditions improve but remain vulnerable to external shocks

32

Summary

In Summary Amount distributable: Approx S$38 million in 1Q 2011; around 22%

higher than in 1Q 2010

DPU for 1Q 2011 increased to 1.55 cents from 1.50 cents in 1Q 2010

Existing portfolio continue to provide stability and organic growth

Announced acquisitions in 1Q 2011 will contribute fully to revenue and DPU in 2Q 2011

Continue to focus on yield optimisation, managing occupancy and rates

Continue to seek out accretive acquisitions Experienced team with proven track record Maintain rigorous asset selection criteria Maintain financial discipline: Acquisition accretion is tested against

WACC of debt and equity for fair pricing

Proactive capital management to back growth plans

34

Q&A Session

Thank You

Appendix

Distribution Details

Distribution Time Table

Last day of trading on “cum” basis 27 April 2011, 5:00pm

Ex-date 28 April 2011, 9:00am

Books closure date 3 May 2011, 5:00pm

Distribution payment date 30 May 2011

Counter Name Distribution Period Distribution per unit (SGD) Payment Date

MapletreeLog 1 Jan 2011 – 31 Mar 2011 1.55 cents 30 May 2011

38

Attractive Yield vs Other Investments

1: Based on MapletreeLog's closing price of S$0.90 per unit as at 31 Mar 11 and annualised 1Q 2011 DPU of 6.2 cents 2: Bloomberg3: Average S$ 12-month fixed deposit savings rate as at 31 Mar 114: Prevailing CPF Ordinary Account interest rate

39

Geographical Diversification (by NPI)

40

4Q 20102

1Q 20113

1Q 20101

Foot note : 1) 1Q 2010 started with 82 properties and ended with 84

properties. 2) 4Q 2010 started with 91 properties and ended with 96

properties. 3) 1Q 2011 started with 96 properties and ended with 98

properties.

Year-on-Year 1Q 2010 vs 1Q 2011

Quarter-on-Quarter

4Q 2010 vs 1Q 2011

Singapore50.0%

Japan23.0%

Hong Kong15.7%

China4.7%

Malaysia4.1%

South Korea2.0% Vietnam

0.5%

Singapore51.9%

Japan16.2%

Hong Kong20.8%

China6.0%

Malaysia4.5%

South Korea0.6%

Vietnam0.0%

Singapore49%

Japan23%

Hong Kong16%

China5%

Malaysia4%

South Korea2%

Vietnam1%

Single-tenanted vs Multi-tenanted Assets (by Gross Revenue)

41

Country split by MTB Country split by SUA

Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted by gross revenue

(as at 31 Mar 11)

Singapore53.2%

Japan0.0%

Hong Kong33.0%

China10.7%

Malaysia1.8%

South Korea0.0% Vietnam

1.3%

Singapore49.2%Japan

39.9%

Hong Kong1.4%

China1.6%

Malaysia5.1%

South Korea2.7% Vietnam

0.0%

Single-tenanted

63%

Multi-tenanted

37%

Single-user vs Multi-tenanted Building(By No. of Assets and NLA)

By No. of Assets as at 31 Mar 2011 By NLA as at 31 Mar 2011

42

Single-tenanted

75

Multi-tenanted

23

Single-tenanted

49.2%

Multi-tenanted

50.8%

Singapore Warehouse Oversupply Exaggerated About 64% of upcoming supply in Singapore has already been pre-leased or is being built

by end-users balance amount (243k sqm) is not a big threat

Source: URA 4Q 2010, Mapletree estimates

Upcoming Non-Committed supply of warehouses in Singapore

Upcoming Non-Committed supply of warehouses in

Singapore vs existing Stock

43

Non-Committed Supply34%

Committed Supply64%

243k sqm

442k sqm

Total upcoming warehouse space of 685k sqm over the next 3 yrs

Non-Committed Supply3% Committed Supply

6%

Existing Stock91%

6,958k sqm

243k sqm

Existing + Upcom-ing Stock 7,643k

sqm

442k sqm

Singapore Warehouse Occupancy Trend

Source : URA 4Q 201044

1Q 9

6

3Q 9

6

1Q 9

7

3Q 9

7

1Q 9

8

3Q 9

8

1Q 9

9

3Q 9

9

1Q 0

0

3Q 0

0

1Q 0

1

3Q 0

1

1Q 0

2

3Q 0

2

1Q 0

3

3Q 0

3

1Q 0

4

3Q 0

4

1Q 0

5

3Q 0

5

1Q 0

6

3Q 0

6

1Q 0

7

3Q 0

7

1Q 0

8

3Q 0

8

1Q 0

9

3Q 0

9

1Q 1

0

3Q 1

0 2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%Upcoming Supply Existing Stock Occupancy

('00

0 sq

m)

Occ

up

ancy

SARS, Nov 02

Dot Com Burst,Mar 00

Asian Financial Crisis, Jul 97

Current Financial Crisis, Jul 07

Bali Bombing, Oct 05

91.4%

Warehouse Sector is Less Volatile

Source: URA 3Q 2010, Singapore; Median Price & Rental of Multiple-user Warehouse

Capital values Rental values

Capital Retail Office WarehouseAvd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Avd p.a. Chg

QtrsAvd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Trough to Peak 9% 17 9% 17 8% 16

Rental Retail Office WarehouseAvd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Avd p.a. Chg

QtrsAvd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Trough to Peak 10% 17 37% 17 11% 16

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

19

98

Q4

19

99

Q2

19

99

Q4

20

00

Q2

20

00

Q4

20

01

Q2

20

01

Q4

20

02

Q2

20

02

Q4

20

03

Q2

20

03

Q4

20

04

Q2

20

04

Q4

20

05

Q2

20

05

Q4

20

06

Q2

20

06

Q4

20

07

Q2

20

07

Q4

20

08

Q2

20

08

Q4

20

09

Q2

20

09

Q4

20

10

Q2

S$

PS

M

Multiple User Warehouse (Average) Office (Average) Retail (Average)

Bottom: 2Q 2004 (warehouse, office)

3Q 2004 (retail)

Bottom: 3Q 2009

(all) Peak:

2Q 2008 (office, retail)3Q 2008 (warehouse)

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1998

Q4

1999

Q2

1999

Q4

2000

Q2

2000

Q4

2001

Q2

2001

Q4

2002

Q2

2002

Q4

2003

Q2

2003

Q4

2004

Q2

2004

Q4

2005

Q2

2005

Q4

2006

Q2

2006

Q4

2007

Q2

2007

Q4

2008

Q2

2008

Q4

2009

Q2

2009

Q4

2010

Q2

S$

PS

M p

er m

th

Multiple User Warehouse (Average) Office (Average) Retail (Average)

Peak: 2Q 2008Bottom: 1Q 2004

Bottom: 4Q 2009

45

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,0001

99

1

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

3Q

20

11

F

20

12

F

20

17

F

('00

0 sq

ft)

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

Occ

up

an

cy

Warehouse Supply Occupancy

Hand over of HK, Jul 97Asian Financial Crisis, Jul 97HK Influenza, Dec 97

Dot Com Burst, Mar 00

SARS, Nov 02

Bali Bombing, Oct 05

Current Financial Crisis, Jul 07

Lack of New Supply in HK is Supportive to Revenues

Source : Savills Research and Consultancy (HK), Sep 2010; Mapletree estimates1: New World development located at Kwai Chung Container Port2: Goodman development located at Tsing Yi3: HK Government tendered for a development site in Tsing Yi Town

No New Supply

1

2

3

46

Outlook of Asian Logistics Industry

Asian Logistics Market is Growing at ~ Double the Rate as the Rest of the World

Source: Datamonitor, August 2009

183 199 220 243 272 291 318 350 387432 472

42%

43%

40%

38%

36%

35%

34%

32%

31%

30%

29%

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009F 2010F 2011F 2012F 2013F

Lo

gis

tic

s M

ark

et

Va

lue

US

$ b

illi

on

25%

27%

29%

31%

33%

35%

37%

39%

41%

43%

45%

Sh

are

of

As

ia-P

ac

ific

in

glo

ba

l lo

gis

tic

s

Asia-Pacific Rest of the World Asia-Pacific as % of Global Logistics

CAGR:

Rest of the World: 5.6%

Asia Pac: 10.1%

48

291

472545

629

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2008 2013F 2008 2013FLo

gis

tic

s M

ark

et

Va

lue

in U

S$

Bill

ion

s… Due to Higher Growth Compared to the Rest of the World

Source: Datamonitor, Aug 2009

Rest of the world logistics market

Asia Pacific logistics market

49

41

104

249

281

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2008 2013F 2008 2013FLo

gis

tics

Mar

ket

Vo

lum

e in

SG

D$

bill

ion

s…Within This, Contract Logistics Shows the Most Significant Growth Potential

Source: Transport Intelligence, May 2009

Global contract logistics marketAsia Pacific contract logistics market

50

Contract Logistics - China, India & Vietnam are the Fastest Growing Markets

Source: Transport Intelligence

Contract Logistics Markets in Asia

4.8%

20.6%

2.8%

15.2%

2.7%4.7%

6.5%

-0.4%

6.1% 6.4%

17.3%

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Japan China SouthKorea

India Taiwan Indonesia Thailand HongKong

Malaysia Singapore Vietnam

Logi

stic

s M

arke

t Val

ue in

SG

D$ M

illio

ns

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Market Volume (2008) Forecasted Market Volume (2013) Forecasted CAGR (2008 to 2013)

51

Freight Forwarding – China, India & Vietnam are the Fastest Growing Markets

Freight Forwarding Markets in Asia

6.1%

-2.1%-3.0%

-0.5%-1.5%

10.1%

-2.7%

0.3%1.7%

2.4%

14.0%

0.00

5,000.00

10,000.00

15,000.00

20,000.00

25,000.00

China Japan SouthKorea

Singapore HongKong

India Taiwan Thailand Malaysia Indonesia Vietnam

Logi

stic

s M

arke

t Vol

ume

in S

GD

$ M

illio

ns

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

Market Volume (2008) Forecasted Market Volume (2012) Forecasted CAGR (2008 to 2012)

Source: Transport Intelligence52

1.0Suvarnabhumi Airport, Thailand20

1.1John F. Kennedy International Airport, USA19

1.2O'Hare International Airport, USA18

1.3Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, The Netherlands17

1.3London Heathrow Airport, UK16

1.4Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, Taiwan15

1.4Beijing Capital International Airport, China14

1.5Los Angeles International Airport, USA13

1.6Miami International Airport, USA12

1.7Singapore Changi Airport, Singapore11

1.8Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport, France10

1.9Narita International Airport, Japan9

1.9Frankfurt Airport, Germany8

1.9Dubai International Airport, UAE7

1.9Louisville International Airport, USA6

2.0Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport, USA5

2.3Incheon International Airport, South Korea4

2.5Shanghai Pudong International Airport, China3

3.4Hong Kong International Airport, Hong Kong2

3.7Memphis International Airport, USA1

2009SeaportRank

1.0Suvarnabhumi Airport, Thailand20

1.1John F. Kennedy International Airport, USA19

1.2O'Hare International Airport, USA18

1.3Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, The Netherlands17

1.3London Heathrow Airport, UK16

1.4Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, Taiwan15

1.4Beijing Capital International Airport, China14

1.5Los Angeles International Airport, USA13

1.6Miami International Airport, USA12

1.7Singapore Changi Airport, Singapore11

1.8Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport, France10

1.9Narita International Airport, Japan9

1.9Frankfurt Airport, Germany8

1.9Dubai International Airport, UAE7

1.9Louisville International Airport, USA6

2.0Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport, USA5

2.3Incheon International Airport, South Korea4

2.5Shanghai Pudong International Airport, China3

3.4Hong Kong International Airport, Hong Kong2

3.7Memphis International Airport, USA1

2009SeaportRank

The World’s Busiest Seaports and Airports are in Asia

4.6Laem Chabang, Thailand20

4.7Xiamen, China19

5.1Long Beach, USA18

6.0Tanjung Pelepas, Malaysia17

6.7Los Angeles, USA16

7.0Hamburg, Germany15

7.3Antwerp, The Netherlands14

7.3Port Klang, Malaysia13

8.6Kaohsiung, Taiwan12

8.7Tianjin, China11

9.7Rotterdam, The Netherlands10

10.3Qingdao, China9

10.5Ningbo, China8

11.1Dubai, UAE7

11.2Guangzhou, China6

12.0Busan, South Korea5

18.3Shenzhen, China4

21.0Hong Kong3

25.0Shanghai, China2

25.9Singapore1

2009SeaportRank

4.6Laem Chabang, Thailand20

4.7Xiamen, China19

5.1Long Beach, USA18

6.0Tanjung Pelepas, Malaysia17

6.7Los Angeles, USA16

7.0Hamburg, Germany15

7.3Antwerp, The Netherlands14

7.3Port Klang, Malaysia13

8.6Kaohsiung, Taiwan12

8.7Tianjin, China11

9.7Rotterdam, The Netherlands10

10.3Qingdao, China9

10.5Ningbo, China8

11.1Dubai, UAE7

11.2Guangzhou, China6

12.0Busan, South Korea5

18.3Shenzhen, China4

21.0Hong Kong3

25.0Shanghai, China2

25.9Singapore1

2009SeaportRank

Source: Containerisation International; Airports Council International

% of Top 20 Volumes in Asia = 79% % of Top 20 Volumes in Asia = 42%

14 of the world’s Top 20 busiest seaports are in Asia

8 of the world’s Top 20 busiest cargo-handling airports are in Asia

Container Throughput (Mil TEU) Total Cargo (Mil Metric Tonnes)

53

Rank EconomyOverallLPI score

Customs(Ranking)

Infrastructure(Ranking)

InternationalShipments(Ranking)

Logisticsquality andCompetence(Ranking)

Tracking andTracing(Ranking)

Timelines(Ranking)

1 Germany 4.11 3 1 9 4 4 3

2 Singapore 4.09 2 4 1 6 6 14

3 Sweden 4.08 5 10 2 2 3 11

4 Netherlands 4.07 4 2 11 3 9 6

5 Luxemborg 3.98 1 9 7 21 19 1

6 Switzerland 3.97 12 6 25 1 1 15

7 Japan 3.97 10 5 12 7 8 13

8 United Kingdom 3.95 11 16 8 9 7 8

9 Belgium 3.94 9 12 26 5 2 12

10 Norway 3.93 6 3 24 13 10 10

11 Ireland 3.89 18 19 5 16 13 4

12 Finland 3.89 7 8 19 10 11 25

13 Hong Kong SAR 3.88 8 13 6 14 17 26

14 Canada 3.87 13 11 32 8 15 5

15 United States 3.86 15 7 36 11 5 16

Source: World Bank, 2010 Logistics Performance Index

Tier 1 Countries – Singapore, Japan & Hong Kong are in Top 15 in Terms of LPI

54

Global logistics market (2008) in S$ dollars

Others 72%

Contract logistics

16%Freight

forwarding13%

Global 3PL market = approx 29%

Note: Freight forwarding involves the arrangement of cargo activity to an international destination.

Note: Contract logistics involves the outsourcing of supply chain management operations in a domestic context.

Source: Transport Intelligence, 2008

Contract Logistics and Freight Forwarding Account for Approximately 30% of the Global Logistics Market…

55

Within This, Contract Logistics and Freight Forwarding Each Account for Approximately Half of the Global 3PL Market

Contract logistics

55%

Freight forwarding

45%

Global 3PL market (2008) in S$ dollars

Note: Contract logistics involves the outsourcing of supply chain management operations in a domestic context.

Note: Freight forwarding involves the arrangement of cargo activity to an international destination.

Source: Transport Intelligence, 2008.3PL refers to freight forwarding and contract logistics sectors. As at 2008, global total logistics size was worth approx S$455 billion.

56

Co

un

try

dev

elo

pm

ent

ind

ex

Emerging

Developed

Logistics market developmentLow High

LaosCambodia

India

China

Vietnam

Philippines

Indonesia

Thailand

Malaysia

TaiwanS. Korea

Hong Kong

JapanSingaporeAustralia

* Poor facilities & infrastructure* Low IT penetration* Industry partners limited

* Traditional channels* Moderate infrastructure* Medium IT penetration* With no integration

* Excellent infrastructure* Sophisticated capabilities & technology* Easier to attract quality labour* Supply chain partners* Processes and infrastructure that support collaboration

Logistics Market DevelopmentMany Asian countries at lower end of development curve

Source: Edelweiss research57

Logistics Market DevelopmentLess developed economies have higher logistics costs as a % of their GDP

Source: Armstrong & Associates; State of Logistics Report (2010), Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals; Saigon port news

25%

20%

18%

13%12%

9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9%8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Vietn

am

Thaila

nd

China

India

UAE (Dubai

)

Singap

ore

Europe

Hong Kong

S.Kore

a

Taiwan

Japan

USA

Lo

gis

tics

co

st/G

DP

High logistics costs indicate inefficiences in supply chain Lower logistics costs in

more developed markets

58

MIPL’s commitment in Development Projects

59

No Country Project nameGFA (sqm)

Status

1 China Mapletree Yangshan Bonded Logistics Park (Shanghai) 45,933 Completed/Leased: 12% of NLA

2 China Mapletree Wuxi Logistics Park (Wuxi) 45,309Completed/Leased: 98.4% of NLA; Warehouse fully taken up.

3 China Mapletree Beijing EPZ Airport Logistics Park (Beijing) 41,100In progress to construct PH 1 (13,840 sqm) at approved construction budget of ~S$8.7million

4 China Mapletree Tianjin Airport Logistics Park (Tianjin) 64,200 Completed/Leased: 36.4% of NLA, with interest expressed for a further 33%

5 China Mapletree Tianjin Port HaiFeng Bonded Logistics Park (Tianjin) 177,882 Completed/Leased: 15% of NLA

Subtotal China   374,424

6 Malaysia Mapletree Shah Alam Logistics Park (Shah Alam) 60,000 Completed/Leased: 98.8% of NLA

Subtotal Malaysia   60,000

7 Vietnam Mapletree Logistics Park (Binh Duong) 440,000Phase 1 completed, Phase 2 in 2Q 11. Leasing underway.

8 Vietnam Mapletree Bac Ninh Logistics Park (Bac Ninh) 310,00070% of first block (18,250 sqm) completed as of end Mar 11. Completion is expected in May 11.

Subtotal Vietnam   750,000

9 Japan Project Piranha Phase 1 (Odawara, Kanagawa) 136,560Construction is expected to start in Sep 11 and complete in Sep 12.

10 Japan Project Joso 27,277 Construction is expected to start in Aug 11 and complete in Feb 12

Subtotal Japan 163,837

Total     1,348,261

As at 31 Mar 11Note: 2Q11 refers to MIPL’s FY (1 Jul 11 to 30 Sep 11)

Important notice

The information contained in this presentation is for information purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or any solicitation of an offer or invitation to purchase or subscribe for units in Mapletree Logistics Trust (“MapletreeLog”, and units in MapletreeLog, “Units”) in Singapore or any other jurisdiction, nor should it or any part of it form the basis of, or be relied upon in any connection with, any contract or commitment whatsoever. The past performance of the Units and Mapletree Logistics Trust Management Ltd. (the “Manager”) is not indicative of the future performance of MapletreeLog and the Manager. Predictions, projections or forecasts of the economy or economic trends of the markets which are targeted by MapletreeLog are not necessarily indicative of the future or likely performance of MapletreeLog.

The value of units in MapletreeLog (“Units”) and the income from them may fall as well as rise. Units are not obligations of, deposits in, or guaranteed by, the Manager or any of its affiliates. An investment in Units is subject to investment risks, including the possible loss of the principal amount invested. Investors have no right to request the Manager to redeem their Units while the Units are listed. It is intended that Unitholders may only deal in their Units through trading on the SGX-ST. Listing of the Units on the SGX-ST does not guarantee a liquid market for the Units. The past performance of MapletreeLog is not necessarily indicative of its future performance.

60

Thank You