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, 2006
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
(Registrant’s 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
  New York Stock Exchange
63/4% Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
  New York Stock Exchange
7% Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
  New York Stock Exchange
6.85% Series P Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
  New York Stock Exchange
 
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 (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  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, 2006 was $4,256,316,319.
 
As of February 21, 2007, there were 90,903,378 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.
 
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
 
Part III incorporates by reference portions of the registrant’s Proxy Statement for its Annual Meeting of Stockholders which the registrant anticipates will be filed no later than 120 days after the end of its fiscal year pursuant to Regulation 14A.
 


 

 
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
 
Some of the information included in this annual report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements, which are made pursuant to the safe-harbor provisions of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Because these forward-looking statements involve numerous risks and uncertainties, there are important factors that could cause 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 should not be read as guarantees of future performance or results, and will not necessarily be accurate indicators of whether, or the time at which, such performance or results will be achieved. There is no assurance that the events or circumstances reflected in forward-looking statements will occur or be achieved. Forward-looking statements are necessarily dependent on assumptions, data or methods that may be incorrect or imprecise and 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;
 
  •  defaults on or 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, public opposition to these activities, as well as the risks associated with our expansion of and increased investment in our development business);
 
  •  risks of doing business internationally, including unfamiliarity with new markets and currency risks;
 
  •  risks of opening offices globally (including increasing headcount);
 
  •  a downturn in the U.S., California or the global economy or real estate conditions;
 
  •  risks of changing personnel and roles;
 
  •  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;
 
  •  risks associated with equity and debt securities financings and issuances (including the risk of dilution);
 
  •  changes in local, state and federal regulatory requirements;
 
  •  increases in real property tax rates;
 
  •  increases in interest rates and operating costs or greater than expected capital expenditures;
 
  •  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.


2


 

 
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. All of our forward-looking statements, including those in this report, are qualified in their entirety by this statement. We assume no obligation to update or supplement forward-looking statements.


3


 

 
PART I
 
Item 1.   Business
 
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 use the term “owned and managed” to describe assets in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term.
 
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 located mostly in the world’s busiest distribution markets: large, supply-constrained locations with proximity to airports, seaports and major highway systems. As of December 31, 2006, we owned, or had investments in, on a consolidated basis or through unconsolidated joint ventures, properties and development projects expected to total approximately 124.7 million square feet (11.6 million square meters) and 1,088 buildings in 39 markets within twelve countries. Additionally, as of December 31, 2006, we managed, but did not have a significant ownership interest in, industrial and other properties totaling approximately 1.5 million rentable square feet.
 
We operate our business primarily through our subsidiary, AMB Property, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, which we refer to as the “operating partnership”. As of December 31, 2006, we owned an approximate 95.0% 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 two to three times the world gross domestic product growth rate during the last 20 years. To serve the facility needs of these customers, we seek to invest globally in major distribution markets, transportation hubs and gateways that generally are tied to global trade.
 
Our strategy is to be a leading provider of industrial properties in supply-constrained submarkets of our targets markets. These submarkets are generally characterized by large population densities and typically offer substantial consumer concentrations, proximity to large clusters of distribution-facility users and significant labor pools, and are generally located near key international passenger and cargo airports, seaports and major highway systems. When measured by annualized base rent, on an owned and managed basis, 99.6% of our portfolio of industrial properties is located in our target markets, and much of this is 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.
 
Further, in many of our target markets, we focus on HTD® facilities, which are buildings designed to facilitate the rapid distribution of our customers’ products rather than storage of goods. 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.


4


 

 
Of the approximately 124.7 million rentable square feet as of December 31, 2006:
 
  •  on an owned and managed basis, which include investments held on a consolidated basis or through unconsolidated joint ventures, we owned and managed 964 industrial buildings, principally warehouse distribution facilities, encompassing approximately 100.7 million rentable square feet that were 96.1% leased;
 
  •  on an owned and managed basis, which include investments held on a consolidated basis or through unconsolidated joint ventures, we had investments in 45 industrial development projects which are expected to total approximately 13.7 million rentable square feet upon completion;
 
  •  on a consolidated basis, we owned nine development projects, totaling approximately 2.7 million rentable square feet that are available for sale or contribution; and
 
  •  through other non-managed unconsolidated joint ventures, we had investments in 46 industrial operating properties, totaling approximately 7.4 million rentable square feet, and one industrial operating property, totaling approximately 0.2 million square feet which is available for sale or contribution.
 
During 2006, our property acquisitions, on an owned and managed basis, totaled $834.2 million (including expected capital expenditures, and acquisitions by AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, an unconsolidated joint venture, totaling $540.0 million), primarily located in our target countries that included France, Germany, Mexico, the Netherlands, and the U.S. As of December 31, 2006, we had four industrial projects held for divestiture. Dispositions during 2006 totaled $335.1 million, including dispositions by two of our unconsolidated joint ventures of $159.8 million. Assets were divested in markets that no longer fit our investment strategy, such as Charlotte, Cincinnati and Memphis, and we also disposed of properties at valuation levels that we considered to be premium. While we continue to sell assets, we believe that we have achieved our near-term strategic disposition goals. Additionally, we contributed $607.3 million of completed development projects and a land parcel for $77.5 million to our private capital joint ventures 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 global headquarters are located at Pier 1, Bay 1, San Francisco, California 94111; our telephone number is (415) 394-9000. We maintain other office locations in Amsterdam, Atlanta, Baltimore, Beijing, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Menlo Park, New Jersey, New York, Nagoya, Narita, Osaka, Shanghai, Singapore, Tokyo, and Vancouver. As of December 31, 2006, we employed 416 individuals: 173 in our San Francisco headquarters, 62 in our Boston office, 43 in our Tokyo office, and the remainder in our other regional offices. Our website address is www.amb.com. Our annual reports 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. The public may read and copy these materials at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains a Web site that contains such reports, proxy and information statements and other information whose Internet address is http://www.sec.gov. Our Corporate Governance Principles and Code of Business Conduct are also posted on our website. 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.


5


 

 
NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE CERTIFICATION
 
We submitted our 2006 annual Section 12(a) Chief Executive Officer certification with the New York Stock Exchange. The certification was not qualified in any respect. Additionally, we filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer certifications required under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and furnished as exhibits to this Annual Report the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer certifications required under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “AMB,” the “Company,” “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®; High Throughput Distribution® (HTD®); and Strategic Alliance Programs®.
 
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 certain of 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 continue 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. During 2006, our average industrial property base rental rates decreased by 0.1% 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. During 2006, 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, 2004) increased by 2.6% on our industrial properties. Since our initial public offering in November 1997, on a consolidated basis, we have experienced average annual increases in industrial property base rental rates of 4.4% and maintained an average quarter-end occupancy rate of 95.0% 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: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Supplemental Earnings Measures” for a discussion of same store net operating income and a reconciliation of same store net operating income and net 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 and Value-Added Conversions
 
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


6


 

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 development 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 are generally contributed to our co-investment joint ventures and held in our owned and managed portfolio or sold to third parties. 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 four years, we have significantly expanded our development staff. We pursue development projects 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, which enables us to acquire land and industrial properties in exchange for limited partnership units in the operating partnership or AMB Property II, L.P., another of our operating partnerships, enhances our attractiveness to owners and developers seeking to transfer properties on a tax-deferred basis. 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: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Key Transactions in 2006.”
 
Growth through Global Expansion
 
By the end of 2010, we expect to have approximately 50% of our owned and managed operating portfolio invested in non-U.S. markets (based on annualized base rent). As of December 31, 2006, our non-U.S. operating properties comprised 14.1% of our owned and managed operating portfolio (based on annualized base rent) and 7.4% of our consolidated operating portfolio (based on annualized base rent). Our North American target countries outside of the United States currently comprise Canada and Mexico. Our European target countries currently comprise Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom. Our Asian target countries currently comprise China, India, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. We expect to add additional target countries outside the United States in the future.
 
We believe that expansion into target markets outside the U.S. 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 focus in the United States on supply-constrained submarkets with political, economic or physical constraints to new development. Our international investments extend our offering of HTD® facilities for customers


7


 

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 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 15%-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, 2006, we owned approximately 64.3 million square feet of our properties (51.6% of the total operating and development portfolio) through our consolidated and unconsolidated joint ventures.
 
Item 1A.   Risk Factors
 
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;


8


 

 
  •  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 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, 2006, leases on a total of 14.3% of our industrial properties (based on annualized base rent) will expire on or prior to December 31, 2007. 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 customer experiences a downturn in its business or other type of financial distress, then it may be unable to make timely rental payments or renew its lease. Further, 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 customers, we may lose potential customers, and we may be pressured to reduce our rental rates below those we currently charge in order to retain customers when our customers’ 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, the Internal Revenue Code regulates the number of properties that we as a real estate investment trust, 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.


9


 

 
We could be adversely affected if a significant number of our customers are unable to meet their lease obligations.
 
Our results of operations, distributable cash flow and the value of our stock would be adversely affected if a significant number of our customers 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, 2006, we did not have any single customer account for annualized base rent revenues greater than 3.1%. However, in the event of lease defaults by a significant number of our customers, 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, and we intend to continue to expand and increase our investment in our development and renovation business. 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 management’s 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


10


 

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 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.
 
We also have offices in many countries outside the United States and, as a result, our operations may be subject to risks that may limit our ability to effectively establish, staff and manage our offices outside the United States, including:
 
  •  Differing employment practices and labor issues;
 
  •  Local business and cultural factors that differ from our usual standards and practices;
 
  •  Regulatory requirements and prohibitions that differ between jurisdictions; and
 
  •  Health concerns.
 
Our global growth (including growth in new regions in the U.S.) subjects us to certain risks, including risks associated with funding increasing headcount, integrating new offices, and establishing effective controls and procedures to regulate the operations of new offices. In addition, payroll expenses are paid in local currencies and, therefore, we are exposed to risks associated with fluctuations in the rate of exchange between the U.S. dollar and these currencies.
 
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 to hedge exchange rate fluctuations. For leases denominated in international currencies, we may use derivative financial instruments to manage the international currency 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


11


 

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 real estate investment trust.
 
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, 2006, our industrial properties located in California represented 25.3% of the aggregate square footage of our industrial operating properties and 25.4% of our industrial annualized base rent, on an owned and managed basis. 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 California’s economic climate. Because of the number of properties we have located in California, a downturn in California’s 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 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 partnership’s 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. U.S. properties located in active seismic areas include properties in the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, and Seattle. Our largest concentration of such properties is in California where, on an owned and managed basis, as of December 31, 2006, we had 267 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 25.5 million square feet and representing 25.3% of our industrial operating properties based on aggregate square footage and 25.4% based on industrial annualized base rent, on an owned and managed basis. International properties located in active seismic areas include Tokyo and Osaka, Japan and Mexico City, Mexico. We carry 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 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


12


 

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, 2006, we owned approximately 64.3 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 partnership’s, limited liability company’s or joint venture’s liabilities;
 
  •  if our partners fail to fund their share of any required capital contributions, then we may be required to contribute such capital;
 
  •  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 venture’s, member’s or partner’s interest 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, limited liability company, 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


13


 

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 acquired and may in the future acquire properties subject to liabilities and without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, with respect to unknown liabilities. As a result, if a liability were asserted against us based upon ownership of any of these entities or properties, then we might have to pay substantial sums to settle it, which could adversely affect our cash flow. Contingent or unknown liabilities with respect to entities or properties acquired might include:
 
  •  liabilities for 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 real estate investment trust status and avoid the payment of income and excise taxes, we may need to borrow funds on a short-term basis to meet the real estate investment trust distribution requirements even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings. These short-term borrowing needs could result from differences in timing between the actual receipt of cash and inclusion of income for federal income tax purposes, or the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. 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 market’s 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: “Management’s 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


14


 

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, 2006, we had total debt outstanding of $3.4 billion. We guarantee the operating partnership’s 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 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, 2006, 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.


15


 

 
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.
 
From time to time, certain of our executive officers and directors may own interests in other real-estate related businesses and investments, including de minimis holdings of the equity securities of public and private real estate companies. Our executive officers’ 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 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 partnership’s 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 partnership’s partnership agreement and individually to approve certain amendments that would adversely affect their rights. The limited partners may exercise these voting rights in a manner that conflicts with the interests of our stockholders. In addition, under the terms of the operating partnership’s 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


16


 

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 consultant’s recommendation. These environmental assessments have not revealed, and 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 of 1986, as amended (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


17


 

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 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, including the contribution of properties to our joint venture funds. 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 or our contributions of properties into our joint venture funds 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 or contributions of properties into our joint venture funds 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 or contribution 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 and other key employees. From time to time, our personnel and their roles may change. While we believe that we could find suitable employees to meet our personnel needs, the loss of key personnel, any change in their roles, 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.
 
Because our compensation packages include equity-based incentives, pressure on our stock price or limitations on our ability to award such incentives could affect our ability to offer competitive compensation packages to our executives and key employees. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain our executive officers, or if compensation costs required to attract and retain key employees become more expensive, our performance and competitive position could be materially adversely affected.
 
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,


18


 

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 (or a customer of any partnership in which we are a partner), then the rent received by us (either directly or through any such partnership) from that customer will not be qualifying income for purposes of the real estate investment trust gross income tests of the Internal Revenue Code. To help 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, series O preferred stock, and series P preferred stock. We also prohibit the ownership, actually or constructively, of any shares of our series D, 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;


19


 

 
  •  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.
 
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.
 
If we issue additional securities, then the investment of existing stockholders will be diluted.
 
As a real estate investment trust, we are dependent on external sources of capital and may issue common or preferred stock or debt securities to fund our future capital needs. We have authority to issue shares of common stock or other equity or debt securities, and to cause the operating partnership or AMB Property II, L.P., to issue limited partnership units, in exchange for property or otherwise. Existing stockholders have no preemptive right to acquire any additional securities issued by the operating partnership, AMB Property II, L.P., or us and any issuance of additional equity securities may adversely effect the market price of our stock and could result in dilution of an existing stockholder’s investment.
 
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 market’s 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 market’s 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


20


 

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 stock’s 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.
 
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. Our board of directors may revise or amend these strategies and policies at any time without a vote of stockholders. Any such changes may not serve the interests of all 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 4,709,056 common limited partnership units issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2006, 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, 2006, under our stock option and incentive plans, we had 3,230,106 shares of common stock reserved and available for future issuance, had outstanding options to purchase 6,843,025 shares of common stock (of which 5,404,361 are vested and exercisable) and had 611,549 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 partnership’s 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.
 
Item 2.   Properties
 
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES
 
As of December 31, 2006, we owned and managed 964 industrial buildings aggregating approximately 100.7 million rentable square feet (on a consolidated basis, we had 820 industrial buildings aggregating approximately 80.3 million rentable square feet), excluding development and renovation projects and recently completed development projects available for sale or contribution, located in 34 markets throughout the United States and in China, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the Netherlands. Our industrial properties were 96.1% leased to 2,633 customers, the largest of which accounted for no more than 3.1% 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.


21


 

 
The following table identifies types and characteristics of our industrial buildings and each type’s percentage, based on square footage, of our total owned and managed operating portfolio, which we define as properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term.
 
                     
        December 31,  
Building Type
 
Description
  2006     2005(1)  
 
Warehouse
  Customers typically 15,000-75,000 square feet, single or multi-customer     48.4 %     44.2 %
Bulk Warehouse
  Customers typically over 75,000 square feet, single or multi-customer     38.3 %     40.0 %
Flex Industrial
  Includes assembly or research & development, single or multi-customer     4.5 %     5.9 %
Light Industrial
  Smaller customers, 15,000 square feet or less, higher office finish     3.5 %     4.6 %
Trans-Shipment
  Unique configurations for truck terminals and cross-docking     1.5 %     1.7 %
Air Cargo
  On-tarmac or airport land for transfer of air cargo goods     3.2 %     3.1 %
Office
  Single or multi-customer, used strictly for office     0.6 %     0.5 %
                     
          100.0 %     100.0 %
                     
 
 
(1) The information for 2005 is presented on a consolidated basis while the information for 2006 is presented on an owned and managed basis. Management believes that the difference in comparability between 2006 and 2005 is not significant.
 
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 U.S. metropolitan areas, which currently comprise Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, Northern New Jersey/New York City, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Seattle. Our other U.S. target markets include Austin, Baltimore/Washington D.C., Boston, Houston, Minneapolis and Orlando. Our non-U.S. industrial properties are located in major distribution markets, including Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Guadalajara, Hamburg, Lyon, Mexico City, Osaka, Paris, Queretaro, Shanghai, Singapore, Tokyo and Toronto.
 
Within these metropolitan areas, our 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.


22


 

 
Owned and Managed Market Operating Statistics(1)
 
As of December 31, 2006, we held investments in operating properties in 34 markets in our owned and managed operating portfolio throughout the United States and in China, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the Netherlands. The following table represents properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term:
 
                                                                                                 
                                                          Total
             
                                  No. New
    San
                U.S. Hub and
    Total
    Total/
 
                      Los
          Jersey/
    Francisco
          U.S.
    Gateway
    Other
    Weighted
 
    Atlanta     Chicago     Dallas     Angeles(2)     Miami     New York     Bay Area     Seattle     On-Tarmac(3)     Markets     Markets     Average  
 
Number of buildings(8)
    47       112       53       148       53       133       116       59       34       755       209       964  
Rentable square feet(8)
    4,622,651       11,321,419       4,843,064       14,858,376       5,678,594       10,538,097       10,499,059       7,430,006       2,681,328       72,472,594       28,230,321       100,702,915  
% of total rentable square feet
    4.6 %     11.2 %     4.8 %     14.8 %     5.6 %     10.5 %     10.4 %     7.4 %     2.7 %     72.0 %     28.0 %     100.0 %
Occupancy percentage
    92.7 %     95.1 %     97.8 %     95.8 %     97.9 %     98.7 %     97.4 %     96.0 %     96.3 %     96.5 %     95.0 %     96.1 %
Annualized base rent (000’s)
  $ 19,016     $ 56,603     $ 22,387     $ 92,562     $ 42,148     $ 75,719     $ 70,466     $ 34,913     $ 46,402     $ 460,216     $ 186,948     $ 647,164  
% of total annualized base rent
    2.9 %     8.7 %     3.5 %     14.3 %     6.5 %     11.7 %     10.9 %     5.4 %     7.2 %     71.1 %     28.9 %     100.0 %
Number of leases
    163       229       258       394       259       381       344       230       233       2,491       785       3,276  
Annualized base rent per square foot
  $ 4.44     $ 5.26     $ 4.73     $ 6.50     $ 7.58     $ 7.28     $ 6.89     $ 4.89     $ 17.96     $ 6.59     $ 6.97     $ 6.69  
Lease expirations as a % of ABR:(4)
                                                                                               
2007
    15.8 %     26.3 %     17.1 %     9.4 %     22.5 %     10.8 %     13.7 %     18.9 %     16.0 %     15.6 %     10.9 %     14.3 %
2008
    21.4 %     15.2 %     15.1 %     19.1 %     11.1 %     13.2 %     16.7 %     13.2 %     13.8 %     15.5 %     9.6 %     13.8 %
2009
    24.2 %     13.9 %     17.2 %     13.7 %     16.3 %     15.3 %     22.8 %     21.2 %     6.5 %     16.2 %     11.8 %     15.0 %
Weighted average lease terms:
                                                                                               
Original
    5.2 years       4.8 years       5.6 years       5.9 years       5.6 years       6.9 years       5.6 years       6.0 years       8.6 years       5.8 years       6.6 years       6.1 years  
Remaining
    2.5 years       2.6 years       3.3 years       3.3 years       3.4 years       3.8 years       2.4 years       2.8 years       4.6 years       3.1 years       4.0 years       3.3 years  
Tenant retention:
                                                                                               
Quarter
    57.1 %     84.7 %     37.1 %     83.6 %     83.7 %     66.6 %     54.2 %     45.5 %     84.5 %     71.9 %     55.4 %     68.9 %
Year-to-date
    66.9 %     69.7 %     47.6 %     78.5 %     77.0 %     75.6 %     71.2 %     76.2 %     90.8 %     73.4 %     61.3 %     70.9 %
Rent increases on renewals and rollovers:
                                                                                               
Quarter
    (4.1 )%     3.9 %     (3.6 )%     13.9 %     10.2 %     11.2 %     (21.0 )%     13.5 %     4.9 %     4.4 %     2.2 %     4.1 %
Same space square feet leased
    233,627       557,402       200,241       990,934       155,519       305,275       317,314       155,385       85,242       3,000,939       580,710       3,581,649  
Year-to-date
    (8.3 )%     (5.4 )%     (5.5 )%     7.5 %     5.2 %     3.4 %     (13.2 )%     4.1 %     4.1 %     (0.4 )%     1.6 %     (0.1 )%
Same space square feet leased
    862,757       2,270,278       777,789       2,842,876       1,083,300       2,175,615       1,505,411       1,080,155       418,545       13,016,726       3,186,854       16,203,580  
Same store cash basis NOI % change:(5)
                                                                                               
Quarter
    (3.5 )%     0.0 %     12.3 %     (1.4 )%     15.6 %     (7.5 )%     6.5 %     (1.1 )%     1.9 %     0.7 %     3.5 %     1.3 %
Year-to-date
    (0.3 )%     2.3 %     2.4 %     2.6 %     16.8 %     (1.2 )%     2.1 %     0.0 %     3.5 %     2.5 %     2.7 %     2.6 %
Square feet owned in same store pool(6)
    3,611,600       8,479,166       3,515,471       12,162,203       4,681,107       8,817,823       9,835,672       6,119,008       2,564,083       59,786,133       17,505,733       77,291,866  
Our pro rata share of square feet(7)
    2,355,377       9,032,175       2,856,821       11,289,385       4,480,180       5,571,416       7,849,682       3,880,944       1,494,569       48,810,549       19,677,264       68,487,813  
 
 
(1) Our owned and managed portfolio excludes development and renovation projects and recently completed development projects available for sale or contribution.
 
(2) We also own a 19.9 acre land parcel, which is leased to a parking lot operator 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, or ABR, is calculated as monthly base rent (cash basis) per the terms of the lease, as of December 31, 2006, multiplied by 12.
 
(5) See Part II Item 7: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Supplemental Earnings Measures” for a discussion of why management believes same store cash basis NOI is a useful supplemental measure for our management and investors, of ways to use this measure when assessing the Company’s financial performance, and the limitations of the measure as a measurement tool.
 
(6) Same store pool excludes properties purchased and developments stabilized after December 31, 2004. 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.
 
(7) Calculated as our pro rata share of square feet on owned and managed operating properties as well as non-managed operating properties.
 
(8) On a consolidated basis, we have 820 industrial buildings, totaling approximately 80.3 million square feet.


23


 

 
Owned and Managed Operating Portfolio Overview(1)
 
As of December 31, 2006, our 964 industrial buildings were diversified across 34 markets throughout the United States and in China, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the Netherlands. The average age of our industrial properties is approximately 23 years (since the property was built or substantially renovated). The following table represents our owned and managed properties which we define as properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the asset or property manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term.
 
                                                                 
          Rentable
    % of Total
          Annualized
    % of Total
          Annualized
 
    Number of
    Square
    Rentable
    Occupancy
    Base Rent
    Annualized
    Number
    Base Rent per
 
    Buildings(5)     Feet(5)     Square Feet     Percentage     (000’s)(3)     Base Rent     of Leases     Square Foot  
 
U.S. Hub and Gateway Markets
    755       72,472,594       72.0 %     96.5 %   $ 460,216       71.1 %     2,491     $ 6.59  
U.S. Other Target Markets(2)
                                                               
Austin
    9       1,758,369       1.7       95.9       9,964       1.5       33       5.91  
Baltimore/Washington DC
    39       3,046,324       3.0       99.6       20,580       3.2       147       6.78  
Boston
    39       5,188,593       5.2       92.5       31,452       4.9       101       6.55  
Houston
    7       1,236,401       1.2       83.5       7,145       1.1       60       6.92  
Minneapolis
    31       3,886,858       3.9       96.2       17,216       2.7       138       4.61  
Orlando
    16       1,424,748       1.4       99.8       6,719       1.0       77       4.72  
                                                                 
Subtotal/Weighted Average
    141       16,541,293       16.4 %     95.0 %   $ 93,076       14.4 %     556       5.92  
U.S. Non-Target Markets
                                                               
Columbus
    1       240,000       0.2       100.0       552       0.1       4       2.30  
New Orleans
    5       410,849       0.4       100.0       2,107       0.3       52       5.13  
                                                                 
Subtotal/Weighted Average
    6       650,849       0.6 %     100.0 %   $ 2,659       0.4 %     56       4.09  
Non U.S. Target Markets(4)
                                                               
North America
                                                               
Guadalajara, Mexico
    6       933,542       0.9       100.0       5,061       0.8       20       5.42  
Mexico City, Mexico
    6       1,803,973       1.8       95.1       10,481       1.6       18       6.11  
Queretaro, Mexico
    1       95,949       0.1       100.0       482       0.1       1       5.02  
Europe
                                                               
Amsterdam, Netherlands
    7       964,039       0.8       100.0       8,377       1.3       7       8.69  
Frankfurt, Germany
    1       166,917       0.2       100.0       2,669       0.4       1       15.99  
Hamburg, Germany
    7       959,214       1.0       98.9       7,931       1.2       21       8.36  
Lyon, France
    1       262,491       0.3       100.0       1,758       0.3       2       6.70  
Paris, France
    20       1,885,532       1.9       96.2       15,179       2.3       51       8.37  
Asia
                                                               
Osaka, Japan
    1       965,155       1.0       90.3       7,546       1.2       13       8.66  
Shanghai, China
    1       151,749       0.2       100.0       550       0.1       2       3.62  
Tokyo, Japan
    11       2,849,618       2.8       88.8       31,179       4.8       37       12.32  
                                                                 
Subtotal/Weighted Average
    62       11,038,179       11.0 %     94.7 %   $ 91,213       14.1 %     173     $ 8.72  
                                                                 
Total Other Markets
    209       28,230,321       28.0       95.0       186,948       28.9       785       6.97  
                                                                 
Total/Weighted Average
    964       100,702,915       100.0 %     96.1 %   $ 647,164       100.0 %     3,276       6.69  
                                                                 
 
 
(1) Our owned and managed operating portfolio excludes development and renovation projects and recently completed development projects available for sale or contribution.
 
(2) Effective as of December 31, 2006, Houston and Orlando have been added to our U.S. target markets.
 
(3) Annualized base rent is calculated as monthly base rent (cash basis) per the terms of the lease, as of December 31, 2006, multiplied by 12.
 
(4) Annualized base rent for leases denominated in foreign currencies is translated using the currency exchange rate at December 31, 2006.
 
(5) On a consolidated basis, we have 820 industrial buildings, totaling approximately 80.3 million rentable square feet.


24


 

 
Lease Expirations(1)
 
The following table summarizes the lease expirations for our owned and managed operating properties for leases in place as of December 31, 2006, 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
    Annualized
 
    Feet     Rent (000’s)(2)     Base Rent  
 
2007
    15,946,335     $ 96,962       14.3 %
2008
    14,987,948       93,720       13.8 %
2009
    15,580,437       101,672       15.0 %
2010
    13,056,478       96,569       14.2 %
2011
    13,193,485       97,473       14.3 %
2012
    7,813,704       66,080       9.7 %
2013
    3,379,973       26,803       3.9 %
2014
    5,326,305       41,105       6.0 %
2015
    2,706,554       20,209       3.0 %
2016 and beyond
    4,925,182       39,118       5.8 %
                         
Total
    96,916,401     $ 679,711       100.0 %
                         
 
 
(1) Schedule includes leases that expire on or after December 31, 2006. Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties which we define as properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term.
 
(2) 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. Amounts represent 100% of the annualized base rent of the owned and managed operating properties.


25


 

 
Customer Information(1)
 
Largest Property Customers.  As of December 31, 2006, our 25 largest property customers by annualized base rent, on an owned and managed basis, are set forth in the table below:
 
                                         
                Percentage of
          Percentage of
 
          Aggregate
    Aggregate
    Annualized
    Aggregate
 
    Number of
    Rentable
    Leased Square
    Base
    Annualized
 
Customer Name(2)
  Leases     Square Feet     Feet(3)     Rent (000’s)(4)     Base Rent(5)  
 
United States Government(6)(7)
    47       1,407,748       1.5 %   $ 20,295       3.1 %
Deutsche Post World Net (DHL)(6)
    41       1,977,650       2.0 %     17,791       2.7 %
FedEx Corporation(6)
    30       1,361,619       1.4 %     14,455       2.2 %
Nippon Express
    12       967,039       1.0 %     9,636       1.5 %
Sagawa Express
    7       726,235       0.8 %     9,008       1.4 %
Harmonic Inc. 
    4       285,480       0.3 %     8,907       1.4 %
BAX Global Inc/Schenker/Deutsche Bahn(6)
    16       711,117       0.7 %     7,067       1.1 %
La Poste
    2       854,427       0.9 %     6,332       1.0 %
City and County of San Francisco
    1       559,605       0.6 %     5,714       0.9 %
Panalpina, Inc. 
    7       870,156       0.9 %     5,585       0.9 %
Expeditors International
    8       1,003,939       1.0 %     4,836       0.7 %
Worldwide Flight Services(6)
    14       327,622       0.3 %     4,694       0.7 %
Eagle Global Logistics, L.P. 
    10       758,121       0.8 %     4,424       0.7 %
Forward Air Corporation
    9       547,544       0.6 %     4,290       0.7 %
FMI International
    3       764,343       0.8 %     4,240       0.7 %
UPS
    15       559,994       0.6 %     3,911       0.6 %
United Air Lines Inc.(6)
    6       191,085       0.2 %     3,408       0.5 %
World Logi K.K
    10       343,883       0.4 %     3,178       0.5 %
Ahold NV
    6       693,280       0.7 %     2,970       0.5 %
Elmhult Limited Partnership
    5       760,253       0.8 %     2,686       0.4 %
Virco Manufacturing Corporation
    1       559,000       0.6 %     2,566       0.4 %
UTi United States Inc. 
    11       314,029       0.3 %     2,494       0.4 %
Menzies Aviation(6)
    4       183,867       0.2 %     2,323       0.4 %
Integrated Airline Services(6)
    4       198,262       0.2 %     2,284       0.4 %
Kintetsu World Express
    7       180,027       0.2 %     2,278       0.4 %
                                         
Total
            17,106,325       17.8 %   $ 155,372       24.2 %
                                         
 
 
(1) Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties which we define as properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term.
 
(2) Customer(s) may be a subsidiary of or an entity affiliated with the named customer. We also own a 19.9 acre land parcel, adjacent to the Los Angeles International Airport which is leased to a parking lot operator with an annualized base rent of $7.5 million, which is not included.
 
(3) Computed as aggregate leased square feet divided by the aggregate leased square feet of operating properties.
 
(4) Annualized base rent is calculated as monthly base rent (cash basis) per the terms of the lease, as of December 31, 2006, multiplied by 12.
 
(5) Computed as aggregate annualized base rent divided by the aggregate annualized base rent of operating properties.
 
(6) Airport apron rental amounts (but not square footage) are included.


26


 

 
(7) United States Government includes the United States Postal Service, United States Customs, United States Department of Agriculture and various other U.S. governmental agencies.
 
OWNED AND MANAGED OPERATING AND LEASING STATISTICS
 
Owned and Managed Operating and Leasing Statistics(1)
 
The following table summarizes key operating and leasing statistics for all of our owned and managed operating properties as of and for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
 
                         
Operating Portfolio
  2006     2005(2)     2004(2)  
 
Square feet owned(3)(6)
    100,702,915       87,772,104       90,278,803  
Occupancy percentage(6)
    96.1 %     95.8 %     94.8 %
Weighted average lease terms:
                       
Original
    6.1 years       6.1 years       6.1 years  
Remaining
    3.3 years       3.3 years       3.3 years  
Tenant retention
    70.9 %     64.2 %     66.8 %
Same Space Leasing Activity(4):
                       
Rent increases (decreases) on renewals and rollovers
    (0.1 )%     (9.7 )%     (13.2 )%
Same space square footage commencing (millions)
    16.2       13.6       17.5  
Second Generation Leasing Activity(5):
                       
Tenant improvements and leasing commissions per sq. ft.:
                       
Retained
  $ 1.41     $ 1.60     $ 1.73  
Re-tenanted
    3.19       3.03       2.70  
                         
Weighted average
  $ 2.20     $ 2.34     $ 2.27  
                         
Square footage commencing (millions)
    19.1       18.5       22.5  
 
 
(1) Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties which we define as properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term. This excludes development and renovation projects and recently completed development projects available for sale or contribution.
 
(2) The information for 2005 and 2004 is presented on a consolidated basis while the information for 2006 is presented on an owned and managed basis. Management believes that the difference in comparability between 2006, 2005 and 2004, is not significant.
 
(3) In addition to owned square feet as of December 31, 2006, we managed, but did not have an ownership interest in, approximately 0.2 million additional square feet of properties. As of December 31, 2006, one of our subsidiaries also managed approximately 1.1 million additional square feet of properties representing the IAT portfolio on behalf of the IAT Air Cargo Facilities Income Fund. As of December 31, 2006, we also had investments in 7.4 million square feet of operating properties through our investments in non-managed unconsolidated joint ventures.
 
(4) Consists of second generation leases renewing or re-tenanting with current and prior lease terms greater than one year.
 
(5) Second generation tenant improvements and leasing commissions per square foot are the total cost of tenant improvements, leasing commissions and other leasing costs incurred during leasing of second generation space divided by the total square feet leased. Costs incurred prior to leasing available space are not included until such space is leased. Second generation space excludes newly developed square footage or square footage vacant at acquisition.


27


 

 
(6) On a consolidated basis, we had approximately 80.3 million rentable square feet with an occupancy rate of 97.0% at December 31, 2006.
 
Owned and Managed Same Store Operating Statistics(1)
 
The following table summarizes key operating and leasing statistics for our owned and managed same store operating properties as of and for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
 
                         
Same Store Pool(2)
  2006     2005(3)     2004(3)  
 
Square feet in same store pool(4)
    77,291,866       72,452,609       74,516,427  
% of total industrial square feet
    76.8 %     82.5 %     82.5 %
Occupancy percentage(4)
    97.0 %     95.6 %     95.3 %
Weighted average lease terms:
                       
Original
    6.0 years       5.9 years       6.0 years  
Remaining
    3.0 years       3.0 years       3.1 years  
Tenant retention
    72.5 %     63.7 %     66.4 %
Rent increases (decreases) on renewals and rollovers
    (0.4 )%     (9.8 )%     (14.7 )%
Square feet leased (millions)
    15.7       13.0       16.2  
Growth % increase (decrease) (including straight-line rents):
                       
Revenues(5)
    2.1 %     (0.7 )%     (0.7 )%
Expenses(5)
    3.5 %     (0.2 )%     (0.5 )%
Net operating income(5)
    1.6 %     (0.8 )%     (0.8 )%
Growth % increase (decrease) (excluding straight-line rents):
                       
Revenues(5)
    2.8 %     0.0 %     (0.8 )%
Expenses(5)
    3.5 %     (0.2 )%     (0.5 )%
Net operating income(5)(6)
    2.6 %     0.1 %     (0.9 )%
 
 
(1) Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties which we define as properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term. This excludes development and renovation projects and recently completed development projects available for sale or contribution.
 
(2) 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 where building has been substantially complete for at least 12 months).
 
(3) The information for 2005 and 2004 is presented on a consolidated basis while the information for 2006 is presented on an owned and managed basis. Management believes that the difference in comparability between 2006, 2005 and 2004, is not significant.
 
(4) On a consolidated basis, we had approximately 71.2 million square feet with an occupancy rate of 96.9% at December 31, 2006.
 
(5) On a consolidated basis, the percentage change was 2.1%, 4.7% and 1.2%, respectively, for revenues, expenses and NOI (including straight-line rents) and 2.4%, 4.7% and 1.6%, respectively, for the revenues, expenses, and NOI (excluding straight line rents).
 
(6) See Part II, Item 7: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Supplemental Earnings Measures” for a discussion of same store net operating income and a reconciliation of same store net operating income and net income.


28


 

 
DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES
 
Development Pipeline
 
The following table sets forth the properties owned by us as of December 31, 2006, which were undergoing development, renovation or expansion. We cannot assure you that any of these projects will be completed on schedule or within budgeted amounts.
 
Industrial Development and Renovation Deliveries
 
                                         
                        Estimated
       
                  Estimated
    Total
    Our
 
            Estimated
    Square Feet
    Investment(1)
    Ownership
 
Projects
 
Market
 
Developer
  Stabilization(6)     at Stabilization(6)     (000’s)     Percentage  
 
2007 Deliveries
                                       
1. Beacon Lakes Village — Phase 1 Bldg E1
  Miami   Flagler     Q1       52,668     $ 6,100       50 %
2. AMB Annagem Distribution Centre
  Toronto, Canada   AMB     Q1       198,169       13,800       100 %
3. AMB Des Plaines Logistics Center
  Chicago   AMB     Q1       126,053       18,600       100 %
4. AMB DFW Logistics Center 1
  Dallas   AMB     Q1       113,640       5,900       100 %
5. AMB Turnberry Distribution VI(7)
  Chicago   AMB     Q1       179,400       10,600       20 %
6. Beacon Lakes — Bldg 6
  Miami   Flagler     Q1       206,464       13,300       79 %
7. AMB Fokker Logistics Center 2A
  Amsterdam, Netherlands   Delta Group     Q2       118,166       15,900       100 %
8. AMB Riverfront Distribution Center — Bldg B
  Seattle   AMB     Q2       388,000       22,800       100 %
9. AMB Forest Park Freight Terminal
  Atlanta   AMB     Q2       142,000       11,200       100 %
10. AMB Gonesse Distribution Center
  Paris, France   GEPRIM     Q2       598,161       55,400       100 %
11. AMB Douglassingel Distribution Center
  Amsterdam, Netherlands   Austin     Q3       148,714       22,800       100 %
12. AMB Port of Hamburg 1
  Hamburg, Germany   BUSS Ports + Logistics     Q3       414,701       36,800       94 %
13. AMB Pearson Logistics Centre 1 — Bldg 200
  Toronto, Canada   AMB     Q3       205,518       16,800       100 %
14. AMB Tres Rios Industrial Park — Bldg 3
  Mexico City, Mexico   G. Accion     Q3       628,784       34,900       98 %
15. AMB Tres Rios Industrial Park — Bldg 4
  Mexico City, Mexico   G. Accion     Q3       315,156       17,800       98 %
16. AMB Arrayanes — Bldg 2
  Guadalajara, Mexico   G. Accion     Q4       473,720       17,800       90 %
17. AMB Aurora Industrial(4)
  Minneapolis   AMB     Q4       125,200       7,100       100 %
18. AMB Milton 401 Business Park — Bldg 2
  Toronto, Canada   AMB     Q4       281,358       21,700       100 %
19. AMB Sagamihara Distribution Center
  Tokyo, Japan   AMB     Q4       543,056       87,100       100 %
20. AMB Pearson Logistics Centre 1 — Bldg 100
  Toronto, Canada   AMB     Q4       446,338       31,700       100 %
21. AMB Dublin(3)
  San Francisco Bay Area   AMB     Q4             13,600       100 %
22. AMB Hathaway(3)
  San Francisco Bay Area   AMB     Q4             16,500       100 %
23. AMB Valley Distribution Center
  Seattle   AMB     Q4       749,970       43,600       100 %
24. AMB Redlands — Parcel 2
  Los Angeles   AMB     Q4       1,313,470       57,200       100 %
25. Platinum Triangle Land — Phase 1(3)
  Los Angeles   AMB     Q4             15,400       100 %
26. AMB Fokker Logistics Center 3
  Amsterdam, Netherlands   Delta Group     Q4       324,725       44,900       50 %
27. AMB Isle d’Abeau Logistics Park Bldg C
  Lyon, France   GEPRIM     Q4       277,817       21,800       100 %
28. AMB Torrance Matrix
  Los Angeles   AMB     Q4       161,785       28,000       100 %
                                         
Total 2007 Deliveries
                    8,533,033     $ 709,100       94 %
                                         
Leased or Under Contract For Sale/Funded-to-date
                    34 %   $ 516,800 (2)        
Weighted Average Estimated Yield(5)
                            8.0 %        
 


29


 

                                         
                        Estimated
       
                  Estimated
    Total
    Our
 
            Estimated
    Square Feet
    Investment(1)
    Ownership
 
Projects
 
Market
 
Developer
  Stabilization(6)     at Stabilization(6)     (000’s)     Percentage  
 
2008 Deliveries
                                       
29. AMB Steel Road
  Los Angeles   AMB     Q1       161,000     $ 10,400       100 %
30. Beacon Lakes Bldg 7
  Miami   Flagler     Q1       193,090       14,400       79 %
31. AMB Amagasaki Distribution Center 2
  Osaka, Japan   AMB     Q2       981,679       105,900       100 %
32. Agave — Bldg 5
  Mexico City, Mexico   G. Accion     Q2       103,204       7,100       98 %
33. AMB Le Grand Roissy Distribution — Mitry
  Paris, France   SIRIUS     Q2       37,954       4,600       100 %
34. AMB Shinkiba Distribution Center
  Tokyo, Japan   AMB     Q2       328,764       90,000       100 %
35. AMB Theodore Park Logistics Center
  Dusseldorf, Germany   Delta Group     Q2       140,566       17,000       100 %
36. AMB Narita Distribution Center 1 — Bldg C
  Tokyo, Japan   AMB     Q2       348,891       43,500       100 %
37. AMB Barajas Logistics Park
  Madrid, Spain   AMB     Q2       427,133       39,500       80 %
38 AMB Funabashi Distribution Center 5
  Tokyo, Japan   AMB     Q2       469,254       57,500       100 %
39. AMB Palmetto Distribution Center
  Orlando   AMB     Q2       406,400       20,800       100 %
40. Platinum Triangle Land — Phase 2(3)
  Los Angeles   AMB     Q2             30,100       100 %
41. AMB Franklin Commerce Center
  New Jersey   AMB     Q3       366,896       26,700       100 %
42. AMB Pompano Center of Commerce — Phase 1
  Miami   AMB     Q3       218,835       21,400       100 %
43. AMB Lijnden Logistics Court 1
  Amsterdam, Netherlands   Keystone Vasgoed     Q3       96,520       16,800       100 %
44. AMB Nanko Naka Distribution Center
  Osaka, Japan   AMB     Q3       402,313       48,700       100 %
45. AMB Siziano Business Park — Bldg 1
  Milan, Italy   Redilco     Q4       436,916       34,000       50 %
                                         
Total 2008 Deliveries
                    5,119,415     $ 588,400       95 %
                                         
Leased or Under Contract For Sale/Funded-to-date
                    7 %   $ 297,700 (2)        
Weighted Average Estimated Yield(5)
                            7.1 %        
Total Scheduled Deliveries
                    13,652,448     $ 1,297,500          
                                         
Leased or Under Contract For Sale/Funded-to-date
                    24 %   $ 814,500 (2)        
Weighted Average Estimated Yield(5)
                            7.6 %        
 
 
(1) Represents total estimated cost of development, renovation or expansion, including initial acquisition costs, prepaid ground leases and associated carry costs. Estimated total investments are based on current forecasts and are subject to change. Non-U.S. dollar investments are translated to U.S. dollars using the exchange rate at December 31, 2006.
 
(2) Our pro rata share of amounts funded to date for 2007 and 2008 deliveries was $489.0 million and $288.5, respectively, for a total of $777.5 million.
 
(3) Represents a value-added conversion project.
 
(4) Represents a renovation project.
 
(5) Yields exclude value-added conversion projects and are calculated on an after-tax basis for international projects.
 
(6) Stabilization is 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 twelve months.
 
(7) Represents projects in unconsolidated joint ventures.

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, 2006:
 
Completed Development Projects Available for Sale or Contribution(1)
 
                             
              Estimated
       
        Estimated
    Total
    Our
 
        Square Feet
    Investment
    Ownership
 
Projects(1)
 
Market
  at Completion     (000’s)(2)     Percentage  
 
1. Agave — Bldg 4
  Mexico City, Mexico     217,514     $ 14,200       98 %
2. AMB BRU Air Cargo Center
  Brussels, Belgium     102,655       12,900       100 %
3. AMB Fengxian Logistics Center — Bldgs 2, 4 & 6(3)
  Shanghai, China     1,040,633       41,500       60 %
4. AMB Fokker Logistics Center 1
  Amsterdam, Netherlands     236,203       30,300       100 %
5. AMB Jiuting Distribution Center 2
  Shanghai, China     187,866       7,300       100 %
6. AMB Layline Distribution Center(3)
  Los Angeles     298,000       30,200       100 %
7. AMB Milton 401 Business Park — Bldg 1
  Toronto, Canada     375,241       21,100       100 %
8. Frankfurt Logistics Center 556 — Phase II
  Frankfurt, Germany     105,723       15,800       100 %
9. Highway 17 — 55 Madison Street(3)
  New Jersey     150,446       12,900       100 %
10. Singapore Airport Logistics Center — Bldg 2(4)
  Singapore City, Singapore     250,758       13,000       50 %
                             
Total Available for Sale or Contribution
        2,965,039     $ 199,200       88 %
                             
 
 
(1) Represents projects where development activities have been completed and which we intend to sell or contribute within two years of construction completion.
 
(2) Represents total estimated cost of development, renovation or expansion, including initial acquisition costs, prepaid ground leases and associated carry costs. The estimates are based on current estimates and forecasts and are subject to change. Non-U.S. Dollar investments are translated to U.S. Dollar using the exchange rate at December 31, 2006.
 
(3) Renovation projects represent projects where the acquired buildings are less than 75% leased and require significant capital expenditures (generally more than 10% - 25% of acquisition cost) to bring the buildings up to operating standards and stabilization (generally 90% occupancy).
 
(4) Represents a project in an unconsolidated joint venture.
 
Properties held through Joint Ventures, Limited Liability Companies and Partnerships
 
Consolidated Joint Ventures:
 
As of December 31, 2006, 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


31


 

ventures include buy/sell provisions. See Part IV, Item 15: Note 9 of the “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” for additional details.
 
The tables that follow summarize our consolidated joint ventures as of December 31, 2006:
 
Consolidated Co-Investment Joint Ventures
(dollars in thousands)
 
                                                         
    Our
                Gross
                JV Partners’
 
    Ownership
    Number
    Square
    Book
    Property
    Other
    Share
 
Joint Ventures
  Percentage     of Buildings     Feet(1)     Value(2)     Debt     Debt     of Debt(3)  
 
Co-Investment Operating Joint Ventures:
                                                       
AMB Erie(4)
    50 %     3       821,712     $ 52,942     $ 20,605     $     $ 10,303  
AMB Partners II(5)
    20 %     118       9,913,375       678,796       323,532       65,000       311,470  
AMB-SGP(6)
    50 %     74       8,287,424       444,990       235,480             117,449  
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II(7)
    20 %     70       8,007,103       515,334       243,263             192,058  
AMB-AMS(8)
    39 %     33       2,172,137       153,563       78,904             48,420  
                                                         
Total Co-Investment Operating Joint Ventures
    30 %     298       29,201,751       1,845,625       901,784       65,000       679,700  
Co-Investment Development Joint Ventures:
                                                       
AMB Partners II(5)
    20 %     n/a       n/a       342                    
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II(7)
    20 %     n/a       n/a       4,200                    
                                                         
Total Co-Investment Development Joint Ventures
    20 %                 4,542                    
                                                         
Total Co-Investment Consolidated Joint Ventures
    30 %     298       29,201,751     $ 1,850,167     $ 901,784     $ 65,000     $ 679,700  
                                                         
 
 
(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, 2006. 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: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — 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 Partners II, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2001 with the City and County of San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System.
 
(6) AMB-SGP, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2001 with Industrial JV Pte. Ltd., a subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte. Ltd., the real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.
 
(7) 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.
 
(8) AMB-AMS, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with three Dutch pension funds.


32


 

 
Other Consolidated Joint Ventures
(dollars in thousands)
 
                                                                 
          Our
                Gross
                JV Partners’
 
          Ownership
    Number
    Square
    Book
    Property
    Other
    Share
 
Properties
  Market     Percentage     of Buildings     Feet     Value(1)     Debt     Debt     of Debt(2)  
 
Other Industrial Operating Joint Ventures
    Various       92 %     32       2,982,313     $ 258,374     $ 60,435     $     $ 4,419  
Other Industrial Development Joint Ventures
    Various       81 %     16       3,930,930       320,942       63,171       98       28,095  
                                                                 
Total Other Industrial Consolidated Joint Ventures
            86 %     48       6,913,243     $ 579,316     $ 123,606     $ 98     $ 32,514  
                                                                 
 
 
(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, 2006. 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: “Management’s 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:
 
As of December 31, 2006, we held interests in 14 equity investment joint ventures that are not consolidated in our financial statements. Effective October 1, 2006, we deconsolidated AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. on a prospective basis. 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. 46®, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.
 
The tables that follow summarize our unconsolidated joint ventures as of December 31, 2006:
 
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
(dollars in thousands)
 
                                                                 
    Our
                Gross
                Our
    Our
 
    Ownership
    Number
    Square
    Book
    Property
    Other
    Net Equity
    Share of
 
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
  Percentage     of Buildings     Feet(1)     Value     Debt     Debt     Investment     Debt(2)  
 
Co-Investment Operating Joint Ventures:
                                                               
1. AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC(3)
    20 %     12       2,737,515     $ 165,381     $ 95,000     $ 11,700     $ 7,601     $ 20,912  
2. AMB Japan Fund I, L.P.(4)
    20 %     12       3,814,773       602,397       368,086       82,184       31,811       90,004  
3. AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P.(5)
    23 %     119       13,784,406       1,313,858       615,500       60,000       136,971       160,280  
                                                                 
Total Co-Investment Joint Ventures
    22 %     143       20,336,694       2,081,636       1,078,586       153,884       176,383       271,196  
Co-Investment Development Joint Ventures:
                                                               
1. AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P.(5)
    23 %     1       179,400       9,636                          
2. AMB DFS Fund I, LLC(6)
    15 %                 78,450                   11,700        
Other Industrial Operating Joint Ventures
    53 %     48       7,684,931 (7)     295,036       184,423             47,955       89,262  
                                                                 
Total Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
    28 %     192       28,201,025     $ 2,464,758     $ 1,263,009     $ 153,884     $ 236,038     $ 360,458  
                                                                 
 
 
(1) For development properties, this represents estimated square feet at completion of development for committed phases of development and renovation projects.
 
(2) See footnote 1 to the Capitalization Ratios table contained in Part II, Item 7: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation — Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a discussion


33


 

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.
 
(3) AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC is an unconsolidated co-investment joint venture formed in 2004 with Industrial (Mexico) JV Pte. Ltd., a subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte. Ltd, the real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation. Includes $5.5 million of shareholder loans outstanding at December 31, 2006 between us and the co-investment partnership and its subsidiaries.
 
(4) AMB Japan Fund I, L.P. is a co-investment partnership formed in 2005 with 13 institutional investors as limited partners.
 
(5) 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. Prior to October 1, 2006, the Company accounted for AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. as a consolidated joint venture.
 
(6) AMB DFS Fund I, LLC is a co-investment partnership formed in 2006 with a subsidiary of GE Real Estate to build and sell properties.
 
(7) Includes investments in 7.4 million square feet of operating properties through the Company’s investments in unconsolidated joint ventures that it does not manage which it excludes from its owned and managed portfolio. Our owned and managed operating portfolio includes properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term.
 
Mortgage and Loan Receivables and Other Investments:
 
The tables that follow summarize our mortgage investments and other investments as of December 31, 2006:
 
Mortgage Investments and Other Investments
(dollars in thousands)
 
                         
            Mortgage
       
Mortgage and Loan Receivables
  Market   Maturity   Receivable(2)     Rate  
 
1. AMB Pier One, LLC(1)
  San Francisco Bay   May 2026   $ 12,686       13.0 %
2. G. Accion
  Various   March 2010     6,061       10.0 %
                         
            $ 18,747          
                         
 
                                 
                  Our
    Our
 
            Net
    Ownership
    Share
 
Other Investments
  Market   Property Type   Investment     Percentage     of Debt(5)  
 
1. Park One Land Parcel
  Los Angeles   Parking Lot   $ 75,498       100 %   $  
2. G. Accion(3)
  Various   Various     38,343       39 %     2,965  
3. IAT Air Cargo Facilities Income Fund(4)
  Canada   Industrial     2,644       5 %      
                                 
            $ 116,485             $ 2,965  
                                 
 
 
(1) 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.
 
(2) We hold inter-company loans that we eliminate in the consolidation process.
 
(3) We also have a 39% unconsolidated equity interest in G. Accion, S.A. de C.V. (G. Accion), a Mexican real estate company. G. Accion provides management and development services for industrial, retail, residential and office properties in Mexico.
 
(4) We also have an approximate 5% equity interest in IAT Air Cargo Facilities Income Fund, a public Canadian real estate income trust.


34


 

 
(5) See footnote 1 to the Capitalization Ratios table contained in Part II, Item 7: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation — Liquidity and Capital Resources” for 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.
 
Secured Debt
 
As of December 31, 2006, we had $1.4 billion of secured indebtedness, net of unamortized premiums, secured by deeds of trust or mortgages. As of December 31, 2006, the total gross consolidated investment value of those properties securing the debt was $2.6 billion. Of the $1.4 billion of secured indebtedness, $1.0 billion was consolidated joint venture debt secured by properties with a gross investment value of $1.9 billion. For additional details, see Part II, Item 7: “Management’s 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, 2006, 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, 2006, 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 Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder 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 February 20, 2007, there were approximately 471 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, 2005 through December 31, 2006:
 
                         
Year
  High     Low     Dividend  
 
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  
2006
                       
1st Quarter
  $ 56.53     $ 48.89     $ 0.460  
2nd Quarter
    54.25       46.26       0.460  
3rd Quarter
    58.65       50.05       0.460  
4th Quarter
    63.02       54.49       0.460  
 
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, real estate investment trust provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and other factors.


36


 

 
Stock Performance Graph
 
The following line graph compares the change in our cumulative total stockholder return on shares of our common stock from December 31, 2001 to December 31, 2006, to the cumulative total return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index and the NAREIT Equity REIT Total Return Index from December 31, 2001 to December 31, 2006. The graph assumes an initial investment of $100 in the common stock of AMB Property Corporation and each of the indices on December 31, 2000 and, as required by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the reinvestment of all distributions. The return shown on the graph is not necessarily indicative of future performance.
 
COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE RETURN
Among AMB Property Corporation, The S&P 500 Index
And The NAREIT Equity Index
 
(COMPARISON CHART)


37


 

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:
 
Note: Effective October 1, 2006, the Company deconsolidated AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. on a prospective basis. See footnote 4 below for further discussion of the comparability of selected financial and other data.
 
                                         
    2006(5)     2005     2004     2003     2002  
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)  
 
Operating Data
                                       
Total revenues
  $ 729,896     $ 660,875     $ 576,395     $ 501,323     $ 480,473  
Income before minority interests, discontinued operations and cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
    234,785       205,086       114,446       111,560       115,405  
Income from continuing operations before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
    171,930       130,309       61,583       54,118       70,228  
Income from discontinued operations
    51,949       127,498       63,888       75,010       50,891  
Net income before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
    223,879       257,807       125,471       129,128       121,119  
Net income
    224,072       257,807       125,471       129,128       121,119  
Net income available to common stockholders
    209,420       250,419       118,340       116,716       113,035  
Income from continuing operations per common share:
                                       
Basic(2)
    1.80       1.46       0.66       0.52       0.75  
Diluted(2)
    1.73       1.40       0.64       0.50       0.73  
Income from discontinued operations per common share:
                                       
Basic(2)
    0.59       1.52       0.78       0.92       0.61  
Diluted(2)
    0.57       1.45       0.75       0.91       0.60  
Net income available to common stockholders per common share:
                                       
Basic(2)
    2.39       2.98       1.44       1.44       1.36  
Diluted(2)
    2.30       2.85       1.39       1.41       1.33  
Dividends declared per common share
    1.84       1.76       1.70       1.66       1.64  
Other Data
                                       
Funds from operations(3)
  $ 297,912     $ 254,363     $ 207,314     $ 186,666     $ 215,194  
Funds from operations per common share and unit:
                                       
Basic
    3.24       2.87       2.39       2.17       2.44  
Diluted
    3.12       2.75       2.30       2.13       2.40  
Cash flows provided by (used in):
                                       
Operating activities
    335,855       295,815       297,349       269,808       297,723  


38


 

                                         
    2006(5)     2005     2004     2003     2002  
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)  
 
Investing activities
    (880,560 )     (60,407 )     (731,402 )     (346,275 )     (253,312 )
Financing activities
    483,621       (101,856 )     409,705       112,022       (28,150 )
Balance Sheet Data
                                       
Investments in real estate at cost
  $ 6,575,733     $ 6,798,294     $ 6,526,144     $ 5,491,707     $ 4,922,782  
Total assets
    6,713,512       6,802,739       6,386,943       5,409,559       4,983,629  
Total consolidated debt
    3,437,415       3,401,561       3,257,191       2,574,257       2,235,361  
Our share of total debt(4)
    3,088,624       2,601,878       2,395,046       1,954,314       1,691,737  
Stockholders’ equity
    2,166,657       1,916,299       1,671,140       1,657,137       1,676,079  
 
 
(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 87,710,500 and 91,106,893 shares, respectively, for 2006; 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.
 
(3) See Part II, Item 7: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Supplemental Earnings Measures — FFO,” for a discussion of why we believe FFO is a useful supplemental measure of operating performance, of ways in which investors might use FFO when assessing our financial performance, and of FFO’s limitations as a measurement tool.
 
(4) 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.”
 
(5) Effective October 1, 2006, we deconsolidated AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. on a prospective basis, due to the re-evaluation of the accounting for our investment in the fund in light of changes to the partnership agreement regarding the general partner’s rights effective October 1, 2006. As a result, the financial measures for the years 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003 and 2002, included in our operating data, other data and balance sheet data above are not comparable.

39


 

Item 7.   Management’s 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, as amended, 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.
 
Management’s 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 disposition of operating assets that no longer fit our strategy, from the disposition of projects in our development-for-sale program and from the 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 continued to improve during 2006 when compared with market conditions in 2005. According to Torto Wheaton Research, availability dropped 10 basis points in the fourth quarter of 2006 to 9.4%, and availability for the year dropped 50 basis points. We believe the strongest industrial markets in the U.S. are the coastal gateway markets tied to global trade, including Los Angeles, our largest market, Miami, the San Francisco Bay Area and Seattle, and to a lesser degree Northern New Jersey/New York (with the exception of the Exit 8A submarket). While we believe that the broader Chicago market is showing signs of stabilization, certain submarkets, like the O’Hare submarket, are relatively strong. We believe Dallas continues to recover, and Atlanta continues to suffer from a large increase in supply. We believe the operating environment in our U.S. on-tarmac business remains good with improving cargo volumes and essentially no new supply.
 
Investor demand for industrial property (as supported by our observation of strong national sales volumes and declining acquisition capitalization rates) has remained consistently strong over the past several years. We believe we capitalized on this demand for industrial property by accelerating the repositioning of our portfolio, through the disposition of non-core properties, which was effectively completed in 2006 with our exit from the Charlotte and Memphis markets. We plan to continue selling selected assets on an opportunistic basis or that no longer fit our strategic investment objectives, but we believe we have substantially achieved our repositioning goals.
 
Occupancy levels in our portfolio continue to outperform the national industrial market, as determined by Torto Wheaton Research, by pricing lease renewals and new leases with sensitivity to local market conditions. During the prior 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. In our stronger markets, we are increasing rents as opposed to occupancy.


40


 

 
The table below summarizes key operating and leasing statistics for our owned and managed operating properties for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005:
 
                         
    U.S. Hub and
    Total Other
    Total/Weighted
 
Owned and Managed Property Data(1)
  Gateway Markets(2)     Markets(3)     Average  
 
For the year ended December 31, 2006:
                       
% of total rentable square feet
    72.0 %     28.0 %     100.0 %
Occupancy percentage at year end
    96.5 %     95.0 %     96.1 %
Same space square footage leased
    13,016,726       3,186,854       16,203,580  
Rent (decreases) increases on renewals and rollovers(4)
    (0.4 )%     1.6 %     (0.1 )%
For the year ended December 31, 2005:(5)
                       
% 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 )%
 
 
(1) Schedule includes owned and managed operating properties which we define as properties in which we have at least a 10% ownership interest, for which we are the property or asset manager, and which we intend to hold for the long-term.
 
(2) Our U.S. hub and gateway markets include on-tarmac and Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, Northern New Jersey/New York City, San Francisco Bay Area, and Seattle.
 
(3) Our total markets include other U.S. target markets, other non-target markets, and non-U.S. target markets.
 
(4) On a consolidated basis, rent increases on renewals and rollovers were 4.4% and 3.0%, respectively, for U.S. hub and gateway markets and total other markets.
 
(5) The information for 2005 is presented on a consolidated basis while the information for 2006 is presented on an owned and managed basis. Management believes that the difference in comparability between the information for 2006 and 2005 is not significant.
 
At December 31, 2006, our operating portfolio’s occupancy rate was 96.1%, on an owned and managed basis (97.0% on a consolidated basis), an increase from both the prior quarter and December 31, 2005. Rental rates on lease renewals and rollovers in our portfolio increased 4.1% in the fourth quarter of 2006 and decreased 0.1% for the full year. 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, 2004) grew by 1.3% in the fourth quarter of 2006 and 2.6% for the full-year 2006, on an owned and managed basis. Excluding lease termination fees, same store net operating income grew 3.0% and 3.2% in the quarter and for the full year (decreased 0.5% and increased 1.6%, respectively, on a consolidated basis), respectively, on an owned and managed basis. See Part II, Item 7: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Supplemental Earnings Measures” for a discussion of same store net operating income and a reconciliation of same store net operating income and net income. We currently expect that same store growth in our operating portfolio, excluding lease termination fees, will be about 3% to 4% for 2007, on an owned and managed basis. Market rents continue to rebound from their lows and in many of our hub and gateway markets are back to or above their prior peak levels of 2001.
 
We believe that industrial market rents in the San Francisco Bay Area are improving. While market rents in the San Francisco Bay Area were up 10% to 15% in 2006, rents still have not yet fully recovered to normal levels. Rents on lease renewals and rollovers in the San Francisco Bay Area declined 21.0% in the fourth quarter of 2006 and 13.2% for the full-year 2006, on an owned and managed basis. Without the effect of the San Francisco Bay Area, rents on renewals and rollovers for the full-year 2006 would have been 2.0%, on an owned and managed basis, which we believe reflects the generally positive trends in U.S. industrial space availability.
 
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-


41


 

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, Japan and China are particularly attractive given the current lack of supply of modern industrial distribution facilities in the major metropolitan markets of these countries. Prior to our global expansion, our development pipeline was $106.8 million at the end of 2002. As a result of our global expansion and increased development capabilities, we have increased our development pipeline to approximately $1.3 billion at December 31, 2006. In addition to our committed development pipeline, we hold a total of 1,735 acres for future development or sale, of which 92% is in North America. We believe these 1,735 acres of land could support approximately 30.5 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 new investments. Through these co-investment joint ventures, we typically earn acquisition 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 cannot 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, 2006, we owned approximately 64.3 million square feet of our properties (51.6% 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.
 
By the end of 2010, we expect to have approximately 50% of our owned and managed operating portfolio invested in non-U.S. markets (based on owned and managed annualized base rent). As of December 31, 2006, our non-U.S. operating properties comprised 14.1% of our owned and managed operating portfolio (based on annualized base rent) and 7.4% of our consolidated operating portfolio (based on annualized base rent). Our North American target countries outside of the United States currently comprise Canada and Mexico. Our European target countries currently comprise Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom. Our Asian target countries currently comprise China, India, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. We expect to add additional target countries outside the United States in the future.
 
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 2006
 
During the year ended December 31, 2006, we completed the following significant capital deployment and other transactions:
 
  •  Acquired, on an owned and managed basis, 106 buildings in North America and Europe, aggregating approximately 9.8 million square feet, for $834.2 million;
 
  •  Committed to 30 development projects in North America, Asia and Europe totaling 10.4 million square feet with an estimated total investment of approximately $914.3 million;
 
  •  Acquired 835 acres of land for development in North America and Asia for approximately $293.2 million;
 
  •  Sold five land parcels and six development projects totaling approximately 1.3 million square feet for an aggregate sale price of $86.6 million;
 
  •  Contributed four completed development projects for $486.2 million to AMB Japan Fund I, L.P., two completed development projects for $56.4 million to AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, three completed development projects for $64.8 million to AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. and one land parcel for $77.5 million to AMB DFS Fund I, LLC, all of which entities are unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures. As a result of these contributions, we recognized an aggregate after-tax gain of $94.1 million,


42


 

  representing the portion of our interest in the contributed properties acquired by the third-party co-investors for cash;
 
  •  Divested ourselves of 73 industrial buildings aggregating approximately 6.4 million square feet, for an aggregate price of approximately $335.1 million, including 34 industrial buildings that were sold by two of our unconsolidated joint ventures; and
 
  •  Acquired the 50% interest in AMB BlackPine that we did not previously own;
 
  •  Received an incentive distribution of $19.8 million from AMB Partners II, L.P.; and
 
  •  Deconsolidated AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., on a prospective basis, as of October 1, 2006.
 
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, 2006, we completed the following significant capital markets and other financing transactions:
 
  •  Obtained long-term secured debt financings for our co-investment joint ventures of $141.6 million with a weighted average interest rate of 6.1%;
 
  •  Assumed $29.9 million of debt for our co-investment joint ventures at a weighted average interest rate of 6.0%;
 
  •  Obtained $177.7 million of new debt (using exchange rates in effect at applicable quarter end dates) with a weighted average interest rate of 4.2% for international acquisitions;
 
  •  Obtained a $65.0 million floating rate unsecured revolving credit facility for one of our co-investment joint ventures;
 
  •  Entered into a third amended and restated credit agreement for a $250.0 million unsecured multi-currency revolving credit facility which replaced an existing $100.0 million unsecured multi-currency revolving credit facility;
 
  •  Repurchased all of AMB Property II, L.P.’s outstanding 7.75% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units for an aggregate cost of $10.9 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions;
 
  •  Repurchased all of AMB Property II, L.P.’s outstanding 7.95% Series F Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units for an aggregate cost of $10.0 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions;
 
  •  Repurchased all of AMB Property II, L.P.’s outstanding 8.125% Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units for an aggregate cost of $42.8 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions;
 
  •  Purchased all of AMB Property II, L.P.’s outstanding 5.00% Series N Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units for an aggregate cost of $36.6 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions;
 
  •  Completed the early renewal and increase of our senior unsecured revolving line of credit in the amount of $550.0 million, an increase of $50.0 million;
 
  •  Entered into an amended and restated revolving credit agreement for a 45.0 billion Yen (approximately $377.9 million U.S. dollars, using the exchange rate at December 31, 2006) unsecured revolving credit facility that replaced an existing 35.0 billion Yen (approximately $293.9 million U.S. dollars, using the exchange rate at December 31, 2006) unsecured revolving credit facility;
 
  •  Raised approximately $48.1 million in net proceeds from the issuance and sale of $50.0 million of our 6.85% Series P Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock;
 
  •  Issued $175.0 million aggregate principal amount of fixed rate senior unsecured notes under the operating partnership’s 2006 medium-term note program which mature on August 15, 2013 and bear interest at a rate of 5.90% per annum; and


43


 

 
  •  Entered into a 228.0 million Euro (approximately $300.9 million U.S. dollars, using the exchange rate at December 31, 2006) revolving credit facility agreement, which provides for loans on a secured and unsecured basis.
 
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 and leasehold interests 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 regularly review the impact of above or below-market leases, in-place leases and lease origination costs for all new acquisitions, and record an intangible asset or liability accordingly. Carrying values for financial reporting purposes are reviewed for impairment on a property-by-property basis whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of a property may not be fully recoverable. Impairment is recognized when estimated expected future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) are less than the carrying value of the property. The estimation of expected future net cash flows is inherently uncertain and relies on assumptions regarding current and future economics and market conditions and the availability of capital. If impairment analysis assumptions change, then an adjustment to the carrying value 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. As a result of leasing activity and the economic environment, we re-evaluated the carrying value of our investments and recorded impairment charges of $6.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2006 on certain of our investments.
 
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 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 customer’s 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 and are included in gains from disposition of real estate interests in the statement of operations. 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, and are included in development profits, net of taxes, in the statement of operations. Lastly,


44


 

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, requires 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, which is included in gains from dispositions of real estate, net of minority interests, in the statement of operations. 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 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 or FASB Interpretation No. 46R, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities “FIN 46”. Based on the guidance set forth in EITF 04-5, 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 under EITF 04-5, 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.
 
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 real estate investment trust subsidiaries and international entities. A deferred tax component could arise based upon the differences in GAAP versus tax income for items such as depreciation and gain recognition. However, we believe deferred tax is an immaterial component of our consolidated balance sheet.
 
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
 
Effective October 1, 2006, we deconsolidated AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., on a prospective basis, due to the re-evaluation of the accounting for our investment in the fund in light of changes to the partnership agreement regarding the general partner’s rights effective October 1, 2006. As a result, our results of operations presented below are not comparable between years presented.
 
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, 2004 (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, 2006, same store industrial properties consisted of properties aggregating approximately 71.2 million square feet. The properties acquired during 2006 consisted of 73 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.6 million square feet. The properties acquired during 2005 consisted of 41 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.9 million square feet. During 2006, property divestitures and contributions consisted of 50 buildings, aggregating approximately 7.5 million square feet. In 2005, property divestitures and contributions consisted of 150 buildings, aggregating approximately 10.6 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.


45


 

 
For the Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 (dollars in millions)
 
                                 
Revenues
  2006     2005     $ Change     % Change  
 
Rental revenues
                               
U.S. industrial:
                               
Same store
  $ 514.9     $ 501.5     $ 13.4       2.7 %
2006 acquisitions
    4.4             4.4       %
2005 acquisitions
    19.4       11.4       8.0       70.2 %
Development
    8.3       7.4       0.9       12.2 %
Other industrial
    74.3       63.6       10.7       16.8 %
Non U.S. industrial
    62.5       33.1       29.4       88.8 %
                                 
Total rental revenues
    683.8       617.0       66.8       10.8 %
Private capital income
    46.1       43.9       2.2       5.0 %
                                 
Total revenues
  $ 729.9     $ 660.9     $ 69.0       10.4 %
                                 
 
U.S. industrial same store revenues increased $13.4 million from the prior year despite the decrease of $12.8 million in same store revenues due to the deconsolidation of AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., effective October 1, 2006, attributable primarily to improved occupancy and increased rental rates in various markets. The properties acquired during 2005 consisted of 41 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.9 million square feet. The properties acquired during 2006 consisted of 73 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.6 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. Non-U.S. industrial revenues increased approximately $29.4 million from the prior year due primarily to the stabilization of three properties in Japan and the continued acquisition of properties in France, Germany and Mexico. The increase in private capital income was primarily due to increased asset management and acquisition fees from additional assets held in co-investment joint ventures, which were partially offset by a decrease in incentive distributions of approximately $3.9 million. During 2006, we received


46


 

incentive distributions of $22.5 million, of which $19.8 million was from AMB Partners II, L.P., as compared to incentive distribution of $26.4 million for the sale of AMB Institutional Alliance Fund I, L.P., during 2005.
 
                                 
Costs and Expenses
  2006     2005     $ Change     % Change  
 
Property operating costs:
                               
Rental expenses
  $ 100.8     $ 78.4     $ 22.4       28.6 %
Real estate taxes
    75.0       80.5       (5.5 )     (6.8 )%
                                 
Total property operating costs
  $ 175.8     $ 158.9     $ 16.9       10.6 %
                                 
Property operating costs U.S. industrial:
                               
Same store
  $ 139.0     $ 132.5     $ 6.5       4.9 %
2006 acquisitions
    1.1             1.1       %
2005 acquisitions
    4.4       2.5       1.9       76.0 %
Development
    2.8       2.5       0.3       12.0 %
Other industrial
    16.3       15.2       1.1       7.2 %
Non U.S. industrial
    12.2       6.2       6.0       96.8 %
                                 
Total property operating costs
    175.8       158.9       16.9       10.6 %
Depreciation and amortization
    177.8       161.7       16.1       10.0 %
Impairment losses
    6.3             6.3       %
General and administrative
    104.3       71.6       32.7       45.7 %
Other expenses
    2.6       5.0       (2.4 )     (48.0 )%
Fund costs
    2.1       1.5       0.6       40.0 %
                                 
Total costs and expenses
  $ 468.9     $ 398.7     $ 70.2       17.6 %
                                 
 
Same store properties’ operating expenses increased $6.5 million from the prior year, despite the decrease of $2.5 million in same store operating expenses due to the deconsolidation of AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., effective October 1, 2006, due primarily to increased insurance costs, utility expenses, repair and maintenance expenses, and other non-reimbursable expenses. The 2005 acquisitions consisted of 41 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.9 million square feet. The 2006 acquisitions consisted of 73 buildings, aggregating approximately 6.6 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. Non-U.S. industrial revenues increased approximately $6.0 million from the prior year due primarily to the stabilization of three properties in Japan and the continued acquisition of properties in France, Germany and Mexico. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was due to the increase in our net investment in real estate. The 2006 impairment loss was taken on several non-core assets as a result of leasing activities and changes in the economic environment and the holding period of certain assets. The increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily due to increased stock-based compensation expense as a result of higher values assigned to option and stock awards and executive departures, additional staffing and expenses for our international expansion, and the acquisition of AMB Blackpine. Other expenses decreased approximately $2.4 million from the prior year due primarily to a decrease in losses associated with our deferred compensation plan and a decrease in certain deal costs. Fund costs represent general and administrative costs paid to third parties associated with our co-investment joint ventures.
 


47


 

                                 
Other Income and (Expenses)
  2006     2005     $ Change     % Change  
 
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures, net
  $ 23.2     $ 10.8     $ 12.4       114.8 %
Other income
    9.4       5.6       3.8       67.9 %
Gains from dispositions of real estate interests, net
          19.1       (19.1 )     (100.0 )%
Development profits, net of taxes
    106.4       54.8       51.6       94.2 %
Interest expense, including amortization
    (165.2 )     (147.3 )     17.9       12.2 %
                                 
Total other income and (expenses), net
  $ (26.2 )   $ (57.0 )   $ (30.8 )     (54.0 )%
                                 
 
The $12.4 million increase in equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures was primarily due to gains of $17.5 million from the disposition of real estate by our unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures during 2006 as opposed to $5.5 million of such gains during 2005 and, effective October 1, 2006, the deconsolidation of AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., which resulted in an increase of approximately $5.1 million. These increases were partially offset by an increase in expenses by our unconsolidated joint ventures. The increase in other income was primarily due to increased bank interest income and an increase in property management income due to the expansion of our property management business. The 2005 gains from disposition of real estate interests resulted primarily from our contribution of $106.9 million (using the exchange rate in effect at contribution) in operating properties to our then newly formed unconsolidated co-investment joint venture, AMB Japan Fund I, L.P. 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 disposition and contribution volume during 2006. During 2006, we sold five land parcels and six development projects totaling approximately 1.3 million square feet for an aggregate sale price of $86.6 million, resulting in an after-tax gain of $13.3 million. In addition, during 2006, we received approximately $0.4 million in connection with the condemnation of a parcel of land resulting in a loss of $1.0 million, $0.8 million of which was the joint venture partner’s share. During 2006, we also contributed a total of ten completed development projects into unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures. Four projects totaling approximately 2.6 million square feet were contributed into AMB Japan Fund I, L.P, two projects totaling approximately 0.8 million square feet were contributed into AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, three projects totaling approximately 0.6 million square feet were contributed into AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P., and one land parcel into AMB DFS Fund I, LLC. As a result of these contributions, we recognized an aggregate after-tax gain of $94.1 million, representing the portion of our interest in the contributed property acquired by the third-party investors for cash. 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 portion of our interest in the contributed property acquired by the third-party co-investor for cash. The increase in interest expense, including amortization, was due primarily to increased borrowings on unsecured credit facilities and other debt.
 
                                 
Discontinued Operations
  2006     2005     $ Change     % Change  
 
Income attributable to discontinued operations, net of minority interests
  $ 9.3     $ 13.9     $ (4.6 )     (33.1 )%
Gains from dispositions of real estate, net of minority interests
    42.6       113.6       (71.0 )     (62.5 )%
                                 
Total discontinued operations
  $ 51.9     $ 127.5     $ (75.6 )     (59.3 )%
                                 
 
During 2006, we divested ourselves of 39 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 3.5 million square feet, for an aggregate price of approximately $175.3 million, with a resulting net gain of approximately $42.6 million. 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 Institutional Alliance Fund I, L.P., for $618.5 million. The multi-investor fund owned 100 buildings totaling approximately 5.8 million square feet. We

48


 

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.
 
                                 
Preferred Stock
  2006     2005     $ Change     % Change  
 
Preferred stock dividends
  $ (13.6 )   $ (7.4 )   $ 6.2       83.8 %
Preferred unit redemption issuance costs
    (1.1 )           1.1       %
                                 
Total preferred stock dividends
  $ (14.7 )   $ (7.4 )   $ 7.3       98.6 %
                                 
 
In December 2005, we issued 3,000,000 shares of 7.0% Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. In August 2006, we issued 2,000,000 shares of 6.85% Series P Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. The increase in preferred stock dividends is due to the newly issued shares. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2006, AMB Property II, L.P., one of our subsidiaries, repurchased all 840,000 of its outstanding 8.125% Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units, all 220,440 of its outstanding 7.75% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units, all 201,139 of its outstanding 7.95% Series F Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units and all 729,582 of its outstanding 5.00% Series N Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units. As a result, we recognized a decrease in income available to common stockholders of $1.1 million for the original issuance costs, net of discount on repurchase.
 
For the Years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 (dollars in millions)
 
                                 
Revenues
  2005     2004     $ Change     % Change  
 
Rental revenues
                               
U.S. industrial:
                               
Same store
  $ 501.5     $ 489.9     $ 11.6       2.4 %
2005 acquisitions
    11.4       3.2       8.2       256.3 %
Development
    7.4       8.6       (1.2 )     (14.0 )%
Other industrial
    63.6       34.6       29.0       83.8 %
Non U.S. industrial
    33.1       27.2       5.9       21.7 %
                                 
Total rental revenues
    617.0       563.5       53.5       9.5 %
Private capital income
    43.9       12.9       31.0       240.3 %
                                 
Total revenues
  $ 660.9     $ 576.4     $ 84.5       14.7 %
                                 
 
U.S. industrial same store revenues increased $11.6 million from 2004 to 2005 on a year-to-date basis attributable primarily to improved occupancy and increased rental rates in various markets. 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 was primarily due to increased asset management fees from additional assets held in co-investment joint ventures and incentive distributions for 2005 of $26.4 million for the sale of AMB Institutional Alliance Fund I, asset


49


 

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
  $ 78.4     $ 80.8     $ (2.4 )     (3.0 )%
Real estate taxes
    80.5       63.3       17.2       27.2 %
                                 
Total property operating costs
  $ 158.9     $ 144.1     $ 14.8       10.3 %
                                 
Property operating costs
                               
U.S. industrial:
                               
Same store
  $ 132.5     $ 128.7     $ 3.8       3.0 %
2005 acquisitions
    2.5       0.9       1.6       177.8 %
Development
    2.5       2.1       0.4       19.0 %
Other industrial
    15.2       7.8       7.4       94.9 %
Non U.S. industrial
    6.2       4.6       1.6       34.8 %
                                 
Total property operating costs
    158.9       144.1       14.8       10.3 %
Depreciation and amortization
    161.7       136.6       25.1       18.4 %
General and administrative
    71.6       57.2       14.4       25.2 %
Other expenses
    5.0       2.6       2.4       92.3 %
Fund costs
    1.5       1.7       (0.2 )     (11.8 )%
                                 
Total costs and expenses
  $ 398.7     $ 342.2     $ 56.5       16.5 %
                                 
 
Same store properties’ operating expenses increased $3.8 million from 2004 to 2005 on a year-to-date basis due primarily to increased insurance costs, utility expenses, repair and maintenance expenses, and other non-reimbursable expenses. 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 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 2004 and 2005, we continued to acquire properties in China, 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 during the year. The increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily due to additional staffing and expenses for new initiatives, including our international and development expansions and the expansion of satellite offices. Other expenses increased approximately $2.4 million from the prior year due primarily to greater losses on our non-qualified deferred compensation plan in 2005 and an increase in certain deal costs. Fund costs represent general and administrative costs paid to third parties associated with our 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 %
Other income
    5.6       4.7       0.9       19.1 %
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
    (147.3 )     (141.9 )     5.4       3.8 %
                                 
Total other income and (expenses), net
  $ (57.0 )   $ (119.7 )   $ (62.7 )     (52.4 )%
                                 
 
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 ventures during the


50


 

second quarter of 2005. The increase in other income was primarily due to increased bank interest income. 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 portion 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 portion 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
  $ 13.9     $ 21.9     $ (8.0 )     (36.5 )%
Gains from dispositions of real estate, net of minority interests
    113.6       42.0       71.6       170.5 %
                                 
Total discontinued operations
  $ 127.5     $ 63.9     $ 63.6       99.5 %
                                 
 
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
  $ (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.
 
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;


51


 

 
  •  private capital from co-investment partners;
 
  •  net proceeds from contribution of properties and completed development projects to our co-investment joint ventures;
 
  •  borrowings under our unsecured credit facilities;
 
  •  other forms of secured or unsecured financing;
 
  •  proceeds from equity (common and preferred) or debt securities offerings;
 
  •  proceeds from limited partnership unit offerings (including issuances of limited partnership units by our subsidiaries); and
 
  •  net proceeds from divestitures of properties.
 
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.
 
Cash flows.  As of December 31, 2006, cash provided by operating activities was $335.9 million as compared to $295.8 million for the same period in 2005. This change is primarily due to increases in rental rates, partially offset by an increase in general and administrative expenses primarily due to additional staffing and expenses for new initiatives, including our international and development expansions and increased occupancy costs related to the expansion of regional offices. Cash used for investing activities was $880.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, as compared to cash used for investing activities of $60.4 million for the same period in 2005. This change is primarily due to an increase in funds used for property acquisitions and capital expenditures, and a decrease in proceeds from property divestitures (mainly due to the divesture of AMB Institutional Alliance Fund I, L.P., portfolio in 2005), offset by less funds used for additions to interests in unconsolidated joint ventures and an increase in capital distributions received from unconsolidated joint ventures. Cash provided by financing activities was $483.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, as compared to cash used in financing activities of $101.9 million for the same period in 2005. This change is due primarily to an increase in borrowings, net of repayments, issuance of common stock upon the exercise of options and issuances of preferred stock, offset by the cost of the repurchase of preferred units for the year ended December 31, 2006.
 
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
 
Property Divestitures.  During 2006, we divested ourselves of 39 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 3.5 million square feet, for an aggregate price of $175.3 million, with a resulting net gain of $42.6 million.
 
Development Sales.  During 2006, we sold five land parcels and six development projects totaling approximately 1.3 million square feet for an aggregate sale price of $86.6 million, resulting in an after-tax gain of $13.3 million. In addition, during 2006, we received approximately $0.4 million in connection with the condemnation of a parcel of land resulting in a loss of $1.0 million, $0.8 million of which was the joint venture partner’s share.


52


 

 
Development Contributions.  During 2006, we contributed a total of nine completed development projects and one land parcel into unconsolidated co-investment joint ventures. Four projects totaling approximately 2.6 million square feet were contributed into AMB Japan Fund I, L.P, two projects totaling approximately 0.8 million square feet were contributed into AMB-SGP Mexico, LLC, and three projects totaling approximately 0.6 million square feet were contributed into AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. In addition, one land parcel was contributed into AMB DFS Fund I, LLC. As a result of these contributions, we recognized an aggregate after-tax gain of $94.1 million, representing the portion of our interest in the contributed property acquired by the third-party investors for cash. These gains are included in development profits, net of taxes, in the statement of operations.
 
Properties Held for Contribution.  As of December 31, 2006, we held for contribution to co-investment joint ventures, nine industrial projects with an aggregate net book value of $154.0 million, which, when contributed to a joint venture, will reduce our current ownership interest from approximately 100% to an expected range of 15-50%.
 
Properties Held for Divestiture.  As of December 31, 2006, we held for divestiture four industrial projects, 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, 2006, the net carrying value of the properties held for divestiture was $20.9 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 and the general partners do not have significant rights under EITF 04-5.
 
Third-party equity interests in the joint ventures are reflected as minority interests in the consolidated financial statements. As of December 31, 2006, we owned approximately 64.3 million square feet of our properties (51.6% 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, 2006 (dollars in thousands):
 
                     
        Our
       
        Approximate
    Original
 
        Ownership
    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 %   $ 420,000  
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P. 
  AMB Institutional Alliance REIT II, Inc.(3)     20 %   $ 490,000  
AMB-AMS, L.P.(4)
  PMT, SPW and TNO(5)     39 %   $ 228,000  
 
 
(1) Planned capitalization includes anticipated debt and both partners’ expected equity contributions.
 
(2) A subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte. Ltd., the real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.
 
(3) Comprised of 14 institutional investors as stockholders and one third-party limited partner as of December 31, 2006.
 
(4) AMB-AMS, L.P. is a co-investment partnership with three Dutch pension funds.
 
(5) PMT is Stichting Pensioenfonds Metaal en Techniek, SPW is Stichting Pensioenfonds voor de Woningcorporaties and TNO is Stichting Pensioenfonds TNO.


53


 

 
Our unconsolidated joint ventures at December 31, 2006 (dollars in thousands):
 
                     
        Our
       
        Approximate
    Original
 
        Ownership
    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)
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P.(5)
  AMB Institutional Alliance REIT III, Inc.     23 %   $ 1,323,000 (6)
AMB DFS Fund I, LLC(7)
  Strategic Realty Ventures, LLC     15 %   $ 500,000  
 
 
(1) Planned capitalization includes anticipated debt and both partners’ expected equity contributions.
 
(2) A subsidiary of GIC Real Estate Pte. Ltd., the real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.
 
(3) Comprised of 13 institutional investors as of December 31, 2006.
 
(4) AMB Japan Fund I, L.P. is a yen-denominated fund. U.S. dollar amounts are converted at the December 31, 2006 exchange rate.
 
(5) AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. is an open-ended co-investment partnership formed in 2004 with institutional investors, which invests through a private real estate investment trust. Prior to October 1, 2006, the Company accounted for AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. as a consolidated joint venture.
 
(6) The planned gross capitalization and investment capacity of AMB Institutional Alliance Fund III, L.P. as an open-end fund, is not limited. The planned gross capitalization represents the gross book value of real estate assets as of the most recent quarter end.
 
(7) AMB DFS Fund I, LLC is a co-investment partnership formed in 2006 with a subsidiary of GE Real Estate to build and sell properties.
 
We also have a 0.1% unconsolidated equity interest (with an approximate 33% economic interest) in AMB Pier One, LLC, a joint venture related to the 2000 redevelopment of the pier which houses our office space in the San Francisco Bay Area. The investment is not consolidated because we do not exercise control over major operating decisions such as approval of budgets, selection of property managers, investment activity and changes in financing. We have an option to purchase the remaining equity interest beginning January 1, 2007 and expiring December 31, 2009, based on the fair market value as stipulated in the joint venture agreement. As of December 31, 2006, we also had an approximate 39.0% 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. In addition, as of December 31, 2006, one of our subsidiaries also had an approximate 5% interest in IAT Air Cargo Facilities Income Fund (IAT), a Canadian income trust specializing in aviation-related real estate at Canada’s leading international airports. This equity investment is included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.
 
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, 2006: 1,595,337 shares of series D 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; 3,000,000 shares of series O cumulative redeemable preferred, all of which are outstanding; and 2,000,000 shares of series P cumulative redeemable preferred, all of which are outstanding.
 
On November 1, 2006, AMB Property II, L.P., issued 1,130,835 of its class B common limited partnership units in connection with a property acquisition.
 
On September 21, 2006, AMB Property II, L.P., repurchased all 201,139 of its outstanding 7.95% Series F Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units from a single institutional investor for an aggregate price of $10.0 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions. In connection with this repurchase, we reclassified all of our 267,439 shares of 7.95% series F Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock as preferred stock.


54


 

 
On June 30, 2006, AMB Property II, L.P., repurchased all 220,440 of its outstanding 7.75% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units from a single institutional investor for an aggregate price of $10.9 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions. In connection with this repurchase, we reclassified all of our 220,440 shares of 7.75% series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock as preferred stock.
 
On March 21, 2006, AMB Property II, L.P., repurchased all 840,000 of its outstanding 8.125% Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Limited Partnership Units from a single institutional investor for an aggregate price of $42.8 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions. In connection with this repurchase, we reclassified all of our 840,000 shares of 8.125% Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock as preferred stock.
 
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 8.0% general partnership interest and the operating partnership owns an approximate 92% common limited partnership interest, issued 729,582 5.00% 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 to AMB Property II, L.P of certain parcels of land that are located in multiple markets. 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 the series N preferred units to the operating partnership for an aggregate price of $36.6 million, including accrued and unpaid distributions. Also on January 27, 2006, AMB Property II, L.P. repurchased all of the series N preferred units from the operating partnership at an aggregate price of $36.6 million and cancelled all of the outstanding series N preferred units as of such date.
 
As of December 31, 2006, $145.3 million in preferred units with a weighted average rate of 7.85%, issued by the operating partnership, were callable under the terms of the partnership agreement and $40.0 million in preferred units with a weighted average rate of 7.95% become callable in 2007.
 
On August 25, 2006, we issued and sold 2,000,000 shares of 6.85% Series P 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 $1.7125 per annum. The series P preferred stock is redeemable by us on or after August 25, 2011, 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 $48.1 million to the operating partnership, and in exchange, the operating partnership issued to us 2,000,000 6.85% Series P Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units.
 
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 approximately $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 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 thereon, if any, to the redemption date. We contributed the net proceeds of approximately $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 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


55


 

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.
 
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, 2006.
 
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, 2006, our share of total debt-to-our share of total market capitalization ratio was 34.2%. (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 co-investment joint ventures with secured debt at a loan-to-value ratio of 50-65% per our joint venture 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, 2006, the aggregate principal amount of our secured debt was $1.4 billion, excluding unamortized debt premiums of $6.3 million. Of the $1.4 billion of secured debt, $1.0 billion is secured by properties in our joint ventures. The secured debt is generally non-recourse and bears interest at rates varying from 2.9% to 10.4% per annum (with a weighted average rate of 6.2%) and final maturity dates ranging from February 2007 to January 2025. As of December 31, 2006, $1.0 billion of the secured debt obligations bear interest at fixed rates with a weighted average interest rate of 6.1%, while the remaining $386.1 million bear interest at variable rates (with a weighted average interest rate of 4.7%).
 
As of December 31, 2006, the operating partnership had outstanding an aggregate of $1.1 billion in unsecured senior debt securities, which bore a weighted average interest rate of 6.2% and had a weighted average term of 4.8 years. These unsecured senior debt securities include $300.0 million in notes issued in June 1998, $225.0 million of medium-term notes, which were issued under the operating partnership’s 2000 medium-term note program, $275.0 million of medium-term notes, which were issued under the operating partnership’s 2002 medium-term note program, $175.0 million of medium-term notes, which were issued under the operating partnership’s 2006 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 $100.0 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. Also included is a $25.0 million promissory note which matures in January 2007.
 
We guarantee the operating partnership’s 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, 2006, the operating partnership entered into a third amended and restated $550.0 million unsecured revolving credit agreement that replaced its then-existing $500.0 million credit facility, which was to mature on June 1, 2007. We are a guarantor of the operating partnership’s obligations under the credit facility. The line, which matures on June 1, 2010, carries a one-year extension option and can be increased to up to


56


 

$700.0 million upon certain conditions. The rate on the borrowings is generally LIBOR plus a margin, based on the operating partnership’s long-term debt rating, which was 42.5 basis points as of December 31, 2006, with an annual facility fee of 15 basis points. The four-year credit facility includes a multi-currency component, under which up to $550.0 million can be drawn in U.S. dollars, Euros, Yen or British Pounds Sterling. The operating partnership uses its unsecured credit facility principally for acquisitions, funding development activity and general working capital requirements. As of December 31, 2006, the outstanding balance on the credit facility was $303.7 million and the remaining amount available was $234.6 million, net of outstanding letters of credit of $11.7 million. The outstanding balance included borrowings denominated in Euros, which, using the exchange rate in effect on December 31, 2006, equaled approximately $303.7 million U.S. dollars.
 
On June 23, 2006, AMB Japan Finance Y.K., a subsidiary of the operating partnership and as the initial borrower, entered into an amended and restated revolving credit agreement for a 45.0 billion Yen unsecured revolving credit facility, which, using the exchange rate in effect on December 31, 2006, equaled approximately $377.9 million U.S. dollars. This replaced the 35.0 billion Yen unsecured revolving credit facility executed on June 29, 2004, as previously amended, which using the exchange rate in effect on December 31, 2006, equaled approximately $293.9 million U.S. dollars. We, along with the operating partnership, guarantee the obligations of AMB Japan Finance Y.K. under the 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 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, China and South Korea. Generally, borrowers under the credit facility have the option to secure all or a portion of the borrowings under the credit facility with certain real estate assets or equity in entities holding such real estate assets. The credit facility matures in June 2010 and has a one-year extension option. The credit facility can be increased to up to 55.0 billion Yen, which, using the exchange rate in effect on December 31, 2006, equaled approximately $461.9 million U.S. dollars. The extension option is subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions and the payment of an extension fee equal to 0.15% 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 credit rating of the operating partnership’s long-term debt and was 42.5 basis points as of December 31, 2006. In addition, there is an annual facility fee, payable in quarterly amounts, which is based on the credit rating of the operating partnership’s long-term debt, and was 15 basis points of the outstanding commitments under the facility as of December 31, 2006. As of December 31, 2006, the outstanding balance on this credit facility, using the exchange rate in effect on December 31, 2006, was $320.9 million in U.S. dollars.
 
On June 13, 2006, the operating partnership and certain of its consolidated subsidiaries entered into a fourth amended and restated credit agreement for a $250.0 million unsecured revolving credit facility, which replaced the third amended and restated credit agreement for a $250.0 million unsecured credit facility. On February 16, 2006, the third amended and restated credit agreement replaced the then-existing $100.0 million unsecured revolving credit facility that was to mature in June 2008. We, along with the operating partnership, guarantee the obligations for such subsidiaries and other entities controlled by us or the operating partnership that are selected by the operating partnership from time to time to be borrowers under and pursuant to the credit facility. The four-year credit facility includes a multi-currency component under which up to $250.0 million can be drawn in U.S. dollars, Hong Kong dollars, Singapore dollars, Canadian dollars and Euros. The line, which matures in February 2010 and carries a one-year extension option, can be increased to up to $350.0 million upon certain conditions and the payment of an extension fee equal to 0.15% of the outstanding commitments. The rate on the borrowings is generally LIBOR plus a margin, based on the credit rating of the operating partnership’s senior unsecured long-term debt, which was 60 basis points as of December 31, 2006, with an annual facility fee based on the credit rating of the operating partnership’s senior unsecured long-term debt. The borrowers intend to use the proceeds from the facility to fund the acquisition and development of properties and general working capital requirements. As of December 31, 2006, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $227.4 million. The credit agreement contains affirmative covenants, including financial reporting requirements and maintenance of specified financial ratios by the operating partnership, and negative covenants, including limitations on the incurrence of liens and limitations on mergers or consolidations.


57


 

 
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, 2006, the outstanding balance on the note was $12.7 million. We also hold a loan receivable on G. Accion, an unconsolidated joint venture totaling $6.1 million with an interest rate of 10.0%. The loan matures in March 2010.
 
The tables below summarize our debt maturities and capitalization and reconcile our share of total debt to total consolidated debt as of December 31, 2006 (dollars in thousands):
 
                                                 
    Debt  
    Our
    Joint
    Unsecured
                   
    Secured
    Venture
    Senior Debt
    Other
    Credit
    Total
 
    Debt(1)     Debt     Securities     Debt     Facilities(2)     Debt  
 
2007
  $ 12,929     $ 84,815     $ 100,000     $ 16,125     $     $ 213,869  
2008
    41,906       173,029       175,000       810             390,745  
2009
    3,536       96,833       100,000       971             201,340  
2010
    69,327       112,918       250,000       941       852,033       1,285,219  
2011
    3,094       228,708       75,000       1,014             307,816  
2012
    5,085       169,717             1,093             175,895  
2013
    38,668       55,168       175,000       65,920 (5)           334,756  
2014
    186,864       4,261             616             191,741  
2015
    2,174       19,001       112,491       664             134,330  
2016
    4,749       50,648                         55,397  
Thereafter
          25,580       125,000                   150,580  
                                                 
Subtotal
    368,332       1,020,678       1,112,491       88,154       852,033       3,441,688  
Unamortized premiums
    1,632       4,712       (10,617 )                 (4,273 )
                                                 
Total consolidated debt
    369,964       1,025,390       1,101,874       88,154       852,033       3,437,415  
Our share of unconsolidated joint venture debt(3)
          330,813             32,610             363,423  
                                                 
Total debt
    369,964       1,356,203       1,101,874       120,764       852,033       3,800,838  
Joint venture partners’ share of consolidated joint venture debt
          (660,193 )           (52,021 )           (712,214 )
                                                 
Our share of total debt(4)
  $ 369,964     $ 696,010     $ 1,101,874     $ 68,743     $ 852,033     $ 3,088,624  
                                                 
Weighted average interest rate
    5.6 %     6.5 %     6.2 %     6.6 %     3.1 %     5.5 %
Weighted average maturity (in years)
    6.6       4.5       4.8       5.3       3.3       4.6  
 
 
(1) Our secured debt and joint venture debt include debt related to European assets in the amount of $331.3 million translated to U.S. dollars using the exchange rate in effect on December 31, 2006.
 
(2) Includes $418.5 million, $321.0 million and $112.5 million in Euro, Yen and Canadian dollar based borrowings, respectively, translated to U.S. dollars using the exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2006.
 
(3) The weighted average interest and maturity for the unconsolidated joint venture debt were 4.4% and 5.8 years, respectively.
 
(4) 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 joint 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.


58


 

 
(5) Maturity includes $65.0 million balance outstanding on a $65.0 million non-recourse credit facility obtained by AMB Partners II, L.P.
 
                         
Market Equity as of December 31, 2006  
    Shares/Units
    Market
    Market
 
Security
  Outstanding     Price     Value  
 
Common stock
    89,662,435     $ 58.61     $ 5,255,115  
Common limited partnership units(1)
    4,709,056     $ 58.61       275,998  
                         
Total
    94,371,491             $ 5,531,113  
                         
 
 
(1) Includes 1,258,713 class B common limited partnership units issued by AMB Property II, L.P. as of December 31, 2006.
 
                     
Preferred Stock and Units
    Dividend
    Liquidation
     
Security
  Rate     Preference     Redemption Date
 
Series D preferred units
    7.75 %   $ 79,767     May 2004
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 L preferred stock
    6.50 %     50,000     June 2008
Series M preferred stock
    6.75 %     57,500     November 2008
Series O preferred stock
    7.00 %     75,000     December 2010
Series P preferred stock
    6.85 %     50,000     August 2011
                     
Weighted average/total
    7.27 %   $ 417,767      
                     
 
         
Capitalization Ratios as of December 31, 2006  
 
Total debt-to-total market capitalization(1)
    39.0 %
Our share of total debt-to-our share of total market capitalization(1)
    34.2 %
Total debt plus preferred-to-total market capitalization(1)
    43.3 %
Our share of total debt plus preferred-to-our share of total market capitalization(1)
    38.8 %
Our share of total debt-to-our share of total book capitalization(1)
    55.8 %
 
 
(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, 2006. 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 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.


59


 

 
Liquidity
 
As of December 31, 2006, we had $174.8 million in cash and cash equivalents and $314.2 million of additional available borrowings under our credit facilities. As of December 31, 2006, we had $21.1 million in restricted cash.
 
Our board of directors declared a regular cash dividend for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 of $0.46 per share of common stock, and the operating partnership announced its intention to pay a regular cash distribution for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 of $0.46 per common unit. The dividends and distributions were payable on January 5, 2007 to stockholders and unitholders of record on December 22, 2006. The series L, M, O and P preferred stock dividends were payable on January 16, 2007 to stockholders of record on January 5, 2007. The series J and K preferred unit quarterly distributions were payable on January 16, 2007. The series D and I preferred unit quarterly distributions were paid on December 25, 2006. The following table sets forth the dividends and distributions paid or payable per share or unit for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004: