UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 |
|
or |
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission File Number 001-13545
AMB Property Corporation
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Maryland |
|
94-3281941 |
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization) |
|
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
Pier 1, Bay 1,
San Francisco, California
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) |
|
94111
(Zip Code) |
(415) 394-9000
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
(Title of Each Class) |
|
(Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered) |
|
|
|
Common Stock, $.01 par value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange |
61/2%
Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
|
|
|
63/4%
Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
|
|
|
7% Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
|
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the
registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the
registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the
registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter
period that the registrant was required to file such reports),
and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if
disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is
not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of
registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information
statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K or any
amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the
registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer,
or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated
filer and large accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated
filer þ Accelerated
filer o Non-accelerated
filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the
registrant is a shell company (as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of
common shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant (based
upon the closing sale price on the New York Stock Exchange) on
June 30, 2005 was $3,506,339,073.
As of March 01, 2006, there
were 87,561,917 shares of the Registrants common
stock outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Part III incorporates
by reference portions of the registrants 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.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Some of the information included in this annual report on
Form 10-K contains
forward-looking statements, which are made pursuant to the
safe-harbor provisions of Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 27A of the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Because these
forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties,
there are important factors that could cause our 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 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, 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 involve numerous risks
and uncertainties and you should not rely upon them as
predictions of future events. 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 we may not be able to realize
them.
The following factors, among others, could cause actual
results and future events to differ materially from those set
forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in general economic conditions or in the real estate
sector; |
|
|
|
non-renewal of leases by customers or renewal at lower than
expected rent; |
|
|
|
difficulties in identifying properties to acquire and in
effecting acquisitions on advantageous terms and the failure of
acquisitions to perform as we expect; |
|
|
|
risks and uncertainties affecting property development and
renovation (including construction delays, cost overruns, our
inability to obtain necessary permits and financing); |
|
|
|
risks of doing business internationally, including
unfamiliarity with new markets and currency risks; |
|
|
|
a downturn in the U.S., California, or the global economy or
real estate conditions; |
|
|
|
losses in excess of our insurance coverage; |
|
|
|
our failure to divest of properties on advantageous terms or
to timely reinvest proceeds from any such divestitures; |
|
|
|
unknown liabilities acquired in connection with acquired
properties or otherwise; |
|
|
|
risks associated with using debt to fund acquisitions and
development, including re-financing risks; |
|
|
|
our failure to obtain necessary financing; |
|
|
|
changes in local, state and federal regulatory
requirements; |
|
|
|
environmental uncertainties; and |
|
|
|
our failure to qualify and maintain our status as a real
estate investment trust under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended. |
Our 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 1.A of this report. We caution you not to place undue
reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect our
analysis only and speak as of the date of this report or as of
the dates indicated in the statements. We assume no obligation
to update or supplement forward-looking statements.
2
PART I
General
AMB Property Corporation, a Maryland corporation, acquires,
develops and operates industrial properties in key distribution
markets throughout North America, Europe and Asia. We use the
terms industrial properties or industrial
buildings to describe various types of industrial
properties in our portfolio and use these terms interchangeably
with the following: logistics facilities, centers or warehouses;
distribution facilities, centers or warehouses; High Throughput
Distribution®
(HTD®)
facilities; or any combination of these terms.
We commenced operations as a fully integrated real estate
company effective with the completion of our initial public
offering on November 26, 1997. Our strategy focuses on
providing properties for customers who value the efficient
movement of goods in the worlds busiest distribution
markets: large, supply-constrained locations with proximity to
airports, seaports and major highway systems. As of
December 31, 2005, we owned or had investments in, on a
consolidated basis or through unconsolidated joint ventures, or
managed buildings, properties and development projects expected
to total approximately 115.0 million rentable square feet
(10.7 million square meters) and 1,057 buildings in 42
markets within eleven countries.
We operate our business through our subsidiary, AMB Property,
L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, which we refer to as the
operating partnership. As of December 31, 2005,
we owned an approximate 95.1% general partnership interest in
the operating partnership, excluding preferred units. As the
sole general partner of the operating partnership, we have the
full, exclusive and complete responsibility for and discretion
in its day-to-day
management and control.
Our investment strategy generally targets customers whose
businesses are tied to global trade, which, according to the
World Trade Organization, has grown more than three times the
world gross domestic product growth rate during the last
20 years. To serve the facilities needs of these customers,
we seek to invest in major distribution markets, transportation
hubs and gateways, both domestically and internationally. Our
investment strategy targets markets that are generally
characterized by large population densities and typically offer
substantial consumer bases, proximity to large clusters of
distribution-facility users and significant labor pools. When
measured by total consolidated and unconsolidated annualized
base rents, 94.6% of our portfolio of industrial properties is
located in our target markets, and much of it in in-fill
submarkets within our target markets. In-fill 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.
Our strategy is to become a leading provider of industrial
properties in supply-constrained submarkets located near key
international passenger and cargo airports, highway systems and
seaports in major metropolitan areas of North America, Europe
and Asia. These submarkets are generally tied to global trade.
Further, we focus on High Throughput
Distribution®
(HTD®)
facilities, which are buildings designed to facilitate the
distribution of our customers products rather than store
them. Our investment focus on HTD assets is based on what we
believe to be a global trend toward lower inventory levels and
expedited supply chains. HTD facilities generally have a variety
of physical 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. We believe that these building
characteristics represent an important success factor for
time-sensitive customers such as air express, logistics and
freight forwarding companies, and that these facilities function
best when located in convenient proximity to transportation
infrastructure such as major airports and seaports.
Of the approximately 115.0 million rentable square feet as
of December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
on a consolidated basis, we owned or partially owned 876
industrial buildings, principally warehouse distribution
facilities, encompassing approximately 87.8 million
rentable square feet that were 95.8% |
3
|
|
|
|
|
leased, and other buildings encompassing approximately
0.3 million rentable square feet that were 98.7% leased; |
|
|
|
we managed, but did not have an ownership interest in,
industrial and other properties, totaling approximately
1.7 million rentable square feet; |
|
|
|
through unconsolidated joint ventures, we had investments in 86
industrial operating properties, totaling approximately
12.8 million rentable square feet, and two industrial
development projects, expected to total approximately
0.3 million rentable square feet; |
|
|
|
on a consolidated basis, we had investments in 45 industrial
development projects which are expected to total approximately
11.5 million rentable square feet; and |
|
|
|
on a consolidated basis, we owned one development project,
totaling $32.8 million and approximately 0.6 million
rentable square feet, that was available for sale or
contribution. |
During 2005, our property acquisitions totaled
$555.0 million(including expected capital expenditures),
primarily in target metropolitan markets including Amsterdam,
Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Guadalajara, Hamburg,
Shanghai and Tokyo. As of December 31, 2005, we had five
industrial buildings and one undeveloped land parcel held for
divestiture. Our dispositions during 2005 totaled
$926.6 million, including assets in markets that no longer
fit our investment strategy and properties at valuations that we
considered to be at premium levels. While we continue to sell
assets, we believe that we have substantially achieved our
near-term strategic disposition goals. Additionally, we
contributed $130.5 million of operating assets to a private
capital joint venture as part of our continuing strategy to
increase the proportion of our assets owned in co-investment
joint ventures.
We are self-administered and self-managed and expect that we
have 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, our own employees
perform our corporate administrative and management functions,
rather than our relying on an outside manager for these
services. We manage our portfolio of properties in a flexible
operating model which includes both direct property management
and a Strategic Alliance
Program®
in which we have established relationships with third-party real
estate management firms, brokers and developers that provide
property-level administrative and management services under our
direction.
Our principal executive office is located at Pier 1,
Bay 1, San Francisco, California 94111; our telephone
number is (415) 394-9000. We maintain regional offices in
Amsterdam, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New Jersey,
Shanghai, Singapore, Tokyo and Vancouver. As of
December 31, 2005, we employed 309 individuals: 161 at our
San Francisco headquarters, 60 in our Boston office and the
remainder in our other regional offices. Our website address is
www.amb.com. Our annual report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q, current
reports on
Form 8-K 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 our website free of charge as soon as
reasonably practicable after we electronically file such
material with, or furnish it to, the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission. Information contained on our website is not
and should not be deemed a part of this annual report or any
other report or filing filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.
Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms we,
us and our refer to AMB Property
Corporation, AMB Property, L.P. and their other controlled
subsidiaries, and the references to AMB Property Corporation
include AMB Property, L.P. and their controlled subsidiaries. We
refer to AMB Property, L.P. as the operating
partnership. The following marks are our registered
trademarks:
AMB®;
HTD®;
and High Throughput
Distribution®.
4
Operating Strategy
We base our operating strategy on a variety of operational and
service offerings, including in-house acquisitions, development,
redevelopment, asset management, property management, leasing,
finance, accounting and market research. Our strategy is to
leverage our expertise across a large customer base, and
complement our internal management resources with long-standing
relationships with entrepreneurial real estate management and
development firms in our target markets.
We believe that real estate is fundamentally a local business
and best operated by local teams in each market comprised of AMB
employees, local alliance partners or both. We intend to
increase utilization of internal management resources in target
markets to achieve both operating efficiencies and to expose our
customers to the broadening array of AMB service offerings,
including access to multiple locations worldwide and
build-to-suit
developments. We actively manage our portfolio, whether directly
or with an alliance partner, by establishing leasing strategies,
negotiating lease terms, pricing, and level and timing of
property improvements.
Growth Strategies
|
|
|
Growth through Operations |
We seek to generate long-term internal growth through rent
increases on existing space and renewals on rollover space by
working to maintain a high occupancy rate at our properties and
to control expenses by capitalizing on the economies of scale
inherent in owning, operating and growing a large, global
portfolio. However, during 2005, our average industrial property
base rental rates decreased by 9.7% from the rent in place at
expiration for that space on leases entered into or renewed
during the period. This amount excludes expense reimbursements,
rental abatements, percentage rents and straight-line rents.
Since 2001, as the industrial property market weakened, we have
focused on maintaining occupancy levels. During 2005, cash-basis
same-store net operating income (rental revenues less property
operating expenses and real estate taxes for properties included
in the same-store pool, which is set annually and excludes
properties purchased or developments stabilized after
December 31, 2003) increased by 0.1% on our industrial
properties. Since our initial public offering in November 1997,
we have experienced average annual increases in industrial
property base rental rates of 4.9% and maintained an average
quarter-end occupancy of 94.9% in our industrial property
operating portfolio. While we believe that it is important to
view real estate as a long-term investment, past results are not
necessarily an indication of future performance. See
Part II, Item 7: Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Supplemental Earnings Measures for
a discussion of net operating income and Part IV,
Item 15: Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements for detailed segment information,
including revenue attributable to each segment, gross investment
in each segment and total assets.
|
|
|
Growth through Development |
We believe that development, redevelopment and expansion of
well-located, high-quality industrial properties should continue
to provide us with attractive investment opportunities at a
higher rate of return than we may obtain from the purchase of
existing properties. We believe we have the in-house expertise
to create value both through new construction and acquisition
and management of value-added properties. Value-added conversion
projects represent the repurposing of land or a building site
for a more valuable use and may include such activities as
rezoning, redesigning, reconstructing and retenanting. Both new
development and value-added conversions require significant
management attention and capital investment to maximize their
return. Completed development properties may be held in our
portfolio, sold to third parties or contributed to our
co-investment joint ventures. We believe our global market
presence and expertise will enable us to continue to generate
and capitalize on a diverse range of development opportunities.
We believe that the multidisciplinary backgrounds of our
employees should provide us with the skills and experience to
capitalize on strategic renovation, expansion and development
opportunities. Many of our officers have specific experience in
real estate development, both with us and with national
development firms, and over the past two years, we have expanded
our development staff. We pursue development projects
5
directly and in joint ventures, providing us with the
flexibility to pursue development projects independently or in
partnerships, depending on market conditions, submarkets or
building sites.
|
|
|
Growth through Acquisitions and Capital Redeployment |
We believe that our acquisition experience and our network of
property management, leasing and acquisition resources will
continue to provide opportunities for growth. In addition to our
internal resources, we have long-term relationships with
third-party local property management firms, which we believe
may give us access to additional acquisition opportunities, as
such managers frequently market properties on behalf of sellers.
We believe also that our UPREIT structure enables us to acquire
land and industrial properties in exchange for limited
partnership units in the operating partnership or AMB
Property II, L.P., thereby enhancing our attractiveness to
owners and developers seeking to transfer properties on a
tax-deferred basis. Going forward, we believe that AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., will serve as our
primary source of capital for acquisitions of operating
properties within the U.S. In addition, we seek to redeploy
capital from non-strategic assets into properties that better
fit our current investment focus.
We are generally engaged in various stages of negotiations for a
number of acquisitions and dispositions that may include
acquisitions and dispositions of individual properties, large
multi-property portfolios or other real estate companies. We
cannot assure you that we will consummate any of these
transactions. Such transactions, if we consummate them, may be
material individually or in the aggregate. Sources of capital
for acquisitions may include retained cash flow from operations,
borrowings under our unsecured credit facilities, other forms of
secured or unsecured debt financing, issuances of debt or
preferred or common equity securities by us or the operating
partnership (including issuances of units in the operating
partnership or its subsidiaries), proceeds from divestitures of
properties, assumption of debt related to the acquired
properties and private capital from our co-investment partners.
See Part II, Item 7: Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Summary of Key Transactions in 2005.
|
|
|
Growth through Global Expansion |
By the end of 2007, we plan to have approximately 15% of our
operating portfolio (based on consolidated and unconsolidated
annualized base rent) invested in international markets. As of
December 31, 2005, our international operating properties
comprised 3.7% of our consolidated annualized base rent. When
international operating properties owned in unconsolidated joint
ventures are included, our annualized base rents from
international investments increases to 7.1%. Our North American
target markets outside of the United States currently
comprise Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey and Toronto. Our
European target markets currently comprise Amsterdam, Brussels,
Frankfurt, Hamburg, London, Lyon, Madrid, Milan and Paris. Our
Asian target markets currently include Beijing, Busan, Nagoya,
Osaka, the Pearl River Delta, Seoul, Shanghai, Singapore and
Tokyo. We expect to add additional target markets outside the
United States in the future.
We believe that expansion into international target markets
represents a natural extension of our strategy to invest in
industrial property markets with high population densities,
close proximity to large customer clusters and available labor
pools, and major distribution centers serving global trade. Our
international expansion strategy mirrors our domestic focus on
supply-constrained submarkets with political, economic or
physical constraints to new development. Our international
investments extend our offering of High Throughput
Distribution®
facilities for customers who value
speed-to-market over
storage. Specifically, we are focused on customers whose
business is derived from global trade. In addition, our
investments target major consumer distribution markets and
customers. We believe that our established customer
relationships, our contacts in the air cargo and logistics
industries, our underwriting of markets and investments and our
strategic alliances with knowledgeable developers and managers
will assist us in competing internationally.
There are many factors that could cause our entry into target
markets and future capital allocation to differ from our current
expectations, which are discussed in this report under the
heading Business Risks Risks Associated with Our
International Business. Further, it is possible that our
target markets will change over time to reflect experience,
market opportunities, customer needs and changes in global
distribution
6
patterns. For a discussion of the amount of our revenues
attributable to the United States and international markets,
please see Part IV, Item 15: Note 16 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
|
|
Growth through Co-Investments |
We co-invest in properties with private-capital investors
through partnerships, limited liability companies or joint
ventures. Our co-investment joint ventures are managed by our
private capital group and typically operate under the same
investment strategy that we apply to our other operations.
Typically we will own a 20-50% interest in our co-investment
joint ventures. We believe that our co-investment program will
continue to serve as a source of capital for acquisitions and
developments; however, we cannot assure you that it will
continue to do so. In addition, our co-investment joint ventures
typically allow us to earn acquisition and development fees,
asset management fees or priority distributions, as well as
promoted interests or incentive distributions based on the
performance of the co-investment joint ventures. As of
December 31, 2005, we owned approximately 54.8 million
square feet of our properties (47.7% of the total operating and
development portfolio) through our consolidated and
unconsolidated joint ventures.
BUSINESS RISKS
Our operations involve various risks that could have adverse
consequences to us. These risks include, among others:
General Real Estate Industry Risks
|
|
|
Our performance and value are subject to general economic
conditions and risks associated with our 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 our
properties do not generate income sufficient to meet operating
expenses, including debt service and capital expenditures, then
our ability to pay dividends to our 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, our
properties may be adversely affected by:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the general economic climate; |
|
|
|
local conditions, such as oversupply of or a reduction in demand
for industrial space; |
|
|
|
the attractiveness of our properties to potential customers; |
|
|
|
competition from other properties; |
|
|
|
our ability to provide adequate maintenance and insurance; |
|
|
|
increased operating costs; |
|
|
|
increased cost of compliance with regulations; |
|
|
|
the potential for liability under applicable laws (including
changes in tax laws); and |
|
|
|
disruptions in the global supply chain caused by political,
regulatory or other factors including terrorism. |
In addition, periods of economic slowdown or recession in the
United States and in other countries, rising interest rates or
declining demand for real estate, or public perception that any
of these events may occur, would result in a general decrease in
rents or an increased occurrence of defaults under existing
leases, which
7
would adversely affect our 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 our properties. To the extent that future attacks
impact our customers, their businesses similarly could be
adversely affected, including their ability to continue to honor
their existing leases.
Our properties are concentrated predominantly in the industrial
real estate sector. As a result of this concentration, we would
feel the impact of an economic downturn in this sector more
acutely than if our portfolio included other property types.
|
|
|
We may be unable to renew leases or relet space as leases
expire. |
As of December 31, 2005, leases on a total of 16.2% of our
industrial properties (based on annualized base rent) will
expire on or prior to December 31, 2006. We derive most of
our income from rent received from our customers. Accordingly,
our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
our ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our
stock could be adversely affected if we are unable to promptly
relet or renew these expiring leases or if the rental rates upon
renewal or reletting are significantly lower than expected. If a
tenant 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, our ability to rent space
and the rents that we can charge are impacted, not only by
customer demand, but by the number of other properties we have
to compete with to appeal to customers.
|
|
|
Actions by our competitors may decrease or prevent
increases of the occupancy and rental rates of our
properties. |
We compete with other developers, owners and operators of real
estate, some of which own properties similar to ours in the same
submarkets in which our properties are located. If our
competitors offer space at rental rates below current market
rates or below the rental rates we currently charge our tenants,
we may lose potential tenants, and we may be pressured to reduce
our rental rates below those we currently charge in order to
retain tenants when our tenants leases expire. As a
result, our financial condition, cash flow, cash available for
distribution, trading price of our common stock and ability to
satisfy our debt service obligations could be materially
adversely affected.
|
|
|
Real estate investments are relatively illiquid, making it
difficult for us to respond promptly to changing
conditions. |
Real estate assets are not as liquid as certain other types of
assets. Further, as a real estate investment trust, the Internal
Revenue Code regulates the number of properties that we can
dispose of in a year, their tax bases and the cost of
improvements that we make to the properties. In addition, a
portion of the properties held directly or indirectly by certain
of our 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, that result in a
taxable transaction for specified periods, following the
contribution of these properties to the applicable partnership.
These limitations may affect our ability to sell properties.
This lack of liquidity and the Internal Revenue Code
restrictions may limit our ability to vary our portfolio
promptly in response to changes in economic or other conditions
and, as a result, could adversely affect our financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow and our ability to
pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock.
|
|
|
We could be adversely affected if a significant number of
our tenants are unable to meet their lease obligations. |
Our results of operations, distributable cash flow and the value
of our common stock would be adversely affected if a significant
number of our tenants were unable to meet their lease
obligations to us. In the event of a significant number of lease
defaults, our cash flow may not be sufficient to pay dividends
to our stockholders and repay maturing debt. As of
December 31, 2005, we did not have any single tenant
account for annualized
8
base rent revenues greater than 3.7%. However, in the event of
lease defaults by a significant number of our tenants, we may
incur substantial costs in enforcing our rights as landlord.
|
|
|
We may be unable to consummate acquisitions on
advantageous terms or acquisitions may not perform as we
expect. |
We acquire and intend to continue to acquire primarily
industrial properties. The acquisition of properties entails
various risks, including the risks that our investments may not
perform as we expect, that we may be unable to quickly and
efficiently integrate our new acquisitions into our existing
operations and that our cost estimates for bringing an acquired
property up to market standards may prove inaccurate. Further,
we face significant competition for attractive investment
opportunities from other well-capitalized real estate investors,
including both publicly-traded real estate investment trusts and
private institutional investment funds. This competition
increases as investments in real estate become increasingly
attractive relative to other forms of investment. As a result of
competition, we may be unable to acquire additional properties
as we desire or the purchase price may be significantly
elevated. In addition, we expect to finance future acquisitions
through a combination of borrowings under our unsecured credit
facilities, proceeds from equity or debt offerings by us or the
operating partnership or its subsidiaries and proceeds from
property divestitures, which may not be available and which
could adversely affect our cash flow. Any of the above risks
could adversely affect our financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the
market price of, our stock.
|
|
|
We may be unable to complete renovation and development
projects on advantageous terms. |
As part of our business, we develop new and renovate existing
properties. The real estate development and renovation business
involves significant risks that could adversely affect our
financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock,
which include the following risks:
|
|
|
|
|
we may not be able to obtain financing for development projects
on favorable terms and complete construction on schedule or
within budget, resulting in increased debt service expense and
construction costs and delays in leasing the properties and
generating cash flow; |
|
|
|
we may not be able to obtain, or may experience delays in
obtaining, all necessary zoning, land-use, building, occupancy
and other governmental permits and authorizations; |
|
|
|
the properties may perform below anticipated levels, producing
cash flow below budgeted amounts; |
|
|
|
substantial renovation and new development activities,
regardless of their ultimate success, typically require a
significant amount of managements time and attention,
diverting their attention from our
day-to-day
operations; and |
|
|
|
upon completion of construction, we may not be able to obtain,
or obtain on advantageous terms, permanent financing for
activities that we have financed through construction loans. |
Risks Associated With Our International Business
|
|
|
Our international growth is subject to special risks and
we may not be able to effectively manage our international
growth. |
We have acquired and developed, and expect to continue to
acquire and develop, properties outside the United States.
Because local markets affect our operations, our international
investments are subject to economic fluctuations in the
international locations in which we invest. In addition, our
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 our
international revenues, restrictions on the transfer of funds,
and, in certain parts of the world, uncertainty over property
rights and political instability. We cannot predict the
likelihood that any of these developments may occur. Further, we
have entered, and may in the future enter, into agreements with
non-U.S. entities
that are governed by the laws of, and are
9
subject to dispute resolution in the courts of, another country
or region. We cannot accurately predict whether such a forum
would provide us with an effective and efficient means of
resolving disputes that may arise. And even if we are able to
obtain a satisfactory decision through arbitration or a court
proceeding, we could have difficulty enforcing any award or
judgment on a timely basis or at all.
Further, our business has grown rapidly and continues to grow
through international property acquisitions and developments. If
we fail to effectively manage our international growth, then our
financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock
could be adversely affected.
|
|
|
Acquired properties may be located in new markets, where
we may face risks associated with investing in an unfamiliar
market. |
We have acquired and may continue to acquire properties in
international markets that are new to us. When we acquire
properties located in these markets, we 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. We work 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.
|
|
|
We are subject to risks from potential fluctuations in
exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and the currencies
of the other countries in which we invest. |
We are pursuing, and intend to continue to pursue, growth
opportunities in international markets. As we invest in
countries where the U.S. dollar is not the national
currency, we are 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 we have a significant investment may
materially affect our results of operations. We attempt to
mitigate any such effects by borrowing under our multi-currency
credit facility in the currency of the country we are investing
in and, under certain circumstances, by putting in place
international currency put option contracts hedging exchange
rate fluctuations. For leases denominated in international
currencies, we may use derivative financial instruments to
manage the international exchange risk. We cannot, however,
assure you that our efforts will successfully neutralize all
international currency risks. If we do engage in international
currency exchange rate hedging activities, any income recognized
with respect to these hedges (as well as any international
currency gain recognized with respect to changes in exchange
rates) may not qualify under the 75% gross income test or the
95% gross income test that we must satisfy annually in order to
qualify and maintain our status as a REIT.
General Business Risks
|
|
|
Our performance and value are impacted by the local
economic conditions of and the risks associated with doing
business in California. |
As of December 31, 2005, our industrial properties located
in California represented 27.6% of the aggregate square footage
of our industrial operating properties and 28.5% of our
industrial annualized base rent. Our revenue from, and the value
of, our properties located in California may be affected by
local real estate conditions (such as an oversupply of or
reduced demand for industrial properties) and the local economic
climate. Business layoffs, downsizing, industry slowdowns,
changing demographics and other factors may adversely impact
Californias economic climate. Because of the number of
properties we have located in California, a downturn in
Californias economy or real estate conditions could
adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations,
cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market price
of, our stock.
|
|
|
We may experience losses that our insurance does not
cover. |
We carry commercial liability, property and rental loss
insurance covering all the properties that we own and manage in
types and amounts that we believe 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
10
terrorism, windstorms, floods or seismic activity, may be
insured subject to certain limitations, including large
deductibles or co-payments and policy limits. Although we have
obtained coverage for certain acts of terrorism, with policy
specifications and insured limits that we consider commercially
reasonable given the cost and availability of such coverage, we
cannot be certain that we 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
our industry because it is not economically feasible to do so.
We may incur material losses in excess of insurance proceeds and
we may not be able to continue to obtain insurance at
commercially reasonable rates. If we experience a loss that is
uninsured or that exceeds our insured limits with respect to one
or more of our properties, then we 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 we would remain obligated for any mortgage debt or
other financial obligations related to the properties. Moreover,
as the general partner of the operating partnership, we
generally will be liable for all of the operating
partnerships unsatisfied recourse obligations, including
any obligations incurred by the operating partnership as the
general partner of co-investment joint ventures. Any such losses
could adversely affect our financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the
market price of, our stock.
A number of our properties are located in areas that are known
to be subject to earthquake activity. Domestic properties
located in active seismic areas include properties in the
San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Memphis and Seattle.
Our largest concentration of such properties is in California
where, as of December 31, 2005, we had 253 industrial
buildings, aggregating approximately 24.3 million square
feet and representing 27.6% of our industrial operating
properties based on aggregate square footage and 28.5% based on
industrial annualized base rent. International properties
located in active seismic areas include Tokyo and Osaka, Japan
and Mexico City, Mexico. We carry replacement-cost earthquake
insurance on all of our properties located in areas historically
subject to seismic activity, subject to coverage limitations and
deductibles that we believe are commercially reasonable. We
evaluate our earthquake insurance coverage annually in light of
current industry practice through an analysis prepared by
outside consultants.
A number of our properties are located in areas that are known
to be subject to hurricane and/or flood risk. We carry
replacement-cost hurricane and flood hazard insurance on all of
our properties located in areas historically subject to such
activity, subject to coverage limitations and deductibles that
we believe are commercially reasonable. We evaluate our
insurance coverage annually in light of current industry
practice through an analysis prepared by outside consultants. In
2005, various properties that we own or lease in New Orleans,
Louisiana and South Florida suffered damage as a result of
Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma. Although we expect that our
insurance will cover losses arising from this damage in excess
of the deductibles paid by us and do not believe that such
losses would have a material adverse effect on our business,
assets or results from operations, we cannot assure you that we
will be reimbursed for all losses incurred.
|
|
|
We are subject to risks and liabilities in connection with
properties owned through joint ventures, limited liability
companies and partnerships. |
As of December 31, 2005, we owned approximately
54.8 million square feet of our properties through several
joint ventures, limited liability companies or partnerships with
third parties. Our organizational documents do not limit the
amount of available funds that we may invest in partnerships,
limited liability companies or joint ventures and we intend to
continue to develop and acquire properties through joint
ventures, limited liability companies and partnerships with
other persons or entities when warranted by the circumstances.
Such partners may share certain approval rights over major
decisions. Partnership, limited liability company or joint
venture investments involve certain risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
if our partners, co-members or joint venturers go bankrupt, then
we and any other remaining general partners, members or joint
venturers would generally remain liable for the
partnerships, limited liability companys or joint
ventures liabilities; |
|
|
|
if our partners fail to fund their share of any required capital
contributions, then we may be required to contribute such
capital; |
11
|
|
|
|
|
our partners, co-members or joint venturers might have economic
or other business interests or goals that are inconsistent with
our business interests or goals that would affect our ability to
operate the property; |
|
|
|
our partners, co-members or joint venturers may have the power
to act contrary to our instructions, requests, policies or
objectives, including our current policy with respect to
maintaining our qualification as a real estate investment trust; |
|
|
|
the joint venture, limited liability and partnership agreements
often restrict the transfer of a joint ventures,
members or partners interest or buy-sell
or may otherwise restrict our ability to sell the interest when
we desire or on advantageous terms; |
|
|
|
our relationships with our partners, co-members or joint
ventures are contractual in nature and may be terminated or
dissolved under the terms of the agreements, and in such event,
we may not continue to own or operate the interests or assets
underlying such relationship or may need to purchase such
interests or assets at an above- market price to continue
ownership; |
|
|
|
disputes between us and our partners, co-members or joint
venturers may result in litigation or arbitration that would
increase our expenses and prevent our officers and directors
from focusing their time and effort on our business and result
in subjecting the properties owned by the applicable partnership
or joint venture to additional risk; and |
|
|
|
we may in certain circumstances be liable for the actions of our
partners, co-members or joint venturers. |
We generally seek to maintain sufficient control of our
partnerships, limited liability companies and joint ventures to
permit us to achieve our business objectives, however, we may
not be able to do so, and the occurrence of one or more of the
events described above could adversely affect our financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay
dividends on, and the market price of, our stock.
|
|
|
We may be unable to complete divestitures on advantageous
terms or contribute properties. |
We intend to continue to divest ourselves of properties that do
not meet our strategic objectives, provided that we can
negotiate acceptable terms and conditions. Our ability to
dispose of properties on advantageous terms depends on factors
beyond our control, including competition from other sellers and
the availability of attractive financing for potential buyers of
our properties. If we are unable to dispose of properties on
favorable terms or redeploy the proceeds of property
divestitures in accordance with our investment strategy, then
our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock
could be adversely affected.
We also anticipate contributing or selling properties to funds
and joint ventures. If the funds are unable to raise additional
capital on favorable terms after currently available capital is
depleted or if the value of such properties are appraised at
less than the cost of such properties, then such contributions
or sales could be delayed or prevented, adversely affecting our
financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock.
For example, although we have acquired land for development and
made capital commitments in Japan and Mexico, we cannot be
assured that we ultimately will be able to contribute such
properties to funds or joint ventures as we have planned.
|
|
|
Contingent or unknown liabilities could adversely affect
our financial condition. |
We have 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 us based upon ownership of any
of these entities or properties, then we might have to pay
substantial sums to
12
settle it, which could adversely affect our cash flow. Unknown
liabilities with respect to entities or properties acquired
might include:
|
|
|
|
|
liabilities for
clean-up or remediation
of undisclosed environmental conditions; |
|
|
|
accrued but unpaid liabilities incurred in the ordinary course
of business; |
|
|
|
tax liabilities; and |
|
|
|
claims for indemnification by the general partners, officers and
directors and others indemnified by the former owners of the
properties. |
|
|
|
We are dependent on external sources of capital. |
In order to qualify as a real estate investment trust, we are
required each year to distribute to our stockholders at least
90% of our real estate investment trust taxable income
(determined without regard to the dividends-paid deduction and
by excluding any net capital gain) and are taxed on our income
to the extent it is not fully distributed. Consequently, we may
not be able to fund all future capital needs, including
acquisition and development activities, from cash retained from
operations and must rely on third-party sources of capital.
Further, in order to maintain our REIT status and avoid the
payment of income and excise taxes, we may need to borrow funds
on a short-term basis to meet the REIT 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. Our
ability to access private debt and equity capital on favorable
terms or at all is dependent upon a number of factors,
including, general market conditions, the markets
perception of our growth potential, our current and potential
future earnings and cash distributions and the market price of
our capital stock.
Debt Financing Risks
|
|
|
We could incur more debt, increasing our debt
service. |
It is our policy to incur debt, either directly or through our
subsidiaries, only if it will not cause our share of total
debt-to-our share of
total market capitalization ratio to exceed approximately 45%.
Our definition of our share of total market
capitalization is our share of total debt plus preferred
equity liquidation preferences plus market equity. See
footnote 1 to the Capitalization Ratios table contained in
Part II, Item 7: Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operation Liquidity and Capital Resources for
our definitions of market equity and our share
of total debt. The aggregate amount of indebtedness that
we may incur under our policy increases directly with an
increase in the market price per share of our capital stock.
Further, our management could alter or eliminate this policy
without stockholder approval. If we change this policy, then we
could become more highly leveraged, resulting in an increase in
debt service that could adversely affect the cash available for
distribution to our stockholders.
|
|
|
We face risks associated with the use of debt to fund
acquisitions and developments, including refinancing
risk. |
As of December 31, 2005, we had total debt outstanding of
$3.4 billion. We guarantee the operating partnerships
obligations with respect to the senior debt securities
referenced in our financial statements. We are subject to risks
normally associated with debt financing, including the risk that
our cash flow will be insufficient to meet required payments of
principal and interest. We anticipate that we will repay only a
small portion of the principal of our debt prior to maturity.
Accordingly, we will likely need to refinance at least a portion
of our outstanding debt as it matures. There is a risk that we
may not be able to refinance existing debt or that the terms of
any refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of our
existing debt. If we are unable to refinance or extend principal
payments due at maturity or pay them with proceeds of other
capital transactions, then we expect that our cash flow will not
be sufficient in all years to pay dividends to our stockholders
and to repay all such maturing debt. Furthermore, if prevailing
interest rates or other factors at
13
the time of refinancing (such as the reluctance of lenders to
make commercial real estate loans) result in higher interest
rates upon refinancing, then the interest expense relating to
that refinanced indebtedness would increase.
In addition, if we mortgage one or more of our properties to
secure payment of indebtedness and we are unable to meet
mortgage payments, then the property could be foreclosed upon or
transferred to the mortgagee with a consequent loss of income
and asset value. A foreclosure on one or more of our properties
could adversely affect our financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the
market price of, our stock.
|
|
|
Covenants in our debt agreements could adversely affect
our financial condition. |
The terms of our credit agreements and other indebtedness
require that we comply 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 our operations, and our
failure to comply with these covenants could cause a default
under the applicable debt agreement even if we have satisfied
our payment obligations. As of December 31, 2005, we had
certain non-recourse, secured loans, which are
cross-collateralized by multiple properties. If we default on
any of these loans, we 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 our properties, or
our inability to refinance our loans on favorable terms, could
adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations,
cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market price
of, our stock. In addition, our credit facilities and senior
debt securities contain certain cross-default provisions, which
are triggered in the event that our other material indebtedness
is in default. These cross-default provisions may require us 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 our financial condition,
results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends
on, and the market price of, our stock.
|
|
|
Failure to hedge effectively against interest rates may
adversely affect results of operations. |
We seek to manage our exposure to interest rate volatility by
using interest rate hedging arrangements, such as interest rate
cap agreements and interest rate 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 our exposure to interest rate changes and that a court
could rule that such agreements are not legally enforceable.
Hedging may reduce overall returns on our investments. Failure
to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may
materially adversely affect our results of operations.
Conflicts of Interest Risks
|
|
|
Some of our directors and executive officers are involved
in other real estate activities and investments and, therefore,
may have conflicts of interest with us. |
Certain of our executive officers and directors own interests in
other real-estate related businesses and investments, including
retail development projects, office buildings and de minimis
holdings of the equity securities of public and private real
estate companies. Our executive officers continued
involvement in other real estate-related activities could divert
their attention from our
day-to-day operations.
Our executive officers have entered into non-competition
agreements with us 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 our ability
to enforce these agreements. We believe that these properties
and activities generally do not directly compete with any of our
properties. However, it is possible that a property in which an
executive officer or director, or an affiliate of an executive
officer or director, has an interest may compete with us in the
future if we were to invest in a property similar in type and in
close proximity to that property.
14
We will not acquire any properties from our 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 our
board of directors with respect to that transaction.
|
|
|
Our role as general partner of the operating partnership
may conflict with the interests of our stockholders. |
As the general partner of the operating partnership, we have
fiduciary obligations to the operating partnerships
limited partners, the discharge of which may conflict with the
interests of our stockholders. In addition, those persons
holding limited partnership units will have the right to vote as
a class on certain amendments to the operating
partnerships partnership agreement and individually to
approve certain amendments that would adversely affect their
rights. The limited partners may exercise these voting rights in
a manner that conflicts with the interests of our stockholders.
In addition, under the terms of the operating partnerships
partnership agreement, holders of limited partnership units will
have certain approval rights with respect to certain
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 our
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 or in 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 U.S., 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 our properties may contain
asbestos-containing building materials.
In addition, some of our 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 our
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,
we may acquire properties, or interests in properties, with
known adverse environmental conditions where we believe 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, we underwrite the
costs of environmental investigation,
clean-up and monitoring
into the acquisition cost and obtain appropriate environmental
insurance for the property. Further, in connection with certain
divested properties, we have 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, we subject all of our properties to
a Phase I or similar environmental assessments by
independent environmental consultants and we may have additional
Phase II testing performed upon the consultants
recommendation. These environmental assessments have not
revealed, and
15
we are not aware of, any environmental liability that we believe
would have a material adverse effect on our 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 us, or that known environmental
conditions may give rise to liabilities that are greater than we
anticipated. Further, our 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 our budgets for these items, then
our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and
ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our 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 we are required to
make unanticipated expenditures to comply with the Americans
with Disabilities Act, including removing access barriers, then
our cash flow and the amounts available for dividends to our
stockholders may be adversely affected. Our properties are also
subject to various federal, state and local regulatory
requirements, such as state and local fire and life-safety
requirements. We could incur fines or private damage awards if
we fail to comply with these requirements. While we believe that
our 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 us that will affect our cash flow
and results of operations.
Federal Income Tax Risks
|
|
|
Our failure to qualify as a real estate investment trust
would have serious adverse consequences to our
stockholders. |
We elected to be taxed as a real estate investment trust under
Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code
commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 1997.
We currently intend to operate so as to qualify as a real estate
investment trust under the Internal Revenue Code and believe
that our current organization and method of operation comply
with the rules and regulations promulgated under the Internal
Revenue Code to enable us to continue to qualify as a real
estate investment trust. However, it is possible that we have
been organized or have operated in a manner that would not allow
us to qualify as a real estate investment trust, or that our
future operations could cause us to fail to qualify.
Qualification as a real estate investment trust requires us to
satisfy numerous requirements (some on an annual and others on a
quarterly basis) established under highly technical and complex
Internal Revenue Code provisions for which there are only
limited judicial and administrative interpretations, and
involves the determination of various factual matters and
circumstances not entirely within our control. For example, in
order to qualify as a real estate investment trust, we must
derive at least 95% of our gross income in any year from
qualifying sources. In addition, we must pay dividends to
stockholders aggregating annually at least 90% of our 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. These provisions and the applicable Treasury regulations
are more complicated in our case because we hold our assets
through the operating partnership. Legislation, new regulations,
administrative interpretations or court decisions could
significantly change the tax laws with respect to qualification
as a real estate investment trust or the federal income tax
consequences of such qualification. However, we are not aware of
any pending tax legislation that would adversely affect our
ability to qualify as a real estate investment trust.
If we fail to qualify as a real estate investment trust in any
taxable year, then we will be required to pay federal income tax
(including any applicable alternative minimum tax) on our
taxable income at regular corporate rates. Unless we are
entitled to relief under certain statutory provisions, we would
be disqualified from treatment as a real estate investment trust
for the four taxable years following the year in which we lost
16
qualification. If we lose our real estate investment trust
status, then our net earnings available for investment or
distribution to stockholders would be significantly reduced for
each of the years involved. In addition, we would no longer be
required to make distributions to our stockholders.
|
|
|
Certain property transfers may generate prohibited
transaction income, resulting in a penalty tax on gain
attributable to the transaction. |
From time to time, we may transfer or otherwise dispose of some
of our properties. Under the Internal Revenue Code, any gain
resulting from transfers of properties that we hold as inventory
or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of
business would be treated as income from a prohibited
transaction subject to a 100% penalty tax. Since we acquire
properties for investment purposes, we do not believe that our
occasional transfers or disposals of property are properly
treated as 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 disposals of properties by us are
prohibited transactions. While we believe that the Internal
Revenue Service would not prevail in any such dispute, if the
Internal Revenue Service were to argue successfully that a
transfer or disposition of property constituted a prohibited
transaction, then we would be required to pay a 100% penalty tax
on any gain allocable to us from the prohibited transaction. In
addition, income from a prohibited transaction might adversely
affect our ability to satisfy the income tests for qualification
as a real estate investment trust for federal income tax
purposes.
Risks Associated With Our Dependence on Key Personnel
We depend on the efforts of our executive officers. While we
believe that we could find suitable replacements for these key
personnel, the loss of their services or the limitation of their
availability could adversely affect our financial condition,
results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends
on, and the market price of, our stock. We do not have
employment agreements with any of our executive officers.
Risks Associated with Our Disclosure Controls and Procedures
and Internal Control over Financial Reporting
|
|
|
Our business could be adversely impacted if we have
deficiencies in our disclosure controls and procedures or
internal control over financial reporting. |
The design and effectiveness of our 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 our
disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over
financial reporting, there can be no guarantee that our internal
control over financial reporting will be effective in
accomplishing all control objectives all of the time.
Deficiencies, including any material weakness, in our internal
control over financial reporting which may occur in the future
could result in misstatements of our results of operations,
restatements of our financial statements, a decline in our stock
price, or otherwise materially adversely affect our business,
reputation, results of operations, financial condition or
liquidity.
Risks Associated with Ownership of Our Stock
|
|
|
Limitations in our charter and bylaws could prevent a
change in control. |
Certain provisions of our charter and bylaws may delay, defer or
prevent a change in control or other transaction that could
provide the holders of our common stock with the opportunity to
realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price for the
common stock. To maintain our qualification as a real estate
investment trust for federal income tax purposes, not more than
50% in value of our 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, our 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
we, or an owner of 10% or more of our stock, actually or
constructively owns 10% or more of one of our customers
17
(or a tenant of any partnership in which we are a partner), then
the rent received by us (either directly or through any such
partnership) from that tenant will not be qualifying income for
purposes of the real estate investment trust gross income tests
of the Internal Revenue Code. To help us maintain our
qualification as a real estate investment trust for federal
income tax purposes, we prohibit 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 our common stock,
series L preferred stock, series M preferred stock and
series O preferred stock. We also prohibit the ownership,
actually or constructively, of any shares of our series D,
E, F, H, I, J and K preferred stock by any single person so
that no such person, taking into account all of our stock so
owned by such person, including any common stock or other series
of preferred stock, may own in excess of 9.8% of our issued and
outstanding capital stock. We refer to this limitation as the
ownership limit. Shares acquired or held in
violation of the ownership limit will be transferred to a trust
for the benefit of a designated charitable beneficiary. 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 our
stockholders ability to realize a premium over the
then-prevailing market price for the shares of our common stock
in connection with such transaction.
Our charter authorizes us 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 we
issue. Although our board of directors has no intention to do so
at the present time, it 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 our stockholders.
Our charter and bylaws and Maryland law also contain other
provisions that may impede various actions by stockholders
without approval of our board of directors, which in turn may
delay, defer or prevent a transaction, including a change in
control. Those provisions in our charter and bylaws include:
|
|
|
|
|
directors may be removed only for cause and only upon a
two-thirds vote of stockholders; |
|
|
|
our board can fix the number of directors within set limits
(which limits are subject to change by our board), and fill
vacant directorships upon the vote of a majority of the
remaining directors, even though less than a quorum, or in the
case of a vacancy resulting from an increase in the size of the
board, a majority of the entire board; |
|
|
|
stockholders must give advance notice to nominate directors or
propose business for consideration at a stockholders
meeting; and |
|
|
|
the request of the holders of 50% or more of our common stock is
necessary for stockholders to call a special meeting. |
Those provisions provided for under Maryland law include:
|
|
|
|
|
a two-thirds vote of stockholders is required to amend our
charter; and |
|
|
|
stockholders may only act by written consent with the unanimous
approval of all stockholders entitled to vote on the matter in
question. |
In addition, our board could elect to adopt, without stockholder
approval, certain other provisions under Maryland law that may
impede a change in control.
18
|
|
|
The market value of our stock could be substantially
affected by various factors. |
As with other publicly traded securities, the trading price of
our stock will depend on many factors that are not within our
control and may change from time to time, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the extent of investor interest in us; |
|
|
|
the market for similar securities issued by real estate
investment trusts; |
|
|
|
the general reputation of real estate investment trusts and the
attractiveness of their equity securities in comparison to other
equity securities (including securities issued by other real
estate-based companies); |
|
|
|
general stock and bond market conditions, including changes in
interest rates on fixed income securities, that may lead
prospective purchasers of our stock to demand a higher annual
yield from future dividends; |
|
|
|
terrorist activity may adversely affect the markets in which our
securities trade, possibly increasing market volatility and
causing the further erosion of business and consumer confidence
and spending; |
|
|
|
general economic conditions; and |
|
|
|
our financial condition, performance and prospects. |
Other factors such as governmental regulatory action and changes
in tax laws could also have a significant impact on the future
trading price of our stock.
|
|
|
Earnings, cash dividends, asset value and market interest
rates affect the price of our stock. |
As a real estate investment trust the market value of our equity
securities, in general, is based primarily upon the
markets perception of our growth potential and our current
and potential future earnings and cash dividends. Our equity
securities market value is based secondarily upon the
market value of our underlying real estate assets. For this
reason, shares of our stock may trade at prices that are higher
or lower than our net asset value per share. To the extent that
we retain operating cash flow for investment purposes, working
capital reserves, or other purposes, these retained funds, while
increasing the value of our underlying assets, may not
correspondingly increase the market price of our stock. Our
failure to meet the markets expectations with regard to
future earnings and cash dividends likely would adversely affect
the market price of our 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 our stock. An increase in market interest rates might lead
prospective purchasers of our stock to expect a higher
distribution yield, which would adversely affect our
stocks market price. Additionally, if the market price of
our stock declines significantly, then we might breach certain
covenants with respect to our debt obligations, which could
adversely affect our liquidity and ability to make future
acquisitions and our ability to pay dividends to our
stockholders.
|
|
|
If we issue additional securities, then the investment of
existing stockholders will be diluted. |
We have authority to issue shares of common stock or other
equity or debt securities, and to cause the operating
partnership 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 or us and any issuance of additional
equity securities could result in dilution of an existing
stockholders investment.
|
|
|
We could change our investment and financing policies
without a vote of stockholders. |
Subject to our current investment policy to maintain our
qualification as a real estate investment trust (unless a change
is approved by our board of directors under certain
circumstances), our board of directors determines our investment
and financing policies, our growth strategy and our debt,
capitalization, distribution and operating policies. Although
our board of directors does not presently intend to revise or
amend these strategies and policies, they may do so at any time
without a vote of stockholders. Any such changes may not
19
serve the interests of all stockholders and could adversely
affect our financial condition or results of operations,
including our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders.
|
|
|
Shares available for future sale could adversely affect
the market price of our common stock. |
The operating partnership and AMB Property II, L.P. had
4,396,525 common limited partnership units issued and
outstanding as of December 31, 2005, which may be exchanged
generally one year after their issuance on a one-for-one basis
into shares of our common stock. In the future, the operating
partnership or AMB Property II, L.P. may issue additional
limited partnership units, and we 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 we have granted, or may
grant in connection with future issuances, or pursuant to
Rule 144. In addition, common stock issued under our stock
option and incentive plans may also be sold in the market
pursuant to registration statements that we have filed or
pursuant to Rule 144. As of December 31, 2005, under
our stock option and incentive plans, we had
3,872,024 shares of common stock reserved and available for
future issuance, had outstanding options to
purchase 9,148,437 shares of common stock (of which
7,236,870 are vested and exercisable) and had 547,524 unvested
restricted shares of common stock outstanding. Future sales of a
substantial number of shares of our common stock in the market
or the perception that such sales might occur could adversely
affect the market price of our common stock. Further, the
existence of the operating partnerships limited
partnership units and the shares of our 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 we are able to obtain
additional capital through the sale of equity securities.
|
|
Item 1B. |
Unresolved Staff Comments |
None.
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES
As of December 31, 2005, on a consolidated basis, we owned
876 industrial buildings aggregating approximately
87.8 million rentable square feet, located in 33 markets
throughout the United States and in China, France, Germany,
Japan, Mexico and the Netherlands. Our industrial properties
accounted for $527.3 million or 99.7% of our total
annualized base rent as of December 31, 2005. Our
industrial properties were 95.8% leased to 2,202 customers, the
largest of which accounted for no more than 3.7% of our
annualized base rent from our industrial properties. See
Part IV, Item 15: Note 16 of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for segment information
related to our operations.
Property Characteristics. Our industrial properties,
which consist primarily of warehouse distribution facilities
suitable for single or multiple customers, are typically
comprised of multiple buildings.
20
The following table identifies type and characteristics of our
industrial buildings and each types percentage of our
total portfolio based on square footage at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building Type |
|
Description |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Warehouse
|
|
Customers typically 15,000-75,000 square feet, single or
multi-tenant |
|
|
44.2 |
% |
|
|
41.4 |
% |
Bulk Warehouse
|
|
Customers typically over 75,000 square feet, single or
multi-tenant |
|
|
40.0 |
% |
|
|
38.9 |
% |
Flex Industrial
|
|
Includes assembly or research & development, single or
multi-customer |
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
|
7.1 |
% |
Light Industrial
|
|
Smaller customers, 15,000 square feet or less, higher
office finish |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
5.9 |
% |
Trans-Shipment
|
|
Unique configurations for truck terminals and cross-docking |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
|
2.3 |
% |
Air Cargo
|
|
On-tarmac or airport land for transfer of air cargo goods |
|
|
3.1 |
% |
|
|
3.2 |
% |
Office
|
|
Single or multi-customer, used strictly for office |
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
1.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Lease Terms. Our industrial properties are typically
subject to lease 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 our
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 our
industrial leases do not include renewal options.
Overview of Major Target Markets. Our industrial
properties are typically located near major airports, key
interstate highways and seaports in major domestic metropolitan
areas, such as Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas/ Fort Worth, Los
Angeles, Miami, Northern New Jersey/ New York City, the
San Francisco Bay Area and Seattle. Our international
industrial properties are located in major distribution markets,
including Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Guadalajara, Hamburg, Mexico
City, Paris, Shanghai, Singapore and Tokyo.
Within these metropolitan areas, 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 in-fill locations are typically near major airports,
seaports or convenient to major highways 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. We generally avoid locations at the
periphery of metropolitan areas where there are fewer
constraints to the supply of additional industrial properties.
21
Industrial Market Operating Statistics (1)
As of December 31, 2005, we held investments in operating
properties in 33 markets in our consolidated portfolio and an
additional nine markets in our unconsolidated portfolio
throughout the United States and in China, France, Germany,
Japan, Mexico and the Netherlands. The following table
represents properties in which we own a 100% interest or a
controlling interest (consolidated), and excludes properties in
which we only own a non-controlling interest
(unconsolidated) and properties under development:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. New | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Hub | |
|
|
|
Total/ | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dallas/ | |
|
Los | |
|
Jersey/ | |
|
San Francisco | |
|
|
|
|
|
North American | |
|
and Gateway | |
|
Total Other | |
|
Weighted | |
|
|
Atlanta | |
|
Chicago | |
|
Ft. Worth | |
|
Angeles(2) | |
|
New York | |
|
Bay Area | |
|
Miami | |
|
Seattle | |
|
On-Tarmac(3) | |
|
Markets | |
|
Markets | |
|
Average | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Number of buildings
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
876 |
|
Rentable square feet
|
|
|
4,416,190 |
|
|
|
9,770,876 |
|
|
|
3,515,054 |
|
|
|
13,104,346 |
|
|
|
9,370,830 |
|
|
|
11,147,409 |
|
|
|
5,015,247 |
|
|
|
6,952,127 |
|
|
|
2,674,136 |
|
|
|
65,966,215 |
|
|
|
21,805,889 |
|
|
|
87,772,104 |
|
|
% of total rentable square feet
|
|
|
4.9 |
% |
|
|
11.1 |
% |
|
|
4.0 |
% |
|
|
14.9 |
% |
|
|
10.7 |
% |
|
|
12.7 |
% |
|
|
5.7 |
% |
|
|
7.9 |
% |
|
|
3.0 |
% |
|
|
74.9 |
% |
|
|
25.1 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Occupancy percentage
|
|
|
95.2 |
% |
|
|
94.5 |
% |
|
|
91.5 |
% |
|
|
98.6 |
% |
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
95.9 |
% |
|
|
98.3 |
% |
|
|
95.6 |
% |
|
|
95.0 |
% |
|
|
96.2 |
% |
|
|
94.6 |
% |
|
|
95.8 |
% |
Annualized base rent (000s)
|
|
$ |
18,473 |
|
|
$ |
45,249 |
|
|
$ |
12,311 |
|
|
$ |
80,542 |
|
|
$ |
67,212 |
|
|
$ |
69,704 |
|
|
$ |
36,207 |
|
|
$ |
31,124 |
|
|
$ |
45,296 |
|
|
$ |
406,118 |
|
|
$ |
121,194 |
|
|
$ |
527,312 |
|
|
% of total annualized base rent
|
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
8.6 |
% |
|
|
2.3 |
% |
|
|
15.3 |
% |
|
|
12.6 |
% |
|
|
13.2 |
% |
|
|
6.9 |
% |
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
|
8.6 |
% |
|
|
76.9 |
% |
|
|
23.1 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Number of leases
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
373 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
2,192 |
|
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
2,871 |
|
Annualized base rent per square foot
|
|
$ |
4.39 |
|
|
$ |
4.90 |
|
|
$ |
3.83 |
|
|
$ |
6.23 |
|
|
$ |
7.41 |
|
|
$ |
6.52 |
|
|
$ |
7.34 |
|
|
$ |
4.68 |
|
|
$ |
17.83 |
|
|
$ |
6.40 |
|
|
$ |
5.87 |
|
|
$ |
6.27 |
|
Lease expirations as a % of ABR:(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
25.1 |
% |
|
|
28.7 |
% |
|
|
9.4 |
% |
|
|
19.5 |
% |
|
|
14.9 |
% |
|
|
9.8 |
% |
|
|
17.9 |
% |
|
|
17.2 |
% |
|
|
17.0 |
% |
|
|
17.4 |
% |
|
|
12.1 |
% |
|
|
16.2 |
% |
|
2006
|
|
|
12.7 |
% |
|
|
26.7 |
% |
|
|
14.1 |
% |
|
|
13.7 |
% |
|
|
13.2 |
% |
|
|
15.5 |
% |
|
|
20.1 |
% |
|
|
18.2 |
% |
|
|
7.9 |
% |
|
|
15.7 |
% |
|
|
13.0 |
% |
|
|
15.1 |
% |
|
2007
|
|
|
24.2 |
% |
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
|
19.3 |
% |
|
|
23.7 |
% |
|
|
10.6 |
% |
|
|
16.6 |
% |
|
|
12.1 |
% |
|
|
13.7 |
% |
|
|
11.7 |
% |
|
|
15.7 |
% |
|
|
13.3 |
% |
|
|
15.2 |
% |
Weighted average lease terms:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original
|
|
|
5.1 years |
|
|
|
4.5 years |
|
|
|
5.8 years |
|
|
|
6.0 years |
|
|
|
6.8 years |
|
|
|
5.6 years |
|
|
|
5.4 years |
|
|
|
6.0 years |
|
|
|
8.6 years |
|
|
|
5.8 years |
|
|
|
6.9 years |
|
|
|
6.1 years |
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
2.7 years |
|
|
|
2.4 years |
|
|
|
3.7 years |
|
|
|
3.2 years |
|
|
|
3.6 years |
|
|
|
2.9 years |
|
|
|
3.3 years |
|
|
|
3.0 years |
|
|
|
4.9 years |
|
|
|
3.1 years |
|
|
|
3.9 years |
|
|
|
3.3 years |
|
Tenant retention:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
96.6 |
% |
|
|
97.5 |
% |
|
|
85.0 |
% |
|
|
21.8 |
% |
|
|
13.9 |
% |
|
|
62.2 |
% |
|
|
76.1 |
% |
|
|
26.0 |
% |
|
|
83.6 |
% |
|
|
68.1 |
% |
|
|
56.0 |
% |
|
|
66.1 |
% |
|
Year-to-date
|
|
|
89.3 |
% |
|
|
82.1 |
% |
|
|
62.2 |
% |
|
|
48.6 |
% |
|
|
41.3 |
% |
|
|
67.6 |
% |
|
|
68.4 |
% |
|
|
53.2 |
% |
|
|
80.7 |
% |
|
|
64.5 |
% |
|
|
63.1 |
% |
|
|
64.2 |
% |
Rent increases on renewals and rollovers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
(5.2 |
)% |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
(6.4 |
)% |
|
|
(4.0 |
)% |
|
|
(8.3 |
)% |
|
|
(14.6 |
)% |
|
|
(0.9 |
)% |
|
|
9.1 |
% |
|
|
6.7 |
% |
|
|
(3.9 |
)% |
|
|
(5.8 |
)% |
|
|
(4.3 |
)% |
|
Same space SF leased
|
|
|
426,728 |
|
|
|
733,877 |
|
|
|
271,284 |
|
|
|
316,071 |
|
|
|
270,250 |
|
|
|
449,978 |
|
|
|
329,653 |
|
|
|
147,427 |
|
|
|
126,674 |
|
|
|
3,071,942 |
|
|
|
769,692 |
|
|
|
3,841,634 |
|
|
Year-to-date
|
|
|
(3.0 |
)% |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
(6.0 |
)% |
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
|
(41.0 |
)% |
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
(3.2 |
)% |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
(10.8 |
)% |
|
|
(4.3 |
)% |
|
|
(9.7 |
)% |
|
Same space SF leased
|
|
|
888,881 |
|
|
|
1,822,495 |
|
|
|
698,886 |
|
|
|
2,371,014 |
|
|
|
900,336 |
|
|
|
2,089,998 |
|
|
|
1,078,385 |
|
|
|
819,959 |
|
|
|
362,528 |
|
|
|
11,032,482 |
|
|
|
2,574,944 |
|
|
|
13,607,426 |
|
Same store cash basis NOI % change:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
3.9 |
% |
|
|
(18.4 |
)% |
|
|
(21.6 |
)% |
|
|
8.3 |
% |
|
|
41.3 |
% |
|
|
(2.8 |
)% |
|
|
21.0 |
% |
|
|
9.3 |
% |
|
|
12.1 |
% |
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
|
1.2 |
% |
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
Year-to-date
|
|
|
(3.5 |
)% |
|
|
(5.1 |
)% |
|
|
(2.4 |
)% |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
17.6 |
% |
|
|
(11.2 |
)% |
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
|
7.0 |
% |
|
|
4.4 |
% |
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
(1.9 |
)% |
|
|
0.1 |
% |
Sq. feet owned in same store pool(5)
|
|
|
3,843,330 |
|
|
|
7,104,452 |
|
|
|
3,374,894 |
|
|
|
11,510,097 |
|
|
|
6,517,164 |
|
|
|
10,587,804 |
|
|
|
4,236,006 |
|
|
|
6,117,008 |
|
|
|
2,556,891 |
|
|
|
55,847,646 |
|
|
|
16,604,963 |
|
|
|
72,452,609 |
|
AMBs pro rata share of square feet(6)
|
|
|
2,533,993 |
|
|
|
8,671,069 |
|
|
|
2,552,038 |
|
|
|
10,633,857 |
|
|
|
5,315,216 |
|
|
|
8,562,343 |
|
|
|
4,262,752 |
|
|
|
3,763,649 |
|
|
|
2,530,524 |
|
|
|
48,825,441 |
|
|
|
18,341,161 |
|
|
|
67,166,602 |
|
Total market square footage(7)
|
|
|
5,422,133 |
|
|
|
14,431,125 |
|
|
|
3,737,334 |
|
|
|
17,930,364 |
|
|
|
9,853,611 |
|
|
|
11,551,326 |
|
|
|
5,671,847 |
|
|
|
7,718,372 |
|
|
|
3,930,038 |
|
|
|
80,246,150 |
|
|
|
34,708,482 |
|
|
|
114,954,632 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Includes all industrial consolidated operating properties and
excludes industrial development and renovation projects. |
|
(2) |
We also own a 19.9-acre
parking lot with 2,720 parking spaces and 12 billboard signs in
the Los Angeles market immediately adjacent to the Los Angeles
International Airport. |
|
(3) |
Includes domestic on-tarmac air cargo facilities at 14 airports. |
|
(4) |
Annualized base rent is calculated as monthly base rent (cash
basis) per the terms of the lease, as of December 31, 2005,
multiplied by 12. |
|
(5) |
Same store pool excludes properties or developments stabilized
after December 31, 2003. Stabilized properties are
generally defined as properties that are 90% leased or
properties for which we have held a certificate of occupancy or
where building has been substantially complete for at least
12 months. |
|
(6) |
Calculated as our pro rata share of square feet on consolidated
and unconsolidated operating properties. |
|
(7) |
Total market square footage includes industrial and retail
operating properties, development properties, unconsolidated
properties (100% of the square footage) and properties managed
for third parties. |
22
Industrial Operating Portfolio Overview
As of December 31, 2005, our 876 industrial buildings were
diversified across 33 markets throughout the United States and
in China, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the Netherlands.
The average age of our industrial properties is approximately
21 years (since the property was built or substantially
renovated). The following table represents properties in which
we own a fee simple or leasehold interest or a controlling
interest (consolidated), and excludes properties in which we
only own a non-controlling interest (unconsolidated):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable | |
|
% of Total | |
|
|
|
Annualized | |
|
% of Total | |
|
|
|
Annualized | |
|
|
Number of | |
|
Square | |
|
Rentable | |
|
Occupancy | |
|
Base Rent | |
|
Annualized | |
|
Number | |
|
Base Rent per | |
|
|
Buildings | |
|
Feet | |
|
Square Feet | |
|
Percentage | |
|
(000s) | |
|
Base Rent | |
|
of Leases | |
|
Square Foot | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Domestic Hub Markets
|
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
65,966,215 |
|
|
|
74.9 |
% |
|
|
96.2 |
% |
|
$ |
406,118 |
|
|
|
76.9 |
% |
|
|
2,192 |
|
|
$ |
6.40 |
|
Other Markets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic Target Markets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Austin
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1,558,757 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
93.9 |
|
|
|
8,371 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
5.72 |
|
|
|
Baltimore/ Washington DC
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
2,809,554 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
98.2 |
|
|
|
18,689 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
6.77 |
|
|
|
Boston
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
5,288,268 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
91.1 |
|
|
|
31,694 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
6.58 |
|
|
|
Minneapolis
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
3,707,692 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
98.0 |
|
|
|
15,912 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
4.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/ Weighted Average
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
13,364,271 |
|
|
|
15.2 |
|
|
|
94.8 |
|
|
|
74,666 |
|
|
|
14.1 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
5.89 |
|
|
Domestic Non-Target Markets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charlotte
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
1,317,864 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
83.7 |
|
|
|
5,518 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
Columbus
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
240,000 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3.00 |
|
|
|
Houston
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
410,000 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
2,531 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6.17 |
|
|
|
Memphis
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
1,883,845 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
91.4 |
|
|
|
8,744 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
5.08 |
|
|
|
New Orleans
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
410,839 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
98.3 |
|
|
|
2,004 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
4.96 |
|
|
|
Orlando
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
1,424,748 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
96.4 |
|
|
|
6,250 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
4.55 |
|
|
|
San Diego
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
276,167 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
85.4 |
|
|
|
1,911 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
8.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/ Weighted Average
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
5,963,463 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
92.0 |
|
|
|
27,678 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
|
International Target Markets(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
476,972 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
4,608 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
9.66 |
|
|
|
Frankfurt, Germany
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
166,917 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
1,980 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
11.86 |
|
|
|
Hamburg, Germany
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
397,963 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
99.1 |
|
|
|
3,153 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7.99 |
|
|
|
Lyon, France
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
262,491 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
1,452 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5.53 |
|
|
|
Paris, France
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,022,063 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
7,125 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
6.97 |
|
|
|
Shanghai, China
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
151,749 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/ Weighted Average
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
2,478,155 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
|
|
18,850 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Markets
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
21,805,889 |
|
|
|
25.1 |
|
|
|
94.6 |
|
|
|
121,194 |
|
|
|
23.1 |
|
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
5.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/ Weighted Average
|
|
|
876 |
|
|
|
87,772,104 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
95.8 |
% |
|
$ |
527,312 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
2,871 |
|
|
$ |
6.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Annualized base rent for leases denominated in foreign
currencies is translated using the currency exchange rate at
December 31, 2005. |
|
(2) |
Annualized base rent is calculated as monthly base rent (cash
basis) per the lease, as of December 31, 2005, multiplied
by 12. If free rent is granted, then the first positive rent
value is used. |
23
Industrial Lease Expirations
The following table summarizes the lease expirations for our
industrial properties for leases in place as of
December 31, 2005, without giving effect to the exercise of
renewal options or termination rights, if any, at or prior to
the scheduled expirations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized | |
|
% of | |
|
|
Square | |
|
Base Rent | |
|
Annualized | |
|
|
Feet(1)(2) | |
|
(000s)(3) | |
|
Base Rent | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
2006
|
|
|
14,814,362 |
|
|
$ |
89,922 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
% |
2007
|
|
|
14,245,738 |
|
|
|
83,898 |
|
|
|
15.1 |
% |
2008
|
|
|
14,095,709 |
|
|
|
84,259 |
|
|
|
15.2 |
% |
2009
|
|
|
11,726,525 |
|
|
|
70,944 |
|
|
|
12.8 |
% |
2010
|
|
|
10,368,286 |
|
|
|
77,179 |
|
|
|
13.9 |
% |
2011
|
|
|
6,097,520 |
|
|
|
43,935 |
|
|
|
7.9 |
% |
2012
|
|
|
3,983,288 |
|
|
|
35,548 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
% |
2013
|
|
|
1,397,167 |
|
|
|
14,630 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
% |
2014
|
|
|
3,508,245 |
|
|
|
24,318 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
% |
2015 and beyond
|
|
|
3,943,343 |
|
|
|
31,404 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
84,180,183 |
|
|
$ |
556,037 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Schedule includes leases that expire on or after
December 31, 2005. |
|
(2) |
The schedule also includes leases in
month-to-month and
hold-over status totaling 3.7 million square feet. |
|
(3) |
Calculated as monthly base rent at expiration multiplied by 12.
Non-U.S. dollar
projects are converted to U.S. dollars based on the forward
exchange rate at expiration. |
24
Customer Information
Largest Property Customers. As of December 31, 2005,
our 25 largest industrial property customers by annualized base
rent are set forth in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate | |
|
|
|
Aggregate | |
|
|
|
|
Aggregate | |
|
Leased | |
|
Annualized | |
|
Annualized | |
|
|
Number of | |
|
Rentable | |
|
Square | |
|
Base Rent | |
|
Base | |
Customer Name(1) |
|
Leases | |
|
Square Feet | |
|
Feet(2) | |
|
(000s)(3) | |
|
Rent(4) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
United States Government(5)(6)
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
1,118,282 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
$ |
19,576 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
% |
FedEx Corporation
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
1,359,559 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
|
14,130 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
% |
Deutsche Post World Net
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
1,727,890 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
% |
|
|
13,753 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
% |
Harmonic Inc.
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
285,480 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
|
6,674 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
City and County of San Francisco
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
559,605 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
5,714 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
La Poste
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
854,427 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
5,424 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
Expeditors International
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1,041,773 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
% |
|
|
5,115 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
Worldwide Flight Services
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
318,959 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
3,870 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
UPS
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
549,994 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
3,812 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
International Paper Company
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
473,399 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
3,800 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
Panalpina, Inc.
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
572,935 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
3,542 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
Forward Air Corporation
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
475,954 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
3,416 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
% |
Nippon Express USA
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
429,040 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
3,361 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
% |
Ahold NV
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
644,571 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
Elmhult Limited Partnership
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
760,253 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
% |
|
|
2,686 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
Virco Manufacturing Corporation
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
559,000 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
2,566 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
BAX Global Inc
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
169,531 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
2,561 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
Aeroground Inc.
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
201,367 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
2,555 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
United Air Lines Inc
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
118,825 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
|
2,456 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
Applied Materials, Inc.
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
290,557 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
|
2,277 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
Iron Mountain Information Management
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
442,041 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
2,126 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
Kintetsu World Express
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
167,027 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
2,112 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
Eagle Global Logistics, L.P.
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
350,563 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
2,071 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
FMI International
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
315,000 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
2,068 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
United Liquors, Ltd.
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
440,000 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
2,057 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,226,032 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
% |
|
$ |
120,559 |
|
|
|
22.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Customer(s) may be a subsidiary of or an entity affiliated with
the named customer. We also have a lease with ParkN Fly at
our Park One property, a parking lot, adjacent to the Los
Angeles International Airport with an annualized base rent of
$7.2 million, which is not included. |
|
(2) |
Computed as aggregate leased square feet divided by the
aggregate leased square feet of the industrial and retail
properties. |
|
(3) |
Annualized base rent is calculated as monthly base rent (cash
basis) per the lease, as of December 31, 2005, multiplied
by 12. |
|
(4) |
Computed as aggregate annualized base rent divided by the
aggregate annualized base rent of the industrial, retail and
other properties. |
|
(5) |
Airport apron rental amounts (but not square footage) are
included. |
|
(6) |
United States Government includes the United States Postal
Service, United States Customs, United States Department of
Agriculture and various other U.S. governmental agencies. |
25
OPERATING AND LEASING STATISTICS
Industrial Operating and Leasing Statistics
The following table summarizes key operating and leasing
statistics for all of our industrial properties as of and for
the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Portfolio(1) |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Square feet owned(2)
|
|
|
87,772,104 |
|
|
|
90,278,803 |
|
|
|
87,101,412 |
|
Occupancy percentage
|
|
|
95.8 |
% |
|
|
94.8 |
% |
|
|
93.1 |
% |
Weighted average lease terms:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original
|
|
|
6.1 years |
|
|
|
6.1 years |
|
|
|
6.1 years |
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
3.3 years |
|
|
|
3.3 years |
|
|
|
3.2 years |
|
Tenant retention
|
|
|
64.2 |
% |
|
|
66.8 |
% |
|
|
65.3 |
% |
Same Space Leasing Activity(3):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rent increases (decreases) on renewals and rollovers
|
|
|
(9.7 |
)% |
|
|
(13.2 |
)% |
|
|
(10.1 |
)% |
|
Same space square footage commencing (millions)
|
|
|
13.6 |
|
|
|
17.5 |
|
|
|
17.3 |
|
Second Generation Leasing Activity(4):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tenant improvements and leasing commissions per sq. ft.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
$ |
1.60 |
|
|
$ |
1.73 |
|
|
$ |
1.39 |
|
|
|
Re-tenanted
|
|
|
3.03 |
|
|
|
2.70 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average
|
|
$ |
2.34 |
|
|
$ |
2.27 |
|
|
$ |
1.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square footage commencing (millions)
|
|
|
18.5 |
|
|
|
22.5 |
|
|
|
22.7 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Includes all consolidated industrial operating properties and
excludes industrial development and renovation projects.
Excludes retail and other properties square footage of
0.3 million with occupancy of 98.7% and annualized base
rents of $1.7 million as of December 31, 2005. |
|
(2) |
In addition to owned square feet as of December 31, 2005,
we managed, but did not have an ownership interest in,
approximately 0.4 million additional square feet of
industrial and other properties. As of December 31, 2005,
one of our subsidiaries also managed approximately
1.3 million square feet of industrial properties on behalf
of the IAT Air Cargo Facilities Income Fund. As of
December 31, 2005, we also had investments in
12.8 million square feet of industrial operating properties
through our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures. |
|
(3) |
Consists of second generation leases renewing or re-tenanting
with current and prior lease terms greater than one year. |
|
(4) |
Second generation tenant improvements and leasing commissions
per square foot are the total cost of tenant improvements,
leasing commissions and other leasing costs incurred during
leasing of second generation space divided by the total square
feet leased. Costs incurred prior to leasing available space are
not included until such space is leased. Second generation space
excludes newly developed square footage or square footage vacant
at acquisition. |
26
Industrial Same Store Operating Statistics
The following table summarizes key operating and leasing
statistics for our same store properties as of and for the years
ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Square feet in same store pool(1)
|
|
|
72,452,609 |
|
|
|
74,516,427 |
|
|
|
71,985,575 |
|
|
% of total industrial square feet
|
|
|
82.5 |
% |
|
|
82.5 |
% |
|
|
82.6 |
% |
Occupancy percentage at period end
|
|
|
95.6 |
% |
|
|
95.3 |
% |
|
|
93.0 |
% |
Tenant retention
|
|
|
63.7 |
% |
|
|
66.4 |
% |
|
|
65.1 |
% |
Rent increases (decreases) on renewals and rollovers
|
|
|
(9.8 |
)% |
|
|
(14.7 |
)% |
|
|
(10.6 |
)% |
|
Square feet leased (millions)
|
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
Growth % increase (decrease) (including straight-line rents):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
|
|
(3.8 |
)% |
|
Expenses
|
|
|
(0.2 |
)% |
|
|
(0.5 |
)% |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
Net operating income
|
|
|
(0.8 |
)% |
|
|
(0.8 |
)% |
|
|
(5.7 |
)% |
Growth % increase (decrease) (excluding straight-line rents):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
(0.8 |
)% |
|
|
(3.6 |
)% |
|
Expenses
|
|
|
(0.2 |
)% |
|
|
(0.5 |
)% |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
Net operating income
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
|
(0.9 |
)% |
|
|
(5.6 |
)% |
|
|
(1) |
Same store properties are those properties that we owned during
both the current and prior year reporting periods, excluding
development properties prior to being stabilized (generally
defined as properties that are 90% leased or properties for
which we have held a certificate of occupancy or building has
been substantially complete for at least 12 months). |
27
DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES
Development Pipeline
The following table sets forth the properties owned by us as of
December 31, 2005 which were undergoing development,
renovation or expansion. We can not assure you that any of these
projects will be completed on schedule or within budgeted
amounts.
Industrial Development and Renovation Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
Estimated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square | |
|
Total | |
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
Feet at | |
|
Investment | |
|
Ownership | |
Projects |
|
Location |
|
Developer |
|
Stabilization | |
|
Stabilization | |
|
(000s)(1) | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
2006 Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. AMB BRU Air Cargo Center
|
|
Brussels, Belgium |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
100,212 |
|
|
$ |
11,600 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
2. AMB West OHare Bldg 1
|
|
El Grove, Village, IL |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
189,240 |
|
|
|
15,700 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
3. AMB West OHare Bldg 2
|
|
El Grove, Village, IL |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
119,808 |
|
|
|
9,300 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
4. Narita Air Cargo 1 Phase 1 Bldg A
|
|
Tokyo, Japan |
|
AMB Blackpine |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
107,966 |
|
|
|
11,000 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
5. Narita Air Cargo 1 Phase 1 Bldg B
|
|
Tokyo, Japan |
|
AMB Blackpine |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
564,207 |
|
|
|
57,500 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
6. Highway 17 50 Broad Street
|
|
Carlstadt, NJ |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
120,000 |
|
|
|
9,100 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
7. Monarch Commerce Center Bldg 1
|
|
Miramar, FL |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
71,903 |
|
|
|
5,600 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
8. Monarch Commerce Center Bldg 2
|
|
Miramar, FL |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
32,152 |
|
|
|
2,400 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
9. Monarch Commerce Center Bldg 3
|
|
Miramar, FL |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
37,447 |
|
|
|
2,800 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
10. Dulles Commerce Center Bldg 150
|
|
Dulles, VA |
|
Seefried Properties |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
72,600 |
|
|
|
6,300 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
11. Dulles Commerce Center Bldg 200
|
|
Dulles, VA |
|
Seefried Properties |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
97,232 |
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
12. AMB Horizon Creek Bldg 400
|
|
Atlanta, GA |
|
Seefried Properties |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
204,256 |
|
|
|
9,100 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
13. AMB Ohta Distribution Center
|
|
Tokyo, Japan |
|
AMB Blackpine |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
789,965 |
|
|
|
173,300 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
14. Singapore Airport Logistics Center Bldg 2(4)
|
|
Changi Airport, Singapore |
|
Boustead Projects PTE |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
254,267 |
|
|
|
12,000 |
|
|
|
50 |
% |
15. AMB Amagasaki Distribution Center
|
|
Osaka, Japan |
|
AMB Blackpine |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
973,029 |
|
|
|
94,100 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
16. AMB Layline Distribution Center(3)
|
|
Torrance, CA |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
298,000 |
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
17. AMB Redlands Parcel 1
|
|
Redlands, CA |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
699,350 |
|
|
|
24,800 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
18. Nash Logistics Center(4)
|
|
El Segundo, CA |
|
IAC |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
12,500 |
|
|
|
50 |
% |
19. Spinnaker Logistics(3)
|
|
Redondo Beach, CA |
|
IAC |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
279,431 |
|
|
|
30,900 |
|
|
|
39 |
% |
20. Beacon Lakes Bldg 6
|
|
Miami, FL |
|
Codina |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
206,464 |
|
|
|
12,300 |
|
|
|
79 |
% |
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
Estimated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square | |
|
Total | |
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
Feet at | |
|
Investment | |
|
Ownership | |
Projects |
|
Location |
|
Developer |
|
Stabilization | |
|
Stabilization | |
|
(000s)(1) | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
21. Northfield Bldg 700
|
|
Dallas, TX |
|
Seefried Properties |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
108,640 |
|
|
|
6,300 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
22. Agave Bldg 4
|
|
Mexico City, Mexico |
|
G. Accion |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
217,514 |
|
|
|
13,600 |
|
|
|
98 |
% |
23. AMB Fokker Logistics Center 1
|
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands |
|
Delta Group |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
236,238 |
|
|
|
27,100 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
24. AMB Annagem Distribution Centre
|
|
Toronto, Canada |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
194,330 |
|
|
|
12,800 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
25. AMB Milton 401 Business Park Bldg 1
|
|
Toronto, Canada |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
373,245 |
|
|
|
19,300 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
26. Beacon Lakes Bldg 10
|
|
Miami, FL |
|
Codina |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
192,476 |
|
|
|
11,500 |
|
|
|
79 |
% |
27. Beacon Lakes Village Phase 1 Bldg 2E
|
|
Miami, FL |
|
Codina |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
52,918 |
|
|
|
5,700 |
|
|
|
79 |
% |
28. Platinum Triangle Land(6)
|
|
Anaheim, CA |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,200 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
29. AMB Kashiwa DC-1
|
|
Kashiwa, Japan |
|
AMB Blackpine |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
221,477 |
|
|
|
23,900 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
30. Highway 17 55 Madison Street
|
|
Carlstadt, NJ |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
150,446 |
|
|
|
12,000 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2006 Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,039,813 |
|
|
$ |
702,200 |
|
|
|
90 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased or Under Contract For Sale/ Funded-to-date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50 |
% |
|
$ |
592,100 |
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Estimated Stabilized Yield(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
2007 Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31. AMB Pearson Logistics Centre 1-Bldg 200
|
|
Toronto, Canada |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
205,518 |
|
|
$ |
14,400 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
32. AMB Isle dAbeau Logistics Bldg C
|
|
Lyon, France |
|
GEPRIM |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
277,817 |
|
|
|
18,900 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
33. AMB Turnberry Distribution VI
|
|
Roselle, IL |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
179,400 |
|
|
|
10,400 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
34. AMB Frankfurt Logistics Center 556 Phase II
|
|
Frankfurt, Germany |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
102,031 |
|
|
|
13,400 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
35. AMB Pearson Logistics Centre Bldg 100
|
|
Toronto, Canada |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
446,338 |
|
|
|
28,000 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
36. AMB Horizon Creek Bldg 300
|
|
Atlanta, GA |
|
Seefried Properties |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
190,923 |
|
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
37. AMB Gonesse Distribution Center
|
|
Gonesse, France |
|
GEPRIM |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
590,088 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
38. Agave Bldg 2
|
|
Mexico City, Mexico |
|
G. Accion |
|
|
Q2 |
|
|
|
259,473 |
|
|
|
14,800 |
|
|
|
98 |
% |
39. AMB Douglassingel Distribution Center
|
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands |
|
Austin |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
148,994 |
|
|
|
20,200 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
Estimated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square | |
|
Total | |
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
Feet at | |
|
Investment | |
|
Ownership | |
Projects |
|
Location |
|
Developer |
|
Stabilization | |
|
Stabilization | |
|
(000s)(1) | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
40. AMB Fokker Logistics Center 2 Bldg 1
|
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands |
|
Delta Group |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
118,375 |
|
|
|
14,400 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
41. AMB DFW Logistics Center 1
|
|
Dallas, TX |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
113,640 |
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
42. AMB Des Plaines Logistics Center
|
|
Des Plaines, IL |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
125,080 |
|
|
|
12,400 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
43. AMB Port of Hamburg 1
|
|
Hamburg, Germany |
|
BUSS Ports + Logistics |
|
|
Q3 |
|
|
|
403,862 |
|
|
|
33,100 |
|
|
|
94 |
% |
44. Civic Center Corporate Park
|
|
Torrance, CA |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q4 |
|
|
|
161,785 |
|
|
|
25,900 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2007 Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,323,324 |
|
|
$ |
270,300 |
|
|
|
96 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased or Under Contract
For Sale/ Funded-to-date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
$ |
56,700 |
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Estimated Stabilized Yield(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
2008 Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45. AMB Valley Distribution Center
|
|
Auburn , WA |
|
AMB |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
766,245 |
|
|
$ |
42,700 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
46. AMB Barajas Logistics Park
|
|
Madrid, Spain |
|
Codina Torimbia |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
452,841 |
|
|
|
32,500 |
|
|
|
80 |
% |
47. AMB Fokker Logistics Center 3
|
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands |
|
Delta Group |
|
|
Q1 |
|
|
|
313,229 |
|
|
|
38,900 |
|
|
|
50 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2008 Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,532,315 |
|
|
$ |
114,100 |
|
|
|
77 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased or Under Contract For Sale/ Funded-to-date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
$ |
32,600 |
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Estimated Stabilized Yield(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Total Scheduled Deliveries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,895,452 |
|
|
$ |
1,086,600 |
|
|
|
90 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased or Under Contract For Sale/ Funded-to-date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
$ |
681,400 |
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Estimated Stabilized Yield(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents total estimated cost of development, renovation or
expansion, including initial acquisition costs, third-party
developer earnouts and associated carry costs. The estimates are
based on our current estimates and forecasts and are subject to
change. Excludes 1,307 acres of land held for future
development or sale representing a potential 24.3 million
square feet and costs totaling $349.5 million.
Non-U.S. dollar
investments are translated to U.S. dollars using the
exchange rate at December 31, 2005. |
|
(2) |
Our share of amounts funded to date for 2006, 2007 and 2008
deliveries was $527.2 million, $51.4 million and
$23.7 million, respectively, for a total of
$602.3 million. |
|
(3) |
Represents a renovation project. |
|
(4) |
Represents projects in unconsolidated joint ventures. |
|
(5) |
Yields exclude value-added conversion projects and are
calculated on an after-tax basis for international projects. |
|
(6) |
Represents a value-added conversion project. |
30
The following table sets forth completed development projects
that we intend to either sell or contribute to co-investment
funds as of December 31, 2005:
Completed Development Projects Available for Sale or
Contribution(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
Total | |
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
Square Feet at | |
|
Investment | |
|
Ownership | |
Projects(1) |
|
Market | |
|
Completion | |
|
(000s)(3) | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
1. Encino Distribution Center
|
|
|
Mexico City, Mexico |
|
|
|
580,669 |
|
|
$ |
32,800 |
|
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Available for Sale or Contribution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
580,669 |
|
|
$ |
32,800 |
|
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded-to-date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
32,800 |
(4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents
build-to-suit and
speculative development or redevelopment. |
|
(2) |
We intend to sell these properties or contribute them into a
co-investment joint venture within two years of completion.
Non-U.S. dollar
investments are translated to U.S. dollars using the
exchange rate at December 31, 2005. |
|
(3) |
Represents total estimated cost of renovation, expansion or
development, including initial acquisition cost, carry and
partner earnouts. The estimates are based on current estimates
and forecasts and are subject to change. |
|
(4) |
Our share of amounts funded as of December 31, 2005 was
$32.1 million. |
Properties held through Joint Ventures, Limited Liability
Companies and Partnerships
|
|
|
Consolidated Joint Ventures: |
As of December 31, 2005, we held interests in joint
ventures, limited liability companies and partnerships with
institutional investors and other third parties, which we
consolidate in our financial statements. Such investments are
consolidated because we own a majority interest or, as general
partner, exercise significant control over major operating
decisions such as acquisition or disposition decisions, approval
of budgets, selection of property managers and changes in
financing. Under the agreements governing the joint ventures, we
and the other party to the joint venture may be required to make
additional capital contributions and, subject to certain
limitations, the joint ventures may incur additional debt. Such
agreements also impose certain restrictions on the transfer of
joint venture interests by us or the other party to the joint
venture and typically provide certain rights to us or the other
party to the joint venture to sell our or their interest in the
joint venture to the joint venture or to the other joint-venture
partner on terms specified in the agreement. In addition, under
certain circumstances, many of the joint ventures include
buy/sell provisions. See Part IV, Item 15: Note 9
of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
for additional details.
31
The tables that follow summarize our consolidated joint ventures
as of December 31, 2005:
Co-investment Consolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JV Partners | |
|
|
Ownership | |
|
Number of | |
|
Square | |
|
Gross Book | |
|
Property | |
|
Share of | |
Joint Ventures |
|
Percentage | |
|
Buildings | |
|
Feet(1) | |
|
Value(2) | |
|
Debt | |
|
Debt(3) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) | |
Co-Investment Operating Joint Ventures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Erie(4)
|
|
|
50 |
% |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
1,921,432 |
|
|
$ |
99,722 |
|
|
$ |
40,710 |
|
|
$ |
20,354 |
|
|
AMB Partners II(6)
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
8,618,386 |
|
|
|
557,461 |
|
|
|
285,668 |
|
|
|
229,017 |
|
|
AMB-SGP(7)
|
|
|
50 |
% |
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
8,287,007 |
|
|
|
436,713 |
|
|
|
239,944 |
|
|
|
119,666 |
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II(5)
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
7,964,444 |
|
|
|
498,161 |
|
|
|
245,056 |
|
|
|
193,486 |
|
|
AMB-AMS(8)
|
|
|
39 |
% |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
1,891,934 |
|
|
|
115,852 |
|
|
|
49,159 |
|
|
|
30,130 |
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III(9)
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
7,219,725 |
|
|
|
743,322 |
|
|
|
421,290 |
|
|
|
333,156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Co-Investment Operating Joint Ventures
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
35,902,928 |
|
|
|
2,451,231 |
|
|
|
1,281,827 |
|
|
|
925,809 |
|
Co-Investment Development Joint Ventures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB Partners II(6)
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
478,880 |
|
|
|
34,654 |
|
|
|
6,016 |
|
|
|
4,765 |
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II(5)
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
108,640 |
|
|
|
9,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMB-AMS(8)
|
|
|
39 |
% |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
279,431 |
|
|
|
30,155 |
|
|
|
13,984 |
|
|
|
8,597 |
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III(9)
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
179,400 |
|
|
|
6,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Co-Investment Development Joint Ventures
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1,046,351 |
|
|
|
80,453 |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
13,362 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Co-Investment Consolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
36,949,279 |
|
|
$ |
2,531,684 |
|
|
$ |
1,301,827 |
|
|
$ |
939,171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
For development properties, this represents estimated square
feet at completion of development for committed phases of
development and renovation projects. |
|
(2) |
Represents the book value of the property (before accumulated
depreciation) owned by the joint venture entity and excludes net
other assets as of December 31, 2005. Development book
values include uncommitted land. |
|
(3) |
JV partners share of debt is defined as total debt less
our share of total debt See footnote 1 to the
Capitalization Ratios table contained in Part II,
Item 7: Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operation
Liquidity and Capital Resources for a discussion of why we
believe our share of total debt is a useful supplemental measure
for our management and investors, of ways to use this measure
when assessing our financial performance, the limitations of the
measure as a measurement tool, and for a reconciliation of our
share of total debt to total consolidated debt, a GAAP financial
measure. |
|
(4) |
AMB/ Erie, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 1998
with the Erie Insurance Company and certain related entities. |
|
(5) |
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P. is a co-investment
partnership formed in 2001 with institutional investors, which
invest through a private real estate investment trust. |
32
|
|
(6) |
AMB Partners II, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed
in 2001 with the City and County of San Francisco
Employees Retirement System. |
|
(7) |
AMB-SGP, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2001 with
Industrial JV Pte. Ltd., a subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte.
Ltd., a real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of
Singapore Investment Corporation. |
|
(8) |
AMB-AMS, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with
three Dutch pension funds advised by Mn Services NV. |
|
(9) |
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. is an open-ended
co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with institutional
investors, which invest through a private real estate investment
trust. |
Other Consolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our | |
|
|
|
Gross | |
|
|
|
JV Partners | |
|
|
|
|
Ownership | |
|
Square | |
|
Book | |
|
Property | |
|
Share of | |
Properties |
|
Market | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Feet | |
|
Value(1) | |
|
Debt | |
|
Debt(2) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) | |
Other Industrial Operating Joint Ventures
|
|
|
Various |
|
|
|
92 |
% |
|
|
2,956,762 |
|
|
$ |
244,787 |
|
|
$ |
42,688 |
|
|
$ |
3,329 |
|
Other Industrial Development Joint Ventures
|
|
|
Various |
|
|
|
73 |
% |
|
|
1,834,483 |
|
|
|
133,903 |
|
|
|
42,975 |
|
|
|
18,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Industrial Consolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86 |
% |
|
|
4,791,245 |
|
|
$ |
378,690 |
|
|
$ |
85,663 |
|
|
$ |
21,632 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents the book value of the property (before accumulated
depreciation) owned by the joint venture entity and excludes net
other assets as of December 31, 2005. Development book
values include uncommitted land. |
|
(2) |
JV Partners Share of Debt is defined as total debt less
our share of total debt. See footnote 1 to the
Capitalization Ratios table contained in Part II,
Item 7: Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operation
Liquidity and Capital Resources for a discussion of why we
believe our share of total debt is a useful supplemental measure
for our management and investors, of ways to use this measure
when assessing our financial performance, the limitations of the
measure as a measurement tool, and for a reconciliation of our
share of total debt to total consolidated debt, a GAAP financial
measure. |
|
|
|
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures, Mortgage and Loan Receivables
and Other Investments: |
As of December 31, 2005, we held interests in 12 equity
investment joint ventures that are not consolidated in our
financial statements. The management and control over
significant aspects of these investments are held by the
third-party joint-venture partners and we are not the primary
beneficiary for the investments that meet the variable-interest
entity consolidation criteria under FASB Interpretation
No. 46R, Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities. In addition, as of December 31, 2005, we held
mortgage investments, from which we receive interest income.
33
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures,
Mortgage Investments and Other Investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our Net | |
|
Our | |
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
Square | |
|
Equity | |
|
Ownership | |
|
Share of | |
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures |
|
Market | |
|
Feet | |
|
Investment | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Debt(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) | |
Co-Investment Joint Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. AMB-SGP Mexico(2)
|
|
|
Various, Mexico |
|
|
|
1,892,407 |
|
|
$ |
16,218 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
12,809 |
|
|
2. AMB Japan Fund I(3)
|
|
|
Various, Japan |
|
|
|
1,201,698 |
|
|
|
10,112 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
14,667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Co-Investment Joint Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,094,105 |
|
|
|
26,330 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
27,476 |
|
Other Industrial Operating Joint Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,295,507 |
|
|
|
41,520 |
|
|
|
52 |
% |
|
|
91,847 |
|
Other Industrial Development Joint Ventures(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
719,267 |
|
|
|
6,176 |
|
|
|
50 |
% |
|
|
12,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,108,879 |
|
|
$ |
74,026 |
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
$ |
131,448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage | |
|
|
|
|
Mortgage and Loan Receivables |
|
Market | |
|
Maturity | |
|
Receivable(6) | |
|
Rate | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
1. Pier 1(5)
|
|
|
SF Bay Area |
|
|
|
May 2026 |
|
|
$ |
12,821 |
|
|
|
13.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
2. G.Accion
|
|
|
Various |
|
|
|
November 2006 |
|
|
|
8,800 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
21,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our | |
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net | |
|
Ownership | |
|
Share of | |
Other Investments |
|
Market | |
|
Property Type | |
|
Investment | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Debt(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
1. Park One
|
|
|
Los Angeles |
|
|
|
Parking Lot |
|
|
$ |
75,498 |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
$ |
|
|
2. G.Accion(7)
|
|
|
Various |
|
|
|
Various |
|
|
|
44,627 |
|
|
|
39% |
|
|
|
29,672 |
|
3. IAT Air Cargo Facilities Income Fund(8)
|
|
|
Canada |
|
|
|
Industrial |
|
|
|
2,644 |
|
|
|
5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
122,769 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
29,672 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
See footnote 1 to the Capitalization Ratios table contained
in Part II, Item 7: Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operation Liquidity and Capital Resources for
a discussion of why we believe our share of total debt is a
useful supplemental measure for our management and investors, of
ways to use this measure when assessing our financial
performance, the limitations of the measure as a measurement
tool, and for a reconciliation of our share of total debt to
total consolidated debt, a GAAP financial measure. |
|
(2) |
AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC is an unconsolidated co-investment joint
venture formed in 2004 with Industrial (Mexico) JV Pte. Ltd., a
real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of Singapore
Investment Corporation. Includes $7.3 million of
shareholder loans outstanding at December 31, 2005 between
us and the co-investment partnership and its subsidiaries. |
|
(3) |
AMB Japan Fund I is a co-investment partnership formed in
2005 with 13 institutional investors as limited partners. |
|
(4) |
Square feet for development joint ventures represents estimated
square feet at completion of development project. |
|
(5) |
AMB has an 0.1% unconsolidated equity interest (with a 33%
economic interest) in this property and also has an option to
purchase the remaining equity interest beginning January 1,
2007 and expiring December 31, 2009. |
34
|
|
(6) |
We hold inter-company loans that we eliminate in consolidation. |
|
(7) |
We also have a 39% unconsolidated equity interest in G. Accion,
a Mexican real estate company. G. Accion provides management and
development services for industrial, retail, residential and
office properties in Mexico. |
|
(8) |
We also have an approximate 5% equity interest in IAT Air Cargo
Facilities Income Fund, a public Canadian real estate income
trust. |
Secured Debt
As of December 31, 2005, we had $1.9 billion of
secured indebtedness, net of unamortized premiums, secured by
deeds of trust or mortgages. As of December 31, 2005, the
total gross consolidated investment value of those properties
securing the debt was $3.6 billion. Of the
$1.9 billion of secured indebtedness, $1.4 billion was
joint venture debt secured by properties with a gross investment
value of $2.5 billion. For additional details, see
Part II, Item 7: Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Liquidity and Capital Resources and
Part IV, Item 15: Note 6 of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in this report.
We believe that as of December 31, 2005, the fair value of
the properties securing the respective obligations in each case
exceeded the principal amount of the outstanding obligations.
|
|
Item 3. |
Legal Proceedings |
As of December 31, 2005, there were no pending legal
proceedings to which we were a party or of which any of our
properties was the subject, the adverse determination of which
we anticipate would have a material adverse effect upon our
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
|
|
Item 4. |
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
None.
35
PART II
|
|
Item 5. |
Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related
Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities |
Our common stock began trading on the New York Stock Exchange on
November 21, 1997 under the symbol AMB. As of
March 1, 2006, there were approximately 481 holders of
record of our common stock (excluding shares held through The
Depository Trust Company, as nominee). Set forth below are the
high and low sales prices per share of our common stock, as
reported on the NYSE composite tape, and the distribution per
share paid or payable by us during the period from
January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
Dividend | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$ |
37.21 |
|
|
$ |
32.77 |
|
|
$ |
0.425 |
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
|
37.30 |
|
|
|
28.15 |
|
|
|
0.425 |
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
|
38.15 |
|
|
|
33.85 |
|
|
|
0.425 |
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
41.35 |
|
|
|
35.85 |
|
|
|
0.425 |
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$ |
41.45 |
|
|
$ |
36.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.440 |
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
|
44.00 |
|
|
|
36.38 |
|
|
|
0.440 |
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
|
46.46 |
|
|
|
41.85 |
|
|
|
0.440 |
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
50.25 |
|
|
|
40.92 |
|
|
|
0.440 |
|
The payment of dividends and other distributions by us is at the
discretion of our board of directors and depends on numerous
factors, including our cash flow, financial condition and
capital requirements, REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue
Code and other factors.
36
|
|
Item 6. |
Selected Financial Data |
SELECTED COMPANY FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA(1)
The following table sets forth selected consolidated historical
financial and other data for AMB Property Corporation on a
historical basis as of and for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Operating Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$ |
676,149 |
|
|
$ |
592,429 |
|
|
$ |
517,002 |
|
|
$ |
497,453 |
|
|
$ |
450,478 |
|
|
Income before minority interests and discontinued operations
|
|
|
210,299 |
|
|
|
118,871 |
|
|
|
115,041 |
|
|
|
118,831 |
|
|
|
154,241 |
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
|
135,255 |
|
|
|
65,593 |
|
|
|
58,599 |
|
|
|
74,802 |
|
|
|
104,564 |
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
122,552 |
|
|
|
59,878 |
|
|
|
70,529 |
|
|
|
46,317 |
|
|
|
31,636 |
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
257,807 |
|
|
|
125,471 |
|
|
|
129,128 |
|
|
|
121,119 |
|
|
|
136,200 |
|
|
Net income available to common stockholders
|
|
|
250,419 |
|
|
|
118,340 |
|
|
|
116,716 |
|
|
|
113,035 |
|
|
|
120,100 |
|
|
Income from continuing operations per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic(2)
|
|
|
1.52 |
|
|
|
0.71 |
|
|
|
0.57 |
|
|
|
0.80 |
|
|
|
1.05 |
|
|
|
Diluted(2)
|
|
|
1.46 |
|
|
|
0.69 |
|
|
|
0.56 |
|
|
|
0.78 |
|
|
|
1.04 |
|
|
Income from discontinued operations per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic(2)
|
|
|
1.46 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
|
|
0.87 |
|
|
|
0.56 |
|
|
|
0.38 |
|
|
|
Diluted(2)
|
|
|
1.39 |
|
|
|
0.70 |
|
|
|
0.85 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
|
|
0.37 |
|
|
Net income available to common stockholders per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic(2)
|
|
|
2.98 |
|
|
|
1.44 |
|
|
|
1.44 |
|
|
|
1.36 |
|
|
|
1.43 |
|
|
|
Diluted(2)
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
1.39 |
|
|
|
1.41 |
|
|
|
1.33 |
|
|
|
1.41 |
|
|
Dividends declared per common share
|
|
|
1.76 |
|
|
|
1.70 |
|
|
|
1.66 |
|
|
|
1.64 |
|
|
|
1.58 |
|
Other Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations
|
|
$ |
254,363 |
|
|
$ |
207,314 |
|
|
$ |
186,666 |
|
|
$ |
215,194 |
|
|
$ |
186,707 |
|
|
Funds from operations per common share and unit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
2.87 |
|
|
|
2.39 |
|
|
|
2.17 |
|
|
|
2.44 |
|
|
|
2.09 |
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
|
2.40 |
|
|
|
2.07 |
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
295,815 |
|
|
|
297,349 |
|
|
|
269,808 |
|
|
|
297,723 |
|
|
|
293,903 |
|
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(60,407 |
) |
|
|
(731,402 |
) |
|
|
(346,275 |
) |
|
|
(253,312 |
) |
|
|
(368,493 |
) |
|
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(101,856 |
) |
|
|
409,705 |
|
|
|
112,022 |
|
|
|
(28,150 |
) |
|
|
127,303 |
|
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments in real estate at cost
|
|
$ |
6,798,294 |
|
|
$ |
6,526,144 |
|
|
$ |
5,491,707 |
|
|
$ |
4,922,782 |
|
|
$ |
4,527,511 |
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
6,802,739 |
|
|
|
6,386,943 |
|
|
|
5,409,559 |
|
|
|
4,983,629 |
|
|
|
4,763,614 |
|
|
Total consolidated debt
|
|
|
3,401,561 |
|
|
|
3,257,191 |
|
|
|
2,574,257 |
|
|
|
2,235,361 |
|
|
|
2,143,714 |
|
|
Our share of total debt(3)
|
|
|
2,601,878 |
|
|
|
2,395,046 |
|
|
|
1,954,314 |
|
|
|
1,691,737 |
|
|
|
1,655,386 |
|
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,916,299 |
|
|
|
1,671,140 |
|
|
|
1,657,137 |
|
|
|
1,676,079 |
|
|
|
1,747,389 |
|
37
|
|
(1) |
Certain items in the consolidated financial statements for prior
periods have been reclassified to conform with current
classifications with no effect on net income or
stockholders equity. |
|
(2) |
Basic and diluted net income per weighted average share equals
the net income available to common stockholders divided by
84,048,936 and 87,873,399 shares, respectively, for 2005;
82,133,627 and 85,368,626 shares, respectively, for 2004;
81,096,062 and 82,852,528 shares, respectively, for 2003;
83,310,885 and 84,795,987 shares, respectively, for 2002;
84,174,644 and 85,214,066 shares, respectively, for 2001. |
|
(3) |
Our share of total debt is the pro rata portion of the total
debt based on our percentage of equity interest in each of the
consolidated ventures holding the debt. We believe that our
share of total debt is a meaningful supplemental measure, which
enables both management and investors to analyze our leverage
and to compare our leverage to that of other companies. In
addition, it allows for a more meaningful comparison of our debt
to that of other companies that do not consolidate their joint
ventures. Our share of total debt is not intended to reflect our
actual liability should there be a default under any or all of
such loans or a liquidation of the joint ventures. For a
reconciliation of our share of total debt to total consolidated
debt, a GAAP financial measure, please see the table of debt
maturities and capitalization in Part II, Item 7:
Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Liquidity and Capital
Resources Capital Resources. |
38
|
|
Item 7. |
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations |
GENERAL
You should read the following discussion and analysis of our
consolidated financial condition and results of operations in
conjunction with the notes to consolidated financial
statements.
We commenced operations as a fully integrated real estate
company effective with the completion of our initial public
offering on November 26, 1997, and elected to be taxed as a
real estate investment trust under Sections 856 through 860
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with our initial tax return
for the year ended December 31, 1997. AMB Property
Corporation and AMB Property, L.P. were formed shortly before
the consummation of our initial public offering.
Managements Overview
The primary source of our revenue and earnings is rent received
from customers under long-term (generally three to ten years)
operating leases at our properties, including reimbursements
from customers for certain operating costs, and from partnership
distributions and fees from our private capital business. We
also produce earnings from the strategic disposition of
operating assets, from the disposition of projects in our
development-for-sale or contribution program and from
contributions of properties to our co-investment joint ventures.
Our long-term growth is driven by our ability to maintain and
increase occupancy rates or increase rental rates at our
properties, and by our ability to continue to acquire and
develop new properties.
National industrial markets improved during 2005 when compared
with market conditions in 2004. According to Torto Wheaton
Research, the positive trend in demand began in the second
quarter of 2004 and reversed 14 prior quarters of negatively
trending, or rising, space availability. We believe the
protracted period of rising availability created a difficult
national leasing environment which is now improving,
particularly in large industrial property markets tied to global
trade. During the three-and-a-half year period of negatively
trending industrial space availability, investor demand for
industrial property (as supported by our observation of strong
national sales volumes and declining acquisition capitalization
rates) remained consistently strong. We believe we capitalized
on the demand for acquisition property by accelerating the
repositioning of our portfolio through the disposition of
non-core properties. We plan to continue selling selected assets
on an opportunistic basis but believe we have substantially
achieved our repositioning goals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Hub and | |
|
Total Other | |
|
Total/Weighted | |
Property Data |
|
Gateway Markets(1) | |
|
Markets(2) | |
|
Average | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
For the year ended December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of total rentable square feet
|
|
|
74.9 |
% |
|
|
25.1 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
Occupancy percentage at year end
|
|
|
96.2 |
% |
|
|
94.6 |
% |
|
|
95.8 |
% |
|
Same space square footage leased
|
|
|
11,032,482 |
|
|
|
2,574,944 |
|
|
|
13,607,426 |
|
|
Rent decreases on renewals and rollovers
|
|
|
(10.8 |
)% |
|
|
(4.3 |
)% |
|
|
(9.7 |
)% |
For the year ended December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of total rentable square feet
|
|
|
74.1 |
% |
|
|
25.9 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
Occupancy percentage at year end
|
|
|
95.0 |
% |
|
|
94.2 |
% |
|
|
94.8 |
% |
|
Same space square footage leased
|
|
|
13,932,213 |
|
|
|
3,553,563 |
|
|
|
17,485,776 |
|
|
Rent decreases on renewals and rollovers
|
|
|
(15.3 |
)% |
|
|
(3.6 |
)% |
|
|
(13.2 |
)% |
|
|
(1) |
Our U.S. hub and gateway markets include on-tarmac and
Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas/ Fort Worth, Los Angeles,
Northern New Jersey/ New York City, the San Francisco Bay
Area, Miami and Seattle. |
|
(2) |
Our total other markets include other domestic target markets,
other non-target markets, international target markets and
retail. |
We observed two positive trends nationally for industrial real
estate during the year ended December 31, 2005, supported
by data provided by Torto Wheaton Research. First, national
industrial space availability
39
declined 130 basis points during the year from 10.9% to
9.6%. The availability rate has fallen for seven consecutive
quarters, reversing the trend of the prior 14 quarters in which
national industrial space availability increased on
average 36 basis points per quarter. Second, national
absorption of industrial space, defined as the net change in
occupied stock as measured by square feet of completions less
the change in available square feet, totaled approximately
281 million square feet in the year ended December 31,
2005, substantially exceeding the 183 million square feet
of space absorbed in 2004 and well above the previous ten-year
historical average of 139 million square feet of space
absorbed annually.
In this improved environment, our industrial portfolios
occupancy levels increased to 95.8% at December 31, 2005
from 94.8% at December 31, 2004, which we believe reflects
higher levels of demand for industrial space generally and in
our portfolio specifically. During the year ended
December 31, 2005, our lease expirations totaled
approximately 17.6 million square feet while commencements
of new or renewed leases totaled approximately 21.3 million
square feet, resulting in an increase in our occupancy level of
approximately 100 basis points.
Rental rates on industrial renewals and rollovers in our
portfolio decreased 9.7% during the year ended December 31,
2005 as leases were entered into or renewed at rates consistent
with what we believe to be current market levels. We believe
this decline in rents on lease renewals and rollovers reflects
trends in national industrial space availability. We believe
that relatively high levels of national industrial space
availability have caused market rents for industrial properties
to decline between 10% and 20% from their peak levels in 2001
based on our research data; 42.5% of the space that rolled over
in our portfolio in 2005 had commenced between 1999 and 2001.
Rental rates in our portfolio declined at successively lower
rates in each of the last three quarters during 2005, which we
believe indicates a stabilization of market rental rate levels.
While the level of rental rate reduction varied by market, we
achieved occupancy levels in our portfolio 540 basis points
in excess of the national industrial market, as determined by
Torto Wheaton Research, by pricing lease renewals and new leases
with sensitivity to local market conditions. During periods of
decreasing or stabilizing rental rates, we strove to sign leases
with shorter terms to prevent locking in lower rent levels for
long periods and to be prepared to sign new, longer-term leases
during periods of growing rental rates. When we sign leases of
shorter duration, we attempt to limit overall leasing costs and
capital expenditures by offering different grades of tenant
improvement packages, appropriate to the lease term.
We expect development to be a significant driver of our earnings
growth as we expand our land and development pipeline, and
contribute completed development projects into our co-investment
program and recognize development profits. We believe that
development, renovation and expansion of well-located,
high-quality industrial
properties should generally continue to provide us with
attractive investment opportunities at a higher rate of return
than we may obtain from the purchase of existing properties. We
believe that our development opportunities in Mexico and Japan
are particularly attractive given the current lack of supply of
modern industrial distribution facilities in the major
metropolitan markets of these countries. Globally, we have
increased our development pipeline from $106.8 million at
the end of 2002 to approximately $1.1 billion at
December 31, 2005. In addition to our committed development
pipeline, we hold a total of 1,307 acres for future
development or sale. We believe these 1,307 acres of land
could support approximately 24.3 million square feet of
future development.
Going forward, we believe that our co-investment program with
private-capital investors will continue to serve as a
significant source of revenues and capital for acquisitions.
Through these co-investment joint ventures, we typically earn
acquisition and development fees, asset management fees and
priority distributions, as well as promoted interests and
incentive distributions based on the performance of the
co-investment joint ventures; however, we can not assure you
that we will continue to do so. Through contribution of
development properties to our co-investment joint ventures, we
expect to recognize value creation from our development
pipeline. As of December 31, 2005, we owned approximately
54.8 million square feet of our properties (47.7% of the
total operating and development portfolio) through our
consolidated and unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures. We
may make additional investments through these co-investment
joint ventures or new joint ventures in the future and presently
plan to do so.
40
By the end of 2007, we plan to have approximately 15% of our
operating portfolio (based on both consolidated and
unconsolidated annualized base rent) invested in international
markets. Our North American target markets outside of the United
States currently include Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey and
Toronto. Our European target markets currently include
Amsterdam, Brussels, Frankfurt, Hamburg, London, Lyon, Madrid,
Milan and Paris. Our Asian target markets currently include
Beijing, Busan, Nagoya, Osaka, the Pearl River Delta, Seoul,
Shanghai, Singapore and Tokyo. It is possible that our target
markets will change over time to reflect experience, market
opportunities, customer needs and changes in global distribution
patterns. As of December 31, 2005, our international
operating properties comprised 7.1% of our annualized base
rents, including properties owned by our unconsolidated joint
ventures.
To maintain our qualification as a real estate investment trust,
we must pay dividends to our stockholders aggregating annually
at least 90% of our taxable income. As a result, we cannot rely
on retained earnings to fund our on-going operations to the same
extent that other corporations that are not real estate
investment trusts can. We must continue to raise capital in both
the debt and equity markets to fund our working capital needs,
acquisitions and developments. See Liquidity and Capital
Resources for a complete discussion of the sources of our
capital.
Summary of Key Transactions in 2005
During the year ended December 31, 2005, we completed the
following significant capital deployment transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
Acquired 41 buildings in North America, Europe and Asia,
aggregating approximately 6.9 million square feet, for
$555.0 million, including two buildings that were acquired
by two of our unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures; |
|
|
|
Acquired an approximate 43% unconsolidated equity interest in
G.Accion, one of Mexicos largest real estate companies for
$46.1 million; |
|
|
|
Committed to 30 development projects in North America, Europe
and Asia totaling 7.0 million square feet with an estimated
total investment of approximately $522.4 million; |
|
|
|
Acquired 341 acres of land for industrial warehouse
development in North America, Europe and Asia for approximately
$193.9 million; |
|
|
|
Sold five land parcels and five development projects available
for sale, aggregating approximately 0.9 million square
feet, for an aggregate price of approximately
$155.2 million; and |
|
|
|
Divested ourselves of 142 industrial buildings and one retail
center aggregating approximately 9.3 million square feet,
for an aggregate price of approximately $926.6 million.
Included in these divestitures is the sale of the assets of AMB
Alliance Fund I for $618.5 million. The multi-investor
fund owned 100 buildings totaling approximately 5.8 million
square feet. We received cash and a distribution of an on-tarmac
property, AMB DFW Air Cargo Center I, in exchange for our
21% interest in the fund. We also received a net incentive
distribution of approximately $26.4 million in cash. |
See Part IV, Item 15: Notes 3 and 4 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a
more detailed discussion of our acquisition, development and
disposition activity.
During the year ended December 31, 2005, we completed the
following significant capital markets and other financing
transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
Formed an unconsolidated co-investment joint venture, AMB Japan
Fund I, L.P., with planned investment of capacity of
approximately 247.3 billion Yen ($2.1 billion
U.S. dollars, using exchange rate at December 31,
2005). We contributed $106.9 million (using exchange rate
in effect at contribution) of operating properties to the fund; |
|
|
|
Contributed an industrial property for $23.6 million to
AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, an unconsolidated co-investment joint
venture; |
41
|
|
|
|
|
Obtained $69.7 million of debt (using exchange rates in
effect at applicable quarter end dates) with a weighted average
interest rate of 3.8% for international acquisitions; |
|
|
|
Assumed $62.8 million of debt for our consolidated
co-investment joint ventures at a weighted average interest rate
of 7.4%; |
|
|
|
Obtained long-term secured debt financings for our co-investment
joint ventures of $139.7 million with a weighted average
rate of 5.4%; |
|
|
|
Exchanged $100.0 million of 6.9% Reset Put Securities for
approximately $112.5 million of 5.094% Notes due 2015; |
|
|
|
Raised $72.3 million in net proceeds from the issuance of
$75.0 million of our 7.0% Series O Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock; and |
|
|
|
Issued $175.0 million of unsecured senior debt securities
due 2010. |
See Part IV, Item 15: Notes 6, 9 and 11 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a
more detailed discussion of our capital markets transactions.
Critical Accounting Policies
Our discussion and analysis of financial condition and results
of operations is based on our consolidated financial statements,
which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the
U.S. (GAAP). The preparation of these financial
statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that
affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and
contingencies as of the date of the financial statements and the
reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting
periods. We evaluate our assumptions and estimates on an
on-going basis. We base our estimates on historical experience
and on various other assumptions that we believe to be
reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form
the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of
assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other
sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions. We believe the following
critical accounting policies affect our more significant
judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our
consolidated financial statements:
Investments in Real Estate. Investments in real estate
are stated at cost unless circumstances indicate that cost
cannot be recovered, in which case the carrying value of the
property is reduced to estimated fair value. We also record at
acquisition an intangible asset or liability for the value
attributable to above or below-market leases, in-place leases
and lease origination costs for all acquisitions. Carrying
values for financial reporting purposes are reviewed for
impairment on a property-by-property basis quarterly and
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the
carrying value of a property may not be recoverable. Impairment
is recognized when estimated expected future cash flows
(undiscounted and without interest charges) are less than the
carrying amount of the property. The estimation of expected
future net cash flows is inherently uncertain and relies on
assumptions regarding current and future market conditions and
the availability of capital. Examples of certain situations that
could affect future cash flows of a property may include, but
are not limited to: significant decreases in occupancy;
unforeseen bankruptcy, lease termination and move-out of a major
customer; or a significant decrease in annual base rents of that
property. If impairment analysis assumptions change, then an
adjustment to the carrying amount of our long-lived assets could
occur in the future period in which the assumptions change. To
the extent that a property is impaired, the excess of the
carrying amount of the property over its estimated fair value is
charged to earnings.
Revenue Recognition. We record rental revenue from
operating leases on a straight-line basis over the term of the
leases and maintain an allowance for estimated losses that may
result from the inability of our customers to make required
payments. If customers fail to make contractual lease payments
that are greater than our allowance for doubtful accounts,
security deposits and letters of credit, then we may have to
recognize additional doubtful account charges in future periods.
We monitor the liquidity and creditworthiness of our customers
on an on-going basis by reviewing their financial condition
periodically as appropriate. Each period we review our
outstanding accounts receivable, including straight-line rents,
for doubtful accounts and
42
provide allowances as needed. We also record lease termination
fees when a customer has executed a definitive termination
agreement with us and the payment of the termination fee is not
subject to any conditions that must be met or waived before the
fee is due to us. If a customer remains in the leased space
following the execution of a definitive termination agreement,
the applicable termination fees are deferred and recognized over
the term of such customers occupancy.
Property Dispositions. We report real estate dispositions
in three separate categories on our consolidated statements of
operations. First, when we divest a portion of our interests in
real estate entities or properties, gains from the sale
represent the interests acquired by third-party investors for
cash. Second, we dispose of value-added conversion projects and
build-to-suit and
speculative development projects for which we have not generated
material operating income prior to sale. The gain or loss
recognized from the disposition of these projects is reported
net of estimated taxes, when applicable. Lastly, beginning in
2002, SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, required us to separately
report as discontinued operations the historical operating
results attributable to operating properties sold and the
applicable gain or loss on the disposition of the properties.
The consolidated statements of operations for prior periods are
also adjusted to conform with this classification. There is no
impact on our previously reported consolidated financial
position, net income or cash flows. In all cases, gains and
losses are recognized using the full accrual method of
accounting. Gains relating to transactions which do not meet the
requirements of the full accrual method of accounting are
deferred and recognized when the full accrual method of
accounting criteria are met.
Joint Ventures. We hold interests in both consolidated
and unconsolidated joint ventures. We determine consolidation
based on standards set forth in EITF 96-16,
Investors Accounting for an Investee When the Investor
Has a Majority of the Voting Interest but the Minority
Shareholder or Shareholders Have Certain Approval or Veto
Rights, Statement of Position 78-9, Accounting for
Investments in Real Estate Ventures and FASB Interpretation
No. 46R, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities
FIN 46. Based on the guidance set forth in these
pronouncements, we consolidate certain joint venture investments
because we exercise significant control over major operating
decisions, such as approval of budgets, selection of property
managers, asset management, investment activity and changes in
financing. For joint ventures that are variable interest
entities as defined under FIN 46 where we are not the primary
beneficiaries, we do not consolidate the joint venture for
financial reporting purposes. For joint ventures where we do not
exercise significant control over major operating and management
decisions, but where we exercise significant influence, we use
the equity method of accounting and do not consolidate the joint
venture for financial reporting purposes.
In June 2005, the Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
issued EITF 04-5,
Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General
Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar
Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights. Under
this consensus, a sole general partner is presumed to control a
limited partnership (or similar entity) and should consolidate
that entity unless the limited partners possess kick-out rights
or other substantive participating rights as described in
EITF 96-16, Investors Accounting for an Investee
When the Investor has a Majority of the Voting Interest but the
Minority Shareholder or Shareholders Have Certain Approval or
Veto rights. As of June 29, 2005, this consensus was
effective immediately for all new or modified agreements, and
effective beginning in the first reporting period that ends
after December 15, 2005 for all existing agreements. We
adopted the consolidation requirements of this consensus in the
third quarter 2005 for all new or modified agreements and will
adopt the consensus for existing agreements in the first quarter
of 2006. There was not a material impact on our financial
position, results of operations or cash flows upon the adoption
of the consolidation requirements of this consensus for all new
or modified agreements. We do not believe that there will be a
material impact on our financial position, results of operations
or cash flows, upon adopting the consensus for existing
agreements.
Real Estate Investment Trust. As a real estate investment
trust, we generally will not be subject to corporate level
federal income taxes in the U.S. if we meet minimum
distribution, income, asset and shareholder tests. However, some
of our subsidiaries may be subject to federal and state taxes.
In addition, foreign entities may also be subject to the taxes
of the host country. An income tax allocation is required to be
estimated on our taxable income arising from our taxable REIT
subsidiaries and international entities. A deferred tax
component could arise based upon the differences in GAAP versus
tax income for items such as
43
depreciation and gain recognition. However, we believe deferred
tax is an immaterial component of our consolidated balance sheet.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The analysis below includes changes attributable to same store
growth, acquisitions, development activity and divestitures.
Same store properties are those that we owned during both the
current and prior year reporting periods, excluding development
properties stabilized after December 31, 2003 (generally
defined as properties that are 90% leased or properties for
which we have held a certificate of occupancy or where building
has been substantially complete for at least 12 months).
As of December 31, 2005, same store industrial properties
consisted of properties aggregating approximately
72.5 million square feet. The properties acquired during
2005 consisted of 41 buildings, aggregating approximately
6.9 million square feet. The properties acquired during
2004 consisted of 64 buildings, aggregating approximately
7.6 million square feet. During 2005, property divestitures
and contributions consisted of 150 buildings, aggregating
approximately 10.6 million square feet. In 2004, property
divestitures and contributions consisted of 29 industrial
buildings, two retail centers and one office, aggregating
approximately 4.4 million square feet. Our future financial
condition and results of operations, including rental revenues,
may be impacted by the acquisition of additional properties and
dispositions. Our future revenues and expenses may vary
materially from historical results.
For the Years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 (dollars
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Rental revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. industrial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$ |
510.4 |
|
|
$ |
514.1 |
|
|
$ |
(3.7 |
) |
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
|
|
2004 acquisitions
|
|
|
57.8 |
|
|
|
25.2 |
|
|
|
32.6 |
|
|
|
129.4 |
% |
|
|
2005 acquisitions
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
Development
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
33.8 |
% |
|
International industrial
|
|
|
30.8 |
|
|
|
25.2 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
22.2 |
% |
|
Retail
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total rental revenues
|
|
|
632.2 |
|
|
|
579.5 |
|
|
|
52.7 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
% |
Private capital income
|
|
|
43.9 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
31.0 |
|
|
|
240.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$ |
676.1 |
|
|
$ |
592.4 |
|
|
$ |
83.7 |
|
|
|
14.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The decrease in U.S. industrial same store rental revenues
was primarily driven by decreased lease termination fees and
decreased rental rates in various markets. These decreases were
partially offset by increased occupancy. Industrial same store
occupancy was 95.6% at December 31, 2005 and 95.2% at
December 31, 2004. For the year ended December 31,
2005, rents in the same store portfolio decreased 9.8% on
industrial renewals and rollovers (cash basis) on
13.0 million square feet leased due to decreases in market
rates. The properties acquired during 2004 consisted of 64
buildings, aggregating approximately 7.6 million square
feet. The properties acquired during 2005 consisted of 41
buildings, aggregating approximately 6.9 million square
feet. Other industrial revenues include rental revenues from
properties that have been contributed to an unconsolidated joint
venture, and accordingly are not classified as discontinued
operations in our consolidated financial statements, and
development projects that have reached certain levels of
operation and are not yet part of the same store operating pool
of properties. In 2004 and 2005, we continued to acquire
properties in China, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the
Netherlands, resulting in increased international industrial
revenues. The increase in private capital income of
$31.0 million was primarily due to incentive distributions
for 2005 of $26.4 million for the sale of AMB Institutional
Alliance Fund I, asset
44
management priority distributions from AMB Japan Fund I,
L.P., and acquisition fees from AMB Institutional Alliance
Fund III, L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Property operating costs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expenses
|
|
$ |
88.2 |
|
|
$ |
83.0 |
|
|
$ |
5.2 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
Real estate taxes
|
|
|
75.0 |
|
|
|
65.3 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
|
|
|
14.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
$ |
163.2 |
|
|
$ |
148.3 |
|
|
$ |
14.9 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. industrial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$ |
133.3 |
|
|
$ |
133.5 |
|
|
$ |
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
)% |
|
|
2004 acquisitions
|
|
|
15.9 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
133.8 |
% |
|
|
2005 acquisitions
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
Development
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
22.2 |
% |
|
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
55.6 |
% |
|
International industrial
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
35.4 |
% |
|
Retail
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
|
163.2 |
|
|
|
148.3 |
|
|
|
14.9 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
% |
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
165.4 |
|
|
|
141.1 |
|
|
|
24.3 |
|
|
|
17.2 |
% |
General and administrative
|
|
|
77.4 |
|
|
|
58.8 |
|
|
|
18.6 |
|
|
|
31.6 |
% |
Fund costs
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(11.8 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
$ |
407.5 |
|
|
$ |
349.9 |
|
|
$ |
57.6 |
|
|
|
16.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store properties operating expenses showed a decrease
of $0.2 million from the prior year. The 2004 acquisitions
consisted of 64 buildings, aggregating approximately
7.6 million square feet. The 2005 acquisitions consisted of
41 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.9 million square
feet. Other industrial expenses include expenses from properties
that have been contributed to an unconsolidated joint venture,
and accordingly are not classified as discontinued operations in
our consolidated financial statements, and development
properties that have reached certain levels of operation and are
not yet part of the same store operating pool of properties. In
2004 and 2005, we continued to acquire properties in China,
France, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the Netherlands, resulting in
increased international industrial operating costs. The increase
in depreciation and amortization expense was due to the increase
in our net investment in real estate. The increase in general
and administrative expenses was primarily due to an increase of
$17.0 million in personnel costs related to additional
staffing and expenses for new initiatives, including our
international and development expansions, and an increase of
$1.5 million due to the expansion of satellite offices.
Fund costs represent general and administrative costs paid to
third parties associated with our consolidated co-investment
joint ventures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income and (Expenses) |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures, net
|
|
$ |
10.8 |
|
|
$ |
3.8 |
|
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
|
|
184.2 |
% |
Interest and other income
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
71.1 |
% |
Gains from dispositions of real estate interests
|
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
13.9 |
|
|
|
267.3 |
% |
Development profits, net of taxes
|
|
|
54.8 |
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
46.3 |
|
|
|
544.7 |
% |
Interest expense, including amortization
|
|
|
(149.5 |
) |
|
|
(144.9 |
) |
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income and (expenses), net
|
|
$ |
(58.3 |
) |
|
$ |
(123.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(65.3 |
) |
|
|
(52.8 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $7.0 million increase in equity in earnings of
unconsolidated joint ventures was primarily due to a gain of
$5.4 million from the disposition of real estate by one of
our unconsolidated co-investment joint
45
ventures during the second quarter of 2005. The increase in
interest and other income was primarily due to increased bank
interest income and a $1.0 million other fee. The 2005
gains from disposition of real estate interests resulted
primarily from our contribution of $106.9 million (using
exchange rate in effect at contribution) in operating properties
to our newly-formed unconsolidated co-investment joint venture,
AMB Japan Fund I, L.P. The 2004 gains from disposition of
real estate interests resulted from our contribution of
$71.5 million in operating properties to our unconsolidated
co-investment joint venture, AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC. Development
profits represent gains from the sale of development projects
and land as part of our development-for-sale program. The
increase in development profits was due to increased volume in
2005. During 2005, we sold five land parcels and five
development projects, aggregating approximately 0.9 million
square feet for an aggregate price of $155.2 million,
resulting in an after-tax gain of $45.1 million. In
addition, during 2005, we received final proceeds of
$7.8 million from a land sale that occurred in 2004. During
2005, we also contributed one completed development project into
an unconsolidated joint venture, AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, and
recognized an after-tax gain of $1.9 million representing
the partial sale of our interest in the contributed property
acquired by the third-party co-investor for cash. During 2004,
we sold seven land parcels and six development projects as part
of our development-for-sale program, aggregating approximately
0.3 million square feet for an aggregate price of
$40.4 million, resulting in an after-tax gain of
$6.5 million. During 2004, we also contributed one
completed development project into a newly formed unconsolidated
joint venture, AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, and recognized an after-tax
gain of $2.0 million representing the partial sale of our
interest in the contributed property acquired by the third-party
co-investor for cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued Operations |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Income attributable to discontinued operations, net of minority
interests
|
|
$ |
9.0 |
|
|
$ |
17.9 |
|
|
$ |
(8.9 |
) |
|
|
(49.7 |
)% |
Gains from dispositions of real estate, net of minority interests
|
|
|
113.6 |
|
|
|
42.0 |
|
|
|
71.6 |
|
|
|
170.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
122.6 |
|
|
$ |
59.9 |
|
|
$ |
62.7 |
|
|
|
104.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During 2005, we divested ourselves of 142 industrial buildings
and one retail center, aggregating approximately
9.3 million square feet, for an aggregate price of
approximately $926.6 million, with a resulting net gain of
approximately $113.6 million. Included in these
divestitures is the sale of the assets of AMB Alliance
Fund I for $618.5 million. The multi-investor fund
owned 100 buildings totaling approximately 5.8 million
square feet. We received cash and a distribution of an on-tarmac
property, AMB DFW Air Cargo Center I, in exchange for our
21% interest in the fund. During 2004, we divested ourselves of
21 industrial buildings, two retail centers and one office
building, aggregating approximately 3.1 million square
feet, for an aggregate price of $200.3 million, with a
resulting net gain of $42.0 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Preferred stock dividends
|
|
$ |
(7.4 |
) |
|
$ |
(7.1 |
) |
|
$ |
0.3 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total preferred stock dividends
|
|
$ |
(7.4 |
) |
|
$ |
(7.1 |
) |
|
$ |
0.3 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In December 2005, we issued 3,000,000 shares of 7.0%
Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. The
increase in preferred stock dividends is due to the newly issued
shares.
46
For the Years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 (dollars
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Rental revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. industrial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$ |
514.1 |
|
|
$ |
485.4 |
|
|
$ |
28.7 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
|
2004 acquisitions
|
|
|
25.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.2 |
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
Development
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
(10.1 |
)% |
|
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
75.0 |
% |
|
International industrial
|
|
|
25.2 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
|
313.1 |
% |
|
Retail
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
22.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total rental revenues
|
|
|
579.5 |
|
|
|
503.7 |
|
|
|
75.8 |
|
|
|
15.0 |
% |
Private capital income
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
13.3 |
|
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$ |
592.4 |
|
|
$ |
517.0 |
|
|
$ |
75.4 |
|
|
|
14.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in U.S. industrial same store rental revenues
was primarily driven by increased lease termination fees.
Industrial same store occupancy was 95.2% at December 31,
2004 and 93.0% at December 31, 2003. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, rents in the same store portfolio
decreased 14.7% on industrial renewals and rollovers (cash
basis) on 16.2 million square feet leased due to decreases
in market rates. The properties acquired during 2003 consisted
of 82 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.5 million
square feet. The properties acquired during 2004 consisted of 64
buildings, aggregating approximately 7.6 million square
feet. Other industrial revenues include rental revenues from
divested properties that have been contributed to an
unconsolidated joint venture, and accordingly are not classified
as discontinued operations in our consolidated financial
statements, and development projects that have reached certain
levels of operation and are not yet part of the same store
operating pool of properties. In 2003 and 2004, we continued to
acquire properties in France, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the
Netherlands, resulting in increased international industrial
revenues. The decrease in private capital income was due to
greater incentive fees earned in the prior year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Property operating costs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expenses
|
|
$ |
83.0 |
|
|
$ |
73.2 |
|
|
$ |
9.8 |
|
|
|
13.4 |
% |
|
Real estate taxes
|
|
|
65.3 |
|
|
|
59.6 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
9.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
$ |
148.3 |
|
|
$ |
132.8 |
|
|
$ |
15.5 |
|
|
|
11.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. industrial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same store
|
|
$ |
133.5 |
|
|
$ |
126.8 |
|
|
$ |
6.7 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
% |
|
|
2004 acquisitions
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
Development
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
(52.6 |
)% |
|
|
Other industrial
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(35.7 |
)% |
|
International industrial
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
1,100.0 |
% |
|
Retail
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
25.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating costs
|
|
|
148.3 |
|
|
|
132.8 |
|
|
|
15.5 |
|
|
|
11.7 |
% |
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
141.1 |
|
|
|
116.1 |
|
|
|
25.0 |
|
|
|
21.5 |
% |
Impairment losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
|
(5.3 |
) |
|
|
(100.0 |
)% |
General and administrative
|
|
|
58.8 |
|
|
|
46.4 |
|
|
|
12.4 |
|
|
|
26.7 |
% |
Fund costs
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
112.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
$ |
349.9 |
|
|
$ |
301.4 |
|
|
$ |
48.5 |
|
|
|
16.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
Same store properties operating expenses showed an
increase of $6.7 million from the prior year due primarily
to increased real estate tax expenses. The 2004 acquisitions
consisted of 64 buildings, aggregating approximately
7.6 million square feet. Other industrial expenses include
expenses from divested properties that have been contributed to
an unconsolidated joint venture, and accordingly are not
classified as discontinued operations in our consolidated
financial statements, and development properties that have
reached certain levels of operation and are not yet part of the
same store operating pool of properties. In 2003 and 2004, we
continued to acquire properties in France, Germany, Japan,
Mexico and the Netherlands, resulting in increased international
industrial property operating costs. The increase in
depreciation and amortization expense was due to the increase in
our net investment in real estate. The 2003 impairment loss was
on investments in real estate and leasehold interests. The
increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily
due to increased stock-based compensation expense of
$2.3 million and additional staffing and expenses for new
initiatives, including our international and development
expansions. Fund costs represent general and administrative
costs paid to third parties associated with our co-investment
joint ventures. The increase in fund costs was due to additional
formation of co-investment joint ventures in 2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income and (Expenses) |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures, net
|
|
$ |
3.8 |
|
|
$ |
5.5 |
|
|
$ |
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
(30.9 |
)% |
Interest and other income
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(5.0 |
)% |
Gains from dispositions of real estate interests
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
(29.7 |
)% |
Development profits, net of taxes
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
14.4 |
|
|
|
(5.9 |
) |
|
|
(41.0 |
)% |
Interest expense, including amortization
|
|
|
(144.9 |
) |
|
|
(131.9 |
) |
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income and (expenses), net
|
|
$ |
(123.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(100.6 |
) |
|
$ |
23.0 |
|
|
|
22.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $1.7 million decrease in equity in earnings of
unconsolidated joint ventures was primarily due to decreased
occupancy at a property held by one of our joint ventures and
increased non-reimbursable expenses. This decrease was offset by
the receipt of a lease termination fee at a property in Chicago
in the first quarter of 2004. The gains from dispositions of
real estate (not classified as discontinued operations) in 2004,
resulted from our contribution of $71.5 million in
operating properties to our newly formed unconsolidated
co-investment joint
venture, AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC. The gains from disposition of real
estate (not classified as discontinued operations) in 2003,
resulted from our contribution of $94.0 million in
operating properties to our unconsolidated co-investment joint
venture, Industrial Fund I, LLC. Development profits
represent gains from sales from our development-for-sale and
contribution program. During 2004, we sold seven land parcels
and six development projects as part of our development-for-sale
program, aggregating approximately 0.3 million square feet
for an aggregate price of $40.4 million, resulting in an
after-tax gain of $6.5 million. During 2004, we also
contributed one completed development project into a
newly-formed unconsolidated joint venture, AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC,
and recognized an after-tax gain of $2.0 million
representing the partial sale of our interest in the contributed
property acquired by the third-party co-investor for cash.
During 2003, we sold seven development-for-sale and other
projects, for an aggregate price of $74.8 million, with a
resulting gain of $14.4 million, net of taxes. The increase
in interest expense, including amortization, was due to the
issuance of additional unsecured debt under our 2002 medium-term
note program, increased borrowings on the unsecured credit
facilities and additional secured debt borrowings in our
co-investment joint ventures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued Operations |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Income attributable to discontinued operations, net of minority
interests
|
|
$ |
17.9 |
|
|
$ |
27.6 |
|
|
$ |
(9.7 |
) |
|
|
(35.1 |
)% |
Gains from dispositions of real estate, net of minority interests
|
|
|
42.0 |
|
|
|
42.9 |
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
(2.1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
59.9 |
|
|
$ |
70.5 |
|
|
$ |
(10.6 |
) |
|
|
(15.0 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During 2004, we divested ourselves of 21 industrial buildings,
two retail centers and one office building, aggregating
approximately 3.1 million square feet, for an aggregate
price of $200.3 million, with a resulting net
48
gain of $42.0 million. During 2003, we divested ourselves
of 24 industrial buildings and two retail centers, aggregating
approximately 2.8 million square feet, for an aggregate
price of $272.3 million, with a resulting net gain of
$42.9 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Preferred stock dividends
|
|
$ |
(7.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(7.0 |
) |
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
% |
Preferred stock and unit redemption discount/(issuance costs or
premium)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5.4 |
) |
|
|
(5.4 |
) |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total preferred stock
|
|
$ |
(7.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(12.4 |
) |
|
$ |
(5.3 |
) |
|
|
(42.7 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In July 2003, we redeemed all 3,995,800 outstanding shares of
our 8.5% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock and
recognized a reduction of income available to common
stockholders of $3.7 million for the original issuance
costs. In addition, on November 26, 2003, the operating
partnership redeemed all 1,300,000 of its outstanding
85/8%
Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Partnership Units
and we recognized a reduction of income available to common
stockholders of $1.7 million for the original issuance
costs. In June and November 2003, we issued
2,000,000 shares of 6.5% Series L Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock and 2,300,000 shares of 6.75%
Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock,
respectively. The timing of the newly issued shares contributed
to the increase in preferred stock dividends.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Balance Sheet Strategy. In general, we use unsecured
lines of credit, unsecured notes, preferred stock and common
equity (issued by us and/or the operating partnership and its
subsidiaries) to capitalize our 100%-owned assets. Over time, we
plan to retire non-recourse, secured debt encumbering our
100%-owned assets and replace that debt with unsecured notes. In
managing our co-investment joint ventures, in general, we use
non-recourse, secured debt to capitalize our co-investment joint
ventures.
We currently expect that our principal sources of working
capital and funding for acquisitions, development, expansion and
renovation of properties will include:
|
|
|
|
|
retained earnings and cash flow from operations; |
|
|
|
borrowings under our unsecured credit facilities; |
|
|
|
other forms of secured or unsecured financing; |
|
|
|
proceeds from equity or debt offerings by us or the operating
partnership (including issuances of limited partnership units in
the operating partnership or its subsidiaries); |
|
|
|
net proceeds from divestitures of properties; |
|
|
|
private capital contributions from co-investment
partners; and |
|
|
|
net proceeds from contribution of properties and completed
development projects to our co-investment joint ventures. |
We currently expect that our principal funding requirements will
include:
|
|
|
|
|
working capital; |
|
|
|
development, expansion and renovation of properties; |
|
|
|
acquisitions, including our global expansion; |
|
|
|
debt service; and |
|
|
|
dividends and distributions on outstanding common and preferred
stock and limited partnership units. |
49
We believe that our sources of working capital, specifically our
cash flow from operations, borrowings available under our
unsecured credit facilities and our ability to access private
and public debt and equity capital, are adequate for us to meet
our liquidity requirements for the foreseeable future. The
unavailability of capital could adversely affect our financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay
dividends on, and the market price of, our stock.
Capital Resources
Dispositions of Real Estate Interests. During 2005, we
recognized a gain of $1.3 million from disposition of real
estate interests, representing the additional value received
from the contribution of properties in 2004 to AMB-SGP Mexico,
LLC.
During 2005, we contributed $106.9 million (using exchange
rate in effect at contribution) in operating properties,
consisting of six industrial buildings, aggregating
approximately 0.9 million square feet, to our newly formed
unconsolidated co-investment joint venture, AMB Japan
Fund I, L.P. We recognized a total gain of
$17.8 million on the contribution, representing the partial
sale of our interests in the contributed properties acquired by
the third-party investors for cash.
Property Divestitures. During 2005, we divested ourselves
of 142 industrial buildings and one retail center, aggregating
approximately 9.3 million square feet, for an aggregate
price of $926.6 million, with a resulting net gain of
$113.6 million. Included in these divestitures is the sale
of the assets of AMB Alliance Fund I for
$618.5 million. The multi-investor fund owned 100 buildings
totaling approximately 5.8 million square feet. We received
cash and a distribution of an on-tarmac property, AMB DFW Air
Cargo Center I, in exchange for our 21% interest in the
fund. We also received a net incentive distribution of
approximately $26.4 million in cash which is classified
under private capital income on the consolidated statement of
operations.
Development Sales and Contributions. During 2005, we sold
five land parcels and five development projects, aggregating
approximately 0.9 million square feet for an aggregate
price of $155.2 million, resulting in an after-tax gain of
$45.1 million. In addition, during 2005, we received final
proceeds of $7.8 million from a land sale that occurred in
2004. During 2005, we also contributed one completed development
project into an unconsolidated joint venture, AMB-SGP Mexico,
LLC, and recognized an after-tax gain of $1.9 million
representing the partial sale of our interest in the contributed
property acquired by the third-party co-investor for cash.
Properties Held for Contribution. As of December 31,
2005, we held for contribution to a co-investment joint venture
one industrial building with an aggregate net book value of
$32.8 million, which, when contributed to the joint
venture, will reduce our current ownership interest from
approximately 98% to an expected range of 20-50%. This asset is
not being held for divestiture under SFAS No. 144.
Properties Held for Divestiture. As of December 31,
2005, we held for divestiture five industrial buildings and one
undeveloped land parcel, which are not in our core markets, do
not meet our current strategic objectives or which we have
included as part of our development-for-sale program. The
divestitures of the properties are subject to negotiation of
acceptable terms and other customary conditions. As of
December 31, 2005, the net carrying value of the properties
held for divestiture was $17.9 million. Expected net sales
proceeds exceed the net carrying value of the properties.
Co-investment Joint Ventures. Through the operating
partnership, we enter into co-investment joint ventures with
institutional investors. These co-investment joint ventures are
managed by our private capital group and provide us with an
additional source of capital to fund certain acquisitions,
development projects and renovation projects, as well as private
capital income. We generally consolidate these joint ventures
for financial reporting purposes because they are not variable
interest entities and because we are the sole managing general
partner and control all major operating decisions. However, in
certain cases, our
co-investment joint
ventures are unconsolidated because we do not control all major
operating decisions.
Third-party equity interests in the joint ventures are reflected
as minority interests in the consolidated financial statements.
As of December 31, 2005, we owned approximately
54.8 million square feet of our
50
properties (47.7% of the total operating and development
portfolio) through our consolidated and unconsolidated joint
ventures. We may make additional investments through these joint
ventures or new joint ventures in the future and presently plan
to do so. Our consolidated co-investment joint ventures at
December 31, 2005 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership | |
|
Original Planned | |
Consolidated co-investment Joint Venture |
|
Joint Venture Partner |
|
Percentage | |
|
Capitalization(1) | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
AMB/ Erie, L.P.
|
|
Erie Insurance Company and affiliates |
|
|
50 |
% |
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
AMB Partners II, L.P.
|
|
City and County of San Francisco Employees Retirement
System |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
580,000 |
|
AMB-SGP, L.P.
|
|
Industrial JV Pte Ltd(2) |
|
|
50 |
% |
|
$ |
425,000 |
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P.
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance REIT II, Inc.(3) |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
489,000 |
|
AMB-AMS, L.P.(4)
|
|
PMT, SPW and TNO(5) |
|
|
39 |
% |
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P.(6)
|
|
AMB Institutional Alliance REIT III, Inc. |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
(1) |
Planned capitalization includes anticipated debt and both
partners expected equity contributions. |
|
(2) |
A real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of
Singapore Investment Corporation. |
|
(3) |
Comprised of 14 institutional investors as stockholders as of
December 31, 2005. |
|
(4) |
AMB-AMS, L.P. is a co-investment partnership with three Dutch
pension funds advised by Mn Services NV. |
|
(5) |
PMT is Stichting Pensioenfonds Metaal en Techniek, SPW is
Stichting Pensioenfonds voor de Woningcorporaties and TNO is
Stichting Pensioenfonds TNO. |
|
(6) |
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. is an open-ended
co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with institutional
investors, which invest through a private real estate investment
trust. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership | |
|
Original Planned | |
Unconsolidated co-investment Joint Venture |
|
Joint Venture Partner | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Capitalization(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC
|
|
|
Industrial (Mexico) JV Pte Ltd(2) |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
715,000 |
|
AMB Japan Fund I, L.P.
|
|
|
Institutional investors(3) |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
2,100,000 |
(4) |
|
|
(1) |
Planned capitalization includes anticipated debt and both
partners expected equity contributions. |
|
(2) |
A real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of
Singapore Investment Corporation. |
|
(3) |
Comprised of 13 institutional investors as of December 31,
2005. |
|
(4) |
Using the exchange rate at December 31, 2005. |
Common and Preferred Equity. We have authorized for
issuance 100,000,000 shares of preferred stock, of which
the following series were designated as of December 31,
2005: 1,595,337 shares of series D preferred;
220,440 shares of series E cumulative redeemable
preferred; 267,439 shares of series F cumulative
redeemable preferred of which 201,139 are outstanding;
840,000 shares of series H cumulative redeemable
preferred; 510,000 shares of series I cumulative
redeemable preferred; 800,000 shares of series J
cumulative redeemable preferred; 800,000 shares of
series K cumulative redeemable preferred;
2,300,000 shares of series L cumulative redeemable
preferred, of which 2,000,000 are outstanding;
2,300,000 shares of series M cumulative redeemable
preferred, all of which are outstanding and
3,000,000 shares of series O cumulative redeemable
preferred, all of which are outstanding.
51
On December 13, 2005, we issued and sold
3,000,000 shares of 7.00% Series O Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock at $25.00 per share. Dividends
are cumulative from the date of issuance and payable quarterly
in arrears at a rate per share equal to $1.75 per annum.
The series O preferred stock is redeemable by us on or
after December 13, 2010, subject to certain conditions, for
cash at a redemption price equal to $25.00 per share, plus
accumulated and unpaid dividends thereon, if any, to the
redemption date. We contributed the net proceeds of
$72.3 million to the operating partnership, and in
exchange, the operating partnership issued to us 3,000,000 7.00%
Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units.
On June 23, 2003, we issued and sold 2,000,000 shares
of 6.5% Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock at a
price of $25.00 per share. Dividends are cumulative from
the date of issuance and payable quarterly in arrears at a rate
per share equal to $1.625 per annum. The series L
preferred stock is redeemable by us on or after June 23,
2008, subject to certain conditions, for cash at a redemption
price equal to $25.00 per share, plus accumulated and
unpaid dividends thereon, if any, to the redemption date. We
contributed the net proceeds of approximately $48.0 million
to the operating partnership, and in exchange, the operating
partnership issued to us 2,000,000 6.5% Series L Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Units. The operating partnership used the
proceeds, in addition to proceeds previously contributed to the
operating partnership from other equity issuances, to redeem all
3,995,800 of its 8.5% Series A Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Units from us on July 28, 2003. We, in turn, used
those proceeds to redeem all 3,995,800 of our 8.5% Series A
Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock for $100.2 million,
including all accumulated and unpaid dividends thereon, to the
redemption date.
On November 25, 2003, we issued and sold
2,300,000 shares of 6.75% Series M Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock at $25.00 per share. Dividends
are cumulative from the date of issuance and payable quarterly
in arrears at a rate per share equal to $1.6875 per annum.
The series M preferred stock is redeemable by us on or
after November 25, 2008, subject to certain conditions, for
cash at a redemption price equal to $25.00 per share, plus
accumulated and unpaid dividends theron, if any, to the
redemption date. We contributed the net proceeds of
$55.4 million to the operating partnership, and in
exchange, the operating partnership issued to us 2,300,000 6.75%
Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units.
On September 24, 2004, AMB Property II, L.P., a
partnership in which Texas AMB I, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company and our indirect subsidiary, owns an
approximate 1.0% general partnership interest and the operating
partnership owns an approximate 99% common limited partnership
interest, issued 729,582 5.0% Series N Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units at a price of
$50.00 per unit. The series N preferred units were
issued to Robert Pattillo Properties, Inc. in exchange for the
contribution of certain parcels of land that are located in
multiple markets to AMB Property II, L.P. Effective
January 27, 2006, Robert Pattillo Properties, Inc.
exercised its rights under its Put Agreement, dated
September 24, 2004, with the operating partnership, and
sold all of its series N preferred units to the operating
partnership at a price equal to $50.00 per unit, plus all
accrued and unpaid distributions to the date of such sale. Also
on January 27, 2006, AMB Property II, L.P. repurchased
all of the series N preferred units from the operating
partnership at a price equal to $50.00 per unit, plus all
accrued and unpaid distributions to the date of such sale and
cancelled all of the outstanding series N preferred units
as of such date.
As of December 31, 2005, $142.8 million in preferred
units with a weighted average rate of 7.87%, issued by the
operating partnership, were callable under the terms of the
partnership agreement and $102.0 million in preferred units
with a weighted average rate of 6.9% become callable in 2006.
In December 2005, our board of directors approved a new two-year
common stock repurchase program for the repurchase of up to
$200.0 million of our common stock. We did not repurchase
or retire any shares of our common stock during the year ended
December 31, 2005.
Debt. In order to maintain financial flexibility and
facilitate the deployment of capital through market cycles, we
presently intend to operate with an our share of total
debt-to-our share of
total market capitalization ratio of approximately 45% or less.
As of December 31, 2005, our share of total
debt-to-our share of
total market capitalization ratio was 34.7%. (See
footnote 1 to the Capitalization Ratios table below for our
definitions of our share of total market
capitalization, market equity and our
share of total debt.) However, we typically finance our
consolidated co-investment joint ventures with secured debt at a
loan-to-
52
value ratio of 50-65% per our joint venture partnership
agreements. Additionally, we currently intend to manage our
capitalization in order to maintain an investment grade rating
on our senior unsecured debt. Regardless of these policies,
however, our organizational documents do not limit the amount of
indebtedness that we may incur. Accordingly, our management
could alter or eliminate these policies without stockholder
approval or circumstances could arise that could render us
unable to comply with these policies.
As of December 31, 2005, the aggregate principal amount of
our secured debt was $1.9 billion, excluding unamortized
debt premiums of $12.0 million. Of the $1.9 billion of
secured debt, $1.4 billion is secured by properties in our
joint ventures. The secured debt is generally non-recourse and
bears interest at rates varying from 0.6% to 10.4% per
annum (with a weighted average rate of 5.7%) and final maturity
dates ranging from January 2006 to January 2025. As of
December 31, 2005, $1.6 billion of the secured debt
obligations bears interest at fixed rates with a weighted
average interest rate of 6.3% while the remaining
$291.7 million bears interest at variable rates (with a
weighted average interest rate of 2.1%).
As of December 31, 2005, the operating partnership had
outstanding an aggregate of $975.0 million in unsecured
senior debt securities, which bore a weighted average interest
rate of 6.2% and had an average term of 5.2 years. These
unsecured senior debt securities include $300.0 million in
notes issued in June 1998, $250.0 million of medium-term
notes, which were issued under the operating partnerships
2000 medium-term note program, $325.0 million of
medium-term notes, which were issued under the operating
partnerships 2002 medium-term note program, and
approximately $112.5 million of 5.094% Notes Due
2015, which were issued to Teachers Insurance and Annuity
Association of America on July 11, 2005 in a private
placement, in exchange for the cancellation of $100 million
of notes that were issued in June 1998 resulting in a discount
of approximately $12.5 million. The unsecured senior debt
securities are subject to various covenants.
We guarantee the operating partnerships obligations with
respect to its senior debt securities. If we are unable to
refinance or extend principal payments due at maturity or pay
them with proceeds from other capital transactions, then our
cash flow may be insufficient to pay dividends to our
stockholders in all years and to repay debt upon maturity.
Furthermore, if prevailing interest rates or other factors at
the time of refinancing (such as the reluctance of lenders to
make commercial real estate loans) result in higher interest
rates upon refinancing, then the interest expense relating to
that refinanced indebtedness would increase. This increased
interest expense would adversely affect our financial condition,
results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends
on, and the market price of, our stock.
Credit Facilities. On June 1, 2004, the operating
partnership completed the early renewal of its senior unsecured
revolving line of credit in the amount of $500.0 million.
We remain a guarantor of the operating partnerships
obligations under the credit facility. The three-year credit
facility includes a multi-currency component under which up to
$250.0 million can be drawn in Yen, Euros or British Pounds
Sterling. The line, which matures in June 2007 and carries a
one-year extension option, can be increased up to
$700.0 million upon certain conditions, and replaces the
operating partnerships previous $500.0 million credit
facility that was to mature in December 2005. The rate on the
borrowings is generally LIBOR plus a margin, based on the
operating partnerships long-term debt rating, which is
currently 60 basis points with an annual facility fee of
20 basis points, based on the current credit rating of the
operating partnerships long-term debt. The operating
partnership uses its unsecured credit facility principally for
acquisitions, funding development activity and general working
capital requirements. The total amount available under the
credit facility fluctuates based upon the borrowing base, as
defined in the agreement governing the credit facility, which is
generally based upon the value of our unencumbered properties.
As of December 31, 2005, the outstanding balance on the
credit facility was $216.8 million and the remaining amount
available was $244.8 million, net of outstanding letters of
credit of $38.4 million (excluding the additional
$200.0 million of potential additional capacity). The
outstanding balance included borrowings denominated in Euros and
Yen, which, using the exchange rate in effect on
December 31, 2005, would equal approximately
$173.1 million and $43.7 million in U.S. dollars,
respectively.
On June 29, 2004, AMB Japan Finance Y.K., a subsidiary of
the operating partnership, entered into an unsecured revolving
credit agreement providing for loans or letters of credit. On
December 8, 2005, the unsecured revolving credit agreement
was amended to increase the maximum principal amount outstanding
at
53
any time to up to 35.0 billion Yen, which, using the
exchange rate in effect on December 31, 2005, equaled
approximately $297.2 million U.S. dollars, and can be
increased to up to 40.0 billion Yen upon certain
conditions. We, along with the operating partnership, guarantee
the obligations of AMB Japan Finance Y.K. under the revolving
credit facility, as well as the obligations of any other entity
in which the operating partnership directly or indirectly owns
an ownership interest, and which is selected from time to time
to be a borrower under and pursuant to the revolving credit
agreement. The borrowers intend to use the proceeds from the
facility to fund the acquisition and development of properties
and for other real estate purposes in Japan. Generally,
borrowers under the revolving credit facility have the option to
secure all or a portion of the borrowings under the revolving
credit facility with certain real estate assets or equity in
entities holding such real estate assets. The revolving credit
facility matures in June 2007 and has a one-year extension
option, which is subject to the satisfaction of certain
conditions and the payment of an extension fee equal to 0.25% of
the outstanding commitments under the facility at that time. The
rate on the borrowings is generally TIBOR plus a margin, which
is based on the current credit rating of the operating
partnerships long-term debt and is currently 60 basis
points. In addition, there is an annual facility fee, payable in
quarterly amounts, which is based on the credit rating of the
operating partnerships long-term debt, and is currently
20 basis points of the outstanding commitments under the
facility. As of December 31, 2005, the outstanding balance
on this credit facility, using the exchange rate in effect on
December 31, 2005, was $205.8 million in
U.S. dollars.
On November 24, 2004, AMB Tokai TMK, a Japanese subsidiary
of the operating partnership, entered into a secured
multi-advance project financing, providing for loans in a
maximum principal amount outstanding at any time of up to
20.0 billion Yen, which, using the exchange rate in effect
on December 31, 2005, would equal approximately
$169.9 million U.S. dollars. The financing agreement
is among AMB Tokai TMK, us, the operating partnership, Sumitomo
Mitsui Banking Corporation and a syndicate of banks. We, along
with the operating partnership, jointly and severally guarantee
AMB Tokai TMKs obligations under the financing agreement,
pursuant to a guaranty of payment executed in connection with
the project financing. The financing is secured by a mortgage on
certain real property located in Tokai, Tokyo, Japan, and
matures on October 31, 2006 with a one-year extension
option. The rate on the borrowings will generally be TIBOR plus
a margin, which is based on the credit rating of the operating
partnerships long-term debt and is currently 60 basis
points per annum, except that AMB Tokai TMK has purchased from
Sumitomo an interest rate swap, which has fixed the interest
rate payable on a principal amount equal to 13.0 billion
Yen at 1.32% per annum plus the applicable margin. In
addition, there is an annual commitment fee based on unused
commitments, payable quarterly, which is based on the credit
rating of the operating partnerships long-term debt, and
is currently 20 basis points of the amount of unused
commitments. The financing agreement contains affirmative
covenants, including financial reporting requirements and
maintenance of specified financial ratios, and negative
covenants, including limitations on the incurrence of liens and
limitations on mergers or consolidations. In addition, Sumitomo,
AMB Tokai TMK and the operating partnership signed a commitment
letter on November 24, 2004, pursuant to which Sumitomo
committed to purchase bonds that may be issued by AMB Tokai TMK
in an amount between 10.0 billion Yen and 15.0 billion
Yen (such amount to be determined by AMB Tokai TMK). The bonds
would be secured by the AMB Ohta Distribution Center and would
generally accrue interest at a rate of TIBOR plus 1.10% per
annum; because the swap purchased by AMB Tokai TMK from Sumitomo
is coterminous with the maturity date of the proposed bonds, AMB
Tokai TMK will have fixed the interest rate payable on, in
general, a principal amount equal to 13.0 billion Yen at
2.42% per annum. The bonds, if issued, would mature on
October 31, 2012. As of December 31, 2005, the
outstanding balance on this financing agreement was
19.5 billion Yen, which, using the exchange rate in effect
on December 31, 2005, equaled approximately
$165.6 million U.S. dollars and is accounted for as
wholly-owned secured debt.
On February 16, 2006, the operating partnership and certain
of its consolidated subsidiaries entered into a third amended
and restated credit agreement for a $250 million unsecured
multi-currency revolving credit facility with a maturity date of
February 2010, that replaced the then-existing $100 million
unsecured multi-currency revolving credit facility that was to
mature in June 2008. As of December 31, 2005, we had an
additional outstanding balance of $67.5 million under the
then-existing facility.
54
Mortgages Receivable. Through a wholly-owned subsidiary,
we hold a mortgage loan receivable on AMB Pier One, LLC, an
unconsolidated joint venture. The note bears interest at 13.0%
and matures in May 2026. As of December 31, 2005, the
outstanding balance on the note was $12.8 million. We also
hold a loan receivable on G. Accion, an unconsolidated joint
venture totaling $8.8 million with an interest rate of
10.0%. The loan matures in November 2006.
The tables below summarize our debt maturities, capitalization
and reconcile our share of total debt to total consolidated debt
as of December 31, 2005 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt | |
| |
|
|
Our | |
|
Joint | |
|
Unsecured | |
|
|
|
|
Secured | |
|
Venture | |
|
Senior Debt | |
|
Unsecured | |
|
Credit | |
|
|
|
|
Debt(4) | |
|
Debt | |
|
Securities | |
|
Debt | |
|
Facilities(1) | |
|
Total Debt | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
2006
|
|
$ |
65,369 |
|
|
$ |
79,262 |
|
|
$ |
75,000 |
|
|
$ |
16,280 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
235,911 |
|
2007
|
|
|
12,680 |
|
|
|
58,124 |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
752 |
|
|
|
422,602 |
|
|
|
569,158 |
|
2008
|
|
|
40,705 |
|
|
|
178,795 |
|
|
|
175,000 |
|
|
|
810 |
|
|
|
67,470 |
|
|
|
462,780 |
|
2009
|
|
|
5,264 |
|
|
|
120,551 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
873 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226,688 |
|
2010
|
|
|
71,078 |
|
|
|
116,927 |
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
438,946 |
|
2011
|
|
|
21,573 |
|
|
|
357,207 |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
1,014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
454,794 |
|
2012
|
|
|
254,996 |
|
|
|
171,442 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
427,531 |
|
2013
|
|
|
14,773 |
|
|
|
196,894 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
920 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
212,587 |
|
2014
|
|
|
15,066 |
|
|
|
4,684 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
616 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,366 |
|
2015
|
|
|
1,951 |
|
|
|
61,653 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
164,268 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
19,004 |
|
|
|
32,544 |
|
|
|
125,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
522,459 |
|
|
|
1,378,083 |
|
|
|
975,000 |
|
|
|
23,963 |
|
|
|
490,072 |
|
|
|
3,389,577 |
|
|
Unamortized premiums
|
|
|
2,577 |
|
|
|
9,407 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated debt
|
|
|
525,036 |
|
|
|
1,387,490 |
|
|
|
975,000 |
|
|
|
23,963 |
|
|
|
490,072 |
|
|
|
3,401,561 |
|
Our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
161,120 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
161,120 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
525,036 |
|
|
|
1,548,610 |
|
|
|
975,000 |
|
|
|
23,963 |
|
|
|
490,072 |
|
|
|
3,562,681 |
|
Joint venture partners share of consolidated joint venture
debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(960,803 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(960,803 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our share of total debt(3)
|
|
$ |
525,036 |
|
|
$ |
587,807 |
|
|
$ |
975,000 |
|
|
$ |
23,963 |
|
|
$ |
490,072 |
|
|
$ |
2,601,878 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average interest rate
|
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
|
6.2 |
% |
|
|
8.2 |
% |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
5.3 |
% |
Weighted average maturity (in years)
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Includes $173.1 million, $249.5 million and
$67.5 million in Euro, Yen and Canadian dollar based
borrowings, respectively, translated to U.S. dollars using
the functional exchange rates in effect on December 31,
2005. |
|
(2) |
The weighted average interest and maturity for the
unconsolidated joint venture debt were 5.3% and 3.7 years,
respectively. |
|
(3) |
Our share of total debt is the pro rata portion of the total
debt based on our percentage of equity interest in each of the
consolidated or unconsolidated ventures holding the debt. We
believe that our share of total debt is a meaningful
supplemental measure, which enables both management and
investors to analyze our leverage and to compare our leverage to
that of other companies. In addition, it allows for a more
meaningful comparison of our debt to that of other companies
that do not consolidate their joint ventures. Our share of total
debt is not intended to reflect our actual liability should
there be a default under any or all of such loans or a
liquidation of the joint ventures. The above table reconciles
our share of total debt to total consolidated debt, a GAAP
financial measure. |
55
|
|
(4) |
Our secured debt and joint venture debt include debt related to
international assets in the amount of $383.0 million. Of
this, $250.5 million is associated with assets located in
Asia and the remaining $132.5 million is related to assets
located in Europe. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market Equity as of December 31, 2005 | |
| |
|
|
Shares/Units | |
|
Market | |
|
Market | |
Security |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Price | |
|
Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Common stock
|
|
|
85,814,905 |
|
|
$ |
49.17 |
|
|
$ |
4,219,519 |
|
Common limited partnership units(1)
|
|
|
4,396,525 |
|
|
$ |
49.17 |
|
|
|
216,177 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
90,211,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,435,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Includes 145,548 class B common limited partnership units
issued by AMB Property II, L.P. in November 2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock and Units | |
| |
|
|
Dividend | |
|
Liquidation | |
|
|
Security |
|
Rate | |
|
Preference | |
|
Redemption Date | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Series D preferred units
|
|
|
7.75 |
% |
|
$ |
79,767 |
|
|
|
May 2004 |
|
Series E preferred units
|
|
|
7.75 |
% |
|
|
11,022 |
|
|
|
August 2004 |
|
Series F preferred units
|
|
|
7.95 |
% |
|
|
10,057 |
|
|
|
March 2005 |
|
Series H preferred units
|
|
|
8.13 |
% |
|
|
42,000 |
|
|
|
September 2005 |
|
Series I preferred units
|
|
|
8.00 |
% |
|
|
25,500 |
|
|
|
March 2006 |
|
Series J preferred units
|
|
|
7.95 |
% |
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
September 2006 |
|
Series K preferred units
|
|
|
7.95 |
% |
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
April 2007 |
|
Series N preferred units(1)
|
|
|
5.00 |
% |
|
|
36,479 |
|
|
|
September 2006-September 2009 |
|
Series L preferred stock
|
|
|
6.50 |
% |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
June 2008 |
|
Series M preferred stock
|
|
|
6.75 |
% |
|
|
57,500 |
|
|
|
November 2008 |
|
Series O preferred stock
|
|
|
7.00 |
% |
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
December 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average/total
|
|
|
7.24 |
% |
|
$ |
467,325 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
The holder of the series N preferred units exercised its
put option in January 2006 and sold all of its series N
preferred units to the operating partnership at a price equal to
$50 per unit, plus all accrued and unpaid distributions. |
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalization Ratios as of December 31, 2005 | |
| |
Total debt-to-total market capitalization(1)
|
|
|
42.1 |
% |
Our share of total debt-to-our share of total market
capitalization(1)
|
|
|
34.7 |
% |
Total debt plus preferred-to-total market capitalization(1)
|
|
|
47.6 |
% |
Our share of total debt plus preferred-to-our share of total
market
capitalization(1)
|
|
|
40.9 |
% |
Our share of total debt-to-our share of total book
capitalization(1)
|
|
|
53.3 |
% |
|
|
(1) |
Our definition of total market capitalization is
total debt plus preferred equity liquidation preferences plus
market equity. Our definition of our share of total market
capitalization is our share of total debt plus preferred
equity liquidation preferences plus market equity. Our
definition of market equity is the total number of
outstanding shares of our common stock and common limited
partnership units multiplied by the closing price per share of
our common stock as of December 31, 2005. Our definition of
preferred is preferred equity liquidation
preferences. Our share of total book capitalization is defined
as our share of total debt plus minority interests to preferred
unitholders and limited partnership unitholders plus
stockholders equity. Our share of total debt is the pro
rata portion of the total debt based on our percentage of equity
interest in each of the consolidated or unconsolidated ventures
holding the debt. We |
56
|
|
|
believe that our share of total debt is a meaningful
supplemental measure, which enables both management and
investors to analyze our leverage and to compare our leverage to
that of other companies. In addition, it allows for a more
meaningful comparison of our debt to that of other companies
that do not consolidate their joint ventures. Our share of total
debt is not intended to reflect our actual liability should
there be a default under any or all of such loans or a
liquidation of the joint ventures. For a reconciliation of our
share of total debt to total consolidated debt, a GAAP financial
measure, please see the table of debt maturities and
capitalization above. |
Liquidity
As of December 31, 2005, we had $232.9 million in cash
and cash equivalents and $368.8 million of additional
available borrowings under our credit facilities. As of
December 31, 2005, we had $34.4 million in restricted
cash.
Our board of directors declared a regular cash dividend for the
quarter ended December 31, 2005 of $0.44 per share of
common stock, and the operating partnership announced its
intention to pay a regular cash distribution for the quarter
ended December 31, 2005 of $0.44 per common unit. The
dividends and distributions were payable on January 6, 2006
to stockholders and unitholders of record on December 22,
2005. The series L and M preferred stock dividends were
payable on January 16, 2006 to stockholders of record on
January 6, 2006. The series E, F, J and K preferred
unit quarterly distributions were payable on January 15,
2006. The series O preferred stock dividends are payable on
April 15, 2006. The series D, H, I and N preferred
unit quarterly distributions were paid on December 25,
2005. The following table sets forth the dividends and
distributions paid or payable per share or unit for the years
ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paying Entity |
|
Security |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Common stock |
|
$ |
1.76 |
|
|
$ |
1.70 |
|
|
$ |
1.66 |
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Series A preferred stock |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
$ |
1.15 |
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Series L preferred stock |
|
$ |
1.63 |
|
|
$ |
1.63 |
|
|
$ |
0.85 |
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Series M preferred stock |
|
$ |
1.69 |
|
|
$ |
1.69 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
AMB Property Corporation
|
|
Series O preferred stock |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Operating Partnership
|
|
Common limited partnership units |
|
$ |
1.76 |
|
|
$ |
1.70 |
|
|
$ |
1.66 |
|
Operating Partnership
|
|
Series B preferred units |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
$ |
3.71 |
|
Operating Partnership
|
|
Series J preferred units |
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
Operating Partnership
|
|
Series K preferred units |
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
AMB Property II, L.P.
|
|
Class B common limited partnership units |
|
$ |
1.76 |
|
|
$ |
1.70 |
|
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
AMB Property II, L.P.
|
|
Series D preferred units |
|
$ |
3.88 |
|
|
$ |
3.88 |
|
|
$ |
3.88 |
|
AMB Property II, L.P.
|
|
Series E preferred units |
|
$ |
3.88 |
|
|
$ |
3.88 |
|
|
$ |
3.88 |
|
AMB Property II, L.P.
|
|
Series F preferred units |
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
AMB Property II, L.P.
|
|
Series H preferred units |
|
$ |
4.06 |
|
|
$ |
4.06 |
|
|
$ |
4.06 |
|
AMB Property II, L.P.
|
|
Series I preferred units |
|
$ |
4.00 |
|
|
$ |
4.00 |
|
|
$ |
4.00 |
|
AMB Property II, L.P.
|
|
Series N preferred units(1) |
|
$ |
2.50 |
|
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
(1) |
The holder of the series N preferred units exercised its
put option in January 2006 and sold all of its series N
preferred units to the Operating Partnership at a price equal to
$50 per unit, plus all accrued and unpaid distributions. |
The anticipated size of our distributions, using only cash from
operations, will not allow us to retire all of our debt as it
comes due. Therefore, we intend to also repay maturing debt with
net proceeds from future debt or equity financings, as well as
property divestitures. However, we may not be able to obtain
future financings on favorable terms or at all. Our inability to
obtain future financings on favorable terms or at all would
57
adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations,
cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market price
of, our stock.
Capital Commitments
Developments. In addition to recurring capital
expenditures, which consist of building improvements and leasing
costs incurred to renew or re-tenant space, during 2005, we
initiated 30 new industrial development projects in North
America, Europe and Asia with a total estimated investment of
$522.4 million, aggregating an estimated 7.0 million
square feet. As of December 31, 2005, we had 47 projects in
our development pipeline representing a total estimated
investment of $1.1 billion upon completion, of which two
industrial projects with a total of 0.3 million square feet
and an aggregate estimated investment of $24.5 million upon
completion are held in unconsolidated joint ventures. In
addition, we held one development project available for sale or
contribution, representing a total estimated investment of
$32.8 million upon completion. Of the total development
pipeline, $681.4 million had been funded as of
December 31, 2005 and an estimated $405.2 million was
required to complete current and planned projects. We expect to
fund these expenditures with cash from operations, borrowings
under our credit facilities, debt or equity issuances, net
proceeds from property divestitures and private capital from
co-investment partners, which could have an adverse effect on
our cash flow.
Acquisitions. During 2005, we acquired 41 industrial
buildings, aggregating approximately 6.9 million square
feet for a total expected investment of $555.0 million,
including two buildings that were acquired by two of our
unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures. Additional
acquisition activity in 2005 included the purchase of an
approximate 43% unconsolidated equity interest in G.Accion, one
of Mexicos largest real estate companies, for
$46.1 million. We generally fund our acquisitions through
private capital contributions, borrowings under our credit
facility, cash, debt issuances and net proceeds from property
divestitures.
Lease Commitments. We have entered into operating ground
leases on certain land parcels, primarily on-tarmac facilities
and office space with remaining lease terms from one to
57 years. These operating lease payments are amortized
ratably over the terms of the related leases. Future minimum
rental payments required under non-cancelable operating leases
in effect as of December 31, 2005 were as follows (dollars
in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$ |
20,894 |
|
2007
|
|
|
21,036 |
|
2008
|
|
|
20,617 |
|
2009
|
|
|
20,327 |
|
2010
|
|
|
19,997 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
278,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
381,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
Co-investment Joint Ventures. Through the operating
partnership, we enter into co-investment joint ventures with
institutional investors. These co-investment joint ventures are
managed by our private capital group and provide us with an
additional source of capital to fund acquisitions, development
projects and renovation projects, as well as private capital
income. As of December 31, 2005, we had investments in
co-investment joint ventures with a gross book value of
$2.5 billion, which are consolidated for financial
reporting purposes, and net equity investments in two
unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures of
$26.3 million. As of December 31, 2005, we may make
additional capital contributions to current and planned
co-investment joint ventures of up to $133.7 million (using
the exchange rates at December 31, 2005). From time to
time, we may raise additional equity commitments for AMB
Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., an open-ended
consolidated co-investment joint venture formed in 2004 with
institutional investors, which invest through a private real
estate investment trust. This would increase our obligation to
make additional capital commitments. Pursuant to the terms of
the partnership agreement of this fund, we are obligated to
contribute 20% of the total equity commitments to the fund until
such time our total equity commitment is greater than
58
$150.0 million, at which time, our obligation is reduced to
10% of the total equity commitments. We expect to fund these
contributions with cash from operations, borrowings under our
credit facilities, debt or equity issuances or net proceeds from
property divestitures, which could adversely effect our cash
flow.
Captive Insurance Company. In December 2001, we formed a
wholly-owned captive insurance company, Arcata National
Insurance Ltd., which provides insurance coverage for all or a
portion of losses below the deductible under our third-party
policies. We capitalized Arcata National Insurance Ltd. in
accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements. Arcata
National Insurance Ltd. established annual premiums based on
projections derived from the past loss experience of our
properties. Annually, we engage an independent third party to
perform an actuarial estimate of future projected claims,
related deductibles and projected expenses necessary to fund
associated risk management programs. Premiums paid to Arcata
National Insurance Ltd. may be adjusted based on this estimate.
Premiums paid to Arcata National Insurance Ltd. have a
retrospective component, so that if expenses, including losses,
deductibles and reserves, are less than premiums collected, the
excess may be returned to the property owners (and, in turn, as
appropriate, to the customers) and, conversely, subject to
certain limitations, if expenses, including losses, deductibles
and reserves, are greater than premiums collected, an additional
premium will be charged. As with all recoverable expenses,
differences between estimated and actual insurance premiums are
recognized in the subsequent year. Through this structure, we
believe that we have more comprehensive insurance coverage at an
overall lower cost than would otherwise be available in the
market.
Potential Unknown Liabilities. Unknown liabilities may
include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
liabilities for
clean-up or remediation
of undisclosed environmental conditions; |
|
|
|
claims of customers, vendors or other persons dealing with our
predecessors prior to our formation transactions that had not
been asserted prior to our formation transactions; |
|
|
|
accrued but unpaid liabilities incurred in the ordinary course
of business; |
|
|
|
tax liabilities; and |
|
|
|
claims for indemnification by the officers and directors of our
predecessors and others indemnified by these entities. |
|
|
|
Overview of Contractual Obligations |
The following table summarizes our debt, interest and lease
payments due by period as of December 31, 2005 (dollars in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than | |
|
|
|
|
|
More than | |
|
|
Contractual Obligations |
|
1 Year | |
|
1-3 Years | |
|
3-5 Years | |
|
5 Years | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Debt
|
|
$ |
235,911 |
|
|
$ |
1,031,938 |
|
|
$ |
665,634 |
|
|
$ |
1,456,094 |
|
|
$ |
3,389,577 |
|
Debt interest payments
|
|
|
14,459 |
|
|
|
46,749 |
|
|
|
37,056 |
|
|
|
83,106 |
|
|
|
181,370 |
|
Operating lease commitments
|
|
|
20,894 |
|
|
|
41,653 |
|
|
|
49,324 |
|
|
|
278,759 |
|
|
|
381,630 |
|
Construction commitments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
271,264 |
|
|
$ |
1,256,940 |
|
|
$ |
743,014 |
|
|
$ |
1,817,959 |
|
|
$ |
4,089,177 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
Standby Letters of Credit. As of December 31, 2005,
we had provided approximately $48.7 million in letters of
credit, of which $38.4 million was provided under the
operating partnerships $500.0 million unsecured
credit facility. The letters of credit were required to be
issued under certain ground lease provisions, bank guarantees
and other commitments.
Guarantees. As of December 31, 2005, we had
outstanding guarantees in the aggregate amount of
$128.2 million in connection with certain acquisitions. As
of December 31, 2005, we guaranteed $23.4 million
59
and $2.3 million on outstanding loans on two of our
consolidated joint ventures and one of our unconsolidated joint
ventures, respectively.
Performance and Surety Bonds. As of December 31,
2005, we had outstanding performance and surety bonds in an
aggregate amount of $0.9 million. These bonds were issued
in connection with certain of its development projects and were
posted to guarantee certain tax obligations and the construction
of certain real property improvements and infrastructure, such
as grading, sewers and streets. Performance and surety bonds are
commonly required by public agencies from real estate
developers. Performance and surety bonds are renewable and
expire upon the payment of the taxes due or the completion of
the improvements and infrastructure.
Promoted Interests and Other Contractual Obligations.
Upon the achievement of certain return thresholds and the
occurrence of certain events, we may be obligated to make
payments to certain of joint venture partners pursuant to the
terms and provisions of their contractual agreements with us.
From time to time in the normal course of our business, we enter
into various contracts with third parties that may obligate us
to make payments or perform other obligations upon the
occurrence of certain events.
SUPPLEMENTAL EARNINGS MEASURES
FFO. We believe that net income, as defined by GAAP, is
the most appropriate earnings measure. However, we consider
funds from operations, or FFO, as defined by the National
Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts
(NAREIT), to be a useful supplemental measure of our
operating performance. FFO is defined as net income, calculated
in accordance with GAAP, less gains (or losses) from
dispositions of real estate held for investment purposes and
real estate-related depreciation, and adjustments to derive our
pro rata share of FFO of consolidated and unconsolidated joint
ventures. Further, we do not adjust FFO to eliminate the effects
of non-recurring charges. We believe that FFO, as defined by
NAREIT, is a meaningful supplemental measure of our operating
performance because historical cost accounting for real estate
assets in accordance with GAAP implicitly assumes that the value
of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time, as
reflected through depreciation and amortization expenses.
However, since real estate values have historically risen or
fallen with market and other conditions, many industry investors
and analysts have considered presentation of operating results
for real estate companies that use historical cost accounting to
be insufficient. Thus, NAREIT created FFO as a supplemental
measure of operating performance for real estate investment
trusts that excludes historical cost depreciation and
amortization, among other items, from net income, as defined by
GAAP. We believe that the use of FFO, combined with the required
GAAP presentations, has been beneficial in improving the
understanding of operating results of real estate investment
trusts among the investing public and making comparisons of
operating results among such companies more meaningful. We
consider FFO to be a useful measure for reviewing our
comparative operating and financial performance because, by
excluding gains or losses related to sales of previously
depreciated operating real estate assets and real estate
depreciation and amortization, FFO can help the investing public
compare the operating performance of a companys real
estate between periods or as compared to other companies.
While FFO is a relevant and widely used measure of operating
performance of real estate investment trusts, it does not
represent cash flow from operations or net income as defined by
GAAP and should not be considered as an alternative to those
measures in evaluating our liquidity or operating performance.
FFO also does not consider the costs associated with capital
expenditures related to our real estate assets nor is FFO
necessarily indicative of cash available to fund our future cash
requirements. Further, our computation of FFO may not be
comparable to FFO reported by other real estate investment
trusts that do not define the term in accordance with the
current NAREIT definition or that interpret the current NAREIT
definition differently than we do.
60
The following table reflects the calculation of FFO reconciled
from net income for the years ended December 31 (dollars in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income(1)
|
|
$ |
257,807 |
|
|
$ |
125,471 |
|
|
$ |
129,128 |
|
|
$ |
121,119 |
|
|
$ |
136,200 |
|
Gains from dispositions of real estate, net of minority
interests(2)
|
|
|
(132,652 |
) |
|
|
(47,224 |
) |
|
|
(50,325 |
) |
|
|
(19,383 |
) |
|
|
(41,859 |
) |
Real estate, related depreciation and amortization:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total depreciation and
amortization
|
|
|
165,438 |
|
|
|
141,120 |
|
|
|
116,067 |
|
|
|
107,097 |
|
|
|
90,527 |
|
|
Discontinued operations
depreciation
|
|
|
14,866 |
|
|
|
26,230 |
|
|
|
26,270 |
|
|
|
29,406 |
|
|
|
23,016 |
|
|
Non-real estate depreciation
|
|
|
(3,388 |
) |
|
|
(871 |
) |
|
|
(720 |
) |
|
|
(712 |
) |
|
|
(731 |
) |
|
Ground lease amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,301 |
) |
|
|
(1,232 |
) |
Adjustments to derive FFO from consolidated joint ventures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joint venture partners minority interests (Net income)
|
|
|
36,398 |
|
|
|
29,544 |
|
|
|
21,015 |
|
|
|
15,112 |
|
|
|
11,288 |
|
|
Limited partnership unitholders minority interests (Net
income)
|
|
|
3,681 |
|
|
|
2,615 |
|
|
|
2,378 |
|
|
|
3,572 |
|
|
|
4,836 |
|
|
Limited partnership unitholders minority interests
(Development profits)
|
|
|
2,262 |
|
|
|
435 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
764 |
|
|
Discontinued operations minority interests (Net income)
|
|
|
8,502 |
|
|
|
13,549 |
|
|
|
16,214 |
|
|
|
17,745 |
|
|
|
17,595 |
|
|
FFO attributable to minority
interests
|
|
|
(100,275 |
) |
|
|
(80,192 |
) |
|
|
(65,603 |
) |
|
|
(52,051 |
) |
|
|
(40,144 |
) |
Adjustments to derive FFO from unconsolidated joint ventures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our share of net income
|
|
|
(10,770 |
) |
|
|
(3,781 |
) |
|
|
(5,445 |
) |
|
|
(5,674 |
) |
|
|
(5,467 |
) |
|
Our share of FFO
|
|
|
14,441 |
|
|
|
7,549 |
|
|
|
9,755 |
|
|
|
9,291 |
|
|
|
8,014 |
|
|
Our share of development profits, net of taxes
|
|
|
5,441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends
|
|
|
(7,388 |
) |
|
|
(7,131 |
) |
|
|
(6,999 |
) |
|
|
(8,496 |
) |
|
|
(8,500 |
) |
Preferred stock and unit redemption discount (issuance costs)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,413 |
) |
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
(7,600 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations
|
|
$ |
254,363 |
|
|
$ |
207,314 |
|
|
$ |
186,666 |
|
|
$ |
215,194 |
|
|
$ |
186,707 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic FFO per common share and
unit
|
|
$ |
2.87 |
|
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.17 |
|
|
$ |
2.44 |
|
|
$ |
2.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted FFO per common share and
unit
|
|
$ |
2.75 |
|
|
$ |
2.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.13 |
|
|
$ |
2.40 |
|
|
$ |
2.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares
and units:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
88,684,262 |
|
|
|
86,885,250 |
|
|
|
85,859,899 |
|
|
|
88,204,208 |
|
|
|
89,286,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
92,508,725 |
|
|
|
90,120,250 |
|
|
|
87,616,365 |
|
|
|
89,689,310 |
|
|
|
90,325,801 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
(1) |
Includes gains from undepreciated land sales of
$25.0 million, $3.7 million and $1.2 million for
2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. |
|
(2) |
2005 includes accumulated depreciation re-capture of
approximately $1.1 million associated with the sale of the
Interstate Crossdock redevelopment project. |
SS NOI. We believe that net income, as defined by GAAP,
is the most appropriate earnings measure. However, we consider
same store net operating income (SS NOI) to be a useful
supplemental measure of our operating performance. For
properties that are considered part of the same store pool, see
Part I, Item 2: Properties
Industrial Properties Industrial Market Operating
Statistics, Note 5, and Operating and Leasing
Statistics Industrial Same Store Operating
Statistics, Note 1. In deriving SS NOI, we define NOI
as rental revenues (as calculated in accordance with GAAP),
including reimbursements, less straight-line rents, property
operating expenses and real estate taxes. We exclude
straight-line rents in calculating SS NOI because we believe it
provides a better measure of actual cash basis rental growth for
a year-over-year comparison. In addition, we believe that SS NOI
helps the investing public compare the operating performance of
a companys real estate as compared to other companies.
While SS NOI is a relevant and widely used measure of operating
performance of real estate investment trusts, it does not
represent cash flow from operations or net income as defined by
GAAP and should not be considered as an alternative to those
measures in evaluating our liquidity or operating performance.
SS NOI also does not reflect general and administrative
expenses, interest expenses, depreciation and amortization
costs, capital expenditures and leasing costs, or trends in
development and construction activities that could materially
impact our results from operations. Further, our computation of
SS NOI may not be comparable to that of other real estate
companies, as they may use different methodologies for
calculating SS NOI.
|
|
Item 7a. |
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk |
Market risk is the risk of loss from adverse changes in market
prices, interest rates and international exchange rates. Our
future earnings and cash flows are dependent upon prevailing
market rates. Accordingly, we manage our market risk by matching
projected cash inflows from operating, investing and financing
activities with projected cash outflows for debt service,
acquisitions, capital expenditures, distributions to
stockholders and unitholders, and other cash requirements. The
majority of our outstanding debt has fixed interest rates, which
minimizes the risk of fluctuating interest rates. Our exposure
to market risk includes interest rate fluctuations in connection
with our credit facilities and other variable rate borrowings
and our ability to incur more debt without stockholder approval,
thereby increasing our debt service obligations, which could
adversely affect our cash flows. As of December 31, 2005,
we had two outstanding interest rate swaps with aggregate
notional amount of $119.5 million (in U.S. dollars).
See Financial Instruments below.
The table below summarizes the market risks associated with our
fixed and variable rate debt outstanding before unamortized debt
premiums of $12.0 million as of December 31, 2005
(dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
2008 | |
|
2009 | |
|
2010 | |
|
Thereafter | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Fixed rate debt(1)
|
|
$ |
165,953 |
|
|
$ |
129,214 |
|
|
$ |
374,174 |
|
|
$ |
190,548 |
|
|
$ |
437,934 |
|
|
$ |
1,260,015 |
|
|
$ |
2,557,838 |
|
Average interest rate
|
|
|
6.9 |
% |
|
|
7.2 |
% |
|
|
6.9 |
% |
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
6.1 |
% |
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
|
6.3 |
% |
Variable rate debt(2)
|
|
$ |
69,958 |
|
|
$ |
439,944 |
|
|
$ |
88,606 |
|
|
$ |
36,140 |
|
|
$ |
1,012 |
|
|
$ |
196,079 |
|
|
$ |
831,739 |
|
Average interest rate
|
|
|
4.3 |
% |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
2.0 |
% |
|
|
1.9 |
% |
|
|
2.3 |
% |
Interest Payments
|
|
$ |
14,459 |
|
|
$ |
18,982 |
|
|
$ |
27,767 |
|
|
$ |
10,322 |
|
|
$ |
26,734 |
|
|
$ |
83,106 |
|
|
$ |
181,370 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents 75.5% of all outstanding debt. |
|
(2) |
Represents 24.5% of all outstanding debt. |
If market rates of interest on our variable rate debt increased
or decreased by 10%, then the increase or decrease in interest
expense on the variable rate debt would be $1.9 million
annually. As of December 31, 2005, the book value and the
estimated fair value of our total consolidated debt (both
secured and unsecured) was $3.4 billion based on our
estimate of current market interest rates.
62
As of December 31, 2005 and 2004, variable rate debt
comprised 24.5% and 15.3%, respectively, of all our outstanding
debt. Variable rate debt was $831.7 million and
$498.3 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2005
and 2004. The increase is primarily due to higher outstanding
balances on our credit facilities. This increase in our
outstanding variable rate debt increases our risk associated
with unfavorable interest rate fluctuations.
Financial Instruments. We record all derivatives on the
balance sheet at fair value as an asset or liability, with an
offset to accumulated other comprehensive income or income. For
revenues or expenses denominated in non-functional currencies,
we may use derivative financial instruments to manage foreign
currency exchange rate risk. Our derivative financial
instruments in effect at December 31, 2005 were two
interest rate swaps hedging cash flows of our variable rate
borrowings based on Euribor (Europe) and Japanese TIBOR (Japan)
and two put options hedging against adverse foreign fluctuations
of the Mexican Peso and the Euro against the U.S. dollar.
The following table summarizes our financial instruments as of
December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity Dates | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 8, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
December 8, | |
|
October 29, | |
|
Notional | |
|
|
Related Derivatives (In thousands) |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2008 | |
|
2012 | |
|
Amount | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Interest Rate Swaps:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plain Interest Rate Swap, Japan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional Amount (U.S. Dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
110,403 |
|
|
$ |
110,403 |
|
|
|
|
|
Receive Floating(%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3M TIBOR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pay Fixed Rate(%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.32 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Market Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
760 |
|
|
Plain Interest Rate Swap, Europe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional Amount (U.S. Dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
Receive Floating(%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3M EURIBOR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pay Fixed Rate(%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.72 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Market Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign Exchange Agreements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mexico
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options to Sell MXN/ Buy USD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract Amount (U.S. Dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
Contract FX Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.96 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract Premium
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options to Sell EUR/ Buy (U.S. Dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract Amount (U.S. Dollars)
|
|
$ |
1,180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,184 |
|
|
|
|
|
Contract FX Rate
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract Premium
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
125,197 |
|
|
$ |
631 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Operations. Our exposure to market risk
also includes foreign currency exchange rate risk. The
U.S. dollar is the functional currency for our subsidiaries
operating in the United States and Mexico. The functional
currency for our subsidiaries operating outside North America is
generally the local currency of the country in which the entity
is located, mitigating the effect of foreign exchange gains and
losses. Our subsidiaries whose functional currency is not the
U.S. dollar translate their financial statements into
U.S. dollars. Assets and liabilities are translated at the
exchange rate in effect as of the financial statement
63
date. We translate income statement accounts using the average
exchange rate for the period and significant nonrecurring
transactions using the rate on the transaction date. The losses
resulting from the translation are included in accumulated other
comprehensive income as a separate component of
stockholders equity and totaled $1.8 million for year
ended December 31, 2005.
Our international subsidiaries may have transactions denominated
in currencies other than their functional currency. In these
instances, non-monetary assets and liabilities are reflected at
the historical exchange rate, monetary assets and liabilities
are remeasured at the exchange rate in effect at the end of the
period and income statement accounts are remeasured at the
average exchange rate for the period. For the year ended
December 31, 2005, gains from remeasurement and the sale of
one foreign exchange agreement included in our results of
operations totaled $0.6 million.
We also record gains or losses in the income statement when a
transaction with a third party, denominated in a currency other
than the entitys functional currency, is settled and the
functional currency cash flows realized are more or less than
expected based upon the exchange rate in effect when the
transaction was initiated. We believe that these gains or losses
are immaterial.
|
|
Item 8. |
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
See Item 15: Exhibits and Financial Statement
Schedule.
|
|
Item 9. |
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on
Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
None.
|
|
Item 9A. |
Controls and Procedures |
Disclosure Controls and Procedures and Changes to Internal
Control over Financial Reporting
As required by
Rule 13a-15(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, we carried out
an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation
of our management, including our chief executive officer,
president and chief financial officer, of the effectiveness of
the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures that were in effect as of the end of the year covered
by this report. Our chief executive officer, president and chief
financial officer each concluded that our disclosure controls
and procedures were effective at a reasonable assurance level as
of December 31, 2005.
No changes were made in our internal control over financial
reporting during our most recent fiscal quarter that have
materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal
control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or
under the supervision of, the Chief Executive Officer, President
and Chief Financial Officer, and effected by our board of
directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and
the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and
includes those policies and procedures that:
|
|
|
(1) Pertain to the maintenance of records that in
reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions
involving our assets; |
|
|
(2) Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being
made only in accordance with authorizations of our management
and directors; and |
64
|
|
|
(3) Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or
timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition
of our assets that could have a material effect on our
consolidated financial statements. |
Internal control over financial reporting cannot provide
absolute assurance of achieving financial reporting objectives
because of its inherent limitations. Internal control over
financial reporting is a process that involves human diligence
and compliance, and is subject to lapses in judgment and
breakdowns resulting from human failures. Internal control over
financial reporting also can be circumvented by collusion or
improper management override. Because of such limitations, there
is a risk that material misstatements may not be prevented or
detected on a timely basis by internal control over financial
reporting. However, these inherent limitations are known
features of the financial reporting process. Therefore, it is
possible to design into the process safeguards to reduce, though
not eliminate, this risk.
Our management has used the framework set forth in the report
entitled Internal Control Integrated
Framework published by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission to evaluate the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.
Based on our evaluation under the framework in Internal
Control Integrated Framework, our management
has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting
was effective as of December 31, 2005.
Our managements assessment of the effectiveness of our
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2005 has been audited by our independent
registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP,
as stated in their report which appears herein.
Respectfully,
Hamid R. Moghadam, Chairman and CEO
W. Blake Baird, President and Director
Michael A. Coke, Executive Vice President and CFO
|
|
Item 9B. |
Other Information |
None.
65
PART III
Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14.
The information required by Items 10 through 14 will be
contained in a definitive proxy statement for our Annual Meeting
of Stockholders, which we anticipate will be filed no later than
120 days after the end of our fiscal year pursuant to
Regulation 14A and accordingly these items have been
omitted in accordance with General Instruction G(3) to
Form 10-K.
PART IV
|
|
Item 15. |
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedule |
(a)(1) and (2) Financial Statements and Schedule:
The following consolidated financial information is included as
a separate section of this report on
Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
F-1 |
|
|
|
|
F-3 |
|
|
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
F-5 |
|
|
|
|
F-6 |
|
|
|
|
F-7 |
|
|
|
|
S-1 |
|
All other schedules are omitted since the required information
is not present in amounts sufficient to require submission of
the schedule or because the information required is included in
the financial statements and notes thereto.
66
(a)(3) Exhibits:
Unless otherwise indicated below, the Commission file number to
the exhibit is No. 001-13545.
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
3 |
.1 |
|
Articles of Incorporation of AMB Property Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-11
(No. 333-35915)). |
|
|
3 |
.2 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 7.75% Series D Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1
of AMB Property Corporations Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1999). |
|
|
3 |
.3 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 7.75% Series E Cumulative Preferred
Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of AMB
Property Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on September 14, 1999). |
|
|
3 |
.4 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 7.95% Series F Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1
of AMB Property Corporations Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on April 14, 2000). |
|
|
3 |
.5 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 8.125% Series H Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.3 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on September 29, 2000). |
|
|
3 |
.6 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 8.00% Series I Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1
of AMB Property Corporations Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on March 23, 2001). |
|
|
3 |
.7 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 7.95% Series J Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1
of AMB Property Corporations Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on October 3, 2001). |
|
|
3 |
.8 |
|
Articles Supplementary redesignating and reclassifying all
2,200,000 Shares of the 8.75% Series C Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock as Preferred Stock (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 of AMB Property Corporations
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 7, 2001). |
|
|
3 |
.9 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 7.95% Series K Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1
of AMB Property Corporations Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on April 23, 2002). |
|
|
3 |
.10 |
|
Articles Supplementary redesignating and reclassifying
130,000 Shares of 7.95% Series F Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock as Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.2 of AMB Property Corporations Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2002). |
|
|
3 |
.11 |
|
Articles Supplementary redesignating and reclassifying all
20,000 Shares of 7.95% Series G Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock as Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.3 of AMB Property Corporations Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2002). |
|
|
3 |
.12 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the
61/2%
Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.16 of AMB Property
Corporations Current Report on Form 8-A filed on
June 20, 2003). |
|
|
3 |
.13 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the
63/4%
Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.17 of AMB Property
Corporations Form 8-K filed on November 26,
2003). |
|
|
3 |
.14 |
|
Articles Supplementary establishing and fixing the rights
and preferences of the 7.00% Series O Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1
to AMB Property Corporations Form 8-K filed
January 5, 2006). |
|
|
3 |
.15 |
|
Articles Supplementary redesignating and reclassifying all
1,300,000 shares of
85/8%
Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock as Preferred
Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.18 to AMB
Property Corporations Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2004). |
|
|
3 |
.16 |
|
Fourth Amended and Restated Bylaws of AMB Property Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of AMB Property
Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
August 17, 2004). |
67
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
.1 |
|
Form of Certificate for Common Stock of AMB Property Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-11
(No. 333-35915)). |
|
|
4 |
.2 |
|
Form of Certificate for
61/2%
Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of AMB
Property Corporation (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.3 of AMB Property Corporations
Form 8-A filed on June 20, 2003). |
|
|
4 |
.3 |
|
Form of Certificate for
63/4%
Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of AMB
Property Corporation (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.3 of AMB Property Corporations
Form 8-A filed on November 12, 2003). |
|
|
4 |
.4 |
|
Form of Certificate for 7.00% Series O Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to AMB Property Corporations
Form 8-K filed January 5, 2006). |
|
|
4 |
.5 |
|
$30,000,000 7.925% Fixed Rate Note No. 1 dated
August 18, 2000, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
August 18, 2000 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.5 of AMB Property Corporations Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000). |
|
|
4 |
.6 |
|
$25,000,000,000 7.925% Fixed Rate Note No. 2 dated
September 12, 2000, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
September 12, 2000 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.6 of AMB Property Corporations Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000). |
|
|
4 |
.7 |
|
$50,000,000 8.00% Fixed Rate Note No. 3 dated
October 26, 2000, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
October 26, 2000 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.7 of AMB Property Corporations Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000). |
|
|
4 |
.8 |
|
$25,000,000 8.000% Fixed Rate Note No. 4 dated
October 26, 2000, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
October 26, 2000 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.8 of AMB Property Corporations Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000). |
|
|
4 |
.9 |
|
$50,000,000 7.20% Fixed Rate Note No. 5 dated
December 19, 2000, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
December 19, 2000 (incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on January 8, 2001). |
|
|
4 |
.10 |
|
$50,000,000 7.20% Fixed Rate Note No. 6 dated
December 19, 2000, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
December 19, 2000 (incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on January 8, 2001). |
|
|
4 |
.11 |
|
$50,000,000 7.20% Fixed Rate Note No. 7 dated
December 19, 2000, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
December 19, 2000 (incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 4.3 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on January 8, 2001). |
|
|
4 |
.12 |
|
Specimen of 7.10% Notes due 2008 (included in the First
Supplemental Indenture incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 of AMB Property Corporations Registration
Statement on Form S-11 (No. 333-49163)). |
|
|
4 |
.13 |
|
Specimen of 7.50% Notes due 2018 (included in the Second
Supplemental Indenture incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.3 of AMB Property Corporations Registration
Statement on Form S-11 (No. 333-49163)). |
|
|
4 |
.14 |
|
Specimen of 6.90% Reset Put Securities due 2015 (included in the
Third Supplemental Indenture incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.4 of AMB Property Corporations Registration
Statement on Form S-11 (No. 333-49163)). |
|
|
4 |
.15 |
|
$25,000,000 6.90% Fixed Rate Note No. 8 dated
January 9, 2001, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
January 9, 2001 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on January 31, 2001). |
|
|
4 |
.16 |
|
$50,000,000 7.00% Fixed Rate Note No. 9 dated
March 7, 2001, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
March 7, 2001 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on March 16, 2001). |
|
|
4 |
.17 |
|
$25,000,000 6.75% Fixed Rate Note No. 10 dated
September 6, 2001, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
September 6, 2001 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on September 18, 2001). |
68
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
.18 |
|
$20,000,000 5.90% Fixed Rate Note No. 11 dated
January 17, 2002, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
January 17, 2002 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on January 23, 2002). |
|
|
4 |
.19 |
|
$75,000,000 5.53% Fixed Rate Note No. B-1 dated
November 10, 2003, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
November 10, 2003 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2003). |
|
|
4 |
.20 |
|
$50,000,000 Floating Rate Note No. B-1 dated
November 21, 2003, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
November 21, 2003 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on November 21, 2003). |
|
|
4 |
.21 |
|
$100,000,000 Fixed Rate Note No. B-2 dated
March 16, 2004, attaching the Parent Guarantee dated
March 16, 2004 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on March 17, 2004). |
|
|
4 |
.22 |
|
$175,000,000 Fixed Rate Note No. B-3, attaching the Parent
Guarantee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of AMB
Property Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on November 18, 2005). |
|
|
4 |
.23 |
|
Indenture dated as of June 30, 1998, by and among AMB
Property, L.P., AMB Property Corporation and State Street Bank
and Trust Company of California, N.A., as trustee (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-11
(No. 333-49163)). |
|
|
4 |
.24 |
|
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of June 30, 1998 by
and among AMB Property, L.P., AMB Property Corporation and State
Street Bank and Trust Company of California, N.A., as trustee
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-11
(No. 333-49163)). |
|
|
4 |
.25 |
|
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of June 30, 1998, by
and among AMB Property, L.P., AMB Property Corporation and State
Street Bank and Trust Company of California, N.A., as trustee
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-11
(No. 333-49163)). |
|
|
4 |
.26 |
|
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of June 30, 1998, by
and among AMB Property, L.P., AMB Property Corporation and State
Street Bank and Trust Company of California, N.A., as trustee
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-11
(No. 333-49163)). |
|
|
4 |
.27 |
|
Fourth Supplemental Indenture, by and among AMB Property, L.P.,
AMB Property Corporation and State Street Bank and Trust Company
of California, N.A., as trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K/ A filed on November 9, 2000). |
|
|
4 |
.28 |
|
Fifth Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 7, 2002, by
and among AMB Property, L.P., AMB Property Corporation and State
Street Bank and Trust Company of California, N.A., as trustee
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.15 of AMB Property
Corporations Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2002). |
|
|
4 |
.29 |
|
Sixth Supplemental Indenture dated as of July 11, 2005, by
and among AMB Property, L.P., AMB Property Corporation and
U.S. Bank National Association, as successor-in-interest to
State Street Bank and Trust Company of California, N.A., as
trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of AMB
Property Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on July 13, 2005). |
|
|
10 |
.1 |
|
Dividend Reinvestment and Direct Purchase Plan, dated
July 9, 1999 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 of AMB Property Corporations Quarterly
Report on Report Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 1999). |
|
|
*10 |
.2 |
|
Third Amended and Restated 1997 Stock Option and Incentive Plan
of AMB Property Corporation and AMB Property, L.P. (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.22 of AMB Property
Corporations Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2001). |
|
|
*10 |
.3 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to the Third Amended and Restated 1997
Stock Option and Incentive Plan of AMB Property Corporation and
AMB Property, L.P. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.23 of AMB Property Corporations Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001). |
69
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
*10 |
.4 |
|
Amendment No. 2 to the Third Amended and Restated 1997
Stock Option and Incentive Plan of AMB Property Corporation and
AMB Property, L.P., dated September 23, 2004 (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.5 of AMB Property
Corporations Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed on
November 9, 2004). |
|
|
*10 |
.5 |
|
2002 Stock Option and Incentive Plan of AMB Property Corporation
and AMB Property, L.P. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.15 of AMB Property Corporations
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-90042)). |
|
|
*10 |
.6 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to the 2002 Stock Option and Incentive Plan
of AMB Property Corporation and AMB Property, L.P., dated
September 23, 2004 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 of AMB Property Corporations Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q filed on November 9, 2004). |
|
|
*10 |
.7 |
|
Amended and Restated AMB Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.17 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-8
(No. 333-100214)). |
|
|
*10 |
.8 |
|
Form of Amended and Restated Change of Control and
Noncompetition Agreement by and between AMB Property, L.P. and
executive officers (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on December 15, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.9 |
|
Tenth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
AMB Property, L.P. dated as of November 26, 2003
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of AMB Property
Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
November 26, 2003). |
|
|
10 |
.10 |
|
Thirteenth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership
of AMB Property II, L.P., dated September 24, 2004
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of AMB Property
Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
September 30, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.11 |
|
Form of Registration Rights Agreement among AMB Property
Corporation and the persons named therein (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 of AMB Property
Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-11
(No. 333-35915)). |
|
|
10 |
.12 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement dated November 14, 2003 by
and among AMB Property II, L.P. and the unitholders whose
names are set forth on the signature pages thereto (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of AMB Property
Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
November 17, 2003). |
|
|
10 |
.13 |
|
Note Purchase Agreement dated as of November 5, 2003,
by and between AMB Property, L.P. and Teachers Insurance and
Annuity Association of America (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 99.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on November 6, 2003). |
|
|
10 |
.14 |
|
Second Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as
of June 1, 2004 by and among AMB Property L.P., the banks
listed therein, JPMorgan Chase Bank, as administrative agent,
J.P. Morgan Europe Limited, as administrative agent for
alternate currencies, Bank of America, N.A., as syndication
agent, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. and Banc of America
Securities LLC, as joint lead arrangers and joint bookrunners,
Commerzbank Aktiengesellschaft New York and Grand Cayman
Branches, PNC Bank National Association and Wachovia Bank, N.A.,
as documentation agents, KeyBank National Association, The Bank
of Nova Scotia, acting through its San Francisco Agency,
and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as managing agents, and ING Real
Estate Finance (USA) LLC, Southtrust Bank and Union Bank of
California, N.A., as co-agents (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on June 10, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.15 |
|
Guaranty of Payment, dated as of June 1, 2004 by AMB
Property Corporation for the benefit of JPMorgan Chase Bank, as
administrative agent, and J.P. Morgan Europe Limited, as
administrative agent for alternate currencies, for the banks
listed on the signature page to the Second Amended and Restated
Revolving Credit Agreement (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on June 10, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.16 |
|
Qualified Borrower Guaranty, dated as of June 1, 2004 by
AMB Property, L.P. for the benefit of JPMorgan Chase Bank and
J.P. Morgan Europe Limited, as administrative agents for
the banks listed on the signature page to the Second Amended and
Restated Revolving Credit Agreement (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.3 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on June 10, 2004). |
70
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
.17 |
|
Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as of June 29, 2004, by
and among AMB Japan Finance Y.K., as initial borrower, AMB
Property, L.P., as guarantor, AMB Property Corporation, as
guarantor, the banks listed on the signature pages thereof, and
Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, as administrative agent and
sole lead arranger and bookmanager (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on July 2, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.18 |
|
Guaranty of Payment, dated as of June 29, 2004 by AMB
Property, L.P. and AMB Property Corporation for the benefit of
Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, as administrative agent and
sole lead arranger and bookmanager, for the banks that are from
time to time parties to the Revolving Credit Agreement
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of AMB Property
Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 2, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.19 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as of
June 9, 2005, by and among, AMB Japan Finance Y.K., AMB
Amagasaki TMK, AMB Narita 1-1 TMK and AMB Narita 2 TMK, as
borrowers, AMB Property, L.P., as guarantor, AMB Property
Corporation, as guarantor, the banks listed on the signature
pages thereof, and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, as
administrative agent and sole lead arranger and bookmanager. |
|
|
10 |
.20 |
|
Amendment No. 2 to Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as of
December 8, 2005, by and among, AMB Japan Finance Y.K., as
initial borrower, AMB Property, L.P., as guarantor, AMB Property
Corporation, as guarantor, the banks listed on the signature
pages thereof, and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, as
administrative agent and sole lead arranger and bookmanager. |
|
|
10 |
.21 |
|
Credit Facility Agreement, dated as of November 24, 2004,
by and among AMB Tokai TMK, as borrower, AMB Property, L.P., as
guarantor, AMB Property Corporation, as guarantor, the banks
listed on the signature pages thereof, and Sumitomo Mitsui
Banking Corporation, as administrative agents and sole lead
arranger and bookmanager (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on December 1, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.22 |
|
Guaranty of Payment, dated as of November 24, 2004 by AMB
Property, L.P. and AMB Property Corporation for the benefit of
Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, as administrative agent and
sole lead arranger and bookmanager, for the banks that are from
time to time parties to the Credit Facility Agreement
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of AMB Property
Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 1, 2004). |
|
|
10 |
.23 |
|
Agreement of Sale, made as of October 6, 2003, by and
between AMB Property, L.P., International Airport Centers L.L.C.
and certain affiliated entities (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 99.3 of AMB Property Corporations Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on November 6, 2003). |
|
|
10 |
.24 |
|
Third Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as
of February 16, 2006, by and among AMB Property, L.P., as
guarantor, AMB Property Corporation, as guarantor, the banks
listed on the signature pages thereto, Bank of America, N.A., as
administrative agent, The Bank of Nova Scotia, as syndication
agent, Societe Generale, as documentation agent, Banc of America
Securities Asia Limited, as Hong Kong dollars agent, Bank of
America, N.A., acting by its Canada branch, as reference bank,
Bank of America, Singapore branch, as Singapore dollars agent,
and each of the other lending institutions that becomes a lender
thereunder (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of
AMB Property Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on February 22, 2006). |
|
|
10 |
.25 |
|
Separation Agreement and Release of All Claims, dated
August 17, 2005, by and between AMB Property Corporation
and David S. Fries (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of
AMB Property Corporations Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on August 17, 2005). |
71
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
.1 |
|
Subsidiaries of AMB Property Corporation. |
|
|
23 |
.1 |
|
Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. |
|
|
24 |
.1 |
|
Powers of Attorney (included in Part IV of this 10-K). |
|
|
31 |
.1 |
|
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certifications dated
March 10, 2006. |
|
|
32 |
.1 |
|
18 U.S.C. § 1350 Certifications dated
March 10, 2006. The certifications in this exhibit are
being furnished solely to accompany this report pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, and are not being filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and are not to be incorporated by reference
into any of our filings, whether made before or after the date
hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing. |
|
|
* |
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement |
(b) Financial Statement Schedule:
See Item 15(a)(1) and (2) above.
72
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, AMB Property
Corporation has duly caused this report to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized on
March 10, 2006.
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Hamid R. Moghadam
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hamid R. Moghadam |
|
Chairman of the Board and |
|
Chief Executive Officer |
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we, the undersigned
officers and directors of AMB Property Corporation, hereby
severally constitute Hamid R. Moghadam, W. Blake Baird, Michael
A. Coke and Tamra D. Browne, and each of them singly, our true
and lawful attorneys with full power to them, and each of them
singly, to sign for us and in our names in the capacities
indicated below, the
Form 10-K filed
herewith and any and all amendments to said
Form 10-K, and
generally to do all such things in our names and in our
capacities as officers and directors to enable AMB Property
Corporation to comply with the provisions of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and all requirements of the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, hereby ratifying
and confirming our signatures as they may be signed by our said
attorneys, or any of them, to said
Form 10-K and any
and all amendments thereto.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of AMB Property Corporation and in the capacities and
on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Hamid R. Moghadam
Hamid R. Moghadam |
|
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ W. Blake Baird
W. Blake Baird |
|
President and Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ Afsaneh M.
Beschloss
Afsaneh M. Beschloss |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ T. Robert Burke
T. Robert Burke |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ David A. Cole
David A. Cole |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ Lydia H. Kennard
Lydia H. Kennard |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ J. Michael Losh
J. Michael Losh |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ Frederick W. Reid
Frederick W. Reid |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ Jeffrey L. Skelton
Jeffrey L. Skelton |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ Thomas W. Tusher
Thomas W. Tusher |
|
Director |
|
March 10, 2006 |
|
/s/ Michael A. Coke
Michael A. Coke |
|
Chief Financial Officer and Executive
Vice President (Duly Authorized
Officer and Principal Financial and
Accounting Officer) |
|
March 10, 2006 |
74
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
AMB Property Corporation:
We have completed integrated audits of AMB Property
Corporations 2005 and 2004 consolidated financial
statements and of its internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2005 and an audit of its 2003
consolidated financial statements in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(United States). Our opinions, based on our audits, are
presented below.
Consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in
the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of AMB Property
Corporation and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2005 and
2004, and the results of their operations and their cash flows
for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2005 in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition,
in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the
index appearing under Item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all
material respects, the information set forth therein when read
in conjunction with the related consolidated financial
statements. These financial statements and financial statement
schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements and financial statements schedule based on
our audits. We conducted our audits of these statements in
accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about
whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit of financial statements includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, and evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that out audits provide a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial
statements, the Company adopted Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 150, Accounting for
Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both
Liabilities and Equity, in 2003.
Internal control over financial reporting
Also, in our opinion, managements assessment, included in
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting appearing under Item 9A, that the Company
maintained effective internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2005 based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO), is fairly stated, in all material respects,
based on those criteria. Furthermore, in our opinion, the
Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005,
based on criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the COSO. The Companys
management is responsible for maintaining effective internal
control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our
responsibility is to express opinions on managements
assessment and on the effectiveness of the Companys
internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We
conducted our audit of internal control over financial reporting
in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether effective internal control over
financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. An
audit of internal control over financial reporting includes
obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial
reporting, evaluating managements assessment, testing and
evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal
control, and performing such other procedures as we consider
necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit
provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external
F-1
purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. A companys internal control over financial
reporting includes those policies and procedures that
(i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in
reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company;
(ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Francisco, California
March 9, 2006
F-2