Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
| (MARK ONE) | ||
|
ý |
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 |
||
|
or |
||
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
For the transition period from to |
||
COMMISSION FILE NUMBER 1-34948
GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
27-2963337
(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) |
|
|
110 N. Wacker Dr., Chicago, IL (Address of principal executive offices) |
|
60606 (Zip Code) |
(312) 960-5000
(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 |
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 ý 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 ý
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 ý NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). YES ý NO o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of 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, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of "accelerated filer", "large accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
| Large accelerated filer ý | Accelerated filer o |
Non-accelerated filer
o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). YES o NO ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant, the registrant's predecessor or its subsidiaries have filed all reports required to be filed by section 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. YES ý NO o
On June 30, 2011, the last business day of the most recently completed second quarter of the registrant, the aggregate market value of the shares of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $8.73 billion based upon the closing price of the common stock on such date.
As of February 24, 2012, there were 937,596,569 shares of the registrant's common stock outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the proxy statement for the annual stockholders meeting to be held on April 27, 2012 are incorporated by reference into Part III.
GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES, INC.
Annual Report on Form 10-K
December 31, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements of General Growth Properties, Inc. ("GGP" or the "Company") and related notes, as included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (this "Annual Report"). The terms "we," "us" and "our" may also be used to refer to GGP and its subsidiaries (or, in certain contexts, the Predecessor (as defined below) and its subsidiaries). GGP, a Delaware corporation, was organized in July 2010 and is a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust, referred to as a "REIT". GGP is the successor registrant, by merger, on November 9, 2010 (the "Effective Date") to GGP, Inc. (the "Predecessor"). The Predecessor had filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code ("Chapter 11") and emerged from bankruptcy, pursuant to a plan of reorganization (the "Plan") on the Effective Date as described below.
On January 12, 2012, we completed the spin-off (the "RPI Spin-Off") of Rouse Properties, Inc. ("RPI"), which now owns a 30-mall portfolio of "Class B properties", totaling approximately 21 million square feet. The RPI Spin-Off was accomplished through a special dividend of the common stock of RPI to holders of GGP common stock as of December 30, 2011. Subsequent to the spin-off, we retained an approximately 1% interest in RPI. Because RPI is presented as part of our continuing operations as of December 31, 2011, the consolidated financial information presented herein includes RPI for all periods presented. However, unless otherwise indicated, the description of our regional malls and related metrics herein exclude RPI for all periods presented.
Our Company and Strategy
We are a leading real estate owner and operator of high quality regional malls with an ownership interest in 136 regional malls in 41 states as of December 31, 2011, comprising 58 million square feet of gross leasable area, or GLA, excluding anchor tenants. Based on the number of regional malls in our portfolio and GLA, we are the second largest owner of regional malls in the United States.
Of our 136 regional malls, 78 are considered Class A regional malls and have average tenant sales exceeding $575 per square foot, representing 75% of our NOI (as defined in Item 6). These high quality malls include:
More broadly, we have an interest in 125 of the 600 regional malls in the country with the highest sales per square foot. These malls are located in core markets defined by population density, household growth, and a high-income demographic. Together, these regional malls had 2011 average tenant sales per square foot of $505.
In 2011, we saw a strengthening of lease spreads across our portfolio, with comparable mall average tenant sales per square foot, which we refer to as "mall productivity", increasing 8% in 2011 over 2010. We see increasing productivity and revenues through leasing activity within our regional malls as a significant opportunity for growth. In addition, we believe that the limited supply of new
1
mall space in the last five years and lack of new development pipeline will further increase our productivity and help us to increase our occupancy levels.
Our long-term business strategy is to own and operate high quality regional malls in the United States. The regional malls we own and operate generally exhibit the following attributes:
We believe our long term strategy will provide our shareholders with a compelling risk-adjusted total return comprised of dividends and share price appreciation.
Transactions
During 2011, we successfully completed transactions promoting our long-term strategy as summarized below (figures shown represent our share):
We will continue to execute transactions to achieve our long-term strategy of enhancing the quality of our portfolio and maximizing total returns for our shareholders. Our key objectives include the following:
2
On February 23, 2012, we signed a definitive agreement for the acquisition of 11 Sears anchor pads within our portfolio for $270 million. This portfolio represents a significant opportunity to recapture valuable real estate within our portfolio and enhances several expansion and redevelopment opportunities, including re-tenanting the anchor space and adding new in-line GLA. The acquisition is expected to close in the second quarter of 2012 subject to customary closing conditions.
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF OUR BUSINESS
Our Business
GGP, through its subsidiaries and affiliates, operates, manages, develops and acquires retail and other rental properties, primarily regional malls, which are predominantly located throughout the United States. GGP also holds assets in Brazil through an investment in an Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliate (as defined below). Substantially all of our business is conducted through GGP Limited Partnership (the "Operating Partnership" or "GGPLP"). As of December 31, 2011, GGP holds approximately a 99% common equity ownership (without giving effect to the potential conversion of the Preferred Units as defined below) of the Operating Partnership, while the remaining 1% is held by limited partners that indirectly include family members of the original stockholders of the Predecessor and certain previous contributors of properties to the Operating Partnership. The Operating Partnership also has preferred units of limited partnership interest (the "Preferred Units") outstanding.
In this Annual Report, we refer to our ownership interests in properties in which we own a majority or controlling interest and, as a result, are consolidated under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP") as the "Consolidated Properties." We also hold some properties through joint venture entities in which we own a non-controlling interest ("Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates") and we refer to those properties as the "Unconsolidated Properties".
Retail and Other
We operate in a single reportable segment, which we term Retail and Other, which consists of regional malls, retail centers, office and industrial buildings and mixed-use and other properties. Our portfolio of regional malls and other rental properties represents a collection of retail offerings that are targeted to a range of market sizes and consumer tastes. Our Consolidated Financial Statements, beginning on page F-1 of this Annual Report, includes financial information for our business.
A detailed listing of the principal properties in our retail portfolio is included in Item 2 of this Annual Report.
For the year ended December 31, 2011, our largest tenant (based on common parent ownership) accounted for approximately 3% of consolidated rents. Of the approximately 58 million square feet of GLA, which excludes anchor tenants (see Item 2 for anchor tenants GLA), four tenants (The GAP,
3
Limited Brands, Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, and Foot Locker) occupied, in the aggregate, approximately 10% of our GLA in 2011.
In addition to regional malls, as of December 31, 2011, we own 13 community shopping centers totaling 1.6 million square feet, primarily in the Western region of the United States, as well as 26 stand-alone office buildings totaling 2.2 million square feet, concentrated in Columbia, Maryland and Las Vegas, Nevada.
We also currently hold non-controlling ownership interests in a public Brazilian real estate operating company, Aliansce Shopping Centers (ticker ALSC3), and a large regional mall (Shopping Leblon) in Rio de Janeiro.
Competition
The nature and extent of the competition we face varies from property to property. Our direct competitors include other publicly-traded retail mall development and operating companies, retail real estate companies, commercial property developers and other owners of retail real estate that engage in similar businesses.
Within our portfolio of retail properties, we compete for retail tenants. We believe the principal factors that retailers consider in making their leasing decision include:
As discussed above, we own and interest in 125 of the 600 regional malls in the country with the highest sales per square foot. These malls are located in core markets defined by population density, household growth, and a high-income demographic. Approximately one of every three U.S. households with an income of greater than $100,000 a year is located within 10 miles of one of these malls. We frequently are able to offer "first-to-market" stores (the first location of a store in a particular region or city) in these core markets that enhance the reputation of our regional malls as premier shopping destinations. For example, in 2011, the first Crate and Barrel and H&M stores in Utah opened in our Fashion Place Mall.
Based on these criteria, we believe that the size and scope of our property portfolio, as well as the overall quality and attractiveness of our individual properties, enable us to compete effectively for retail tenants in our local markets. Retailers are looking to expand in the highest traffic centers, and we believe regional malls with the optimal mix of retailers, dining and entertainment options typically have high traffic. Further, over the last several years we have not seen any new major mall development and do not expect to see any new mall development in the near term based on the current pipeline.
With respect to our office and other properties, we experience competition in the development and management of our properties similar to that of our retail properties. Prospective tenants generally consider quality and appearance, amenities, location relative to other commercial activity and price in determining the attractiveness of our properties. Based on the quality and location of our properties, we believe that our properties are viewed favorably among prospective tenants.
4
Environmental Matters
Under various Federal, state and local laws and regulations, an owner of real estate may be liable for the costs of remediation of certain hazardous or toxic substances on such real estate. These laws may impose liability without regard to whether the owner knew of the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. The costs of remediation may be substantial and may adversely affect the owner's ability to sell or borrow against such real estate as collateral. In connection with the ownership and operation of our properties, we, or the relevant joint venture through which the property is owned, may be potentially liable for such costs.
Substantially all of our properties have been subject to a Phase I environmental site assessment, which is intended to evaluate the environmental condition of the subject property and its surroundings. Phase I environmental assessments typically include a historical review, a public records review, a site visit and interviews, but do not include sampling or subsurface investigations.
To date, the Phase I environmental site assessments have not revealed any recognized environmental conditions that would have a material adverse effect on our overall business, financial condition or results of operations. However, it is possible that these assessments do not reveal all potential environmental liabilities or that conditions have changed since the assessment was prepared (typically, at the time the property was purchased or developed).
See Risk Factors regarding additional discussion of environmental matters.
Other Policies
The following is a discussion of our investment policies, financing policies, conflict of interest policies and policies with respect to certain other activities. One or more of these policies may be amended or rescinded from time to time without a stockholder vote.
Investment Policies
Our business is to own and invest in real estate assets. The Company elected to be treated as a REIT in connection with the filing of its tax return for 2011, subject to GGP's ability to meet the requirements of a REIT at the time of election. REIT limitations restrict us from making an investment that would cause our real estate assets to be less than 75% of our total assets. In addition, at least 75% of our gross income must be derived directly or indirectly from investments relating to real property or mortgages on real property, including "rents from real property," dividends from other REITs and, in certain circumstances, interest from certain types of temporary investments. At least 95% of our income must be derived from such real property investments, and from dividends, interest and gains from the sale or dispositions of stock or securities or from other combinations of the foregoing.
Subject to REIT limitations, we may invest in the securities of other issuers in connection with acquisitions of indirect interests in real estate. Such an investment would normally be in the form of general or limited partnership or membership interests in special purpose partnerships and limited liability companies that own one or more properties. We may, in the future, acquire all or substantially all of the securities or assets of other REITs, management companies or similar entities where such investments would be consistent with our investment policies.
Financing Policies
We do not have a policy limiting the number or amount of mortgages that may be placed on any particular property. Mortgage financing instruments, however, usually limit additional indebtedness on those properties. Typically, we invest in or form separate legal entities to assist us in obtaining permanent financing at attractive terms. Long term financing may be structured as a mortgage loan on a single property, or on a group of properties, and generally requires us to provide a mortgage interest
5
on the property in favor of an institutional third party or as a securitized financing. For securitized financings, we create separate legal entities to own the properties. These legal entities are structured so that they would not necessarily be consolidated with us in the event we would ever become subject to a bankruptcy proceeding or liquidation. We decide upon the structure of the financing based upon the best terms then available to us and whether the proposed financing is consistent with our other business objectives. For accounting purposes, we include the outstanding securitized debt of legal entities owning consolidated properties as part of our consolidated indebtedness.
We must comply with the covenants contained in our financing agreements. We are party to a revolving credit facility and publically traded bonds that requires us to satisfy certain affirmative and negative covenants and to meet financial ratios and tests, which may include ratios and tests based on leverage, interest coverage and net worth.
If our Board of Directors determines to seek additional capital, we may raise that capital through additional public equity offerings, public debt offerings, debt financing, creating joint ventures with existing ownership interests in properties, retention of cash flows or a combination of these methods. Our ability to retain cash flows is limited by the requirement for REITs to pay tax on or distribute 100% of their capital gains income and distribute at least 90% of their taxable income. Our desire is to avoid entity level U.S. federal income tax by distributing 100% of our capital gains and ordinary taxable income.
In 2011, we implemented our dividend reinvestment plan in which all stockholders are entitled to participate. However, we may determine to pay dividends in a combination of cash and shares of common stock. We must also take into account taxes that would be imposed on undistributed taxable income.
If our Board of Directors determines to raise additional equity capital, it may, without stockholder approval, issue additional shares of common stock or other capital stock. Our Board of Directors may issue a number of shares up to the amount of our authorized capital in any manner and on such terms and for such consideration as it deems appropriate. Such securities may be senior to the outstanding classes of common stock. Such securities also may include additional classes of preferred stock, which may be convertible into common stock. The Plan Sponsors have preemptive rights to purchase our common stock as necessary to allow them to maintain their respective proportional ownership interest in GGP on a fully diluted basis. Any such offering could dilute a stockholder's investment in us and may make it more difficult to raise equity capital.
Conflict of Interest Policies
We maintain policies and have entered into agreements designed to reduce or eliminate potential conflicts of interest. We have adopted governance principles governing our affairs and the Board of Directors, as well as written charters for each of the standing committees of the Board of Directors. In addition, we have a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which applies to all of our officers, directors, and employees. At least a majority of the members of our Board of Directors must qualify as independent under the listing standards for NYSE companies. Any transaction between us and any director, officer or 5% stockholder must be approved pursuant to our Related Party Transaction Policy. As a result of the Plan, Brookfield is our largest stockholder.
Policies With Respect To Certain Other Activities
We intend to make investments which are consistent with our qualification as a REIT, unless the Board of Directors determines that it is no longer in our best interests to so qualify as a REIT. We have authority to offer shares of our capital stock or other securities in exchange for property. We also have authority to repurchase or otherwise reacquire our shares or any other securities. We may issue shares of our common stock, or cash at our option, to holders of units of limited partnership interest in
6
the Operating Partnership in future periods upon exercise of such holders' rights under the Operating Partnership agreement. Our policy prohibits us from making any loans to our directors or executive officers for any purpose. We may make loans to the joint ventures in which we participate.
We intend to borrow money as part of our business, and we also may issue senior securities, purchase and sell investments, offer securities in exchange for property and repurchase or reacquire shares or other securities in the future. To the extent we engage in these activities, we will comply with applicable law.
GGP makes reports to its security holders in accordance with the NYSE rules which include financial statements certified by independent registered public accounting firms, as required by the NYSE.
We do not have policies in place with respect to making loans to other persons (other than our conflict of interest policies described above), investing in the securities of other issuers for the purpose of exercising control and underwriting the securities of other issuers, and we do not currently, and do not intend to, engage in these activities.
Bankruptcy and Reorganization
In April 2009, the Predecessor and certain of its domestic subsidiaries (the "Debtors") filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code in the bankruptcy court of the Southern District of New York (the "Bankruptcy Court"). During the remainder of 2009 and to the Effective Date, the Debtors operated as "debtors in possession" under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court and the applicable provisions of Chapter 11. In general, as debtors in possession, we were authorized under Chapter 11 to continue to operate as an ongoing business.
On October 21, 2010, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming the Plan. Pursuant to the Plan, on the Effective Date, the Predecessor merged with a wholly-owned subsidiary of New GGP, Inc. and New GGP, Inc. was re-named General Growth Properties, Inc. Also pursuant to the Plan, prepetition creditor claims were satisfied in full and equity holders received newly issued common stock in New GGP, Inc. and in Howard Hughes Corporation ("HHC"). After that distribution, HHC became a publicly-held company, majority-owned by the Predecessor's previous stockholders. GGP has no remaining interest in HHC as of the Effective Date.
On the Effective Date, the Plan Sponsors, Blackstone and Texas Teachers owned a majority of the outstanding common stock of GGP. The Predecessor common stockholders held approximately 317 million shares of GGP common stock at the Effective Date; whereas, the Plan Sponsors, Blackstone, Texas Teachers held approximately 644 million shares of GGP common stock on such date. Notwithstanding such majority ownership, the Plan Sponsors entered into certain agreements that limited their discretion with respect to affiliate, change of control and other stockholder transactions or votes. In addition, 120 million warrants (the "Warrants") to purchase our common stock were issued to the Plan Sponsors and Blackstone at exercise prices of $10.50 and $10.75 per share. The estimated $835.8 million fair value of the Warrants was recognized as a liability on the Effective Date. Subsequent to the Effective Date, changes in the fair value of the Warrants have been recognized in earnings and pursuant to the terms of the agreement, adjustments to the exercise price and conversion ratio of the Warrants have been made as of a result of stock dividends and the RPI Spin-Off.
Employees
As of January 25, 2012, we had approximately 1,750 employees.
Insurance
We have comprehensive liability, fire, flood, extended coverage and rental loss with respect to our portfolio of retail properties. Our management believes that such insurance provides adequate coverage.
7
Qualification as a Real Estate Investment Trust and Taxability of Distributions
The Predecessor qualified as a real estate investment trust pursuant to the requirements contained in Sections 856-860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). The Predecessor for 2009, and the Company for 2010 and 2011, met their distribution requirements to its common stockholders as provided for in Section 857 of the Code wherein a dividend declared in October, November or December but paid in January of the following year will be considered a prior year dividend for all purposes of the Code (Note 8). The Company elected to be taxed as a REIT commencing with the taxable year beginning July 1, 2010, its date of incorporation and the Company intends to maintain REIT status, and therefore our operations will not be subject to Federal tax on its real estate investment trust taxable income. A schedule detailing the taxability of dividends for 2011, 2010 and 2009 has been presented in Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
GGP believes that it is a domestically controlled qualified investment entity as defined by the Code. However, because its shares are publicly traded, no assurance can be given that the Company is or will continue to be a domestically controlled qualified investment entity.
Securities and Exchange Commission Investigation
By letter dated January 9, 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") notified the Company that it had completed its investigation into possible violations of proscriptions on insider trading under the federal securities laws by certain former officers and directors and that the SEC does not intend to recommend any enforcement action.
Available Information
Our Internet website address is www.ggp.com. Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Interactive Data Files, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports are available and may be accessed free of charge through the Investment section of our Internet website under the Shareholder Info subsection, as soon as reasonably practicable after those documents are filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Our Internet website and included or linked information on the website are not intended to be incorporated into this Annual Report. Additionally, the public may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC's Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20549, and may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, which can be accessed at http://www.sec.gov.
Business Risks
Regional and local economic conditions may adversely affect our business
Our real property investments are influenced by the regional and local economy, which may be negatively impacted by increased unemployment, industry slowdowns, lack of availability of consumer credit, increased levels of consumer debt, poor housing market conditions, adverse weather conditions, natural disasters, plant closings, and other factors. Similarly, local real estate conditions, such as an oversupply of, or a reduction in demand for, retail space or retail goods, and the supply and creditworthiness of current and prospective tenants may affect the ability of our properties to generate significant revenue.
8
Economic conditions, especially in the retail sector, may have an adverse effect on our revenues and available cash
Unemployment, weak income growth, tight credit and the need to pay down existing obligations may negatively impact consumer spending. Given these economic conditions, we believe there is a risk that the sales at stores operating in our malls may be adversely affected. This may hinder our ability to implement our strategies and may have an unfavorable effect on our operations and our ability to attract new tenants.
We may be unable to lease or re-lease space in our properties on favorable terms or at all
Our results of operations depend on our ability to continue to strategically lease space in our properties, including re-leasing space in properties where leases are expiring, optimizing our tenant mix or leasing properties on more economically favorable terms. Because approximately eight to nine percent of our total leases expire annually, we are continually focused on our ability to lease properties and collect rents from tenants. Similarly, we are pursuing a strategy of replacing expiring short-term leases with long-term leases. If the sales at certain stores operating in our regional malls do not improve sufficiently, tenants might be unable to pay their existing minimum rents or expense recovery charges, since these rents and charges would represent a higher percentage of their sales. If our tenants' sales do not improve, new tenants would be less likely to be willing to pay minimum rents as high as they would otherwise pay. In addition, some of our leases are fixed-rate leases, and we may not be able to collect rent sufficient to meet our costs. Because substantially all of our income is derived from rentals of real property, our income and available cash would be adversely affected if a significant number of tenants are unable to meet their obligations.
The bankruptcy or store closures of national tenants, which are tenants with chains of stores in many of our properties, may adversely affect our revenues
Our leases generally do not contain provisions designed to ensure the creditworthiness of the tenant, and in recent years a number of companies in the retail industry, including some of our tenants, have declared bankruptcy or voluntarily closed certain of their stores. We may be unable to re-lease such space or to re-lease it on comparable or more favorable terms. As a result, the bankruptcy or closure of a national tenant may adversely affect our revenues.
Certain co-tenancy provisions in our lease agreements may result in reduced rent payments, which may adversely affect our operations and occupancy
Certain of our lease agreements include a co-tenancy provision which allows the tenant to pay a reduced rent amount and, in certain instances, terminate the lease, if we fail to maintain certain occupancy levels. Therefore, if occupancy or tenancy falls below certain thresholds, rents we are entitled to receive from our retail tenants could be reduced and may limit our ability to attract new tenants.
It may be difficult to sell real estate quickly, and transfer restrictions apply to some of our properties
Equity real estate investments are relatively illiquid, which may limit our ability to strategically change our portfolio promptly in response to changes in economic or other conditions. In addition, significant expenditures associated with each equity investment, such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes and maintenance costs, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a reduction in income from the investment. If income from a property declines while the related expenses do not decline, our income and cash available to us would be adversely affected. If it becomes necessary or desirable for us to dispose of one or more of our mortgaged properties, we might not be able to obtain a release of the lien on the mortgaged property without payment of the associated debt. The
9
foreclosure of a mortgage on a property or inability to sell a property could adversely affect the level of cash available to us.
Our business is dependent on perceptions by retailers and shoppers of the convenience and attractiveness of our retail properties, and our inability to maintain a positive perception may adversely affect our revenues
We are dependent on perceptions by retailers or shoppers of the safety, convenience and attractiveness of our retail properties. If retailers and shoppers perceive competing retail properties and other retailing options such as the internet to be more convenient or of a higher quality, our revenues may be adversely affected.
We redevelop and expand properties, and this activity is subject to risks due to various economic factors that are beyond our control
Capital investment to expand or redevelop our properties will be an ongoing part of our strategy going forward. In connection with such projects, we will be subject to various risks, including the following:
If redevelopment, expansion or reinvestment projects are unsuccessful, our investments in those projects may not be fully recoverable from future operations or sales.
We are in a competitive business
There are numerous shopping facilities that compete with our properties in attracting retailers to lease space. In addition, retailers at our properties face continued competition from retailers at other regional malls, outlet malls and other discount shopping centers, discount shopping clubs, catalog companies, and through internet sales and telemarketing. Competition of these types could adversely affect our revenues and cash flows.
We compete with other major real estate investors with significant capital for attractive investment opportunities. These competitors include REITs, investment banking firms and private institutional investors.
Our ability to realize our strategies and capitalize on our competitive strengths are dependent on our ability to effectively operate a large portfolio of high quality malls, maintain good relationships with our tenants and consumers, and remain well-capitalized, and our failure to do any of the foregoing could affect our ability to compete effectively in the markets in which we operate.
10
Some of our properties are subject to potential natural or other disasters
A number of our properties are located in areas which are subject to natural or other disasters, including hurricanes and earthquakes. Furthermore, many of our properties are located in coastal regions, and would therefore be affected by any future increases in sea levels. For example, certain of our properties are located in California or in other areas with higher risk of earthquakes.
Possible terrorist activity or other acts of violence could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations
Future terrorist attacks in the United States or other acts of violence may result in declining economic activity, which could harm the demand for goods and services offered by our tenants and the value of our properties and might adversely affect the value of an investment in our securities. Such a resulting decrease in retail demand could make it difficult for us to renew or re-lease our properties at lease rates equal to or above historical rates. Terrorist activities or violence also could directly affect the value of our properties through damage, destruction or loss, and the availability of insurance for such acts, or of insurance generally, might be lower or cost more, which could increase our operating expenses and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. To the extent that our tenants are affected by future attacks, their businesses similarly could be adversely affected, including their ability to continue to meet obligations under their existing leases. These acts might erode business and consumer confidence and spending and might result in increased volatility in national and international financial markets and economies. Any one of these events might decrease demand for real estate, decrease or delay the occupancy of our new or redeveloped properties, and limit our access to capital or increase our cost of raising capital.
We may incur costs to comply with environmental laws
Under various federal, state or local laws, ordinances and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of real estate may be required to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances released at a property, and may be held liable to third parties for bodily injury or property damage (investigation and/or clean-up costs) incurred by the parties in connection with the contamination. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of the release of the hazardous or toxic substances. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination may adversely affect the owner's ability to sell, lease or borrow with respect to the real estate. Other federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations require abatement or removal of asbestos-containing materials in the event of demolition or certain renovations or remodeling, the cost of which may be substantial for certain redevelopments, and also govern emissions of and exposure to asbestos fibers in the air. Federal and state laws also regulate the operation and removal of underground storage tanks. In connection with the ownership, operation and management of certain properties, we could be held liable for the costs of remedial action with respect to these regulated substances or tanks or related claims.
Our properties have been subjected to varying degrees of environmental assessment at various times. However, the identification of new areas of contamination, a change in the extent or known scope of contamination or changes in cleanup requirements could result in significant costs to us.
Some potential losses are not insured
We carry comprehensive liability, fire, flood, earthquake, terrorism, extended coverage and rental loss and environmental insurance on all of our properties. We believe the policy specifications and insured limits of these policies are adequate and appropriate. There are, however, some types of losses, including lease and other contract claims, and certain environmental conditions not discovered within the applicable policy period, which generally are not insured. If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of
11
insured limits occurs, we could lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the property. If this happens, we might nevertheless remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the property.
Inflation may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations
Should inflation increase in the future, this may have an impact on our consumers' disposable income. This may place temporary pressure on retailer sales and margins as their costs rise and we may be unable to pass the costs along to the consumer, which in turn may affect our ability to collect rents or renew spaces at higher overall rents. In addition, inflation may also impact our overall costs of operation. Many but not all of our leases have fixed amounts for recoveries and if our costs rise we may not be able to pass these costs on to our tenants. However, over the long term, substantially all of our tenant leases contain provisions designed to partially mitigate the negative impact of inflation as discussed in Item 7 below, which discussion is incorporated by reference here.
Inflation also poses a risk to us due to the possibility of future increases in interest rates. Such increases would adversely impact us due to our outstanding variable-rate debt as well as result in higher interest rates on new fixed-rate debt. In certain cases, we have previously limited our exposure to interest rate fluctuations related to a portion of our variable-rate debt by the use of interest rate cap and swap agreements. Such agreements, subject to current market conditions, allow us to replace variable-rate debt with fixed-rate debt in order to achieve our desired ratio of variable-rate to fixed rate date. However, in an increasing interest rate environment the fixed rates we can obtain with such replacement fixed-rate cap and swap agreements or the fixed-rate on new debt will also continue to increase.
Organizational Risks
We are a holding company with no operations of our own and will depend on our subsidiaries for cash
Our operations are conducted almost entirely through our subsidiaries. Our ability to make dividends or distributions in connection with being a REIT is highly dependent on the earnings of and the receipt of funds from our subsidiaries through dividends or distributions, and our ability to generate cash to meet our debt service obligations is further limited by our subsidiaries' ability to make such dividends, distributions or intercompany loans. Our subsidiaries' ability to pay any dividends or distributions to us are limited by their obligations to satisfy their own obligations to their creditors and preferred stockholders before making any dividends or distributions to us. In addition, Delaware law imposes requirements that may restrict our ability to pay dividends to holders of our common stock.
We share control of some of our properties with other investors and may have conflicts of interest with those investors
For the Unconsolidated Properties, we are required to make decisions with the other investors who have interests in the relevant property or properties. For example, the approval of certain of the other investors is required with respect to operating budgets and refinancing, encumbering, expanding or selling any of these properties, to make distributions, as well as to bankruptcy decisions related to the Unconsolidated Properties and related joint ventures. Also, the assets of Unconsolidated Properties may be used as collateral to secure loans of our joint venture partners, and the indemnity we may be entitled to from our joint venture partners could be worth less than the value of those assets. We might not have the same interests as the other investors in relation to these transactions. Accordingly, we might not be able to favorably resolve any of these issues, or we might have to provide financial or other inducements to the other investors to obtain a favorable resolution.
12
In addition, various restrictive provisions and rights apply to sales or transfers of interests in our jointly owned properties. As such, we might be required to make decisions about buying or selling interests in a property or properties at a time that is not desirable.
Bankruptcy of our joint venture partners could impose delays and costs on us with respect to the jointly owned retail properties
The bankruptcy of one of the other investors in any of our jointly owned shopping malls could materially and adversely affect the relevant property or properties. Pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code, we would be precluded from taking some actions affecting the estate of the other investor without prior court approval which would, in most cases, entail prior notice to other parties and a hearing. At a minimum, the requirement to obtain court approval may delay the actions we would or might want to take. If the relevant joint venture through which we have invested in a property has incurred recourse obligations, the discharge in bankruptcy of one of the other investors might result in our ultimate liability for a greater portion of those obligations than would otherwise be required.
We are impacted by tax-related obligations to some of our partners
We own certain properties through partnerships which have arrangements in place that protect the deferred tax situation of our existing third party limited partners. Violation of these arrangements could impose costs on us. As a result, we may be restricted with respect to decisions such as financing, encumbering, expanding or selling these properties.
Several of our joint venture partners are tax-exempt. As such, they are taxable to the extent of their share of unrelated business taxable income generated from these jointly owned properties. As the manager of these joint ventures, we have obligations to avoid the creation of unrelated business taxable income at these properties. As a result, we may be restricted with respect to decisions related to the financing of and revenue generation from these properties.
We may not be able to maintain our status as a REIT
We have elected to be treated as a REIT in connection with the filing of our tax return for 2010, retroactive to July 1, 2010. It is possible that we may not meet the conditions for continued qualification as a REIT. In addition, once an entity is qualified as a REIT, the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") generally requires that such entity distribute at least 90% of its ordinary taxable income to shareholders and pay tax on or distribute 100% of its capital gains. To avoid current entity level U.S. federal income taxes, we expect to distribute 100% of our capital gains and ordinary income to shareholders annually. For 2010 we made 90% of this distribution in common stock and 10% in cash. For 2011, we made this distribution in the form of quarterly $.10 per share cash payments and the special dividend of the common stock of RPI. There can be no assurances as to the allocation between cash and common stock of our future dividends.
If, with respect to any taxable year, we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we would not be allowed to deduct distributions to shareholders in computing our taxable income and federal income tax. If any of our REIT subsidiaries fail to qualify as a REIT, such failure could result in our loss of REIT status. If we lose our REIT status, corporate level income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, would apply to our taxable income at regular corporate rates. As a result, the amount available for distribution to holders of equity securities that would otherwise receive dividends would be reduced for the year or years involved, and we would no longer be required to make distributions. In addition, unless we were entitled to relief under the relevant statutory provisions, we would be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for four subsequent taxable years.
13
An ownership limit, certain anti-takeover defenses and applicable law may hinder any attempt to acquire us
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain the following limitations.
The ownership limit . Generally, for us to qualify as a REIT under the Code for a taxable year, not more than 50% in value of the outstanding shares of our capital stock may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer "individuals" at any time during the last half of such taxable year. Our charter provides that no one individual may own more than 9.9% of the outstanding shares of capital stock unless our board of directors provides a waiver from the ownership restrictions, which the Investment Agreements contemplate subject to the applicable Plan Sponsor making certain representations and covenants. The Code defines "individuals" for purposes of the requirement described above to include some types of entities. However, our certificate of incorporation also permits us to exempt a person from the ownership limit described therein upon the satisfaction of certain conditions which are described in our certificate of incorporation.
Selected provisions of our charter documents. Our charter authorizes the board of directors:
Selected provisions of our bylaws. Our amended and restated bylaws contain the following limitations:
Selected provisions of Delaware law . We are a Delaware corporation, and Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law applies to us. In general, Section 203 prevents an "interested stockholder" (as defined below), from engaging in a "business combination" (as defined in the statute) with us for three years following the date that person becomes an interested stockholder unless one or more of the following occurs:
14
by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of our outstanding voting stock not owned by the interested stockholder.
The statute defines "interested stockholder" as any person that is the owner of 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock or is an affiliate or associate of us and was the owner of 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock at any time within the three-year period immediately before the date of determination.
Each item discussed above may delay, deter or prevent a change in control of our company, even if a proposed transaction is at a premium over the then current market price for our common stock. Further, these provisions may apply in instances where some stockholders consider a transaction beneficial to them. As a result, our stock price may be negatively affected by these provisions.
Bankruptcy Risks
Our actual financial results may vary significantly from the projections filed with the Bankruptcy Court
Statements required to be made in the disclosure statement filed with the Bankruptcy Court in connection with the Plan, contained projected financial information and estimates of value that demonstrated the feasibility of the Plan and our Debtors' ability to continue operations upon their emergence from proceedings under the Bankruptcy Code. The information in the disclosure statement was prepared for the limited purpose of furnishing recipients with adequate information to make an informed judgment regarding acceptance of the Plan and was not prepared for the purpose of providing the basis for an investment decision relating to any of our securities. The projections and estimates of value, are expressly excluded from this Annual Report and should not be relied upon in any way or manner and should not be regarded for the purpose of this report as representations or warranties by us or any other person, as to the accuracy of such information or that any such projections or valuations will be realized. Those projections and estimates of value have not been, and will not be, updated on an ongoing basis, and they were not audited or reviewed by independent accountants. They reflected numerous assumptions concerning our anticipated future performance and with respect to prevailing and anticipated market and economic conditions that were, and remain, beyond our control. Projections and estimates of value are inherently subject to substantial and numerous uncertainties and to a wide variety of significant business, economic and competitive risks, and the assumptions underlying the projections and/or valuation estimates may be wrong in any material respect. Actual results may vary and may continue to vary significantly from those contemplated by the projections and/or valuation estimates. As a result, you should not rely on those projections and/or valuation estimates.
We cannot be certain that the Chapter 11 Cases will not adversely affect our operations going forward. Our bankruptcy may have affected our relationship with key employees, tenants, consumers, suppliers and communities, and our future success depends on our ability to maintain these relationships
Although we emerged from bankruptcy upon consummation of the Plan, we cannot assure you that our having been subject to bankruptcy protection will not adversely affect our operations going forward, including our ability to negotiate favorable terms from and maintain relationships with tenants, consumers, suppliers and communities. The failure to obtain such favorable terms and maintain such relationships could adversely affect our financial performance and our ability to realize our strategy.
There is a risk of investor influence over our company that may be adverse to our best interests and those of our other shareholders
The Plan Sponsors (excluding Fairholme), Blackstone and Texas Teachers still own, in the aggregate, a majority of the shares of our common stock (excluding shares issuable upon the exercise of Warrants) as of December 31, 2011. The effect of the exercise of the Warrants, representing
15
131,748,000 shares, or the election to receive future dividends in the form of common stock, would further increase their ownership.
Although the Plan Sponsors have entered into standstill agreements to limit their influence, the concentration of ownership of our outstanding equity in the Plan Sponsors may make some transactions more difficult or impossible without the support of the Plan Sponsors, or more likely with the support of the Plan Sponsors. The interests of any of the Plan Sponsors, any other substantial stockholder or any of their respective affiliates could conflict with or differ from our interests or the interests of the holders of our common stock. For example, the concentration of ownership held by the Plan Sponsors could delay, defer or prevent a change of control of our company or impede a merger, takeover or other business combination that may otherwise be favorable for us and the other stockholders. A Plan Sponsor, substantial stockholder or affiliate thereof may also pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. We cannot assure you that the standstill agreements can fully protect against these risks.
As long as the Plan Sponsors and any other substantial stockholder own, directly or indirectly, a substantial portion of our outstanding shares, subject to the terms of the standstill agreements and were they to act in a coordinated manner, they would be able to exert significant influence over us, including:
Some of our directors are involved in other businesses including, without limitation, real estate activities and public and/or private investments and, therefore, may have competing or conflicting interests with us and our board of directors has adopted resolutions renouncing any interest or expectation in any such business opportunities. In addition, our relationship agreement with Brookfield Asset Management Inc. contains significant exclusions from Brookfield's obligation to present opportunities to us
Certain of our directors have and may in the future have interests in other real estate business activities, and may have control or influence over these activities or may serve as investment advisors, directors or officers. These interests and activities, and any duties to third parties arising from such interests and activities, could divert the attention of such directors from our operations. Additionally, certain of our directors are engaged in investment and other activities in which they may learn of real estate and other related opportunities in their non-director capacities. Our board of directors has adopted resolutions applicable to our directors that expressly provide, as permitted by Section 122(17) of the DGCL, that our non-employee directors are not obligated to limit their interests or activities in their non-director capacities or to notify us of any opportunities that may arise in connection therewith, even if the opportunities are complementary to or in competition with our businesses. Accordingly, we
16
have, and investors in our common stock should have, no expectation that we will be able to learn of or participate in such opportunities. Additionally, the relationship agreement with Brookfield Asset Management, Inc. contains significant exclusions from Brookfield Asset Management Inc.'s obligations to present opportunities to us.
Liquidity Risks
Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and operating flexibility
As of December 31, 2011, we have approximately $20.04 billion aggregate principal amount of indebtedness outstanding at our pro rata share, net of noncontrolling interest, which includes approximately $2.78 billion of our share of unconsolidated debt. Our indebtedness may have important consequences to us and the value of our common stock, including:
Our debt contains restrictions and covenants which may limit our ability to enter into or obtain funding for certain transactions or operate our business
The terms of certain of our debt will require us to satisfy certain customary affirmative and negative covenants and to meet financial ratios and tests, including ratios and tests based on leverage, interest coverage and net worth, or to satisfy similar tests as a precondition to incurring additional debt. We entered into a $750 million revolving credit facility in April 2011 containing such covenants and restrictions. In addition, certain of our indebtedness that was reinstated in connection with the Plan contains restrictions. The covenants and other restrictions under our debt agreements affect, among other things, our ability to:
Further, our ability to incur debt under the indentures governing the Rouse notes which are expected to remain outstanding through November 2015 (with maturities from September 2012), is determined by the calculation of several covenant tests, including ratios of secured debt to gross assets
17
and total debt to gross assets. We expect that Rouse and its subsidiaries may need to refinance project-level debt prior to 2015, and our ability to refinance such debt may be limited by these ratios and any potential non-compliance with the covenants may result in Rouse seeking other sources of capital, including investments from us, or may result in a default on the reinstated Rouse notes. Our current plan with respect to the 2012 maturities in to pay down the amount with available capital.
In addition, our refinanced debt contains certain terms which include restrictive operational and financial covenants, restrictions on the distribution of cash flows from properties serving as collateral for the debt and, in certain instances, higher interest rates. These fees and cash flow restrictions may affect our ability to fund our on-going operations from our operating cash flows and we may be limited in our operating and financial flexibility and, thus, may be limited in our ability to respond to changes in our business or competitive activities.
We may not be able to refinance, extend or repay our portion of indebtedness of our Unconsolidated Properties
As of December 31, 2011, our share of indebtedness secured by our Unconsolidated Properties was approximately $2.78 billion. We cannot assure you that our Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates will be able to support, extend, refinance or repay their debt on acceptable terms or otherwise. If we or our joint venture partners cannot service this debt, the joint venture may have to deed property back to the applicable lenders. There can be no assurance that we will be able to refinance or restructure such debt on acceptable terms or otherwise, or that joint venture operations or contributions by us and/or our partners will be sufficient to repay such loans. The ability to refinance this debt is negatively affected by the current condition of the credit markets, which have significantly reduced the capacity levels of commercial lending. The ability to successfully refinance or extend this debt may also be negatively affected by our previous bankruptcy proceedings and the restructuring of the related debt, as well as the real or perceived decline in the value of our Unconsolidated Properties based on general and retail economic conditions.
We may not be able to raise capital through the sale of properties, including the strategic sale of non-core assets at prices we believe are appropriate
We desire to opportunistically sell non-core assets, such as stand-alone office buildings, community shopping centers and certain regional malls. Our ability to sell our properties to raise capital may be limited. The retail economic climate negatively affects the value of our properties and therefore reduces our ability to sell these properties on acceptable terms. Our ability to sell our properties could be affected by the availability of credit, which could increase the cost and difficulty for potential purchasers to acquire financing, as well as by the illiquid nature of real estate. For example, as part of our strategy to further delever our balance sheet in order to build liquidity and optimize our portfolio, we plan to reposition certain of our underperforming properties. If we cannot reposition these properties on terms that are acceptable to us, we may not be able to delever and realize our strategy of building liquidity and optimizing our portfolio. See "Business Risks" for a further discussion of the effects of the retail economic climate on our properties, as well as the illiquid nature of our investments in our properties.
Risks Related to the Distribution of HHC
We have indemnified HHC for certain tax liabilities
Pursuant to the Investment Agreements, we have indemnified HHC from and against 93.75% of any and all losses, claims, damages, liabilities and reasonable expenses to which HHC and its subsidiaries become subject, in each case solely to the extent directly attributable to certain taxes related to sales in the Predecessor's Master Planned Communities segment prior to March 31, 2010, in an amount up to $303.8 million as reflected in our consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2011 and 2010. Under certain circumstances, the Company has also agreed to be responsible for interest or penalties attributable to such taxes in excess of $303.8 million.
18
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
We may make forward-looking statements in this Annual Report and in other reports which we file with the SEC. In addition, our senior management might make forward-looking statements orally to analysts, investors, the media and others.
Forward-looking statements include:
In this Annual Report, for example, we make forward-looking statements discussing our expectations about:
Forward-looking statements discuss matters that are not historical facts. Because they discuss future events or conditions, forward-looking statements often include words such as "anticipate," "believe," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "plan," "project," "target," "can," "could," "may," "should," "would" or similar expressions. Forward-looking statements should not be unduly relied upon. They give our expectations about the future and are not guarantees. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and we might not update them to reflect changes that occur after the date they are made.
Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements include but are not limited to:
19
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
Our investments in real estate as of December 31, 2011 consisted of our interests in the properties in our Retail and Other segment. We generally own the land underlying the properties; however, at certain of our properties, all or part of the underlying land is owned by a third party that leases the land to us pursuant to a long-term ground lease. The leases generally contain various purchase options and typically provide us with a right of first refusal in the event of a proposed sale of the property by the landlord. Information regarding encumbrances on our properties is included in Schedule III of this Annual Report.
20
The following sets forth certain information regarding our retail properties including regional malls and strip centers as of December 31, 2011:
CONSOLIDATED RETAIL PROPERTIES
|
Property Count
|
Property Name | Location(1) |
GGP
Ownership |
Total GLA |
Mall and
Freestanding GLA |
Retail
Percentage Leased |
Anchors | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
Ala Moana Center(2) | Honolulu, HI | 100 | % | 2,372,434 | 964,285 | 98.5 | % | Macy's, Neiman Marcus, Sears, Nordstrom | |||||||||
|
2 |
Apache Mall(2) | Rochester, MN | 100 | % | 752,923 | 269,931 | 99.8 | % | Herberger's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
3 |
Augusta Mall(2) | Augusta, GA | 100 | % | 1,088,151 | 490,928 | 98.9 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
4 |
Baskin Robbins | Idaho Falls, ID | 100 | % | 1,814 | 1,814 | 100.0 | % | | |||||||||
|
5 |
Baybrook Mall | Friendswood (Houston), TX | 100 | % | 1,243,183 | 424,346 | 100.0 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
6 |
Bayside Marketplace(2) | Miami, FL | 100 | % | 218,258 | 218,258 | 94.5 | % | | |||||||||
|
7 |
Beachwood Place | Beachwood, OH | 100 | % | 913,729 | 334,149 | 96.8 | % | Dillard's, Nordstrom, Saks Fifth Avenue | |||||||||
|
8 |
Bellis Fair | Bellingham (Seattle), WA | 100 | % | 776,788 | 338,464 | 98.2 | % | JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Macy's Home Store, Sears, Target | |||||||||
|
9 |
Boise Plaza | Boise, ID | 75 | % | 114,404 | 114,404 | 100.0 | % | | |||||||||
|
10 |
Boise Towne Square | Boise, ID | 100 | % | 1,213,366 | 423,418 | 89.6 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears, Kohl's | |||||||||
|
11 |
Brass Mill Center | Waterbury, CT | 100 | % | 1,179,961 | 396,066 | 93.6 | % | Burlington Coat Factory, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
12 |
Burlington Town Center(2) | Burlington, VT | 100 | % | 354,394 | 153,024 | 89.6 | % | Macy's | |||||||||
|
13 |
Capital Mall | Jefferson City, MO | 100 | % | 550,343 | 317,266 | 79.1 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
14 |
Coastland Center(2) | Naples, FL | 100 | % | 923,486 | 333,096 | 90.1 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
15 |
Columbia Bank Drive Thru | Towson (Baltimore), MD | 100 | % | 17,000 | 17,000 | 100.0 | % | | |||||||||
|
16 |
Columbia Mall | Columbia, MO | 100 | % | 736,807 | 315,747 | 95.5 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears, Target | |||||||||
|
17 |
Columbiana Centre | Columbia, SC | 100 | % | 825,984 | 267,007 | 98.1 | % | Belk, Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
18 |
Coral Ridge Mall | Coralville (Iowa City), IA | 100 | % | 1,076,055 | 524,890 | 96.0 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears, Target, Younkers | |||||||||
|
19 |
Coronado Center(2) | Albuquerque, NM | 100 | % | 1,149,271 | 403,246 | 97.7 | % | JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Sears, Target | |||||||||
|
20 |
Crossroads Center | St. Cloud, MN | 100 | % | 890,802 | 367,360 | 99.0 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears, Target | |||||||||
|
21 |
Cumberland Mall | Atlanta, GA | 100 | % | 1,032,110 | 384,126 | 94.3 | % | Costco, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
22 |
Deerbrook Mall | Humble (Houston), TX | 100 | % | 1,207,794 | 554,254 | 98.1 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
23 |
Eastridge Mall WY | Casper, WY | 100 | % | 567,494 | 277,698 | 76.5 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears, Target | |||||||||
|
24 |
Eastridge Mall CA | San Jose, CA | 100 | % | 1,300,572 | 628,311 | 98.2 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
25 |
Eden Prairie Center | Eden Prairie (Minneapolis), MN | 100 | % | 1,135,549 | 404,046 | 98.5 | % | Kohl's, Sears, Target, Von Maur, JCPenney | |||||||||
|
26 |
Fallbrook Center(2) | West Hills (Los Angeles), CA | 100 | % | 856,387 | 856,387 | 88.2 | % | | |||||||||
|
27 |
Fashion Place(2) | Murray, UT | 100 | % | 1,083,735 | 435,201 | 97.7 | % | Dillard's, Nordstrom, Sears | |||||||||
|
28 |
Fashion Show | Las Vegas, NV | 100 | % | 1,891,725 | 665,110 | 99.5 | % | Bloomingdale's Home, Dillard's, Macy's, Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom, Saks Fifth Avenue | |||||||||
|
29 |
Foothills Mall | Fort Collins, CO | 100 | % | 747,679 | 287,753 | 65.9 | % | Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
30 |
Fort Union(2) | Midvale (Salt Lake City), UT | 100 | % | 32,968 | 32,968 | 56.2 | % | | |||||||||
|
31 |
Four Seasons Town Centre | Greensboro, NC | 100 | % | 1,087,379 | 445,363 | 91.4 | % | Belk, Dillard's, JCPenney | |||||||||
|
32 |
Fox River Mall | Appleton, WI | 100 | % | 1,213,642 | 618,728 | 92.7 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears, Target, Younkers | |||||||||
|
33 |
Fremont Plaza(2) | Las Vegas, NV | 100 | % | 54,076 | 54,076 | 73.7 | % | | |||||||||
|
34 |
Glenbrook Square | Fort Wayne, IN | 100 | % | 1,226,628 | 449,758 | 95.9 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
35 |
Governor's Square(2) | Tallahassee, FL | 100 | % | 1,021,845 | 330,240 | 96.2 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
36 |
Grand Teton Mall | Idaho Falls, ID | 100 | % | 627,146 | 209,947 | 99.8 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
37 |
Greenwood Mall | Bowling Green, KY | 100 | % | 844,996 | 415,943 | 92.1 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
38 |
Harborplace(2) | Baltimore, MD | 100 | % | 149,066 | 149,066 | 90.9 | % | | |||||||||
|
39 |
Hulen Mall | Ft. Worth, TX | 100 | % | 964,158 | 367,588 | 99.6 | % | Dillard's, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
40 |
Jordan Creek Town Center | West Des Moines, IA | 100 | % | 1,307,241 | 724,314 | 99.4 | % | Dillard's, Younkers | |||||||||
21
|
Property Count
|
Property Name | Location(1) |
GGP
Ownership |
Total GLA |
Mall and
Freestanding GLA |
Retail
Percentage Leased |
Anchors | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
41 |
Lakeside Mall | Sterling Heights, MI | 100 | % | 1,507,867 | 487,149 | 81.1 | % | JCPenney, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Macy's Mens & Home, Sears | |||||||||
|
42 |
Lincolnshire Commons | Lincolnshire (Chicago), IL | 100 | % | 118,562 | 118,562 | 100.0 | % | | |||||||||
|
43 |
Lockport Mall | Lockport, NY | 100 | % | 90,734 | 90,734 | 100.0 | % | | |||||||||
|
44 |
Lynnhaven Mall | Virginia Beach, VA | 100 | % | 1,291,445 | 640,053 | 98.9 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's | |||||||||
|
45 |
Mall Of Louisiana | Baton Rouge, LA | 100 | % | 1,564,881 | 615,632 | 99.2 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
46 |
Mall Of The Bluffs | Council Bluffs (Omaha, NE), IA | 100 | % | 701,355 | 375,133 | 72.6 | % | Dillard's, Sears | |||||||||
|
47 |
Mall St. Matthews(2) | Louisville, KY | 100 | % | 1,017,018 | 501,313 | 98.1 | % | Dillard's, Dillard's Men's & Home, JCPenney | |||||||||
|
48 |
Market Place Shopping Center | Champaign, IL | 100 | % | 952,049 | 416,303 | 96.7 | % | Bergner's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
49 |
Mayfair | Wauwatosa (Milwaukee), WI | 100 | % | 1,517,129 | 615,230 | 99.1 | % | Boston Store, Macy's | |||||||||
|
50 |
Meadows Mall | Las Vegas, NV | 100 | % | 945,518 | 308,665 | 98.5 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
51 |
Mondawmin Mall | Baltimore, MD | 100 | % | 436,442 | 371,125 | 92.1 | % | | |||||||||
|
52 |
Newgate Mall(2) | Ogden (Salt Lake City), UT | 100 | % | 723,675 | 377,795 | 84.4 | % | Dillard's, Sears | |||||||||
|
53 |
North Point Mall | Alpharetta (Atlanta), GA | 100 | % | 1,375,757 | 385,349 | 97.6 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears, Von Maur | |||||||||
|
54 |
North Star Mall | San Antonio, TX | 100 | % | 1,245,713 | 516,391 | 99.5 | % | Dillard's, Macy's, Saks Fifth Avenue, JCPenney | |||||||||
|
55 |
Northridge Fashion Center | Northridge (Los Angeles), CA | 100 | % | 1,510,884 | 641,072 | 96.3 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
56 |
Northtown Mall | Spokane, WA | 100 | % | 1,044,187 | 490,936 | 84.3 | % | JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Red Fox, Sears | |||||||||
|
57 |
Oak View Mall | Omaha, NE | 100 | % | 862,348 | 258,088 | 93.8 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears, Younkers | |||||||||
|
58 |
Oakwood Center | Gretna, LA | 100 | % | 791,436 | 277,408 | 98.0 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
59 |
Oakwood Mall | Eau Claire, WI | 100 | % | 812,588 | 397,744 | 93.2 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears, Younkers | |||||||||
|
60 |
Oglethorpe Mall | Savannah, GA | 100 | % | 943,564 | 406,980 | 95.6 | % | Belk, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
61 |
Oxmoor Center(2) | Louisville, KY | 100 | % | 924,802 | 357,592 | 95.8 | % | Macy's, Sears, Von Maur | |||||||||
|
62 |
Paramus Park | Paramus, NJ | 100 | % | 755,035 | 295,978 | 94.7 | % | Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
63 |
Park City Center | Lancaster (Philadelphia), PA | 100 | % | 1,441,169 | 541,272 | 93.0 | % | Bon Ton, Boscov's, JCPenney, Kohl's, Sears | |||||||||
|
64 |
Park Place | Tucson, AZ | 100 | % | 1,058,540 | 477,083 | 94.1 | % | Dillard's, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
65 |
Peachtree Mall | Columbus, GA | 100 | % | 817,992 | 309,377 | 93.9 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's | |||||||||
|
66 |
Pecanland Mall | Monroe, LA | 100 | % | 944,320 | 328,884 | 98.0 | % | Belk, Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears, Burlington Coat Factory | |||||||||
|
67 |
Pembroke Lakes Mall | Pembroke Pines (Fort Lauderdale | 100 | % | 1,132,073 | 350,798 | 93.4 | % | Dillard's, Dillard's Men's & Home, JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Home Store, Sears | |||||||||
|
68 |
Pine Ridge Mall(2) | Pocatello, ID | 100 | % | 636,213 | 198,226 | 74.8 | % | JCPenney, Sears, Shopko | |||||||||
|
69 |
Pioneer Place(2) | Portland, OR | 100 | % | 652,400 | 315,495 | 91.3 | % | | |||||||||
|
70 |
Plaza 800(2) | Sparks (Reno), NV | 100 | % | 72,431 | 72,431 | 83.9 | % | | |||||||||
|
71 |
Prince Kuhio Plaza(2) | Hilo, HI | 100 | % | 503,836 | 317,416 | 96.9 | % | Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
72 |
Providence Place(2) | Providence, RI | 100 | % | 1,263,412 | 749,721 | 96.3 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
|
73 |
Provo Towne Centre(2)(3) | Provo, UT | 75 | % | 792,056 | 300,337 | 88.4 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
74 |
Red Cliffs Mall | St. George, UT | 100 | % | 440,376 | 148,041 | 92.9 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
75 |
Regency Square Mall | Jacksonville, FL | 100 | % | 1,435,444 | 556,443 | 74.1 | % | Belk, Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
76 |
Ridgedale Center | Minnetonka, MN | 100 | % | 1,028,121 | 325,741 | 91.7 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
77 |
River Hills Mall | Mankato, MN | 100 | % | 716,950 | 353,008 | 95.5 | % | Herberger's, JCPenney, Sears, Target | |||||||||
|
78 |
Rivertown Crossings | Grandville (Grand Rapids), MI | 100 | % | 1,179,948 | 544,323 | 92.5 | % | JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Sears, Younkers | |||||||||
|
79 |
Rogue Valley Mall | Medford (Portland), OR | 100 | % | 638,396 | 281,412 | 90.8 | % | JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Macy's Home Store | |||||||||
|
80 |
Salem Center(2) | Salem, OR | 100 | % | 631,824 | 193,824 | 83.5 | % | JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
|
81 |
Sooner Mall | Norman, OK | 100 | % | 472,721 | 205,816 | 100.0 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
82 |
Southlake Mall | Morrow (Atlanta), GA | 100 | % | 1,012,506 | 272,254 | 91.6 | % | Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
83 |
Southshore Mall(2) | Aberdeen, WA | 100 | % | 273,289 | 139,514 | 62.6 | % | JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
22
|
Property Count
|
Property Name | Location(1) |
GGP
Ownership |
Total GLA |
Mall and
Freestanding GLA |
Retail
Percentage Leased |
Anchors | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
84 |
Southwest Plaza | Littleton (Denver), CO | 100 | % | 1,362,497 | 636,949 | 90.1 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
85 |
Spokane Valley Mall(3) | Spokane, WA | 75 | % | 857,890 | 346,758 | 93.5 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
86 |
Staten Island Mall | Staten Island, NY | 100 | % | 1,277,367 | 523,186 | 96.6 | % | Macy's, Sears, JCPenney | |||||||||
|
87 |
Stonestown Galleria | San Francisco, CA | 100 | % | 908,378 | 425,771 | 99.1 | % | Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
|
88 |
The Crossroads | Portage (Kalamazoo), MI | 100 | % | 770,563 | 267,603 | 96.2 | % | Burlington Coat Factory, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
89 |
The Gallery At Harborplace | Baltimore, MD | 100 | % | 398,019 | 131,904 | 95.2 | % | | |||||||||
|
90 |
The Grand Canal Shoppes | Las Vegas, NV | 100 | % | 498,258 | 463,844 | 98.2 | % | | |||||||||
|
91 |
The Maine Mall(2) | South Portland, ME | 100 | % | 1,005,783 | 507,277 | 96.0 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
92 |
The Mall In Columbia | Columbia, MD | 100 | % | 1,400,909 | 600,741 | 98.3 | % | JCPenney, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears | |||||||||
|
93 |
The Parks At Arlington | Arlington (Dallas), TX | 100 | % | 1,510,366 | 697,564 | 100.0 | % | Dillard's, Jcpenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
94 |
The Shoppes At Buckland Hills | Manchester, CT | 100 | % | 1,038,151 | 525,540 | 92.0 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Mens & Home, Sears | |||||||||
|
95 |
The Shoppes At The Palazzo | Las Vegas, NV | 100 | % | 269,818 | 185,075 | 97.9 | % | Barneys New York | |||||||||
|
96 |
The Shops At Fallen Timbers | Maumee, OH | 100 | % | 590,280 | 328,778 | 96.3 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney | |||||||||
|
97 |
The Shops at La Cantera(3) | San Antonio, TX | 75 | % | 1,279,056 | 582,386 | 98.1 | % | Dillard's, Macy's, Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom | |||||||||
|
98 |
The Streets At Southpoint(3) | Durham, NC | 100 | % | 1,332,425 | 606,078 | 99.2 | % | Hudson Belk, JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears | |||||||||
|
99 |
The Village of Cross Keys | Baltimore, MD | 100 | % | 290,141 | 74,172 | 93.2 | % | | |||||||||
|
100 |
The Woodlands Mall | Woodlands (Houston), TX | 100 | % | 1,355,051 | 572,662 | 99.6 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
101 |
Town East Mall | Mesquite (Dallas), TX | 100 | % | 1,225,608 | 416,222 | 99.2 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
102 |
Tucson Mall(2) | Tucson, AZ | 100 | % | 1,258,472 | 605,014 | 94.9 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
103 |
Tysons Galleria | McLean (Washington, D.C.), VA | 100 | % | 812,615 | 300,682 | 91.5 | % | Macy's, Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue | |||||||||
|
104 |
Valley Plaza Mall | Bakersfield, CA | 100 | % | 1,175,121 | 518,153 | 98.8 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Sears, Target | |||||||||
|
105 |
Visalia Mall | Visalia, CA | 100 | % | 437,840 | 180,840 | 89.1 | % | JCPenney, Macy's | |||||||||
|
106 |
West Oaks Mall | Ocoee (Orlando), FL | 100 | % | 1,066,134 | 411,345 | 73.6 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears | |||||||||
|
107 |
Westlake Center | Seattle, WA | 100 | % | 102,859 | 102,859 | 90.4 | % | | |||||||||
|
108 |
White Marsh Mall | Baltimore, MD | 100 | % | 965,750 | 439,740 | 95.3 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Home Store, Sears | |||||||||
|
109 |
Willowbrook | Wayne, NJ | 100 | % | 1,523,081 | 493,021 | 98.7 | % | Bloomingdale's, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
110 |
Woodbridge Center | Woodbridge, NJ | 100 | % | 1,654,921 | 669,886 | 95.7 | % | JCPenney, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
|
111 |
Woodlands Village | Flagstaff, AZ | 100 | % | 91,810 | 91,810 | 87.4 | % | ||||||||||
|
|
99,487,512 | 42,598,084 | ||||||||||||||||
23
|
Property
Count |
Property Name | Location(2) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
Austin Bluffs Plaza |
Colorado Springs, CO | ||
|
2 |
Grand Traverse |
Traverse City, MI | ||
|
3 |
Orem Plaza State/Center Street |
Orem, UT | ||
|
4 |
River Pointe Plaza |
West Jordan (Salt Lake City), UT | ||
|
5 |
University Crossing |
Orem, UT |
|
Property
Count |
Property Name | Location(2) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
Animas Valley Mall |
Farmington, NM | ||
|
2 |
Bayshore Mall |
Eureka, CA | ||
|
3 |
Birchwood Mall |
Port Huron (Detroit), MI | ||
|
4 |
Cache Valley Mall |
Logan, UT | ||
|
5 |
Chula Vista Center |
Chula Vista (San Diego), CA | ||
|
6 |
Collin Creek |
Plano, TX | ||
|
7 |
Colony Square Mall |
Zanesville, OH | ||
|
8 |
Gateway Mall |
Springfield, OR | ||
|
9 |
Knollwood Mall |
St. Louis Park (Minneapolis), MN | ||
|
10 |
Lakeland Square |
Lakeland (Orlando), FL | ||
|
11 |
Lansing Mall |
Lansing, MI | ||
|
12 |
Mall St. Vincent |
Shreveport-Bossier City, LA | ||
|
13 |
Newpark Mall |
Newark (San Francisco), CA | ||
|
14 |
North Plains Mall |
Clovis, NM | ||
|
15 |
Pierre Bossier Mall |
Bossier City (Shreveport), LA | ||
|
16 |
Sikes Senter |
Wichita Falls, TX | ||
|
17 |
Silver Lake Mall |
Coeur d' Alene, ID | ||
|
18 |
Southland Center |
Taylor, MI | ||
|
19 |
Southland Mall |
Hayward, CA | ||
|
20 |
Spring Hill Mall |
West Dundee (Chicago), IL | ||
|
21 |
Steeplegate Mall |
Concord, NH | ||
|
22 |
The Boulevard Mall |
Las Vegas, NV | ||
|
23 |
The Mall at Sierra Vista |
Sierra Vista, AZ | ||
|
24 |
Three Rivers Mall |
Kelso, WA | ||
|
25 |
Valley Hills Mall NC |
Hickory, NC | ||
|
26 |
Vista Ridge |
Lewisville (Dallas), TX | ||
|
27 |
Washington Park Mall |
Bartlesville, OK | ||
|
28 |
West Valley |
Tracy (San Francisco), CA | ||
|
29 |
Westwood Mall |
Jackson, MI | ||
|
30 |
White Mountain Mall |
Rock Springs, WY |
24
UNCONSOLIDATED RETAIL PROPERTIESDOMESTIC
|
Property Count
|
Property Name | Location(1) |
GGP
Ownership |
Total
GLA |
Mall and
Freestanding GLA |
Retail
Percentage Leased |
Anchors | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alderwood | Lynnwood (Seattle), WA | 50 | % | 1,283,496 | 577,598 | 98.1 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears | |||||||||
| 2 | Altamonte Mall | Altamonte Springs (Orlando), FL | 50 | % | 1,152,556 | 474,008 | 94.9 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
| 3 | Bridgewater Commons | Bridgewater, NJ | 35 | % | 992,710 | 396,038 | 98.0 | % | Bloomingdale's, Lord & Taylor, Macy's | |||||||||
| 4 | Carolina Place | Pineville (Charlotte), NC | 50 | % | 1,156,021 | 382,519 | 98.4 | % | Belk, Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
| 5 | Center Point Plaza(3) | Las Vegas, NV | 50 | % | 144,635 | 70,299 | 98.2 | % | | |||||||||
| 6 | Christiana Mall | Newark, DE | 50 | % | 1,108,330 | 467,018 | 99.5 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom, Target | |||||||||
| 7 | Clackamas Town Center | Happy Valley, OR | 50 | % | 1,367,055 | 592,213 | 97.9 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Home Store, Nordstrom, Sears | |||||||||
| 8 | First Colony Mall | Sugar Land, TX | 50 | % | 1,121,123 | 502,075 | 98.1 | % | Dillard's, Dillard's Men's & Home, JCPenney, Macy's | |||||||||
| 9 | Florence Mall | Florence (Cincinnati, OH), KY | 50 | % | 957,443 | 405,036 | 93.8 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Home Store, Sears | |||||||||
| 10 | Galleria At Tyler(2) | Riverside, CA | 50 | % | 1,025,419 | 557,211 | 96.7 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 11 | Glendale Galleria(2) | Glendale, CA | 50 | % | 1,463,221 | 515,430 | 95.3 | % | JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom, Target | |||||||||
| 12 | Kenwood Towne Centre(2) | Cincinnati, OH | 50 | % | 1,157,137 | 515,816 | 97.2 | % | Dillard's, Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 13 | Lake Mead & Buffalo(3) | Las Vegas, NV | 50 | % | 150,948 | 64,991 | 96.6 | % | | |||||||||
| 14 | Mizner Park(2) | Boca Raton, FL | 50 | % | 519,293 | 177,330 | 85.1 | % | | |||||||||
| 15 | Natick Mall | Natick (Boston), MA | 50 | % | 1,188,247 | 477,027 | 95.7 | % | JCPenney, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
| 16 | Natick West | Natick (Boston), MA | 50 | % | 501,947 | 265,517 | 96.5 | % | Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 17 | Neshaminy Mall | Bensalem, PA | 50 | % | 1,019,284 | 412,295 | 94.3 | % | Boscov's, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
| 18 | Northbrook Court | Northbrook (Chicago), IL | 50 | % | 1,012,594 | 476,317 | 98.1 | % | Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Neiman Marcus | |||||||||
| 19 | Oakbrook Center | Oak Brook (Chicago), IL | 48 | % | 2,215,826 | 790,956 | 97.2 | % | Bloomingdale's Home, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom, Sears | |||||||||
| 20 | Otay Ranch Town Center | Chula Vista (San Diego), CA | 50 | % | 652,164 | 512,164 | 97.9 | % | Macy's | |||||||||
| 21 | Owings Mills Mall | Owings Mills, MD | 50 | % | 1,411,117 | 438,017 | 52.8 | % | JCPenney, Macy's | |||||||||
| 22 | Park Meadows | Lone Tree, CO | 35 | % | 1,576,098 | 753,098 | 99.0 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 23 | Perimeter Mall | Atlanta, GA | 50 | % | 1,568,651 | 515,377 | 91.8 | % | Bloomingdale's, Dillard's, Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 24 | Pinnacle Hills Promenade | Rogers, AR | 50 | % | 979,219 | 360,344 | 98.0 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Target | |||||||||
| 25 | Plaza Frontenac | St. Louis, MO | 55 | % | 482,843 | 222,130 | 97.5 | % | Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue, | |||||||||
| 26 | Quail Springs Mall | Oklahoma City, OK | 50 | % | 1,138,802 | 450,949 | 99.3 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
| 27 | Riverchase Galleria | Hoover (Birmingham), AL | 50 | % | 1,583,238 | 509,318 | 92.8 | % | Belk, Belk Home Store, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
| 28 | Saint Louis Galleria | St. Louis, MO | 74 | % | 1,178,700 | 464,648 | 96.1 | % | Dillard's, Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 29 | Stonebriar Centre | Frisco (Dallas), TX | 50 | % | 1,651,695 | 786,503 | 99.3 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears | |||||||||
| 30 | The Oaks Mall | Gainesville, FL | 51 | % | 897,759 | 339,892 | 97.2 | % | Belk, Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears | |||||||||
| 31 | The Shoppes At River Crossing | Macon, GA | 50 | % | 694,595 | 361,376 | 99.4 | % | Belk, Dillard's | |||||||||
| 32 | Towson Town Center | Towson, MD | 35 | % | 999,086 | 579,957 | 95.9 | % | Macy's, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 33 | The Trails Village Center(3) | Las Vegas, NV | 50 | % | 174,644 | | 95.4 | % | | |||||||||
| 34 | Village Of Merrick Park(2) | Coral Gables, FL | 40 | % | 838,019 | 406,756 | 87.3 | % | Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom | |||||||||
| 35 | Water Tower Place | Chicago, IL | 52 | % | 774,812 | 389,875 | 97.3 | % | Macy's | |||||||||
| 36 | Westroads Mall | Omaha, NE | 51 | % | 1,070,253 | 540,851 | 97.0 | % | JCPenney, Von Maur, Younkers | |||||||||
| 37 | Whaler's Village | Lahaina, HI | 50 | % | 105,627 | 105,627 | 97.1 | % | | |||||||||
| 38 | Willowbrook Mall | Houston, TX | 50 | % | 1,399,439 | 415,067 | 97.2 | % | Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Mens, Sears | |||||||||
| 38,714,046 | 16,271,643 | |||||||||||||||||
25
UNCONSOLIDATED RETAIL PROPERTIESINTERNATIONAL
We also currently hold a non-controlling ownership interest in a public Brazilian real estate operating company, Aliansce Shopping centers, and a large regional mall (Shopping Leblon) in Rio de Janeiro. On January 29, 2010, our Brazilian joint venture, Aliansce Shopping Centers S.A. ("Aliansce"), commenced trading on the Brazilian Stock Exchange, or BM&FBovespa, as a result of an initial public offering of Aliansce's common shares in Brazil (the "Aliansce IPO"). Our ownership interest in Aliansce was diluted from 49% to approximately 31% as a result of the stock sold in the Aliansce IPO.
|
Aliansce
Count |
Property Name(1) | Location |
GGP
Ownership(2) |
Total GLA |
Mall and
Freestanding GLA |
Retail
Percentage Leased |
|||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
Bangu Shopping |
Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro | 31 | % | 562,263 | 562,263 | 99.9 | % | |||||||||
|
2 |
Boulevard Brasilia |
Brasilia, Brazil | 16 | % | 182,007 | 182,007 | 94.4 | % | |||||||||
|
3 |
Boulevard Shopping Belem |
Belem, Brazil | 24 | % | 370,084 | 370,084 | 98.8 | % | |||||||||
|
4 |
Boulevard Shopping Belo Horizonte |
Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais | 22 | % | 463,020 | 463,020 | 91.6 | % | |||||||||
|
5 |
Boulevard Shopping Campina Grande |
Campina Grande, Paraiba | 24 | % | 186,216 | 186,216 | 100.0 | % | |||||||||
|
6 |
Boulevard Shopping Campos |
Campose dos Goytacazes | 31 | % | 204,514 | 204,514 | 95.4 | % | |||||||||
|
7 |
Carioca Shopping |
Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro | 31 | % | 252,952 | 252,952 | 100.0 | % | |||||||||
|
8 |
Caxias Shopping |
Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro | 28 | % | 275,556 | 275,556 | 98.6 | % | |||||||||
|
9 |
Santana Parque Shopping |
Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo | 16 | % | 285,233 | 285,233 | 97.6 | % | |||||||||
|
10 |
Shopping Grande Rio |
Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro | 8 | % | 395,789 | 395,789 | 98.7 | % | |||||||||
|
11 |
Shopping Iguatemi Salvador |
Salvador, Bahia | 17 | % | 670,592 | 670,592 | 99.6 | % | |||||||||
|
12 |
Shopping Santa Ursula |
Ribeirao Preto, Brazil | 12 | % | 249,712 | 249,712 | 93.6 | % | |||||||||
|
13 |
Shopping Taboao |
Taboao da Serra, Sao Paulo | 25 | % | 383,195 | 383,195 | 99.9 | % | |||||||||
|
14 |
SuperShopping Osasco |
Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo | 12 | % | 188,659 | 188,659 | 96.2 | % | |||||||||
|
15 |
Via Parque Shopping |
Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro | 22 | % | 611,412 | 611,412 | 99.4 | % | |||||||||
|
Other
|
Property Name(1) | Location |
GGP
Ownership(2) |
Total GLA |
Mall and
Freestanding GLA |
Retail
Percentage Leased |
|||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
16 |
Shopping Leblon |
Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro | 35 | % | 249,227 | 249,227 | 98.8 | % | |||||||||
|
|
5,530,431 | 5,530,431 | |||||||||||||||
26
The following table sets forth certain information regarding the mortgages and other indebtedness encumbering our properties and also our unsecured corporate debt. Substantially all of the mortgage and property related debt is nonrecourse to us. The following table includes mortgage debt related to properties that were part of the RPI Spin-Off as such mortgage debt is included in our Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
Property(2)
|
Ownership |
Proportionate
Balance(1) |
Maturity Year |
Balloon Pmt
at Maturity |
Coupon Rate | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
|
Fixed Rate |
||||||||||||||
|
Consolidated Property Level |
||||||||||||||
|
Provo Towne Center |
75 | % | $ | 39,282 | 2012 | $ | 39,130 | 5.75% | ||||||
|
Spokane Valley Mall |
75 | % | 39,282 | 2012 | 39,130 | 5.75% | ||||||||
|
The Mall In Columbia |
100 | % | 400,000 | 2012 | 400,000 | 5.83% | ||||||||
|
The Shoppes at Buckland Hills |
100 | % | 156,643 | 2012 | 154,958 | 4.92% | ||||||||
|
The Streets at Southpoint |
94 | % | 216,179 | 2012 | 215,066 | 5.36% | ||||||||
|
Lakeland Square |
100 | % | 51,877 | 2013 | 49,647 | 5.12% | ||||||||
|
Meadows Mall |
100 | % | 97,282 | 2013 | 93,631 | 5.45% | ||||||||
|
Pembroke Lakes Mall |
100 | % | 122,418 | 2013 | 118,449 | 4.94% | ||||||||
|
Senate Plaza |
100 | % | 11,345 | 2013 | 10,956 | 5.71% | ||||||||
|
West Oaks |
100 | % | 66,043 | 2013 | 63,539 | 5.25% | ||||||||
|
Bayside Marketplace |
100 | % | 76,714 | 2014 | 74,832 | 7.50% | ||||||||
|
Bayside Marketplace (Bond) |
100 | % | 3,575 | 2014 | 1,255 | 5.75% | ||||||||
|
Crossroads Center (MN) |
100 | % | 79,621 | 2014 | 74,943 | 4.73% | ||||||||
|
Cumberland Mall |
100 | % | 101,714 | 2014 | 99,219 | 7.50% | ||||||||
|
Eden Prairie Mall |
100 | % | 75,251 | 2014 | 69,893 | 4.67% | ||||||||
|
Fashion Place |
100 | % | 137,736 | 2014 | 130,124 | 5.30% | ||||||||
|
Fort Union |
100 | % | 2,446 | 2014 | 2,180 | 4.40% | ||||||||
|
Governor's Square |
100 | % | 72,830 | 2014 | 71,043 | 7.50% | ||||||||
|
Jordan Creek Town Center |
100 | % | 175,309 | 2014 | 164,537 | 4.57% | ||||||||
|
Lansing Mall |
100 | % | 20,796 | 2014 | 16,593 | 9.35% | ||||||||
|
Mall St. Matthews |
100 | % | 136,845 | 2014 | 129,452 | 4.81% | ||||||||
|
Newgate Mall |
100 | % | 38,621 | 2014 | 36,028 | 4.84% | ||||||||
|
Newpark Mall |
100 | % | 64,943 | 2014 | 60,487 | 7.45% | ||||||||
|
North Point Mall |
100 | % | 206,221 | 2014 | 195,971 | 5.48% | ||||||||
|
Oak View Mall |
100 | % | 81,569 | 2014 | 79,569 | 7.50% | ||||||||
|
Oakwood Center |
100 | % | 46,777 | 2014 | 45,057 | 4.38% | ||||||||
|
Pecanland Mall |
100 | % | 52,779 | 2014 | 48,586 | 4.28% | ||||||||
|
Prince Kuhio Plaza |
100 | % | 35,162 | 2014 | 32,793 | 3.45% | ||||||||
|
Rogue Valley Mall |
100 | % | 25,171 | 2014 | 23,607 | 7.85% | ||||||||
|
Southland Mall |
100 | % | 75,706 | 2014 | 70,709 | 3.62% | ||||||||
|
Steeplegate Mall |
100 | % | 73,699 | 2014 | 68,272 | 4.94% | ||||||||
|
The Gallery at Harborplace |
100 | % | 61,712 | 2014 | 58,024 | 7.89% | ||||||||
|
The Grand Canal Shoppes |
100 | % | 371,808 | 2014 | 346,723 | 4.78% | ||||||||
|
Town East Mall |
100 | % | 97,981 | 2014 | 91,387 | 3.46% | ||||||||
|
Tucson Mall |
100 | % | 113,630 | 2014 | 106,556 | 4.26% | ||||||||
|
Visalia Mall |
100 | % | 37,566 | 2014 | 34,264 | 3.78% | ||||||||
|
West Valley Mall |
100 | % | 50,770 | 2014 | 46,164 | 3.43% | ||||||||
|
Woodbridge Center |
100 | % | 195,752 | 2014 | 181,464 | 4.24% | ||||||||
|
Woodlands Village |
100 | % | 6,190 | 2014 | 5,518 | 4.40% | ||||||||
|
10000 West Charleston |
100 | % | 20,667 | 2015 | 19,016 | 7.88% | ||||||||
|
Boise Towne Plaza |
100 | % | 10,266 | 2015 | 9,082 | 4.70% | ||||||||
|
Burlington Town Center |
100 | % | 25,255 | 2015 | 23,360 | 5.03% | ||||||||
|
Coastland Center |
100 | % | 114,586 | 2015 | 110,204 | 7.50% | ||||||||
27
|
Property(2)
|
Ownership |
Proportionate
Balance(1) |
Maturity Year |
Balloon Pmt
at Maturity |
Coupon Rate | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
|
Coral Ridge Mall |
100 | % | 86,425 | 2015 | 83,120 | 7.50% | ||||||||
|
Hulen Mall |
100 | % | 107,168 | 2015 | 96,621 | 5.03% | ||||||||
|
Lynnhaven Mall |
100 | % | 225,246 | 2015 | 203,367 | 5.05% | ||||||||
|
North Star Mall |
100 | % | 219,329 | 2015 | 199,315 | 4.43% | ||||||||
|
Paramus Park |
100 | % | 98,860 | 2015 | 90,242 | 4.86% | ||||||||
|
Peachtree Mall |
100 | % | 85,146 | 2015 | 77,085 | 5.08% | ||||||||
|
Regency Square Mall |
100 | % | 87,195 | 2015 | 75,797 | 3.59% | ||||||||
|
The Shops at La Cantera |
75 | % | 123,760 | 2015 | 117,345 | 5.95% | ||||||||
|
Baybrook Mall |
100 | % | 165,081 | 2016 | 156,329 | 7.50% | ||||||||
|
Bayshore Mall |
100 | % | 29,355 | 2016 | 24,704 | 7.13% | ||||||||
|
Brass Mill Center |
100 | % | 113,171 | 2016 | 93,347 | 4.55% | ||||||||
|
Collin Creek |
100 | % | 63,586 | 2016 | 54,423 | 6.78% | ||||||||
|
Coronado Center |
100 | % | 160,419 | 2016 | 135,704 | 5.08% | ||||||||
|
Eastridge (WY) |
100 | % | 37,150 | 2016 | 31,252 | 5.08% | ||||||||
|
Glenbrook Square |
100 | % | 168,254 | 2016 | 141,325 | 4.91% | ||||||||
|
Harborplace |
100 | % | 48,769 | 2016 | 44,547 | 5.79% | ||||||||
|
Lakeside Mall |
100 | % | 169,797 | 2016 | 144,451 | 4.28% | ||||||||
|
Lincolnshire Commons |
100 | % | 27,363 | 2016 | 24,629 | 5.98% | ||||||||
|
Pine Ridge Mall |
100 | % | 25,048 | 2016 | 21,071 | 5.08% | ||||||||
|
Red Cliffs Mall |
100 | % | 23,806 | 2016 | 20,026 | 5.08% | ||||||||
|
Ridgedale Center |
100 | % | 168,929 | 2016 | 149,112 | 4.86% | ||||||||
|
The Maine Mall |
100 | % | 205,128 | 2016 | 172,630 | 4.84% | ||||||||
|
The Parks At Arlington |
100 | % | 170,908 | 2016 | 161,847 | 7.50% | ||||||||
|
Three Rivers Mall |
100 | % | 20,393 | 2016 | 17,155 | 5.08% | ||||||||
|
Valley Hills Mall |
100 | % | 53,603 | 2016 | 46,302 | 4.73% | ||||||||
|
Valley Plaza Mall |
100 | % | 88,849 | 2016 | 75,790 | 3.90% | ||||||||
|
Vista Ridge Mall |
100 | % | 75,768 | 2016 | 64,660 | 6.87% | ||||||||
|
Washington Park Mall |
100 | % | 11,476 | 2016 | 9,988 | 5.35% | ||||||||
|
White Marsh Mall |
100 | % | 182,595 | 2016 | 163,196 | 5.62% | ||||||||
|
Willowbrook Mall (NJ) |
100 | % | 150,575 | 2016 | 129,003 | 6.82% | ||||||||
|
Augusta Mall |
100 | % | 170,419 | 2017 | 145,438 | 5.49% | ||||||||
|
Beachwood Place |
100 | % | 229,909 | 2017 | 190,177 | 5.60% | ||||||||
|
Columbia Mall |
100 | % | 87,982 | 2017 | 77,540 | 6.05% | ||||||||
|
Eastridge (CA) |
100 | % | 165,806 | 2017 | 143,626 | 5.79% | ||||||||
|
Four Seasons Town Centre |
100 | % | 92,882 | 2017 | 72,532 | 5.60% | ||||||||
|
Knollwood Plaza |
100 | % | 38,093 | 2017 | 31,113 | 5.35% | ||||||||
|
Mall of Louisiana |
100 | % | 225,321 | 2017 | 191,409 | 5.81% | ||||||||
|
Market Place Shopping Center |
100 | % | 103,623 | 2017 | 91,325 | 6.05% | ||||||||
|
Oglethorpe Mall |
100 | % | 134,184 | 2017 | 115,990 | 4.89% | ||||||||
|
Sikes Senter |
100 | % | 58,397 | 2017 | 48,194 | 5.20% | ||||||||
|
Stonestown Galleria |
100 | % | 211,249 | 2017 | 183,227 | 5.79% | ||||||||
|
Tysons Galleria |
100 | % | 248,636 | 2017 | 214,755 | 5.72% | ||||||||
|
Ala Moana Center |
100 | % | 1,300,157 | 2018 | 1,091,485 | 5.59% | ||||||||
|
Fallbrook Center |
100 | % | 83,129 | 2018 | 71,473 | 6.14% | ||||||||
|
River Hills Mall |
100 | % | 78,239 | 2018 | 67,269 | 6.14% | ||||||||
|
Sooner Mall |
100 | % | 58,679 | 2018 | 50,452 | 6.14% | ||||||||
|
The Boulevard Mall |
100 | % | 100,754 | 2018 | 72,881 | 4.27% | ||||||||
|
The Gallery at HarborplaceOther |
100 | % | 12,288 | 2018 | 190 | 6.05% | ||||||||
|
10450 West Charleston Blvd |
100 | % | 3,603 | 2019 | 53 | 6.84% | ||||||||
|
Bellis Fair |
100 | % | 93,882 | 2019 | 82,395 | 5.23% | ||||||||
|
Park City Center |
100 | % | 195,740 | 2019 | 172,224 | 5.34% | ||||||||
|
Southlake Mall |
100 | % | 97,935 | 2019 | 77,877 | 6.44% | ||||||||
|
Deerbrook Mall |
100 | % | 152,656 | 2021 | 127,934 | 5.25% | ||||||||
|
Fashion ShowOther |
100 | % | 5,537 | 2021 | 1,577 | 6.06% | ||||||||
28
|
Property(2)
|
Ownership |
Proportionate
Balance(1) |
Maturity Year |
Balloon Pmt
at Maturity |
Coupon Rate | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
|
Fox River Mall |
100 | % | 185,835 | 2021 | 156,373 | 5.46% | ||||||||
|
Northridge Fashion Center |
100 | % | 248,738 | 2021 | 207,503 | 5.10% | ||||||||
|
Oxmoor Center |
100 | % | 94,396 | 2021 | 79,217 | 5.37% | ||||||||
|
Park Place |
100 | % | 198,468 | 2021 | 165,815 | 5.18% | ||||||||
|
Providence Place |
100 | % | 378,364 | 2021 | 320,526 | 5.65% | ||||||||
|
Rivertown Crossings |
100 | % | 167,829 | 2021 | 141,356 | 5.52% | ||||||||
|
Westlake CenterLand |
99 | % | 2,413 | 2021 | 2,413 | 12.06% | ||||||||
|
Boise Towne Square |
100 | % | 139,650 | 2023 | 106,372 | 4.79% | ||||||||
|
Staten Island Mall |
100 | % | 271,541 | 2023 | 206,942 | 4.77% | ||||||||
|
The Woodlands |
100 | % | 268,047 | 2023 | 207,057 | 5.04% | ||||||||
|
Providence PlaceOther |
100 | % | 43,007 | 2028 | 2,381 | 7.75% | ||||||||
|
Provo Town Center Land |
75 | % | 2,250 | 2095 | 37 | 10.00% | ||||||||
|
Total |
$ | 13,032,809 | $ | 11,452,929 | 5.44% | |||||||||
|
Unconsolidated Property Level |
||||||||||||||
|
Clackamas Town Center |
50 | % | $ | 100,000 | 2012 | $ | 100,000 | 6.05% | ||||||
|
Florence Mall |
71 | % | 64,700 | 2012 | 63,783 | 4.95% | ||||||||
|
Glendale Galleria |
50 | % | 179,986 | 2012 | 177,133 | 4.93% | ||||||||
|
Oakbrook Center |
47 | % | 95,376 | 2012 | 93,427 | 5.12% | ||||||||
|
Pinnacle Hills Promenade |
50 | % | 70,000 | 2012 | 70,000 | 5.57% | ||||||||
|
Riverchase Galleria |
50 | % | 152,500 | 2012 | 152,500 | 5.65% | ||||||||
|
Stonebriar Mall |
50 | % | 78,595 | 2012 | 76,785 | 5.23% | ||||||||
|
The Oaks Mall |
51 | % | 52,020 | 2012 | 52,020 | 5.74% | ||||||||
|
Westroads Mall |
51 | % | 45,518 | 2012 | 45,518 | 5.74% | ||||||||
|
Altamonte Mall |
50 | % | 75,000 | 2013 | 75,000 | 5.05% | ||||||||
|
Bridgewater Commons |
35 | % | 44,323 | 2013 | 43,143 | 5.27% | ||||||||
|
Plaza Frontenac |
55 | % | 28,967 | 2013 | 28,283 | 7.00% | ||||||||
|
Towson Town Center |
35 | % | 62,289 | 2013 | 61,393 | 3.86% | ||||||||
|
Carolina Place |
50 | % | 73,126 | 2014 | 68,211 | 4.60% | ||||||||
|
Alderwood |
50 | % | 127,700 | 2015 | 120,409 | 6.65% | ||||||||
|
Quail Springs Mall |
50 | % | 35,806 | 2015 | 33,432 | 6.74% | ||||||||
|
Center Pointe Plaza |
50 | % | 6,428 | 2017 | 5,570 | 6.31% | ||||||||
|
Saint Louis Galleria |
74 | % | 165,814 | 2017 | 139,096 | 4.86% | ||||||||
|
First Colony Mall |
50 | % | 92,500 | 2019 | 84,473 | 4.50% | ||||||||
|
Natick Mall |
50 | % | 225,000 | 2019 | 209,699 | 4.60% | ||||||||
|
Christiana Mall |
50 | % | 117,495 | 2020 | 108,697 | 5.10% | ||||||||
|
Kenwood Towne Center |
75 | % | 162,331 | 2020 | 137,191 | 5.37% | ||||||||
|
Water Tower Place |
52 | % | 101,466 | 2020 | 83,850 | 4.85% | ||||||||
|
Northbrook Court |
50 | % | 65,500 | 2021 | 56,811 | 4.25% | ||||||||
|
Village of Merrick Park |
40 | % | 73,417 | 2021 | 62,398 | 5.73% | ||||||||
|
Whaler's Village |
50 | % | 40,000 | 2021 | 40,000 | 5.42% | ||||||||
|
Willowbrook Mall (TX) |
50 | % | 106,538 | 2021 | 88,965 | 5.13% | ||||||||
|
Galleria at Tyler |
50 | % | 99,881 | 2023 | 76,716 | 5.05% | ||||||||
|
Lake Mead and Buffalo |
50 | % | 2,539 | 2023 | 27 | 7.20% | ||||||||
|
Park Meadows |
35 | % | 126,000 | 2023 | 112,734 | 4.60% | ||||||||
|
Trails Village Center |
50 | % | 7,033 | 2023 | 78 | 8.21% | ||||||||
|
Total |
$ | 2,677,848 | $ | 2,467,342 | 5.19% | |||||||||
|
Total FixedProperty Level |
$ | 15,710,657 | $ | 13,920,271 | 5.39% | |||||||||
29
|
Property(2)
|
Ownership |
Proportionate
Balance(1) |
Maturity Year |
Balloon Pmt
at Maturity |
Coupon Rate | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
|
Consolidated Corporate |
||||||||||||||
|
Rouse Bonds1995 Indenture |
100 | % | $ | 349,472 | 2012 | $ | 349,472 | 7.20% | ||||||
|
Rouse Bonds1995 Indenture |
100 | % | 91,786 | 2013 | 91,786 | 5.38% | ||||||||
|
Rouse Bonds2006 Indenture |
100 | % | 600,054 | 2013 | 600,054 | 6.75% | ||||||||
|
Arizona Two (HHC) |
100 | % | 25,248 | 2015 | 573 | 4.41% | ||||||||
|
Rouse Bonds2010 Indenture |
100 | % | 608,688 | 2015 | 608,688 | 6.75% | ||||||||
|
Total |
$ | 1,675,248 | $ | 1,650,573 | 6.73% | |||||||||
|
Total Fixed Rate Debt |
$ | 17,385,905 | $ | 15,570,844 | 5.52% | |||||||||
|
Variable Rate |
||||||||||||||
|
Consolidated Property Level |
||||||||||||||
|
Oakwood Center |
100 | % | $ | 46,777 | 2014 | $ | 45,057 | 2.52% | ||||||
|
Animas Valley Mall |
100 | % | 43,451 | 2016 | 38,604 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Birchwood Mall |
100 | % | 46,924 | 2016 | 41,689 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Cache Valley Mall |
100 | % | 28,623 | 2016 | 25,430 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Colony Square Mall |
100 | % | 28,212 | 2016 | 25,065 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Columbiana Centre |
100 | % | 103,800 | 2016 | 92,220 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Foothills Mill |
100 | % | 38,682 | 2016 | 34,367 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Grand Teton Mall |
100 | % | 50,733 | 2016 | 45,074 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Mall At Sierra Vista |
100 | % | 23,335 | 2016 | 20,732 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Mall Of The Bluffs |
100 | % | 25,909 | 2016 | 23,018 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Mayfair |
100 | % | 297,065 | 2016 | 263,926 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Mondawmin Mall |
100 | % | 72,556 | 2016 | 64,462 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
North Plains Mall |
100 | % | 13,160 | 2016 | 11,692 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
North Town Mall |
100 | % | 89,565 | 2016 | 79,573 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Oakwood |
100 | % | 81,591 | 2016 | 72,490 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Pierre Bossier |
100 | % | 41,439 | 2016 | 36,817 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Pioneer Place |
100 | % | 157,792 | 2016 | 140,189 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Salem Center |
100 | % | 37,416 | 2016 | 33,242 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Silver Lake Mall |
100 | % | 13,078 | 2016 | 11,619 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Southwest Plaza |
100 | % | 106,375 | 2016 | 94,508 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Spring Hill Mall |
100 | % | 52,611 | 2016 | 46,742 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
The Shops at Fallen Timbers |
100 | % | 46,992 | 2016 | 41,749 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Westwood Mall |
100 | % | 27,019 | 2016 | 24,005 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
White Mountain Mall |
100 | % | 10,596 | 2016 | 9,414 | 3.52% | ||||||||
|
Fashion Show |
100 | % | 624,453 | 2017 | 538,366 | 3.27% | ||||||||
|
The Shoppes At The Palazzo |
100 | % | 241,327 | 2017 | 208,058 | 3.27% | ||||||||
|
Total |
$ | 2,349,481 | $ | 2,068,108 | 3.41% | |||||||||
|
Consolidated Corporate |
||||||||||||||
|
Junior Subordinated Notes Due 2041 |
100 | % | $ | 206,200 | 2041 | $ | 206,200 | Libor + 145 bps | ||||||
|
Total Variable Rate Debt |
$ | 2,555,681 | $ | 2,274,308 | 3.27% | |||||||||
|
Total Fied and Variable Rate Debt(3) |
$ | 19,941,586 | $ | 17,845,152 | 5.23% | |||||||||
30
Anchors
Anchors have traditionally been a major component of a regional shopping center. Anchors are frequently department stores whose merchandise appeals to a broad range of shoppers. Anchors generally either own their stores, the land under them and adjacent parking areas, or enter into long-term leases at rates that are generally lower than the rents charged to mall store tenants. We also typically enter into long-term reciprocal agreements with anchors that provide for, among other things, mall and anchor operating covenants and anchor expense participation. The centers in the Retail Portfolio receive a smaller percentage of their operating income from anchors than from stores (other than anchors) that are typically specialty retailers who lease space in the structure including, or attached to, the primary complex of buildings that comprise a shopping center. While the market share of many traditional department store anchors has been declining, strong anchors continue to play an important role in maintaining customer traffic and making the centers in the Retail Portfolio desirable locations for mall store tenants.
Regional Mall Lease Expiration Schedule
The following table indicates various lease expiration information related to the consolidated regional malls, community centers and office buildings owned and excludes properties transferred to RPI, properties classified as discontinued operations and properties held for disposition. The table also excludes expirations and rental revenue from temporary tenants and tenants that pay percent in lieu rent. See "Note 3Summary of Significant Accounting Policies" to the consolidated financial statements for our accounting policies for revenue recognition from our tenant leases and "Note 10Rentals Under Operating Leases" to the consolidated financial statements for the future minimum rentals of our operating leases for the consolidated properties.
|
Year
|
Total Minimum
Rent |
Total Minimum
Rent Expiring |
% of Total
Minimum Rent Expiring |
Number of
Leases Expiring |
Total Area
Square Feet Expiring |
|||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|||||||||||
|
2012 |
$ | 1,337,195 | $ | 48,473 | 3.6 | % | 2,453 | 5,982 | ||||||||
|
2013 |
1,267,646 | 44,186 | 3.5 | % | 1,713 | 5,754 | ||||||||||
|
2014 |
1,143,619 | 50,937 | 4.5 | % | 1,474 | 6,388 | ||||||||||
|
2015 |
1,003,459 | 55,325 | 5.5 | % | 1,344 | 6,171 | ||||||||||
|
2016 |
860,472 | 68,954 | 8.0 | % | 1,255 | 7,130 | ||||||||||
|
2017 |
710,858 | 55,950 | 7.9 | % | 1,032 | 6,131 | ||||||||||
|
2018 |
557,687 | 50,280 | 9.0 | % | 879 | 4,980 | ||||||||||
|
2019 |
428,504 | 38,022 | 8.9 | % | 590 | 4,330 | ||||||||||
|
2020 |
329,819 | 37,586 | 11.4 | % | 525 | 4,053 | ||||||||||
|
2021 |
222,279 | 44,780 | 20.1 | % | 571 | 3,116 | ||||||||||
|
Subsequent |
426,118 | 322,474 | 75.7 | % | 560 | 11,483 | ||||||||||
Non-Retail Properties
See Item 1 "Narrative Description of Business" for information regarding our other properties (office, industrial and mixed-use buildings).
31
Other than certain remaining claims related to or arising from our Chapter 11 cases described in this Annual Report (see Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements), neither the Company nor any of the Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates is currently involved in any material pending legal proceedings nor, to our knowledge, is any material legal proceeding currently threatened against the Company or any of the Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates.
Urban Litigation
In October 2004, certain limited partners (the "Urban Plaintiffs") of Urban Shopping Centers, L.P. ("Urban") filed a lawsuit against Urban's general partner, Head Acquisition, L.P. ("Head"), as well as TRCLP, Simon Property Group, Inc., Westfield America, Inc., and various of their affiliates, including Head's general partners (collectively, the "Urban Defendants"), in Circuit Court in Cook County, Illinois. The Predecessor, GGPLP and other affiliates were later included as Urban Defendants. The lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the Urban Defendants breached the Urban partnership agreement, unjustly enriched themselves through misappropriation of partnership opportunities, failed to grow the partnership, breached their fiduciary duties, and tortiously interfered with several contractual relationships. The plaintiffs seek relief in the form of unspecified monetary damages, equitable relief and injunctive relief, the last of which would require the Urban Defendants, including the Predecessor and its affiliates, to engage in certain future transactions through the Urban Partnership. The case is currently in expert discovery; certain fact discovery matters are on appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court. John Schreiber, one of our directors, serves on the board of directors of, and is an investor in, an entity that is a principal investor in the Urban Plaintiffs, and is himself an investor in the Urban Plaintiffs and, therefore, has a financial interest in the outcome of the litigation that is adverse to us. While we do not believe that this litigation will have a material adverse effect on us, we are disclosing its existence due to Mr. Schreiber's interest in the case.
Tax Indemnification Liability
Pursuant to the Investment Agreements, the Successor has indemnified HHC from and against 93.75% of any and all losses, claims, damages, liabilities and reasonable expenses to which HHC and its subsidiaries become subject, in each case solely to the extent directly attributable to MPC Taxes (as defined in the Investment Agreements) in an amount up to $303.8 million. Under certain circumstances, we agreed to be responsible for interest or penalties attributable to such MPC Taxes in excess of the $303.8 million. As a result of this indemnity, The Howard Hughes Company, LLC and Howard Hughes Properties, Inc. filed petitions in the United States Tax Court on May 6, 2011, contesting this liability. We have accrued $303.8 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 related to the tax indemnification liability. In addition, we have accrued $21.6 million of interest related to the tax indemnification liability in accounts payable and accrued expenses on our Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011 and $19.7 million as of December 31, 2010. The aggregate liability of $325.4 million represents management's best estimate of our liability as of December 31, 2011, which will be periodically evaluated in the aggregate. We do not expect to make any payments on the tax indemnification liability within the next 12 months.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable.
32
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
On April 16, 2009, the Predecessor's common stock was suspended from trading on the New York Stock Exchange (the "Exchange"). On April 17, 2009, the Predecessor's common stock began trading on the Pink Sheets under the symbol GGWPQ. The Predecessor's common stock was delisted from the Exchange on May 21, 2009. On February 24, 2010, the Predecessor's common stock was relisted on the Exchange. On November 5, 2010, GGP common stock and HHC common stock began trading on a "when issued basis" and such stock began regular trading on November 10, 2010 following the effectiveness of the Plan and the issuance of such stock. As of February 17, 2012, our common stock was held by 3,449 stockholders of record.
The following table summarizes the quarterly high and low bid quotations prices per share of our common stock as reported on the Pink Sheets between April 17, 2009 and February 24, 2010 and by the high and low sales prices on the Exchange for all other periods. The Pink Sheet quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
|
|
Stock Price | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quarter Ended
|
High | Low | |||||
|
2011 |
|||||||
|
December 31 |
$ | 15.19 | $ | 10.68 | |||
|
September 30 |
17.43 | 11.64 | |||||
|
June 30 |
16.85 | 14.81 | |||||
|
March 31 |
16.24 | 14.13 | |||||
|
2010 |
|||||||
|
December 31 |
$ | 16.50 | $ | 13.30 | |||
|
September 30* |
15.67 | 12.36 | |||||
|
June 30* |
16.84 | 13.16 | |||||
|
March 31* |
17.28 | 8.58 | |||||
The following table summarizes distributions per share of our common stock.
|
Declaration Date
|
Record Date | Payment Date | Amount | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2011 |
||||||||
|
December 20 |
December 30 | January 12, 2012(a) | $ | 0.43 | ||||
|
November 7 |
December 30 | January 13, 2012 | 0.10 | |||||
|
July 29 |
October 14 | October 31 | 0.10 | |||||
|
April 26 |
July 15 | July 29 | 0.10 | |||||
|
March 29 |
April 15 | April 29 | 0.10 | |||||
|
2010 |
||||||||
|
December 20 |
December 30 | January 27, 2011(b) | $ | 0.38 | ||||
33
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities and Repurchase of Shares
On May 4, 2011, we purchased shares of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange through a private purchase (Note 11). In addition, on August 8, 2011, our Board of Directors authorized the Company to repurchase up to $250 million of its common stock. During the year ended December 31, 2011, we have purchased 5,247,580 shares at a weighted average price of $12.53 per share for a total of $65.7 million.
The following table provides the information with respect to the stock repurchases made by GGP during the year ended December 31, 2011.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Period
|
Total Number
of Shares Purchased |
Average Price
Paid per Share |
Total Number of Shares
Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs |
Approximate Dollar Value
of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs |
|||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|||||||||
|
August 18 - 26, 2011 |
2,046,940 | 13.15 | 2,046,940 | 223,092 | |||||||||
|
September 1 - 22, 2011 |
2,273,172 | 12.46 | 2,273,172 | 194,770 | |||||||||
|
October 3 - 5, 2011 |
927,468 | 11.33 | 927,468 | 184,261 | |||||||||
See Note 13 for information regarding shares of our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2011, Note 11 for information regarding redemptions of the common units of GGP Limited Partnership held by limited partners (the "Common Units") for common stock and Note 18 for information regarding the previous issuance of common stock related to the Contingent Stock Agreement.
34
The following line graph sets forth the cumulative total returns on a $100 investment in each of our Common Stock, S&P 500 and the National Association of REITEquity REITs for the period of November 10, 2010 (the first trading day following the Effective Date) through December 31, 2011.
Comparison of 14 Month Cumulative Total Return
Assumes Initial Investment of $100
December 2011
|
|
|
11/9/2010 | Q4 2010 | Q1 2011 | Q2 2011 | Q3 2011 | Q4 2011 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
General Growth Properties, Inc. |
Return % | (10.98 | ) | 0.00 | 8.53 | (27.07 | ) | 25.81 | |||||||||||||
|
|
Cum $ | 100.00 | 89.02 | 89.01 | 96.61 | 70.45 | 88.63 | ||||||||||||||
|
S&P 500 IndexTotal Returns |
Return % |
3.95 |
5.92 |
0.10 |
(13.86 |
) |
11.81 |
||||||||||||||
|
|
Cum $ | 100.00 | 103.95 | 110.11 | 110.22 | 94.94 | 106.15 | ||||||||||||||
|
National Association of REIT'sEquity Reits |
Return % |
2.27 |
7.48 |
2.88 |
(15.06 |
) |
15.24 |
||||||||||||||
|
|
Cum $ | 100.00 | 102.27 | 109.92 | 113.09 | 96.06 | 110.70 | ||||||||||||||
35
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table sets forth selected financial data which is derived from, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements and the related Notes and Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contained in this Annual Report. As the Investment Agreements and consummation of the Plan on November 9, 2010 (Note 2 and 4) triggered the application of acquisition accounting on the Effective Date, the results presented in the following table for the year ended December 31, 2010 have been presented separately for the Predecessor and Successor companies. In addition, the distribution of the HHC Businesses on the Effective Date results in such businesses being classified as discontinued operations in the Predecessor financial information and being excluded in the Successor financial information.
|
|
Successor | Predecessor | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31, 2011 |
Period from November 10,
2010 through December 31, 2010 |
Period from January 1,
2010 through November 9, 2010 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2007 |
|||||||||||||
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
OPERATING DATA |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Revenues |
$ | 2,742,942 | $ | 409,117 | $ | 2,362,955 | $ | 2,829,964 | $ | 3,005,373 | $ | 2,821,290 | |||||||
|
Depreciation and amortization |
(979,328 | ) | (136,207 | ) | (561,861 | ) | (694,139 | ) | (704,176 | ) | (599,969 | ) | |||||||
|
Provisions for impairment |
(64,337 | ) | | (4,516 | ) | (393,076 | ) | (63,376 | ) | (2,583 | ) | ||||||||
|
Other operating expenses |
(1,106,348 | ) | (187,747 | ) | (893,616 | ) | (1,133,749 | ) | (1,060,146 | ) | (1,134,765 | ) | |||||||
|
Interest expense, net |
(956,148 | ) | (138,448 | ) | (1,257,751 | ) | (1,281,136 | ) | (1,305,215 | ) | (1,183,368 | ) | |||||||
|
Warrant liability adjustment |
55,042 | (205,252 | ) | | | | | ||||||||||||
|
Reorganization items |
| | (339,314 | ) | 118,872 | | | ||||||||||||
|
(Provision for) benefit from income taxes |
(9,256 | ) | 8,909 | 60,456 | (6,570 | ) | (7,820 | ) | 304,388 | ||||||||||
|
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated affiliates |
2,898 | (504 | ) | 21,857 | 32,843 | 57,088 | 89,949 | ||||||||||||
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
(314,535 | ) | (250,132 | ) | (611,790 | ) | (526,991 | ) | (78,272 | ) | 294,942 | ||||||||
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations |
7,654 | (5,952 | ) | (600,618 | ) | (777,725 | ) | 96,746 | 52,456 | ||||||||||
|
Allocation to noncontrolling interests |
(6,291 | ) | 1,868 | 26,650 | 20,027 | (13,755 | ) | (73,756 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Net (loss) income available to common stockholders |
$ | (313,172 | ) | $ | (254,216 | ) | $ | (1,185,758 | ) | $ | (1,284,689 | ) | $ | 4,719 | $ | 273,642 | |||
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share: |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Continuing operations |
$ | (0.34 | ) | $ | (0.26 | ) | $ | (1.89 | ) | $ | (1.62 | ) | $ | (0.35 | ) | $ | 1.15 | ||
|
Discontinued operations |
0.01 | (0.01 | ) | (1.85 | ) | (2.49 | ) | 0.37 | 0.27 | ||||||||||
|
Total basic earnings per share |
$ | (0.33 | ) | $ | (0.27 | ) | $ | (3.74 | ) | $ | (4.11 | ) | $ | 0.02 | $ | 1.42 | |||
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share: |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Continuing operations |
$ | (0.38 | ) | $ | (0.26 | ) | $ | (1.89 | ) | $ | (1.62 | ) | $ | (0.35 | ) | $ | 1.15 | ||
|
Discontinued operations |
0.01 | (0.01 | ) | (1.85 | ) | (2.49 | ) | 0.37 | 0.27 | ||||||||||
|
Total diluted earnings per share |
$ | (0.37 | ) | $ | (0.27 | ) | $ | (3.74 | ) | $ | (4.11 | ) | $ | 0.02 | $ | 1.42 | |||
|
Dividends declared per share(1)(2)(3) |
$ | 0.83 | $ | 0.38 | $ | | $ | 0.19 | $ | 1.50 | $ | 1.85 | |||||||
|
REAL ESTATE PROPERTY NET OPERATING INCOME(4) |
$ | 2,171,089 | $ | 317,318 | $ | 1,879,238 | $ | 2,241,805 | $ | 2,394,158 | $ | 2,218,373 | |||||||
|
FUNDS FROM OPERATIONS(5) |
$ |
908,153 |
$ |
(81,750 |
) |
$ |
694,427 |
$ |
610,426 |
$ |
885,202 |
$ |
1,083,439 |
||||||
|
CASH FLOW DATA(6) |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Operating activities |
$ | 502,802 | $ | (358,607 | ) | $ | 41,018 | $ | 871,266 | $ | 556,441 | $ | 707,416 | ||||||
|
Investing activities |
485,423 | 63,370 | (89,160 | ) | (334,554 | ) | (1,208,990 | ) | (1,780,932 | ) | |||||||||
|
Financing activities |
(1,436,664 | ) | (221,051 | ) | 931,345 | (51,309 | ) | 722,008 | 1,075,911 | ||||||||||
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
2011 | 2010 |
|
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
BALANCE SHEET DATA |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Investment in real estate assetscost |
$ | 27,610,311 | $ | 28,293,864 | $ | 30,329,415 | $ | 31,733,578 | $ | 30,449,086 | |||||||||
|
Total assets |
29,518,151 | 32,367,379 | 28,149,774 | 29,557,330 | 28,814,319 | ||||||||||||||
|
Total debt |
17,335,706 | 18,047,957 | 24,456,017 | 24,756,577 | 24,282,139 | ||||||||||||||
|
Redeemable preferred noncontrolling interests |
120,756 |
120,756 |
120,756 |
120,756 |
223,677 |
||||||||||||||
|
Redeemable common noncontrolling interests |
103,039 | 111,608 | 86,077 | 379,169 | 2,135,224 | ||||||||||||||
|
Stockholders' equity |
8,483,329 | 10,079,102 | 822,963 | 1,836,141 | (314,305 | ) | |||||||||||||
36
Basis of Presentation
The Company emerged from Chapter 11 on November 9, 2010, which we refer to as the Effective Date. The structure of the Plan Sponsors' investments triggered the application of the acquisition method of accounting. The acquisition method of accounting was applied at the Effective Date and, therefore, the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the year ended December 31, 2011 and for the period from November 10, 2010 to December 31, 2010, and the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows and the Consolidated Statement of Equity for the year ended December 31, 2011 and for the period from November 10, 2010 to December 31, 2010 reflect the revaluation of the Predecessor's assets and liabilities to fair value as of the Effective Date. Certain elements of our financial statements were significantly changed by these adjustments, such as depreciation which is calculated on revalued property and equipment and amortization of above and below market leases and other intangibles which is also calculated on revalued assets and liabilities. The results for the Successor and Predecessor are based on different bases of accounting. Due to the increased depreciation in operating expenses and the net decrease of revenues due to the amortization of above and below market leases and straight-line rent, certain line items of the Predecessor's and Successor's statements of operations are not directly comparable.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
Real Estate Property Net Operating Income
We present NOI, as defined below, in this Annual Report as supplemental measures of our performance that are not required by, or presented in accordance with GAAP. We believe that NOI is a useful supplemental measures of our operating performance. NOI is defined as operating revenues (rental income, tenant recoveries and other income) less property and related expenses (real estate taxes, property maintenance costs, marketing, other property expenses and provision for doubtful accounts). Other real estate companies may use different methodologies for calculating NOI, and accordingly, our NOI may not be comparable to other real estate companies.
Because NOI excludes general and administrative expenses, interest expense, impairment or other non-recoverable development costs, depreciation and amortization, gains and losses from property dispositions, allocations to noncontrolling interests, reorganization items, strategic initiatives, provision for income taxes and discontinued operations, we believe that NOI provides performance measures that, when compared year over year, reflect the revenues and expenses directly associated with owning and operating regional shopping malls and the impact on operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates and operating costs. These measures thereby provide an operating perspective not immediately apparent from GAAP operating income (loss) or net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders. We use NOI to evaluate our operating performance on a property-by-property basis because NOI allows us to evaluate the impact that factors such as lease structure, lease rates and tenant base, which vary by property, have on our operating results, gross margins and investment returns.
37
In addition, management believes that NOI provides useful information to the investment community about our operating performance. However, due to the exclusions noted above, NOI should only be used as supplemental measures of our financial performance and not as an alternative to GAAP operating income (loss) or net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders.
|
|
Successor | Predecessor | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31, 2011 |
Period from
November 10, 2010 through December 31, 2010 |
Period from
January 1, 2010 through November 9, 2010 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2007 |
|||||||||||||
|
|
(In thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Real Estate Property Net Operating Income: |
$ | 2,171,089 | $ | 317,318 | $ | 1,879,238 | $ | 2,241,805 | $ | 2,394,158 | $ | 2,218,373 | |||||||
|
Unconsolidated properties |
(368,848 | ) | (53,958 | ) | (313,129 | ) | (366,644 | ) | (374,354 | ) | (337,933 | ) | |||||||
|
Management fees and other corporate revenues |
61,173 | 8,887 | 54,351 | 75,304 | 96,069 | 117,835 | |||||||||||||
|
Property management and other costs |
(205,759 | ) | (29,837 | ) | (136,787 | ) | (170,455 | ) | (180,773 | ) | (194,076 | ) | |||||||
|
General and administrative |
(36,003 | ) | (22,262 | ) | (24,895 | ) | (47,440 | ) | (54,590 | ) | (40,269 | ) | |||||||
|
Strategic initiatives |
| | | (46,882 | ) | (2,951 | ) | | |||||||||||
|
Litigation benefit (provision) |
| | | | 57,131 | (89,225 | ) | ||||||||||||
|
Provisions for impairment |
(64,337 | ) | | (4,516 | ) | (393,076 | ) | (63,376 | ) | (2,583 | ) | ||||||||
|
Depreciation and amortization |
(979,328 | ) | (136,207 | ) | (561,861 | ) | (694,139 | ) | (704,176 | ) | (599,969 | ) | |||||||
|
Noncontrolling interest in NOI of consolidated properties and other |
14,942 | 1,222 | 10,561 | 10,527 | 10,537 | 11,820 | |||||||||||||
|
Operating income |
$ | 592,929 | $ | 85,163 | $ | 902,962 | $ | 609,000 | $ | 1,177,675 | $ | 1,083,973 | |||||||
Funds From Operations
Consistent with real estate industry and investment community practices, we use FFO as a supplemental measure of our operating performance. The National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts ("NAREIT") defines FFO as net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders computed in accordance with GAAP, excluding impairment write-downs on depreciable real estate, gains or losses from cumulative effects of accounting changes, extraordinary items and sales of properties, plus real estate related depreciation and amortization and after adjustments for the preceding items in our unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. We believe our definition of FFO is consistent with the definition of FFO as established by NAREIT.
We consider FFO a useful supplemental measure and a complement to GAAP measures because it facilitates an understanding of the operating performance of our properties. FFO does not include real estate depreciation and amortization required by GAAP since these amounts are computed to allocate the cost of a property over its useful life. Since values for well-maintained real estate assets have historically increased or decreased based upon prevailing market conditions, we believe that FFO provides investors with a clearer view of our operating performance. FFO is not a measurement of our financial performance under GAAP and should not be considered as an alternative to revenues, operating income (loss), net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders or any other performance measures derived in accordance with GAAP or as an alternative to cash flow from operating activities as a measure of our liquidity.
38
In order to provide a better understanding of the relationship between FFO and net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders, a reconciliation of FFO to net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders has been provided.
|
|
Successor | Predecessor | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31, 2011 |
Period from
November 10, 2010 through December 31, 2010 |
Period from
January 1, 2010 through November 9, 2010 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 |
Year Ended
December 31, 2007 |
|||||||||||||
|
|
(In thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
FFO(1) |
$ | 908,153 | $ | (81,750 | ) | $ | 694,427 | $ | 610,426 | $ | 885,202 | $ | 1,083,439 | ||||||
|
Depreciation and amortization of capitalized real estate costs |
(1,167,799 | ) | (163,086 | ) | (672,544 | ) | (826,083 | ) | (831,247 | ) | (733,821 | ) | |||||||
|
(Loss) gain on dispositions |
16,559 | (4,976 | ) | (1,129,711 | ) | 957 | 55,044 | 42,745 | |||||||||||
|
Noncontrolling interest in depreciation of consolidated joint ventures and other |
9,339 | 382 | 4,129 | 3,684 | 3,330 | 3,199 | |||||||||||||
|
Provision for impairment excluded from FFO |
(63,421 | ) | | (4,516 | ) | (230,787 | ) | (3,951 | ) | | |||||||||
|
Provision for impairment excluded from FFO of discontinued operations |
(4,045 | ) | | (62,640 | ) | (801,023 | ) | (48,165 | ) | | |||||||||
|
Redeemable noncontrolling interests |
2,212 | 4,044 | 36,352 | 31,370 | (927 | ) | (58,552 | ) | |||||||||||
|
Depreciation and amortization of discontinued operations |
(14,170 | ) | (8,830 | ) | (51,255 | ) | (73,233 | ) | (54,567 | ) | (63,368 | ) | |||||||