UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
Form 10-K

 

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)

 

 

(415) 394-9000
(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

 

 

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.

 

 

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 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes þ     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 the registrant’s 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:

 

 

AMB Property, L.P.:

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

 

 

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, 2010 was $3,889,698,154.

 

As of February 16, 2011, there were 169,409,343 shares of AMB Property Corporation’s common stock, $0.01 par value per share, outstanding.

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

Part III incorporates by reference portions of AMB Property Corporation’s 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, 2010 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, 2010, the parent company owned an approximate 98.2% general partnership interest in the operating partnership, excluding preferred units. The remaining approximate 1.8% 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, 2010, 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 partnership’s 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:

 

 

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 directly or indirectly holds the ownership interests in the company’s 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 company’s business through the operating partnership’s operations, by the operating partnership’s 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

operating partnership’s financial statements and as noncontrolling interests in the parent company’s financial statements. The noncontrolling interests in the operating partnership’s financial statements include the interests of joint venture partners, and preferred limited partnership unitholders (if applicable) and common limited partnership unitholders of AMB Property II, L.P., a subsidiary of the operating partnership. The noncontrolling interests in the parent company’s 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:

 

 

 

 

This report also includes separate Item 9A. Controls and Procedures sections and separate Exhibits 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 directly or indirectly 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.

AMB PROPERTY CORPORATION AND AMB PROPERTY, L.P.

 

INDEX

 

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

Some of the information included in this annual report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements, such as those related to our capital resources, portfolio performance, results of operations and management’s beliefs and expectations, 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 company’s 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 company’s 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:

 

 

 

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 company’s actual results and future events could differ materially from those set forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements.

 

The company’s 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 company’s analysis only and speak as of the date of this report or as of the dates indicated in the statements. All of the company’s 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, management’s discussion and analysis applies to both the operating partnership and the parent company.

 

The company’s website address is http://www.amb.com. The company posts and will post announcements and other company information, some of which may be material, in the Investor Relations section of the company’s website. Investors should visit the company’s website regularly to access such information. The annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and 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 company’s website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after the company electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to, the SEC. The public may read and copy these materials at the SEC’s 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 company’s Corporate Governance Principles and Code of Business Conduct are also posted on the company’s website. Information contained on the company’s 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 company’s 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^®).

 

 

The company is an owner, operator and developer of global industrial real estate, focused on major hub and gateway distribution markets in the Americas, Europe and Asia. As of December 31, 2010, the company owned, or had investments in, on a consolidated basis or through unconsolidated joint ventures, properties and development projects expected to total approximately 159.6 million square feet (14.8 million square meters) in 49 markets within 15 countries.

 

Of the approximately 159.6 million square feet as of December 31, 2010:

 

 

The company’s business is operated primarily through the operating partnership. As of December 31, 2010, the parent company owned an approximate 98.2% 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 company’s 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 company’s direction.

 

The parent company was incorporated in the state of Maryland in 1997, and the operating partnership was formed in the state of Delaware in 1997. See Part IV, Item 15: Note 17 of “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” for segment information related to the company’s operations and information regarding geographic areas.

 

The company’s global headquarters are located at Pier 1, Bay 1, San Francisco, California 94111; the company’s telephone number is (415) 394-9000. The company’s other principal office locations are in Amsterdam, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Mexico City, Shanghai, Singapore and Tokyo.

 

The company’s investment strategy focuses on providing distribution and logistics space to customers whose businesses are tied to global trade and depend on the efficient movement of goods through the global supply chain. The company’s properties are primarily located in the world’s busiest distribution markets featuring large, supply-constrained infill locations with dense populations and proximity to airports, seaports and ground transportation

systems. When measured by annualized base rent, on an owned and managed basis, a substantial majority of the company’s 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 physical, political or economic barriers to new development. The company believes that its facilities are essential to creating efficiencies in the supply chain, and that 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 company’s 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 location 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 reduce their costs and become more efficient in their logistics operations. The company’s customers include logistics, freight forwarding and air-express companies with time-sensitive needs that value facilities 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. 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 correlated as higher levels of investment, production and consumption within a globalized economy 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 in excess of growth in global GDP. In the second half of the year, improving consumer demand and double-digit gains in global production and trade led customers to begin rebuilding their inventory levels, which is a trend that management believes will strengthen in 2011. Management also believes that its key hub and gateway markets will continue to lead the recovery in operating fundamentals and that a stronger recovery of fundamentals is expected to take hold in 2011, with further increases in positive net absorption and declining availabilities.

 

The primary source of the company’s core earnings is revenue 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 10 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, including priority distributions, acquisition and development reimbursements, 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.

 

The company believes that its long-term growth will be driven by its ability to:

 

 

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, 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 it 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 shorter leasing terms. 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 the strategic infill 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. Management believes the company’s regular maintenance, capital expenditure, energy management and sustainability programs create cost efficiencies that benefit the company 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) industry’s co-investment model and has more than 27 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 a significant number of institutional investors. As of December 31, 2010, more than 56% of the company’s owned and managed operating portfolio is held through its nine significant co-investment ventures and funds. 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 open-ended funds and owns a 10-50% interest in its co-investment ventures. The company believes its significant ownership in each of its funds provides a strong alignment of interests with its co-investment partners’ interests.

 

The company believes its co-investment program with private capital investors will continue to serve as a source of capital for new investments and revenues for its stockholders. In anticipation of the formation of future co-investment ventures, the company may also hold acquired and newly developed properties for contribution to future co-investment ventures. The company may make additional investments through its existing co-investment ventures or to new co-investment ventures in the future and currently 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 company believes its acquisition experience and its network of property management, leasing and acquisition resources will continue to provide opportunities for growth. In addition to its internal resources, the company has long-standing 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. The company is actively monitoring opportunities in its target markets and intends to acquire high-quality, well-located industrial real estate.

 

Additionally, the company seeks to acquire industrial properties that are wholly or partially vacant as a part of management’s belief that the discount in pricing attributed to the operating challenges of such a property could provide greater returns once it is stabilized. Value-added acquisitions represent unstabilized properties acquired by the company, which generally have one or more of the following characteristics: (i) existing vacancy, typically in excess of 20%, (ii) short-term lease rollover, typically during the first two years of ownership, or (iii) significant capital improvement requirements, typically in excess of 20% of the purchase price. The company excludes value-

added acquisitions from its owned and managed and consolidated operating statistics prior to stabilization (generally 90% leased) in order to provide investors with data which it feels better reflect the performance of its core portfolio. The company strives to enhance the quality of its portfolio through acquisitions that are accretive to the company’s earnings and its net asset value. The company also 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 and property-owning or real-estate-related entities.

 

Growth Through Development

 

The company’s development business consists of conventional development, build-to-suit development, redevelopment, value-added conversions and land sales. The company believes, over the long term, customer demand for new industrial space in strategic markets tied to global trade will continue to outpace supply, most notably in major gateway markets in Asia, Europe and the Americas. The company believes that developing, redeveloping and/or expanding of well-located, high-quality industrial properties provides higher rates of return than may be obtained from purchasing existing properties. However, new developments, redevelopments and value-added conversions may require significant management attention and capital investment to maximize 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.

 

Management believes its long-standing focus on infill locations can at times lead to opportunities to enhance value through the conversion of some of the company’s 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, manufacturing, office, residential, or retail properties. Activities required to prepare the property for conversion to a higher and better use may include rezoning, redesigning, reconstructing and re-tenanting. The sales price of a value-added conversion project is generally based on the underlying land value, reflecting its ultimate conversion to a 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 property’s repurposed use.

 

Members of the company’s development team have broad experience in real estate development and possess multidisciplinary backgrounds that allow for the completion of the build-out and lease-up of the company’s development portfolio. Management believes that there are currently opportunities for land entitlement as municipalities are beginning to seek revenue generating activities.

 

Proposed Merger with ProLogis

 

On January 30, 2011, the parent company and the operating partnership entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “merger agreement”) with ProLogis, a Maryland real estate investment trust, New Pumpkin Inc., a Maryland corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of ProLogis, Upper Pumpkin LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and a wholly owned subsidiary of New Pumpkin, and Pumpkin LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and a wholly owned subsidiary of Upper Pumpkin. The merger agreement provides for a merger of equals, in which through a series of transactions, ProLogis and its newly formed subsidiaries will be merged with and into the parent company (the “merger”), with the parent company continuing as the surviving corporation with its corporate name changed to “ProLogis Inc.” As a result of the mergers, each outstanding common share of beneficial interest of ProLogis will be converted into the right to receive 0.4464 of a newly issued share of common stock of

the parent company. The merger is subject to customary closing conditions, including receipt of approval of parent company stockholders and ProLogis shareholders.

 

The merger transactions entail the following steps: (1) Pumpkin LLC will be merged with and into ProLogis, with ProLogis continuing as the surviving entity and as a wholly owned subsidiary of Upper Pumpkin; (2) then, New Pumpkin will be merged with and into the parent company with the parent company continuing as the surviving corporation and its corporate name changed, and (3) then, the surviving corporation will contribute all of the outstanding equity interests of Upper Pumpkin to the operating partnership in exchange for the issuance by the operating partnership of partnership interests to the surviving corporation. As a result of these merger transactions, the combined company will be structured as an UPREIT.

 

The merger agreement provides that, upon the consummation of the merger, the board of directors of the surviving corporation will consist of 11 members, as follows: (i) Mr. Hamid R. Moghadam, the current chief executive officer of the parent company, (ii) Mr. Walter C. Rakowich, the current chief executive officer of ProLogis, (iii) four individuals to be selected by the current members of the board of directors of the parent company, and (iv) five individuals to be selected by the current members of the board of trustees of ProLogis. In addition, upon the consummation of the merger, (a) Mr. Moghadam and Mr. Rakowich will become co-chief executive officers of the surviving corporation, (b) Mr. William E. Sullivan, the current chief financial officer of ProLogis, will become the chief financial officer of the surviving corporation, (c) Mr. Irving F. Lyons, III, a current member of the board of trustees of ProLogis, will become the lead independent director of the surviving corporation, (d) Mr. Moghadam will become the chairman of the board of directors of the surviving corporation and (e) Mr. Rakowich will become the chairman of the executive committee of the board of directors of the surviving corporation.

 

The merger agreement also provides that, on December 31, 2012, (i) unless earlier terminated in accordance with the bylaws of the surviving corporation, the employment of Mr. Rakowich as co-chief executive officer will terminate and Mr. Rakowich will thereupon retire as co-chief executive officer and as a director of the surviving corporation, and Mr. Moghadam will become the sole chief executive officer (and will remain the chairman of the board of directors) of the surviving corporation, and (ii) unless earlier terminated, the employment of Mr. Sullivan as the chief financial officer of the surviving corporation will terminate and Mr. Thomas S. Olinger, the current chief financial officer of the parent company, will become the chief financial officer of the surviving corporation.

 

The parent company and the operating partnership have been named as defendants in at least two pending putative shareholder class actions filed in connection with the merger of the parent company and ProLogis: James Kinsey, et al. v. ProLogis, et al., no. 2011CV818, filed on or about February 2, 2011 in the Denver County District Court, Colorado; and Vernon C. Burrows, et al. v. ProLogis, et al., filed on or about February 15, 2011, in the Circuit Court of Maryland for Baltimore City. The complaints seek to enjoin the merger, alleging, among other things, that ProLogis’ directors and certain executive officers breached their fiduciary duties by failing to maximize the value to be received by ProLogis shareholders and by improperly considering certain directors’ personal interests in the transaction in determining whether to enter into the merger agreement. The Maryland complaint also includes a derivative claim on behalf of ProLogis based upon the same allegations. Both complaints also assert a claim of aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duties against ProLogis, the parent company and the merger entities. The Colorado complaint also asserts a claim of aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duties against the operating partnership. In addition to an order enjoining the transaction, the complaints seek, among other things, attorneys’ fees and expenses, and the Maryland complaint further seeks certain monetary damages. The parent company and the operating partnership view the complaints to be without merit and intend to defend against them vigorously.

 

Additional Information About the Proposed Transaction and Where to Find it:

 

In connection with the proposed transaction, the company expects to file with the SEC a registration statement on Form S-4 that will include a joint proxy statement of ProLogis and the company that also constitutes a prospectus of the company. ProLogis and the company also plan to file other relevant documents with the SEC regarding the proposed transaction. INVESTORS ARE URGED TO READ THE JOINT PROXY STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC IF AND WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE, BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. You may obtain a free copy of the joint proxy statement/prospectus (if and when it becomes available) and other relevant documents filed by ProLogis

and the company with the SEC at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Copies of the documents filed by ProLogis with the SEC will be available free of charge on ProLogis’ website at www.prologis.com or by contacting ProLogis Investor Relations at +1-303-567-5690. Copies of the documents filed by the company with the SEC will be available free of charge on the company’s website at www.amb.com or by contacting AMB Investor Relations at +1-415-394-9000.

 

The company and ProLogis and their respective directors and executive officers and other members of management and employees may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies in respect of the proposed transaction. You can find information about the company’s executive officers and directors in the company’s definitive proxy statement filed with the SEC on March 23, 2010. You can find information about ProLogis’ executive officers and directors in ProLogis’ definitive proxy statement filed with the SEC on March 30, 2010. Additional information regarding the interests of such potential participants will be included in the joint proxy statement/prospectus and other relevant documents filed with the SEC if and when they become available. You may obtain free copies of these documents from the company or ProLogis using the sources indicated above.

 

This document shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, nor shall there be any sale of securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction. No offering of securities shall be made except by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

 

BUSINESS RISKS

 

The company’s 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 company’s business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.

 

Global market and economic conditions have been unprecedented and challenging with tighter credit conditions, slower growth and recession in most major economies during the last two years. 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 the last two years. Any additional, continued or recurring disruptions in the capital and credit markets may adversely affect the company’s 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 company’s 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 partnership’s borrowing capacity and liquidity position. The operating partnership’s 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 partnership’s lenders fails (some of whom are lenders under a number of the operating partnership’s 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 company’s business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Certain of the company’s third-party indebtedness is held by the company’s consolidated or unconsolidated joint ventures. In the event that the company’s 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 partner’s portion of debt to avoid foreclosure on the mortgaged property or permit the lender to foreclose on the mortgaged property to meet the joint venture’s 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 company’s 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 company’s properties may result in such properties not meeting the company’s 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 company’s common stockholders and its funds from operations will decrease. Additionally, business layoffs, downsizing, industry slowdowns and other similar factors that affect the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s liquidity will be available to the company. Additionally, taking such measures to increase the company’s liquidity may adversely affect its business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

As of December 31, 2010, the company had $198.4 million in cash and cash equivalents. The company’s 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, 2010, the amount in such deposits was approximately $171.3 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.

The price per share of the parent company’s stock may decline or fluctuate significantly.

 

The market price per share of the parent company’s common stock may decline or fluctuate significantly in response to many factors, including:

 

 

Many of the factors listed above are beyond the company’s control. These factors may cause the market price of shares of the parent company’s common stock to decline, regardless of its financial condition, results of operations, business or its prospects.

 

Risks Related to Our Proposed Merger Transaction with ProLogis

 

We will be subject to various uncertainties and contractual restrictions while the merger is pending that could adversely affect our financial results.

 

Uncertainty about the effect of the merger on employees, suppliers and customers may have an adverse effect on us. These uncertainties may impair our ability to attract, retain and motivate key personnel until the merger is completed and for a period of time thereafter, and could cause customers, suppliers and others who deal with us to

seek to change existing business relationships. Employee retention and recruitment may be particularly challenging prior to completion of the merger, as employees and prospective employees may experience uncertainty about their future roles with the combined company.

 

The pursuit of the merger and the preparation for the integration may place a significant burden on management and internal resources. Any significant diversion of management attention away from ongoing business and any difficulties encountered in the transition and integration process could affect our financial results.

 

In addition, the merger agreement restricts us, without ProLogis’ consent, from making certain acquisitions and dispositions, from engaging in certain capital raising transactions and taking other specified actions while the merger is pending. These restrictions may prevent us from pursuing attractive business opportunities and making other changes to our business prior to completion of the merger or termination of the merger agreement.

 

Pending litigation against AMB and ProLogis could result in an injunction preventing completion of the merger and the payment of damages in the event the merger is completed and/or may adversely affect our company’s business, financial condition or results of operation before the merger and/or the combined company’s business, financial condition or results of operations following the merger.

 

In connection with the merger, purported stockholders of ProLogis have filed two putative stockholder class action lawsuits against us and ProLogis, among others. Among other remedies, the plaintiffs seek to enjoin the merger. We may be subject to additional stockholder class action lawsuits during the pendency of the merger. If a final settlement is not reached, these lawsuits could prevent or delay completion of the merger and result in substantial costs to us, including any costs associated with the indemnification of directors. The defense or settlement of any lawsuit or claim that remains unresolved may adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations and/or the combined company’s business, financial condition or results of operations.

 

We may be unable to obtain in the anticipated timeframe, or at all, satisfaction of all conditions to complete the merger or, in order to do so, we may be required to comply with material restrictions or conditions that may negatively affect the combined company after the merger is completed or cause us to abandon the merger. Failure to complete the merger could negatively affect our future business and financial results.

 

Completion of the merger is contingent upon, among other things, receipt of certain regulatory approvals and the absence of any injunction prohibiting the merger. All required regulatory authorizations, approvals or consents may not be obtained or may contain terms, conditions or restrictions that will be detrimental to the combined company after completion of the merger.

 

The stockholders of both AMB and ProLogis must approve the merger transaction at special stockholder meetings to be held after our merger proxy and registration statement is effective. If the stockholders of either company do not approve the merger, the merger will not be consummated.

 

In addition, satisfying the conditions to, and completion of, the merger may take longer than, and could cost more than, we expect. Any delay in completing or any additional conditions imposed in order to complete the merger may materially adversely affect the synergies and other benefits that we and ProLogis expect to achieve from the merger and the integration of our businesses.

 

We may be unable to satisfy all the conditions to the merger or succeed in any litigation brought in connection with the merger. If the merger is not completed, our financial results may be adversely affected and we will be subject to several risks, including but not limited to:

 

 

Any delay or inability to satisfy all conditions to complete the merger, or failure to complete the merger could negatively affect our future business, financial condition or results of operation.

 

If completed, the merger may not achieve its intended results, and we and ProLogis may be unable to successfully integrate our operations.

 

We and ProLogis entered into the merger agreement with the expectation that the merger will result in various benefits, including, among other things, cost savings and operating efficiencies. Achieving the anticipated benefits of the merger is subject to a number of uncertainties, including whether the businesses of AMB and ProLogis can be integrated in an efficient and effective manner.

 

If the merger is completed, it is possible that the integration process could take longer than anticipated and could result in the loss of valuable employees, the disruption of each company’s ongoing businesses, processes and systems or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures, practices, policies and compensation arrangements, any of which could adversely affect the combined company’s ability to achieve the anticipated benefits of the merger. The combined company’s results of operations could also be adversely affected by any issues attributable to either company’s operations that arise or are based on events or actions that occur prior to the closing of the merger. The companies may have difficulty addressing possible differences in corporate cultures and management philosophies. The integration process is subject to a number of uncertainties, and no assurance can be given that the anticipated benefits will be realized or, if realized, the timing of their realization. Failure to achieve these anticipated benefits could result in increased costs or decreases in the amount of expected revenues and could adversely affect the combined company’s future business, results of operations, financial condition and 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, 2010, the operating partnership had total debt outstanding of $3.3 billion. As of December 31, 2010, the parent company guaranteed $1.7 billion of the operating partnership’s obligations with respect to the senior debt securities referenced in the parent company’s 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 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 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 partnership’s 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 company’s stock, the operating partnership’s ability to pay principal and interest on its debt and to pay distributions to its unitholders, the parent company’s ability to pay cash dividends to its stockholders and the operating partnership’s 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 company’s properties could adversely affect its financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay distributions to the

operating partnership’s unitholders and cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders, and the market price of the parent company’s stock.

 

As of December 31, 2010, the company had outstanding bank guarantees in the amount of $0.3 million used to secure contingent obligations, primarily obligations under development and purchase agreements. As of December 31, 2010, the company also guaranteed $58.6 million and $83.5 million on outstanding loans for five of its consolidated co-investment ventures and three 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 venture’s debt obligation and may be greater than the company’s share of the co-investment venture’s debt obligation or the value of the company’s share of any property securing such debt. The company’s 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 company’s potential obligations under these contribution agreements were $260.6 million as of December 31, 2010. 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 company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders and the market price of the parent company’s stock.

 

Adverse changes in the company’s credit ratings could negatively affect its financing activity.

 

The credit ratings of the operating partnership’s senior unsecured long-term debt and the parent company’s 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 company’s 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. In addition, the announcement of the proposed merger transaction with ProLogis resulted in the company being placed on a negative credit rating watch list and because ProLogis’ credit rating is lower than the company’s, the credit rating of the combined company may be adversely affected if the proposed merger is completed. 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 and may encounter difficulty in obtaining additional financing. Also, a downgrade in the company’s 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 partnership’s 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 partnership’s 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 company’s stock, and its development and acquisition activity.

 

Covenants in the operating partnership’s debt agreements could adversely affect its financial condition.

 

The terms of the operating partnership’s 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 partnership’s 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, 2010, 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 partnership’s 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 company’s stockholders or distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the market price of the parent company’s stock. In addition, the operating partnership’s 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 partnership’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay distributions to its unitholders and the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s investments. Failure to hedge effectively against exchange and interest rate changes may materially adversely affect the company’s 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, the parent company can 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 order to maintain the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 market’s perception of the company’s 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, 2010, the operating partnership’s share of total debt-to-its share of total market capitalization ratio was 41.3%. The operating partnership’s definition of “the operating partnership’s share of total market capitalization” is the operating partnership’s 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: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation — Liquidity and Capital Resources” for the operating partnership’s definitions of “market equity” and “the operating partnership’s share of total debt.” As this ratio percentage increases directly with a decrease in the market price per share of the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s properties do not generate income sufficient to meet operating expenses, including debt service and capital expenditures, then the operating partnership’s ability to pay distributions to its unitholders (including the parent company) and, in turn, the parent company’s 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 company’s properties may be adversely affected by:

 

 

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 company’s acquisition and development activities, which would adversely affect the company’s 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 company’s properties. To the extent that future attacks impact the company’s customers, their businesses similarly could be adversely affected, including their ability to continue to honor their existing leases.

 

The company’s 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 company’s portfolio included other property types.

 

The company may be unable to lease vacant space or renew leases or relet space as leases expire.

 

As of December 31, 2010, on an owned and managed basis, the company’s occupancy average was 91.2% year-to-date and the leases on 16.4% of the company’s industrial properties (based on annualized base rent) will expire on or prior to December 31, 2011. The company derives most of its income from rent received from its customers. Accordingly, the company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and its ability to pay

dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the market price of the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s results of operations, distributable cash flow and the value of the parent company’s stock would be adversely affected if a significant number of the company’s 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 customer’s 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 company’s cash flow may not be sufficient to pay distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders and cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and repay maturing debt and any other obligations. As of December 31, 2010, on an owned and managed basis, the company did not have any single customer account for annualized base rent revenues greater than 3.1%. However, in the event of lease defaults by a significant number of the company’s customers, the company may incur substantial costs in enforcing its rights as landlord.

 

Declining real estate valuations and impairment charges could adversely affect the company’s earnings and financial condition.

 

The 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 asset’s 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 may need to re-evaluate the carrying value of its investments and recognize real estate impairment losses on certain of its investments.

 

The principal trigger which has led to impairment charges in the recent past 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. Impairments may be necessary in the future in the event that market conditions deteriorate and

impact the factors used to estimate fair value, which may include impairments relating to the company’s unconsolidated real estate as well as impairments relating to the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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. During the year ended December 31, 2010, 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 company’s financial condition, results of operations and its ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders and the market price of the parent company’s stock.

 

The company’s performance and value are impacted by the local economic conditions of and the risks associated with doing business in California.

 

As of December 31, 2010, the company’s industrial properties located in California represented 21.1% of the aggregate square footage of its industrial operating properties and 19.7% of its industrial annualized base rent, on an owned and managed basis. The company’s 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 California’s economic climate. Because of the number of properties the company has located in California, a downturn in California’s economy or real estate conditions could adversely affect the company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to its stockholders and the market price of its stock.

 

A number of the company’s 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 company’s largest concentration of such properties is in California where, on an owned and managed basis, as of December 31, 2010, the company had 277 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 29.9 million square feet, 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.

 

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 company’s size and alter its capital and organizational structure. Such acquisitions entail various risks, including the risks that the company’s investments may not perform or be accretive to the company’s

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 include non-core assets, that the new investments may come with unexpected liabilities and that the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and the ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the market price of the parent company’s 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, 2010, approximately 91.4 million square feet of the company’s properties were held through joint ventures, limited liability companies or partnerships with third parties. The company’s 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 company’s inability to do so may have an adverse effect on the company’s growth, its earnings and the market price of the parent company’s 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:

 

 

 

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 company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders and the market price of the parent company’s 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 company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the market price of the parent company’s stock.

 

A delay in these contributions could result in adverse effects on the company’s liquidity and on its ability to meet projected earnings levels in a particular reporting period, which could have an adverse effect on the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s stock.

 

Actions by the company’s competitors may affect the company’s ability to divest properties and may decrease or prevent increases of the occupancy and rental rates of the company’s properties.

 

The company competes with other owners, operators and developers of real estate, some of which own properties similar to the company’s properties in the same submarkets in which the company’s properties are located. If the company’s competitors sell assets similar to assets the company intends to divest in the same markets and/or at valuations below the company’s 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 company’s competitors offer space at rental rates below current market rates or below the rental rates the company currently charges its customers, the 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 company’s financial condition, cash flow, cash available for distributions and dividends and, trading price of the parent company’s stock and ability to satisfy the operating partnership’s 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 company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders and the market price of the parent company’s stock, which include the following risks:

 

 

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 company’s 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 company’s ability to sell properties. This lack of liquidity and the Internal Revenue Code restrictions may limit the company’s ability to vary its portfolio promptly in response to changes in economic or other conditions and, as a result, could adversely affect the company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flow, the market price of the parent company’s stock, the ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the operating partnership’s ability to access capital necessary to meet its debt payments and other obligations.

 

Risks Associated with the Company’s International Business

 

The company’s 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 company’s operations, the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s operations may be subject to risks that may limit its ability to effectively establish, staff and manage its offices outside the United States, including:

 

 

The company’s 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 company’s business has grown rapidly and may continue to grow in a strategic and deliberate manner. If the proposed merger with ProLogis is completed, the risks associated with the combined company’s

international business will be enhanced due to the combined company’s larger international presence. If the company fails to effectively manage its international growth or integrate the combined company’s international operations in the event the merger is completed, then the company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the market price of the parent company’s 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 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):

 

 

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 company’s investments in these

securities or funds will be redeemable at par value. A decline in the value of the company’s investment or a delay or suspension of its right to redeem may have an adverse effect on the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 partnership’s 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 company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders and the market price of the parent company’s stock.

 

A number of the company’s 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 company’s largest concentration of such properties is in California where, on an owned and managed basis, as of December 31, 2010, the company had 277 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 29.9 million square feet and representing 21.1% of its industrial operating properties based on aggregate square footage and 19.7% 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.

 

A number of the company’s 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 company’s 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:

 

 

Risks Associated with the Company’s Dependence on Key Personnel

 

The company depends on the efforts of its executive officers and other key employees. From time to time, the company’s personnel and their roles may change. As part of the company’s cost savings plan in 2008 and 2009, the company has reduced its total global headcount and may do so again in the future. In connection with the completion of the proposed merger with ProLogis, there may be additional changes to the company’s personnel and their roles that impact the combined company. 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 company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the market price of the parent company’s stock. The company currently does not have employment agreements with any of its executive officers, other than agreements that may be contingent on the completion of the proposed merger with ProLogis.

 

Because the company’s compensation packages include equity-based incentives, pressure on the parent company’s stock price or limitations on the company’s ability to award such incentives could affect the company’s 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 company’s performance and competitive position could be materially adversely affected.

 

Federal Income Tax Risks

 

The parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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, the parent company can 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 company’s case because it holds its assets through the operating partnership.

 

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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s ability to comply with the REIT income and asset tests, and thus the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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. 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 company’s stock if certain conditions are met. Taxable stockholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of the dividend as ordinary income to the extent of the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s stock.

 

Legislative or regulatory action could adversely affect the parent company’s 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.

 

Conflicts of Interest Risks

 

Some of the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s executive officers’ involvement in other real estate-related activities could divert their attention from the company’s day-to-day operations. The company’s 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 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 company’s 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 company’s board of directors with respect to that transaction.

 

The parent company’s 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 partnership’s limited partners, the discharge of which may conflict with the interests of the parent company’s stockholders. In addition, those persons holding limited partnership units will have the right to vote as a class on certain amendments to the operating partnership’s 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 company’s stockholders. In addition, under the terms of the operating partnership’s 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 company’s 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 company’s properties are known to contain asbestos-containing building materials.

 

In addition, some of the company’s 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 company’s 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.

 

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 consultant’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s budgets for these items, then the company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders, and the market price of the parent company’s 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 company’s cash flow and the amounts available for dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders may be adversely affected. The company’s 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.

 

Risks Associated with Ownership of the Parent Company’s Stock

 

Limitations in the parent company’s charter and bylaws could prevent a change in control.

 

Certain provisions of the parent company’s charter and bylaws may delay, defer or prevent a change in control or other transaction that could provide the holders of the parent company’s common stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price for the common stock. To maintain the parent company’s qualification as a real estate investment trust for federal income tax purposes, not more than 50% in value of the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s stock, actually or constructively owns 10% or more of one of the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s stockholders’ ability to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price for the shares of the parent company’s common stock in connection with such transaction.

 

The parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s stockholders.

 

The parent company’s charter and bylaws and Maryland law also contain other provisions that may impede various actions by stockholders without the approval of the parent company’s board of directors, which in turn may delay, defer or prevent a transaction, including a change in control. The parent company’s charter and bylaws include the following provisions:

 

 

 

Maryland law includes the following provisions:

 

 

In addition, the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s stock and could result in dilution of an existing stockholder’s investment. In addition, in the event the proposed merger with ProLogis is completed, the investment of existing stockholders will be diluted based on the exchange ratio of ProLogis shares of common stock into the company’s shares, which will result in current AMB stockholders owning approximately 40% of the combined company.

 

Earnings, cash dividends, asset value and market interest rates affect the price of the parent company’s stock.

 

As the parent company is a real estate investment trust, the market value of the parent company’s equity securities, in general, is based primarily upon the market’s perception of the parent company’s growth potential and its current and potential future earnings and cash dividends. The market value of the parent company’s equity securities is based secondarily upon the market value of its underlying real estate assets. For this reason, shares of the parent company’s 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 company’s underlying assets, may not correspondingly increase the market price of its stock. The parent company’s failure to meet the market’s expectations with regard to future earnings and cash dividends likely would adversely affect the market price of the parent company’s 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 company’s stock. An increase in market interest rates might lead prospective purchasers of the parent company’s stock to expect a higher distribution yield, which would adversely affect the parent company’s stock’s market price. Additionally, if the market price of the parent company’s stock declines significantly, then the operating partnership might breach certain covenants with respect to its debt obligations, which could adversely affect the company’s liquidity and ability to make future acquisitions and the parent company’s ability to pay cash dividends to its stockholders and the operating partnership’s ability to pay distributions to its unitholders.

 

The parent company’s board of directors has decided to align the parent company’s 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 company’s board of directors has suspended dividends to the parent company’s stockholders, and it is possible that they may do so again in the future, or decide to pay dividends partially in the parent company’s 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 company’s current investment policy to maintain the parent company’s qualification as a real estate investment trust (unless a change is approved by the parent company’s board of directors under certain circumstances), the parent company’s board of directors determines the company’s investment and financing policies, its growth strategy and its debt, capitalization, distribution and operating policies. The parent company’s 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 company’s stockholders or the operating partnership’s unitholders and could adversely affect the company’s financial condition or results of operations, including its ability to pay cash dividends to the parent company’s stockholders and distributions to the operating partnership’s unitholders.

 

Shares available for future sale could adversely affect the market price of the parent company’s common stock.

 

The operating partnership and AMB Property II, L.P. had 3,041,743 common limited partnership units issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2010, all of which are currently exchangeable on a one-for-one basis into shares of the parent company’s 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 company’s 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, 2010, under the company’s stock option and incentive plans, the company had 4,014,453 shares of common stock reserved and available for future issuance, had outstanding options to purchase 8,694,938 shares of common stock (of which 6,361,551 are vested and exercisable and 5,731,803 have exercise prices below market value at December 31, 2010) and had 1,202,122 unvested restricted shares of common stock outstanding. Future sales of a substantial number of shares of the parent company’s common stock in the market or the perception that such sales might occur could adversely affect the market price of the parent company’s 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 company’s 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 Company’s Disclosure Controls and Procedures and Internal Control over Financial Reporting

 

The company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, there can be no guarantee that the company’s internal control over financial reporting will be effective in accomplishing all control objectives all of the time. Furthermore, the company’s 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 company’s internal control over financial reporting which may occur in the future could result in misstatements of the company’s results of operations, restatements of its financial statements, a decline in the parent company’s stock price, or otherwise materially adversely affect the company’s business, reputation, results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

 

 

None.

 

 

As of December 31, 2010, the company owned and managed 1,128 industrial buildings aggregating approximately 141.9 million rentable square feet (on a consolidated basis, the company had 697 industrial buildings aggregating approximately 79.8 million rentable square feet), excluding development and renovation projects and recently completed development projects available for sale or contribution, located in 49 global markets throughout the Americas, Europe and Asia. The company’s industrial properties were 93.7% leased to 2,655 customers, the largest of which accounted for no more than 3.1% of the company’s annualized base rent from its industrial properties. See Part IV, Item 15: Note 17 of “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” for segment information related to the company’s operations.

 

Property Characteristics.  The company’s 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 company’s industrial buildings and each type’s percentage, based on square footage, of the company’s total owned and managed operating portfolio:

 

 

Lease Terms.  The company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s industrial leases do not include renewal options.

Overview of Our Global Market Presence.  The company’s industrial properties are located in the following markets:

 

 

Within these metropolitan areas, the company’s 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.

Portfolio Overview

 

The following includes the company’s 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:

 

 

 

 

Lease Expirations(1)

 

The following table summarizes the lease expirations for the company’s owned and managed operating properties for leases in place as of December 31, 2010, without giving effect to the exercise of renewal options or termination rights, if any, at or prior to the scheduled expirations:

 

 

 

 

Customer Information(1)

 

Top Customers.  As of December 31, 2010, the company’s largest customers by annualized base rent, on an owned and managed basis, are set forth in the table below:

 

 

 

 

Owned and Managed Operating and Leasing Statistics(1)

 

The following table summarizes key operating and leasing statistics for all of the company’s owned and managed operating properties as of and for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:

 

 

 

 

Owned and Managed Same Store Operating Statistics(1)

 

The following table summarizes key operating and leasing statistics for the company’s owned and managed same store operating properties as of and for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008:

 

 

 

 

 

Development Portfolio(1)

 

The following table sets forth the development portfolio of the company as of December 31, 2010 (dollars in thousands):