UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2009
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
Commission File Number:
001-13545
(AMB Property Corporation)
001-14245
(AMB Property, L.P.)
AMB Property
Corporation
AMB Property, L.P.
(Exact Name of Registrant as
Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Maryland (AMB Property Corporation)
Delaware (AMB Property, L.P.)
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
94-3281941
94-3285362
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|
Pier 1, Bay 1,
San Francisco, California
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
|
|
94111
(Zip Code)
|
(415) 394-9000
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Common Stock, $.01 par value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
6.50% Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
6.75% Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
7.00% Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
6.85% Series P Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
AMB Property, L.P.
|
|
None
|
|
None
|
Securities registered pursuant
to Section 12(g) of the Act:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Property, L.P.
|
|
None
|
|
|
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act.
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Yes
þ
|
|
No
o
|
AMB Property, L.P.
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act.
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
AMB Property, L.P.
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has
filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has
been subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days.
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Yes
þ
|
|
No
o
|
AMB Property, L.P.
|
|
Yes
þ
|
|
No
o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
(§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such
files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
(§229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be
contained, to the best of registrants knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by
reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
AMB Property Corporation:
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
þ
|
|
Accelerated filer
o
|
Non-accelerated filer (Do not check if a smaller reporting
company)
o
|
|
Smaller reporting company
o
|
AMB Property, L.P.:
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
o
|
|
Accelerated filer
o
|
Non-accelerated filer (Do not check if a smaller reporting
company)
þ
|
|
Smaller reporting company
o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act).
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
AMB Property, L.P.
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
The aggregate market value of common shares held by
non-affiliates of AMB Property Corporation (based upon the
closing sale price on the New York Stock Exchange) on
June 30, 2009 was $2,668,464,248.
As of February 17, 2010, there were 149,203,394 shares
of AMB Property Corporations common stock, $0.01 par
value per share, outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Part III incorporates by reference portions of AMB Property
Corporations Proxy Statement for its Annual Meeting of
Stockholders which the registrant anticipates will be filed no
later than 120 days after the end of its fiscal year
pursuant to Regulation 14A.
EXPLANATORY
NOTE
This report combines the annual reports on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 of AMB Property
Corporation and AMB Property, L.P. Unless stated otherwise or
the context otherwise requires: references to AMB Property
Corporation, the Parent Company or the
parent company mean AMB Property Corporation, a
Maryland corporation, and its controlled subsidiaries; and
references to AMB Property, L.P., the
Operating Partnership or the operating
partnership mean AMB Property, L.P., a Delaware limited
partnership, and its controlled subsidiaries. The terms
the Company and the company mean the
parent company, the operating partnership and their controlled
subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. In addition, references to
the company, the parent company or the operating partnership
could mean the entity itself or one or a number of their
controlled subsidiaries.
The parent company is a real estate investment trust and the
general partner of the operating partnership. As of
December 31, 2009, the parent company owned an approximate
97.8% general partnership interest in the operating partnership,
excluding preferred units. The remaining approximate 2.2% common
limited partnership interests are owned by non-affiliated
investors and certain current and former directors and officers
of the parent company. As of December 31, 2009, the parent
company owned all of the preferred limited partnership units of
the operating partnership. As the sole general partner of the
operating partnership, the parent company has the full,
exclusive and complete responsibility for the operating
partnerships
day-to-day
management and control.
The company believes combining the annual reports on
Form 10-K
of the parent company and the operating partnership into this
single report results in the following benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
enhancing investors understanding of the parent company
and the operating partnership by enabling investors to view the
business as a whole in the same manner as management views and
operates the business;
|
|
|
|
eliminating duplicative disclosure and providing a more
streamlined and readable presentation since a substantial
portion of the companys disclosure applies to both the
parent company and the operating partnership; and
|
|
|
|
creating time and cost efficiencies through the preparation of
one combined report instead of two separate reports.
|
Management operates the parent company and the operating
partnership as one enterprise. The management of the parent
company consists of the same members as the management of the
operating partnership. These members are officers of the parent
company and employees of the operating partnership.
There are few differences between the parent company and the
operating partnership, which are reflected in the disclosure in
this report. The company believes it is important to understand
the differences between the parent company and the operating
partnership in the context of how the parent company and the
operating partnership operate as an interrelated consolidated
company. The parent company is a real estate investment trust,
whose only material asset is its ownership of partnership
interests of the operating partnership. As a result, the parent
company does not conduct business itself, other than acting as
the sole general partner of the operating partnership, issuing
public equity from time to time and guaranteeing certain debt of
the operating partnership. The parent company itself does not
hold any indebtedness but guarantees some of the secured and
unsecured debt of the operating partnership, as disclosed in
this report. The operating partnership holds substantially all
the assets of the company and holds the ownership interests in
the companys joint ventures. The operating partnership
conducts the operations of the business and is structured as a
partnership with no publicly traded equity. Except for net
proceeds from public equity issuances by the parent company,
which are contributed to the operating partnership in exchange
for partnership units, the operating partnership generates the
capital required by the companys business through the
operating partnerships operations, by the operating
partnerships direct or indirect incurrence of indebtedness
or through the issuance of partnership units of the operating
partnership or its subsidiaries.
Noncontrolling interests and stockholders equity and
partners capital are the main areas of difference between
the consolidated financial statements of the parent company and
those of the operating partnership. The common limited
partnership interests in the operating partnership are accounted
for as partners capital in the
2
operating partnerships financial statements and as
noncontrolling interests in the parent companys financial
statements. The noncontrolling interests in the operating
partnerships financial statements include the interests of
joint venture partners, and preferred limited partnership
unitholders and common limited partnership unitholders of AMB
Property II, L.P., a subsidiary of the operating partnership.
The noncontrolling interests in the parent companys
financial statements include the same noncontrolling interests
at the operating partnership level and limited partnership
unitholders of the operating partnership. The differences
between stockholders equity and partners capital
result from the differences in the equity issued at the parent
company and operating partnership levels.
To help investors understand the significant differences between
the parent company and the operating partnership, this report
presents the following separate sections for each of the parent
company and the operating partnership:
|
|
|
|
|
consolidated financial statements;
|
|
|
|
the following notes to the consolidated financial statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt;
|
|
|
|
Income taxes;
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling Interests; and
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity of the Parent Company/Partners
Capital of the Operating Partnership; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidity and Capital Resources in the Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
This report also includes separate Item 9A. Controls and
Procedures sections and separate Exhibit 31 and 32
certifications for each of the parent company and the operating
partnership in order to establish that the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of each entity have made
the requisite certifications and that the parent company and
operating partnership are compliant with
Rule 13a-15
or
Rule 15d-15
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.
§1350.
In order to highlight the differences between the parent company
and the operating partnership, the separate sections in this
report for the parent company and the operating partnership
specifically refer to the parent company and the operating
partnership. In the sections that combine disclosure of the
parent company and the operating partnership, this report refers
to actions or holdings as being actions or holdings of the
company. Although the operating partnership is generally the
entity that enters into contracts and joint ventures and holds
assets and debt, reference to the company is appropriate because
the business is one enterprise and the parent company operates
the business through the operating partnership.
As general partner with control of the operating partnership,
the parent company consolidates the operating partnership for
financial reporting purposes, and the parent company does not
have significant assets other than its investment in the
operating partnership. Therefore, the assets and liabilities of
the parent company and the operating partnership are the same on
their respective financial statements. The separate discussions
of the parent company and the operating partnership in this
report should be read in conjunction with each other to
understand the results of the company on a consolidated basis
and how management operates the company.
3
AMB
PROPERTY CORPORATION AND AMB PROPERTY, L.P.
INDEX
4
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
Some of the information included in this annual report on
Form 10-K
contains forward-looking statements, which are made pursuant to
the safe-harbor provisions of Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 27A of the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Because these
forward-looking statements involve numerous risks and
uncertainties, there are important factors that could cause the
companys actual results to differ materially from those in
the forward-looking statements, and you should not rely on the
forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. The
events or circumstances reflected in the forward-looking
statements might not occur. You can identify forward-looking
statements by the use of forward-looking terminology such as
believes, expects, may,
will, should, seeks,
approximately, intends,
plans, forecasting,
pro forma, estimates or
anticipates, or the negative of these words and
phrases, or similar words or phrases. You can also identify
forward-looking statements by discussions of strategy, plans or
intentions. Forward-looking statements should not be read as
guarantees of future performance or results, and will not
necessarily be accurate indicators of whether, or the time at
which, such performance or results will be achieved. There is no
assurance that the events or circumstances reflected in
forward-looking statements will occur or be achieved.
Forward-looking statements are necessarily dependent on
assumptions, data or methods that may be incorrect or imprecise
and the company may not be able to realize them.
The following factors, among others, apply to the
companys business as a whole and could cause its actual
results and future events to differ materially from those set
forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in general economic conditions in California, the
U.S. or globally (including financial market fluctuations),
global trade or in the real estate sector (including risks
relating to decreasing real estate valuations and impairment
charges);
|
|
|
|
risks associated with using debt to fund the companys
business activities, including re-financing and interest rate
risks;
|
|
|
|
the companys failure to obtain, renew, or extend
necessary financing or access the debt or equity markets;
|
|
|
|
the companys failure to maintain its current credit
agency ratings or comply with its debt covenants;
|
|
|
|
risks related to the companys obligations in the event
of certain defaults under co-investment venture and other
debt;
|
|
|
|
risks associated with equity and debt securities financings
and issuances (including the risk of dilution);
|
|
|
|
defaults on or non-renewal of leases by customers or renewal
at lower than expected rent;
|
|
|
|
difficulties in identifying properties, portfolios of
properties, or interests in real-estate related entities or
platforms to acquire and in effecting acquisitions on
advantageous terms and the failure of acquisitions to perform as
the company expects;
|
|
|
|
unknown liabilities acquired in connection with acquired
properties, portfolios of properties, or interests in
real-estate related entities;
|
|
|
|
the companys failure to successfully integrate acquired
properties and operations;
|
|
|
|
risks and uncertainties affecting property development,
redevelopment and value-added conversion (including construction
delays, cost overruns, the companys inability to obtain
necessary permits and financing, the companys inability to
lease properties at all or at favorable rents and terms, and
public opposition to these activities);
|
|
|
|
the companys failure to set up additional funds,
attract additional investment in existing funds or to contribute
properties to its co-investment ventures due to such factors as
its inability to acquire, develop, or lease properties that meet
the investment criteria of such ventures, or the co-investment
ventures inability to access debt and equity capital to
pay for property contributions or their allocation of available
capital to cover other capital requirements;
|
|
|
|
risks and uncertainties relating to the disposition of
properties to third parties and the companys ability to
effect such transactions on advantageous terms and to timely
reinvest proceeds from any such dispositions;
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
risks of doing business internationally and global expansion,
including unfamiliarity with new markets and currency risks;
|
|
|
|
risks of changing personnel and roles;
|
|
|
|
losses in excess of the companys insurance coverage;
|
|
|
|
changes in local, state and federal regulatory requirements,
including changes in real estate and zoning laws;
|
|
|
|
increases in real property tax rates;
|
|
|
|
risks associated with the companys tax structuring;
|
|
|
|
increases in interest rates and operating costs or greater
than expected capital expenditures; and
|
|
|
|
environmental uncertainties and risks related to natural
disasters.
|
In addition, if the parent company fails to qualify and
maintain its status as a real estate investment trust under the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, then the parent
companys actual results and future events could differ
materially from those set forth or contemplated in the
forward-looking statements.
The companys success also depends upon economic trends
generally, various market conditions and fluctuations and those
other risk factors discussed under the heading Risk
Factors in Item 1A of this report. The company
cautions you not to place undue reliance on forward-looking
statements, which reflect the companys analysis only and
speak as of the date of this report or as of the dates indicated
in the statements. All of the companys forward-looking
statements, including those in this report, are qualified in
their entirety by this statement. The company assumes no
obligation to update or supplement forward-looking
statements.
The company uses the terms industrial properties or
industrial buildings to describe the various types
of industrial properties in its portfolio and uses these terms
interchangeably with the following: logistics facilities,
centers or warehouses, High Throughput
Distribution®
(HTD®)
facilities; or any combination of these terms. The company uses
the term owned and managed to describe assets in
which it has at least a 10% ownership interest, for which it is
the property or asset manager and which it currently intends to
hold for the long term. The company uses the term joint
venture to describe all joint ventures, including
co-investment ventures with real estate developers, other real
estate operators, or institutional investors where the company
may or may not have control, act as the manager
and/or
developer, earn asset management distributions or fees, or earn
incentive distributions or promote interests. In certain cases,
the company might provide development, leasing, property
management
and/or
accounting services, for which it may receive compensation. The
company uses the term co-investment venture to
describe joint ventures with institutional investors, managed by
the company, from which the company typically receives
acquisition fees for acquisitions, portfolio and asset
management distributions or fees, as well as incentive
distributions or promote interests. Unless otherwise indicated,
managements discussion and analysis applies to both the
operating partnership and the parent company.
The companys website address is
http://www.amb.com.
The annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K
of the parent company and any amendments to those reports filed
or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are available on the
companys website free of charge as soon as reasonably
practicable after the company electronically files such material
with, or furnishes it to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, or SEC. The public may read and copy these materials
at the SECs Public Reference Room at
100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. The public may
obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room
by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
The SEC maintains a website that contains such reports, proxy
and information statements and other information, and the
Internet address is
http://www.sec.gov.
The companys Corporate Governance Principles and Code of
Business Conduct are also posted on the companys website.
Information contained on the companys website is not and
should not be deemed a part of this report or any other report
or filing filed with or furnished to the SEC. The operating
partnership does not have a separate internet address and its
SEC reports are available free of charge upon request to the
attention of the companys Investor Relations Department,
AMB Property Corporation, Pier 1, Bay 1, San Francisco, CA
94111. The following marks are registered trademarks of AMB
Property Corporation:
AMB®;
and High Throughput
Distribution®
(HTD®).
6
PART I
The
Company
The company is a global owner, operator and developer of
industrial real estate, focused on major hub and gateway
distribution markets in the Americas, Europe and Asia. As of
December 31, 2009, the company owned, or had investments
in, on a consolidated basis or through unconsolidated joint
ventures, properties and development projects expected to total
approximately 155.1 million square feet (14.4 million
square meters) in 47 markets within 14 countries. The company
invests in properties located predominantly in the infill
submarkets of its targeted markets. The companys portfolio
is comprised of High Throughput
Distribution®
facilities industrial properties built for speed and
located near airports, seaports and ground transportation
systems.
The approximately 155.1 million square feet as of
December 31, 2009 included:
|
|
|
|
|
132.6 million square feet (principally, warehouse
distribution buildings) on an owned and managed basis, which
includes investments held on a consolidated basis or through
unconsolidated joint ventures, that were 91.2% leased;
|
|
|
|
15.0 million square feet in its development portfolio,
including approximately 9.7 million square feet in 33
development projects that are complete and in the process of
stabilization and approximately 5.3 million square feet in
15 development projects under construction;
|
|
|
|
7.4 million square feet in 46 industrial operating
buildings in unconsolidated joint ventures in which the company
has investments but does not manage; and
|
|
|
|
152,000 square feet through a ground lease, which is the
location of its global headquarters.
|
The companys business is operated primarily through the
operating partnership. As of December 31, 2009, the parent
company owned an approximate 97.8% general partnership interest
in the operating partnership, excluding preferred units. As the
sole general partner of the operating partnership, the parent
company has the full, exclusive and complete responsibility for
and discretion in its
day-to-day
management and control.
The parent company is a self-administered and self-managed real
estate investment trust and it expects that it has qualified,
and will continue to qualify, as a real estate investment trust
for federal income tax purposes beginning with the year ended
December 31, 1997. As a self-administered and self-managed
real estate investment trust, the companys own employees
perform its corporate administrative and management functions,
rather than the company relying on an outside manager for these
services. The company believes that real estate is fundamentally
a local business and is best operated by local teams in each of
its markets. As a vertically integrated company, the company
actively manages its portfolio of properties. In select markets,
the company may, from time to time, establish relationships with
third-party real estate management firms, brokers and developers
that provide some property-level administrative and management
services under the companys direction.
The companys global headquarters are located at Pier 1,
Bay 1, San Francisco, California 94111; the companys
telephone number is
(415) 394-9000.
The companys other principal office locations are in
Amsterdam, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Mexico City, Shanghai,
Singapore and Tokyo. As of December 31, 2009, the company
employed 521 individuals.
Investment
Strategy
The companys investment strategy focuses on providing
distribution space to customers whose businesses are tied to
global trade and depend on the efficient movement of goods
through the global supply chain. The companys properties
are primarily located in the worlds busiest distribution
markets featuring large, supply-constrained infill locations
with dense populations and proximity to seaports, airports and
major freeway interchanges. When measured by annualized base
rent, on an owned and managed basis, a substantial majority of
the companys portfolio of industrial properties is located
in its target markets and much of this is in infill submarkets.
Infill locations are characterized by supply constraints on the
availability of land for competing projects as well as
7
physical, political or economic barriers to new development. The
company believes that its facilities are essential to creating
efficiencies in the supply chain and its business encompasses a
blend of real estate, global logistics and infrastructure.
In its target markets, the company focuses on
HTD®
facilities, industrial properties designed to facilitate the
rapid distribution of its customers products rather than
the long term storage of goods. The companys investment
focus on
HTD®
assets is based on what it believes to be a global trend toward
lower inventory levels and expedited supply chains.
HTD®
facilities generally have a variety of physical and locational
characteristics that allow for the rapid transport of goods from
point to point. These physical characteristics could include
numerous dock doors, shallower building depths, fewer columns,
large truck courts and more space for trailer parking. The
company believes that these building characteristics help its
customers to reduce their costs and become more efficient in
their delivery systems. The locational characteristics feature
large, supply-constrained infill locations with dense
populations and proximity to seaports, airports and major
freeway interchanges. The companys customers comprise
logistics, freight forwarding and air-express companies with
time-sensitive needs that value facilities that are proximate to
transportation infrastructure.
The company believes that changes in global trade have been a
primary driver of demand for industrial real estate for decades,
as the correlation between industrial demand and
U.S. imports and exports is approximately 80%. The company
has observed that demand for industrial real estate is further
influenced by the long-term relationship between trade and GDP.
Trade and GDP are closely interrelated as higher levels of
investment, production and consumption within a globalized
country are consistent with increased levels of imports and
exports. As the world produces and consumes more, the company
believes that the volume of global trade will continue to
increase at a rate well in excess of global GDP. International
Monetary Fund (IMF) forecasts indicated that global trade fell
by more than 12% in 2009, the steepest decline in modern
history. This compares to a forecasted decline of only 1% in
global GDP. Current 2010 consensus estimates for the
U.S. and global GDP growth are 2.7% and 3.9%, respectively,
which the company believes should result in a significant
rebound in trade and industrial real estate demand.
Primary
Sources of Revenue and Earnings
The primary source of the companys core earnings is
revenues received from its real estate operations and private
capital business. The principal contributor of its core earnings
is rent received from customers under long-term (generally three
to ten years) operating leases at its properties, including
reimbursements from customers for certain operating costs and
asset management fees. The company also generates core earnings
from its private capital business, which include priority
distributions, acquisition and development fees, promote
interests and incentive distributions from its co-investment
ventures. The company may generate additional earnings from the
disposition of assets in its
development-for-sale
and value-added conversion programs as well as from land sales.
Long-Term
Growth Strategies
The company believes that its long-term growth will be driven by
its ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
maintain and increase occupancy rates
and/or
increase rental rates at its properties;
|
|
|
|
raise third-party equity and grow its earnings from its private
capital business from the acquisition of new properties or
through the possible contribution of properties;
|
|
|
|
acquire industrial real estate with total returns above the
companys cost of capital; and
|
|
|
|
develop properties profitably and either to hold or to sell
these development properties to third parties.
|
Growth
through Operations
The company seeks to generate long-term internal growth by
maintaining a high occupancy rate at its properties, by
controlling expenses and through contractual rent increases on
existing space and thus capitalizing on the economies of scale
inherent in owning, operating and growing a large, global
portfolio. The company actively manages its portfolio by
establishing leasing strategies and negotiating lease terms,
pricing, and level and timing of property improvements. With
respect to its leasing strategies, the company takes a long-term
view to ensure that it
8
maximizes the value of its real estate. As the company continues
to work through a challenging operating environment and to
provide flexibility to its customers, the company evaluates and
adjusts its leasing strategies for market terms and leasing
rates, which may include leasing terms of less than four years
in duration. The company believes that its long-standing focus
on customer relationships and ability to provide global
solutions for a well-diversified customer base in the logistics,
shipping, and air cargo industries will enable it to capitalize
on opportunities as they arise.
The company believes that the strategic locations within its
portfolio, the experience of its cycle-tested operations team
and its ability to respond quickly to the needs of its customers
provides a competitive advantage in leasing. The company
believes that its regular maintenance programs, capital
expenditure programs, energy management and sustainability
programs create cost efficiencies that provide benefit to it and
its customers.
Growth
through Co-Investments
The company, through AMB Capital Partners, LLC, its private
capital group, was one of the pioneers of the real estate
investment trust (REIT) industrys co-investment model and
has more than 26 years of experience in asset management
and fund formation. The company co-invests in properties with
private capital investors through partnerships, limited
liability companies or other joint ventures. The company has a
direct and long-standing relationship with institutional
investors. More than 60% of the companys owned and managed
operating portfolio is held through its eight co-investment
ventures. The company tailors industrial portfolios to
investors specific needs in separate or commingled
accounts and deploys capital in both close-ended and open-ended
structures, while providing complete portfolio management and
financial reporting services. Generally, the company is the
largest investor in its funds and owns a
10-50%
interest in its co-investment ventures. The company believes
that its significant ownership of
10-50% in
each of its funds provides a strong alignment of its interest
with its co-investment partners interests.
The company believes that its co-investment program with
private-capital investors will continue to serve as a source of
revenues and capital for new investments. In anticipation of the
formation of future co-investment ventures, the company may also
hold acquired and newly developed properties for contribution to
such future co-investment ventures. The company may make
additional investments through its existing co-investment
ventures or new co-investment ventures in the future and
presently plans to do so. The company is in various stages of
discussions with prospective investors to attract new capital to
take advantage of potential future opportunities and these
capital raising activities may include the formation of new
joint ventures. Such transactions, if the company completes
them, may be material individually or in aggregate.
Growth
through Acquisitions and Capital Redeployment
The companys acquisition experience and its network of
property management, leasing and acquisition resources should
continue to provide opportunities for growth. In addition to its
internal resources, the company has long-term relationships with
lenders, leasing and investment sales brokers, as well as
third-party local property management firms, which may give it
access to additional acquisition opportunities because such
managers frequently market properties on behalf of sellers. The
company is actively monitoring its target markets and may seek
opportunities to selectively acquire high-quality, well-located
industrial real estate. The company strives to enhance the
quality of its portfolio through acquisitions that are accretive
to the companys earnings and its net asset value. In
addition, the company seeks to redeploy capital from the sale of
non-strategic assets into properties that better fit its current
investment focus.
The company is generally engaged in various stages of
negotiations for a number of acquisitions and other
transactions, some of which may be significant, that may
include, but are not limited to, individual properties, large
multi-property portfolios and platforms or property owning or
real estate-related entities.
Growth
through Development
The companys development business consists of conventional
development,
build-to-suit
development, redevelopment, value-added conversions and land
sales. Despite the cyclical downturn in the U.S. and global
economy, the company believes that, over the long term, customer
demand for new industrial space in strategic
9
markets tied to global trade will continue to outpace supply,
most notably in major gateway markets in Asia, Europe and
Brazil. The company believes that the development, redevelopment
and expansion of well-located, high-quality industrial
properties provide attractive investment opportunities at higher
rates of return, due to the development risk, than may be
obtained from the purchase of existing properties. Through the
deployment of its in-house development and redevelopment
expertise, the company seeks to create value both through new
construction and the acquisition and management of redevelopment
opportunities. New developments, redevelopments and value-added
conversions require significant management attention, and
development and redevelopment may require significant capital
investment, to maximize their returns. The company pursues
development projects directly and in co-investment ventures and
development joint ventures, providing it with the flexibility to
pursue development projects independently or in partnerships,
depending on market conditions, submarkets or building sites and
availability of capital. Completed development and redevelopment
properties are held in its owned and managed portfolio or sold
to third parties.
The company believes that its long-standing focus on infill
locations creates a unique opportunity to enhance value through
the conversion of select industrial properties to higher and
better uses. Value-added conversion projects generally involve a
significant enhancement or a change in use of the property from
an industrial facility to a higher and better use, including use
as research & development, office, residential,
retail, or manufacturing properties. Activities required to
prepare the property for conversion to a higher and better use
may include rezoning, redesigning, reconstructing and
retenanting. The sales price of a value-added conversion project
is generally based on the underlying land value, reflecting its
ultimate higher and better use and, as such, little to no
residual value is ascribed to the industrial building.
Generally, the company expects to sell to third parties these
value-added conversion projects at some point in the
re-entitlement and conversion process, thus recognizing the
enhanced value of the underlying land that supports the
propertys repurposed use. The company believes that its
global market presence and expertise will enable it to generate
and capitalize on a diverse range of development opportunities
over the long term.
The companys development team has experience in real
estate development, both with the company and with local,
national or international development firms. Although the
company has reduced its development staff in correlation to
reduced levels of development activity, the company has retained
certain key investment and development personnel in its most
productive platforms around the globe to preserve its long-term
growth potential. This core development team possesses
multidisciplinary backgrounds that allows for the completion of
the build-out of the companys development pipeline, as
well as the temporary deployment of some of the team members in
leasing, operations and customer service, as it completes the
build-out and
lease-up of
its current development pipeline.
See Part IV, Item 15: Note 18 of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for segment information
related to the companys operations and information
regarding geographic areas.
10
BUSINESS
RISKS
The companys operations involve various risks that could
have adverse consequences to it. These risks include, among
others:
Risks of
the Current Economic Environment
Disruptions
in the global capital and credit markets may adversely affect
the companys business, results of operations, cash flows
and financial condition.
Recent global market and economic conditions have been
unprecedented and challenging with tighter credit conditions,
slower growth and recession in most major economies during 2009.
Although signs of recovery may exist, there are continued
concerns about the systemic impact of inflation, the
availability and cost of credit, a declining real estate market,
and geopolitical issues that contribute to increased market
volatility and uncertain expectations for the global economy.
These conditions, combined with declining business activity
levels and consumer confidence, increased unemployment and
volatile oil prices, contributed to unprecedented levels of
volatility in the capital markets during 2009. Any additional,
continued or recurring disruptions in the capital and credit
markets may adversely affect the companys business,
results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.
As a result of these market conditions, the cost and
availability of credit have been and may continue to be
adversely affected by illiquid credit markets and wider credit
spreads. Concern about the stability of the markets generally
and the strength of counterparties specifically has led many
lenders and institutional investors to reduce, and in some
cases, cease to provide funding to businesses and consumers.
These factors have led to a decrease in spending by businesses
and consumers alike, and a corresponding decrease in global
infrastructure spending. While the company currently believes
that it has sufficient working capital and capacity under its
credit facilities in the near term, continued or recurring
turbulence in the global markets and economies and prolonged
declines in business and consumer spending may adversely affect
its liquidity and financial condition, as well as the liquidity
and financial condition of its customers. If these market
conditions persist, recur or worsen in the long term, they may
limit the companys ability, and the ability of its
customers, to timely replace maturing liabilities, and access
the credit markets to meet liquidity needs.
If the long-term debt ratings of the operating partnership fall
below its current levels, the borrowing cost of debt under its
unsecured credit facilities and certain term loans may increase.
In addition, if the long-term debt ratings of the operating
partnership fall below investment grade, it may be unable to
request borrowings in currencies other than U.S. dollars or
Japanese Yen, as applicable; however, the lack of other currency
borrowings does not affect its ability to fully draw down under
the credit facilities or term loans. While the operating
partnership currently does not expect its long-term debt ratings
to fall below investment grade, in the event that its ratings do
fall below those levels, it may be unable to exercise its
options to extend the term of its credit facilities, and the
loss of its ability to borrow in foreign currencies could affect
its ability to optimally hedge its borrowings against foreign
currency exchange rate changes. In addition, the company cannot
assure you that additional, continuing or recurring long-term
disruptions in the global economy and the continuation of
tighter credit conditions among, and potential failures of,
third-party financial institutions as a result of such
disruptions will not have an adverse effect on the operating
partnerships borrowing capacity and liquidity position.
The operating partnerships access to funds under its
credit facilities is dependent on the ability of the lenders
that are parties to such facilities to meet their funding
commitments to the operating partnership. The company cannot
assure you that if one of the operating partnerships
lenders fails (some of whom are lenders under a number of the
operating partnerships facilities), the operating
partnership will be successful in finding a replacement lender
and, as a result, its borrowing capacity under the applicable
facilities may be permanently reduced. If the company does not
have sufficient cash flows and income from its operations to
meet its financial commitments and those lenders are not able to
meet their funding commitments to the operating partnership, the
companys business, results of operations, cash flows and
financial condition could be adversely affected.
11
Certain of the companys third-party indebtedness is held
by the companys consolidated or unconsolidated joint
ventures. In the event that the companys joint venture
partner is unable to meet its obligations under the joint
venture agreements or the third-party debt agreements, the
company may elect to pay its joint venture partners
portion of debt to avoid foreclosure on the mortgaged property
or permit the lender to foreclose on the mortgaged property to
meet the joint ventures debt obligations. In either case,
the company could face a loss of income and asset value on the
property.
There can be no assurance that the markets will stabilize in the
near future or that the company will choose to or be able to
increase its levels of capital deployment at such time or ever.
In addition, a continued increase in the cost of credit and
inability to access the capital and credit markets may adversely
impact the occupancy of the companys properties, the
disposition of its properties, private capital raising and
contribution of properties to its co-investment ventures. For
example, an inability to fully lease the companys
properties may result in such properties not meeting the
companys investment criteria for contributions to its
co-investment ventures. If the company is unable to contribute
completed development properties to its co-investment ventures
or sell its completed development projects to third parties, the
company will not be able to recognize gains from the
contribution or sale of such properties and, as a result, the
net income available to the parent companys common
stockholders and its funds from operations will decrease.
Additionally, business layoffs, downsizing, industry slowdowns
and other similar factors that affect the companys
customers may adversely impact its business and financial
condition. Furthermore, general uncertainty in the real estate
markets has resulted in conditions where the pricing of certain
real estate assets may be difficult due to uncertainty with
respect to capitalization rates and valuations, among other
things, which may add to the difficulty of buyers or the
companys co-investment ventures to obtain financing on
favorable terms to acquire such properties or cause potential
buyers to not complete acquisitions of such properties. The
market uncertainty with respect to capitalization rates and real
estate valuations also adversely impacts the companys net
asset value. In addition, the operating partnership may face
difficulty in refinancing its mortgage debt, or may be unable to
refinance such debt at all, if its property values significantly
decline. Such a decline may also cause a default under the
loan-to-value
covenants in some of the companys joint ventures
mortgage debt, which may require its joint ventures to re-margin
or pay down a portion of the applicable debt. There can be no
assurance, however, that in such an event, the company will be
able to do so to prevent foreclosure.
In the event that the company does not have sufficient cash
available to it through its operations to continue operating its
business as usual, the company may need to find alternative ways
to increase its liquidity. Such alternatives may include,
without limitation, divesting itself of properties, whether or
not they otherwise meet the companys strategic objectives
to keep in the long term, at less than optimal terms; issuing
and selling its debt and equity in public or private
transactions under less than optimal conditions; entering into
leases with its customers at lower rental rates or less than
optimal terms; or entering into lease renewals with its existing
customers without an increase in rental rates at turnover. There
can be no assurance, however, that such alternative ways to
increase the companys liquidity will be available to the
company. Additionally, taking such measures to increase the
companys liquidity may adversely affect its business,
results of operations and financial condition.
As of December 31, 2009, the company had
$187.2 million in cash and cash equivalents. The
companys available cash and cash equivalents are held in
accounts managed by third-party financial institutions and
consist of invested cash and cash in its operating accounts. The
invested cash is invested in money market funds that invest
solely in direct obligations of the government of the United
States or in time deposits with certain financial institutions.
To date, the company has experienced no loss or lack of access
to its invested cash or cash equivalents; however, the company
can provide no assurances that access to its invested cash and
cash equivalents will not be impacted by adverse conditions in
the financial markets.
At any point in time, the company also has a significant amount
of cash deposits in its operating accounts that are with
third-party financial institutions, and, as of December 31,
2009, the amount in such deposits was approximately
$159.4 million on a consolidated basis. These balances
exceed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance
limits. While the company monitors daily the cash balances in
its operating accounts and adjusts the cash balances as
appropriate, these cash balances could be impacted if the
underlying financial institutions fail or be subject to other
adverse conditions in the financial markets. To date, the
company has experienced no loss or lack of access to cash in its
operating accounts.
12
The
price per share of the parent companys stock may decline
or fluctuate significantly.
The market price per share of the parent companys common
stock may decline or fluctuate significantly in response to many
factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
general market and economic conditions;
|
|
|
|
actual or anticipated variations in the parent companys
operating results or dividends or the parent companys
payment of dividends in shares of its stock;
|
|
|
|
changes in its funds from operations or earnings estimates;
|
|
|
|
difficulties or inability to access capital or extend or
refinance existing debt;
|
|
|
|
breaches of covenants and defaults under the operating
partnerships credit facilities and other debt;
|
|
|
|
decreasing (or uncertainty in) real estate valuations, market
rents and rental occupancy rates;
|
|
|
|
a change in analyst ratings or the operating partnerships
credit ratings;
|
|
|
|
general stock and bond market conditions, including changes in
interest rates on fixed income securities, that may lead
prospective purchasers of the parent companys stock to
demand a higher annual yield from future dividends;
|
|
|
|
adverse market reaction to any additional debt the operating
partnership incurs in the future or any other capital market
activity the company may conduct, including additional issuances
of parent company stock;
|
|
|
|
adverse market reaction to the companys strategic
initiatives and their implementation;
|
|
|
|
changes in market valuations of similar companies;
|
|
|
|
publication of research reports about the parent company or the
real estate industry;
|
|
|
|
the general reputation of real estate investment trusts and the
attractiveness of their equity securities in comparison to other
equity securities (including securities issued by other real
estate-based companies);
|
|
|
|
additions or departures of key management personnel;
|
|
|
|
actions by institutional stockholders;
|
|
|
|
speculation in the press or investment community;
|
|
|
|
terrorist activity may adversely affect the markets in which the
companys securities trade, possibly increasing market
volatility and causing the further erosion of business and
consumer confidence and spending;
|
|
|
|
governmental regulatory action and changes in tax laws; and
|
|
|
|
the realization of any of the other risk factors included in
this report.
|
Many of the factors listed above are beyond the companys
control. These factors may cause the market price of shares of
the parent companys common stock to decline, regardless of
its financial condition, results of operations, business or its
prospects.
Debt
Financing Risks
The
company faces risks associated with the use of debt to fund its
business activities, including refinancing and interest rate
risks.
As of December 31, 2009, the operating partnership had
total debt outstanding of $3.2 billion. As of
December 31, 2009, the parent company guaranteed
$1.2 billion of the operating partnerships
obligations with respect to the senior debt securities
referenced in the parent companys financial statements.
The operating partnership is subject to risks normally
associated with debt financing, including the risk that its cash
flow will be insufficient to meet required payments of principal
and interest. It is likely that the operating partnership will
need
13
to refinance at least a portion of its outstanding debt as it
matures. There is a risk that the operating partnership may not
be able to refinance existing debt or that the terms of any
refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of its
existing debt. If the operating partnership is unable to
refinance or extend principal payments due at maturity or pay
them with proceeds of other capital transactions, then the
operating partnership expects that its cash flow will not be
sufficient in all years to repay all such maturing debt and to
pay distributions to its unitholders, including the parent
company, which, in turn, will be unable to pay cash dividends to
its stockholders. Furthermore, if prevailing interest rates or
other factors at the time of refinancing (such as the reluctance
of lenders to make commercial real estate loans) result in
higher interest rates upon refinancing, then the interest
expense relating to that refinanced indebtedness would increase.
Higher interest rates on newly incurred debt may negatively
impact the operating partnership as well. If interest rates
increase, the operating partnerships interest costs and
overall costs of capital will increase, which could adversely
affect its financial condition, results of operation and cash
flow, the market price of the parent companys stock, the
operating partnerships ability to pay principal and
interest on its debt and to pay distributions to its
unitholders, the parent companys ability to pay cash
dividends to its stockholders and the operating
partnerships capital deployment activity. In addition,
there may be circumstances that will require the operating
partnership to obtain amendments or waivers to provisions in its
credit facilities or other financings. There can be no assurance
that the operating partnership will be able to obtain necessary
amendments or waivers at all or without significant expense. In
such case, the operating partnership may not be able to fund its
business activities as planned, within budget or at all.
In addition, if the company mortgages one or more of its
properties to secure payment of indebtedness and the company is
unable to meet mortgage payments, then the property could be
foreclosed upon or transferred to the lender with a consequent
loss of income and asset value. A foreclosure on one or more of
the companys properties could adversely affect its
financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay distributions to the operating partnerships
unitholders and cash dividends to the parent companys
stockholders, and the market price of the parent companys
stock.
As of December 31, 2009, the company had outstanding bank
guarantees in the amount of $0.4 million used to secure
contingent obligations, primarily obligations under development
and purchase agreements. As of December 31, 2009, the
company also guaranteed $47.9 million and
$106.7 million on outstanding loans for six of its
consolidated co-investment ventures and four of its
unconsolidated co-investment ventures, respectively. Also, the
company has entered into contribution agreements with certain of
its unconsolidated co-investment venture funds. These
contribution agreements require the company to make additional
capital contributions to the applicable co-investment venture
fund upon certain defaults by the co-investment venture of its
debt obligations to the lenders. Such additional capital
contributions will cover all or part of the applicable
co-investment ventures debt obligation and may be greater
than the companys share of the co-investment
ventures debt obligation or the value of the
companys share of any property securing such debt. The
companys contribution obligations under these agreements
will be reduced by the amounts recovered by the lender and the
fair market value of the property, if any, used to secure the
debt and obtained by the lender upon default. The companys
potential obligations under these contribution agreements were
$260.6 million as of December 31, 2009. The company
intends to continue to guarantee debt of its unconsolidated
co-investment venture funds and make additional contributions to
its unconsolidated co-investment venture funds in connection
with property contributions to the funds. Such payment
obligations under such guarantees and contribution obligations
under such contribution agreements, if required to be paid,
could be of a magnitude that could adversely affect the
companys financial condition, results of operations, cash
flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent
companys stockholders and distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders and the market price of the
parent companys stock.
Adverse
changes in the companys credit ratings could negatively
affect its financing activity.
The credit ratings of the operating partnerships senior
unsecured long-term debt and the parent companys preferred
stock are based on its operating performance, liquidity and
leverage ratios, overall financial position and other factors
employed by the credit rating agencies in their rating analyses
of the company. The companys credit ratings can affect the
amount of capital it can access, as well as the terms and
pricing of any debt the operating partnership may incur. There
can be no assurance that the company will be able to maintain
its current credit ratings, and in the event its current credit
ratings are downgraded, the company would likely incur higher
borrowing costs
14
and may encounter difficulty in obtaining additional financing.
Also, a downgrade in the companys credit ratings may
trigger additional payments or other negative consequences under
its current and future credit facilities and debt instruments.
For example, if the operating partnerships credit ratings
of its senior unsecured long-term debt are downgraded to below
investment grade levels, the operating partnership may not be
able to obtain or maintain extensions on certain of its existing
debt. Adverse changes in the operating partnerships credit
ratings could negatively impact its refinancing and other
capital market activities, its ability to manage its debt
maturities, its future growth, its financial condition, the
market price of the parent companys stock, and its
development and acquisition activity.
Covenants
in the operating partnerships debt agreements could
adversely affect its financial condition.
The terms of the operating partnerships credit agreements
and other indebtedness require that it complies with a number of
financial and other covenants, such as maintaining debt service
coverage and leverage ratios and maintaining insurance coverage.
These covenants may limit flexibility in the operating
partnerships operations, and its failure to comply with
these covenants could cause a default under the applicable debt
agreement even if it has satisfied its payment obligations. As
of December 31, 2009, the operating partnership had certain
non-recourse, secured loans, which are cross-collateralized by
multiple properties. If the operating partnership defaults on
any of these loans, it may then be required to repay such
indebtedness, together with applicable prepayment charges, to
avoid foreclosure on all the cross-collateralized properties
within the applicable pool. Foreclosure on the operating
partnerships properties, or its inability to refinance its
loans on favorable terms, could adversely impact its financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay
cash dividends to the parent companys stockholders or
distributions to the operating partnerships unitholders,
and the market price of the parent companys stock. In
addition, the operating partnerships credit facilities and
senior debt securities contain certain cross-default provisions,
which are triggered in the event that its other material
indebtedness is in default. These cross-default provisions may
require the operating partnership to repay or restructure the
credit facilities and the senior debt securities in addition to
any mortgage or other debt that is in default, which could
adversely affect the operating partnerships financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay
distributions to its unitholders and the parent companys
ability to pay cash dividends to its stockholders and the market
price of its stock.
Failure
to hedge effectively against exchange and interest rates may
adversely affect results of operations.
The company seeks to manage its exposure to exchange and
interest rate volatility by using exchange and interest rate
hedging arrangements, such as cap agreements and swap
agreements. These agreements involve risks, such as the risk
that the counterparties may fail to honor their obligations
under these arrangements, that these arrangements may not be
effective in reducing the companys exposure to exchange or
interest rate changes and that a court could rule that such
agreements are not legally enforceable. Hedging may reduce
overall returns on the companys investments. Failure to
hedge effectively against exchange and interest rate changes may
materially adversely affect the companys results of
operations.
The
company is dependent on external sources of
capital.
In order to qualify as a real estate investment trust, the
parent company is required each year to distribute to its
stockholders at least 90% of its real estate investment trust
taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends-paid
deduction and by excluding any net capital gain) and is subject
to tax to the extent its income is not fully distributed. While
historically the parent company has satisfied these distribution
requirements by making cash distributions to its stockholders,
the parent company may choose to satisfy these requirements by
making distributions of cash or other property, including, in
limited circumstances, its own stock. For distributions with
respect to taxable years ending on or before December 31,
2011, and in some cases declared as late as December 31,
2012, recent Internal Revenue Service guidance allows the parent
company to satisfy up to 90% of the distribution requirements
discussed above through the distribution of shares of its stock,
if certain conditions are met. Assuming the parent company
continues to satisfy these distribution requirements with cash,
the parent company and the operating partnership may not be able
to fund all future capital needs, including acquisition and
development activities, from cash retained from operations and
may have to rely on third-party sources of capital. Further, in
15
order to maintain the parent companys real estate
investment trust status and avoid the payment of federal income
and excise taxes, the parent company, through the operating
partnership, may need to borrow funds on a short-term basis to
meet the real estate investment trust distribution requirements
even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable
for these borrowings. These short-term borrowing needs could
result from differences in timing between the actual receipt of
cash and inclusion of income for federal income tax purposes, or
the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures, the creation
of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. The
companys ability to access private debt and equity capital
on favorable terms or at all is dependent upon a number of
factors, including general market conditions, the markets
perception of the companys growth potential, its current
and potential future earnings and cash distributions and the
market price of its securities.
The
operating partnership could incur more debt, increasing its debt
service.
As of December 31, 2009, the operating partnerships
share of total
debt-to-its
share of total market capitalization ratio was 46.5%. The
operating partnerships definition of the operating
partnerships share of total market capitalization is
the operating partnerships share of total debt plus
preferred equity liquidation preferences plus market equity. See
footnote 1 to the Capitalization Ratios table contained in
Part II, Item 7: Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operation Liquidity and Capital Resources for
the operating partnerships definitions of market
equity and the operating partnerships share of
total debt. As this ratio percentage increases directly
with a decrease in the market price per share of the parent
companys capital stock, an unstable market environment
will impact this ratio in a volatile manner. There can also be
no assurance that the operating partnership would not become
more highly leveraged, resulting in an increase in debt service
that could adversely affect the cash available for distribution
to its unitholders and, in turn, the cash available to
distribute to the parent companys stockholders.
Furthermore, if the operating partnership becomes more highly
leveraged, the operating partnership may not be in compliance
with the debt covenants contained in the agreements governing
its co-investment ventures, which could adversely impact its
private capital business.
Other
Real Estate Industry Risks
The
companys performance and value are subject to general
economic conditions and risks associated with its real estate
assets.
The investment returns available from equity investments in real
estate depend on the amount of income earned and capital
appreciation generated by the properties, as well as the
expenses incurred in connection with the properties. If the
companys properties do not generate income sufficient to
meet operating expenses, including debt service and capital
expenditures, then the operating partnerships ability to
pay distributions to its unitholders (including the parent
company) and, in turn, the parent companys ability to pay
cash dividends to its stockholders could be adversely affected.
In addition, there are significant expenditures associated with
an investment in real estate (such as mortgage payments, real
estate taxes and maintenance costs) that generally do not
decline when circumstances reduce the income from the property.
Income from, and the value of, the companys properties may
be adversely affected by:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the general economic climate, such as the current
one, including diminished access to or availability of capital
(including difficulties in financing, refinancing and extending
existing debt) and rising inflation (see Risks of the
Current Economic Environment);
|
|
|
|
local conditions, such as oversupply of or a reduction in demand
for industrial space;
|
|
|
|
the attractiveness of the companys properties to potential
customers;
|
|
|
|
competition from other properties;
|
|
|
|
the companys ability to provide adequate maintenance and
insurance;
|
|
|
|
increased operating costs;
|
|
|
|
increased cost of compliance with regulations;
|
|
|
|
the potential for liability under applicable laws (including
changes in tax laws); and
|
|
|
|
disruptions in the global supply chain caused by political,
regulatory or other factors, including terrorism.
|
16
In addition, periods of economic slowdown or recession in the
United States and in other countries, rising interest rates,
diminished access to or availability of capital or declining
demand for real estate, may result in a general decrease in
rents, an increased occurrence of defaults under existing leases
or greater difficulty in financing the companys
acquisition and development activities, which would adversely
affect the companys financial condition and results of
operations. Future terrorist attacks may result in declining
economic activity, which could reduce the demand for and the
value of the companys properties. To the extent that
future attacks impact the companys customers, their
businesses similarly could be adversely affected, including
their ability to continue to honor their existing leases.
The companys properties are concentrated predominantly in
the industrial real estate sector. As a result of this
concentration, the company feels the impact of an economic
downturn in this sector more acutely than if the companys
portfolio included other property types.
Declining
real estate valuations and impairment charges could adversely
affect the companys earnings and financial
condition.
The current economic downturn has generally resulted in lower
real estate valuations, which has required the company to
recognize real estate impairment charges on its assets. The
company conducts a comprehensive review of all real estate asset
classes in accordance with its policy of accounting for the
impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, which indicates
that asset values should be analyzed whenever events or changes
in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of a property
may not be fully recoverable. The intended use of an asset,
either held for sale or held for the long term, can
significantly impact how impairment is measured. If an asset is
intended to be held for the long term, the impairment analysis
is based on a two-step test. The first test measures estimated
expected future cash flows over the holding period, including a
residual value (undiscounted and without interest charges),
against the carrying value of the property. If the asset fails
the first test, then the asset carrying value is measured
against the estimated fair value from a market participant
standpoint, with the excess of the assets carrying value
over the estimated fair value recognized as an impairment charge
to earnings. If an asset is intended to be sold, impairment is
tested based on a one-step test, comparing the carrying value to
the estimated fair value less costs to sell. The estimation of
expected future net cash flows is inherently uncertain and
relies on assumptions regarding current and future economic and
market conditions and the availability of capital. The company
determines the estimated fair values based on assumptions
regarding rental rates, costs to complete,
lease-up and
holding periods, as well as sales prices or contribution values.
The company also utilizes the knowledge of its regional teams
and the recent valuations of its two open-ended funds, which
contain a large, geographically diversified pool of assets, all
of which are subject to third-party appraisals on at least an
annual basis. As a result of changing market conditions, the
company re-evaluated the carrying value of its investments and
recognized real estate impairment losses of $181.9 million
during the year ended December 31, 2009 on certain of its
investments.
The principal trigger which led to the impairment charges was
the severe economic deterioration in some markets resulting in a
decrease in leasing and rental rates, rising vacancies and an
increase in capitalization rates. Additional impairments may be
necessary in the future in the event that market conditions
continue to deteriorate and impact the factors used to estimate
fair value, which may include impairments relating to the
companys unconsolidated real estate as well as impairments
relating to the companys investments in its unconsolidated
co-investment ventures. Investments in unconsolidated joint
ventures are presented under the equity method. The equity
method is used when the company has the ability to exercise
significant influence over operating and financial policies of
the joint venture but does not have control of the joint
venture. Under the equity method, these investments are
initially recognized in the balance sheet at cost and are
subsequently adjusted to reflect the companys
proportionate share of net earnings or losses of the joint
venture, distributions received, contributions, deferred gains
from the contribution of properties and certain other
adjustments, as appropriate. When circumstances indicate there
may have been a loss in value of an equity investment, the
company evaluates the investment for impairment by estimating
the companys ability to recover its investment or if the
loss in value is other than temporary. To evaluate whether an
impairment is other than temporary, the company considers
relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the period of
time in any unrealized loss position, the likelihood of a future
recovery, and the companys positive intent and ability to
hold the investment until the forecasted recovery. If the
company determines the loss in value is other than temporary,
the company recognizes an impairment charge to reflect the
17
investment at fair value. Fair value is determined through
various valuation techniques, including, but not limited to,
discounted cash flow models, quoted market values and third
party appraisals. During the year ended December 31, 2009,
the company did not record any impairment on its investments in
unconsolidated co-investment ventures. There can be no assurance
that the estimates and assumptions the company uses to assess
impairments are accurate and will reflect actual results. A
worsening real estate market may cause the company to reevaluate
the assumptions used in its impairment analysis and its intent
to hold, sell, develop or contribute properties. Impairment
charges could adversely affect the companys financial
condition, results of operations and its ability to pay cash
dividends to the parent companys stockholders and
distributions to the operating partnerships unitholders
and the market price of the parent companys stock. See
Part IV, Item 15: Note 3 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for a more detailed
discussion of the real estate impairment losses recorded in the
companys results of operations.
The
company may be unable to lease vacant space or renew leases or
relet space as leases expire.
As of December 31, 2009, on an owned and managed basis, the
companys occupancy average was 91.4%
year-to-date
and the leases on 13.1% of the companys industrial
properties (based on annualized base rent) will expire on or
prior to December 31, 2010. The company derives most of its
income from rent received from its customers. Accordingly, the
companys financial condition, results of operations, cash
flow and its ability to pay dividends to the parent
companys stockholders and distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders, and the market price of the
parent companys stock could be adversely affected if the
company is unable to lease vacant space at favorable rents or
terms or at all and to promptly relet or renew expiring leases
or if the rental rates upon leasing, renewal or reletting are
significantly lower than expected. There can be no assurance
that the company will be able to lease its vacant space, renew
its expiring leases, increase its occupancy to its historical
averages or generally realize the potential of its currently
low-yielding assets (including the build-out and leasing of its
development platform). Periods of economic slowdown or recession
are likely to adversely affect the companys leasing
activities. If a customer experiences a downturn in its business
or other type of financial distress, then it may be unable to
make timely rental payments or renew its lease. Further, the
companys ability to rent space and the rents that it can
charge are impacted, not only by customer demand, but by the
number of other properties the company has to compete with to
appeal to customers.
The
company could be adversely affected if a significant number of
its customers are unable to meet their lease
obligations.
The companys results of operations, distributable cash
flow and the value of the parent companys stock would be
adversely affected if a significant number of the companys
customers were unable to meet their lease obligations. In the
current economic environment, it is likely that customer
bankruptcies will increase. If a customer seeks the protection
of bankruptcy, insolvency or similar laws, such customers
lease may be terminated in the process and result in a reduction
of cash flow to the company. In the event of a significant
number of lease defaults
and/or
tenant bankruptcies, the companys cash flow may not be
sufficient to pay distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders and cash dividends to the parent
companys stockholders and repay maturing debt and any
other obligations. As of December 31, 2009, on an owned and
managed basis, the company did not have any single customer
account for annualized base rent revenues greater than 3.6%.
However, in the event of lease defaults by a significant number
of the companys customers, the company may incur
substantial costs in enforcing its rights as landlord.
The
company may be unable to consummate acquisitions on advantageous
terms or at all or acquisitions may not perform as it
expects.
On a strategic and selective basis, the company may acquire
U.S. or foreign properties, portfolios of properties or
interests in property-owning or real-estate related entities and
platforms, which could include large acquisitions that could
increase the companys size and alter its capital and
organizational structure. Such acquisitions entail various
risks, including the risks that the companys investments
may not perform or be accretive to the companys value as
it expects, that it may be unable to quickly and efficiently
integrate its new acquisitions into its existing operations or,
if applicable, contribute the acquired properties to a joint
venture, that portfolio acquisitions may
18
include non-core assets, that the new investments may come with
unexpected liabilities and that the companys cost
estimates for developing or bringing an acquired property up to
market standards may prove inaccurate. The company may not be
able to acquire assets at values above the companys cost
of capital. In addition, the company expects to finance future
acquisitions through a combination of borrowings under its
unsecured credit facilities, proceeds from private or public
equity or debt offerings (including issuances of operating
partnership units) and proceeds from property divestitures,
which may not be available at favorable pricing or at all and
which could adversely affect the companys cash flow.
Further, the company faces significant competition for
attractive investment opportunities from other real estate
investors, including both publicly-traded real estate investment
trusts and private institutional investors and funds. This
competition increases as quality investment opportunities arise
at favorable pricing and investments in real estate become
increasingly attractive relative to other forms of investment.
As a result of competition, the company may be unable to make
additional investments as it desires or the purchase price of
the investments may be significantly elevated. Also, the company
may incur significant transaction-related costs in exploring and
pursuing potential transactions it may not consummate. Any of
the above risks could adversely affect the companys
financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and the
ability to pay cash dividends to the parent companys
stockholders and distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders, and the market price of the
parent companys stock.
The
company is subject to risks and liabilities in connection with
forming new joint ventures, investing in new or existing joint
ventures, attracting third party investment and owning
properties through joint ventures and other investment
vehicles.
As of December 31, 2009, approximately 88.1 million
square feet of the companys properties were held through
joint ventures, limited liability companies or partnerships with
third parties. The companys organizational documents do
not limit the amount of available funds that it may invest in
partnerships, limited liability companies or joint ventures, and
the company may and currently intends to develop and acquire
properties through joint ventures, limited liability companies,
partnerships with and investments in other entities when
warranted by the circumstances. However, there can be no
assurance that the company will be able to form new joint
ventures, attract third party investment or make additional
investments in new or existing joint ventures, successfully
develop or acquire properties through such joint ventures, or
realize value from such joint ventures. The companys
inability to do so may have an adverse effect on the
companys growth, its earnings and the market price of the
parent companys securities.
Joint venture partners may share certain approval rights over
major decisions and some partners may manage the properties in
the joint venture investments. Joint venture investments involve
certain risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
if the companys joint venture partners go bankrupt, then
the company and any other remaining partners may generally
remain liable for the investments liabilities;
|
|
|
|
if the companys joint venture partners fail to fund their
share of any required capital contributions, then the company
may choose to or be required to contribute such capital;
|
|
|
|
the company may, under certain circumstances, guarantee all or a
portion of the joint ventures debt, which may require the
company to pay an amount greater than its investment in the
joint venture;
|
|
|
|
the companys joint venture partners might have economic or
other business interests or goals that are inconsistent with the
companys business interests or goals that would affect the
companys ability to operate the property;
|
|
|
|
the companys joint venture partners may have the power to
act contrary to the companys instructions, requests,
policies or objectives, including its current policy with
respect to maintaining the parent companys qualification
as a real estate investment trust;
|
|
|
|
the joint venture or other governing agreements often restrict
the transfer of an interest in the joint venture or may
otherwise restrict the companys ability to sell the
interest when it desires or on advantageous terms;
|
|
|
|
the companys relationships with its joint venture partners
are generally contractual in nature and may be terminated or
dissolved under the terms of the agreements, and in such event,
the company may not continue
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
to own or operate the interests or assets underlying such
relationship or may need to purchase such interests or assets at
an above-market price to continue ownership;
|
|
|
|
|
|
disputes between the company and its joint venture partners may
result in litigation or arbitration that would increase the
companys expenses and prevent its officers and directors
from focusing their time and effort on the companys
business and result in subjecting the properties owned by the
applicable joint venture to additional risk; and
|
|
|
|
the company may in certain circumstances be liable for the
actions of its joint venture partners.
|
The company generally seeks to maintain sufficient control or
influence over its joint ventures to permit it to achieve its
business objectives; however, the company may not be able to do
so, and the occurrence of one or more of the events described
above could adversely affect the companys financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay
cash dividends to the parent companys stockholders and
distributions to the operating partnerships unitholders
and the market price of the parent companys stock.
The
company may not be successful in contributing properties to its
co-investment ventures.
The company may contribute or sell properties to certain of its
co-investment ventures on a
case-by-case
basis. However, the company may fail to contribute properties to
its co-investment ventures due to such factors as its inability
to acquire, develop, or lease properties that meet the
investment criteria of such ventures, or its co-investment
ventures inability to access debt and equity capital to
pay for property contributions or their allocation of available
capital to cover other capital requirements such as forward
commitments, loan maturities and future redemptions. If the
co-investment ventures are unable to raise additional capital on
favorable terms after available capital is depleted or if the
value of properties to be contributed or sold to the
co-investment ventures are appraised at less than the cost of
such properties, then such contributions or sales could be
delayed or prevented, adversely affecting the companys
financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay cash dividends to the parent companys
stockholders and distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders, and the market price of the
parent companys stock.
A delay in these contributions could result in adverse effects
on the companys liquidity and on its ability to meet
projected earnings levels in a particular reporting period,
which could have an adverse effect on the companys results
of operations, distributable cash flow and the value of its
securities.
The
company may be unable to complete divestitures on advantageous
terms or at all.
The company may divest itself of properties, which are currently
in its portfolio, are held for sale or which otherwise do not
meet its strategic objectives. The company may, in certain
circumstances, divest itself of properties to increase its
liquidity or to capitalize on opportunities that arise. The
companys ability to dispose of properties on advantageous
terms or at all depends on factors beyond its control, including
competition from other sellers, current market conditions
(including capitalization rates applicable to its properties)
and the availability of financing for potential buyers of its
properties. If the company is unable to dispose of properties on
favorable terms or at all or redeploy the proceeds of property
divestitures in accordance with its investment strategy, then
the companys financial condition, results of operations,
cash flow, ability to meet its debt obligations in a timely
manner and the ability to pay cash dividends and distributions
could be adversely affected, which could also negatively impact
the market price of the parent companys stock.
Actions
by the companys competitors may affect the companys
ability to divest properties and may decrease or prevent
increases of the occupancy and rental rates of the
companys properties.
The company competes with other owners, operators and developers
of real estate, some of which own properties similar to the
companys properties in the same submarkets in which the
companys properties are located. If the companys
competitors sell assets similar to assets the company intends to
divest in the same markets
and/or at
valuations below the companys valuations for comparable
assets, the company may be unable to divest its assets at
favorable pricing or on favorable terms or at all. In addition,
if the companys competitors offer space at rental rates
below current market rates or below the rental rates the company
currently charges its customers, the
20
company may lose potential customers, and the company may be
pressured to reduce its rental rates below those the company
currently charges in order to retain customers when its
customers leases expire. As a result, the companys
financial condition, cash flow, cash available for distributions
and dividends and, trading price of the parent companys
stock and ability to satisfy the operating partnerships
debt service obligations could be materially adversely affected.
The
company may be unable to complete renovation, development and
redevelopment projects on advantageous terms or at
all.
On a strategic and selective basis, the company may develop,
renovate and redevelop properties. After the financial and real
estate markets stabilize, the company may expand its investment
in its development, renovation and redevelopment business and
complete the build-out and leasing of its development platform.
The company may also develop, renovate and redevelop properties
in newly formed development joint ventures into which the
company may contribute assets. The real estate development,
renovation and redevelopment business involves significant risks
that could adversely affect the companys financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay
cash dividends to the parent companys stockholders and
distributions to the operating partnerships unitholders
and the market price of the parent companys stock, which
include the following risks:
|
|
|
|
|
the company may not be able to obtain financing for development
projects on favorable terms or at all and complete construction
on schedule or within budget, resulting in increased debt
service expense and construction costs and delays in leasing the
properties, generating cash flow and, if applicable,
contributing properties to a joint venture;
|
|
|
|
the company may not be able to obtain, or may experience delays
in obtaining, all necessary zoning, land-use, building,
occupancy and other governmental permits and authorizations;
|
|
|
|
the properties may perform below anticipated levels, producing
cash flow below budgeted amounts;
|
|
|
|
the company may not be able to lease properties on favorable
terms or at all;
|
|
|
|
construction costs, total investment amounts and the
companys share of remaining funding may exceed the
companys estimates and projects may not be completed,
delivered or stabilized as planned;
|
|
|
|
the company may not be able to attract third party investment in
new development joint ventures or sufficient customer demand for
its product;
|
|
|
|
the company may not be able to capture the anticipated enhanced
value created by its value-added conversion projects on its
expected timetables or at all;
|
|
|
|
the company may not be able to successfully form development
joint ventures or capture value from such newly formed ventures;
|
|
|
|
the company may fail to contribute properties to its
co-investment ventures due to such factors as its inability to
acquire, develop, or lease properties that meet the investment
criteria of such ventures, or its co-investment ventures
inability to access debt and equity capital to pay for property
contributions or their allocation of available capital to cover
other capital requirements such as future redemptions;
|
|
|
|
the company may experience delays (temporary or permanent) if
there is public opposition to its activities;
|
|
|
|
substantial renovation, new development and redevelopment
activities, regardless of their ultimate success, typically
require a significant amount of managements time and
attention, diverting their attention from the companys
day-to-day
operations; and
|
|
|
|
upon completion of construction, the company may not be able to
obtain, on advantageous terms or at all, permanent financing for
activities that it has financed through construction loans.
|
21
Real
estate investments are relatively illiquid, making it difficult
for the company to respond promptly to changing
conditions.
Real estate assets are not as liquid as certain other types of
assets. Further, the Internal Revenue Code regulates the number
of properties that the parent company, as a real estate
investment trust, can dispose of in a year, their tax bases and
the cost of improvements that the parent company makes to the
properties. In addition, a portion of the properties held
directly or indirectly by certain of the companys
subsidiary partnerships were acquired in exchange for limited
partnership units in the applicable partnership. The
contribution agreements for such properties may contain
restrictions on certain sales, exchanges or other dispositions
of these properties, or a portion thereof, which result in a
taxable transaction for specified periods, following the
contribution of these properties to the applicable partnership.
These limitations may affect the companys ability to sell
properties. This lack of liquidity and the Internal Revenue Code
restrictions may limit the companys ability to vary its
portfolio promptly in response to changes in economic or other
conditions and, as a result, could adversely affect the
companys financial condition, results of operations and
cash flow, the market price of the parent companys stock,
the ability to pay cash dividends to the parent companys
stockholders and distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders, and the operating
partnerships ability to access capital necessary to meet
its debt payments and other obligations.
Risks
Associated with the Companys International
Business
The
companys international activities are subject to special
risks and it may not be able to effectively manage its
international business.
The company acquired and developed, and may continue to acquire
and develop on a strategic and selective basis, properties and
operating platforms outside the United States. Because local
markets affect the companys operations, the companys
international investments are subject to economic fluctuations
in the international locations in which the company invests.
Access to capital may be more restricted, or unavailable on
favorable terms or at all, in certain locations. In addition,
the companys international operations are subject to the
usual risks of doing business abroad such as revisions in tax
treaties or other laws and regulations, including those
governing the taxation of the companys international
revenues, restrictions on the transfer of funds, and, in certain
parts of the world, uncertainty over property rights, terrorist
or gang-related activities, civil unrest and political
instability. The company cannot predict the likelihood that any
of these developments may occur. Further, the company has
entered, and may in the future enter, into agreements with
non-U.S. entities
that are governed by the laws of, and are subject to dispute
resolution in the courts of, another country or region. The
company cannot accurately predict whether such a forum would
provide it with an effective and efficient means of resolving
disputes that may arise. Further, even if the company is able to
obtain a satisfactory decision through arbitration or a court
proceeding, the company could have difficulty enforcing any
award or judgment on a timely basis or at all.
The company also has offices in many countries outside the
United States and, as a result, the companys operations
may be subject to risks that may limit its ability to
effectively establish, staff and manage its offices outside the
United States, including:
|
|
|
|
|
differing employment practices and labor issues;
|
|
|
|
local business and cultural factors that differ from the
companys usual standards and practices;
|
|
|
|
regulatory requirements and prohibitions that differ between
jurisdictions; and
|
|
|
|
health concerns.
|
The companys global growth (including growth in new
regions in the United States) subjects the company to certain
risks, including risks associated with funding increasing
headcount, integrating new offices, and establishing effective
controls and procedures to regulate the operations of new
offices and to monitor compliance with regulations such as the
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. In addition, payroll expenses are
paid in local currencies and, therefore, the company is exposed
to risks associated with fluctuations in the rate of exchange
between the U.S. dollar and these currencies.
Further, the companys business has grown rapidly and may
continue to grow in a strategic and deliberate manner. If the
company fails to effectively manage its international growth,
then the companys financial condition,
22
results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash
dividends to the parent companys stockholders and
distributions to the operating partnerships unitholders,
and the market price of the parent companys stock could be
adversely affected.
The
company is subject to risks from potential fluctuations in
exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and the currencies of the
other countries in which it invests.
The company may pursue growth opportunities in international
markets on a strategic and selective basis. As the company
invests in countries where the U.S. dollar is not the
national currency, the company is subject to international
currency risks from the potential fluctuations in exchange rates
between the U.S. dollar and the currencies of those other
countries. A significant depreciation in the value of the
currency of one or more countries where the company has a
significant investment may materially affect its results of
operations. The company attempts to mitigate any such effects by
borrowing in the currency of the country in which it is
investing and, under certain circumstances, by putting in place
international currency put option contracts to hedge exchange
rate fluctuations. For leases denominated in international
currencies, the company may use derivative financial instruments
to manage the international currency exchange risk. The company
cannot assure you, however, that its efforts will successfully
neutralize all international currency risks.
Acquired
properties may be located in new markets, where the company may
face risks associated with investing in an unfamiliar
market.
The company has acquired and may continue to acquire properties,
portfolios of properties, interests in real-estate related
entities or platforms on a strategic and selective basis in
international markets that are new to it. When the company
acquires properties or platforms located in these markets, it
may face risks associated with a lack of market knowledge or
understanding of the local economy, forging new business
relationships in the area and unfamiliarity with local
government and permitting procedures. The company works to
mitigate such risks through extensive diligence and research and
associations with experienced partners; however, there can be no
guarantee that all such risks will be eliminated.
General
Business Risks
The
companys performance and value are impacted by the local
economic conditions of and the risks associated with doing
business in California.
As of December 31, 2009, the companys industrial
properties located in California represented 22.6% of the
aggregate square footage of its industrial operating properties
and 21.0% of its industrial annualized base rent, on an owned
and managed basis. The companys revenue from, and the
value of, its properties located in California may be affected
by local real estate conditions (such as an oversupply of or
reduced demand for industrial properties) and the local economic
climate. Business layoffs, downsizing, industry slowdowns,
changing demographics and other factors may adversely impact
Californias economic climate. Because of the number of
properties the company has located in California, a downturn in
Californias economy or real estate conditions could
adversely affect the companys financial condition, results
of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to
its stockholders and the market price of its stock.
The
company faces risks associated with short-term liquid
investments.
The company continues to have significant cash balances that it
invests in a variety of short-term investments that are intended
to preserve principal value and maintain a high degree of
liquidity while providing current income. From time to time,
these investments may include (either directly or indirectly):
|
|
|
|
|
direct obligations issued by the U.S. Treasury;
|
|
|
|
obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or
its agencies;
|
|
|
|
taxable municipal securities;
|
|
|
|
obligations (including certificates of deposit) of banks and
thrifts;
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
commercial paper and other instruments consisting of short-term
U.S. dollar denominated obligations issued by corporations
and banks;
|
|
|
|
repurchase agreements collateralized by corporate and
asset-backed obligations;
|
|
|
|
both registered and unregistered money market funds; and
|
|
|
|
other highly rated short-term securities.
|
Investments in these securities and funds are not insured
against loss of principal. Under certain circumstances the
company may be required to redeem all or part of its investment,
and its right to redeem some or all of its investment may be
delayed or suspended. In addition, there is no guarantee that
the companys investments in these securities or funds will
be redeemable at par value. A decline in the value of the
companys investment or a delay or suspension of its right
to redeem may have an adverse effect on the companys
results of operations or financial condition.
The
company may experience losses that its insurance does not
cover.
The company carries commercial liability, property and rental
loss insurance covering all the properties that it owns and
manages in types and amounts that it believes are adequate and
appropriate given the relative risks applicable to the property,
the cost of coverage and industry practice. Certain losses, such
as those due to terrorism, windstorms, floods or seismic
activity, may be insured subject to certain limitations,
including large deductibles or co-payments and policy limits.
Although the company has obtained coverage for certain acts of
terrorism, with policy specifications and insured limits that
the company considers commercially reasonable given the cost and
availability of such coverage, the company cannot be certain
that it will be able to renew coverage on comparable terms or
collect under such policies. In addition, there are other types
of losses, such as those from riots, bio-terrorism or acts of
war, that are not generally insured in the companys
industry because it is not economically feasible to do so. The
company may incur material losses in excess of insurance
proceeds and it may not be able to continue to obtain insurance
at commercially reasonable rates. Given current market
conditions, there can also be no assurance that the insurance
companies providing the companys coverage will not fail or
have difficulty meeting their coverage obligations to the
company. Furthermore, the company cannot assure you that its
insurance companies will be able to continue to offer products
with sufficient coverage at commercially reasonable rates. If
the company experiences a loss that is uninsured or that exceeds
its insured limits with respect to one or more of its properties
or if the companys insurance companies fail to meet their
coverage commitments to it in the event of an insured loss, then
the company could lose the capital invested in the damaged
properties, as well as the anticipated future revenue from those
properties and, if there is recourse debt, then the company
would remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial
obligations related to the properties. Moreover, as the general
partner of the operating partnership, the parent company
generally will be liable for all of the operating
partnerships unsatisfied recourse obligations, including
any obligations incurred by the operating partnership as the
general partner of co-investment ventures. Any such losses or
higher insurance costs could adversely affect the companys
financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay cash dividends to the parent companys
stockholders and distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders and the market price of the
parent companys stock.
A number of the companys properties are located in areas
that are known to be subject to earthquake activity.
U.S. properties located in active seismic areas include
properties in the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, and
Seattle. The companys largest concentration of such
properties is in California where, on an owned and managed
basis, as of December 31, 2009, the company had 280
industrial buildings, aggregating approximately
30.0 million square feet and representing 22.6% of its
industrial operating properties based on aggregate square
footage and 21.0% based on industrial annualized base rent, on
an owned and managed basis. International properties located in
active seismic areas include Tokyo and Osaka, Japan and Mexico
City, Mexico. The company carries earthquake insurance on all of
its properties located in areas historically subject to seismic
activity, subject to coverage limitations and deductibles that
it believes are commercially reasonable. The company evaluates
its earthquake insurance coverage annually in light of current
industry practice through an analysis prepared by outside
consultants.
24
A number of the companys properties are located in areas
that are known to be subject to hurricane
and/or flood
risk. The company carries hurricane and flood hazard insurance
on all of its properties located in areas historically subject
to such activity, subject to coverage limitations and
deductibles that it believes are commercially reasonable. The
company evaluates its insurance coverage annually in light of
current industry practice through an analysis prepared by
outside consultants.
Contingent
or unknown liabilities could adversely affect the companys
financial condition.
The company has acquired and may in the future acquire
properties subject to liabilities and without any recourse, or
with only limited recourse, with respect to unknown liabilities.
As a result, if a liability were asserted against the company
based upon ownership of any of these entities or properties,
then the company might have to pay substantial sums to settle
it, which could adversely affect its cash flow. Contingent or
unknown liabilities with respect to entities or properties
acquired might include:
|
|
|
|
|
liabilities for environmental conditions;
|
|
|
|
losses in excess of the companys insured coverage;
|
|
|
|
accrued but unpaid liabilities incurred in the ordinary course
of business;
|
|
|
|
tax, legal and regulatory liabilities;
|
|
|
|
claims of customers, vendors or other persons dealing with the
companys predecessors prior to its formation or
acquisition transactions that had not been asserted or were
unknown prior to the companys formation or acquisition
transactions; and
|
|
|
|
claims for indemnification by the general partners, officers and
directors and others indemnified by the former owners of the
companys properties.
|
Risks
Associated with the Companys Dependence on Key
Personnel
The company depends on the efforts of its executive officers and
other key employees. From time to time, the companys
personnel and their roles may change. As part of the
companys cost savings plan, the company has reduced its
total global headcount and may do so again in the future. While
the company believes that it has retained its key talent, left
its global platform intact and can find suitable employees to
meet its personnel needs, the loss of key personnel, any change
in their roles, or the limitation of their availability could
adversely affect the companys financial condition, results
of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to
the parent companys stockholders and distributions to the
operating partnerships unitholders, and the market price
of the parent companys stock. The company does not have
employment agreements with any of its executive officers.
Because the companys compensation packages include
equity-based incentives, pressure on the parent companys
stock price or limitations on the companys ability to
award such incentives could affect the companys ability to
offer competitive compensation packages to its executives and
key employees. If the company is unable to continue to attract
and retain its executive officers, or if compensation costs
required to attract and retain key employees become more
expensive, the companys performance and competitive
position could be materially adversely affected.
Conflicts
of Interest Risks
Some
of the companys directors and executive officers are
involved in other real estate activities and investments and,
therefore, may have conflicts of interest with the
company.
From time to time, certain of the companys executive
officers and directors may own interests in other real-estate
related businesses and investments, including de minimis
holdings of the equity securities of public and private real
estate companies. The companys executive officers
involvement in other real estate-related activities could divert
their attention from the companys
day-to-day
operations. The companys executive officers have entered
into non-competition agreements with the company pursuant to
which they have agreed not to engage in any activities, directly
or indirectly, in respect of commercial real estate, and not to
make any investment in respect of
25
any industrial or retail real estate, other than through
ownership of not more than 5% of the outstanding shares of a
public company engaged in such activities or through certain
specified investments. State law may limit the companys
ability to enforce these agreements. The company will not
acquire any properties from its executive officers, directors or
their affiliates unless the transaction is approved by a
majority of the disinterested and independent (as defined by the
rules of the New York Stock Exchange) members of the parent
companys board of directors with respect to that
transaction.
The
parent companys role as general partner of the operating
partnership may conflict with the interests of its
stockholders.
As the general partner of the operating partnership, the parent
company has fiduciary obligations to the operating
partnerships limited partners, the discharge of which may
conflict with the interests of the parent companys
stockholders. In addition, those persons holding limited
partnership units will have the right to vote as a class on
certain amendments to the operating partnerships
partnership agreement and individually to approve certain
amendments that would adversely affect their rights. The limited
partners may exercise these voting rights in a manner that
conflicts with the interests of the parent companys
stockholders. In addition, under the terms of the operating
partnerships partnership agreement, holders of limited
partnership units will have approval rights with respect to
specified transactions that affect all stockholders but which
they may not exercise in a manner that reflects the interests of
all stockholders.
Risks
Associated with Government Regulations
The
costs of compliance with environmental laws and regulations and
any related potential liability could exceed the companys
budgets for these items.
Under various environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, a
current or previous owner or operator of real estate may be
liable for the costs of investigation, removal or remediation of
certain hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products at,
on, under, in or from its property. The costs of removal or
remediation of such substances could be substantial. These laws
typically impose liability and
clean-up
responsibility without regard to whether the owner or operator
knew of or caused the presence of the contaminants. Even if more
than one person may have been responsible for the contamination,
each person covered by the environmental laws may be held
responsible for all of the
clean-up
costs incurred. In addition, third parties may sue the owner or
operator of a site for damages based on personal injury,
property damage or other costs, including investigation and
clean-up
costs, resulting from the environmental contamination.
Environmental laws in some countries, including the United
States, also require that owners or operators of buildings
containing asbestos properly manage and maintain the asbestos,
adequately inform or train those who may come into contact with
asbestos and undertake special precautions, including removal or
other abatement, in the event that asbestos is disturbed during
building renovation or demolition. These laws may impose fines
and penalties on building owners or operators who fail to comply
with these requirements and may allow third parties to seek
recovery from owners or operators for personal injury associated
with exposure to asbestos. Some of the companys properties
are known to contain asbestos-containing building materials.
In addition, some of the companys properties are leased or
have been leased, in part, to owners and operators of businesses
that use, store or otherwise handle petroleum products or other
hazardous or toxic substances, creating a potential for the
release of such hazardous or toxic substances. Further, certain
of the companys properties are on, adjacent to or near
other properties that have contained or currently contain
petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances, or
upon which others have engaged, are engaged or may engage in
activities that may release such hazardous or toxic substances.
From time to time, the company may acquire properties, or
interests in properties, with known adverse environmental
conditions where the company believes that the environmental
liabilities associated with these conditions are quantifiable
and that the acquisition will yield a superior risk-adjusted
return. In such an instance, the company underwrites the costs
of environmental investigation,
clean-up and
monitoring into the acquisition cost and obtains appropriate
environmental insurance for the property. Further, in connection
with certain divested properties, the company has agreed to
remain responsible for, and to bear the cost of, remediating or
monitoring certain environmental conditions on the properties.
26
At the time of acquisition, the company subjects all of its
properties to a Phase I or similar environmental assessments by
independent environmental consultants and the company may have
additional Phase II testing performed upon the
consultants recommendation. These environmental
assessments have not revealed, and the company is not aware of,
any environmental liability that it believes would have a
material adverse effect on the companys financial
condition or results of operations taken as a whole.
Nonetheless, it is possible that the assessments did not reveal
all environmental liabilities and that there are material
environmental liabilities unknown to the company, or that known
environmental conditions may give rise to liabilities that are
greater than the company anticipated. Further, the
companys properties current environmental condition
may be affected by customers, the condition of land, operations
in the vicinity of the properties (such as releases from
underground storage tanks) or by unrelated third parties. If the
costs of compliance with existing or future environmental laws
and regulations exceed the companys budgets for these
items, then the companys financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the
parent companys stockholders and distributions to the
operating partnerships unitholders, and the market price
of the parent companys stock could be adversely affected.
Compliance
or failure to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act
and other similar regulations could result in substantial
costs.
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, places of public
accommodation must meet certain federal requirements related to
access and use by disabled persons. Noncompliance could result
in the imposition of fines by the federal government or the
award of damages to private litigants. If the company is
required to make unanticipated expenditures to comply with the
Americans with Disabilities Act, including removing access
barriers, then the companys cash flow and the amounts
available for dividends to the parent companys
stockholders and distributions to the operating
partnerships unitholders may be adversely affected. The
companys properties are also subject to various federal,
state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local
fire and life-safety requirements. The company could incur fines
or private damage awards if it fails to comply with these
requirements. While the company believes that its properties are
currently in material compliance with these regulatory
requirements, the requirements may change or new requirements
may be imposed that could require significant unanticipated
expenditures by the company that will affect its cash flow and
results of operations.
Federal
Income Tax Risks
The
parent companys failure to qualify as a real estate
investment trust would have serious adverse consequences to its
stockholders.
The parent company elected to be taxed as a real estate
investment trust under Sections 856 through 860 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Internal
Revenue Code), commencing with its taxable year ended
December 31, 1997. The parent company believes it has
operated so as to qualify as a real estate investment trust
under the Internal Revenue Code and believes that the parent
companys current organization and method of operation
comply with the rules and regulations promulgated under the
Internal Revenue Code to enable it to continue to qualify as a
real estate investment trust. However, it is possible that the
parent company has been organized or has operated in a manner
that would not allow it to qualify as a real estate investment
trust, or that the parent companys future operations could
cause it to fail to qualify. Qualification as a real estate
investment trust requires the parent company to satisfy numerous
requirements (some on an annual and others on a quarterly basis)
established under highly technical and complex sections of the
Internal Revenue Code for which there are only limited judicial
and administrative interpretations, and involves the
determination of various factual matters and circumstances not
entirely within the parent companys control. For example,
in order to qualify as a real estate investment trust, the
parent company must derive at least 95% of its gross income in
any year from qualifying sources. In addition, the parent
company must pay dividends to its stockholders aggregating
annually at least 90% of its real estate investment trust
taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends paid
deduction and by excluding capital gains) and must satisfy
specified asset tests on a quarterly basis. While historically
the parent company has satisfied the distribution requirement
discussed above by making cash distributions to its
stockholders, the parent company may choose to satisfy this
requirement by making distributions of cash or other property,
including, in limited circumstances, its own stock. For
distributions with respect to taxable years ending on or before
December 31, 2011, and in some cases declared as late as
December 31, 2012, recent Internal Revenue
27
Service guidance allows the parent company to satisfy up to 90%
of this distribution requirement through the distribution of
shares of its stock, if certain conditions are met. The
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and applicable Treasury
regulations regarding qualification as a real estate investment
trust are more complicated in the parent companys case
because it holds its assets through the operating partnership.
Legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or
court decisions could significantly change the tax laws with
respect to qualification as a real estate investment trust or
the federal income tax consequences of such qualification.
However, the parent company is not aware of any pending tax
legislation that would adversely affect its ability to qualify
as a real estate investment trust.
If the parent company fails to qualify as a real estate
investment trust in any taxable year, the parent company will be
required to pay federal income tax (including any applicable
alternative minimum tax) on its taxable income at regular
corporate rates. Unless the parent company is entitled to relief
under certain statutory provisions, the parent company would be
disqualified from treatment as a real estate investment trust
for the four taxable years following the year in which the
parent company lost its qualification. If the parent company
lost its real estate investment trust status, the parent
companys net earnings available for investment or
distribution to stockholders would be significantly reduced for
each of the years involved. In addition, the parent company
would no longer be required to make distributions to its
stockholders.
Furthermore, the parent company owns a direct or indirect
interest in certain subsidiary REITs which elected to be taxed
as REITs under Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal
Revenue Code. Provided that each subsidiary REIT qualifies as a
REIT, the parent companys interest in such subsidiary REIT
will be treated as a qualifying real estate asset for purposes
of the REIT asset tests, and any dividend income or gains
derived by the parent company from such subsidiary REIT will
generally be treated as income that qualifies for purposes of
the REIT gross income tests. To qualify as a REIT, the
subsidiary REIT must independently satisfy all of the REIT
qualification requirements. If such subsidiary REIT were to fail
to qualify as a REIT, and certain relief provisions did not
apply, it would be treated as a regular taxable corporation and
its income would be subject to United States federal income tax.
In addition, a failure of the subsidiary REIT to qualify as a
REIT would have an adverse effect on the parent companys
ability to comply with the REIT income and asset tests, and thus
the parent companys ability to qualify as a REIT.
Certain
property transfers may generate prohibited transaction income,
resulting in a penalty tax on gain attributable to the
transaction.
From time to time, the company may transfer or otherwise dispose
of some of its properties, including by contributing properties
to its co-investment venture funds. Under the Internal Revenue
Code, any gain resulting from transfers of properties the
company holds as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in
the ordinary course of business is treated as income from a
prohibited transaction subject to a 100% penalty tax. The
company does not believe that its transfers or disposals of
property or its contributions of properties into its
co-investment ventures are prohibited transactions. However,
whether property is held for investment purposes is a question
of fact that depends on all the facts and circumstances
surrounding the particular transaction. The Internal Revenue
Service may contend that certain transfers or dispositions of
properties by the company or contributions of properties into
the companys co-investment venture funds are prohibited
transactions. While the company believes that the Internal
Revenue Service would not prevail in any such dispute, if the
Internal Revenue Service were to argue successfully that a
transfer, disposition, or contribution of property constituted a
prohibited transaction, the company would be required to pay a
100% penalty tax on any gain allocable to the company from the
prohibited transaction. In addition, income from a prohibited
transaction might adversely affect the companys ability to
satisfy the income tests for qualification as a real estate
investment trust.
The
parent company may in the future choose to pay dividends in its
own stock, in which case you may be required to pay tax in
excess of the cash you receive.
The parent company may distribute taxable dividends that are
partially payable in cash and partially payable in its stock.
Under recent IRS guidance, up to 90% of any such taxable
dividend with respect to calendar years 2008 through 2011, and
in some cases declared as late as December 31, 2012, could
be payable in the parent companys stock if certain
conditions are met. Taxable stockholders receiving such
dividends will be required to include the full
28
amount of the dividend as ordinary income to the extent of the
parent companys current and accumulated earnings and
profits for United States federal income tax purposes. As a
result, a U.S. stockholder may be required to pay tax with
respect to such dividends in excess of the cash received. If a
U.S. stockholder sells the stock it receives as a dividend
in order to pay this tax, the sales proceeds may be less than
the amount included in income with respect to the dividend,
depending on the market price of the parent companys stock
at the time of the sale. Furthermore, with respect to
non-U.S. stockholders,
the parent company may be required to withhold U.S. tax
with respect to such dividends, including in respect of all or a
portion of such dividend that is payable in stock. In addition,
if a significant number of the parent companys
stockholders determine to sell shares of its stock in order to
pay taxes owed on dividends, it may put downward pressure on the
trading price of the parent companys stock.
Legislative
or regulatory action could adversely affect the parent
companys stockholders.
In recent years, numerous legislative, judicial and
administrative changes have been made to the federal income tax
laws applicable to investments in REITs and similar entities.
Additional changes to tax laws are likely to continue to occur
in the future, and there can be no assurance that any such
changes will not adversely affect the taxation of the parent
company, the operating partnership, any stockholder of the
parent company or any limited partner of the operating
partnership.
Risks
Associated with Ownership of the Parent Companys
Stock
Limitations
in the parent companys charter and bylaws could prevent a
change in control.
Certain provisions of the parent companys charter and
bylaws may delay, defer or prevent a change in control or other
transaction that could provide the holders of the parent
companys common stock with the opportunity to realize a
premium over the then-prevailing market price for the common
stock. To maintain the parent companys qualification as a
real estate investment trust for federal income tax purposes,
not more than 50% in value of the parent companys
outstanding stock may be owned, actually or constructively, by
five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Internal Revenue
Code to include certain entities) during the last half of a
taxable year after the first taxable year for which a real
estate investment trust election is made. Furthermore, the
parent companys common stock must be held by a minimum of
100 persons for at least 335 days of a
12-month
taxable year (or a proportionate part of a short tax year). In
addition, if the parent company, or an owner of 10% or more of
the parent companys stock, actually or constructively owns
10% or more of one of the parent companys customers (or a
customer of any partnership in which the company is a partner),
then the rent received by the parent company (either directly or
through any such partnership) from that customer will not be
qualifying income for purposes of the real estate investment
trust gross income tests of the Internal Revenue Code. To help
the parent company maintain its qualification as a real estate
investment trust for federal income tax purposes, the parent
company prohibits the ownership, actually or by virtue of the
constructive ownership provisions of the Internal Revenue Code,
by any single person, of more than 9.8% (by value or number of
shares, whichever is more restrictive) of the issued and
outstanding shares of each of the parent companys common
stock, series L preferred stock, series M preferred
stock, series O preferred stock, and series P
preferred stock (unless such limitations are waived by the
parent companys board of directors). The parent company
refers to this limitation as the ownership limit.
The charter provides that shares acquired or held in violation
of the ownership limit will be transferred to a trust for the
benefit of a designated charitable beneficiary. The charter
further provides that any person who acquires shares in
violation of the ownership limit will not be entitled to any
dividends on the shares or be entitled to vote the shares or
receive any proceeds from the subsequent sale of the shares in
excess of the lesser of the price paid for the shares or the
amount realized from the sale. A transfer of shares in violation
of the above limits may be void under certain circumstances. The
ownership limit may have the effect of delaying, deferring or
preventing a change in control and, therefore, could adversely
affect the parent companys stockholders ability to
realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price for the
shares of the parent companys common stock in connection
with such transaction.
The parent companys charter authorizes it to issue
additional shares of common and preferred stock and to establish
the preferences, rights and other terms of any series or class
of preferred stock that the parent company issues. The parent
companys board of directors could establish a series or
class of preferred stock that could have the effect of delaying,
deferring or preventing a transaction, including a change in
control, that might involve a premium price for the common stock
or otherwise be in the best interests of the parent
companys stockholders.
29
The parent companys charter and bylaws and Maryland law
also contain other provisions that may impede various actions by
stockholders without the approval of the parent companys
board of directors, which in turn may delay, defer or prevent a
transaction, including a change in control. The parent
companys charter and bylaws include the following
provisions:
|
|
|
|
|
directors may be removed only for cause and only upon a
two-thirds vote of stockholders;
|
|
|
|
the parent companys board can fix the number of directors
within set limits (which limits are subject to change by the
parent companys board), and fill vacant directorships upon
the vote of a majority of the remaining directors, even though
less than a quorum, or in the case of a vacancy resulting from
an increase in the size of the board, a majority of the entire
board;
|
|
|
|
stockholders must give advance notice to nominate directors or
propose business for consideration at a stockholders
meeting; and
|
|
|
|
the request of the holders of 50% or more of the parent
companys common stock is necessary for stockholders to
call a special meeting.
|
Maryland law includes the following provisions:
|
|
|
|
|
a two-thirds vote of stockholders is required to amend the
parent companys charter; and
|
|
|
|
stockholders may only act by written consent with the unanimous
approval of all stockholders entitled to vote on the matter in
question.
|
In addition, the parent companys board could elect to
adopt, without stockholder approval, other provisions under
Maryland law that may impede a change in control.
If the
parent company issues additional securities, then the investment
of existing stockholders will be diluted.
As the parent company is a real estate investment trust, the
company is dependent on external sources of capital and the
parent company may issue common or preferred stock and the
operating partnership may issue debt securities to fund the
companys future capital needs. The company has the
authority to issue shares of common stock or other equity or
debt securities, and to cause the operating partnership or AMB
Property II, L.P., one of the companys subsidiaries, to
issue limited partnership units, in exchange for property or
otherwise. Existing stockholders have no preemptive right to
acquire any additional securities issued by the operating
partnership, AMB Property II, L.P., or the parent company and
any issuance of additional equity securities may adversely
affect the market price of the parent companys stock and
could result in dilution of an existing stockholders
investment.
Earnings,
cash dividends, asset value and market interest rates affect the
price of the parent companys stock.
As the parent company is a real estate investment trust, the
market value of the parent companys equity securities, in
general, is based primarily upon the markets perception of
the parent companys growth potential and its current and
potential future earnings and cash dividends. The market value
of the parent companys equity securities is based
secondarily upon the market value of its underlying real estate
assets. For this reason, shares of the parent companys
stock may trade at prices that are higher or lower than its net
asset value per share. To the extent that the parent company
retains operating cash flow for investment purposes, working
capital reserves, or other purposes, these retained funds, while
increasing the value of the parent companys underlying
assets, may not correspondingly increase the market price of its
stock. The parent companys failure to meet the
markets expectations with regard to future earnings and
cash dividends likely would adversely affect the market price of
the parent companys stock. Further, the distribution yield
on the stock (as a percentage of the price of the stock)
relative to market interest rates may also influence the price
of the parent companys stock. An increase in market
interest rates might lead prospective purchasers of the parent
companys stock to expect a higher distribution yield,
which would adversely affect the parent companys
stocks market price. Additionally, if the market price of
the parent companys stock declines significantly, then the
operating partnership might breach certain covenants with
respect to its debt obligations, which could adversely affect
the companys liquidity and ability to make future
30
acquisitions and the parent companys ability to pay cash
dividends to its stockholders and the operating
partnerships ability to pay distributions to its
unitholders.
The parent companys board of directors has decided to
align the parent companys regular dividend payments with
the projected taxable income from recurring operations alone.
The parent company may make special distributions going forward,
as necessary, related to taxable income associated with any
asset dispositions and gain activity. In the past, the parent
companys board of directors has suspended dividends to the
parent companys stockholders, and it is possible that they
may do so again in the future, or decide to pay dividends in the
parent companys own stock as provided for in the Internal
Revenue Code.
The
parent company could change its investment and financing
policies without a vote of stockholders.
Subject to the parent companys current investment policy
to maintain the parent companys qualification as a real
estate investment trust (unless a change is approved by the
parent companys board of directors under certain
circumstances), the parent companys board of directors
determines the companys investment and financing policies,
its growth strategy and its debt, capitalization, distribution
and operating policies. The parent companys board of
directors may revise or amend these strategies and policies at
any time without a vote of stockholders. Any such changes may
not serve the interests of all of the parent companys
stockholders or the operating partnerships unitholders and
could adversely affect the companys financial condition or
results of operations, including its ability to pay cash
dividends to the parent companys stockholders and
distributions to the operating partnerships unitholders.
Shares
available for future sale could adversely affect the market
price of the parent companys common stock.
The operating partnership and AMB Property II, L.P. had
3,376,141 common limited partnership units issued and
outstanding as of December 31, 2009, all of which are
currently exchangeable on a
one-for-one
basis into shares of the parent companys common stock. In
the future, the operating partnership or AMB Property II, L.P.
may issue additional limited partnership units, and the parent
company may issue shares of common stock, in connection with the
acquisition of properties or in private placements. These shares
of common stock and the shares of common stock issuable upon
exchange of limited partnership units may be sold in the public
securities markets over time, pursuant to registration rights
that the parent company has granted, or may grant in connection
with future issuances, or pursuant to Rule 144 under the
Securities Act of 1933. In addition, common stock issued under
the companys stock option and incentive plans may also be
sold in the market pursuant to registration statements that the
parent company has filed or pursuant to Rule 144. As of
December 31, 2009, under the companys stock option
and incentive plans, the company had 6,079,937 shares of
common stock reserved and available for future issuance, had
outstanding options to purchase 8,107,697 shares of common
stock (of which 5,807,455 are vested and exercisable and
3,200,220 have exercise prices below market value at
December 31, 2009) and had 918,753 unvested restricted
shares of common stock outstanding. Future sales of a
substantial number of shares of the parent companys common
stock in the market or the perception that such sales might
occur could adversely affect the market price of the parent
companys common stock. Further, the existence of the
common limited partnership units of the operating partnership
and AMB Property II, L.P. and the shares of the parent
companys common stock reserved for issuance upon exchange
of limited partnership units and the exercise of options, and
registration rights referred to above, may adversely affect the
terms upon which the parent company is able to obtain additional
capital through the sale of equity securities.
Risks
Associated with the Companys Disclosure Controls and
Procedures and Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
The
companys business could be adversely impacted if it has
deficiencies in its disclosure controls and procedures or
internal control over financial reporting.
The design and effectiveness of the companys disclosure
controls and procedures and internal control over financial
reporting may not prevent all errors, misstatements or
misrepresentations. While management will continue to review the
effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and
procedures and internal control over
31
financial reporting, there can be no guarantee that the
companys internal control over financial reporting will be
effective in accomplishing all control objectives all of the
time. Furthermore, the companys disclosure controls and
procedures and internal control over financial reporting with
respect to entities that the company does not control or manage
or third-party entities that the company may acquire may be
substantially more limited than those the company maintains with
respect to the subsidiaries that the company has controlled or
managed over the course of time. Deficiencies, including any
material weakness, in the companys internal control over
financial reporting which may occur in the future could result
in misstatements of the companys results of operations,
restatements of its financial statements, a decline in the
parent companys stock price, or otherwise materially
adversely affect the companys business, reputation,
results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.
|
|
ITEM 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
INDUSTRIAL
PROPERTIES
As of December 31, 2009, the company owned and managed
1,101 industrial buildings aggregating approximately
132.6 million rentable square feet (on a consolidated
basis, the company had 684 industrial buildings aggregating
approximately 73.7 million rentable square feet), excluding
development and renovation projects and recently completed
development projects available for sale or contribution, located
in 47 global markets throughout the Americas, Europe and Asia.
The companys industrial properties were 91.2% leased to
2,481 customers, the largest of which accounted for no more than
3.6% of the companys annualized base rent from its
industrial properties. See Part IV, Item 15:
Note 18 of Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements for segment information related to the
companys operations.
Property Characteristics. The companys
industrial properties, which consist primarily of warehouse
distribution facilities suitable for single or multiple
customers, are typically comprised of multiple buildings.
The following table identifies types and characteristics of the
companys industrial buildings and each types
percentage, based on square footage, of the companys total
owned and managed operating portfolio:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
Building Type
|
|
Description
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Warehouse
|
|
Customers typically 15,000-75,000 square feet, single or
multi-customer
|
|
|
55.3
|
%
|
|
|
53.6
|
%
|
Bulk Warehouse
|
|
Customers typically over 75,000 square feet, single or
multi-customer
|
|
|
34.8
|
%
|
|
|
36.2
|
%
|
Flex Industrial
|
|
Includes assembly or research & development, single or
multi-customer
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
Light Industrial
|
|
Smaller customers, 15,000 square feet or less, higher
office finish
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
Air Cargo
|
|
On-tarmac or airport land for transfer of air cargo goods
|
|
|
2.4
|
%
|
|
|
2.5
|
%
|
Trans-Shipment
|
|
Unique configurations for truck terminals and cross-docking
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
|
|
1.1
|
%
|
Office
|
|
Single or multi-customer, used strictly for office
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
|
|
0.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Lease Terms. The companys industrial
properties are typically subject to leases on a triple net
basis, in which customers pay their proportionate share of
real estate taxes, insurance and operating costs, or are subject
to leases on a modified gross basis, in which
customers pay expenses over certain threshold levels. In
addition, most of the companys leases include fixed rental
increases or Consumer Price Index-based rental increases. Lease
terms typically range from three to ten years, with a weighted
average of six years, excluding renewal options. However, the
majority of the companys industrial leases do not include
renewal options.
32
Overview of Our Global Market Presence. The
companys industrial properties are located in the
following markets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
Europe
|
|
Asia
|
|
Atlanta
|
|
Northern New Jersey/
|
|
Amsterdam
|
|
Beijing
|
Austin
|
|
New York City
|
|
Bremerhaven
|
|
Guangzhou
|
Baltimore/Washington D.C.
|
|
Orlando
|
|
Brussels
|
|
Nagoya
|
Boston
|
|
Querétaro
|
|
Frankfurt
|
|
Osaka
|
Chicago
|
|
Reynosa
|
|
Hamburg
|
|
Seoul
|
Dallas/Ft. Worth
|
|
San Francisco Bay Area
|
|
Le Havre
|
|
Shanghai
|
Guadalajara
|
|
Savannah
|
|
London
|
|
Singapore
|
Houston
|
|
Seattle
|
|
Lyon
|
|
Tokyo
|
Mexico City
|
|
South Florida
|
|
Madrid
|
|
|
Minneapolis
|
|
Southern California
|
|
Milan
|
|
|
Monterrey
|
|
Tijuana
|
|
Paris
|
|
|
New Orleans
|
|
Toronto
|
|
Rotterdam
|
|
|
Within these metropolitan areas, the companys industrial
properties are generally concentrated in locations with limited
new construction opportunities within established, relatively
large submarkets, which we believe should provide a higher rate
of occupancy and rent growth than properties located elsewhere.
These infill locations are typically near major airports or
seaports or convenient to major highway systems and rail lines,
and are proximate to large and diverse labor pools. There is
typically broad demand for industrial space in these
centrally-located submarkets due to a diverse mix of industries
and types of industrial uses, including warehouse distribution,
light assembly and manufacturing. The company generally avoids
locations at the periphery of metropolitan areas where there are
fewer constraints to the supply of additional industrial
properties.
33
Portfolio
Overview
The following includes the companys owned and managed
operating portfolio and development properties, investments in
operating properties through non-managed unconsolidated joint
ventures, and recently completed developments that have not yet
been placed in operations but are being held for sale or
contribution:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year-to-Date
|
|
|
Trailing Four
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
Same Store NOI
|
|
|
Quarters Rent
|
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Share of Square
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Base Rent(1)
|
|
|
Growth Without
|
|
|
Change on
|
|
|
|
as of
|
|
|
Feet as of
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
psf as of
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Renewals and
|
|
Markets
|
|
12/31/2009
|
|
|
12/31/2009
|
|
|
Occupancy
|
|
|
12/31/2009
|
|
|
Termination Fees(2)
|
|
|
Rollovers(3)
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
|
18,917,656
|
|
|
|
55.6
|
%
|
|
|
92.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
6.34
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)%
|
|
|
(6.5
|
)%
|
Chicago
|
|
|
13,118,853
|
|
|
|
54.0
|
%
|
|
|
90.4
|
%
|
|
|
5.14
|
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(15.6
|
)%
|
No. New Jersey/New York
|
|
|
11,638,422
|
|
|
|
50.8
|
%
|
|
|
90.2
|
%
|
|
|
7.65
|
|
|
|
(9.5
|
)%
|
|
|
(5.5
|
)%
|
San Francisco Bay Area
|
|
|
10,958,673
|
|
|
|
76.3
|
%
|
|
|
90.1
|
%
|
|
|
6.33
|
|
|
|
(5.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)%
|
Seattle
|
|
|
7,883,158
|
|
|
|
51.6
|
%
|
|
|
94.1
|
%
|
|
|
5.48
|
|
|
|
(5.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)%
|
South Florida
|
|
|
6,363,198
|
|
|
|
72.8
|
%
|
|
|
94.4
|
%
|
|
|
7.37
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)%
|
|
|
(12.4
|
)%
|
U.S. On-Tarmac(4)
|
|
|
2,463,090
|
|
|
|
92.4
|
%
|
|
|
89.7
|
%
|
|
|
19.85
|
|
|
|
(4.2
|
)%
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
Other U.S. Markets
|
|
|
28,502,247
|
|
|
|
62.5
|
%
|
|
|
88.9
|
%
|
|
|
5.52
|
|
|
|
(7.6
|
)%
|
|
|
(11.0
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Subtotal/Wtd Avg
|
|
|
99,845,297
|
|
|
|
60.8
|
%
|
|
|
90.9
|
%
|
|
$
|
6.43
|
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)%
|
|
|
(7.5
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canada
|
|
|
3,564,059
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
95.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
5.49
|
|
|
|
(28.6
|
)%
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mexico City
|
|
|
4,165,885
|
|
|
|
36.9
|
%
|
|
|
91.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
5.59
|
|
|
|
(18.7
|
)%
|
|
|
(14.8
|
%)
|
Guadalajara
|
|
|
2,890,526
|
|
|
|
21.6
|
%
|
|
|
96.7
|
%
|
|
|
4.42
|
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(13.2
|
)%
|
Other Mexico Markets
|
|
|
893,500
|
|
|
|
65.6
|
%
|
|
|
90.5
|
%
|
|
|
4.63
|
|
|
|
(26.0
|
)%
|
|
|
(8.0
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mexico Subtotal/Wtd Avg
|
|
|
7,949,911
|
|
|
|
34.5
|
%
|
|
|
93.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
5.08
|
|
|
|
(12.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(14.1
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas Total/Wtd Avg
|
|
|
111,359,267
|
|
|
|
60.1
|
%
|
|
|
91.1
|
%
|
|
$
|
6.30
|
|
|
|
(5.4
|
)%
|
|
|
(8.2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
France
|
|
|
4,060,708
|
|
|
|
32.7
|
%
|
|
|
97.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
8.70
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)%
|
|
|
(14.3
|
)%
|
Germany
|
|
|
3,192,628
|
|
|
|
30.2
|
%
|
|
|
96.9
|
%
|
|
|
8.98
|
|
|
|
(5.5
|
)%
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)%
|
Benelux
|
|
|
3,267,362
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
%
|
|
|
91.9
|
%
|
|
|
9.90
|
|
|
|
(15.1
|
)%
|
|
|
1.2
|
%
|
Other Europe Markets
|
|
|
343,077
|
|
|
|
61.9
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
14.92
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe Subtotal/Wtd Avg(5)
|
|
|
10,863,775
|
|
|
|
32.4
|
%
|
|
|
95.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
9.32
|
|
|
|
(4.7
|
)%
|
|
|
(3.9
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tokyo
|
|
|
5,364,804
|
|
|
|
21.5
|
%
|
|
|
91.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
14.80
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
%
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)%
|
Osaka
|
|
|
2,000,037
|
|
|
|
20.0
|
%
|
|
|
90.5
|
%
|
|
|
11.96
|
|
|
|
(3.2
|
)%
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Japan Subtotal/Wtd Avg(5)
|
|
|
7,364,841
|
|
|
|
21.1
|
%
|
|
|
91.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
14.07
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
China
|
|
|
1,897,400
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
86.1
|
%
|
|
$
|
4.54
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
%
|
|
|
14.1
|
%
|
Singapore
|
|
|
935,926
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
98.4
|
%
|
|
|
9.41
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(4.2
|
)%
|
Other Asia Markets
|
|
|
218,119
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
85.2
|
%
|
|
|
5.96
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
(15.7
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Total/Wtd Avg(5)
|
|
|
10,416,286
|
|
|
|
44.2
|
%
|
|
|
91.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
11.95
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
%
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owned and Managed Total/Wtd Avg(6)
|
|
|
132,639,328
|
|
|
|
56.6
|
%
|
|
|
91.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
6.98
|
|
|
|
(4.5
|
)%
|
|
|
(6.9
|
)%
|
Other Real Estate Investments(7)
|
|
|
7,495,959
|
|
|
|
51.8
|
%
|
|
|
86.7
|
%
|
|
|
5.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Operating Portfolio
|
|
|
140,135,287
|
|
|
|
56.4
|
%
|
|
|
91.1
|
%
|
|
$
|
6.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction-in-Progress
|
|
|
5,260,930
|
|
|
|
86.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Stabilized Developments(8)
|
|
|
9,667,775
|
|
|
|
97.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development Portfolio Subtotal
|
|
|
14,928,705
|
|
|
|
93.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Global Portfolio
|
|
|
155,063,992
|
|
|
|
59.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Annualized base rent (ABR) is calculated as monthly
base rent (cash basis) per the terms of the lease, as of
December 31, 2009, multiplied by 12. |
|
(2) |
|
See Part II, Item 7: Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Supplemental Earnings Measures for
a reconciliation to net income and a discussion of why
management believes same store cash basis NOI is a useful
supplemental measure for the companys management and
investors, ways to use this measure when assessing the
companys financial performance, and the limitations of the
measure as a measurement tool. |
|
(3) |
|
Rent changes on renewals and rollovers are calculated as the
difference, weighted by square feet, of the net ABR due the
first month of a term commencement and the net ABR due the
last month of the former tenants term. If free rent is
granted, then the first positive full rent value is used as a
point of comparison. The rental |
34
|
|
|
|
|
amounts exclude base stop amounts, holdover rent and premium
rent charges. If either the previous or current lease terms are
under 12 months, then they are excluded from this
calculation. If the lease is first generation or there is no
prior lease for comparison, then it is excluded from this
calculation. |
|
(4) |
|
Includes domestic on-tarmac air cargo facilities at 14 airports. |
|
(5) |
|
Annualized base rent for leases denominated in foreign
currencies is translated using the currency exchange rate at
December 31, 2009. |
|
(6) |
|
Owned and managed is defined by the company as assets in which
it has at least a 10% ownership interest, for which it is the
property or asset manager, and which the company currently
intends to hold for the long term. |
|
(7) |
|
Includes investments in operating properties through the
companys investments in unconsolidated joint ventures that
it does not manage, and are therefore excluded from the
companys owned and managed portfolio, and the location of
the companys global headquarters. |
|
(8) |
|
Represents development projects available for sale or
contribution that are not included in the operating portfolio. |
Lease
Expirations(1)
The following table summarizes the lease expirations for the
companys owned and managed operating properties for leases
in place as of December 31, 2009, without giving effect to
the exercise of renewal options or termination rights, if any,
at or prior to the scheduled expirations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Annualized Base
|
|
|
% of Annualized
|
|
Year
|
|
Feet
|
|
|
Rent (000s)(2)(3)
|
|
|
Base Rent(2)
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
17,309,720
|
|
|
$
|
116,679
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
%
|
2011
|
|
|
23,340,991
|
|
|
|
167,194
|
|
|
|
18.8
|
%
|
2012
|
|
|
17,790,198
|
|
|
|
138,026
|
|
|
|
15.5
|
%
|
2013
|
|
|
16,418,476
|
|
|
|
118,763
|
|
|
|
13.4
|
%
|
2014
|
|
|
14,197,938
|
|
|
|
113,349
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
11,079,728
|
|
|
|
78,101
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
%
|
2016
|
|
|
3,955,600
|
|
|
|
26,703
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
2017
|
|
|
5,007,304
|
|
|
|
35,374
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
%
|
2018
|
|
|
3,777,633
|
|
|
|
30,570
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
2019+
|
|
|
8,647,646
|
|
|
|
64,062
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
121,525,234
|
|
|
$
|
888,821
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Schedule includes leases that expire on or after
December 31, 2009. Schedule includes owned and managed
operating properties which the company defines as properties in
which it has at least a 10% ownership interest, for which it is
the property or asset manager, and which the company currently
intends to hold for the long term. |
|
(2) |
|
Annualized base rent is calculated as monthly base rent (cash
basis) per the terms of the lease, as of December 31, 2009,
multiplied by 12. If free rent is granted, then the first
positive rent value is used. Leases denominated in foreign
currencies are translated using the currency exchange rate at
December 31, 2009. |
|
(3) |
|
Apron rental amounts (but not square footage) are included. |
35
Customer
Information(1)
Top Customers. As of December 31, 2009,
the companys largest customers by annualized base rent, on
an owned and managed basis, are set forth in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Base (000s)
|
|
|
% of Annualized
|
|
Customer(2)
|
|
Feet
|
|
|
Rent(3)
|
|
|
Base Rent(3)(4)
|
|
|
1
|
|
Deutsche Post World Net (DHL)(5)
|
|
|
3,545,758
|
|
|
$
|
30,668
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
2
|
|
United States Government(5)(6)
|
|
|
1,355,450
|
|
|
|
20,287
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
%
|
3
|
|
FedEx Corporation(5)
|
|
|
1,400,090
|
|
|
|
14,687
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
4
|
|
Sagawa Express
|
|
|
828,552
|
|
|
|
13,825
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
%
|
5
|
|
Nippon Express
|
|
|
1,029,170
|
|
|
|
13,578
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
%
|
6
|
|
BAX Global Inc/Schenker/Deutsche Bahn(5)
|
|
|
1,127,451
|
|
|
|
10,450
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
%
|
7
|
|
La Poste
|
|
|
902,391
|
|
|
|
8,829
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
8
|
|
Panalpina
|
|
|
1,316,351
|
|
|
|
8,636
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
9
|
|
Caterpillar Logistics Services
|
|
|
543,039
|
|
|
|
7,810
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
10
|
|
CEVA Logistics, Inc.
|
|
|
1,032,000
|
|
|
|
6,933
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
13,080,252
|
|
|
$
|
135,703
|
|
|
|
15.8
|
%
|
|
|
Top 11-20
Customers
|
|
|
6,634,092
|
|
|
|
46,682
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
19,714,344
|
|
|
$
|
182,385
|
|
|
|
21.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties. |
|
(2) |
|
Customer(s) may be a subsidiary of or an entity affiliated with
the named customer. |
|
(3) |
|
Annualized base rent is calculated as monthly base rent (cash
basis) per the terms of the lease, as of December 31, 2009,
multiplied by 12. If free rent is granted, then the first
positive rent value is used. Leases denominated in foreign
currencies are translated using the currency exchange rate at
December 31, 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
Computed as aggregate annualized base rent divided by the
aggregate annualized base rent of operating properties. |
|
(5) |
|
Airport apron rental amounts (but not square footage) are
included. |
|
(6) |
|
United States Government includes the United States Postal
Service, United States Customs, United States Department of
Agriculture and various other U.S. governmental agencies. |
36
OWNED AND
MANAGED OPERATING STATISTICS
Owned
and Managed Operating and Leasing
Statistics(1)
The following table summarizes key operating and leasing
statistics for all of the companys owned and managed
operating properties as of and for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Portfolio
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Square feet owned(2)(3)
|
|
|
132,639,328
|
|
|
|
131,508,119
|
|
|
|
118,180,295
|
|
Occupancy percentage(3)
|
|
|
91.2
|
%
|
|
|
95.1
|
%
|
|
|
96.0
|
%
|
Average occupancy percentage
|
|
|
91.4
|
%
|
|
|
94.9
|
%
|
|
|
95.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average lease terms (years):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trailing four quarters tenant retention
|
|
|
61.2
|
%
|
|
|
71.5
|
%
|
|
|
74.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trailing four quarters rent change on renewals and rollovers:(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
(6.9
|
)%
|
|
|
3.1
|
%
|
|
|
4.9
|
%
|
Same space square footage commencing (millions)
|
|
|
21.7
|
|
|
|
18.4
|
|
|
|
19.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trailing four quarters second generation leasing activity:(5)
Tenant improvements and leasing commissions per sq. ft.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
$
|
1.14
|
|
|
$
|
1.43
|
|
|
$
|
1.19
|
|
Re-tenanted
|
|
$
|
2.61
|
|
|
$
|
3.23
|
|
|
$
|
3.25
|
|
Weighted average
|
|
$
|
1.73
|
|
|
$
|
2.02
|
|
|
$
|
2.03
|
|
Square footage commencing (millions)
|
|
|
27.0
|
|
|
|
22.0
|
|
|
|
22.8
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties. This
excludes development and renovation projects and recently
completed development projects available for sale or
contribution. |
|
(2) |
|
As of December 31, 2008, one of the companys
subsidiaries also managed approximately 1.1 million
additional square feet of properties representing the IAT
portfolio on behalf of the IAT Air Cargo Facilities Income Fund.
In December 2008, the company entered into a definitive
agreement to terminate our management agreement with IAT Air
Cargo Facilities Income Fund, effective in the first quarter of
2009. As of December 31, 2009, the company also had
investments in 7.3 million square feet of operating
properties through its investments in non-managed unconsolidated
joint ventures and 0.1 million square feet, which is the
location of the companys global headquarters. |
|
(3) |
|
On a consolidated basis, the company had approximately
73.7 million rentable square feet with an occupancy rate of
89.6% at December 31, 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
Rent changes on renewals and rollovers are calculated as the
difference, weighted by square feet, of the net ABR due the
first month of a term commencement and the net ABR due the
last month of the former customers term. If free rent is
granted, then the first positive full rent value is used as a
point of comparison. The rental amounts exclude base stop
amounts, holdover rent and premium rent charges. If either the
previous or current lease terms are under 12 months, then
they are excluded from this calculation. If the lease is first
generation or there is no prior lease for comparison, then it is
excluded from this calculation. |
|
(5) |
|
Second generation tenant improvements and leasing commissions
per square foot are the total cost of tenant improvements,
leasing commissions and other leasing costs incurred during
leasing of second generation space divided by the total square
feet leased. Costs incurred prior to leasing available space are
not included until such space is leased. Second generation space
excludes newly developed square footage or square footage vacant
at acquisition. |
37
Owned
and Managed Same Store Operating
Statistics(1)
The following table summarizes key operating and leasing
statistics for the companys owned and managed same store
operating properties as of and for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Store Pool(2)
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Square feet in same store pool(3)
|
|
|
113,692,509
|
|
|
|
100,912,256
|
|
|
|
85,192,781
|
|
% of total square feet
|
|
|
85.7
|
%
|
|
|
76.7
|
%
|
|
|
72.1
|
%
|
Occupancy percentage(3)
|
|
|
90.9
|
%
|
|
|
94.8
|
%
|
|
|
96.4
|
%
|
Average occupancy percentage
|
|
|
91.6
|
%
|
|
|
94.6
|
%
|
|
|
95.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average lease terms (years):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trailing four quarters tenant retention
|
|
|
61.1
|
%
|
|
|
71.7
|
%
|
|
|
73.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trailing four quarters rent change on renewals and
rollovers:(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)%
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
|
|
5.0
|
%
|
Same space square footage commencing (millions)
|
|
|
20.2
|
|
|
|
17.3
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Growth % increase (decrease) (including straight-line rents):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues(5)
|
|
|
(2.3
|
)%
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
|
|
4.3
|
%
|
Expenses(5)
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
|
5.0
|
%
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
Net operating income, excluding lease termination fees(5)(6)
|
|
|
(4.2
|
)%
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Growth % increase (decrease) (excluding straight-line rents):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues(5)
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)%
|
|
|
4.0
|
%
|
|
|
5.6
|
%
|
Expenses(5)
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
|
5.0
|
%
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
Net operating income, excluding lease termination fees(5)(6)
|
|
|
(4.5
|
)%
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
|
|
5.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties. This
excludes development and renovation projects and recently
completed development projects available for sale or
contribution. |
|
(2) |
|
Same store pool includes all properties that are owned as of
both the current and prior year reporting periods and excludes
development properties for both the current and prior reporting
years. The same store pool is set annually and excludes
properties purchased and developments completed (generally
defined as properties that are stabilized or have been
substantially complete for at least 12 months) after
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Stabilized
is generally defined as properties that are 90% occupied. |
|
(3) |
|
On a consolidated basis, the company had approximately
63.8 million square feet with an occupancy rate of 89.5% at
December 31, 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
Rent changes on renewals and rollovers are calculated as the
difference, weighted by square feet, of the net ABR due the
first month of a term commencement and the net ABR due the
last month of the former customers term. If free rent is
granted, then the first positive full rent value is used as a
point of comparison. The rental amounts exclude base stop
amounts, holdover rent and premium rent charges. If either the
previous or current lease terms are under 12 months, then
they are excluded from this calculation. If the lease is first
generation or there is no prior lease for comparison, then it is
excluded from this calculation. |
38
|
|
|
(5) |
|
As of December 31, 2009, on a consolidated basis, the
percentage change was (3.0)%, 1.9% and (5.0)%, respectively, for
revenues, expenses and NOI (including straight-line rents) and
(2.8)%, 1.9% and (4.8)%, respectively, for revenues, expenses
and NOI (excluding straight-line rents). |
|
(6) |
|
See Part II, Item 7: Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Supplemental Earnings Measures for
a discussion of same store net operating income and cash-basis
same store net operating income and a reconciliation of same
store net operating income and cash-basis same store net
operating income and net income. |
DEVELOPMENT
PROPERTIES
Development
Portfolio(1)
The following table sets forth the development portfolio of the
company as of December 31, 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Expected Completions(2)
|
|
|
2011 Expected Completions(2)
|
|
|
Total Construction-in-Progress
|
|
|
Pre-Stabilized Developments(3)
|
|
|
Total Development Portfolio
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
% of Total
|
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Investment(4)
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Investment(4)
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Investment(4)
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Investment(4)
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Investment(4)
|
|
|
Investment(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
|
389,767
|
|
|
$
|
36,601
|
|
|
|
559,605
|
|
|
$
|
67,537
|
|
|
|
949,372
|
|
|
$
|
104,138
|
|
|
|
2,716,297
|
|
|
$
|
237,578
|
|
|
|
3,665,669
|
|
|
$
|
341,716
|
|
|
|
22.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Americas
|
|
|
607,202
|
|
|
|
46,487
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
607,202
|
|
|
|
46,487
|
|
|
|
1,715,452
|
|
|
|
96,415
|
|
|
|
2,322,654
|
|
|
|
142,902
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas Total
|
|
|
996,969
|
|
|
$
|
83,088
|
|
|
|
559,605
|
|
|
$
|
67,537
|
|
|
|
1,556,574
|
|
|
$
|
150,625
|
|
|
|
4,431,749
|
|
|
$
|
333,993
|
|
|
|
5,988,323
|
|
|
$
|
484,618
|
|
|
|
31.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
France
|
|
|
692,754
|
|
|
$
|
59,927
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
692,754
|
|
|
$
|
59,927
|
|
|
|
37,760
|
|
|
$
|
5,085
|
|
|
|
730,514
|
|
|
$
|
65,012
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany
|
|
|
426,552
|
|
|
|
50,170
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
426,552
|
|
|
|
50,170
|
|
|
|
139,608
|
|
|
|
19,320
|
|
|
|
566,160
|
|
|
|
69,490
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benelux
|
|
|
573,352
|
|
|
|
81,649
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
573,352
|
|
|
|
81,649
|
|
|
|
207,232
|
|
|
|
35,061
|
|
|
|
780,584
|
|
|
|
116,710
|
|
|
|
7.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Europe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,022,887
|
|
|
|
115,045
|
|
|
|
1,022,887
|
|
|
|
115,045
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe Total
|
|
|
1,692,658
|
|
|
$
|
191,746
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
1,692,658
|
|
|
$
|
191,746
|
|
|
|
1,407,487
|
|
|
$
|
174,511
|
|
|
|
3,100,145
|
|
|
$
|
366,257
|
|
|
|
23.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Japan
|
|
|
420,847
|
|
|
$
|
54,574
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
420,847
|
|
|
$
|
54,574
|
|
|
|
2,835,609
|
|
|
$
|
501,942
|
|
|
|
3,256,456
|
|
|
$
|
556,516
|
|
|
|
36.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
China
|
|
|
523,793
|
|
|
|
22,251
|
|
|
|
1,067,058
|
|
|
|
56,525
|
|
|
|
1,590,851
|
|
|
|
78,776
|
|
|
|
598,850
|
|
|
|
29,854
|
|
|
|
2,189,701
|
|
|
|
108,630
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Asia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
394,080
|
|
|
|
25,749
|
|
|
|
394,080
|
|
|
|
25,749
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Total
|
|
|
944,640
|
|
|
$
|
76,825
|
|
|
|
1,067,058
|
|
|
$
|
56,525
|
|
|
|
2,011,698
|
|
|
$
|
133,350
|
|
|
|
3,828,539
|
|
|
$
|
557,545
|
|
|
|
5,840,237
|
|
|
$
|
690,895
|
|
|
|
44.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
3,634,267
|
|
|
$
|
351,659
|
|
|
|
1,626,663
|
|
|
$
|
124,062
|
|
|
|
5,260,930
|
|
|
$
|
475,721
|
|
|
|
9,667,775
|
|
|
$
|
1,066,049
|
|
|
|
14,928,705
|
|
|
$
|
1,541,770
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate impairment losses(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28,160
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(84,245
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(112,405
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated total investment, net of real estate impairment losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
447,561
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
981,804
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,429,365
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Projects
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys Weighted Average Ownership Percentage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remainder to Invest
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
23,661
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
31,160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
54,821
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
28,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
83,662
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys Share of Remainder to Invest(6)(7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
18,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
23,833
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
42,133
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
27,014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
69,147
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Estimated Yield(7)(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent Pre-Leased(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes investments held through unconsolidated joint ventures. |
|
(2) |
|
Completions are generally defined as properties that are
stabilized or have been substantially complete for at least
12 months. |
|
(3) |
|
Pre-stabilized development represents assets which have reached
completion but have not reached stabilization. Stabilization is
generally defined as properties that are 90% occupied. |
39
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Represents total estimated cost of development, renovation, or
expansion, including initial acquisition costs, prepaid ground
leases, buildings, tenant improvements and associated
capitalized interest and overhead costs. Estimated total
investments are based on current forecasts and are subject to
change.
Non-U.S.
dollar investments are translated to U.S. dollars using the
exchange rate at December 31, 2009. We cannot assure you
that any of these projects will be completed on schedule or
within budgeted amounts. Includes value-added conversion
projects. |
|
(5) |
|
See Part IV, Item 15: Note 3 of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of real
estate impairment losses. |
|
(6) |
|
Amounts include capitalized interest as applicable. |
|
(7) |
|
Calculated as the companys share of amounts funded to date
to its share of estimated total investment. |
|
(8) |
|
Yields exclude value-added conversion projects and are
calculated on an after-tax basis for international projects. |
|
(9) |
|
Represents the executed lease percentage of total square feet as
of the balance sheet date. |
PROPERTIES
HELD THROUGH CO-INVESTMENT VENTURES, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES
AND PARTNERSHIPS
The company holds interests in both consolidated and
unconsolidated joint ventures. The company consolidates joint
ventures where it exhibits financial or operational control.
Control is determined using accounting standards related to the
consolidation of joint ventures and variable interest
entities. For joint ventures that are defined as variable
interest entities, the primary beneficiary consolidates the
entity. In instances where the company is not the primary
beneficiary, it does not consolidate the joint venture for
financial reporting purposes. For joint ventures that are not
defined as variable interest entities, management first
considers whether the company is the general partner or a
limited partner (or the equivalent in such investments which are
not structured as partnerships). The company consolidates joint
ventures where it is the general partner (or the equivalent) and
the limited partners (or the equivalent) in such investments do
not have rights which would preclude control and, therefore,
consolidation for financial reporting purposes. For joint
ventures where the company is the general partner (or the
equivalent), but does not control the joint venture as the other
partners (or the equivalent) hold substantive participating
rights, the company uses the equity method of accounting. For
joint ventures where the company is a limited partner (or the
equivalent), management considers factors such as ownership
interest, voting control, authority to make decisions, and
contractual and substantive participating rights of the partners
(or the equivalent) to determine if the presumption that the
general partner controls the entity is overcome. In instances
where these factors indicate the company controls the joint
venture, the company consolidates the joint venture; otherwise
it uses the equity method of accounting.
The following table summarizes the companys eight
consolidated and unconsolidated significant co-investment
ventures as of December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
|
|
Date
|
|
Geographic
|
|
Venture
|
|
Functional
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Co-investment Venture
|
|
Established
|
|
Focus
|
|
Investors
|
|
Currency
|
|
Frequency
|
|
Term
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB-SGP
|
|
March 2001
|
|
United States
|
|
Subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte Ltd.
|
|
USD
|
|
10 years
|
|
March 2011; extendable 10 years
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II
|
|
June 2001
|
|
United States
|
|
Various
|
|
USD
|
|
At dissolution
|
|
December 2014 (estimated)
|
AMB-AMS
|
|
June 2004
|
|
United States
|
|
Various
|
|
USD
|
|
At dissolution
|
|
December 2012; extendable 4 years
|
Unconsolidated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III
|
|
October 2004
|
|
United States
|
|
Various
|
|
USD
|
|
3 years (next 2Q11)
|
|
Open ended
|
AMB-SGP Mexico
|
|
December 2004
|
|
Mexico
|
|
Subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte Ltd.
|
|
USD
|
|
7 years
|
|
December 2011; extendable 7 years
|
AMB Japan Fund I
|
|
June 2005
|
|
Japan
|
|
Various
|
|
JPY
|
|
At dissolution
|
|
June 2013; extendable 2 years
|
AMB DFS Fund I
|
|
October 2006
|
|
United States
|
|
Strategic Realty Ventures, LLC
|
|
USD
|
|
Upon project sales
|
|
Perpetual(1)
|
AMB Europe Fund I
|
|
June 2007
|
|
Europe
|
|
Various
|
|
EUR
|
|
3 years (next 2Q10)
|
|
Open ended
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For AMB DFS Fund I, the investment period ended in June
2009. The fund will terminate upon completion and disposition of
assets currently owned and under development by the fund. |
40
Consolidated
Joint Ventures
As of December 31, 2009, the company held interests in
co-investment ventures, limited liability companies and
partnerships with institutional investors and other third
parties, which it consolidates in its financial statements.
Under the agreements governing the co-investment ventures, the
company and the other party to the co-investment venture may be
required to make additional capital contributions and, subject
to certain limitations, the co-investment ventures may incur
additional debt. Such agreements also impose certain
restrictions on the transfer of co-investment venture interests
by the company or the other party to the co-investment venture
and typically provide certain rights to the company or the other
party to the co-investment venture to sell the companys or
their interest in the co-investment venture to the co-investment
venture or to the other co-investment venture partner on terms
specified in the agreement. In addition, under certain
circumstances, many of the co-investment ventures include
buy/sell provisions. See Part IV, Item 15:
Notes 11 and 12 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements for additional details.
The table that follows summarizes the companys
consolidated joint ventures as of December 31, 2009
(dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Book
|
|
|
Property
|
|
|
Other
|
|
Consolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
Feet(1)
|
|
|
Value(2)
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Operating Co-investment Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB-SGP(3)
|
|
|
50
|
%
|
|
|
8,288,663
|
|
|
$
|
470,740
|
|
|
$
|
335,764
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II(4)
|
|
|
20
|
%
|
|
|
7,318,208
|
|
|
|
513,450
|
|
|
|
194,980
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
AMB-AMS(5)
|
|
|
39
|
%
|
|
|
2,172,137
|
|
|
|
158,865
|
|
|
|
79,756
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Operating Co-investment Ventures
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
17,779,008
|
|
|
|
1,143,055
|
|
|
|
610,500
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
Total Consolidated Co-investment Ventures
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
17,779,008
|
|
|
|
1,143,055
|
|
|
|
610,500
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
Other Industrial Operating Joint Ventures
|
|
|
89
|
%
|
|
|
2,436,591
|
|
|
|
230,463
|
|
|
|
32,186
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Industrial Development Joint Ventures
|
|
|
60
|
%
|
|
|
770,442
|
|
|
|
272,237
|
|
|
|
128,374
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Consolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
|
47
|
%
|
|
|
20,986,041
|
|
|
$
|
1,645,755
|
|
|
$
|
771,060
|
|
|
$
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For development properties, represents the estimated square feet
upon completion for committed phases of development projects. |
|
(2) |
|
Represents the book value of the property (before accumulated
depreciation) owned by the joint venture and excludes net other
assets as of December 31, 2009. Development book values
include uncommitted land. |
|
(3) |
|
AMB-SGP, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2001 with
Industrial JV Pte. Ltd., a subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte.
Ltd., the real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of
Singapore Investment Corporation. |
|
(4) |
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P. is a co-investment
partnership formed in 2001 with institutional investors, which
invest through a private real estate investment trust, and a
third-party limited partner. |
|
(5) |
|
AMB-AMS,
L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with three
Dutch pension funds. |
Unconsolidated
Joint Ventures
As of December 31, 2009, the company held interests in five
significant equity investment co-investment ventures that are
not consolidated in its financial statements.
41
The table that follows summarizes our unconsolidated joint
ventures as of December 31, 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Planned
|
|
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Book
|
|
|
Property
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Net Equity
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
Feet(1)
|
|
|
Value(2)
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Investment(3)
|
|
|
Capacity
|
|
|
Capitalization
|
|
|
Operating Co-Investment Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III(4)(5)
|
|
|
23%
|
|
|
|
36,057,101
|
|
|
$
|
3,269,614
|
|
|
$
|
1,720,405
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
209,999
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,270,000
|
|
AMB Europe Fund I(5)(6)
|
|
|
21%
|
|
|
|
9,236,984
|
|
|
|
1,260,362
|
|
|
|
719,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,260,000
|
|
AMB Japan Fund I(7)
|
|
|
20%
|
|
|
|
7,263,090
|
|
|
|
1,498,044
|
|
|
|
832,370
|
|
|
|
8,601
|
|
|
|
80,074
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,498,000
|
|
AMB-SGP Mexico(8)
|
|
|
22%
|
|
|
|
6,331,990
|
|
|
|
357,493
|
|
|
|
167,180
|
|
|
|
150,272
|
|
|
|
19,014
|
|
|
|
245,000
|
|
|
|
602,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Operating Co-investment Ventures
|
|
|
22%
|
|
|
|
58,889,165
|
|
|
|
6,385,513
|
|
|
|
3,439,386
|
|
|
|
158,873
|
|
|
|
369,264
|
|
|
|
245,000
|
|
|
|
6,630,000
|
|
Development Co-investment Ventures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB DFS Fund I(9)
|
|
|
15%
|
|
|
|
200,027
|
|
|
|
85,270
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,259
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,000
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III(4)(5)
|
|
|
23%
|
|
|
|
559,605
|
|
|
|
82,547
|
|
|
|
42,376
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,122
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Development Co-investment Ventures
|
|
|
19%
|
|
|
|
759,632
|
|
|
|
167,817
|
|
|
|
42,376
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,381
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Unconsolidated Co-investment Ventures
|
|
|
22%
|
|
|
|
59,648,797
|
|
|
|
6,553,330
|
|
|
|
3,481,762
|
|
|
|
158,873
|
|
|
|
392,645
|
|
|
|
245,000
|
|
|
|
6,715,000
|
|
Other Industrial Operating Joint Ventures
|
|
|
51%
|
|
|
|
7,419,049
|
(10)
|
|
|
280,432
|
|
|
|
160,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,741
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
|
23%
|
|
|
|
67,067,846
|
|
|
$
|
6,833,762
|
|
|
$
|
3,642,052
|
|
|
$
|
158,873
|
|
|
$
|
443,386
|
|
|
$
|
245,000
|
|
|
$
|
6,715,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For development properties, represents the estimated square feet
upon completion for committed phases of development projects. |
|
(2) |
|
Represents the book value of the property (before accumulated
depreciation) owned by the joint venture and excludes net other
assets as of December 31, 2009. Development book values
include uncommitted land. |
|
(3) |
|
Through its investment in AMB Property Mexico, the company held
equity interests in various other unconsolidated ventures
totaling approximately $18.7 million as of
December 31, 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. is an open-ended
co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with institutional
investors, which invest through a private real estate investment
trust. |
|
(5) |
|
The planned capitalization and investment capacity of AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. and AMB Europe
Fund I, FCP-FIS, as open-ended funds are not limited. The
planned capitalization represents the gross book value of real
estate assets as of the most recent quarter end. |
|
(6) |
|
AMB Europe Fund I, FCP-FIS, is an open-ended co-investment
venture formed in 2007 with institutional investors. The venture
is Euro-denominated. U.S. dollar amounts are converted at the
exchange rate in effect at December 31, 2009. |
|
(7) |
|
AMB Japan Fund I, L.P. is a co-investment venture formed in
2005 with institutional investors. The venture is
Yen-denominated. U.S. dollar amounts are converted at the
exchange rate in effect at December 31, 2009. |
|
(8) |
|
AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC is a co-investment venture formed in 2004
with Industrial (Mexico) JV Pte. Ltd., a subsidiary of GIC Real
Estate Pte. Ltd., the real estate investment subsidiary of the
Government of Singapore Investment Corporation. Other debt
includes $91.4 million of loans from co-investment venture
partners. |
|
(9) |
|
AMB DFS Fund I, LLC is a co-investment venture formed in
2006 with a subsidiary of GE Real Estate to build and sell
properties. |
|
(10) |
|
Includes investments in 7.4 million square feet of
operating properties held through the companys investments
in unconsolidated joint ventures that it does not manage, which
are excluded from the companys owned and managed
portfolio. The companys owned and managed operating
portfolio includes properties in which it has at least a 10%
ownership interest, for which it is the property or asset
manager, and which the company currently intends to hold for the
long-term. |
On December 30, 2004, the company formed AMB-SGP Mexico,
LLC, a co-investment venture with Industrial (Mexico) JV Pte.
Ltd., a subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte. Ltd., the real estate
investment subsidiary
42
of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation, in which
the company retained an approximate 20% interest. This interest
increased to approximately 22% upon the companys
acquisition of AMB Property Mexico. During 2009, the company
made no contributions to this co-investment venture. During
2008, the company contributed three completed development
projects totaling approximately 1.4 million square feet to
this co-investment venture for approximately $90.5 million.
During 2007, the company contributed one approximately
0.1 million square foot operating property for
approximately $4.6 million to this co-investment venture.
In addition, the company recognized development profits from the
contribution to this co-investment venture of two completed
development projects aggregating approximately 0.3 million
square feet with a contribution value of $22.9 million.
On June 30, 2005, the company formed AMB Japan Fund I,
L.P., a co-investment venture with 13 institutional investors,
in which the company retained an approximate 20% interest. The
13 institutional investors have committed 49.5 billion Yen
(approximately $532.2 million in U.S. dollars, using
the exchange rate at December 31, 2009) for an
approximate 80% equity interest. During 2009, the company
contributed to this co-investment venture one completed
development project, aggregating approximately 1.0 million
square feet for approximately $184.8 million (using the
exchange rate on the date of contribution). During 2008, the
company contributed to this co-investment venture two completed
development projects, aggregating approximately 0.9 million
square feet for approximately $174.9 million (using the
exchange rate on the date of contribution). During 2007, the
company contributed to this co-investment venture one completed
development project aggregating approximately 0.5 million
square feet for approximately $84.4 million (using the
exchange rate on the date of contribution).
On October 17, 2006, the company formed AMB DFS
Fund I, LLC, a merchant development co-investment venture
with Strategic Realty Ventures, LLC, in which the company
retained an approximate 15% interest. The investment period for
AMB DFS Fund I, LLC ended in June 2009, and the remaining
capitalization of this fund as of December 31, 2009 was the
estimated investment of $5.1 million to complete the
existing development assets held by the fund. Since inception,
the company has contributed $28.5 million of equity to the
fund. No properties were contributed to this co-investment
venture during 2009 or 2008. During the year ended
December 31, 2007, the company contributed to this
co-investment venture approximately 82 acres of land with a
contribution value of approximately $30.3 million. During
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the
company contributed $1.4 million, $4.7 million and
$6.0 million to this co-investment venture, respectively.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, AMB DFS
Fund I, LLC sold development projects for approximately
$53.6 million. During the year ended December 31,
2008, AMB DFS Fund I, LLC sold development projects and one
land parcel for approximately $57.5 million. During the
year ended December 31, 2007, AMB DFS Fund I, LLC sold
development projects for approximately $8.9 million.
Effective October 1, 2006, the company deconsolidated AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., an open-ended
co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with institutional
investors, on a prospective basis, due to the re-evaluation of
the companys accounting for its investment because of
changes to the partnership agreement regarding the general
partners rights effective October 1, 2006. On
July 1, 2008, the partners of AMB Partners II, L.P.
(previously, a consolidated co-investment venture) contributed
their interests in AMB Partners II, L.P. to AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund III, L.P. in exchange for interests in AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated
co-investment venture. During 2009, the company contributed to
this co-investment venture two completed development projects,
aggregating approximately 0.4 million square feet, for
additional units in the fund equal to 100% of the fair value of
the assets, for an aggregate price of approximately
$32.5 million. During 2008, the company contributed to this
co-investment venture one approximately 0.8 million square
foot operating property and four completed development projects,
aggregating approximately 2.7 million square feet, for
approximately $274.3 million. During 2007, the company
contributed to this co-investment venture one approximately
0.2 million square foot industrial operating property and
four completed development projects, aggregating approximately
1.0 million square feet for approximately
$116.6 million. During 2009, AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P. sold industrial operating properties for
approximately $46.6 million. No industrial operating
property sales were made from this venture during the years
ended December 31, 2008 and 2007.
On June 12, 2007, the company formed AMB Europe
Fund I, FCP-FIS, a Euro-denominated open-ended
co-investment venture with institutional investors, in which the
company retained an approximate 20% interest upon formation. At
the time of formation, the institutional investors committed
approximately 263.0 million Euros (approximately
$376.8 million in U.S. dollars, using the exchange
rate at December 31, 2009) for an approximate
43
80% equity interest. During 2009, the company made no
contributions to this co-investment venture. During 2008, the
company contributed to this co-investment venture two
development projects, aggregating approximately 0.2 million
square feet, for approximately $35.2 million (using the
exchange rate on the date of contribution). During 2007, the
company contributed approximately 4.2 million square feet
of industrial operating properties and approximately
1.8 million square feet of completed development projects
to this co-investment venture for approximately
$799.3 million (using the exchange rates on the dates of
contribution).
During the year ended December 31, 2009, the company made
no contributions of real estate interests, and no gains were
recognized. During 2008, the company recognized gains from the
contribution of real estate interests, net, of approximately
$20.0 million, representing the portion of the
companys interest in the contributed properties acquired
by the third-party investors for cash, as a result of the
contribution of approximately 0.8 million square feet of
industrial operating properties to AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P. During the year ended December 31,
2007, the company contributed industrial operating properties
for approximately $524.9 million, aggregating approximately
4.5 million square feet, into AMB Europe Fund I,
FCP-FIS, AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. and
AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC. The company recognized a gain of
$73.4 million on the contributions, representing the
portion of its interest in the contributed properties acquired
by the third-party investors for cash. These gains are presented
in gains from sale or contribution of real estate interests, net
of taxes in the consolidated statements of operations.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, the company
recognized development profits of approximately
$29.8 million, as a result of the contribution of three
completed development projects, aggregating approximately
1.4 million square feet, to AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P. and AMB Japan Fund I, L.P. During 2008,
the company recognized development profits of approximately
$73.9 million, as a result of the contribution of 11
completed development projects, aggregating approximately
5.2 million square feet, to AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P., AMB Europe Fund I, FCP-FIS, AMB Japan
Fund I, L.P. and AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC. During 2007, the
company recognized development profits of approximately
$95.7 million, as a result of the contribution of 15
completed development projects and two land parcels, aggregating
approximately 82 acres of land, to AMB Europe Fund I,
FCP-FIS, AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P., AMB DFS Fund I, LLC, and AMB Japan
Fund I, L.P.
Under the agreements governing the co-investment ventures, the
company and the other parties to the co-investment ventures may
be required to make additional capital contributions and,
subject to certain limitations, the co-investment ventures may
incur additional debt.
Secured
Debt
As of December 31, 2009, the company had $1.1 billion
of secured indebtedness, net of unamortized premiums, secured by
deeds of trust or mortgages. As of December 31, 2009, the
total gross investment book value of those properties securing
the debt was $2.0 billion. Of the $1.1 billion of
secured indebtedness, $771.1 million, net of unamortized
premiums, was consolidated co-investment venture debt secured by
properties with a gross investment value of $1.5 billion.
As of December 31, 2008, the company had $1.5 billion
of secured indebtedness, net of unamortized premiums, secured by
deeds of trust or mortgages. As of December 31, 2008, the
total gross investment book value of those properties securing
the debt was $2.1 billion. Of the $1.5 billion of
secured indebtedness, $808.1 million was consolidated
co-investment venture debt secured by properties with a gross
investment value of $1.4 billion. For additional details,
see Part II, Item 7: Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Liquidity and Capital Resources and
Part IV, Item 15: Notes 6 and 7 of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in this report.
|
|
ITEM 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
As of December 31, 2009, there were no material pending
legal proceedings to which we were a party or of which any of
our properties was the subject, the adverse determination of
which we anticipate would have a material adverse effect upon
our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
|
|
ITEM 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
None.
44
PART
II
|
|
ITEM 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities (AMB Property
Corporation)
|
The parent companys common stock trades on the New York
Stock Exchange under the symbol AMB. As of
February 17, 2010, there were approximately 452 holders of
record of the parent companys common stock. Set forth
below are the high and low sales prices per share of the parent
companys common stock, as reported on the NYSE composite
tape, and the dividend per share paid or payable by the parent
company during the period from January 1, 2008 through
December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Dividend
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$
|
57.92
|
|
|
$
|
45.75
|
|
|
$
|
0.520
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
|
60.17
|
|
|
|
49.91
|
|
|
|
0.520
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
|
57.13
|
|
|
|
40.27
|
|
|
|
0.520
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
44.18
|
|
|
|
8.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$
|
26.03
|
|
|
$
|
9.12
|
|
|
$
|
0.280
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
|
20.75
|
|
|
|
13.81
|
|
|
|
0.280
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
|
25.96
|
|
|
|
15.91
|
|
|
|
0.280
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
27.43
|
|
|
|
20.71
|
|
|
|
0.280
|
|
The payment of dividends and other distributions by the parent
company is at the discretion of its board of directors and
depends on numerous factors, including the parent companys
cash flow, financial condition and capital requirements, real
estate investment trust provisions of the Internal Revenue Code
and other factors.
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities (AMB Property,
L.P.)
There is no established public trading market for the operating
partnerships partnership units. As of December 31,
2009, the operating partnership had outstanding 160,448,893
partnership units, consisting of 158,328,965 general partnership
units (consisting of 149,028,965 common units, 2,000,000 6.50%
series L cumulative redeemable preferred units, 2,300,000
6.75% series M cumulative redeemable preferred units,
3,000,000 7.00% series O cumulative redeemable preferred
units and 2,000,000 6.85% series P cumulative redeemable
preferred units) and 2,119,928 common limited partnership units.
The series L preferred units were issued on June 23,
2003 to the parent company for total consideration of
$50.0 million. The series M preferred units were
issued on November 25, 2003 to the parent company for total
consideration of $57.5 million. The series O preferred
units were issued on December 13, 2005 to the parent
company for total consideration of $75.0 million. The
series P preferred units were issued on August 25,
2006 to the parent company for total consideration of
$50.0 million. Subject to certain terms and conditions, the
common limited partnership units are redeemable by the holders
thereof or, at the operating partnerships option,
exchangeable on a
one-for-one
basis for shares of the common stock of the parent company. As
of December 31, 2009, there were 48 holders of record of
our common limited partnership units (including the parent
companys general partnership interest).
45
During 2009, the operating partnership redeemed 47,563 common
limited partnership units for the same number of shares of the
parent companys common stock. In addition, during 2009,
the operating partnership redeemed 13,318 common limited
partnership units for approximately $268,599. Set forth below
are the distributions per common limited partnership unit paid
by us during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$
|
0.520
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
|
0.520
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
|
0.520
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$
|
0.280
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
|
0.280
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
|
0.280
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
0.280
|
|
46
Stock
Performance Graph
The following line graph compares the change in the parent
companys cumulative total stockholder return on shares of
its common stock from December 31, 2004 to
December 31, 2009 to the cumulative total return of the
Standard and Poors 500 Stock Index and the FTSE NAREIT
Equity REITs Index from December 31, 2004 to
December 31, 2009. The graph assumes an initial investment
of $100 in the common stock of the parent company and each of
the indices on December 31, 2004 and, as required by the
SEC, the reinvestment of all dividends. The return shown on the
graph is not necessarily indicative of future performance.
COMPARISON
OF FIVE-YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among
AMB Property Corporation, The S&P 500 Index
And The FTSE NAREIT Equity REITs Index
*$100 invested on
12/31/04 in
stock or index, including reinvestment of dividends.
Fiscal year ending December 31.
Copyright©
2010 S&P, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All
rights reserved.
This graph and the accompanying text are not soliciting
material, are not deemed filed with the SEC and are not to
be incorporated by reference in any filing by the company under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after
the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation
language in any such filing.
47
|
|
ITEM 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
SELECTED
COMPANY FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA (1) (AMB Property
Corporation)
The following table sets forth selected consolidated historical
financial and other data for the parent company on a historical
basis as of and for the years ended December 31:
See footnote 2 below for discussion of the comparability of
selected financial and other data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008(2)
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006(2)
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
Operating Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
633,842
|
|
|
$
|
693,563
|
|
|
$
|
650,886
|
|
|
$
|
694,372
|
|
|
$
|
630,643
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations(3)
|
|
|
(122,685
|
)
|
|
|
(11,308
|
)
|
|
|
288,266
|
|
|
|
216,304
|
|
|
|
190,159
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
94,725
|
|
|
|
4,558
|
|
|
|
83,450
|
|
|
|
72,509
|
|
|
|
158,455
|
|
Net (loss) income before cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle
|
|
|
(27,960
|
)
|
|
|
(6,750
|
)
|
|
|
371,716
|
|
|
|
288,813
|
|
|
|
348,614
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(27,960
|
)
|
|
|
(6,750
|
)
|
|
|
371,716
|
|
|
|
289,006
|
|
|
|
348,614
|
|
Net (loss) income available to common stockholders
|
|
|
(50,077
|
)
|
|
|
(66,451
|
)
|
|
|
293,552
|
|
|
|
207,970
|
|
|
|
248,798
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations available to common
stockholders per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
(1.02
|
)
|
|
|
(0.71
|
)
|
|
|
2.23
|
|
|
|
1.60
|
|
|
|
1.21
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(1.02
|
)
|
|
|
(0.71
|
)
|
|
|
2.18
|
|
|
|
1.55
|
|
|
|
1.16
|
|
Income from discontinued operations available to common
stockholders per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
0.65
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.79
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
1.75
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
0.65
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
0.74
|
|
|
|
1.68
|
|
Net (loss) income available to common stockholders per common
share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
(0.37
|
)
|
|
|
(0.68
|
)
|
|
|
3.02
|
|
|
|
2.37
|
|
|
|
2.96
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(0.37
|
)
|
|
|
(0.68
|
)
|
|
|
2.95
|
|
|
|
2.29
|
|
|
|
2.84
|
|
Dividends declared per common share
|
|
|
1.12
|
|
|
|
1.56
|
|
|
|
2.00
|
|
|
|
1.84
|
|
|
|
1.76
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding basic
|
|
|
134,321,231
|
|
|
|
97,403,659
|
|
|
|
97,189,749
|
|
|
|
87,710,500
|
|
|
|
84,048,936
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding diluted
|
|
|
134,321,231
|
|
|
|
97,403,659
|
|
|
|
99,601,396
|
|
|
|
90,960,637
|
|
|
|
87,733,596
|
|
Other Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations(4)
|
|
$
|
99,275
|
|
|
$
|
79,195
|
|
|
$
|
363,102
|
|
|
$
|
295,893
|
|
|
$
|
252,752
|
|
Funds from operations per common share and unit:(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
0.72
|
|
|
|
0.78
|
|
|
|
3.58
|
|
|
|
3.21
|
|
|
|
2.85
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
0.72
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
3.49
|
|
|
|
3.10
|
|
|
|
2.74
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
242,276
|
|
|
|
301,020
|
|
|
|
240,543
|
|
|
|
335,855
|
|
|
|
295,815
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
75,129
|
|
|
|
(881,768
|
)
|
|
|
(632,240
|
)
|
|
|
(880,560
|
)
|
|
|
(60,407
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(288,549
|
)
|
|
|
581,765
|
|
|
|
420,025
|
|
|
|
483,621
|
|
|
|
(101,856
|
)
|
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments in real estate at cost
|
|
$
|
6,708,660
|
|
|
$
|
6,603,856
|
|
|
$
|
6,709,545
|
|
|
$
|
6,575,733
|
|
|
$
|
6,798,294
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
6,841,958
|
|
|
|
7,301,648
|
|
|
|
7,262,403
|
|
|
|
6,713,512
|
|
|
|
6,802,739
|
|
Total consolidated debt
|
|
|
3,212,596
|
|
|
|
3,990,185
|
|
|
|
3,494,844
|
|
|
|
3,437,415
|
|
|
|
3,401,561
|
|
Parent companys share of total debt(5)
|
|
|
3,580,353
|
|
|
|
4,293,510
|
|
|
|
3,272,513
|
|
|
|
3,088,624
|
|
|
|
2,601,878
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
223,412
|
|
|
|
223,412
|
|
|
|
223,412
|
|
|
|
223,417
|
|
|
|
175,548
|
|
Stockholders equity (excluding preferred stock)
|
|
|
2,716,604
|
|
|
|
2,291,695
|
|
|
|
2,540,540
|
|
|
|
1,943,240
|
|
|
|
1,740,751
|
|
48
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All amounts in the consolidated financial statements for prior
years have been retrospectively updated for new accounting
guidance related to accounting for noncontrolling interests,
discontinued operations and per share calculations. |
|
(2) |
|
Effective October 1, 2006, the company deconsolidated AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. on a prospective
basis, due to the re-evaluation of the accounting for the
companys investment in the fund because of changes to the
partnership agreement regarding the general partners
rights effective October 1, 2006. On July 1, 2008, the
partners of AMB Partners II, L.P. (previously, a consolidated
co-investment venture) contributed their interests in AMB
Partners II, L.P. to AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III,
L.P. in exchange for interests in AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated co-investment venture. As
a result, the financial measures for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005, included in
the parent companys operating data, other data and balance
sheet data above are not comparable. |
|
(3) |
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 includes real estate impairment
losses of $174.4 million and $183.8 million,
respectively, and restructuring charges of $6.4 million and
$12.3 million, respectively. |
|
(4) |
|
See Part II, Item 7: Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Supplemental Earnings Measures, for
a reconciliation to net income and a discussion of why the
company believes FFO is a useful supplemental measure of
operating performance, ways in which investors might use FFO
when assessing the parent companys financial performance,
and FFOs limitations as a measurement tool. |
|
(5) |
|
Parent companys share of total debt is the pro rata
portion of the total debt based on the parent companys
percentage of equity interest in each of the consolidated and
unconsolidated joint ventures holding the debt. The company
believes that parent companys share of total debt is a
meaningful supplemental measure, which enables both management
and investors to analyze the parent companys leverage and
to compare the parent companys leverage to that of other
companies. In addition, it allows for a more meaningful
comparison of the parent companys debt to that of other
companies that do not consolidate their joint ventures. Parent
companys share of total debt is not intended to reflect
the parent companys actual liability should there be a
default under any or all of such loans or a liquidation of the
co-investment ventures. For a reconciliation of parent
companys share of total debt to total consolidated debt, a
GAAP financial measure, please see the table of debt maturities
and capitalization in Part II, Item 7:
Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Liquidity and Capital
Resources of the Operating Partnership |
49
SELECTED
COMPANY FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA (1) (AMB Property,
L.P.)
The following table sets forth selected consolidated historical
financial and other data for the operating partnership on a
historical basis as of and for the years ended December 31:
See footnote 2 below for discussion of the comparability of
selected financial and other data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008(2)
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006(2)
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands, except unit and per unit amounts)
|
|
|
Operating Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
633,842
|
|
|
$
|
693,563
|
|
|
$
|
650,886
|
|
|
$
|
694,372
|
|
|
$
|
630,643
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations(3)
|
|
|
(122,685
|
)
|
|
|
(11,308
|
)
|
|
|
288,266
|
|
|
|
216,304
|
|
|
|
190,159
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
94,725
|
|
|
|
4,558
|
|
|
|
83,450
|
|
|
|
72,509
|
|
|
|
158,455
|
|
Net (loss) income before cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle
|
|
|
(27,960
|
)
|
|
|
(6,750
|
)
|
|
|
371,716
|
|
|
|
288,813
|
|
|
|
348,614
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(27,960
|
)
|
|
|
(6,750
|
)
|
|
|
371,716
|
|
|
|
289,006
|
|
|
|
348,614
|
|
Net (loss) income available to common unitholders
|
|
|
(50,866
|
)
|
|
|
(67,233
|
)
|
|
|
305,241
|
|
|
|
217,419
|
|
|
|
262,381
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations available to common
unitholders per common unit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
(1.02
|
)
|
|
|
(0.69
|
)
|
|
|
2.20
|
|
|
|
1.59
|
|
|
|
1.20
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(1.02
|
)
|
|
|
(0.69
|
)
|
|
|
2.15
|
|
|
|
1.54
|
|
|
|
1.15
|
|
Net income from discontinued operations available to common
uniholders per common unit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
0.65
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.81
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
1.76
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
0.65
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.79
|
|
|
|
0.74
|
|
|
|
1.69
|
|
Net (loss) income available to common unitholders per common
unit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
(0.37
|
)
|
|
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
|
3.01
|
|
|
|
2.36
|
|
|
|
2.96
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(0.37
|
)
|
|
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
|
2.94
|
|
|
|
2.28
|
|
|
|
2.84
|
|
Distributions declared per common unit
|
|
|
1.12
|
|
|
|
1.56
|
|
|
|
2.00
|
|
|
|
1.84
|
|
|
|
1.76
|
|
Weighted average common units outstanding basic
|
|
|
136,484,612
|
|
|
|
101,253,972
|
|
|
|
101,550,001
|
|
|
|
92,047,678
|
|
|
|
88,684,262
|
|
Weighted average common units outstanding diluted
|
|
|
136,484,612
|
|
|
|
101,253,972
|
|
|
|
103,961,648
|
|
|
|
95,297,815
|
|
|
|
92,368,922
|
|
Other Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations(4)
|
|
$
|
99,275
|
|
|
$
|
79,195
|
|
|
$
|
363,102
|
|
|
$
|
295,893
|
|
|
$
|
252,752
|
|
Funds from operations per common unit:(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
0.72
|
|
|
|
0.78
|
|
|
|
3.58
|
|
|
|
3.21
|
|
|
|
2.85
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
0.72
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
3.49
|
|
|
|
3.10
|
|
|
|
2.74
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
242,276
|
|
|
|
301,020
|
|
|
|
240,543
|
|
|
|
335,855
|
|
|
|
295,815
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
75,129
|
|
|
|
(881,768
|
)
|
|
|
(632,240
|
)
|
|
|
(880,560
|
)
|
|
|
(60,407
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(288,549
|
)
|
|
|
581,765
|
|
|
|
420,025
|
|
|
|
483,621
|
|
|
|
(101,856
|
)
|
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments in real estate at cost
|
|
$
|
6,708,660
|
|
|
$
|
6,603,856
|
|
|
$
|
6,709,545
|
|
|
$
|
6,575,733
|
|
|
$
|
6,798,294
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
6,841,958
|
|
|
|
7,301,648
|
|
|
|
7,262,403
|
|
|
|
6,713,512
|
|
|
|
6,802,739
|
|
Total consolidated debt
|
|
|
3,212,596
|
|
|
|
3,990,185
|
|
|
|
3,494,844
|
|
|
|
3,437,415
|
|
|
|
3,401,561
|
|
Operating partnerships share of total debt(5)
|
|
|
3,580,353
|
|
|
|
4,293,510
|
|
|
|
3,272,513
|
|
|
|
3,088,624
|
|
|
|
2,601,878
|
|
Preferred units
|
|
|
223,412
|
|
|
|
223,412
|
|
|
|
223,412
|
|
|
|
223,417
|
|
|
|
175,548
|
|
Partners capital (excluding preferred units)
|
|
|
2,755,165
|
|
|
|
2,342,526
|
|
|
|
2,610,574
|
|
|
|
2,095,835
|
|
|
|
1,904,730
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All amounts in the consolidated financial statements for prior
years have been retrospectively updated for new accounting
guidance related to accounting for noncontrolling interests,
discontinued operations and per unit calculations. |
|
(2) |
|
Effective October 1, 2006, the company deconsolidated AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. on a prospective
basis, due to the re-evaluation of the accounting for the
companys investment in the fund because |
50
|
|
|
|
|
of changes to the partnership agreement regarding the general
partners rights effective October 1, 2006. On
July 1, 2008, the partners of AMB Partners II, L.P.
(previously, a consolidated co-investment venture) contributed
their interests in AMB Partners II, L.P. to AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund III, L.P. in exchange for interests in AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated
co-investment venture. As a result, the financial measures for
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006 and
2005, included in the operating partnerships operating
data, other data and balance sheet data above are not comparable. |
|
(3) |
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 includes real estate impairment
losses of $174.4 million and $183.8 million,
respectively, and restructuring charges of $6.4 million and
$12.3 million, respectively. |
|
(4) |
|
See Part II, Item 7: Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Supplemental Earnings Measures, for
a reconciliation to net income and a discussion of why the
company believes FFO is a useful supplemental measure of
operating performance, ways in which investors might use FFO
when assessing the operating partnerships financial
performance, and FFOs limitations as a measurement tool. |
|
(5) |
|
Operating partnerships share of total debt is the pro rata
portion of the total debt based on the operating
partnerships percentage of equity interest in each of the
consolidated and unconsolidated joint ventures holding the debt.
The company believes that operating partnerships share of
total debt is a meaningful supplemental measure, which enables
both management and investors to analyze the operating
partnerships leverage and to compare the operating
partnerships leverage to that of other companies. In
addition, it allows for a more meaningful comparison of the
operating partnerships debt to that of other companies
that do not consolidate their joint ventures. Operating
partnerships share of total debt is not intended to
reflect the operating partnerships actual liability should
there be a default under any or all of such loans or a
liquidation of the co-investment ventures. For a reconciliation
of operating partnerships share of total debt to total
consolidated debt, a GAAP financial measure, please see the
table of debt maturities and capitalization in Part II,
Item 7: Management Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Liquidity and Capital Resources of the Operating
Partnership |
51
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
Please read the following discussion and analysis of our
consolidated financial condition and results of operations in
conjunction with the notes to the consolidated financial
statements.
Managements
Overview
Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2008, the company began to be
impacted by the economic, financial and real estate market
crisis. To maintain its competitive advantage, the company
established three key near-term priorities for 2009 which
included: strengthening its balance sheet and liquidity
position; reducing its cost structure; and positioning for
future growth opportunities.
Management believes that in 2009 it successfully executed on
these near-term priorities, which enabled the company to
navigate through a challenging environment, and that the company
is now positioned to pursue growth opportunities. As such, the
company has established three key growth initiatives for 2010,
which include:
|
|
|
|
|
improving the utilization of its existing assets;
|
|
|
|
acquiring industrial real estate with total returns above the
companys cost of capital; and
|
|
|
|
forming new private capital ventures and funds.
|
Management believes that the leading indicators for economic
recovery reached an inflection point during the fourth quarter
and expects that improving economic conditions will lead to an
increase in the demand for industrial real estate. Management
expects to see earnings growth if it is able to improve asset
utilization by returning its owned and managed portfolio closer
to its historical occupancy average of 95%; complete the
build-out and leasing of its development portfolio; and realize
value from its land bank through new ventures, sales and future
build-to-suit
projects. The company believes that capital deployment
opportunities are increasing and is evaluating multiple
transactions in its target markets around the globe. Management
believes that its ability to provide multiple forms of
consideration to institutional investors, lenders and private
developers provide the company with proprietary access to
acquisition opportunities. The company is also observing a
positive shift in investor interest and believes that this
growing level of interest is being met by the scarcity of high
quality, well-located industrial real estate. Management
believes that its existing and new private capital funds and
ventures are well positioned to benefit from this shift in
investor preferences.
The
Companys Liquidity and Balance Sheet
Management believes that the companys financial position
is strong and its debt maturity schedule is well laddered.
During 2009, the company completed approximately
$2.7 billion of debt repayments, repurchases and
extensions, of which $1.6 billion occurred in the fourth
quarter. Notable transactions during 2009, which further
strengthened the companys liquidity position included:
|
|
|
|
|
The issuance and sale of 47.4 million shares of its common
stock for net proceeds of approximately $552.3 million,
during the first quarter;
|
|
|
|
The issuance of $500.0 million of senior unsecured notes
consisting of a $250.0 million tranche at 6.13% due 2016
and a $250.0 million tranche at 6.63% due 2019;
|
|
|
|
The refinancing of its $325.0 million unsecured term loan
facility with a $345.0 million multi-currency facility,
maturing October 2012, which was subsequently upsized to
$425.0 million in December 2009;
|
|
|
|
The early repayment of its $230.0 million secured term loan
facility originally due September 2010;
|
|
|
|
The completion of the repurchase of $213.6 million in bonds
including $168.9 million in connection with its cash tender
offer of notes due 2011 and 2013 and $44.7 million of open
market repurchases of notes due 2010 and 2013 with a weighted
average yield-to maturity of 4.74%, and the completion of a cash
tender offer for $146.5 million and $28.5 million in
aggregate principal amount of the operating partnerships
5.45% medium-term notes due 2010 and 8.0% medium-term notes due
2010, respectively; and
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
The purchase of AMB Property II, L.P.s outstanding 7.18%
series D cumulative redeemable preferred units in exchange
for 2.9 million shares of the parent companys common
stock for an aggregate price of $67.8 million, which
represented a 15% discount to the liquidation preference.
|
As a result of its 2009 financing activity, the company reduced
its share of total
debt-to-its
share of total assets to 43.6% from 51.1% and extended the
weighted average remaining life of over 25% of its debt to more
than five and a half years at an average interest rate of 4.9%.
Having resolved its near-term maturities, the company embarked
on a strategy, during the fourth quarter, to further lengthen
its maturity schedule to minimize its debt maturities through
2013. Management believes this strategy will provide it with
maximum flexibility and further position the company to take
advantage of opportunities as they arise.
As of December 31, 2009, the companys total
consolidated debt maturities for 2010 after extension options
(subject to certain conditions) were $322.4 million,
excluding principal amortization. The company had unconsolidated
debt maturities of $148.2 million for 2010 after extension
options (subject to certain conditions) as of December 31,
2009, excluding principal amortization.
During 2009, the company disposed of $762.9 million of
properties with a weighted average stabilized capitalization
rate of 6.8%. During the fourth quarter, the company completed
dispositions totaling $92.9 million, with a weighted
average stabilized capitalization rate of 8.2%.
During 2009, the company increased the availability under its
lines of credit by approximately $441 million while
reducing its share of outstanding debt by approximately
$713 million. As of December 31, 2009, the company had
$1.2 billion available for future borrowings under its
three multi-currency lines of credit, representing line
utilization of 30%, and had cash, cash equivalents and
restricted cash of $206.1 million.
The
Companys Cost Structure
To address the challenges of the current business environment,
the company implemented a broad-based cost reduction plan that
began in the fourth quarter of 2008. As a result of this plan,
the company reduced its total global headcount by approximately
one third and reduced gross G&A costs by approximately
$60.0 million on a run-rate basis as of December 31,
2009. In executing these cost-saving efforts, the company
believes that it has preserved its ability to serve its global
customers and manage its industrial operating and development
portfolios. While the company has removed excess capacity in its
capital deployment teams, it believes that it has retained its
key talent and left its global capabilities intact.
During the fourth quarter, the company began the process of
outsourcing various global property accounting and certain back
office functions. The company believes that this initiative will
improve the efficiency, cost structure and scalability of its
back office operations. The company incurred $2.5 million
in severance costs during the fourth quarter and expects to
realize $2-3 million of additional restructuring costs in
2010 related to completing this initiative. Management believes
that it will produce approximately $5.0 million in annual
savings upon the completion of this initiative.
Real
Estate Operations
During 2009, industrial property fundamentals were the most
challenging on record. According to data provided by CBRE
Econometric Advisors as of January 25, 2010, availability
in the United States reached a historical high of 13.9% for the
quarter ended December 31, 2009, up 40 basis points
from the prior quarter and 250 basis points from the fourth
quarter of 2008. For the full year 2009, industrial net
absorption was negative 265 million square feet, the lowest
on record. The negative trend decelerated over the course of the
year, slowing to a negative 38 million square feet in the
fourth quarter. Within the U.S., the company believes that its
coastal markets will continue to outperform other
U.S. industrial markets, as evidenced by flat net
absorption and availability unchanged at 12.1% in the fourth
quarter. The company continues to believe that the primary
infill markets tied to global trade remain relatively strong.
Also according to CBRE Econometric Advisors, new construction
was at an all time low of 71 million square feet for 2009
and 15.2 million square feet for the fourth quarter. While
the company expects the delivery pipeline to continue to
decline, the company expects net absorption to be positive in
the second half of 2010. At the end of the
53
third quarter, the global market fundamentals began to show
early signs of stability. Globally, industrial demand is still
soft, but management believes that it is seeing signs of
increased customer activity and decision making. Market
occupancy declines are slowing globally and leasing activity has
increased. Market rents remain lower than a year ago and the
company expects rent changes on rollovers to continue to trend
down through 2010.
Current forecasts for 2010, according to the IMF, indicate that
global GDP is expected to increase by 3.9% and global trade by
6%, all of which should lead to inventory rebuilding and demand
for industrial real estate. The company believes that while the
leading indicators for demand for industrial real estate have
reached an inflection point, recovery in operating fundamentals
will lag behind the recovery in the macro economy as it has in
prior cycles. Management expects that its operating fundamentals
in the first half of 2010 will be consistent with occupancy in
the fourth quarter of 2009 before improving by the end of 2010.
Rent changes on rollover are expected to be negative for 2010.
For 2009, the company generated $406.9 million of net
operating income, on a consolidated basis, from its real estate
operations. The companys owned and managed portfolio
occupancy during the three months ended December 31, 2009
was 91.2%, up 20 basis points from September 30, 2009.
Average occupancy during the three months ended
December 31, 2009 was 90.7%, up 30 basis points from
the three months ended September 30, 2009. During the three
months ended December 31, 2009, rent changes on rollovers
in the companys industrial operating portfolio declined by
11.5% on an owned and managed basis, excluding expense
reimbursements, rental abatements, percentage rents and
straight-line rents. Rental rates on lease renewals and
rollovers in the companys portfolio declined by 6.9% for
the trailing four quarters ended December 31, 2009.
During the quarter, cash-basis same store net operating income
without the effect of lease termination fees, decreased by 7.3%
and 4.5% for the full year 2009 on an owned and managed basis.
Excluding the impact of foreign currency exchange rate movements
against the U.S. dollar, cash-basis same store net
operating income without the effect of lease termination fees
decreased 8.9% for the fourth quarter and 4.7% for the full year
2009. See Supplemental Earnings Measures below for a
discussion of cash-basis same store net operating income and a
reconciliation of cash-basis same store net operating income and
net income.
As of December 31, 2009, the accounts receivable levels
were consistent with historical levels, during recessionary
periods, and management believes that the accounts receivable
are leveling and that it continues to maintain adequate bad debt
reserves. Although the number of bankruptcies of its customers
increased during 2009, the company believes the impact of such
bankruptcies on its business was not significant for the quarter
and year ended December 31, 2009.
Private
Capital Business
For the year ended December 31, 2009, the company generated
private capital revenues of $37.9 million, of which
$10.5 million occurred in the fourth quarter. During the
first quarter, the company contributed one $185.0 million
development project to AMB Japan Fund I, L.P. During the
third quarter, the company transferred two assets to AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. in exchange for
additional units equal to the fair value of the assets, for an
aggregate price of $32.5 million, increasing its ownership
interest in the fund to 22.7% from 19.3%.
Subsequent to year end, the companys two open-ended funds
completed approximately $267.0 million in net capital
transactions consisting of: $50.0 million in new
third-party equity in AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III;
$67.0 million in investor-elected redemption withdrawals,
thereby reducing AMB Institutional Alliance Fund IIIs
redemption queue to $14.9 million as of February 1,
2010; the companys $100.0 million investment in AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III; and its $50.0 million
investment in AMB Europe Fund I, FCP-FIS.
Equityholders in two of the companys co-investment
ventures, AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. and AMB
Europe Fund I, FCP-FIS, have a right to request that the
ventures redeem their interests under certain conditions. The
redemption right of investors in AMB Europe Fund I, FCP-FIS
is exercisable beginning after July 1, 2011.
Development
Business
Given the uncertainty in the global economy during 2009, the
company limited its development activity to previously committed
projects. During the year ended December 31, 2009, the
company commenced development
54
on four previously committed development projects for a total
estimated investment cost of $60.6 million. In addition to
its committed development pipeline, as of December 31,
2009, the company held a total of 2,488 acres of land for
future development or sale on an owned and managed basis,
approximately 85% of which is located in the Americas. The
company currently estimates that these 2,488 acres of land
could support approximately 45.1 million square feet of
future development.
Impairment
Charges
The company recognized real estate impairment charges on certain
of its assets of $181.9 million in the first quarter of
2009 and of $193.9 million in the fourth quarter of 2008.
The principal trigger which led to the impairment charges was
the severe economic deterioration in some markets resulting in a
decrease in leasing and rental rates, rising vacancies and an
increase in capitalization rates. Additional impairments may be
necessary in the future in the event that market conditions
continue to deteriorate and impact the factors used to estimate
fair value, which may include impairments relating to the
companys unconsolidated real estate as well as impairments
relating to the companys investments in its unconsolidated
co-investment ventures. See Part IV, Item 15:
Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements for a more detailed discussion of the real
estate impairment losses recorded in the companys results
of operations during the year ended December 31, 2009.
Summary
of Key Transactions
During the year ended December 31, 2009, the company
completed the following significant capital deployment and other
transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
Contributed one completed development project aggregating
approximately 1.0 million square feet for an aggregate
price of approximately $184.8 million (using the exchange
rate in effect on the date of contribution) to AMB Japan
Fund I, L.P., an unconsolidated co-investment venture;
|
|
|
|
Sold development projects aggregating approximately
3.1 million square feet, including 1.1 million square
feet that was held in an unconsolidated co-investment venture,
and three land parcels totaling 35 acres for an aggregate
sales price of $347.5 million;
|
|
|
|
Sold industrial operating properties aggregating approximately
2.9 million square feet, including 0.6 million square
feet that were held in an unconsolidated co-investment venture,
for an aggregate sales price of $198.1 million; and
|
|
|
|
Transferred two development assets to AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P. in exchange for additional partnership units
equal to the fair value of the assets for an aggregate price of
$32.5 million and aggregating approximately
0.4 million square feet.
|
See Part IV, Item 15: Notes 4 and 5 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a
more detailed discussion of the companys acquisition,
development and disposition activity.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The companys discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations is based on its consolidated
financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the
U.S. (GAAP). The preparation of these financial statements
requires the company to make estimates and judgments that affect
the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and contingencies as
of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts
of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. The
company evaluates its assumptions and estimates on an on-going
basis. The company bases its estimates on historical experience
and on various other assumptions that it believes to be
reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form
the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of
assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other
sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions. The company believes the
following critical accounting policies affect its more
significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of
its consolidated financial statements.
55
Investments in Real Estate. Investments in
real estate and leasehold interests are stated at cost unless
circumstances indicate that cost cannot be recovered, in which
case, an adjustment to the carrying value of the property is
made to reduce it to its estimated fair value. The company also
regularly reviews the impact of above or below-market leases,
in-place leases and lease origination costs for acquisitions,
and records an intangible asset or liability accordingly.
The company conducts a comprehensive review of all real estate
asset classes in accordance with its policy of accounting for
the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, which indicates
that asset values should be analyzed whenever events or changes
in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of a property
may not be fully recoverable. The intended use of an asset,
either held for sale or held for the long term, can
significantly impact how impairment is measured. If an asset is
intended to be held for the long term, the impairment analysis
is based on a two-step test. The first test measures estimated
expected future cash flows over the holding period, including a
residual value (undiscounted and without interest charges),
against the carrying value of the property. If the asset fails
the test, then the asset carrying value is measured against the
estimated fair value from a market participant standpoint, with
the excess of the assets carrying value over the estimated
fair value recognized as an impairment charge to earnings. If an
asset is intended to be sold, impairment is tested based on a
one-step test, comparing the carrying value to the estimated
fair value less costs to sell. The estimation of expected future
net cash flows is inherently uncertain and relies on assumptions
regarding current and future economic and market conditions and
the availability of capital. The company determines the
estimated fair values based on assumptions regarding rental
rates, costs to complete,
lease-up and
holding periods, as well as sales prices or contribution values.
The company also utilizes the knowledge of its regional teams
and the recent valuations of its two open-ended funds, which
contain a large, geographically diversified pool of assets, all
of which are subject to third-party appraisals on at least an
annual basis.
Revenue Recognition. The company records
rental revenue from operating leases on a straight-line basis
over the term of the leases and maintains an allowance for
estimated losses that may result from the inability of the
companys customers to make required payments. If customers
fail to make contractual lease payments that are greater than
the companys allowance for doubtful accounts, security
deposits and letters of credit, then the company may have to
recognize additional doubtful account charges in future periods.
The company monitors the liquidity and creditworthiness of its
customers on an on-going basis by reviewing their financial
condition periodically as appropriate. Each period the company
reviews its outstanding accounts receivable, including
straight-line rents, for doubtful accounts and provide
allowances as needed. The company also records lease termination
fees when a customer has executed a definitive termination
agreement with the company and the payment of the termination
fee is not subject to any conditions that must be met or waived
before the fee is due to the company. If a customer remains in
the leased space following the execution of a definitive
termination agreement, the applicable termination fees are
deferred and recognized over the term of such customers
occupancy.
Property Dispositions. The company reports
real estate dispositions in four separate categories on its
consolidated statements of operations. First, when the company
divests a portion of its interests in real estate entities or
properties, gains from the sale represent the interests acquired
by third-party investors for cash and are included in gains from
sale or contribution of real estate interests in the statements
of operations. Second, the company disposes of value-added
conversion projects and
build-to-suit
and speculative development projects for which it has not
generated material operating income prior to sale. The gain or
loss recognized from the disposition of these projects is
reported net of estimated taxes, when applicable, and is
included in development profits, net of taxes, within continuing
operations of the statements of operations. Third, the company
disposes of value-added conversion and other redevelopment
projects for which it may have generated material operating
income prior to sale. The gain or loss recognized is reported
net of estimated taxes, when applicable, in the development
profits, net of taxes, line within discontinued operations.
Lastly, guidance related to accounting for the impairment or
disposal of long-lived assets requires the company to separately
report as discontinued operations the historical operating
results attributable to industrial operating properties sold and
the applicable gain or loss on the disposition of the
properties, which is included in development profits and gains
from sale of real estate interests, net of taxes, in the
statements of operations. The consolidated statements of
operations for prior periods are also retrospectively adjusted
to conform with new guidance regarding accounting for
discontinued operations and noncontrolling interests, and there
is no impact on the companys previously reported
consolidated financial position, net income or
56
cash flows. In all cases, gains and losses are recognized using
the full accrual method of accounting. Gains relating to
transactions which do not meet the requirements of the full
accrual method of accounting are deferred and recognized when
the full accrual method of accounting criteria are met.
Joint Ventures. The company holds interests in
both consolidated and unconsolidated joint ventures. The company
consolidates joint ventures where it exhibits financial or
operational control. Control is determined using accounting
standards related to the consolidation of joint ventures and
variable interest entities. For joint ventures that are defined
as variable interest entities, the primary beneficiary
consolidates the entity. In instances where the company is not
the primary beneficiary, it does not consolidate the joint
venture for financial reporting purposes. For joint ventures
that are not defined as variable interest entities, management
first considers whether the company is the general partner or a
limited partner (or the equivalent in such investments which are
not structured as partnerships). The company consolidates joint
ventures where it is the general partner (or the equivalent) and
the limited partners (or the equivalent) in such investments do
not have rights which would preclude control and, therefore,
consolidation for financial reporting purposes. For joint
ventures where the company is the general partner (or the
equivalent), but does not control the joint venture as the other
partners (or the equivalent) hold substantive participating
rights, the company uses the equity method of accounting. For
joint ventures where the company is a limited partner (or the
equivalent), management considers factors such as ownership
interest, voting control, authority to make decisions, and
contractual and substantive participating rights of the partners
(or the equivalent) to determine if the presumption that the
general partner controls the entity is overcome. In instances
where these factors indicate the company controls the joint
venture, the company consolidates the joint venture; otherwise
it uses the equity method of accounting.
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures are presented under
the equity method. Under the equity method, these investments
are initially recognized in the balance sheet at cost and are
subsequently adjusted to reflect the companys
proportionate share of net earnings or losses of the joint
venture, distributions received, contributions, deferred gains
from the contribution of properties and certain other
adjustments, as appropriate. When circumstances indicate there
may have been a loss in value of an equity investment, the
company evaluates the investment for impairment by estimating
the companys ability to recover its investment or if the
loss in value is other than temporary. To evaluate whether an
impairment is other than temporary, the company considers
relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the period of
time in any unrealized loss position, the likelihood of a future
recovery, and the companys positive intent and ability to
hold the investment until the forecasted recovery. If the
company determines the loss in value is other than temporary,
the company recognizes an impairment charge to reflect the
investment at fair value. Fair value is determined through
various valuation techniques, including, but not limited to,
discounted cash flow models, quoted market values and third
party appraisals.
Real Estate Investment Trust. As a real estate
investment trust, the parent company generally will not be
subject to corporate level federal income taxes in the United
States if it meets minimum distribution requirements, and
certain income, asset and share ownership tests. However, some
of the companys subsidiaries may be subject to federal and
state taxes. In addition, foreign entities may also be subject
to the taxes of the host country. An income tax allocation is
required to be estimated on the companys taxable income
arising from its taxable real estate investment trust
subsidiaries and international entities. A deferred tax
component could arise based upon the differences in GAAP versus
tax income for items such as depreciation and gain recognition.
The company is required to establish a valuation allowance for
deferred tax assets if it is determined, based on available
evidence at the time the determination is made, that it is more
likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax
assets will not be realized. The company concluded, based on a
review of the relative weight of the available evidence, that it
was more likely than not that it would not generate sufficient
future taxable income to realize certain deferred tax assets.
Foreign Currency Remeasurement and
Translation. Transactions that require the
remeasurement and translation of a foreign currency are recorded
according to accounting guidance on foreign currency
translation. The U.S. dollar is the functional currency for
the companys subsidiaries formed in the United States,
Mexico and certain subsidiaries in Europe. Other than Mexico and
certain subsidiaries in Europe, the functional currency for the
companys subsidiaries operating outside the United States
is generally the local currency of the country in which the
entity or property is located, mitigating the effect of currency
exchange gains and losses. The companys subsidiaries whose
functional currency is not the U.S. dollar translate their
financial statements into U.S. dollars.
57
Assets and liabilities are translated at the exchange rate in
effect as of the financial statement date. The company
translates income statement accounts using the average exchange
rate for the period and significant nonrecurring transactions
using the rate on the transaction date.
The companys international subsidiaries may have
transactions denominated in currencies other than their
functional currencies. In these instances, non-monetary assets
and liabilities are reflected at the historical exchange rate,
monetary assets and liabilities are remeasured at the exchange
rate in effect at the end of the period and income statement
accounts are remeasured at the average exchange rate for the
period. The company also records gains or losses in the income
statement when a transaction with a third party, denominated in
a currency other than the entitys functional currency, is
settled and the functional currency cash flows realized are more
or less than expected based upon the exchange rate in effect
when the transaction was initiated.
CONSOLIDATED
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The analysis below includes changes attributable to same store
growth, acquisitions, development activity and divestitures. The
same store pool includes all properties that are owned as of the
end of both the current and prior year reporting periods and
excludes development properties stabilized after
December 31, 2007 (generally defined as properties that are
90% occupied). As of December 31, 2009, the same store
industrial pool consisted of properties aggregating
approximately 63.8 million square feet. The companys
future financial condition and results of operations, including
rental revenues, may be impacted by the acquisition and
disposition of additional properties, and expenses may vary
materially from historical results. Acquisition and development
property divestiture activity for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Acquired:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square feet (in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,831
|
|
|
|
702
|
|
Acquisition cost (in thousands)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
217,044
|
|
|
$
|
62,241
|
|
Development Properties Sold or Contributed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square feet (in thousands)
|
|
|
3,387
|
|
|
|
5,274
|
|
|
|
8,600
|
|
For
the Years Ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Rental revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$
|
473.8
|
|
|
$
|
533.5
|
|
|
$
|
(59.7
|
)
|
|
|
(11.2
|
)%
|
2008 acquisitions
|
|
|
19.5
|
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
77.3
|
%
|
Development
|
|
|
50.9
|
|
|
|
21.8
|
|
|
|
29.1
|
|
|
|
133.5
|
%
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
51.8
|
|
|
|
58.8
|
|
|
|
(7.0
|
)
|
|
|
(11.9
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total rental revenues
|
|
|
596.0
|
|
|
|
625.1
|
|
|
|
(29.1
|
)
|
|
|
(4.7
|
)%
|
Private capital revenues
|
|
|
37.9
|
|
|
|
68.5
|
|
|
|
(30.6
|
)
|
|
|
(44.7
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
633.9
|
|
|
$
|
693.6
|
|
|
$
|
(59.7
|
)
|
|
|
(8.6
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store rental revenues decreased $59.7 million from the
prior year due primarily to the contribution of AMB Partners II,
L.P. (previously, a consolidated co-investment venture) to AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated
co-investment venture, on July 1, 2008. Same store rental
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2008 would have
been $494.6 million if the interests in AMB Partners II,
L.P. had been contributed as of January 1, 2008, rather
than July 1, 2008. The decrease of $20.8 million,
excluding the effect of the contribution of interests in AMB
Partners II, L.P., was primarily due to decreased occupancy
during 2009. The increase in revenues from prior year
acquisitions is due to revenues recognized for the full year
ended December 31, 2009 for properties acquired throughout
all of 2008. The increase in rental revenues from development of
$29.1 million is
58
primarily due to increased occupancy at several of the
companys development projects. Other industrial revenues
include rental revenues from development projects that have
reached certain levels of operation but are not yet part of the
same store operating pool of properties. The decrease in these
revenues of $7.0 million primarily reflects a decline in
occupancy in 2009. The decrease in private capital revenues of
$30.6 million was primarily due to a decrease in incentive
and acquisition fees recognized in 2009 from fees recognized in
the prior year. In 2009, the company recognized incentive
distributions of $2.9 million for AMB DFS Fund I, LLC,
and in 2008, the company received incentive distributions of
$33.0 million for AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III,
L.P. and $1.0 million in connection with the sale of the
partnership interests in AMB/Erie, L.P., including its final
real estate asset to AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III,
L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Property operating costs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expenses
|
|
$
|
109.9
|
|
|
$
|
100.5
|
|
|
$
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
%
|
Real estate taxes
|
|
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
78.9
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
$
|
189.0
|
|
|
$
|
179.4
|
|
|
$
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$
|
143.6
|
|
|
$
|
149.6
|
|
|
$
|
(6.0
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)%
|
2008 acquisitions
|
|
|
7.8
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
151.6
|
%
|
Development
|
|
|
21.3
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
|
|
176.6
|
%
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
|
|
(14.2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
|
189.0
|
|
|
|
179.4
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
%
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
179.9
|
|
|
|
164.2
|
|
|
|
15.7
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
%
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
115.3
|
|
|
|
144.0
|
|
|
|
(28.7
|
)
|
|
|
(19.9
|
)%
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
(48.0
|
)%
|
Fund costs
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
Real estate impairment losses
|
|
|
174.4
|
|
|
|
183.7
|
|
|
|
(9.3
|
)
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)%
|
Other expenses
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
1,940.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
$
|
676.3
|
|
|
$
|
685.2
|
|
|
$
|
(8.9
|
)
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store properties operating expenses decreased
$6.0 million from the prior year primarily due to the
contribution of AMB Partners II, L.P. (previously, a
consolidated co-investment venture) to AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated co-investment
venture, on July 1, 2008. Same store operating expenses for
the year ended December 31, 2008 would have been
$139.7 million if the interests in AMB Partners II, L.P.
had been contributed as of January 1, 2008, rather than
July 1, 2008. The increase of $3.9 million, excluding
the effect of the contribution of interests in AMB Partners II,
L.P., was primarily due to an increase in common area
maintenance expenses and ground rent expense. The increase in
expenses of $4.7 million related to properties acquired in
2008 is due to the recognition of expenses for the full year
ended December 31, 2009 for properties acquired throughout
all of 2008. The increase in development operating costs of
$13.6 million was primarily due to an increase in
utilities, repairs and maintenance expenses and ground rent
expenses due to higher occupancy in certain development
projects. The decrease in other industrial operating costs of
$2.7 million was primarily due to the disposition of
industrial operating properties during 2009. The increase in
depreciation and amortization expenses of $15.7 million is
primarily due to $15.5 million additional depreciation
expense recorded upon reclassification of assets from properties
held for contribution to investments in real estate in 2009 and
asset stabilizations, partially offset by the full depreciation
expense taken on an asset demolition in the third quarter of
2008. The decrease in general and administrative expenses of
$28.7 million is primarily due to a personnel and cost
reduction plan implemented in the fourth quarter of 2008. During
the year ended December 31, 2009, the company recorded
$6.4 million in restructuring charges, as compared to
$12.3 million recorded in the fourth quarter of 2008, due
to the further implementation of the cost reduction plan, which
included a reduction in global headcount, office closure costs
and
59
the termination of certain contractual obligations. See
Item 15: Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements for a more detailed discussion of the
real estate impairment losses recorded in the companys
results of operations during 2009 and 2008. Other expenses
increased $9.7 million primarily as a result of an increase
in the companys non-qualified deferred compensation plan
expenses of $15.7 million, partially offset by a decrease
in dead deal costs of $5.8 million from prior year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income and (Expenses)
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Development profits, net of taxes
|
|
$
|
35.9
|
|
|
$
|
81.1
|
|
|
$
|
(45.2
|
)
|
|
|
(55.7
|
)%
|
Gains from sale or contribution of real estate interests, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.0
|
|
|
|
(20.0
|
)
|
|
|
(100.0
|
)%
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures, net
|
|
|
11.3
|
|
|
|
17.1
|
|
|
|
(5.8
|
)
|
|
|
(33.9
|
)%
|
Other income (expenses)
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
303.2
|
%
|
Interest expense, including amortization
|
|
|
(121.4
|
)
|
|
|
(134.0
|
)
|
|
|
(12.6
|
)
|
|
|
(9.4
|
)%
|
Loss on early extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(12.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
11.5
|
|
|
|
1,437.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income and (expenses), net
|
|
$
|
(80.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(60.5
|
)
|
|
|
(307.1
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development profits represent gains from the sale or
contribution of development projects, including land. See the
development sales and development contributions tables and
Development Sales and Contributions in Capital
Resources of the Operating Partnership for a discussion of
the development asset sales and contributions and the associated
development profits during the years ended December 31,
2009 and 2008. During the year ended December 31, 2009, the
company did not contribute any industrial operating properties
to unconsolidated co-investment ventures. During the year ended
December 31, 2008, the company contributed one industrial
operating property for approximately $66.2 million,
aggregating approximately 0.8 million square feet, into AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. As a result, the
company recognized a gain of $20.0 million on the
contribution, representing the portion of the companys
interest in the contributed property acquired by the third-party
investors for cash.
The decrease in equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint
ventures of $5.8 million for 2009 as compared to 2008 was
primarily due to lower occupancy in 2009 and impairment losses
recognized on the companys unconsolidated assets under
management, partially offset by the contribution of AMB Partners
II, L.P. (previously, a consolidated co-investment venture) to
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., an
unconsolidated co-investment venture, on July 1, 2008.
Other income increased $9.4 million from the prior year
primarily due to a $15.7 million increase in gains related
to the companys non-qualified deferred compensation plan,
partially offset by a decrease in bank interest income of
$4.7 million due to lower cash balances and interest rates
and an increase in foreign currency exchange rate losses. During
the year ended December 31, 2009, the company recognized a
loss on currency remeasurement of approximately
$7.2 million, compared to a loss of approximately
$5.7 million in the same period of 2008. Interest expense
decreased $12.6 million primarily due to decreased
borrowings as well as a decrease in interest rates. Loss on
early extinguishment of debt increased by $11.5 million
primarily due to early repayments of secured debt and the
completion of the repurchase of bonds in connection with the
companys tender offers in 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued Operations
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Income attributable to discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
3.0
|
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
50.0
|
%
|
Development profits, net of taxes
|
|
|
53.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Gains from sale of real estate interests, net of taxes
|
|
|
38.7
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
36.1
|
|
|
|
1,388.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
94.7
|
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
$
|
90.1
|
|
|
|
1,958.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in income attributable to discontinued operations
of $1.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
as compared to the year ended December 31, 2008 was
primarily due to a decrease in real estate impairment losses on
properties sold in 2009 or held for sale as of December 31,
2009. During the year ended December 31,
60
2009, the company sold value-added conversion development
projects and land parcels aggregating approximately
0.2 million square for a sale price of $143.9 million,
with a resulting net gain of $53.0 million. During the year
ended December 31, 2009, the company sold industrial
operating properties aggregating approximately 2.3 million
square feet for a sale price of $151.6 million, with a
resulting gain of $37.2 million. Additionally, during the
year ended December 31, 2009, the company recognized a
deferred gain of $1.6 million on the sale of industrial
operating properties, aggregating approximately 0.1 million
square feet, for a price of $17.5 million, which was
deferred as part of the contribution of AMB Partners II, L.P. to
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. in July 2008.
During the year ended December 31, 2008, the company sold
approximately 0.1 million square feet of industrial
operating properties for a sale price of $3.6 million, with
a resulting gain of $1.0 million, and the company
recognized a deferred gain of approximately $1.4 million on
the sale of industrial operating properties, aggregating
approximately 0.1 million square feet, for an aggregate
price of $3.5 million, which were disposed of on
December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock/Units
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends/unit distributions
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock unit redemption discount
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total preferred stock/units
|
|
$
|
(6.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
62.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On November 10, 2009, the parent company purchased all
1,595,337 outstanding series D preferred units of AMB
Property II, L.P. in exchange for 2,880,281 shares of its
common stock at a discount of $9.8 million and contributed
the series D preferred units to the operating partnership.
The operating partnership issued 2,880,281 general partnership
units to the parent company in exchange for the 1,595,337
series D preferred units the parent company purchased. No
repurchases of units were made during the year ended
December 31, 2008.
For
the Years Ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Rental revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$
|
533.5
|
|
|
$
|
555.0
|
|
|
$
|
(21.5
|
)
|
|
|
(3.9
|
)%
|
2008 acquisitions
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Development
|
|
|
21.8
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
198.6
|
%
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
58.8
|
|
|
|
56.9
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total rental revenues
|
|
|
625.1
|
|
|
|
619.2
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
Private capital revenues
|
|
|
68.5
|
|
|
|
31.7
|
|
|
|
36.8
|
|
|
|
116.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
693.6
|
|
|
$
|
650.9
|
|
|
$
|
42.7
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store rental revenues decreased $21.5 million from the
prior year due primarily to the contribution of AMB Partners II,
L.P. (previously, a consolidated co-investment venture) to AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated
co-investment venture, on July 1, 2008. Same store rental
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2008 would have
been $573.3 million if the interests in AMB Partners II,
L.P. had not been contributed as of December 31, 2008. The
increase of $18.3 million, excluding the effect of the
contribution of interests in AMB Partners II, L.P., was
primarily due to increased rental rates and decreases in free
rent. The increase in rental revenues from development of
$14.5 million is primarily due to increased occupancy at
several of the companys development projects. Other
industrial revenues include rental revenues from development
projects that have reached certain levels of operation but are
not yet part of the same store operating pool of properties. The
increase in these revenues of $1.9 million primarily
reflects the number of projects that have reached these levels
of operation and higher rent levels during 2008. The increase in
private capital revenues of $36.8 million was primarily due
to the receipt of an incentive distribution of
$33.0 million for AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III,
L.P., an
61
incentive distribution of $1.0 million in connection with
the sale of the partnership interests in AMB/Erie, L.P.,
including its final real estate asset to AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund III, L.P., and an increase in asset
management fees as a result of an increase in total
unconsolidated assets under management, partially offset by a
decrease in acquisition fees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Property operating costs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expenses
|
|
$
|
100.5
|
|
|
$
|
95.9
|
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
%
|
Real estate taxes
|
|
|
78.9
|
|
|
|
73.2
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
|
7.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
$
|
179.4
|
|
|
$
|
169.1
|
|
|
$
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$
|
149.6
|
|
|
$
|
155.3
|
|
|
$
|
(5.7
|
)
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)%
|
2008 acquisitions
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Development
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
165.5
|
%
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
74.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
|
179.4
|
|
|
|
169.1
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
164.2
|
|
|
|
157.3
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
%
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
144.0
|
|
|
|
129.5
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
11.2
|
%
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Fund costs
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
Real estate impairment losses
|
|
|
183.7
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
182.8
|
|
|
|
20,311.1
|
%
|
Other expenses
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
(4.6
|
)
|
|
|
(90.2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
$
|
685.2
|
|
|
$
|
463.0
|
|
|
$
|
222.2
|
|
|
|
48.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store properties operating expenses decreased
$5.7 million from the prior year primarily due to the
contribution of AMB Partners II, L.P. (previously, a
consolidated co-investment venture) to AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated co-investment
venture, on July 1, 2008. Same store operating expenses for
the year ended December 31, 2008 would have been
$159.9 million if the interests in AMB Partners II, L.P.
had not been contributed as of December 31, 2008. The
increase of $4.6 million, excluding the effect of the
contribution of interests in AMB Partners II, L.P., was
primarily due to increased real estate taxes, utilities, repairs
and maintenance expenses, ground rent expenses and
non-reimbursable expenses. The increase in development operating
costs of $4.8 million was primarily due to an increase in
real estate taxes as well as increased utilities, repairs and
maintenance expenses and ground rent expenses due to higher
occupancy in certain development projects. Other industrial
expenses include expenses from divested properties that have
been contributed to unconsolidated co-investment ventures, which
are not classified as discontinued operations in our
consolidated financial statements, and development properties
that have reached certain levels of operation but are not yet
part of the same store operating pool of properties. The
increase in other industrial operating costs of
$8.1 million was primarily due to an increase in the number
of properties that have reached these levels of operations. The
increase in depreciation and amortization expenses of
$6.9 million was primarily due to the recognition of
$4.3 million of depreciation expense resulting from the
reclassification of $76.7 million from properties held for
contribution to investments in real estate in 2008 and asset
stabilizations, as well as the full depreciation expense taken
on an asset demolition in the third quarter of 2008. The
increase in general and administrative expenses of
$14.5 million was primarily due to an increase in personnel
costs, resulting from increased employee headcount in the first
three quarters of 2008 as well as an increase in professional
services, and taxes. During the year ended December 31,
2008, the company recorded $12.3 million in restructuring
charges due to the implementation of a broad-based cost
reduction plan, which included a reduction in global headcount,
office closure costs and the termination of certain contractual
obligations. The increase in real estate impairment losses was
primarily a result of changes in the economic environment in
addition to the write-off of pursuit costs. See Item 15:
Note 3 of the Notes to
62
Consolidated Financial Statements for a more detailed
discussion of the real estate impairment losses recorded in the
companys results of operations during the fourth quarter
of 2008. The decrease in other expenses of $4.6 million was
primarily due to a loss on our non-qualified deferred
compensation plans during the year ended December 31, 2008,
compared to a gain during the year ended December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income and (Expenses)
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Development profits, net of taxes
|
|
$
|
81.1
|
|
|
$
|
124.3
|
|
|
$
|
(43.2
|
)
|
|
|
(34.8
|
)%
|
Gains from sale or contribution of real estate interests, net
|
|
|
20.0
|
|
|
|
73.4
|
|
|
|
(53.4
|
)
|
|
|
(72.8
|
)%
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures, net
|
|
|
17.1
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
128.0
|
%
|
Other income (expenses)
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
|
22.3
|
|
|
|
(25.4
|
)
|
|
|
(113.9
|
)%
|
Interest expense, including amortization
|
|
|
(134.0
|
)
|
|
|
(126.8
|
)
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
%
|
Loss on early extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income and (expenses), net
|
|
$
|
(19.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
100.3
|
|
|
$
|
(120.0
|
)
|
|
|
(119.6
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development profits represent gains from the sale or
contribution of development projects including land. See the
development sales and development contributions tables and
Development Sales and Contributions in Capital
Resources of the Operating Partnership for a discussion of
the development asset sales and contributions and the associated
development profits during the years ended December 31,
2008 and 2007. During the year ended December 31, 2008, the
company contributed one industrial operating property for
approximately $66.2 million, aggregating approximately
0.8 million square feet, into AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P. As a result, the company recognized a gain
of $20.0 million on the contribution, representing the
portion of its interest in the contributed property acquired by
the third-party investors for cash. During the year ended
December 31, 2007, the company contributed 4.2 million
square feet in industrial operating properties into AMB Europe
Fund I, FCP-FIS, contributed one 0.2 million square
foot industrial operating property into AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund III, L.P., and contributed one industrial
operating property aggregating approximately 0.1 million
square feet into AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, for a total of
approximately $524.9 million. As a result of these
contributions, the company recognized gains from the
contribution of real estate interests of approximately
$73.4 million, representing the portion of its interest in
the contributed properties acquired by the third-party investors
for cash.
The increase in equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint
ventures of $9.6 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008 as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2007 was primarily due to the contribution of
the interests in AMB Partners II, L.P. (previously, a
consolidated co-investment venture) to AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund III, L.P., an unconsolidated co-investment
venture, as well as growth in the companys unconsolidated
assets under management. Other income (expenses) decreased
$25.4 million from the prior year primarily due to foreign
currency exchange rate loss, a loss on the companys
nonqualified deferred compensation plan of $7.8 million,
the recognition of a $5.5 million loss on impairment of an
investment and a decrease in interest income of approximately
$3.3 million, partially offset by an increase in third
party management fees. During the year ended December 31,
2007, the company recognized a gain on currency remeasurement of
approximately $3.9 million, compared to a loss of
approximately $5.7 million in 2008. Additionally, other
income during the year ended December 31, 2007 included
insurance proceeds of approximately $2.9 million related to
losses from Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma. Interest expense
increased $7.2 million as a result of increased total
consolidated debt at December 31, 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued Operations
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Income attributable to discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
|
$
|
19.2
|
|
|
$
|
(17.2
|
)
|
|
|
(89.6
|
)%
|
Development profits, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
|
|
|
(52.1
|
)
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Gains from sale of real estate interests, net of taxes
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
|
|
|
(9.5
|
)
|
|
|
(78.5
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
$
|
83.4
|
|
|
$
|
(78.8
|
)
|
|
|
(94.5
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
63
The decrease in income attributable to discontinued operations
of $17.2 million for 2008 as compared to 2007 was primarily
due to $10.2 million of real estate impairment losses on
assets sold in 2008 and held for sale as of December 31,
2008, as well as a decrease in sales and contributions of
industrial operating properties in 2008. During the year ended
December 31, 2008, the company sold approximately
0.1 million square feet of industrial operating properties
for a sale price of $3.6 million, with a resulting gain of
$1.0 million, and the company recognized a deferred gain of
approximately $1.4 million on the sale of industrial
operating properties, aggregating approximately 0.1 million
square feet, for an aggregate price of $3.5 million, which
were disposed of on December 31, 2007. No value-added
conversion projects were sold during 2008. During the year ended
December 31, 2007, the company sold industrial operating
properties, aggregating approximately 0.3 million square
feet, for an aggregate price of $16.3 million, with a
resulting gain of $12.1 million, and value-added conversion
projects for an aggregate price of $88.0 million, resulting
in a gain of approximately $52.1 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock/Units
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends/unit distributions
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
Preferred stock unit redemption premium
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
(100.0
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total preferred stock/units
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(18.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
(15.5
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On April 17, 2007, the operating partnership redeemed all
800,000 of its outstanding 7.95% series J cumulative
redeemable preferred limited partnership units and all 800,000
of its outstanding 7.95% series K cumulative redeemable
preferred limited partnership units. In addition, AMB Property
II, L.P., one of the operating partnerships subsidiaries,
repurchased all 510,000 of its outstanding 8.00% series I
cumulative redeemable preferred limited partnership units. As a
result of the redemptions and repurchase, the company recognized
a reduction of income available to common stockholders of
$2.9 million for the original issuance costs during the
year ended December 31, 2007. No repurchases of units were
made during the year ended December 31, 2008.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES OF THE PARENT COMPANY
In this Liquidity and Capital Resources of the Parent
Company section, the parent company refers
only to AMB Property Corporation and not to any of its
subsidiaries.
The parent companys business is operated primarily through
the operating partnership. The parent company issues public
equity from time to time, but does not otherwise conduct any
business or generate any capital itself. The parent company
itself does not hold any indebtedness, and its only material
asset is its ownership of partnership interests of the operating
partnership. The parent companys principal funding
requirement is the payment of dividends on its common and
preferred stock. The parent companys principal source of
funding for its dividend payments is distributions it receives
from the operating partnership.
As of December 31, 2009, the parent company owned an
approximate 97.8% general partnership interest in the operating
partnership, excluding preferred units. The remaining
approximate 2.2% common limited partnership interests are owned
by non-affiliated investors and certain current and former
directors and officers of the parent company. As of
December 31, 2009, the parent company owned all of the
preferred limited partnership units of the operating
partnership. As the sole general partner of the operating
partnership, the parent company has the full, exclusive and
complete responsibility for the operating partnerships
day-to-day
management and control. The parent company causes the operating
partnership to distribute all, or such portion as the parent
company may in its discretion determine, of its available cash
in the manner provided in the operating partnerships
partnership agreement. Generally, if distributions are made,
distributions are paid in the following order of priority:
first, to satisfy any prior distribution shortfall to the parent
company as the holder of preferred units; second, to the parent
company as the holder of preferred units; and third, to the
holders of common units of the operating partnership, including
the parent company, in accordance with the rights of each such
class.
As general partner with control of the operating partnership,
the parent company consolidates the operating partnership for
financial reporting purposes, and the parent company does not
have significant assets other than its
64
investment in the operating partnership. Therefore, the assets
and liabilities of the parent company and the operating
partnership are the same on their respective financial
statements. However, all debt is held directly or indirectly at
the operating partnership level, and the parent company has
guaranteed some of the operating partnerships secured and
unsecured debt as discussed below. As the parent company
consolidates the operating partnership, the section entitled
Liquidity and Capital Resources of the Operating
Partnership should be read in conjunction with this
section to understand the liquidity and capital resources of the
company on a consolidated basis and how the company is operated
as a whole.
Capital
Resources of the Parent Company
Distributions from the operating partnership are the parent
companys principal source of capital. The parent company
receives proceeds from equity issuances from time to time, but
is required by the operating partnerships partnership
agreement to contribute the proceeds from its equity issuances
to the operating partnership in exchange for partnership units
of the operating partnership.
As circumstances warrant, the parent company may issue equity
from time to time on an opportunistic basis, dependent upon
market conditions and available pricing. The operating
partnership may use the proceeds to repay debt, including
borrowings under its lines of credit, to make acquisitions of
properties, portfolios of properties or U.S. or foreign
property-owning or real estate-related entities, to invest in
existing or newly created co-investment ventures or for general
corporate purposes.
Common and Preferred Equity The parent company
has authorized for issuance 100,000,000 shares of preferred
stock, of which the following series were designated as of
December 31, 2009: 2,300,000 shares of series L
cumulative redeemable preferred stock, of which 2,000,000 are
outstanding; 2,300,000 shares of series M cumulative
redeemable preferred stock, all of which are outstanding;
3,000,000 shares of series O cumulative redeemable
preferred stock, all of which are outstanding; and
2,000,000 shares of series P cumulative redeemable
preferred stock, all of which are outstanding.
On November 10, 2009, the parent company purchased all
1,595,337 outstanding series D preferred units of AMB
Property II, L.P. in exchange for 2,880,281 shares of its
common stock at a discount of $9.8 million and contributed
the series D preferred units to the operating partnership.
The operating partnership issued 2,880,281 general partnership
units to the parent company in exchange for the 1,595,337
series D preferred units the parent company purchased.
In December 2007, the parent companys board of directors
approved a two-year common stock repurchase program for the
repurchase of up to $200.0 million of the parent
companys common stock, which terminated on
December 31, 2009. During the year ended December 31,
2009, the parent company did not repurchase any shares of its
common stock. During the year ended December 31, 2008, the
parent company repurchased approximately 1.8 million shares
of its common stock for an aggregate price of $87.7 million
at a weighted average price of $49.64 per share. During the year
ended December 31, 2007, the parent company repurchased
approximately 1.1 million shares of its common stock for an
aggregate price of $53.4 million at a weighted average
price of $49.87 per share.
In March 2009, the parent company completed the issuance of
47.4 million shares of its common stock at a price of
$12.15 per share for proceeds of approximately
$552.3 million, net of discounts, commissions and estimated
transaction expenses of approximately $23.8 million. The
proceeds from the offering were contributed to the operating
partnership in exchange for the issuance of 47.4 million
general partnership units to the parent company.
65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market Equity as of December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Shares/Units
|
|
|
Market
|
|
|
Market
|
|
Security
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Price(1)
|
|
|
Value(2)
|
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
149,258,376
|
(5)
|
|
$
|
25.55
|
|
|
$
|
3,813,552
|
|
Common limited partnership units(3)
|
|
|
3,376,141
|
|
|
$
|
25.55
|
|
|
|
86,260
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
152,634,517
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,899,812
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total options outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,107,697
|
|
Dilutive effect of stock options(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Dollars, per share/unit |
|
(2) |
|
Dollars, in thousands |
|
(3) |
|
Includes class B common limited partnership units issued by
AMB Property II, L.P. |
|
(4) |
|
Computed using the treasury stock method and an average share
price for the parent companys common stock of $23.74 for
the quarter ended December 31, 2009. All stock options were
anti-dilutive as of December 31, 2009. |
|
(5) |
|
Includes 918,753 shares of unvested restricted stock. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock as of December 31, 2009 (dollars in
thousands)
|
|
|
Dividend
|
|
|
Liquidation
|
|
|
Redemption/
|
Security
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Preference
|
|
|
Callable Date
|
|
Series L preferred stock
|
|
|
6.50
|
%
|
|
$
|
50,000
|
|
|
June 2008
|
Series M preferred stock
|
|
|
6.75
|
%
|
|
|
57,500
|
|
|
November 2008
|
Series O preferred stock
|
|
|
7.00
|
%
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
December 2010
|
Series P preferred stock
|
|
|
6.85
|
%
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
August 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average/total
|
|
|
6.80
|
%
|
|
$
|
232,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests in the parent company represent the
common limited partnership interests in the operating
partnership, limited partnership interests in AMB Property II,
L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and interests held by
third-party partners in joint ventures. Such joint ventures held
approximately 21.0 million square feet as of
December 31, 2009, and are consolidated for financial
reporting purposes.
Please see Explanatory Note on page 1 and
Part IV, Item 15: Note 11 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of the
noncontrolling interests of the parent company.
In order to maintain financial flexibility and facilitate the
deployment of capital through market cycles, the parent company
presently intends over the long term to operate with a parent
companys share of total
debt-to-parent
companys share of total market capitalization ratio or
parent companys share of total
debt-to-parent
companys share of total assets of approximately 45% or
less. In order to operate at this targeted ratio over the long
term, the parent company is currently exploring various options
to monetize its development assets through possible contribution
to funds where capacity is available, the formation of joint
ventures and the sale to third parties. It is also exploring the
potential sale of industrial operating assets to further enhance
liquidity. As of December 31, 2009, the parent
companys share of total
debt-to-parent
companys share of total assets ratio was 43.6%. (See
footnote 1 to the Capitalization Ratios table below for the
definitions of parent companys share of total market
capitalization, market equity, parent
companys share of total debt and parent
companys share of total assets.) The parent company
typically finances its co-investment ventures with secured debt
at a
loan-to-value
ratio of
50-65%
pursuant to its co-investment venture agreements. Additionally,
the operating partnership currently intends to manage its
capitalization in order to maintain an investment grade rating
on its senior unsecured debt. Regardless of these policies,
however, the parent companys and operating
partnerships organizational documents do not limit the
amount of indebtedness that either entity may incur.
Accordingly, management could alter or eliminate these policies
without stockholder or unitholder approval or circumstances
could arise that could render the parent company or the
operating partnership unable to comply with these policies. For
example, decreases in the market
66
price of the parent companys common stock have caused an
increase in the ratio of parent companys share of total
debt-to-parent
companys share of total market capitalization.
|
|
|
Capitalization Ratios as of December 31, 2009
|
Parent companys share of total
debt-to-parent
companys share of total market capitalization(1)
|
|
46.4%
|
Parent companys share of total debt plus
preferred-to-parent
companys share of total market capitalization(1)
|
|
49.4%
|
Parent companys share of total
debt-to-parent
companys share of total assets(1)
|
|
43.6%
|
Parent companys share of total debt plus
preferred-to-parent
companys share of total assets(1)
|
|
46.4%
|
Parent companys share of total
debt-to-parent
companys share of total book capitalization(1)
|
|
47.7%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Although the parent company does not hold any indebtedness
itself, the parent companys total debt reflects the
consolidation of the operating partnerships total debt for
financial reporting purposes. The parent companys
definition of total market capitalization for the
parent company is total debt plus preferred equity liquidation
preferences plus market equity. The definition of parent
companys share of total market capitalization is the
parent companys share of total debt plus preferred equity
liquidation preferences plus market equity. The definition of
market equity is the total number of outstanding
shares of common stock of the parent company and common limited
partnership units of the operating partnership and AMB Property
II, L.P. multiplied by the closing price per share of the parent
companys common stock as of December 31, 2009. The
definition of preferred is preferred equity
liquidation preferences. Parent companys share of
total book capitalization is defined as the parent
companys share of total debt plus noncontrolling interests
to preferred unitholders and limited partnership unitholders
plus stockholders equity. Parent companys
share of total debt is the parent companys pro rata
portion of the total debt based on the parent companys
percentage of equity interest in each of the consolidated and
unconsolidated joint ventures holding the debt. Parent
companys share of total assets is the parent
companys pro rata portion of the gross book value of real
estate interests plus cash and other assets. The parent company
believes that share of total debt is a meaningful supplemental
measure, which enables both management and investors to analyze
the parent companys leverage and to compare the parent
companys leverage to that of other companies. In addition,
it allows for a more meaningful comparison of the parent
companys debt to that of other companies that do not
consolidate their joint ventures. Parent companys share of
total debt is not intended to reflect the parent companys
actual liability should there be a default under any or all of
such loans or a liquidation of the joint ventures. For a
reconciliation of parent companys share of total debt to
total consolidated debt, a GAAP financial measure, please see
the table of debt maturities and capitalization in the section
below entitled Liq |