Bluegreen Vacations Holding Corp - Annual Report: 2012 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 

Washington, DC  20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

[X] Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

 

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2012

 

[   ] Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

 

Commission File Number

001-09071

 

BFC Financial Corporation

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

None.

 

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

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.            YES [  ]  NO [X]

 

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 [  ]  NO [X]

 

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 [X]  NO [  ]

 

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 [X]  No [  ]

 

---

 

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.   [X]

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company.  See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

Large accelerated filer   [  ]Accelerated filer [ ]Non-accelerated filer [ ]    Smaller reporting company [X]

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).            YES [  ]  NO [X]

On June 30, 2012, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s voting common equity held by non-affiliates was $37.6 million computed by reference to the closing price of the registrant’s Class A Common Stock on such date. The registrant does not have any non-voting common equity.

 

The number of outstanding shares of each of the registrant's classes of common stock, as of March 26, 2013 was as follows:

 

Class A Common Stock, $.01 par value: 75,911,649 shares outstanding

Class B Common Stock, $.01 par value:  7,293,702 shares outstanding

 

Documents Incorporated by Reference

 

Portions of the registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A relating to the registrant’s 2013 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

 

 

---

 

 

BFC Financial Corporation

Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

                                                                                                                                             

 

 

---

 

 

 

 

PART I

 

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

 

This document contains forward-looking statements based largely on current expectations of BFC Financial Corporation (“BFC” and, unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, “we”, “us”, “our” or the “Company”) that involve a number of risks and uncertainties. All opinions, forecasts, projections, future plans or other statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements and can be identified by the use of words or phrases such as “plans,” “believes,” “will,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “estimates,” “our view,” “we see,” “would” and words and phrases of similar import. The forward looking statements in this document are also forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and involve substantial risks and uncertainties. We can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Actual results, performance, or achievements could differ materially from those contemplated, expressed, or implied by the forward-looking statements contained herein. These forward-looking statements are based largely on our expectations and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that are subject to change based on factors which are, in many instances, beyond our control. When considering forward-looking statements, the reader should keep in mind the risks, uncertainties and other cautionary statements made in this report.  The reader should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statement, which speaks only as of the date made.  This document also contains information regarding the past performance of investments and operations, and the reader should note that prior or current performance is not a guarantee or indication of future performance.

 

Some factors which may affect the accuracy of the forward-looking statements apply generally to the industries in which our subsidiaries operate, including the real estate, resort development and vacation ownership industries in which Bluegreen Corporation (“Bluegreen”) operates, and the investment and asset management activities of BBX Capital Corporation (“BBX Capital”), while other factors apply more specifically to BFC, including, but not limited to, the following:

 

 

With respect to Bluegreen, the risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to:

 

---

 

 

With respect to BBX Capital, the risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to:

 

 

In addition to the risks and factors identified above, reference is also made to other risks and factors detailed in reports filed by the Company, BBX Capital and Bluegreen with the SEC, including those disclosed in the “Risk Factors” sections of such reports. The Company cautions that the foregoing factors are not exclusive.

 

 

The Company

 

BFC Financial Corporation (“BFC” or, unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, “we”, “us”, “our” or the “Company”) is a diversified holding company whose principal holdings include direct or indirect controlling interests in BBX Capital Corporation (formerly BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.) and its subsidiaries (“BBX Capital”) and Bluegreen Corporation and its subsidiaries (“Bluegreen”). BFC also holds interests in other investments and subsidiaries as described herein and previously held a significant investment in Benihana Inc. (“Benihana”) until the acquisition of Benihana by Safflower Holdings Corp. (“Safflower”) during August 2012.  The Company currently reports the results of its continuing operations through four segments: Real Estate Operations; Bluegreen Resorts; BBX; and Florida Asset Resolution Group.

 

GAAP requires that BFC consolidate the financial results of the entities in which it has a controlling interest. As a consequence, the assets and liabilities of all such entities are presented on a consolidated basis in BFC’s financial statements. However, except as otherwise noted, the debts and obligations of the consolidated entities, including BBX Capital, Bluegreen and Woodbridge Holdings, LLC, (“Woodbridge”), are not direct obligations of BFC and are non-recourse to BFC. Similarly, the assets of those entities are not available to BFC absent a dividend or distribution from those entities. The recognition by BFC of income from controlled entities is determined based on the total percent of economic ownership in those entities. At December 31, 2012, BFC had an approximately 53% economic ownership interest in BBX Capital and, through Woodbridge, an approximately 54% economic ownership interest in Bluegreen.  BFC’s economic ownership interest in BBX Capital and Bluegreen set forth above and elsewhere herein is calculated in accordance with the requirements of GAAP and, therefore, excludes unvested restricted shares issued by the applicable company to such company’s officers and directors.

 

As of December 31, 2012, we had total consolidated assets of approximately $1.5 billion and shareholders’ equity attributable to BFC of approximately $299.0 million.  Net income attributable to BFC for the year ended December 31, 2012 was approximately $166.0 million, including a gain on sale of BankAtlantic of approximately $293 million.  Net loss attributable to BFC was approximately $11.3 million and $103.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

 

BFC’s business strategy has been to invest in and acquire businesses in diverse industries either directly or through controlled subsidiaries. However, in the short-term, BFC has focused on providing strategic support to its existing investments with a view to the improved performance of the organization as a whole. In addition to our currently proposed transaction with Bluegreen, which is described in detail under “Recent Events” below, we expect to consider

---

 

other opportunities that could alter our ownership in our affiliates.  We may also seek to make opportunistic investments outside of our existing portfolio.  However, we do not currently have pre-determined parameters as to the industry or structure of any future investment. In furtherance of our goals, we will continue to evaluate various financing transactions, including raising additional debt or equity as well as other alternative sources of new capital. For additional information regarding the strategic activities taken by BFC during the past three years and other events which have had a material impact on our operating results and financial condition, see “Recent Events” below and “Part II-Item 7 - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

 

Available Information

 

BFC’s corporate website is www.bfcfinancial.com. BFC’s annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports, are available free of charge through BFC’s website, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. BFC’s website and the information contained on or connected to it are not incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

Recent Events

 

Proposed Bluegreen Merger

 

On November 11, 2011, BFC entered into a definitive merger agreement with Bluegreen (the “2011 merger agreement”).  Pursuant to the terms of the 2011 merger agreement and subject to the conditions set forth therein, if the merger contemplated by the 2011 merger agreement (the “2011 merger”) had been consummated, Bluegreen would have become a wholly-owned subsidiary of BFC, and Bluegreen’s shareholders (other than BFC) would have been entitled to receive eight shares of BFC’s Class A Common Stock for each share of Bluegreen’s common stock that they held at the effective time of the merger.  Consummation of the 2011 merger was subject to certain closing conditions, including the listing of BFC’s Class A Common Stock on a national securities exchange at the effective time of the merger. Due to the inability to satisfy all required closing conditions, specifically the listing of BFC’s Class A Common Stock on a national securities exchange, effective November 14, 2012, the parties agreed to terminate the 2011 merger agreement and entered into the 2012 merger agreement described below.

 

On November 14, 2012, BFC and Woodbridge entered into a new definitive merger agreement with Bluegreen (the “2012 merger agreement”) providing for the acquisition of Bluegreen by Woodbridge in a cash merger (the “2012 merger”) pursuant to which Bluegreen’s shareholders (other than BFC, directly or indirectly through Woodbridge, and shareholders of Bluegreen who duly exercise appraisal rights in accordance with Massachusetts law) will receive consideration of $10.00 in cash for each share of Bluegreen’s common stock that they hold at the effective time of the merger.  Consummation of the 2012 merger is subject to, among other things, the parties obtaining the financing necessary to consummate the transaction.  The aggregate merger consideration is expected to be approximately $150 million.  If the 2012 merger is consummated, Bluegreen will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Woodbridge, and Bluegreen’s common stock will no longer be listed for trading on the NYSE or registered under the Exchange Act.

 

In connection with the financing of the 2012 merger, BFC and BBX Capital entered into a letter agreement relating to a proposed investment by BBX Capital of $71.75 million in Woodbridge. It is contemplated that the proposed investment, which is subject to the execution of definitive agreements by BBX Capital and BFC, would be made by BBX Capital at the effective time of the merger in exchange for a 46% equity interest in Woodbridge. BFC would continue to hold the remaining 54% of Woodbridge’s equity interests. It is anticipated that BBX Capital’s investment in Woodbridge will consist of approximately $60 million in cash and a promissory note in Woodbridge’s favor in the principal amount of approximately $11.75 million. The cash proceeds from the investment are expected to be utilized to pay a portion of the aggregate merger consideration. It is also contemplated that, in connection with the investment, Woodbridge’s operating agreement will be amended to set forth BFC’s and BBX Capital’s respective rights as members of Woodbridge following the investment and provide, among other things, for unanimity on certain specified “major decisions.”

 

On March 26, 2013, Bluegreen issued $75 million of senior secured notes in a private transaction, the proceeds of which will be used to fund a portion of the merger consideration. See the “Bluegreen Resorts Liquidity” section below for further information regarding this financing transaction.  It is also expected that Bluegreen will use approximately $15 million of its unrestricted cash to fund a portion of the merger consideration. To the extent that Bluegreen uses its resources to fund a portion of the merger consideration, BFC anticipates that its shareholders’ equity will be reduced accordingly.  There is no assurance that the 2012 merger will be consummated on the contemplated terms, or at all. 

---

 

 

Following the announcement of the 2011 merger agreement, seven purported class action lawsuits were filed seeking to enjoin the 2011 merger or, if it was completed, to recover relief as determined by the applicable presiding court. Four of these lawsuits were filed in Florida and have been consolidated into a single action. The other three lawsuits, which were filed in Massachusetts, have also been consolidated into a single action, which has been stayed in favor of the consolidated action in Florida. Following the announcement of the termination of the 2011 merger agreement and entry into the 2012 merger agreement, the plaintiffs in the Florida action filed a supplemental complaint alleging that the consideration to be received by Bluegreen’s shareholders pursuant to the 2012 merger agreement remains inadequate and continues to be unfair to Bluegreen’s minority shareholders. See “Item 3 – Legal Proceedings” for additional information regarding this litigation.

 

Sale of Bluegreen Communities

 

On May 4, 2012, Bluegreen sold substantially all of the assets that comprised its residential communities business, Bluegreen Communities, to Southstar Development Partners, Inc. (“Southstar”) for a purchase price of $29.0 million in cash. Southstar also agreed to pay an amount equal to 20% of the net proceeds (as calculated in accordance with the terms of the agreement), of its sale, if any, of two specified parcels of real estate purchased by Southstar under the agreement. Southstar sold one of such parcels during 2012 and paid to Bluegreen the proceeds of the sale to which Bluegreen was entitled, which was insignificant. Assets excluded from the sale included primarily Bluegreen’s Communities notes receivable portfolio. Bluegreen Communities was previously reported as a separate segment in our Real Estate and Other business activities and has been classified as a discontinued operation in all periods presented in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. See Note 5 contained in Item 8 of this report for additional information.

 

Sale of BankAtlantic    

 

On July 31, 2012, BBX completed the sale to BB&T Corporation (“BB&T”) of all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of BankAtlantic, the former wholly owned banking subsidiary of BBX Capital (the stock sale and related transactions are referred to in this report as the “BankAtlantic Sale” or the “BB&T Transaction”).  The BankAtlantic Sale was consummated pursuant to the terms of a definitive agreement, dated November 1, 2011, between BBX Capital and BB&T, as amended on March 13, 2012 (the “Agreement”). The March 13, 2012 amendment amended the previously contemplated terms of the transaction to, among other things, provide for the assumption by BB&T of BBX Capital’s $285.4 million in principal amount of outstanding trust preferred securities (“TruPS”) obligations. 

 

Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, prior to the closing of the BankAtlantic Sale, BankAtlantic formed two subsidiaries, BBX Capital Asset Management, LLC (“CAM”) and Florida Asset Resolution Group, LLC (“FAR”).  BankAtlantic contributed to FAR certain performing and non-performing loans, tax certificates and real estate owned that had an aggregate carrying value on BankAtlantic’s balance sheet of approximately $346 million as of July 31, 2012 (the date the BB&T Transaction was consummated).  FAR assumed all liabilities related to these assets.  BankAtlantic also contributed approximately $50 million in cash to FAR on July 31, 2012 and thereafter distributed all of the membership interests in FAR to BBX Capital.  At the closing of the BankAtlantic Sale, BBX Capital transferred to BB&T 95% of the outstanding preferred membership interests in FAR in connection with BB&T’s assumption of BBX Capital’s outstanding TruPS obligations, as described in further detail below. BBX Capital continues to hold the remaining 5% of FAR’s preferred membership interests. Under the terms of the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company agreement of FAR, which was entered into by BBX Capital and BB&T at the closing, BB&T will hold its 95% preferred interest in the net cash flows of FAR until such time as it has recovered $285 million in preference amount plus a priority return of LIBOR + 200 basis points per annum on any unpaid preference amount. At that time, BB&T’s interest in FAR will terminate, and BBX Capital will thereafter be entitled to any and all residual proceeds from FAR through its ownership of FAR’s Class R units. It is expected that the assets (other than cash) contributed to FAR will be monetized over a period of seven years, or longer provided BB&T’s preference amount is repaid within such seven-year period. BBX Capital entered into an incremental $35 million guarantee in BB&T’s favor to further support BB&T’s recovery of the $285 million preferred interest within seven years. BB&T’s preferred interest in FAR as of December 31, 2012 was reduced through cash distributions to $197 million. FAR is considered a variable interest entity (“VIE”) and in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance for VIEs, BBX Capital, as the primary beneficiary, is required to consolidate the financial statements of FAR.  As previously described, BFC consolidates BBX Capital into BFC’s financial statements.

 

---

 

Prior to the closing of the BankAtlantic Sale, BankAtlantic contributed to CAM certain non-performing commercial loans, commercial real estate owned and previously written-off assets that had an aggregate carrying value on BankAtlantic’s balance sheet of $125 million as of July 31, 2012.  CAM assumed all liabilities related to these assets.  BankAtlantic also contributed approximately $82 million in cash to CAM.  Prior to the closing of the BankAtlantic Sale, BankAtlantic distributed all of the membership interests in CAM to BBX Capital.  CAM remains a wholly-owned subsidiary of BBX Capital. 

 

BB&T made a cash payment in connection with the closing of the BankAtlantic Sale of approximately $6.4 million to BBX Capital which was based on a deposit premium of $315.9 million and the net asset value of BankAtlantic as of June 30, 2012. The deposit premium and BankAtlantic’s net asset value were calculated pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, including, with respect to the net asset value of BankAtlantic, after giving effect to the asset contributions and membership interest distributions by BankAtlantic described above. 

 

At the closing of the BB&T Transaction, BB&T assumed the obligations with respect to BBX Capital’s outstanding TruPS, and BBX Capital paid BB&T approximately $51.3 million, representing all accrued and unpaid interest on the TruPS through closing.  BBX Capital also paid approximately $2.3 million for certain legal fees and expenses with respect to the subsequently resolved TruPS-related litigation which was brought against BBX Capital by holders of the TruPS and certain trustees.  BBX Capital funded the TruPS accrued interest and the TruPS related legal fees and expenses with proceeds received in the BB&T Transaction.    

 

Since the closing of the BankAtlantic Sale, BBX Capital’s activities have been focused on managing the assets in CAM and the commercial nonaccrual loans that it services for FAR as well as overseeing the third party servicers that manage the assets for FAR.  BBX Capital, at its  parent company level (sometimes hereinafter referred to as “BBX Capital Parent Company”), also continues to manage the assets held by BBX Partners, its wholly owned asset workout subsidiary established in 2008 (formerly BankAtlantic Bancorp Partners, Inc.) which consisted of approximately $14 million of loans and real estate owned as of December 31, 2012. In addition, as previously described, it is currently contemplated that BBX Capital will invest $71.75 million in Woodbridge in connection with the financing of the 2012 merger with Bluegreen in exchange for a 46% equity interest in Woodbridge, which will be the parent company of Bluegreen if the 2012 merger is completed.

 

BFC recognized a gain on sale in connection with the BankAtlantic Sale of approximately $293.4 million, including approximately $2.8 million of purchase accounting adjustments related to BFC’s acquisitions during 2008 of shares of BBX Capital’s Class A Common Stock which were accounted for as step acquisitions under the purchase method of accounting then in effect.  This gain is included in discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2012.

 

As a result of the BankAtlantic sale, BankAtlantic’s Community Banking, Investments, Tax Certificates, and Capital Services components were reclassified to discontinued operations.  Discontinued operations also include the results of Bluegreen Communities, as described above, the commercial leasing projects of Core Communities, LLC (“Core” or “Core Communities”), and Cypress Creek Holdings, LLC (“Cypress Creek Holdings”). Core and Cypress Creek Holdings are wholly owned subsidiaries of Woodbridge. See Note 5– “Discontinued Operations” contained in Item 8 of the Notes to the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements for a further discussion of discontinued operations.

 

Acquisition of Benihana by Safflower

 

BFC held a significant investment in Benihana prior to the merger between Benihana and Safflower during August 2012.  Pursuant to the merger agreement, Safflower acquired Benihana for a cash purchase price of $16.30 per share of Benihana’s common stock.  BFC received approximately $24.5 million in exchange for the 1,505,330 shares of Benihana’s common stock that it held at the effective time of the transaction. 

 

Prior to Safflower’s acquisition of Benihana, BFC sold approximately 77,000 shares of Benihana’s common stock during July and August 2012 pursuant to the terms of a Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan and received net proceeds from such sales of approximately $1.25 million.

 

BFC recognized a gain on sale of approximately $9.3 million in connection with its sales of shares of Benihana’s common stock during July and August 2012 and disposition of its remaining shares of Benihana’s common stock pursuant to the merger between Benihana and Safflower during August 2012. In addition, during each of the first three quarters of 2012, BFC received approximately $127,000 of dividend payments with respect to the shares of Benihana’s common stock which BFC owned at that time.

---

 

 

Additional Information

 

See Note 1 – “Basis of Financial Statement Presentation” to the Notes to the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this report for a further discussion of the presentation of the Company’s results of operations, including the impact of the recent events described above on such presentations.

 

 

---

 

 

Business Segments

 

As a result of BBX Capital’s sale of BankAtlantic during July 2012 and the disposition of BFC’s investment in Benihana in connection with Safflower’s acquisition of Benihana during August 2012, BFC reorganized its reportable segments to better align its segments with its and its subsidiaries’ current operations.   We currently report the results of our continuing operations through four segments: Real Estate Operations; Bluegreen Resorts; BBX; and Florida Asset Resolution Group (“FAR”). BFC previously had a BFC Activities reporting segment, which consisted of BFC’s corporate overhead and selling, general and administrative expenses, including the expenses of Woodbridge unrelated to real estate, BFC’s investment in Benihana, and certain other investments and subsidiaries.  During 2012, BFC’s management modified its measure of segment operating profit to exclude the items that were previously classified within the BFC Activities segment.  Accordingly, BFC’s segment disclosure has been adjusted to reflect the revised presentation and the results previously included within BFC Activities have been reclassified to unallocated corporate overhead for all periods presented and are included in the reconciliation of segment amounts to the consolidated amounts. 

 

As previously described, discontinued operations include the results of Bluegreen Communities (which was previously a separate reporting segment), BankAtlantic’s community banking, investment, capital service and tax certificate reporting units (which previously comprised a  portion of our former BankAtlantic segment, as well as Cypress Creek Holdings and, for the year ended December 31, 2010, Core’s commercial leasing projects (which were historically part of the Real Estate Operations reporting segment).  See Note 5 contained in Item 8 of this report for additional information regarding discontinued operations.

 

The presentation and allocation of the assets, liabilities and results of operations of each segment may not reflect the actual economic costs of the segment as a stand-alone business. If a different basis of allocation were utilized, the relative contributions of the segment might differ but, in management’s view, the relative trends in segments would not likely be impacted.  See also Item 7 of this report, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Note  30  contained in Item 8 of this report for a discussion of trends, results of operations, and other relevant information on each segment.

 

Real Estate Operations Segment

 

The Real Estate Operations segment includes the subsidiaries through which Woodbridge historically conducted its real estate business activities. These activities were concentrated in Florida and South Carolina and included the development and sale of land, the construction and sale of single family homes and townhomes and the leasing of commercial properties through Core Communities and Carolina Oak Homes, LLC (“Carolina Oak”). As previously described, the Real Estate Operations segment also previously included the operations of Cypress Creek Holdings, LLC (“Cypress Creek Holdings”), which engaged in leasing activities within an office building that it owned prior to the sale of such building during January 2012.  Cypress Creek Holdings’ results of operations are reported as a discontinued operation in the Company’s consolidated financial statements and its assets, which consisted of the office building that it sold during the first quarter of 2012, are classified as assets held for sale as of December 31, 2011.  In addition, the results of Core’s commercial leasing projects, which were sold in 2010, are reported as a discontinued operation for the year ended December 31, 2010. The operations of Levitt and Sons, LLC, a former wholly owned subsidiary of Woodbridge that engaged in homebuilding and development activities (“Levitt and Sons”), were also included in the Real Estate Operations segment prior to the deconsolidation of Levitt and Sons during November 2007.

 

Carolina Oak

As a result of significant challenges faced during 2009, Woodbridge made a decision to cease all activities at Carolina Oak.  Woodbridge was the obligor under a $37.2 million loan collateralized by property owned by Carolina Oak.  During 2009, the lender declared the loan to be in default and filed an action for foreclosure.  On April 26, 2011, a settlement agreement was entered into to resolve the disputes and litigation relating to the loan. Under the terms and subject to the conditions of the settlement agreement, (i) Woodbridge paid $2.5 million to the note holder, (ii) Carolina Oak conveyed to the note holder the real property securing the loan and (iii) the note holder agreed not to pursue certain remedies, including a deficiency judgment, and after the expiration of an agreed-upon time period (which expired during April 2012), to fully release Woodbridge and Carolina Oak. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, a deferred gain on debt settlement of $29.9 million was recorded in the Company’s consolidated statement of financial condition as of December 31, 2011 and was recognized as income during the second quarter of 2012 as a result of the full release of Woodbridge and Carolina Oak during April 2012.

 

---

 

Core Communities

In early 2010, Woodbridge made the decision to pursue an orderly liquidation of Core and worked cooperatively with its various lenders to achieve that objective.  During November 2010, Core entered into a settlement agreement with one of its lenders, which had previously commenced actions seeking foreclosure of properties in Florida and South Carolina which served as collateral under mortgage loans totaling approximately $113.9 million. Under the terms of the agreement, Core pledged additional collateral to the lender consisting of membership interests in five of Core’s subsidiaries and granted security interests in the real property owned by such subsidiaries in Port St. Lucie, Florida, substantially all of which is undeveloped raw land. Core also agreed to an amendment of the complaint related to the Florida foreclosure action to include this additional collateral and an entry into consensual judgments of foreclosure in both the Florida and South Carolina foreclosure actions. In consideration therefor, the lender agreed not to enforce a deficiency judgment against Core and, in February 2011, released Core from any other claims arising from or relating to the loans. As of November 30, 2010, Core deconsolidated the five subsidiaries, the membership interests in which were transferred to the lender upon entry into the consensual judgments of foreclosure.  In accordance with the accounting guidance for consolidation, Woodbridge recorded a guarantee obligation “deferred gain on settlement of investment in subsidiary” of $11.3 million in the Company’s consolidated statement of financial condition as of December 31, 2010, and the deferred gain on settlement of investment in subsidiary was recognized into income during the first quarter of 2011.

 

Approximately $27.2 million of the $113.9 million of mortgage loans described above was collateralized by property in South Carolina which had an estimated carrying value of approximately $19.4 million at December 31, 2010 and was subject to separate foreclosure proceedings. The foreclosure proceedings relating to this property were completed on November 3, 2011 and, in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance, the Company recorded an $11.6 million gain on extinguishment of debt during the fourth quarter of 2011.

 

In December 2010, Core and one of its subsidiaries entered into agreements, including, without limitation, a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure Agreement, with one of their lenders which resolved the foreclosure proceedings commenced by the lender related to property at Core’s Tradition Hilton Head community which served as collateral for a $25 million loan. Pursuant to the agreements, Core’s subsidiary transferred to the lender all of its right, title and interest in and to the property which served as collateral for the loan as well as certain additional real and personal property. In consideration therefor, the lender released Core and its subsidiary from any claims arising from or relating to the loan.  In accordance with the applicable accounting guidance, this transaction was accounted for as a troubled debt restructuring and a $13.0 million gain on debt extinguishment was recognized in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

 

On June 10, 2010, Core sold its two commercial leasing projects (which were classified as assets held for sale) for approximately $75.4 million. As a result of the sale, Core realized a gain on sale of $2.6 million during the second quarter 2010, which is included in discontinued operations.

 

Cypress Creek Holdings

Cypress Creek Holdings owned an 80,000 square foot office building in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. As of December 31, 2011, the building, which had an estimated carrying value of approximately $6.4 million, served as collateral for an approximately $11.2 million mortgage loan.

 

The building was previously 50% occupied by an unaffiliated third party pursuant to a lease which expired in March 2010. The tenant opted not to renew the lease and vacated the space as of March 31, 2010. After efforts to lease the space proved unsuccessful, the lender agreed to permit Cypress Creek Holdings to pursue a short sale of the building. During January 2012, the building was sold for approximately $10.8 million. The proceeds of the sale plus a $668,000 payment made by Cypress Creek Holdings were paid to the lender in full satisfaction of the loan.  During the first quarter of 2012, the Company recognized a gain of approximately $4.4 million in connection with the sale.

 

Levitt and Sons

Levitt and Sons was a developer of single family homes and town home communities for active adults and families in Florida, Georgia, Tennessee and South Carolina. As a result of deteriorating economic conditions, increased inventory levels combined with weakened consumer demand for housing and tightened credit requirements, Levitt and Sons experienced decreased orders, decreased margins and increased cancellation rates on homes in backlog.  On November 9, 2007, Levitt and Sons and substantially all of its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Debtors”) filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Chapter 11 Cases”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida (the “Bankruptcy Court”). Pursuant to the settlement agreement entered into during June 2008, as subsequently amended (the “Settlement Agreement”), Woodbridge agreed to (i) pay

---

 

$8 million to the Debtors’ bankruptcy estates (sometimes referred to herein as the “Debtors’ Estate”), (ii) place $4.5 million in a release fund to be disbursed to third party creditors in exchange for a third party release and injunction, (iii) make a $300,000 payment to a deposit holders fund and (iv) share a percentage of any tax refund attributable to periods prior to the bankruptcy with the Debtors’ Estate. In addition, Woodbridge agreed to waive and release substantially all of the claims it had against the Debtors, including administrative expense claims through July 2008, and the Debtors (joined by the Joint Committee of Unsecured Creditors appointed in the Chapter 11 Cases (the “Joint Committee”)) agreed to waive and release any claims they had against Woodbridge and its affiliates. On February 20, 2009, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming a plan of liquidation jointly proposed by the Debtors and the Joint Committee.  That order also approved the settlement pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. No appeal or rehearing of the Bankruptcy Court’s order was filed by any party, and the settlement was consummated on March 3, 2009, at which time payment was made in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement. As of December 31, 2011, we had placed into escrow approximately $11.7 million which represented the portion of the tax refund that was likely to be required to be paid to the Debtors’ Estate under the Settlement Agreement. During the quarter ended June 30, 2012, the $11.7 million was paid to the Debtors’ Estate.  In addition, during August 2012, Woodbridge paid to the Debtors’ Estate a settlement holdback amount of approximately $485,000 plus interest thereby satisfying all of its obligations under the Settlement Agreement. 

 

 

---

 

 

Bluegreen Resorts Segment

 

BFC currently owns approximately 54% of Bluegreen’s outstanding common stock.   Bluegreen is a sales, marketing and management company focused on the vacation ownership industry.  Bluegreen’s continuing operations relate to Bluegreen Resorts, which markets, sells and manages vacation ownership interests (“VOIs”) in resorts, which are generally located in popular, high-volume, “drive-to” vacation destinations, and were either developed or acquired by Bluegreen or developed by others, in which case Bluegreen earns fees for providing these services.   Bluegreen Resorts also provides property and homeowners’ association management services, VOI title services, mortgage servicing, design development services, and resort amenity operational services.  In addition, Bluegreen Resorts provides financing to individual purchasers of VOIs, which provides significant interest income to Bluegreen.

 

Industry Overview

 

The resorts component of the leisure industry is serviced primarily by two separate alternatives for overnight accommodations: commercial lodging establishments and vacation ownership resorts. Commercial lodging consists principally of hotels and motels in which a room is rented on a nightly, weekly or monthly basis, or rentals of privately-owned condominium units or homes. For many vacationers, particularly those with families, a lengthy stay at a quality commercial lodging establishment can be expensive, and the space provided to such vacationers by these establishments relative to the cost is often not economical. In addition, room rates at commercial lodging establishments are subject to change periodically and availability is often uncertain. Bluegreen believes that vacation ownership presents an attractive vacation alternative to commercial lodging.

 

Vacation ownership interests were first introduced in Europe in the mid 1960’s. Historically, the vacation ownership industry was highly fragmented and dominated by a large number of local and regional resort developers and operators, each with small resort portfolios generally of differing quality. Bluegreen believes that one of the most significant factors contributing to the historic growth of the vacation ownership industry was the entry into the market of some of the world’s major lodging, hospitality and entertainment companies, such as Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, the Walt Disney Company, Hilton Hotels Corporation, Hyatt Corporation, Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide, Inc., and Wyndham Worldwide Corporation. Although vacation ownership operations currently comprise only a portion of some of these companies’ overall operations, Bluegreen believes that their involvement in the vacation ownership industry has enhanced the industry’s image with the general public.

 

The purchase of a timeshare property typically entitles the buyer to use and occupy a fully-furnished residence, generally for a certain period each year but, in certain cases, for a certain period every two years in perpetuity. Typically, the buyer acquires an ownership interest in the vacation residence, which is often held as a tenant-in-common with other buyers of interests in the vacation residence. Under a points-based vacation club system, such as the Bluegreen Vacation Club, the members cause timeshare properties to be deeded on their behalf into a trust, pursuant to which the member is provided beneficial rights including an annual or biennial allotment of points that can be used to reserve occupancy at participating resorts.

 

Bluegreen Vacation Club resorts are primarily “drive-to” resort destinations. Bluegreen believes that most of its VOI owners live within a 300 mile drive of at least one of Bluegreen’s resorts. Bluegreen believes that, in general, Americans desire to take family vacations and that the Bluegreen Vacation Club is positioned to benefit from consumer demand for family vacations. However, economic conditions may have an adverse effect on the demand for vacations and Bluegreen’s operations.

 

Products and Services

 

Vacation Ownership

Bluegreen Resorts has been involved in the vacation ownership industry since its inception in 1994. Since its inception, Bluegreen has generated approximately 411,000 VOI sales transactions, which include over 29,000 VOI sales transactions on behalf of third parties. As of December 31, 2012, Bluegreen was selling VOIs in the Bluegreen Vacation Club at 23 sales offices at resorts located in the United States and Aruba. VOIs in Bluegreen’s resorts and those sold by Bluegreen on behalf of third parties typically entitle the buyer to use resort accommodations through an annual or biennial allotment of “points” which represent their ownership and beneficial use rights in perpetuity in the Bluegreen Vacation Club (supported by an underlying deeded VOI held in trust for the buyer). Bluegreen believes the Bluegreen

---

 

Vacation Club allows its VOI owners to customize their vacation experience in a more flexible manner than traditional fixed-week vacation ownership programs. Members can stay for varying lengths of time on vacations for as little as two nights or as many nights as their points will allow on any one vacation. The number of points required for a stay at a resort varies depending on a variety of factors, including the resort location, the size of a unit, the vacation season and the days of the week used. Under this system, members can select vacations among available resorts according to their schedules, space needs, and available points. Subject to certain restrictions and fees, members are typically allowed to carry over for one year any unused points and to "borrow" points from the next year. Bluegreen Vacation Club members may use their points to stay in any of 60 resorts (30 Bluegreen Vacation Club – Club Resorts and 30 Club Associate Resorts) or take advantage of other vacation options, including an exchange program offered by a third-party world-wide vacation ownership exchange network of over 4,000 resorts and other vacation experiences such as cruises and hotel stays.

 

The owners of VOIs collectively manage the resort property through a nonprofit property owners’ association that is governed by a board of directors or trustees, consisting of representatives of the developer (so long as the developer owns VOIs in the resort or as otherwise provided by law) and owners of VOIs at the resort. The board of directors hires a management company to which it delegates many of the rights and responsibilities of the property owners’ association, including grounds landscaping, security, housekeeping and operating supplies, garbage collection, utilities, insurance, laundry and repairs and maintenance.  Each VOI owner is required to pay a share of the costs of maintaining all of the properties in the Bluegreen Vacation Club system. These charges generally consist of an annual maintenance fee plus applicable real estate taxes and special assessments, which are assessed on an as-needed basis. If the VOI owner does not pay such charges, Bluegreen Vacation Club may suspend such owner’s use rights and foreclose on the owner’s VOI, subject to the lender’s first mortgage lien on the VOI, if any.

 

Bluegreen Resorts’ estimated remaining life-of-project sales of Bluegreen-owned inventory at December 31, 2012 were approximately $3.4 billion, including approximately $0.9 billion which relates to fully developed inventory. Throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K, “estimated remaining life-of-project sales” assumes the aggregate sales of the existing, currently under construction or development, and planned VOIs at retail prices prevailing at December 31, 2012. For the year ended December 31, 2012, Bluegreen Resorts recognized system-wide sales and operating profit (defined as operating profit prior to the allocation of corporate overhead, interest income, other income or expense, interest expense, income taxes and non-controlling interest) of $376.0 million and $96.3 million, respectively.

 

According to information compiled by various sources, Bluegreen believes its typical customer to be married and between 45-55 years of age, with a median household income of approximately $80,000.

 

Fee-Based Services 

Since 2009, Bluegreen has focused on expanding its fee-based service business. Bluegreen believes that it can leverage its expertise in sales and marketing, mortgage servicing, resort management, title services, and construction management by offering these services to third-party timeshare developers and property owners’ associations. Bluegreen’s fee-based services business typically generates positive cash flows and requires less capital investment than its traditional vacation ownership sales and marketing business. Bluegreen’s goal is for fee-based services to become an increasing portion of its business over time; however, Bluegreen’s efforts to do so may not be successful.  

 

In July 2009, Bluegreen began offering fee-based sales and marketing services to third-party developers by selling VOIs in their resorts as Bluegreen Vacation Club interests through its distribution network of sales offices. Bluegreen seeks to structure its fee for these services to cover its selling and marketing costs, plus a profit. Funds generated from the sales of the third-party VOIs are processed through Bluegreen’s title company, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary that earns title fees in connection with the closing of the VOI transactions. Because the completed VOI was built by a third-party, Bluegreen is not at risk for the development financing of these projects and Bluegreen has little to no capital requirements.

 

Additionally, in exchange for fees, Bluegreen provides management services to the Bluegreen Vacation Club and to certain property owners’ associations of the Club Resorts and Club Associate Resorts. In connection with the management services provided to the Bluegreen Vacation Club, Bluegreen manages the club reservation system and provide owner services as well as billing and collections services. In connection with Bluegreen’s management of property owners’ associations, Bluegreen provides day-to-day management services, including oversight of housekeeping services, maintenance and certain accounting and administrative services. As of December 31, 2012, Bluegreen provided management services to 45 timeshare resort properties and hotels.

 

---

 

Bluegreen also generated fee-based income by providing construction consulting services (where Bluegreen manages the development of VOI inventory for third-parties) and mortgage servicing of the VOI notes originated from the sales for third-party VOIs.

 

Vacation Club Resort Locations

Bluegreen Vacation Club resorts are primarily “drive-to” resort destinations. Bluegreen believes that most of our VOI owners live within a 300 mile drive of at least one of its resorts. Bluegreen Vacation Club members may use their points to stay in any of the Club Resorts or Club Associate Resorts. Bluegreen considers a resort to be a Club Resort if Bluegreen acquired or developed a significant number of VOIs in the resort, even if substantially all of the VOIs in the property have been sold to consumers.

 

A Club Associate Resort is a resort developed by a third-party, in which Bluegreen may have acquired timeshare interests for resale or in which Bluegreen has sold VOIs on behalf of a third-party in connection with its fee-based services sales and marketing business. Only a portion of each Club Associate Resort’s total timeshare interests is included in the Bluegreen Vacation Club and available for use by its members.

 

Units at most of the Bluegreen Vacation Club properties typically include a full kitchen, two televisions, a DVD player and laundry facilities. Many properties offer guests a clubhouse (with an indoor or outdoor pool, a game room, exercise facilities and a lounge) and hotel-type staff. Bluegreen manages all of the Club Resorts, either directly or through a subcontract, and Bluegreen manages certain of the Club Associate Resorts.

 

The following table lists the Bluegreen Vacation Club – Club Resorts and Club Associate Resorts:

 

---

 

---

 

 

 

Club Resorts

 

Below is a description of each of the Club Resorts.  Certain of the amenities described below for these resorts are separately owned and operated, and may require guests to pay separate fees.

 

The Club at Big Bear Village – Big Bear Lake, California.  This resort is located in the mountains of Southern California located in Big Bear Lake.  This resort features three- and four bedroom villas and offers amenities such as a heated pool, private fitness center, private balconies, barbeque grill area, and adult billiards room.

 

Daytona SeaBreeze — Daytona Beach Shores, Florida. This 80-unit, oceanfront resort is located on the “World’s Most Famous Beach.” Amenities include private ocean-front balconies, a heated outdoor swimming pool, a children’s pool, a hot tub, a fitness center, a barbeque grill area and a game room. The resort is located near the world-famous Daytona International Speedway and DAYTONA USA^®.  

 

The Hammocks at Marathon — Marathon, Florida. The Hammocks at Marathon is located in the Florida Keys within easy reach of both Miami and Key West, Florida. This 58-unit waterfront resort offers such amenities as a pool, boat slips, an outside tiki bar and a variety of water sport recreational vehicle rentals.

 

The Fountains — Orlando, Florida. This 54-acre resort is located on a lake and is minutes away from Central Florida’s family attractions, including Walt Disney World^®, SeaWorld^® and Universal Studios Florida^®. Amenities include a clubhouse with a heated indoor/outdoor swimming pool, a pool bar, a massage room, steam and sauna rooms, a family activity room, a tennis court, a basketball court, and a resort style pool facility, as well as an on-site Domino’s Pizza^® and a Benihana restaurant.

 

Orlando’s Sunshine Resorts I and II — Orlando, Florida. Orlando’s Sunshine Resort is located near Wet’n’Wild^® water park and Universal Studios Florida^®. This 90-unit property features an outdoor swimming pool, a hot tub and tennis courts.

 

Casa del Mar Beach Resort — Ormond Beach, Florida. Casa del Mar is a 43-unit resort located directly on the ocean and includes an outdoor pool and miniature golf. In nearby Daytona Beach, guests can drive on the beach or visit the Daytona International Speedway.

 

Grande Villas at World Golf Village — St. Augustine, Florida. Grande Villas is located next to the World Golf Hall of Fame^®. This resort features an extensive array of amenities, including golf courses, swimming pools, a hot tub, a sauna and a playground. The resort includes 152 units.

 

Solara Surfside — Surfside, Florida. This 58-unit oceanfront resort is located in Surfside, Florida, near Miami Beach. Solara Surfside captures the art deco style of its surrounding area and features one- and two-bedroom vacation units, a swimming pool, a sun deck and a hot tub.

 

Bluegreen Club La Pension — New Orleans, Louisiana. This 64-unit resort is located in the French Quarter, just a few blocks from the Mississippi River. Many of the units feature balconies overlooking the French Quarter. The rooftop offers two sundecks with hot tubs and views of the French Quarter, river, and city.

 

Mountain Run at Boyne — Boyne Falls, Michigan. Mountain Run at Boyne is located on Boyne Mountain, which is known for skiing, snowboarding and tubing on more than 50 runs with convenient lift and trail systems. In the summer,

---

 

Boyne Mountain offers golf on nearby world-class courses designed by some of the game’s masters, including Robert Trent Jones, Arthur Hills, Donald Ross and others. Mountain Run has 104 units.

 

The Falls Village — Branson, Missouri. The Falls Village is located near the Ozark Mountains. Fishing, boating and swimming are available at nearby Table Rock Lake and Lake Taneycomo, and area theaters feature shows by renowned country music stars.

 

Paradise Point Resort — Hollister, Missouri. Paradise Point, which currently has 84 units, is situated on Table Rock Lake.  This vacation ownership resort is being developed, marketed and sold by Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations, LLC, a joint venture between Big Cedar, LLC and the Developer, in which the Developer owns 51% interest (“Bluegreen/Big Cedar”).  Paradise Point offers studio units, executive 1-bedroom villas and spacious 2-bedroom villas. On-site amenities include a fitness center and an outdoor swimming pool.

 

Bluegreen Wilderness Club at Big Cedar — Ridgedale, Missouri. The Bluegreen Wilderness Club at Big Cedar is a wilderness-themed resort adjacent to the world famous Big Cedar Lodge luxury hotel resort. This vacation ownership resort is also developed, marketed and sold by Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations. The resort is located on Table Rock Lake, and is near Dogwood Canyon. Guests staying in the two-bedroom cabins or one- and two-bedroom lodge villas enjoy fireplaces, private balconies and full kitchens. Amenities include, or are expected to include, indoor and outdoor swimming pools and hot tubs, a lazy river, hiking trails, a campfire area, a beach and playground. Guests also have access to certain of the luxury amenities at the Big Cedar Lodge, including a marina, horseback riding, tennis courts and a spa.

 

The Cliffs at Long Creek — Ridgedale, Missouri. The Cliffs at Long Creek currently features 29 patio homes that overlook Table Rock Lake. This vacation ownership resort is also developed, marketed and sold by Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations. These two- level, five-bedroom homes feature two master bedrooms, a whirlpool bath, walk-in closet, media room, billiards table, gourmet kitchen, covered porch, and 2-car garage. This resort is developed, marketed and sold by Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations.

 

Bluegreen Club 36 — Las Vegas, Nevada. This 478 unit resort is located just off the Las Vegas Strip and features various amenities, including an indoor pool, outdoor sundeck, fitness center and two on-site restaurants. BG Club 36 features both one- and two-bedroom villas with Parisian Art Deco décor.

 

Bluegreen at Atlantic Palace — Atlantic City, New Jersey. This 31-story, 288-unit resort is situated on the Atlantic Ocean and the Atlantic City Boardwalk and features an outdoor pool, hot tub, game room, exercise room, steam room and sauna.

 

The Suites at Hershey — Hershey, Pennsylvania. This 79-unit resort is located near HersheyPark^® and Hershey’s^® Chocolate World. Amenities include an outdoor swimming pool, a hot tub, a playground, a picnic area with barbeque grills, a game room, a fitness center and indoor basketball courts.

 

The Lodge Alley Inn — Charleston, South Carolina. Located in Charleston’s historic district, The Lodge Alley Inn includes one- and two-bedroom suites, many furnished with an equipped kitchen, a living room with a fireplace, a dining room, a whirlpool bath, pine wood floors and 18th century-style furniture reproductions. This 90-unit resort, which features an on-site restaurant, is within walking distance of many of Charleston’s historical sites, open-air markets and art galleries.

 

Carolina Grande — Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. This 118-unit, 20-story tower is located across the street from the beach.  Through an arrangement with The Carolinian Beach Resort, guests enjoy an accessible breezeway directly to the beach.  Other amenities include indoor and outdoor swimming pools, hot tubs, full kitchens, washers and dryers, and views of the ocean and city. The resort is located near NASCAR^® SpeedPark, Broadway at the Beach^SM (a 350-acre complex featuring numerous specialty shops, restaurants, attractions and nightclubs), Myrtle Waves Water Park, Carolina Opry, Dixie Stampede and the Myrtle Beach Convention Center.

 

Harbour Lights — Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Harbour Lights is located in the Fantasy Harbour Complex in the center of Myrtle Beach. Nearby are Theater Row, shopping, golf courses and restaurants. The resort’s activities center overlooks the Intracoastal Waterway.

 

---

 

SeaGlass Tower — Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The SeaGlass Tower is a 19-story, 144-unit mirrored tower located directly on the beach in Myrtle Beach. Amenities include, among others, balconies, fully equipped kitchens, whirlpool baths, an indoor and two outdoor swimming pools, a hot tub, and two saunas. SeaGlass Tower is located near Broadway at the Beach^SM and the Myrtle Beach Convention Center.

 

Shore Crest Vacation Villas I & II — North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Shore Crest Vacation Villas, consisting of two multi-storied towers and 240 units, is located on the beach in the Windy Hill section of North Myrtle Beach, a mile from Barefoot Landing, which features numerous restaurants, theaters, shops and outlet stores.

 

MountainLoft — Gatlinburg, Tennessee. MountainLoft is located near the Great Smoky Mountains National Park and is minutes from the family attractions of Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. Units are located in individual chalets or mid-rise villa buildings. Each unit has private balconies.

 

Laurel Crest — Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. Laurel Crest is located in close proximity to the Great Smoky Mountains National Park and the Dollywood theme park. In addition, visitors to Pigeon Forge can enjoy over 200 factory outlet stores and music shows featuring renowned country music stars as well as partake in a variety of outdoor activities, such as horseback riding, trout fishing, boating, golfing and white water rafting.

 

Shenandoah Crossing — Gordonsville, Virginia. Shenandoah Crossing, which currently includes 262 units, features an 18-hole golf course, indoor and outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts, horseback riding trails and a lake for fishing and boating.

 

Bluegreen Wilderness Traveler at Shenandoah — Gordonsville, Virginia. This property is located adjacent to our existing Shenandoah Crossing resort. Wilderness Traveler at Shenandoah provides Bluegreen Vacation Club members with a high quality vacation experience in the “great outdoors”. Accommodations consist of cabins, luxury campsites for recreational vehicles and fully furnished climate-controlled platform tents, as well as outdoor-themed amenities and programs.

 

Bluegreen Patrick Henry Square – Williamsburg, Virginia. This 72-unit resort is located only ¹/2 a block from Colonial Williamsburg. The resort has accommodations ranging from studio to two-bedroom villas with kitchen and colonial-inspired décor. Nearby attractions include Busch Gardens^® Williamsburg, and Water Country USA^®, as well as the nearby scenic Atlantic beaches, shopping, golf, and water attractions.

 

Bluegreen Odyssey Dells — Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin. This seven acre resort is located adjacent to the 156-acre Mt. Olympus Resort Water and Theme Park.

 

Christmas Mountain Village — Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin. Christmas Mountain Village offers a 27-hole golf course and seven ski trails served by two chair lifts. Other on-site amenities include tennis courts, a five-acre lake with paddleboats and rowboats and four outdoor swimming pools.

 

La Cabana Beach & Racquet Club — Oranjestad, Aruba. La Cabana Beach & Racquet Club is a 449-suite oceanfront resort that offers one-, two-, and three-bedroom suites, garden suites and penthouse accommodations. On-site amenities include racquetball, squash, two swimming pools and private beach cabanas.

 

The following tables describe the relative size, and stage of development of, as well as the amount and the estimated sales value of Bluegreen’s remaining unsold inventory at each of its Club Resorts as of December 31, 2012. Although all inventory is sold as VOIs, Bluegreen discloses the size and inventory information in terms of number of vacation homes for ease of comparability between Bluegreen’s resorts and those of other companies in its industry. “Vacation homes” are individual lodging units (e.g., condominium-style apartments, town homes, cabins, yurts, luxury campsites, etc.).

---

 

---

 

 

 

---

 

 

Club Associate Resorts

 

Below is a description of each of the Club Associate Resorts.  Certain of the amenities described below for these resorts are separately owned and operated, and may require guests to pay separate fees.

 

Paradise Isle Resort — Gulf Shores, Alabama. This resort is located in Gulf Shores, across the street from the beach and the Gulf of Mexico. Amenities include private oceanfront balconies, an outdoor swimming pool, a children’s pool and a barbeque grill area.

 

Shoreline Towers — Gulf Shores, Alabama. Shoreline Towers is located on the beach in Gulf Shores, overlooking the Gulf of Mexico. This beachfront resort features two- and three-bedroom suites and offers amenities such as a pool, private balconies, biking and nearby tennis facilities.

 

Via Roma Beach Resort — Bradenton Beach, Florida. A beachfront enclave, Via Roma Beach Resort is located on Bradenton Beach. Featuring one- and two-bedroom suites, this beachfront resort offers such amenities as a heated outdoor swimming pool, hot tub and barbecue grill area.

 

Dolphin Beach Club — Daytona Beach, Florida. The Dolphin Beach Club is located in Daytona Beach overlooking the beach and the Atlantic Ocean. This resort features contemporary white furnishings, a tropical décor, private beachfront balconies and a heated outdoor swimming pool. Guests can enjoy numerous nearby golf courses or visit Daytona International Speedway.

 

Fantasy Island Resort II — Daytona Beach, Florida. This resort is situated on Daytona Beach and features units either facing or with views of the ocean.  Amenities include an outdoor heated swimming pool, hot tub and two dry saunas.

 

Mariner’s Boathouse & Beach Resort — Fort Myers Beach, Florida. Mariner’s Boathouse & Beach Resort is located on the seven-mile long island of Fort Myers Beach, alongside the beaches of the Gulf of Mexico. The beachfront villas are uniquely designed to resemble a first-class yacht, and each features a private, screened-in balcony or porch.

 

Tropical Sands Resort — Fort Myers Beach, Florida. Located on the seven-mile long island of Fort Myers Beach, the Tropical Sands Resort is centered around a sun deck and palm-filled courtyard. Resort amenities include an outdoor heated pool, concierge and a barbecue grill area.

 

Windward Passage Resort — Fort Myers Beach, Florida. This resort is located in the heart of Fort Myers Beach. Just steps away from the beach, the resort features one- and two-bedroom suites and an outdoor heated swimming pool, hot tub, tennis, basketball, volleyball, an on-site playground and a poolside bar.

 

Gulfstream Manor — Delray Beach, Florida. The Gulfstream Manor is located just south of Palm Beach, near shops, galleries, fine dining and boutiques. The beachfront resort features views of the ocean or courtyard and offers an intimate, small resort experience.

 

Resort Sixty-Six — Holmes Beach, Florida. The resort is located on Anna Maria Island which stretches for seven miles and overlooks the Gulf of Mexico. The units at Resort Sixty-Six either overlook the courtyard, or offer views of the Gulf. Resort amenities include an outdoor heated swimming pool, hot tub and a barbecue grill area.

 

Outrigger Beach Club — Ormond Beach, Florida. Steps away from the beach and minutes from Daytona Beach, the Outrigger Beach Club’s boomerang shape allows all of the resort’s units to face the Atlantic Ocean. The resort features

---

 

an outdoor heated swimming pool, children’s swimming pool, poolside grills and hot tub overlooking the beach and ocean.

 

Landmark Holiday Beach Resort — Panama City Beach, Florida. The Landmark Holiday Beach Resort is located on Panama City Beach. The resort features a hot tub, sauna, an indoor heated pool, barbecue grill and oceanfront private balconies.

 

Ocean Towers Beach Club — Panama City Beach, Florida. Located on the Miracle Strip, Ocean Towers Beach Club offers one- and two-bedroom oceanfront suites. The resort’s units feature private balconies or porches, full kitchens and washer/dryers.  Other amenities include an exercise room and outdoor heated pool, and nearby tennis and golf are available.

 

Panama City Resort & Club — Panama City Beach, Florida. The Panama City Resort & Club is located on Panama City Beach overlooking the Gulf of Mexico. Amenities include private balconies, an outdoor heated pool, a year-round hot tub, and nearby jet skiing, windsurfing, parasailing, and golf.

 

Surfsider Beach Club — Sanibel Island, Florida. This resort is located along the beach on Sanibel Island. The resort features one- and two-bedroom suites and amenities such as an outdoor heated swimming pool, hot tub, tennis, fishing and biking.

 

Petit Crest & Golf Club Villas at Big Canoe — Big Canoe, Georgia. The resort is located at Big Canoe in the foothills of the North Georgia Appalachians and an hour north of Atlanta with nearby activities such as fishing, boating, golfing and tennis. Petit Crest Villas’ units feature a balcony or porch, full kitchen, fireplace, washer and dryer.

 

Pono Kai Resort — Kapaa (Kauai), Hawaii. This 13-acre oceanfront resort is located on Kauai’s Coconut Coast. Surrounded by palms and the Pacific, the Pono Kai Resort is close to the beaches and features tennis courts, local arts and crafts vendors, concierge and a hospitality suite.

 

Lake Condominiums at Big Sky — Big Sky, Montana. Lake Condominiums at Big Sky is located at the foot of Lore Mountain overlooking Lake Levinsky. Day trips may be made to Yellowstone National Park and an overnight trip may be made to Grand Teton National Park. The resort features amenities such as a year-round heated outdoor swimming pool, two large hot tubs and nearby skiing.

 

Foxrun Townhouses — Lake Lure, North Carolina. Located on Lake Lure at the foot of the Blue Ridge Mountains, Foxrun Townhouses offers two-bedroom units with activities, including golf, fishing, skiing in the winter and water sports in the spring, summer and fall.

 

Sandcastle Village II — New Bern, North Carolina. New Bern is located at the intersection of the Trent and Neuse Rivers. Guests can enjoy nearby sailing, boating and water sports, as well as the antique shops in the historic downtown area. The unique and spacious pedestal-style townhomes feature full kitchens, washers and dryers, and fireplaces.

 

Waterwood Townhouses — New Bern, North Carolina. Secluded in a remote area near historical Tyron Palace, the Waterwood Townhouses is perfect for sports, outdoor and nature enthusiasts. This lakefront resort offers two-bedroom suites and an on-site marina, tennis courts, miniature golf and indoor and outdoor pools.

 

Players Club — Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. Players Club is located on Hilton Head Island, which is famous for its striking natural beauty, expansive beaches and world-class golf and tennis. This resort features 28 lighted tennis courts and one of the finest health clubs on the island.

 

---

 

Club Associate Resorts Related to our Fee-Based Service Business

 

The following are Club Associate Resorts, where in connection with our fee-based service sales and marketing business (which is described under “Fee –Based Services” below), Bluegreen sells third-party developers’ VOIs as Bluegreen Vacation Club interests. Certain of the amenities described below for these resorts are separately owned and operated, and may require guests to pay separate fees.

 

Cibola Vista Resort and Spa — Peoria, Arizona. Located between Lake Pleasant and Phoenix, this resort offers two outdoor pools and water slides, workout facilities, studios, and one- and two- bedroom suites with kitchens, fireplaces, and Western decor.

 

Blue Water Resort at Cable Beach — Cable Beach, Nassau, Bahamas. This oceanfront resort, located on the white sands of Cable Beach in the Nassau suburbs, offers three-bedroom suites and an outdoor pool.

 

The Studio Homes at Ellis Square — Savannah, Georgia. This 28-unit resort is centrally located in historic downtown Savannah. Accommodations include one- and two-bedroom suites with fully-equipped designer kitchens.

 

Bluegreen at Tradewinds – St. Pete Beach, Florida.  This resort is located in St. Pete Beach with easy access to St. Petersburg’s 22-mile shoreline along the Gulf of Mexico.  The resort features studio and one-bedroom villas.  Amenities include spa, fitness center, pool, tennis and nearby paddle boarding, water parks, and casual dining at beach bars.

 

The Breakers Resort — Dennis Port, Massachusetts. This 52-unit resort is located on the beautiful sandy beaches of Nantucket Sound in Cape Cod. This resort offers studio, one- and two-bedroom units and an outdoor heated pool.

 

The Soundings Seaside Resort — Dennis Port, Massachusetts. This 89-unit resort is centrally located on Nantucket Sound in Cape Cod. This resort has studio, one- and two-bedroom units as well as hotel efficiencies. Many of the rooms offer unobstructed views of the Nantucket Sound. The property offers a variety of amenities from the oceanfront outdoor pool and heated indoor pool to an outdoor putting green and a private stretch of beach.

 

South Mountain Resort — Lincoln, New Hampshire. This 69-unit resort features year-round activities and offers many on-site amenities, and is a short drive to three separate ski mountains, hiking and biking trails, and many shops and restaurants.

 

Parkside Williamsburg Resort — Williamsburg, Virginia. This 35-unit resort is located only blocks away from Colonial Williamsburg. The resort has accommodations ranging from studio to two-bedroom villas with kitchens and colonial-inspired décor. Nearby attractions include Busch Gardens^® Williamsburg and Water Country USA^®, as well as the nearby scenic Atlantic beaches, shopping, golf, and water attractions.

 

The Manhattan Club — New York City, New York. This resort is located in the heart of New York City and is within walking distance to some of the city’s finest attractions, bars, restaurants, nightclubs and theaters. Suites feature high-end furnishings, kitchenettes, marble baths and pillow-top mattresses as well as flat screen TVs, Bose radios and Wi-Fi Internet access.

 

Future Resorts and Acquisition of Additional Inventory

Bluegreen believes that it currently has adequate timeshare inventory to satisfy its projected sales of VOIs for 2013 and a number of years thereafter. Accordingly, except in limited instances, such as VOI resorts to be developed through its Bluegreen/Big Cedar Joint Venture, Bluegreen currently does not plan to acquire or significantly develop additional resort properties in the near term. However, if the opportunity to acquire a strategic property on favorable terms presents itself, as was the case with Bluegreen’s acquisition at Big Bear Village in May 2012, Bluegreen may decide to acquire or develop more inventory in the future. Further, Bluegreen anticipates that it will continue to add additional resorts to the Bluegreen Vacation Club through its fee-based services business.

 

VOI Exchange Networks, the Bluegreen Traveler Plus Program and Other Strategic Alliances 

Bluegreen believes that its VOIs are made more attractive by Bluegreen’s affiliation with exchange networks, its Traveler Plus™ program and other strategic alliances with third party resort developers. Bluegreen Vacation Club members may participate in the Resort Condominiums International, LLC (“RCI”), an unaffiliated external exchange network. RCI exchange network allows an owner to exchange their annual VOI for occupancy at over 4,000

---

 

participating resorts located throughout the world in over 100 countries, based upon availability and the payment of a variable exchange fee. The annual membership fees of RCI are included in the Bluegreen Vacation Club dues. In 2012, approximately 8% of Bluegreen’s owners utilized the RCI exchange network for an exchange of two or more nights. Most of the Bluegreen Club Resorts are rated in one of the two highest categories by RCI (Gold Crown and Silver Crown). Bluegreen also has a joint venture with Shell Vacation Club (“Shell”), an unaffiliated privately-held resort developer called Select Connections™.  Select Connections™ provides Bluegreen Vacation Club owners who purchased or upgraded their VOI since July 1, 2007, with the ability to use their vacation points to reserve accommodations in approximately 23 Shell locations for a nominal fee.  The Select Connections joint venture also provides members of Shell access to certain Bluegreen Vacation Club resorts.

 

Bluegreen Vacation Club members, for an additional annual fee, may also participate in the Bluegreen Traveler Plus™ program, which allows them to use their points for a variety of hotel stays, RV site stays within the “Coast to Coast” network, or various cruise vacations.

 

No assurance can be given that Bluegreen’s resorts will continue to participate in the RCI or Select Connections™ exchange networks, or that Bluegreen’s customers will continue to be satisfied with these networks.  Bluegreen’s failure or the failure of any of its resorts to participate in qualified exchange networks, or the failure of such networks to operate effectively could have a material adverse effect on Bluegreen.

 

Further, in January, 2013, Bluegreen entered into multi-year strategic alliance agreements with Choice Hotels International Inc. (“Choice”). Choice currently franchises approximately 6,200 hotels in the United States and more than 30 foreign countries and territories and its brands include Comfort Inn, Comfort Suites, Quality, Sleep Inn, Clarion, Cambria Suites, MainStay Suites, Suburban Extended Stay Hotel, Econo Lodge and Rodeway Inn. Subject to the terms and conditions of the agreements, including specified timelines, these agreements, among other things, to brand 21 Bluegreen Vacation Club resorts as part of the Choice Hotels Ascend^TM Hotel Collection, a network of historic, boutique and unique hotels in the United States, Canada, Scandinavia and Latin America. Additionally, the components of the Choice Hotels loyalty program, Choice Privileges®, will be combined with the Bluegreen Traveler Plus™ program, which will allow Traveler Plus™ participants to enroll as members of Choice Privileges® and to be upgraded to Elite Gold status to receive special benefits, and to convert their Bluegreen Vacation Club Points into Choice Privileges® Points, to use for stays at participating Choice hotels. Additionally, all Bluegreen Vacations’ Club members will be eligible to access discounted rates at all 6,200 Choice hotels, subject to availability.  See below for a description of Bluegreen’s marketing and sales arrangements with Choice.

 

No assurance can be given that Bluegreen’s resorts will continue to participate in the RCI or Select Connections™ exchange networks, or that Bluegreen’s customers will continue to be satisfied with these networks or the Bluegreen Traveler Plus™ program.  In addition, Bluegreen’s relationship with Choice may not be received favorably by its customers or have a positive impact on its operating results and financial condition.  Bluegreen’s failure or the failure of any of its resorts to participate in qualified exchange networks or other strategic alliances, or the failure of such networks or other strategic alliances to operate effectively could have a material adverse effect on Bluegreen.

 

Marketing and Sale of Inventory 

 

Bluegreen Resorts uses a variety of methods to attract prospective purchasers of VOIs, including selling discount vacation packages either face-to-face or through telemarketing efforts to consumers Bluegreen meets in connection with various marketing alliances (as discussed in greater detail below), acquiring the right to market to prospective purchasers from third-party vendors, and referrals of prospective purchasers from existing VOI owners. Bluegreen Resorts sometimes provides hotel accommodations or accommodations in one of its resorts to prospective purchasers at reduced rates in exchange for their touring one of Bluegreen’s resorts.

 

Additionally, Bluegreen offers a sampler program, which allows purchasers of this product to enjoy substantially the same accommodations  offered to Bluegreen Vacation Club members during a trial period, which is generally one or two years. Bluegreen believes that it benefits from the sampler program as it gives Bluegreen an opportunity to market its VOIs to customers when they use their trial memberships at Bluegreen’s resorts and to recapture a portion of the costs incurred in connection with the initial marketing to prospective customers.

 

---

 

In addition to attracting new customers, Bluegreen seeks to sell VOIs to our existing VOI owners (“owner sales”). Owner sales generally have lower marketing costs and typically result in relatively higher operating margins than sales generated through other marketing channels. During 2012, owner sales accounted for 58% of our system-wide sales.

 

In recent years, Bluegreen has focused on increasing Bluegreen Resorts’ use of “permission” marketing and branding programs. “Permission” marketing methods involve obtaining the prospective purchasers’ permission, directly or indirectly, to contact them in the future regarding an offer to purchase a product or service. Branding involves forming alliances with third-party entities that possess what Bluegreen believes to be a nationally or regionally known brand name, a good reputation and a customer base with similar demographic characteristics to Bluegreen’s target market.

 

One of Bluegreen’s wholly-owned subsidiaries has a joint venture arrangement with Big Cedar, LLC (“Big Cedar”), an affiliate of Bass Pro, Inc. (“Bass Pro”). Bluegreen’s subsidiary owns 51% of the limited liability company joint venture (the “Joint Venture”), and Big Cedar owns the remaining 49%. The Joint Venture develops, markets, and sells VOIs at the Bluegreen Wilderness Club at Big Cedar, a wilderness-themed resort adjacent to the Big Cedar Lodge, a luxury hotel resort owned by Big Cedar, on the shores of Table Rock Lake in Ridgedale, Missouri. The Joint Venture also develops, markets, and sells timeshare interests in The Cliffs at Long Creek and, in October 2011, the Joint Venture began marketing and selling timeshare interests in its newest resort, Paradise Point Resort, also located in close proximity to the Big Cedar Resort. The Joint Venture pays Big Cedar a fee upon sales of certain timeshare interests for promotional, marketing and advertising services.

 

Bluegreen has an exclusive marketing agreement with Bass Pro, which was extended through January 2025. Bass Pro is a privately-held retailer of fishing, marine, hunting, camping and sports gear. Pursuant to the agreement, we have the right to market VOIs at each of Bass Pro’s retail locations.  As of December 31, 2012, Bluegreen marketed VOIs in 55 of Bass Pro’s stores.  Under the agreement, Bluegreen also has the right to market VOIs in Bass Pro’s catalogs and on its web site, and Bluegreen has access to Bass Pro’s customer lists. In exchange, Bluegreen compensates Bass Pro based on the overall success of these marketing activities. The amount of compensation is dependent on the level of additional marketing efforts required by Bluegreen to convert the prospect into a sale and a defined time frame for such marketing efforts. No compensation is paid to Bass Pro on sales made by Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations of its VOIs in accordance with the agreement.  Bluegreen makes an annual prepayment to Big Cedar by January of each year. The prepayment is an advance payment for anticipated commissions equal to 100% of the amount of commissions estimated to be generated during the upcoming year, as determined by Bluegreen and Big Cedar, not to exceed $5.0 million. No additional commissions are paid to Big Cedar during any year, until the annual prepayment for that year has been fully earned. In 2012, 2011 and 2010, Bluegreen incurred Bass Pro-related marketing expenses of approximately $4.2 million, $3.9 million, and $2.9 million, respectively.

 

In January, 2013 Bluegreen entered into a multi-year strategic relationship with Choice, as further described above. This relationship impacts several areas of Bluegreen’s business and, while there is no assurance as to the success of the relationship, it includes a sales and marketing alliance component which Bluegreen believes will enable Bluegreen to leverage Choice’s brands, customer relationships and marketing channels to market its VOI offerings, for specified payments and subject to specified terms and conditions.

 

Bluegreen’s sales offices are located adjacent to certain of Bluegreen’s resorts and are staffed with sales representatives and sales managers, all of whom are Bluegreen employees. Bluegreen sponsors ongoing training for its personnel. During the year ended December 31, 2012, Bluegreen’s selling and marketing expense was $167.2 million, or 45% of the system-wide sales of VOIs, net, of $376.0 million (including sales of VOIs on behalf of third parties).

 

It is Bluegreen’s policy to require its sales staff to provide each VOI customer with a written disclosure statement regarding the VOI to be sold prior to the time the customer signs a purchase agreement. The purpose of this disclosure statement is to provide relevant information regarding VOI ownership at the resort and membership in the Bluegreen Vacation Club. Pursuant to Bluegreen’s policies, the statement must be signed by every purchaser. Purchasers are entitled to cancel purchase agreements within required legal rescission periods after execution in accordance with statutory requirements. Substantially all VOI purchasers visit one of Bluegreen’s sales offices prior to or at the time of purchasing.

 

---

 

Customer Financing

 

Bluegreen offers financing of up to 90% of the purchase price of its VOIs to Bluegreen’sVOI customers who meet certain FICO^® score-based underwriting standards. The typical financing extended by Bluegreen on a VOI during the year ended December 31, 2012 provided for a term of 10 years and a fixed interest rate. However, Bluegreen also encourages purchasers to finance their purchase with a loan having a shorter term by offering a lower interest rate. In connection with its VOI sales, Bluegreen delivers the property deed to the trustee of the Bluegreen Vacation Club on behalf of the purchaser and secures repayment of the purchaser’s obligation by obtaining a mortgage on the purchaser’s VOI.

 

Purchasers of VOIs are required to make a down payment of at least 10% of the VOI sales price. As part of Bluegreen’s continued efforts to improve its operating cash flows, beginning in 2009, Bluegreen began incentivizing its sales associates to encourage cash sales, and Bluegreen promoted a point-of-sale credit card program with a third party bank.  As a result, Bluegreen has increased both the percentage of its sales that are 100% cash and its average down payment on financed sales. Including down payments received on financed sales, 53% of Bluegreen’s sales during the year ended December 31, 2012 were paid in cash within approximately 30 days from the contract date.

 

See “Products and Services – Vacation Ownership” above for more information about the demographic profile of Bluegreen’s typical customer. See “Sales of Receivables/Pledging of Receivables” below for information regarding Bluegreen’s receivable financing activities.

 

Loan Underwriting

 

Prior to December 15, 2008, Bluegreen’s VOI financing was not subject to any significant loan underwriting criteria and no FICO^® score was obtained prior to extending credit. Instead, customer financing on sales of VOIs typically only required the following: (i) receipt of a minimum down payment of 10% of the purchase price; (ii) a note and mortgage (or deed of trust); and (iii) other closing documents by the purchaser and the company.

 

Effective December 15, 2008, Bluegreen implemented a FICO^® score-based credit underwriting program. Following implementation, Bluegreen no longer provided financing to customers with FICO^® scores below 500 and new customers with FICO^® scores between 500 and 599 were required to make a minimum cash down payment of 20%. Effective January 1, 2010, Bluegreen further increased its credit underwriting standards such that Bluegreen no longer provides financing to customers with FICO^® scores below 575. For loans with an outstanding balance as of December 31, 2012 that were originated from December 15, 2008 through December 31, 2009, FICO^® scores at the point of sale reflected a weighted average of 706.  For loans with an outstanding balance as of December 31, 2012 that were originated from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2012, FICO^® scores at the point of sale reflected a weighted average of 713. Further information is set forth in the following table:

 

 

 

Bluegreen encourages purchasers to make higher down payments and accept shorter loan period terms by offering lower interest rates.  In addition, where permitted under applicable laws rules and regulations, buyers get a 1% discount in the interest rate by participating in Bluegreen’s pre-authorized checking payment plan.  As of December 31, 2012, approximately 90% of Bluegreen’s serviced VOI notes receivable were on its pre-authorized payment plan. 

---

 

 

Effective November 1, 2008, Bluegreen increased the interest rates charged on new loans.  Bluegreen believes that the weighted-average interest rate on its portfolio will increase over time, as the lower-interest rate older loans continue to amortize down.  The weighted-average interest rate on Bluegreen’s VOI notes receivable was as follows:

 

 

 

 

Collection Policies

 

Financed sales of VOIs originated by Bluegreen typically utilize a note and mortgage. Collection efforts related to the timeshare loans are managed by Bluegreen and are handled by a staff of experienced collectors, assisted by a mortgage collection computer system. Bluegreen’s collectors are incentivized through a performance-based compensation program. Technological capabilities include, but are not limited to, automated lock box and clearing house processing. The goal of Bluegreen’s collection policy is designed to minimize defaults and delinquencies and maximize cash flow, subject to limitations as may be imposed by lenders who hold security interests in such loans or by other note issuers who acquire such loans.

 

Bluegreen generally makes collection efforts to customers by mail and by telephone. Telephone contact generally commences when an account is as few as 10 days past due. At 30 days past due, a collection letter is sent to U.S. residents advising the customer that if the loan is not brought current, the delinquency will be reported to the credit reporting agencies. At 60 days delinquent, Bluegreen sends a lockout letter to the customer by regular and registered/certified mail advising that they cannot make any future reservations for lodging at a resort. If the delinquency continues, at 90 days past due, Bluegreen stops the accrual of, and reverses previously accrued, but unpaid, interest on the note receivable and mails by regular and registered/certified mail a “Notice of Intent to Cancel Membership,” which informs the customer that unless the delinquency is cured within 30 days, Bluegreen will terminate the customer’s VOI ownership. If the customer fails to respond to the correspondence within the given timeframe, the loan will be defaulted and the customer’s VOI terminated. In that case, Bluegreen sends a final letter by regular mail and registered/certified mail to notify the customer of the loan default and the termination of the customer’s beneficial interest in the timeshare property. Thereafter, Bluegreen seeks to resell the VOI to a new purchaser. Historically, Bluegreen has typically not sought to collect a deficiency on defaulted promissory notes.

 

Allowance for Credit Losses

 

The following table summarizes our allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 (dollars in thousands):

 

---

 

 

 

 

Under timeshare accounting rules, Bluegreen estimates uncollectibles based on historical uncollectibles for similar VOI notes receivable and does not consider the value of the underlying collateral. Bluegreen holds large amounts of homogeneous VOI notes receivable and assesses uncollectibility based on pools of receivables. In estimating future credit losses, Bluegreen does not use a single primary indicator of credit quality but instead evaluates its VOI notes based upon a combination of factors, including a static pool analysis, the aging of the respective receivables, current default trends and prepayment rates by origination year, as well as the FICO^® scores of the borrower.

 

Substantially all defaulted vacation ownership notes receivable result in the holder of the note receivable acquiring the related VOI that secured the note receivable, typically soon after default and at little or no cost. The reacquired VOI is then resold in the normal course of business.

 

See “Item 7 - Bluegreen’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for additional information about the performance of Bluegreen’s notes receivable portfolio.

 

Sales of Receivables/Pledging of Receivables

 

Bluegreen’s ability to sell or borrow against its VOI notes receivable has historically been a critical factor in meeting its liquidity requirements. The vacation ownership business generally involves making sales of a vacation product where a buyer is only required to pay a minimum of 10% to 20% of the purchase price up front, while at the same time selling, marketing and administrative expenses are primarily cash expenses. For the year ended December 31, 2012, these expenses approximated 51% of system-wide sales, net. Accordingly, having facilities for the sale or hypothecation of these vacation ownership receivables, along with periodic term securitization transactions, has been a critical factor to Bluegreen in meeting its short- and long-term cash needs.

 

Bluegreen’s vacation ownership receivables purchase facilities and term securitizations typically utilize an owner’s trust structure whereby Bluegreen sells receivables to a wholly-owned, special purpose finance entity which then sells the receivables to an owner’s trust, typically without recourse to Bluegreen or its subsidiaries, except for breaches of certain representations and warranties at the time of sale. While in limited instances, such as the Legacy Securitization described below where Bluegreen has entered into guarantees in connection with its vacation ownership receivables purchase facilities or term securitizations, historically, Bluegreen has typically not entered into such guarantees. These facilities usually have detailed requirements with respect to the eligibility of receivables for purchase, and fundings

---

 

under these facilities are typically subject to certain conditions precedent. Under such purchase facilities, a variable purchase price of a portion of the principal balance of the receivables sold, subject to certain terms and conditions, is paid at closing in cash. The balance of the purchase price is deferred until such time as the purchaser of Bluegreen’s vacation ownership receivables has received a specified return and all servicing, custodial, agent and similar fees and expenses have been paid and, if applicable, a specified overcollateralization ratio is achieved and a cash reserve account is fully funded. Bluegreen’s vacation ownership receivables purchase facilities typically include various conditions to purchase, covenants, trigger events and other provisions Bluegreen believes to be customary for these types of transactions. Bluegreen has historically acted as servicer of the vacation ownership receivables Bluegreen has sold under these purchase facilities for a fee.  See “Item 7- Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for additional information regarding Bluegreen’s vacation ownership receivables purchase facilities and term securitizations, including the Legacy Securitization.

 

Receivables Servicing

 

Receivables servicing includes collecting payments from borrowers and remitting the funds to the owners, lenders or investors in such receivables, accounting for principal and interest on such receivables, making advances when required, contacting delinquent borrowers, terminating a membership in the Bluegreen Vacation Club in the event that defaults are not remedied, and performing other administrative duties.

 

Bluegreen receives mortgage servicing fees for servicing its securitized notes receivable which are included as a component of interest income.  Additionally, Bluegreen records servicing fee income that it earns from third-party lenders in connection with its servicing of their loan portfolio under its fee-based services arrangements. 

 

Trademarks

 

The terms “Bluegreen®,” “Bluegreen Communities®,” “Bluegreen Getaway Station®,” “Bluegreen Resorts®,” “Bluegreen Vacation Club®,” “Bluegreen Wilderness Club™ at Big Cedar®,” “Colorful Places to Play®,” “Colorful Places To Live And Play®,”  “LeisurePath®,” “You’re Going To Like What You See!®,” “Encore Rewards®,” “Outdoor Traveler Logo®,” “Outdoor Traveler Destinations logo®,” “Great Vacations Destinations®,” and “Select Connections®” are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Bluegreen Corporation.

 

The terms “The Hammocks  at Marathon™,”  “Orlando’s Sunshine Resort™,” “Solara Surfside™,” “Mountain Run at Boyne™,” “The Falls Village™,” “Bluegreen Wilderness Club™,” “Grande Villas at World Golf Village™,” “The Lodge Alley Inn™,” “Carolina Grande™,” “Harbour Lights™,” “BG Patrick Henry Square™,” “SeaGlass Tower™,” “Shore Crest Vacation Villas™,” “Laurel Crest™,” “MountainLoft™,” “MountainLoft Resort II™,”  “Daytona SeaBreeze™,” “Shenandoah Crossing™,” “Christmas Mountain Village™,” “Club La Pension™,” “Bluegreen Odyssey Dells™,” “Encore Dividends™,” “Bluegreen Preferred™,” “BG Pirates Lodge™,” “Bluegreen Traveler Plus™,” “BG Club 36™,” “The Cliffs™ at Long Creek,” “Bluegreen Wilderness Traveler at Shenandoah™,” “Outdoor Traveler Destinations™,” “Prizzma™,” “Prizzma The Fun Exchange™,” “Bluegreenaxis™,” “Bluegreen Getaways™,” “Bluegreen Vacations™,” “Bluegreen Share Happiness™,” “Bluegreen Vacations Share Happiness™,” “Hospitality Happens Here™, Monaire™,” and “BluegreenVacations Logo™,” are trademarks or service marks of Bluegreen Corporation in the United States.

 

The terms “Big Cedar®” and “Bass Pro Shops®” are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Bass Pro Trademarks, LP.  The term “World Golf Village®” is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by World Golf Foundation, Inc.  All other marks are registered marks of their respective owners.

 

Market and Industry Data

 

Market and industry data pertaining to Bluegreen and its business contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K pertaining to Bluegreen was obtained from Bluegreen’s internal surveys, industry publications, unpublished industry data and estimates, discussions with industry sources and currently available information.  The sources for this data include, without limitation, the American Resort Development Association.  Industry publications generally state that the information contained therein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but there can be no assurance as to the accuracy and completeness of such information. Bluegreen has not independently verified such market data.  Similarly, Bluegreen’s internal surveys, while believed to be reliable, have not been verified by any independent sources.  Accordingly, such data may not prove to be accurate.

---

 

 

BBX Capital

 

BFC owns shares of BBX Capital’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock representing approximately 53% of the outstanding shares of such stock and 75% of the total voting power of BBX Capital. BBX Capital is a Florida-based company involved in the ownership, investment, financing and management of real estate and real estate related assets and businesses.  Prior to the sale of BankAtlantic on July 31, 2012, BBX Capital was a bank holding company and its principal asset was its 100% ownership interest in BankAtlantic, a federal savings bank.  As previously described, BBX Capital sold BankAtlantic to BB&T during July 2012. 

 

Following the BankAtlantic Sale, the principal assets of BBX Capital consist of its interest in FAR, CAM and BBX Partners, Inc. CAM, which was formed in connection with the BankAtlantic Sale, and BBX Partners are wholly owned subsidiaries of BBX Capital and their primary assets are non-performing commercial loans and real estate owned.  The results of CAM and BBX Partners are included within the BBX segment.  FAR, which was also formed in connection with the BankAtlantic Sale and is a separate reporting segment, is a special purpose limited liability company the membership interests in which, as previously described, are held by BB&T, which holds 95% of FAR’s preferred interests, and BBX Capital, which holds the remaining 5% of the preferred interests and all of the residual common equity interests.  FAR’s primary assets are performing and non-performing loans, tax certificates and real estate owned (formerly held by BankAtlantic). As previously described, it is contemplated that BBX Capital will invest $71.75 million in BFC’s Woodbridge subsidiary in connection with the financing of Woodbridge’s acquisition of Bluegreen and, in exchange, BBX Capital will receive a 46% equity interest in Woodbridge.

 

Loan Products and Tax Certificates

 

BankAtlantic historically offered a number of lending products. BankAtlantic’s lending products were grouped in five loan segments as follows:   residential loans, commercial real estate loans, consumer loans, and small business and commercial non-mortgage loans.  BBX retained loans from the commercial real estate and the commercial non-mortgage loan segments.  FAR retained loans from all five segments.

 

Residential:    Purchased residential loans were acquired in the secondary markets and were originated by financial institutions. These loans, which are serviced by independent servicers, are secured by properties located throughout the United States. Residential loans were typically purchased in bulk and were generally non-conforming loans under agency guidelines due primarily to the size of the individual loans (“jumbo loans”). Some of the purchased residential loans were interest-only loans. These loans result in possible future increases in a borrower’s loan payments when the contractually required repayments increase due to interest rate adjustments or when required amortization of the principal amount commences.  These payment increases could affect a borrower’s ability to repay the loan and result in increased defaults and losses.

 

Commercial Real Estate: Commercial real estate loans were originated in connection with the acquisition, development and construction of various types of properties including office buildings, retail shopping centers, residential construction and other non-residential properties.  Commercial real estate loans were also originated to acquire or refinance existing income-producing properties. These loans were primarily secured by property located in Florida. Due to high concentrations of non-performing and adversely classified commercial real estate and construction loans in the loan portfolio, BankAtlantic generally ceased the origination of commercial real estate loans during the year ended December 31, 2010.

 

The commercial real estate loan portfolio is divided into four loan classes: commercial residential, commercial owner occupied, commercial land, and commercial other.  

 

Commercial residential real estate loans resulted in significant losses. These loans were originated to developers or home builders for the construction of one to four dwelling units. This class of loans is divided into three categories:  builder land bank loans; land acquisition and development loans; and land acquisition, development and construction loans. The builder land bank loan category consists of land loans to borrowers who had land purchase option agreements with regional and/or national builders. The land acquisition and development loan category consists of loans secured by residential land which was intended to be developed by the borrower and sold to homebuilders.  The land acquisition, development and construction loan category consists of loans secured by residential land which was intended to be fully developed by the borrower/developer who also may have had plans to construct homes on the property.

 

---

 

Commercial real estate owner occupied loans are also real estate collateralized loans; however, the primary source of repayment is the cash flow from the business operated on the premises of the property serving as collateral.   

 

Commercial real estate land loans include loans secured by commercial land held for sale or held for investment purposes.  These loans are generally to borrowers who intend to expand the zoning of the property and ultimately sell the property to developers. 

 

Commercial other real estate loans are primarily secured by income producing property which includes shopping centers, office buildings, self-storage facilities, and warehouses. 

 

A percentage of certain commercial real estate loans were sold to other financial institutions as participations.  The loans are administered by BBX Capital or on its behalf by a third party servicer and participants are provided periodic reports on the progress of the project for which the loan was made. Major decisions regarding the loans are made by the participants on either a majority or unanimous basis. As a result, BBX Capital generally cannot significantly modify the loans without either majority or unanimous consent of the participants.

 

Standby Letters of Credit and Commitments:  Standby letters of credit were conditional commitments issued by BankAtlantic to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party.  The credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is the same as extending loans to customers. BankAtlantic may have held certificates of deposit, liens on corporate assets and liens on residential and commercial property as collateral for letters of credit.  BankAtlantic issued commitments for commercial real estate and commercial non-mortgage loans.  BBX Capital had no standby letters of credit or commitments as of December 31, 2012.

 

Commercial non-mortgage loans: These loans are generally business loans secured by the receivables, inventory, equipment, and/or general corporate assets of the borrowers.  These loans generally have variable interest rates that are Prime or LIBOR based and are typically originated for terms ranging from one to five years.

 

Consumer: Consumer loans consist primarily of loans to individuals originated through BankAtlantic’s retail network.  The majority of consumer loans are home equity lines of credit secured by a first or second mortgage on the primary residence of the borrower, substantially all of which are located in Florida.

 

Small Business:  BankAtlantic originated small business loans to companies located primarily in markets within BankAtlantic’s branch network.  Small business loans were primarily originated on a secured basis and do not generally exceed $2.0 million. These loans were generally originated with maturities ranging from one to three years or are due upon demand.  Lines of credit extended to small businesses are due upon demand.  Small business loans have either fixed or variable prime-based interest rates. 

 

Tax certificates:  Tax certificates are evidences of real property tax obligations that are sold through auctions or bulk sales by various state and local taxing authorities.  A tax obligation arises when the property owner fails to timely pay the real estate taxes on the property. Certain municipalities bulk sale their entire tax certificates for the prior year by auctioning the portfolio to the highest bidder instead of auctioning each certificate separately. Tax certificates represent a priority lien against the real property for the delinquent real estate taxes.  The minimum repayment to satisfy the lien is the certificate amount plus the interest accrued through the redemption date, plus applicable penalties, fees and costs. Tax certificates have no payment schedule or stated maturity.  If the certificate holder does not file for the deed within established time frames, the certificate may become null and void and lose its value.

 

BBX Capital’s Business Strategy 

 

BBX Capital’s primary business activities relate to:

 

 

BBX Capital is engaged in the management of its assets and investments.  I currently intends to invest in income producing real estate, real estate developments and real estate joint ventures and to invest in middle market operating businesses.  BBX Capital is seeking to balance its cash needs and the timing of monetizing its existing assets with new investments to maximize BBX Capital’s returns.  In some cases, this may involve immediate sale and in other cases a

---

 

longer term hold or development (either directly or with a joint venture partner).  As previously indicated, BBX Capital has committed approximately $71.75 ($60.0 million of cash and a $11.75 million note) to acquire an approximately 46% interest in Woodbridge in connection with Woodbridge’s proposed acquisition of all of the outstanding capital stock of Bluegreen not owned by it.  BBX anticipates funding investments and operations through the monetization of CAM and BBX Partners assets, cash flows from its 5% preferred interest in FAR, returns from its investments, such as dividends from its proposed investment in Woodbridge, borrowings and through joint venture partners or solicitation of funds from investors.

 

 

BBX Segment

 

BBX’s primary assets are loans receivable, real estate owned and real estate properties held for sale or development (either directly or through joint ventures) and rights to BankAtlantic’s previously charged off loan portfolio and related judgments which were transferred to BBX Capital in connection with the consummation of the BankAtlantic Sale.

 

The composition of BBX’s loan portfolio was (in thousands): 

 

 

 

 

The composition of BBX’s foreclosed real estate portfolio was as follows (in thousands):

 

 

 

FAR Segment

 

FAR’s operations consists of overseeing the management and monetization of its assets through regularly scheduled payments and, where appropriate, orderly liquidations with a view to repaying its priority preferred interest holder and maximizing the cash flows of any remaining assets.  FAR’s assets consist primarily of loans receivable and real estate owned.  FAR also holds a portfolio of tax certificates with a net investment of $3.4 million at December 31, 2012.

 

---

 

The composition of FAR’s foreclosed real estate portfolio as of December 31, 2012 was (in thousands): 

 

 

 

The composition of FAR’s real estate properties as of December 31, 2012 was (in thousands): 

 

 

 

Employees

 

Management believes that its relations with its employees are satisfactory. The Company currently maintains employee benefit programs that are considered by management to be generally competitive with programs provided by other major employers in its markets.

 

As of December 31, 2012, the Company and its subsidiaries had approximately 4,445 employees, with 25 employees at BFC and its wholly owned subsidiaries; 33 employees at BBX Capital; and 4,387 employees at Bluegreen, of which 410 were located at Bluegreen’s headquarters in Boca Raton, Florida, and 3,977 were located in regional field offices throughout the United States, Canada and Aruba.  

 

Competition

 

Bluegreen

 

Bluegreen Resorts competes with various high profile and well-established operators, many of which have greater liquidity and financial resources than Bluegreen. Many of the world’s most recognized lodging, hospitality and entertainment companies develop and sell VOIs in resort properties. Major companies that now operate or are developing or planning to develop vacation ownership resorts directly or through subsidiaries include Marriott

---

 

Vacations Worldwide Corp., the Walt Disney Company, Hilton Hotels Corporation, Hyatt Corporation, Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide, Inc. and Wyndham Worldwide Corporation. Bluegreen also competes with numerous other smaller owners and operators of vacation ownership resorts. In Bluegreen’s fee-based services business, Bluegreen typically competes with Hilton Hotels Corporation, Wyndham Worldwide Corporation and Diamond Resorts International. In addition to competing for sales leads, prospects and fee-based service clients, Bluegreen competes with other VOI developers for marketing, sales, and resort management personnel.

 

BBX Capital

 

The real estate industry is very competitive and the real estate industry has been in a recession for a prolonged period of time.  BBX Capital faces substantial competition from insurance companies, financial institutions, private equity and hedge funds and real estate developers.   BBX Capital competes with institutions and entities that are larger and have greater resources than the resources available to BBX Capital. 

 

Regulation

 

BFC and BBX Capital

 

As a result of their respective historic direct and indirect ownership interests in BankAtlantic, both BBX Capital and BFC were unitary savings and loan holding companies subject to examination and regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”).  As a result of the sale of BankAtlantic, effective July 31, 2012, BBX Capital and BFC were released from registration as savings and loan holding companies.  As such, both BBX Capital and BFC are no longer subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve or restrictions applicable to financial institution holding companies.  

 

Bluegreen

 

The vacation ownership and real estate industries are subject to extensive and complex federal, state, and local governmental regulation. Bluegreen is subject to various federal, state, local and foreign environmental, zoning, consumer protection and other statutes and regulations regarding the acquisition, subdivision, marketing and sale of real estate and VOIs and various aspects of its financing operations. On a federal level, the Federal Trade Commission has taken an active regulatory role through the Federal Trade Commission Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or unfair competition in interstate commerce. In addition, many states have what are known as “Little FTC Acts” that apply to intrastate activity. In addition to the laws applicable to Bluegreen’s customer financing and other operations discussed below, Bluegreen is or may be subject to the Fair Housing Act and various other federal statutes and regulations. Bluegreen is also subject to various foreign laws with respect to La Cabana Beach and Racquet Club in Oranjestad, Aruba and Blue Water Resort in Nassau, Bahamas. In addition, in the future, VOIs may be deemed to be securities subject to regulation as such, which could have a material adverse effect on Bluegreen. The cost of complying with applicable laws and regulations may be significant and Bluegreen may not maintain compliance at all times with all applicable laws, including those discussed below. Any failure to comply with current or future applicable laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on Bluegreen.

 

Bluegreen’s vacation ownership resorts are subject to various regulatory requirements, including state and local approvals. The laws of most states require Bluegreen to file a detailed offering statement describing its business and all material aspects of the project and sale of VOIs with a designated state authority. In addition, when required by state law, Bluegreen provides its VOI purchasers with a public disclosure statement that contains, among other items, detailed information about the surrounding vicinity, the resort and the purchaser’s rights and obligations as a VOI owner.  Laws in each state where Bluegreen sells VOIs generally grant the purchaser of a VOI the right to cancel a purchase contract at any time within a specified rescission period following the earlier of the date the contract was signed or the date the purchaser has received the last of the documents required to be provided by Bluegreen. Most states have other laws that regulate Bluegreen’s activities, including: real estate licensure; sellers of travel licensure; anti-fraud laws; telemarketing laws; prize, gift and sweepstakes laws; and labor laws.  

 

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, the owner of real property generally is liable for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous or toxic substances located on or in, or emanating from, the property, as well as related costs of investigation and property damage. These laws often impose such liability without regard to whether the owner knew of the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. The presence of these substances, or the failure to properly remediate these substances if they exist, may adversely affect the owner’s ability to sell or lease a property or to borrow using the real property as collateral. Other federal and state laws require the

---

 

removal or encapsulation of asbestos-containing material when this material is in poor condition or in the event of construction, demolition, remodeling or renovation. Other statutes may require the removal of underground storage tanks. Noncompliance with these and other environmental, health or safety requirements may result in the need to cease or alter operations at a property. In addition, certain state and local laws may impose liability on property developers with respect to construction defects discovered on the property or repairs made by future owners of such property. Under these laws, Bluegreen may be required to pay for repairs to the developed property.  The development, management and operation of its resorts are also subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act.

 

Bluegreen’s customer financing activities are also subject to extensive regulation, which can include, but are not limited to: the Truth-in-Lending Act and Regulation Z; the Fair Housing Act; the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act; the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B; the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and Regulation E; the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and Regulation C; Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices and Regulation AA; the Patriot Act; the Right to Financial Privacy Act; the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act; the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act; and anti-money laundering laws.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2012, approximately 10% of Bluegreen’s VOI sales were generated by marketing to prospective purchasers obtained through internal and affiliated telemarketing efforts. In addition, approximately 8% of Bluegreen’s VOI sales were generated by marketing to prospective purchasers obtained from third-party VOI prospect vendors, many of whom use telemarketing operations to generate these prospects. Bluegreen attempts to monitor the actions and compliance of these third parties but there are risks associated with their use. In recent years, state regulators have increased regulations and enforcement actions related to telemarketing operations, including requiring the adherence to state “do not call” laws. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission have implemented national “do not call” legislation. These measures have significantly increased the costs associated with telemarketing. While Bluegreen continues to be subject to telemarketing risks and potential liability, Bluegreen believes that its exposure to adverse impacts from this heightened telemarketing legislation and enforcement may be mitigated to some extent by the use of “permission marketing,” whereby Bluegreen obtains the permission of prospective purchasers to contact them in the future, thereby exempting such calls from the various “do not call” laws. Bluegreen has also implemented policies and procedures which it believes will help reduce the possibility that individuals who have requested to be placed on Bluegreen’s internal company do not call list are not contacted, but such policies and procedures may not be effective in ensuring strict regulatory compliance.

 

To date, Bluegreen has not been subject to any material fines or penalties as a result of its telemarketing operations.  However, from time to time Bluegreen has been the subject of proceedings for violation of the “do not call” laws and for violation of state laws applicable to the marketing and sale of VOIs.  Bluegreen may not be able to efficiently or effectively market to prospective purchasers through telemarketing operations in the future or successfully develop alternative sources of prospective purchasers of its VOI products at acceptable costs. In addition, Bluegreen may face significant non-compliance issues or additional costs of compliance, which may adversely impact its operations in the future.

 

Additional Information

 

As public companies, BFC, BBX Capital and Bluegreen are each subject to reporting and other requirements of the Exchange Act.  As previously described, if BFC’s proposed merger with Bluegreen is completed, Bluegreen’s common stock will no longer be publicly traded and will be deregistered under the Exchange Act.

 

See also Item 1A – Risk Factors for a description of risks with respect to regulatory compliance and Item 3 – Legal Proceedings for a description of pending regulatory actions.

 

---

 

 

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

 

We are subject to various risks and uncertainties relating to or arising out of the nature of our business and investments, and general business, economic, financing, legal and other factors or conditions that may affect us. Moreover, the Company’s subsidiaries operate in a very competitive, highly regulated and rapidly changing environment.  New risk factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for management to either predict all risk factors or assess the impact of any factor, or combination of factors, on the Company’s and its subsidiaries operations, results and financial condition. 

 

BFC has in the past incurred cash flow deficits at its parent company level which are expected to continue in the future.

 

BFC is engaged in making investments in operating businesses. Historically, BFC, at its parent company level, has not had revenue generating operating activities and has incurred cash flow deficits. BFC expects to continue to incur cash flow deficits for the foreseeable future. BFC has financed operating cash flow deficits with available working capital, issuances of equity or debt securities, and with dividends from its subsidiaries, which BFC has been dependent upon to fund its operations. BFC historically received dividends on the shares of Benihana’s stock that it owned.  As previously described, Benihana was acquired by Safflower in a cash merger during August 2012.  While BFC received cash proceeds in exchange for its shares of Benihana’s common stock in the transaction, BFC no longer holds an investment in Benihana and, accordingly, will not receive dividends in the future from Benihana.  In addition, BBX Capital may not be in a position to pay dividends for the foreseeable future. Bluegreen has historically not paid dividends on its Common Stock and certain of Bluegreen’s credit facilities contain terms which may limit the payment of cash dividends without the lender’s consent or waiver. In addition, any payment of dividends by BBX Capital or Bluegreen requires the declaration of such dividend by the applicable Company’s Board of Directors, and a majority of BBX Capital’s and, currently, Bluegreen’s respective directors are independent under the listing standards of the NYSE.  Further, dividend decisions made by BBX Capital’s and Bluegreen’s respective Boards of Directors are not within BFC’s control, may not be made in BFC’s best interests, and are generally based on, among other things, the applicable company’s operating results, financial condition, cash flow and operating and cash needs. As described in “Item 3 – Legal Proceedings,” among other expenses we incur and payments we make, including quarterly dividend payments of $187,500 on our 5% cumulative preferred stock, we will also be required to make a significant cash payment to former shareholders of Woodbridge who exercised appraisal rights in connection with the 2009 merger between BFC and Woodbridge.  If cash flow is not sufficient to fund BFC’s liquidity needs in the future, it may be forced to reduce operating expenses further, to liquidate some of its investments or to seek to fund its operations from the proceeds of additional equity or debt financing. Such financing may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all, and if BFC is required to liquidate its investments, it may be forced to do so at depressed prices.

 

Adverse conditions and events where BFC’s investments are currently concentrated or in the industries in which its subsidiaries operate could adversely impact its results and future growth.

 

BBX Capital’s business and the real estate collateralizing its commercial real estate loans and home equity loans are concentrated in Florida and have been adversely impacted by the downturn in economic conditions generally and particularly in Florida. In addition, Bluegreen’s operations were adversely impacted by the economic downturn. The impact of the economic downturn, including the persistence or deterioration of adverse economic conditions, natural disasters, including tropical storms and hurricanes, which are prevalent in Florida, or adverse changes in laws or regulations applicable to BFC or the companies in which BFC holds investments could further adversely impact its operating results and financial condition.

 

Dividends and distributions from BFC’s subsidiaries to their respective parent companies may be subject to claims in the future from creditors of the subsidiary.

 

Subsidiaries have in the past and may in the future make dividends or distributions to their parent companies. Dividend payments and other distributions by a subsidiary to its parent company may, in certain circumstances, be subject to claims made by creditors of the subsidiary which made the payment or distribution. Any such claim, if successful, may have a material and adverse impact on the financial condition of the parent company against which the claim was brought.

---

 

 

There are inherent uncertainties involved in estimates, judgments and assumptions used in the preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP. Any changes in estimates, judgments and assumptions used could have a material adverse effect on BFC’s financial position and operating results.

 

The consolidated financial statements included in the periodic reports BFC files with the SEC, including this Annual Report on Form 10-K, are prepared in accordance with GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP involves making estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets (including goodwill and other intangible assets), liabilities and related reserves, revenues, expenses and income. This includes estimates, judgments and assumptions for assessing the amortization/accretion of purchase accounting fair value differences and the future value of goodwill and other intangible assets pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. BFC bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that BFC believes to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. However, estimates, judgments and assumptions are inherently subject to change in the future. As a result, BFC’s estimates, judgments and assumptions may prove to be incorrect and BFC’s actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. If any estimates, judgments or assumptions change in the future, or BFC’s actual results differ from BFC’s estimates or assumptions, BFC may be required to record additional expenses or impairment charges, which would be recorded as a charge against its earnings and could have a material adverse impact on its financial condition and operating results.

 

BFC’s investments in BBX Capital and Bluegreen subject it to equity pricing risks.

 

Because BBX Capital and Bluegreen are consolidated in BFC’s financial statements, the decline in the market price of their stock would not impact BFC’s consolidated financial statements. However, a decline in the market price of BBX Capital’s stock and, until such time, if any, as the proposed merger with Bluegreen is completed, Bluegreen’s stock (which is not assured) would likely have an adverse effect on the market price of BFC’s Class A Common Stock and/or Class B Common Stock. The market price of BFC’s securities is important to its valuation and ability to obtain equity or debt financing.

 

BFC may issue additional securities and incur additional indebtedness at BFC or at its subsidiaries.

 

If BFC’s cash flow is not sufficient to meet its liquidity needs or BFC’s board of directors otherwise determines it to be appropriate, BFC may seek to raise funds in the future through the issuance of debt or equity securities. There is generally no restriction on BFC’s ability to issue debt or equity securities which are pari passu or have a preference over its Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock.  Authorized but unissued shares of BFC’s capital stock are available for issuance from time to time at the discretion of BFC’s board of directors, and any such issuance may be dilutive to BFC’s shareholders.  In addition, any securities issuances in the future by a subsidiary of BFC may dilute BFC’s economic investment or voting interest in that company. See also the risk factor entitled “The terms of BFC’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, which establish fixed relative voting percentages between BFC’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock, may not be well accepted by the market” below. 

 

Further, BFC and its subsidiaries have in the past and may in the future incur significant amounts of debt. Any indebtedness could have several important effects on BFC, including, without limitation, that BFC may be required to use available cash for the payment of principal and interest due on its debt and that the outstanding indebtedness and leverage at BFC or its subsidiaries will impact liquidity and any negative changes in general economic and industry conditions will increase such impact. 

 

Certain members of BFC’s board of directors and certain of BFC’s executive officers are also directors and executive officers of BFC’s affiliates.

 

Alan B. Levan, BFC’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and John E. Abdo, BFC’s Vice Chairman, are also directors and executive officers of BBX Capital and directors of Bluegreen. None of these individuals is obligated to allocate a specific amount of time to the management of BFC, and they may devote more time and attention to the operations of BFC’s affiliates than they devote directly to BFC’s operations. Each of Jarett S. Levan and Seth M. Wise, who serves as an Executive Vice President of BFC and as a member of its board of directors, is an executive officer of BBX Capital and Mr. Jarett Levan is a member of BBX Capital’s board of directors.  Further, John K. Grelle serves as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of both BFC and BBX Capital.  In addition, D. Keith Cobb, a member of BFC’s board of directors, is also a member of the board of directors of BBX Capital.

---

 

 

Alan B. Levan and John E. Abdo’s control position may adversely affect the market price of BFC’s Common Stock.

 

Alan B. Levan, BFC’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and John E. Abdo, BFC’s Vice Chairman, may be deemed to beneficially own shares of BFC’s Common Stock, including shares that may be acquired pursuant to the exercise of stock options, representing approximately 71% of BFC’s total voting power. These shares consist of 12,284,466 shares, or 16%, of BFC’s Class A Common Stock and 6,521,228 shares, or 87%, of BFC’s Class B Common Stock. Additionally, Alan B. Levan and John E. Abdo have agreed to vote their shares of BFC’s Class B Common Stock in favor of the election of the other to BFC’s board of directors for so long as they are willing and able to serve as directors of BFC. Further, John E. Abdo has agreed, subject to certain exceptions, not to transfer certain of his shares of BFC’s Class B Common Stock and to obtain the consent of Alan B. Levan prior to the conversion of certain of his shares of BFC’s Class B Common Stock into shares of BFC’s Class A Common Stock. Since BFC’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock vote as a single class on most matters, Alan B. Levan and John E. Abdo effectively have the voting power to control the outcome of any vote of BFC’s shareholders (except in those limited circumstances where Florida law mandates that the holders of BFC’s Class A Common Stock vote as a separate class) and to elect the members of BFC’s board of directors. Alan B. Levan and John E. Abdo’s control position may have an adverse effect on the market price of BFC’s Common Stock. Alan B. Levan’s and John E. Abdo’s interests may conflict with the interests of BFC’s other shareholders.

 

The loss of the services of BFC’s key management and personnel could adversely affect its business and the businesses of its subsidiaries.

 

BFC’s ability to successfully implement its business strategy will depend on its ability to attract and retain experienced and knowledgeable management and other professional staff. BFC may not be successful in attracting and retaining key management personnel. During January 2012, the SEC filed a lawsuit against BBX Capital and its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Alan B. Levan, alleging violations of securities laws. In addition to injunctive relief and monetary penalties, the complaint seeks an officer and director bar with respect to Mr. Alan Levan. While BBX Capital believes that it and Mr. Levan fully complied with applicable law, the outcome of this litigation is uncertain. See “Item 3 - Legal Proceedings-BBX Capital and its Subsidiaries” for further information regarding this litigation. As described above, Mr. Alan Levan is also the Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of BFC and, together with John E. Abdo, may be deemed to control BFC by virtue of their collective ownership interest in BFC’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock. In the event Mr. Alan Levan is restricted from serving, or is otherwise unable to serve, as an executive officer and/or director of BFC or any of its public company subsidiaries, including BBX Capital and Bluegreen, BFC and its business, as well as the businesses of its subsidiaries, may be adversely impacted. However, BFC believes that any such adverse impact would be mitigated by the continuation of service of BFC’s other executive officers, including Mr. Abdo, who has served as a director of BFC since 1988 and Vice Chairman of BFC since 1993, Seth M. Wise, who has served as a director and Executive Vice President of BFC since 2009 and has been an executive officer of Woodbridge since 2003, and Jarett S. Levan, who has served as a director of BFC since 2009, Executive Vice President of BFC since 2011, director of BBX Capital since 1999 and as President of BBX Capital since 2007.  In addition, as a holding company, BFC’s results are dependent upon the operations and success of its subsidiaries and each subsidiary has executive management in place.

 

BFC’s control position may adversely affect the market price of BBX Capital’s Class A Common Stock and Bluegreen’s Common Stock.

 

As of December 31, 2012, BFC owned all of BBX Capital’s issued and outstanding Class B Common Stock and approximately 8.1 million shares, or approximately 53%, of BBX Capital’s issued and outstanding Class A Common Stock, representing approximately 75% of BBX Capital’s total voting power. Additionally, BFC currently directly or indirectly owns approximately 16.9 million shares, or approximately 54%, of Bluegreen’s issued and outstanding Common Stock. Accordingly, BFC holds a controlling position with respect to BBX Capital and Bluegreen and has the voting power to influence the outcome of any shareholder vote of the companies, except, with respect to BBX Capital, in those limited circumstances where Florida law mandates separate class votes and, with respect to Bluegreen, where Massachusetts law requires a supermajority vote, such as was the case with the currently proposed merger between BFC and Bluegreen. BFC’s control position may have an adverse effect on the market prices of BBX Capital’s Class A Common Stock and Bluegreen’s Common Stock, which as previously described may in turn adversely impact the market price of BFC’s Class A Common Stock or Class B Common Stock.

 

---

 

The terms of BFC’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, which establish fixed relative voting percentages between BFC’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock, may not be well accepted by the market.

 

BFC’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock generally vote together as a single class. The Class A Common Stock possesses in the aggregate 22% of the total voting power of all of BFC’s Common Stock and the Class B Common Stock possesses in the aggregate the remaining 78% of the total voting power. These relative voting percentages will remain fixed unless the number of shares of Class B Common Stock outstanding decreases to 1,800,000 shares, at which time the Class A Common Stock’s aggregate voting power will increase to 40% and the Class B Common Stock will have the remaining 60%. If the number of shares of Class B Common Stock outstanding decreases to 1,400,000 shares, the Class A Common Stock’s aggregate voting power will increase to 53% and the Class B Common Stock will have the remaining 47%. These relative voting percentages will remain fixed unless the number of shares of Class B Common Stock outstanding decreases to 500,000 shares, at which time the fixed voting percentages will be eliminated. Each of these share thresholds will be ratably decreased in connection with the reverse stock split.

 

Changes in the relative voting power represented by each class of BFC’s Common Stock are based only on the number of shares of Class B Common Stock outstanding. Thus, issuances of Class A Common Stock will have no effect on these provisions, and the issuance of additional shares of Class A Common Stock will widen the disparity between the equity interest represented by the Class B Common Stock and its voting power. While the amendment creating this capital structure was approved by BFC’s shareholders, the fixed voting percentage provisions are somewhat unique. If the market does not view this structure favorably, the trading price and market for BFC’s Class A Common Stock would be adversely affected.

 

Pending litigation and legal proceedings and the impact of any finding of liability or damages could adversely impact BFC and its financial condition and operating results.

 

BFC and its subsidiaries are subject to the pending legal proceedings described in “Item 3 - Legal Proceedings” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K as well as proceedings that may arise from time to time. While BFC believes that the parties to these proceedings have meritorious defenses in the pending legal actions, the ultimate outcomes of these matters are uncertain. Judgments against, or damages, fines or penalties imposed on, BFC, its subsidiaries or its officers in these actions, as well as actions which BFC and its subsidiaries may face in the future, may have a material adverse impact on BFC’s operating results and financial condition.

 

BFC is subject to environmental laws related to its real estate activities and the cost of compliance could adversely affect its business.

 

As a current or previous owner or operator of real property, BFC may be liable under federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in the property. These laws often impose liability whether or not BFC knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. The cost of investigating, remediating or removing such hazardous or toxic substances may be substantial.  

 

The proposed merger between BFC and Bluegreen may not be completed on a timely basis, on anticipated terms, or at all, and there are uncertainties and risks to consummating the merger.

 

As previously described, on November 14, 2012, BFC and its Woodbridge subsidiary entered into a definitive merger agreement with Bluegreen  providing for the acquisition of Bluegreen by Woodbridge in a cash merger pursuant to which Bluegreen’s shareholders (other than BFC, directly or indirectly through Woodbridge, and shareholders of Bluegreen who duly exercise appraisal rights in accordance with Massachusetts law) will receive consideration of $10.00 in cash for each share of Bluegreen’s common stock that they hold at the effective time of the merger.  The aggregate merger consideration is expected to be approximately $150 million. 

 

Consolidated class action lawsuits related to the merger are pending in Florida and Massachusetts and seek to enjoin the merger, or if it is completed, to recover relief as determined by the applicable presiding court to be appropriate.  See “Item 3 – Legal Proceedings” for additional information regarding such litigation. In addition to the risks relating to the litigation challenging the merger, including the costs and expenses of defending the actions, the parties may not be able to satisfy all required closing conditions or otherwise complete the merger when expected, on the contemplated terms, or at all, in which case BFC and Bluegreen would have incurred significant transaction costs without consummating the merger.

---

 

 

In addition, other risks and uncertainties faced by BFC and its shareholders with respect to the merger include, without limitation, that:

 

 

 

---

 

 

RISKS RELATED TO BLUEGREEN

Bluegreen is currently a separate public company.   The following discussion, which was included in Bluegreen’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, was prepared by Bluegreen’s management and describes the risks that Bluegreen’s management currently believes to be material to Bluegreen’s operations.   References to the “Company”, “we”, “us” or “our” in the following discussion are references to Bluegreen and its subsidiaries, and are not references to BFC or BBX Capital. 

 

Our business and operations, including our ability to market VOIs, is subject to general economic conditions, as well as interest rates and the availability of financing.

 

Our business has been adversely affected by unfavorable general economic and industry conditions, including high unemployment rates and job insecurity, declines in discretionary spending, housing values and availability of financing, and geopolitical conflicts. If recent recovery trends do not continue or, economic conditions deteriorate, our business and results may be adversely impacted, particularly if financing for us or for our customers is unavailable or if changes in general economic conditions or other factors adversely affect our customers’ ability to pay amounts owed under notes receivable. Further, adverse changes affecting the vacation ownership industry, such as an oversupply of vacation ownership units, a reduction in demand for such units, changes in travel and vacation patterns, changes in governmental regulation of the industry, imposition of increased taxes by governmental authorities, the declaration of bankruptcy and/or credit defaults by other vacation ownership companies and negative publicity for the industry, could also have a material adverse effect on our business.

 

We would incur substantial losses and our liquidity position could be adversely impacted if the customers to whom we provide financing default on their obligations.

 

Prior to December 15, 2008, we did not perform credit checks on the purchasers of our VOIs in connection with our financing of their purchases. Effective December 15, 2008, we implemented a FICO^® score-based credit underwriting program.  We enhanced this credit underwriting program during January 2010. While our loan portfolio originated after December 15, 2008 has to date experienced defaults at a lower rate than loans originated prior to that date, our FICO^® score-based underwriting standards may not continue to result in decreased default rates or otherwise result in the improved performance of our notes receivable. Adverse conditions in the mortgage industry, including credit sources as well as borrowers’ financial profiles, and other factors outside our control may increase the default rates we experience or otherwise negatively impact the performance of our notes receivable. As of December 31, 2012, approximately 4% of our VOI notes receivable were more than 30 days past due. Although in many cases we may have recourse against a buyer for the unpaid purchase price, certain states have laws that limit our ability to recover personal judgments against customers who have defaulted on their loans or the cost of doing so may not be justified. Historically, we have generally not pursued such recourse against our customers. In the case of our notes receivable secured by VOIs, if we are unable to collect the defaulted amount due, we traditionally have terminated the customer’s interest in the Bluegreen Vacation Club and then remarketed the recovered VOI. Irrespective of our remedy in the event of a default, we cannot recover the marketing, selling and administrative costs associated with the original sale. In addition, we will need to incur such costs again in order to resell the VOI.  If default rates for our borrowers remain at current levels or increase, we may be required to increase our provision for credit losses. In addition, it may cause buyers of, or lenders whose loans are secured by, our VOI notes receivable to reduce the amount of availability under receivables purchase and credit facilities, or to increase the interest costs associated with such facilities. In such an event, the cost of financing may increase and we may not be able to secure financing on terms acceptable to us, if at all, which would adversely affect our earnings, financial position and liquidity.

 

Under the terms of our pledged and receivable sale facilities, we may be required, under certain circumstances, to replace receivables or to pay down the loan to within permitted loan-to-value ratios. Additionally, the terms of our securitization-type transactions require us to repurchase or replace loans if we breach any of the representations and warranties we made at the time we sold the receivables.  These agreements also often  include provisions that require substantially all of our cash flow from our retained interest in the receivable portfolios sold to be paid to the parties who purchased the receivables from us in the event of defaults by customers in excess of stated thresholds,. In addition, we guaranteed certain payments under the Legacy Securitization (described in further detail in Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Substantially all of the timeshare receivables backing the notes subject to the Legacy Securitization were generated prior to December 15, 2008, when we implemented our FICO^® score-based credit underwriting program, and relate to loans to borrowers with FICO^® scores below 600.

 

---

 

While we have attempted to restructure our business to reduce our need for and reliance on financing for liquidity in the short term, there is no assurance that such restructuring will be successful or that our business and profitability will not otherwise continue to depend on our ability to obtain financing, which may not be available on favorable terms, or at all. 

 

We offer financing of up to 90% of the purchase price to purchasers of our VOIs. However, we incur selling, marketing and administrative cash expenditures prior to and concurrent with the sale. These costs generally exceed the down payment we receive at the time of the sale. Accordingly, our ability to borrow against or sell our notes receivable has historically been a critical factor in our continued liquidity, and we therefore have depended on funds from our credit facilities and securitization transactions to finance our operations. The disruption in the credit markets which began in 2007 made obtaining additional and replacement external sources of liquidity more difficult and more costly. The number of banks and other finance companies willing to provide “warehouse” lines of credit for timeshare receivables decreased, and the term securitization market was unavailable for an extended period of time. If our pledged receivables facilities terminate or expire and we are unable to extend them or replace them with comparable facilities, or if we are unable to continue to participate in securitization-type transactions and “warehouse” facilities on acceptable terms, our liquidity, cash flow and profitability would be materially and adversely affected.

 

In addition, financing for real estate acquisition and development and the capital markets for corporate debt have been limited. In response to these conditions, during 2008, we adopted initiatives, which included limiting sales and encouraging higher down payments on sales, in an attempt to conserve cash. We also have increased our focus on expanding our fee-based service business. However, there is no assurance that our implementation of these initiatives will enhance our financial position or otherwise be successful. If these initiatives do not have their intended results, our financial condition may be materially and adversely impacted.

 

Notwithstanding the initiatives implemented by us since 2008 to improve our cash position, we anticipate that we will continue to seek and use external sources of liquidity, including funds that we obtain pursuant to additional borrowings under our existing credit facilities, under credit facilities that we may obtain in the future, under securitizations in which we may participate in the future or pursuant to other borrowing arrangements, to:

 

 

It is also expected that we will incur significant indebtedness in connection with our currently proposed merger with BFC. Our ability to service or to refinance our indebtedness or to obtain additional financing (including our ability to consummate future term securitizations) depends on the credit markets and on our future performance, which is subject to a number of factors, including the success of our business, results of operations, leverage, financial condition and business prospects, prevailing interest rates, general economic conditions and perceptions about the vacation ownership and real estate industries. Further, reputational and other risks to both the lender and to us associated with the 2007 bankruptcy of BFC’s Levitt and Sons subsidiary and the lawsuit brought by the SEC against BBX Capital, a public company in which BFC owns an approximately 49% equity interest and 73% voting interest, and its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Alan B. Levan, who is also Chairman of Bluegreen’s board of directors and Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of BFC, may be considered by lenders in connection with both making and renewing extensions of credit.

 

As of December 31, 2012, we had approximately $6.5 million of indebtedness scheduled to become due during 2013. Historically, much of our debt has been renewed or refinanced in the ordinary course of business. However, we may not in the future be able to obtain sufficient external sources of liquidity on attractive terms, or at all or otherwise renew, extend or refinance a significant portion of our outstanding debt. Any of these occurrences may have a material and adverse impact on our liquidity and financial condition.

 

The ratings of third-party rating agencies could adversely impact our ability to obtain, renew or extend credit facilities, or otherwise raise capital.

 

Rating agencies from time to time review prior corporate and specific transaction ratings in light of tightened ratings criteria. We have maintained a “B-“corporate credit rating with a “stable” outlook with Standard & Poor’s since December 2010, at which time our corporate credit rating was upgraded to a CCC.  If rating agencies were to

---

 

downgrade our corporate credit ratings, our ability to raise capital and/or issue debt on favorable terms, or at all, and our liquidity, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely impacted. In addition, if rating agencies downgraded their original ratings on certain bond classes in our securitizations, holders of such bonds may be required to sell bonds in the marketplace, and such sales could occur at a discount, which could impact the perceived value of the bonds and our ability to sell future bonds on favorable terms or at all. While we are not currently aware of any reasonably likely downgrades to our corporate credit rating or the ratings of bond classes in our securitizations, such ratings changes can occur without advance notice.

 

Our future success depends on our ability to market our products and services successfully and efficiently, and our marketing expenses may increase particularly in the event our marketing focus shifts towards new customers as opposed to existing owners.

 

We compete for customers with hotel and resort properties and other vacation ownership resorts. The identification of sales prospects and leads, and the marketing of our products and services to them are essential to our success. We have incurred and will continue to incur the expenses associated with marketing programs in advance of closing sales to the leads that we identify. If our lead identification and marketing efforts do not yield enough leads or we are unable to successfully convert sales leads to sales, we may be unable to recover the expense of our marketing programs and systems and our business, operating results and financial conditions would be adversely affected. In addition, we have in recent years focused our marketing efforts primarily on sales to existing owners, which typically carry a relatively lower marketing cost. If in the future we focus more of our marketing efforts on selling to new customers as opposed to existing owners, our sales and marketing expenses will likely increase.  If that occurs and we are not successful in offsetting the cost increase with greater sales revenue, our operating results and financial condition would be adversely impacted.

 

We may not be successful in increasing or expanding our fee-based services relationships, and our fee-based service activities, including the POA Sales activities which we commenced during January 2012, may not be profitable, which may have an adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition.

 

In July 2009, we began offering fee-based marketing, sales, resort management and other services to third-party developers. During 2012, we continued to expand our fee-based service business, which we believe enables us to leverage our expertise in sales and marketing, resort management, mortgage servicing, construction management and title services. We currently intend for our fee-based services to become an increasing portion of our resorts business over time as they generally produce positive cash flow and typically require less capital investment than our traditional vacation ownership business. We have attempted to structure these activities to cover our costs and generate a profit. However, our fee-based services business remains relatively new and we have limited experience in our pricing and operation. In addition, while our fee-based marketing and sales services do not require us to use our receivable credit facility capacity, our clients do typically have to maintain their own receivable-backed credit facilities. Should our clients not be able to maintain their facilities, our fee-based marketing and sales business could be materially adversely impacted. Alternatively, we could attempt to structure other arrangements where we would utilize our receivable credit facilities in order to provide fee-based marketing and sales services, but this would reduce the credit otherwise available to us. In addition, when we perform fee-based sales and marketing services, we sell VOIs in a resort developed by a third party as an interest in the Bluegreen Vacation Club. This subjects us to a number of risks typically associated with selling products developed by others under your own brand name, including litigation risks. Additionally, demand for the third party resorts may be below our expectations and the third party developers may not satisfy their obligations. While we attempt to mitigate these risks by performing due diligence on the resorts in which we sell VOIs and by typically performing resort management services at those resorts, we may not be successful in mitigating or managing the risks, which may have a material and adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition.

 

As part of the expansion of our fee-based service business, during January 2012, we began selling VOI inventory in connection with a new category of sales requiring low levels of capital deployment whereby we acquire VOI inventory from our resorts’ property owner associations (“POAs”) on a non-committed basis, in close proximity to the timing of our selling of such VOIs (“POA Sales”). VOIs are typically obtained by the POAs through foreclosure in connection with maintenance fee defaults and are generally acquired by us at a discount. While we intend to increase our POA Sales efforts in the future and enter into similar arrangements with third-party developers as part of our fee-based services initiative, we may not be successful in increasing our POA Sales or entering into similar arrangements, and in any event these efforts may not result in us achieving improved results.

 

---

 

Our results of operations and financial condition may be materially and adversely impacted if we do not continue to participate in exchange networks and other strategic alliances with third parties or our customers are not satisfied with the networks in which we participate or our strategic alliances.

 

As previously described, our participation in exchange networks and other strategic alliances and our Traveler Plus™ program make ownership of our VOIs more attractive by providing owners with the ability to take advantage of vacation experiences in addition to stays at our resorts. A VOI owner’s participation in the RCI exchange network allows an owner to exchange their annual VOI for occupancy at over 4,000 participating resorts, based upon availability and the owner payment of a variable exchange fee. During 2012, approximately 8% of our owners utilized the RCI exchange network for an exchange of two or more nights. We also have a joint venture with Shell, called Select Connections™, which currently gives Bluegreen Vacation Club members who acquired or upgraded their VOIs on or after July 1, 2007 access to 23 Shell resorts and provides members of Shell access to Bluegreen Vacation Club resorts. In addition, certain Bluegreen Vacation Club members may use their points for a variety of hotel stays, RV site stays within the “Coast to Coast” network, or various cruise vacations. We also entered into strategic alliance agreements with Choice during January 2013 pursuant to which certain of our resorts will be branded as part of Choice’s Ascend™ Hotel Collection and owners of our VOIs will be entitled to certain privileges, including discounted rates (subject to availability), with respect to Choice’s hotels.  We may not be able to continue to participate in the RCI or Select Connections™ exchange networks at some point in the future. In addition, these networks and our Travelers Plus™ program may not continue to operate effectively, and our customers may not continue to be satisfied with them.  Further, our relationship with Choice may not be well received by our customers or otherwise result in the benefits we expect to derive from the relationship. If any of these events should occur, our results of operations and financial condition may be materially and adversely impacted.

 

The resale market for VOIs could adversely affect our business.

 

Based on our experience at our resorts and at destination resorts owned by third parties, we believe that resales of VOIs in the secondary market generally are made at net sales prices below their original customer purchase prices. The relatively lower sales prices are partly attributable to the high marketing and sales costs associated with the initial sales of such VOIs. Accordingly, the initial purchase of a VOI may be less attractive to prospective buyers. Also, buyers who seek to resell their VOIs compete with our efforts to sell our VOIs. While VOI resale clearing houses or brokers currently do not have a material impact on our business, if a secondary market for VOIs were to become more organized and liquid, the resulting availability of resale VOIs at lower prices could adversely affect our sales prices and the number of sales we can close, which in turn would adversely affect our business and results of operations.

 

We are subject to the risks of the real estate market and the risks associated with real estate development, including the decline in real estate values and the deterioration of other conditions relating to the real estate market and real estate development.

 

Real estate markets are cyclical in nature and highly sensitive to changes in national and regional economic conditions, including:

 

 

The adverse trends experienced in the real estate market beginning in 2007 exerted pressure upon us, and have had, and may continue to have, an adverse impact on our operations. Further, while general economic trends have recently shown signs of improvement, a deterioration in general economic conditions or continued adverse conditions in the real estate market would have a material adverse effect on our business.

 

To the extent we decide to acquire more real estate inventory in the future, the availability of land for development of resort properties at favorable prices at that time will be critical to our profitability and the ability to cover our significant selling, general and administrative expenses, cost of capital and other expenses. If we are unable to acquire such land or resort properties at a favorable cost, it could have an adverse impact on our results of

---

 

operations. While we believe that the property we have purchased at our adjusted carrying amounts will generate appropriate margins, land prices remain significantly below historical levels, and the projects we acquired prior to or during the recent economic downturn may have been purchased at higher price levels than available in the current market.

 

The profitability of our real estate development activities is also impacted by the cost of construction materials and services. Should the cost of construction materials and services rise, the ultimate cost of our future resorts inventory when developed could increase and have a material, adverse impact on our results of operations.

 

Adverse outcomes in legal or other regulatory procedures, including claims for development-related defects, could adversely affect our financial condition and operating results.

 

In the ordinary course of business, we are subject to litigation, legal and regulatory proceedings which result in significant expenses relating to legal and other professional fees. In addition, litigation is inherently uncertain, and adverse outcomes in the litigation and other proceedings to which we are subject could adversely affect our financial condition and operating results.

 

We engage third-party contractors to construct our resorts.  We also historically engaged third-party contractors to develop our communities. However, our customers may assert claims against us for construction defects or other perceived development defects, including, without limitation, structural integrity, the presence of mold as a result of leaks or other defects, water intrusion, asbestos, electrical issues, plumbing issues, road construction, water and sewer defects and defects in the engineering of amenities. In addition, certain state and local laws may impose liability on property developers with respect to development defects discovered in the future. We could have to accrue a significant portion of the cost to repair such defects in the quarter when such defects arise or when the repair costs are reasonably estimable. In addition, liabilities related to Bluegreen Communities that were not assumed by Southstar in connection with its purchase of substantially all of the assets which comprised Bluegreen Communities on May 4, 2012, including those relating to Bluegreen Communities’ operations prior to the closing of the transaction, remain our responsibility.  See “Item 3. Legal Proceedings” for a description of currently pending legal matters with respect to Bluegreen Communities.  A significant number of claims for development-related defects could adversely affect our liquidity, financial condition and operating results.

 

We may be adversely affected by extensive federal, state and local laws and regulations and changes in applicable laws and regulations, including with respect to the imposition of additional taxes on operations. In addition, results of audits of our tax returns or those of our subsidiaries may have a material and adverse impact on our financial condition.

 

The federal government and the states and local jurisdictions in which we operate have enacted extensive regulations that affect the manner in which we market and sell VOIs and conduct our other business operations. In addition, many states have adopted specific laws and regulations regarding the sale of VOIs. Many states, including Florida and South Carolina, where some of our resorts are located, extensively regulate the creation and management of timeshare resorts, the marketing and sale of timeshare properties, the escrow of purchaser funds prior to the completion of construction and closing, the content and use of advertising materials and promotional offers, the delivery of an offering memorandum and the creation and operation of exchange programs and multi-site timeshare plan reservation systems. Moreover, with regard to sales conducted in South Carolina, the closing of real estate and mortgage loan transactions must be conducted under the supervision of an attorney licensed in South Carolina and otherwise in accordance with South Carolina’s Time Sharing Transaction Procedures Act. Most states also have other laws that regulate our activities, such as timeshare project registration laws, real estate licensure laws, mortgage licensure laws, sellers of travel licensure laws, anti-fraud laws, consumer protection laws, telemarketing laws, prize, gift and sweepstakes laws, and consumer credit laws.

 

We currently are authorized to market and sell VOIs in all states in which our operations are currently conducted. If our agents or employees violate applicable regulations or licensing requirements, their acts or omissions could cause the states where the violations occurred to revoke or refuse to renew our licenses, render our sales contracts void or voidable, or impose fines on us based on past activities. See “Item 3 – Legal Proceedings.”

 

In addition, the federal government and the states and local jurisdictions in which we conduct business have generally enacted extensive regulations relating to direct marketing and telemarketing, including the federal government’s national “Do Not Call” list. The regulations have impacted our marketing of VOIs, and we have taken steps in an attempt to decrease our dependence on restricted calls. However, these steps have increased and are expected to continue to increase our marketing costs. We cannot predict the impact that these legislative initiatives

---

 

or any other legislative measures that may be proposed or enacted in the future may have on our marketing strategies and results. Further, from time to time, complaints are filed against us by individuals claiming that they received calls in violation of the regulation.

 

Currently, most states have taxed VOIs as real estate, imposing property taxes that are billed to the respective POAs that maintain the related resorts and have not sought to impose sales tax upon the sale of the VOI or accommodations tax upon the use of the VOI. From time to time, however, various states have attempted to promulgate new laws or apply existing laws impacting the taxation of VOIs to require that sales or accommodations taxes be collected. Should new state or local laws be implemented or interpreted to impose sales or accommodations taxes on VOIs, our business could be materially adversely affected.

 

From time to time, consumers file complaints against us in the ordinary course of our business. We could be required to incur significant costs to resolve these complaints or enter into consents with regulators regarding our activities. We may not remain in material compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, and violations of applicable laws may have adverse implications for us, including negative public relations, potential litigation and regulatory sanctions. The expense, negative publicity and potential sanctions associated with any failure to comply with applicable laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, liquidity or financial position.

 

In addition, VOIs may in the future be deemed to be securities under federal or state law and therefore subject to applicable securities regulation, which could have a material adverse effect on us due to, among other things, the cost of compliance with such regulations.

 

Environmental liabilities, including claims with respect to mold or hazardous or toxic substances, could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and operating results.

 

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, as well as common law, we may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous or toxic substances, including mold, located on, in or emanating from property that we own, lease or operate, as well as related costs of investigation and property damage at such property. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether we knew of, or were responsible for, the presence of the hazardous or toxic substances. The presence of such substances, or the failure to properly remediate such substances, may adversely affect our ability to sell or lease our property or to borrow money using such property or receivables generated from the sale of such property as collateral. Noncompliance with environmental, health or safety requirements may require us to cease or alter operations at one or more of our properties. Further, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from violations of environmental regulations or from contamination associated with one or more of our properties.

 

There are inherent uncertainties involved in estimates, judgments and assumptions used in the preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP. Any changes in estimates, judgments and assumptions used could have a material adverse impact on our operating results and financial condition.

 

The consolidated financial statements included in the reports we file with the SEC, including this Annual Report on Form 10-K, are, prepared in accordance with GAAP, which involves making estimates, judgments and assumptions. These estimates, judgments and assumptions include, but are not limited to, those related to future cash flows, which in turn are based upon expectations of our performance given current and projected forecasts of the economy in general and the real estate markets. If any estimates, judgments or assumptions change in the future, including in the event the adverse conditions in the real estate market continue for longer than expected or deteriorate further or if our performance does not otherwise meet our expectations, we may be required to record impairment charges against our earnings, which could have a material adverse impact on our operating results and financial condition. In addition, GAAP requirements as to how certain estimates are made may result, for example, in asset valuations which ultimately would not be realized if we were to attempt to sell the asset.

 

The loss of the services of our key management and personnel could adversely affect our business.

 

Our ability to successfully implement our business strategy will depend on our ability to attract and retain experienced and knowledgeable management and other professional staff, and we may not be successful in doing so.  As previously described, during January 2012, the SEC filed a lawsuit against BBX Capital and its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Alan B. Levan, who also serves as non-executive Chairman of our Board of Directors and Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of BFC. The lawsuit alleges violations of securities laws. In addition to injunctive relief and monetary penalties, the complaint seeks an officer and director bar with respect to

---

 

Mr. Levan. While BBX Capital has disclosed that it believes that it and Mr. Levan fully complied with applicable law, the outcome of this litigation is uncertain.

 

Our proposed merger with BFC may not be completed on the contemplated terms, or at all.

 

As previously described, on November 14, 2012, we entered into a merger agreement with BFC, BFC’s subsidiary and Merger Sub, a wholly owned subsidiary of Woodbridge, which provides for Merger Sub to merge with and into Bluegreen, and for Bluegreen to continue as the surviving corporation of the merger and become a wholly owned subsidiary of Woodbridge. Pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement, our shareholders (other than BFC and Woodbridge, and shareholders who exercise their appraisal rights in accordance with Massachusetts law) will receive $10.00 in cash for each share of our common stock that they hold at the effective time of the merger.  There is no assurance that the financing necessary to consummate the merger will be obtained. If the merger is consummated, Bluegreen’s common stock will no longer be listed for trading on the NYSE or registered under the Exchange Act. 

 

There is no assurance that the merger will be consummated on the contemplated terms, or at all. If we are unable to complete the merger for any reason, we would have incurred significant costs without consummating the transaction.  As previously described, we also issued $75.0 million of Notes on March 26, 2013 in connection with the proposed funding of the merger consideration.

 

As previously described, purported class action lawsuits have been filed in Florida and Massachusetts which seek to enjoin the merger or, if it is completed, to recover relief as determined by the presiding court to be appropriate.  While we believe the actions are without merit and we intend to continue to defend against them vigorously, the outcome of the actions is uncertain.  See “Item 3 – Legal Proceedings” for additional information regarding this litigation.

 

We are also subject to risks and uncertainties during the pendency of the transaction.  Specifically, in connection with our efforts to complete the merger, we have and may continue to incur substantial costs and divert significant management resources, including with respect to the class action litigation described above.  In addition, the merger agreement contains restrictions on the conduct of our business until the closing of the merger or the termination of the merger agreement.

 

If the merger is consummated, our common stock will no longer be listed for trading on the NYSE or registered under the Exchange Act.

 

BFC holds a majority of our outstanding common stock, which may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

 

BFC, through Woodbridge, currently owns approximately 53% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. This control position may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. Further, BFC is in a position to control shareholder votes on the election of directors and other matters requiring the approval of holders of a majority of the shares of our issued and outstanding common stock. Approval of our currently proposed merger with BFC required the affirmative vote of holders of at least 66-2/3% of our issued and outstanding common stock and received the affirmative vote of holders of 86% of the issued and outstanding shares of our common stock.

 

 

---

 

 

RISKS RELATED TO BBX CAPITAL

BBX Capital is a separate public company. The following discussion, which was included or is derived from disclosures contained in BBX Capital’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, which was prepared by BBX Capital’s management and describes the risks that BBX Capital’s management currently believes to be material to BBX Capital’s operations.  References to the “Company”, “we”, “us” or “our” in the following discussion are references to BBX Capital and its subsidiaries and are not references to BFC or Bluegreen. 

 

Set forth below are the risk factors that BBX Capital believes to be material to its operations.

 

Our business and operations and the mix of our assets significantly changed as a result of the sale of BankAtlantic to BB&T and our financial condition and results of operations depends on the monetization of our assets at or near their current book values and our results of operations will vary depending upon the timing of such monetization.

As a result of the BB&T Transaction, our business and operations significantly changed from our business and operations prior to the sale of BankAtlantic.  As a consequence, the Company’s financial condition and results of operations will be dependent in the near term, in large part, on our ability to successfully manage and monetize the assets currently held in CAM and BBX Partners and the assets held in FAR which we have been engaged to service, as well as the cash flow we receive based on our interest in FAR.  Additionally, because a majority of FAR’s assets are serviced by a third party servicer, we are also dependent on the ability and efforts of our servicer to efficiently manage and monetize these assets.  Further, nonaccrual loans and real estate are generally not easily salable in the event we decide to liquidate an asset through a sale transaction.  Our financial condition and results of operations will be dependent in the longer term on these factors as well as our ability to successfully invest these cash flows.  If the assets held in CAM and BBX Partners and the assets held in FAR are not monetized at or near the current book values ascribed to them, or if these assets are liquidated for amounts less than book value, our financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected, and our ability to successfully pursue our business goals could be adversely affected.  Because a majority of these assets are nonaccrual and otherwise do not generate income on a regular basis, we do not expect to generate significant revenue or income with respect to these assets until such time as an asset is monetized through repayments or transactions involving the sale, joint venture or development of the underlying real estate.  Accordingly, we expect our revenues and results of operations to vary significantly on a quarterly basis and from year to year.

 

Our current business strategy includes a substantial investment in Woodbridge in connection with its acquisition of Bluegreen which exposes us to risks inherent in the time-share industry.

 

BBX Capital’s anticipated investment in Woodbridge would expose it to risks inherent in the time-share industry.  For a discussion of Bluegreen’s risk factors, see “Risks Related to Bluegreen” above.

 

Our future acquisitions may reduce our earnings, require us to obtain additional financing and expose us to additional risks. 

 

Our business strategy includes investing in or acquiring middle market operating companies and some of these investments and acquisitions may be material. While we will seek investments and acquisitions primarily in companies that provide opportunities for growth, we may not be successful in identifying these opportunities. Investments or acquisitions that we do complete may not prove to be successful or even if successful may not initially generate income, or may generate income on an irregular basis or over a long time period, thus causing our results of operations to vary significantly on a quarterly basis and from year to year.  Acquisitions may expose us to additional risks and may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. Any acquisitions we make may:

 

 

In addition, we will likely face competition in making investments or acquisitions which could increase the costs associated with the investment or acquisition. Our investments or acquisitions may rely on additional debt or equity financing. The issuance of debt will result in additional leverage which could limit our operating flexibility, and the issuance of equity could result in additional dilution to our then-current shareholders. In addition, such financing could consist of equity securities which have rights, preferences or privileges senior to our Class A Common Stock.

---

 

If we do require additional financing in the future, the financing may not be available when needed or on favorable terms, if at all. Additionally, we do not intend to seek shareholder approval of any investments or acquisitions unless required by law or regulation.

 

We plan to conduct some of our operations through unconsolidated joint ventures with independent third parties in which we do not have a controlling interest and we may be adversely impacted by a joint venture partners' failure to fulfill their obligations.

 

By using joint ventures, we can reduce the amount we invest in real estate properties.  However, our joint venture partners may become financially unable or unwilling to fulfill their obligations under the joint venture agreements. Most joint ventures borrow money to help finance their activities, and although recourse on the loans is generally limited to the joint ventures and their properties, we and our joint venture partners may be required to provide financial support.  If joint venture partners do not perform on their obligations, we may incur significant expenditures which may have an adverse effect on our operating results or financial condition.

 

The decline in the Florida real estate market has adversely affected, and may continue to adversely affect, our earnings and financial condition.

 

The deterioration of economic conditions in the Florida residential real estate market, including the cumulative decline in median home prices in all major metropolitan areas in Florida, and the downturn in the Florida commercial real estate market, resulted in substantial non-performing assets and provision for loan losses. The loans retained by BBX Capital in the BankAtlantic Sale were primarily in the Florida market and adverse changes to the Florida economy or the real estate market may negatively impact BBX Capital’s earnings and financial condition.

 

Our loan portfolio is concentrated in loans secured by real estate, a majority of which are located in Florida, which makes us susceptible to credit losses from downturns in the real estate market.

 

Conditions in the United States real estate market deteriorated significantly beginning in 2007, particularly in Florida.  The Company’s loan portfolio is concentrated in commercial real estate loans (most of which are located in Florida), residential mortgages (nationwide), and consumer home-equity loans (mainly in Florida). The Company has a heightened exposure to credit losses that may arise from this concentration as a result of the significant downturn in the Florida real estate markets. At December 31, 2012, 85% of the Company’s loan portfolio based on book value was located in Florida. 

 

An increase in the Company’s allowance for loan losses will result in reduced earnings.

 

BBX Capital is exposed to the risk that its borrowers will be unable to repay their loans according to their terms and that any collateral securing the payment of their loans will not be sufficient to assure full repayment. The Company’s management evaluates the collectability of its loan portfolio and provides an allowance for loan losses that it believes is adequate based upon such factors as:

 

Many of these factors are difficult to predict or estimate accurately, particularly in a changing economic environment. The process of determining the estimated losses inherent in the Company’s loan portfolio requires subjective and complex judgments and the level of uncertainty concerning economic conditions may adversely affect our ability to estimate the losses which may be incurred in its loan portfolio. If BankAtlantic’s evaluation is incorrect and borrower defaults cause losses exceeding the portion of the allowance for loan losses allocated to those loans, or if we perceive adverse trends that require us to significantly increase our allowance for loan losses in the future, our earnings could be significantly and adversely affected.

 

---

 

Non-performing assets take significant time to resolve and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition, and could result in further losses in the future.

 

At December 31, 2012, the Company’s non-performing loans totaled $204.6 million or 69% of our loan portfolio. At December 31, 2012, the Company’s non-performing assets (which include non-performing loans and foreclosed real estate) were $293.2 million or 62% of our total assets. In addition, the Company had approximately $12.8 million in accruing loans that were 31-89 days delinquent at December 31, 2012. Our non-performing assets adversely affect our net income through foreclosure costs, operating expenses and taxes.  Until we monetize these assets, we expect to continue to incur additional losses relating to these non-performing loans and non-performing assets. We record interest income on non-performing loans on a cash basis and generally incur operating losses associated with real estate owned. When we receive the collateral in foreclosures or similar proceedings, we are required to mark the related collateral to the then fair market value, generally based on appraisals of the property obtained by us. These loans and real estate owned also increase our risk profile, and increases in the level of non-performing loans and non-performing assets adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.  While we seek to manage our nonperforming assets, decreases in the value of these assets or deterioration in our borrowers’ financial condition, which is often impacted by economic and market conditions beyond our control, could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the resolution of non-performing assets requires significant commitments of management time.

 

FAR’s consumer loan portfolio is concentrated in home equity loans collateralized by properties located in South Florida. 

 

The decline in residential real estate prices and higher unemployment throughout Florida over the past several years has resulted in an increase in mortgage delinquencies and higher foreclosure rates. Additionally, in response to adverse conditions in the economy and real estate markets, financial institutions and other lenders have tightened underwriting standards which has limited borrowers’ ability to refinance. These conditions have adversely impacted delinquencies and credit loss trends for home equity loan portfolios.  The majority of FAR’s home equity loans are residential second mortgages that exhibit higher loss severity than residential first mortgages. If home prices remain depressed, FAR may experience higher credit losses from this loan portfolio. Since the collateral for this portfolio consists primarily of second mortgages, it is unlikely that FAR will be successful in recovering all or any portion of its loan proceeds in the event of a default unless FAR is prepared to repay the first mortgage and such repayment and the costs associated with a foreclosure are justified by the value of the property.

 

The cost and outcome of pending legal proceedings may impact our results of operations.

 

The Company and its subsidiaries are currently parties in ongoing litigation which have resulted in significant non-interest expenses relating to legal and other professional fees. Pending proceedings include litigation which has been brought by the SEC, litigation arising out of our workouts and foreclosures, and legal proceedings associated with BankAtlantic’s tax certificate business. While, based on current information, we believe that we have meritorious defenses in these proceedings, we anticipate continued elevated legal and related costs as parties to the actions and the ultimate outcomes of the matters are uncertain. See Item 3. Legal Proceedings for a further discussion regarding the material legal proceedings to which the Company is currently subject.

 

Adverse market conditions may affect our business and results of operations.

 

Our financial condition and results of operations have been, and may continue to be, adversely impacted as a result of the downturn in the U.S. housing and commercial real estate markets and general economic conditions. Dramatic declines in the national and, in particular, Florida housing markets over the past years, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures and unemployment, have negatively impacted the credit performance of our loans and resulted in significant asset impairments, including government-sponsored entities, major commercial and investment banks, and regional and community financial institutions. Reflecting concern about the stability of the financial markets generally and the strength of counterparties, many lenders and institutional investors reduced or ceased providing funding to borrowers. This market turmoil and tightening of credit led to an increased level of commercial and consumer delinquencies, lack of consumer confidence, increased market volatility and widespread reduction of business activity generally. The continuing economic pressure on consumers and lack of confidence in the financial markets has adversely affected and may continue to adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further negative market and economic developments may cause adverse changes in payment patterns, causing increases in delinquencies and default rates, which may impact our charge-offs and provisions for loan losses. A worsening of conditions would likely exacerbate the adverse effects of these difficult

---

 

market conditions. In particular, we may experience and may continue to be impacted by the following risks in connection with these events:

 

 

Adverse events in Florida, where our business is currently concentrated, could adversely impact our results and future growth.

 

The Company’s business, the primary source of repayment for its loans and the real estate collateralizing its loans are primarily concentrated in Florida. As a result, we are exposed to geographic risks, as high unemployment rates, declines in the housing industry and declines in the real estate market have generally been more severe in Florida than in the rest of the country. Adverse changes in laws and regulations in Florida would have a negative impact on our revenues, financial condition and business.  Further, the State of Florida is subject to the risks of natural disasters such as tropical storms and hurricanes, which may disrupt our operations, adversely impact the ability of our borrowers to timely repay their loans and the value of any collateral held by us, or otherwise have an adverse effect on our results of operations. The severity and impact of tropical storms, hurricanes and other weather related events are unpredictable.

 

Our recent financial performance may adversely affect our ability to access capital and may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

The Company incurred losses from continuing operations of $28.5 million, $59.5 million and $133.5 million during the years ended December 31, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.

 

The Company’s ability to fund its operations and investment opportunities may depend on its ability to raise capital in the secondary markets and on its ability to monetize its portfolio of non-performing loans and real estate owned. Its ability to raise additional capital will depend on, among other things, conditions in the financial markets at the time, which are outside of our control, as well as litigation and our financial condition, results of operations and prospects. The failure to obtain capital in amounts needed to fund operations or anticipated investments may have a material adverse effect on our results of operation and financial condition.

 

The Company is controlled by BFC Financial Corporation and its controlling shareholders and this control position may adversely affect the market price of the Company’s Class A Common Stock.

 

BFC owns shares of the Company’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock representing approximately 75% of the Company’s total voting power. Additionally, Alan B. Levan, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and John E. Abdo, our Vice Chairman, beneficially own shares of BFC’s Class A and Class B common stock representing approximately 71% of BFC’s total voting power. The Company’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock vote as a single group on most matters. Accordingly, BFC, directly, and Messrs. Levan and Abdo, indirectly through BFC, are in a position to control the Company, elect the Company’s Board of Directors and significantly influence the outcome of any shareholder vote, except in those limited circumstances where Florida law mandates that the holders of the Company’s Class A Common Stock vote as a separate class. This control position may have an adverse effect on the market price of the Company’s Class A Common Stock.

 

BFC can reduce its economic interest in us and still maintain voting control.

 

Our Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock generally vote together as a single class, with our Class A Common Stock possessing a fixed 53% of the aggregate voting power of all of our common stock and our Class B Common Stock possessing a fixed 47% of such aggregate voting power. Our Class B Common Stock currently represents less than 1% of our common equity and 47% of our total voting power. As a result, the voting power of our Class B Common Stock does not bear a direct relationship to the economic interest represented by the shares.

---

 

Any issuance of shares of our Class A Common Stock will further dilute the relative economic interest of our Class B Common Stock, but will not decrease the voting power represented by our Class B Common Stock. Further, our Restated Articles of Incorporation provide that these relative voting percentages will remain fixed until such time as BFC and its affiliates own less than 97,253 shares of our Class B Common Stock, which is approximately 50% of the number of shares of our Class B Common Stock that BFC now owns, even if additional shares of our Class A Common Stock are issued. Therefore, BFC may sell up to approximately 50% of its shares of our Class B Common Stock (after converting those shares to Class A Common Stock), and significantly reduce its economic interest in us, while still maintaining its voting power. If BFC were to take this action, it would widen the disparity between the equity interest represented by our Class B Common Stock and its voting power. Any conversion of shares of our Class B Common Stock into shares of our Class A Common Stock would further dilute the voting interests of the holders of our Class A Common Stock.

 

Provisions in our charter documents and our recently adopted rights agreement may make it difficult for a third party to acquire us and could depress the price of our Class A Common Stock.

 

Our Restated Articles of Incorporation and Amended and Restated Bylaws contain provisions that could delay, defer or prevent a change of control of the Company or our management. These provisions could make it more difficult for shareholders to elect directors and take other corporate actions. As a result, these provisions could limit the price that investors are willing to pay in the future for shares of our Class A Common Stock. These provisions include:

 

 

On February 7, 2013, the Company entered into a Rights Agreement with its stock transfer agent which is designed to preserve certain tax benefits available to the Company. However, because the Rights Agreement provides a deterrent to investors from acquiring a 5% or greater ownership interest in our Class A Common Stock, it may have an anti-takeover effect.

 

A sustained decline in the Company’s Class A Common Stock price may result in the delisting of its Class A Common Stock from the NYSE.

 

The Company’s Class A Common Stock currently trades on the NYSE. A listed company would be deemed to be below compliance with the continued listing standards of the NYSE if, among other things, the listed company’s average closing price was less than $1.00 over a consecutive 30 trading day period or, with respect to listed companies with shareholders’ equity of less than $50 million, the listed company’s average market capitalization was less than $50 million over a consecutive 30 trading day period. The NYSE’s market capitalization and equity requirements are based on the Company’s publicly traded stock at the holding company level.   While the Company currently meets all NYSE listing requirements, the Company has from time to time in the past failed to maintain compliance with the trading price and market capitalization standards and may in the future fail to maintain the standards.

 

The loss of key personnel or the failure to attract and retain highly qualified personnel could adversely affect our operations.

 

Our performance is largely dependent on the talents and efforts of skilled individuals. Our business operations could be adversely affected if we are unable to retain and motivate our existing employees and attract new employees as needed.  During January 2012, the SEC filed a lawsuit against the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Alan B. Levan, alleging violations of securities laws. In addition to injunctive relief and monetary penalties, the complaint seeks an officer and director bar with respect to Mr. Alan Levan. While the Company believes that it and Mr. Levan fully complied with applicable law, the outcome of this litigation is uncertain. In the event Mr. Alan Levan is restricted from serving, or is otherwise unable to serve, as an executive officer and/or director of the Company, the Company and its business, as well as the businesses of its subsidiaries, may be adversely impacted. However, the Company believes that any such adverse impact would be mitigated by the continuation of

---

 

service of other executive officers, including Mr. Abdo, who serves as a director and Vice Chairman of the Company and Jarett S. Levan, President, who previously served as President and CEO of BankAtlantic.  .

---

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM 1B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

 

None

---

 

 

ITEM 2.  PROPERTIES

 

The principal executive offices of BFC and BBX Capital are located at 401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33301.  BBX Capital leases the space pursuant to an office lease with a term of 66 months and an expiration date of June 1, 2018.  BBX Capital has the right to renew the lease for two additional terms of five years commencing on the expiration date. BFC subleases certain of the office space from BBX Capital pursuant to an agreement where BFC reimburses BBX Capital for the costs associated with such space.

 

Bluegreen’s principal executive office is located in Boca Raton, Florida in approximately 158,838 square feet of leased space. At December 31, 2012, Bluegreen also maintained sales offices at 23 of its resorts as well as regional administrative offices in Orlando, Florida and Indianapolis, Indiana. For a description of Bluegreen’s resort properties, please see “Item 1 Business —Products and Services – Vacation Ownership”.

 

---

 

 

 

ITEM 3.  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

 

BFC and its Wholly Owned Subsidiaries

 

In the ordinary course of business, BFC and its wholly-owned subsidiaries are parties to lawsuits as plaintiff or defendant involving its operations and activities. Reserves are accrued for amounts in which it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. BFC accrued $11.9 million for pending legal proceedings as of December 31, 2012, all of which related to the appraisal rights litigation described below. BFC believes that it has meritorious defenses in the pending legal actions and that reasonably possible losses arising from these pending legal matters, in excess of the amounts currently accrued, if any, will not have a material impact on BFC’s financial statements. However, due to the significant uncertainties involved in these legal matters, the actual losses which may be incurred by BFC cannot be predicted.

 

Woodbridge Holdings, LLC v. Prescott Group Aggressive Small Cap Master Fund, G.P., Cede & Co., William J. Maeck, Ravenswood Investments III, L.P., and The Ravenswood Investment Company, Circuit Court, 17th Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Florida

 

Under Florida law, holders of shares of Class A Common Stock of Woodbridge Holdings Corporation (“WHC”) who did not vote to approve BFC’s 2009 merger with WHC, which was consummated during September 2009, and who properly asserted and exercised their appraisal rights with respect to their shares are entitled to receive a cash payment in an amount equal to the fair value of their shares (as determined in accordance with Florida law) in lieu of the shares of BFC’s Class A Common Stock which they would otherwise have been entitled to receive. In accordance with Florida law, Woodbridge Holdings, LLC, the successor to WHC (“Woodbridge”), provided written notices and required forms to the dissenting shareholders setting forth, among other things, its determination that the fair value of WHC’s Class A Common Stock immediately prior to the effectiveness of the merger was $1.10 per share. Dissenting shareholders, who collectively held approximately 4.2 million shares of WHC’s Class A Common Stock, rejected Woodbridge’s offer of $1.10 per share and requested payment for their shares based on their respective fair value estimates of WHC’s Class A Common Stock.  Under Florida law, Woodbridge thereafter commenced the appraisal rights action.  In December 2009, a $4.6 million liability was recorded with a corresponding reduction to additional paid-in capital representing, in the aggregate, Woodbridge’s offer to the dissenting shareholders. On July 5, 2012, the presiding court determined the fair value of the dissenting shareholders’ shares of WHC’s Class A Common Stock to be $1.78 per share and awarded legal and other costs in favor of the dissenting shareholders.  As a result, the $4.6 million liability was increased to approximately $7.5 million as of September 30, 2012 (with a corresponding reduction to additional paid in capital of $2.8 million) to account for the per share value awarded. On March 11, 2013, the court awarded legal fees and pre and post judgment interest to the dissenting shareholders for a total award of approximately $11.9 million (including the $7.5 million based on the $1.78 per share value determination).  As a result, the liability was increased by approximately $4.4 million during the fourth quarter 2012 to $11.9 million as of December 31, 2012. Woodbridge intends to appeal the courts’ ruling with respect to its fair value determination and the award of legal fees and costs and anticipates posting a bond in connection with the appeal. The outcome of the appeal is uncertain.

 

In Re Bluegreen Corporation Shareholder Litigation

 

Between November 16, 2011 and February 13, 2012, seven purported class action lawsuits related to the previously proposed 2011 merger between BFC and Bluegreen were filed against Bluegreen, the members of Bluegreen’s board of directors, BFC and BXG Florida Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Woodbridge formed for purposes of the merger (“Merger Sub”). As described below, four of these lawsuits have been consolidated into a single action in Florida, and the other three lawsuits have been consolidated into a single action in Massachusetts and stayed in favor of the Florida action. Further information regarding each of these lawsuits is set forth below.

 

The four Florida lawsuits, captioned and styled Ronald Kirkland v. Bluegreen Corporation et al. (filed on November 16, 2011); Richard Harriman v. Bluegreen Corporation et al. (filed on November 22, 2011); Alfred Richner v. Bluegreen Corporation et al. (filed on December 2, 2011); and BHR Master Fund, LTD et al. v. Bluegreen Corporation et al. (filed on February 13, 2012), were consolidated into an action styled In Re Bluegreen Corporation Shareholder Litigation. On April 9, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended class action complaint which alleged that the individual director defendants breached their fiduciary duties by (i) agreeing to sell Bluegreen without first taking steps to ensure adequate, fair and maximum consideration, (ii) engineering a transaction to

---

 

benefit themselves and not the shareholders, and (iii) failing to protect the interests of Bluegreen’s minority shareholders. In the complaint, the plaintiffs also alleged that BFC breached its fiduciary duties to Bluegreen’s minority shareholders and that Merger Sub aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by Bluegreen’s directors and BFC. In addition, the complaint included allegations relating to claimed violations of Massachusetts law. The complaint sought declaratory and injunctive relief, along with damages and attorneys’ fees and costs. On September 13, 2012, Bluegreen’s motion to dismiss the action was denied. Bluegreen subsequently answered the complaint.

 

Following the public announcement of the termination of the 2011 merger agreement and the entry into the currently proposed merger agreement, the plaintiffs in the Florida action filed a motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint on November 28, 2012 in order to challenge the structure of, and consideration contemplated to be received by Bluegreen’s shareholders in, the currently proposed merger.  On November 30, 2012, the Florida court granted the plaintiffs’ motion and the supplemental complaint was deemed filed as of that date.   The supplemental complaint alleges that the merger consideration remains inadequate and continues to be unfair to Bluegreen’s minority shareholders.

 

The three Massachusetts lawsuits were filed in the Superior Court for Suffolk County in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and styled as follows: Gaetano Bellavista Caltagirone v. Bluegreen Corporation et al. (filed on November 16, 2011); Alan W. Weber and J.B. Capital Partners L.P. v. Bluegreen Corporation et al. (filed on November 29, 2011); and Barry Fieldman, as Trustee for the Barry & Amy Fieldman Family Trust v. Bluegreen Corporation et al. (filed on December 6, 2011). In their respective complaints, the plaintiffs alleged that the individual director defendants breached their fiduciary duties by agreeing to sell Bluegreen without first taking steps to ensure adequate, fair and maximum consideration. The Fieldman and Weber actions contained the same claim against BFC. In addition, the complaints included claims that Merger Sub, in the case of the Fieldman action, BFC and Merger Sub, in the case of the Caltagirone action, and Bluegreen, in the case of the Weber action, aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. On January 17, 2012, the three Massachusetts lawsuits were consolidated into a single action styled In Re Bluegreen Corp. Shareholder Litigation, which is presently stayed in favor of the Florida action.

 

BFC and Bluegreen believe that these lawsuits are without merit and intend to defend against them vigorously.

 

Bluegreen Corporation

 

In the ordinary course of its business, Bluegreen becomes subject to claims or proceedings from time to time relating to the purchase, sale or financing of VOIs or other resort operations. Bluegreen is also subject to matters relating to Bluegreen Communities’ business, which we now report as a discontinued operation. Additionally, from time to time, Bluegreen becomes involved in disputes with existing and former employees, vendors, taxing jurisdictions and various other parties. From time to time in the ordinary course of business, Bluegreen also receives individual consumer complaints, as well as complaints received through regulatory and consumer agencies, including Offices of State Attorney Generals. Bluegreen takes these matters seriously and attempt to resolve any such issues as they arise. Unless otherwise described below, Bluegreen believes that these claims are routine litigation incidental to its business.

 

Reserves are accrued for matters in which Bluegreen believes it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2012, Bluegreen has accrued $2.3 million for matters which Bluegreen believes meet these criteria. The actual costs of resolving these legal claims may be substantially higher than the amounts accrued for these claims. Management of Bluegreen is not at this time able to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to these matters in which it is reasonably possible that a loss will occur. In certain matters, Bluegreen is unable to estimate the loss or reasonable range of loss until additional developments provide information sufficient to support an assessment of the loss or range of loss. Frequently in these matters, the claims are broad and the plaintiffs’ have not quantified or factually supported the claim.

 

Bluegreen believes that liabilities arising from the litigation and regulatory matters discussed below, in excess of the amounts currently accrued, if any, will not have a material impact on its financial statements.

 

Bluegreen Resorts

 

In 2005, the State of Tennessee Audit Division (the “Division”) audited certain subsidiaries within Bluegreen Resorts for the period from December 1, 2001 through December 31, 2004. On September 23, 2006, the Division

---

 

issued a notice of assessment for approximately $0.7 million of accommodations tax based on the use of Bluegreen Vacation Club accommodations by Bluegreen Vacation Club members who became members through the purchase of non-Tennessee property. We believe the attempt to impose such a tax is contrary to Tennessee law and have vigorously opposed such assessment by the Division. An informal conference was held in December 2007 to discuss this matter with representatives of the Division. No formal resolution of the issue was reached during the conference. By letter dated May 25, 2011, the State of Tennessee Department of Revenue issued a decision in which it held that two of the three types of transactions in question were taxable. The State of Tennessee Department of Revenue confirmed that we had already remitted the proper amount of sales tax due on one of the two types of taxable transactions, but has taken the position that we owed a total of $0.7 million in taxes and interest based on the second type of transaction. On August 1, 2011, we filed suit in the Chancery Court of Davidson County, Tennessee for the purpose of invalidating and setting aside the tax assessment made against us by the State of Tennessee Department of Revenue.  Discovery matters relative to the litigation are ongoing.

 

In Case No. 2006-Ca-3374, styled Joseph M. Scheyd, Jr., P.A. vs. Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited, Inc.; Hubert A. Laird; and MSB of Destin, Inc., in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit in and for Okaloosa County, Florida, during 2006, Joseph M. Scheyd, Jr., P.A., as escrow agent, brought an interpleader action seeking a determination as to whether we, as purchaser, or Hubert A. Laird and MSB of Destin, Inc., as seller, were entitled to the $1.4 million escrow deposit being maintained with the escrow agent pursuant to a purchase and sale contract for real property located in Destin, Florida. We maintained that our decision not to close on the purchase of the property was proper under the terms of the purchase and sale contract and that we are therefore entitled to a return of the full escrow deposit. On June 1, 2011, the trial court made a finding that we breached the purchase and sale contract and that the plaintiff was entitled to the escrow deposit and all accrued interest. We filed a notice of appeal with the First District Court of Appeal seeking to appeal the trial court’s decision. The escrow deposit and all accrued interest have been placed in the appropriate Court registry pending the outcome of the appeal. In January 2013 an Amended Final Judgment was issued finding us in breach of contract and awarding the plaintiff entire deposit plus accrued interest. We raised legal issues with aspects of Amended Final Judgment by filing Motion for Reconsideration with the court. We subsequently filed a Motion for Reconsideration with the Court.  Before the Court rendered a response to our Motion, the matter was settled pursuant to an agreement under which we received approximately $145,000 of the disputed deposit amount with the balance distributed to the plaintiff.

 

The Office of the Attorney General for the State of Florida (the “AGSF”) advised us that it had accumulated a number of consumer complaints since 2004 related to timeshare sales and marketing, and requested that we propose a resolution on a collective basis of any outstanding complaints. The AGSF also requested that we enter into a written agreement. We have determined that many of the identified complaints were previously addressed and/or resolved.  On May 24, 2012, the parties entered into a written agreement establishing a process for determining consumer eligibility for relief (including, where applicable, monetary restitution) and providing a timeframe through August 24, 2012 to resolve identified customer complaints. We have resolved most of the identified customer complaints and the AGSF advised us that it regards the formal portion of the matter closed; however, the terms of the written agreement require us to address any new customer complaints that arise in the ordinary course of business through late 2013.

 

Bluegreen Communities

 

The matters described below relate to Bluegreen Communities’ business. As described above and further in Note 10, we sold substantially all of the assets which comprised Bluegreen Communities to Southstar on May 4, 2012. However, Southstar did not assume the liabilities related to the matters described below in connection with the transaction, and we therefore remain responsible for these matters and any liabilities resulting from them.

 

Bluegreen Southwest One, L.P. (“Southwest”), a subsidiary of Bluegreen Corporation, was the developer of the Mountain Lakes subdivision in Texas. In Case No. 28006, styled Betty Yvon Lesley et a1. v. Bluff Dale Development Corporation, Bluegreen Southwest One. L.P. et al., in the 266^th Judicial District Court, Erath County, Texas, the plaintiffs filed a declaratory judgment action against Southwest seeking to develop their reserved mineral interests in, on and under the Mountain Lakes subdivision. The plaintiffs’ claims are based on property law, oil and gas law, contract and tort theories. The property owners association and some of the individual landowners have filed cross actions against Bluegreen, Southwest and individual directors of the property owners association related to the mineral rights and certain amenities in the subdivision as described below. On January 17, 2007, the court ruled that the restrictions placed on the development that prohibited oil and gas production and development were invalid and not enforceable as a matter of law, that such restrictions did not prohibit the development of the plaintiffs’ prior reserved mineral interests and that Southwest breached its duty to lease the minerals to third parties for development. The court further ruled that Southwest was the sole holder of the right to lease the minerals to third

---

 

parties. The order granting the plaintiffs’ motion was severed into Case No. 28769, styled Betty Yvon Lesley et a1. v. Bluff Dale Development Corporation, Bluegreen Southwest One. L.P. et al. in the 266^th Judicial District Court, Erath County, Texas. Southwest appealed the trial court’s ruling. On January 22, 2009, in Bluegreen Southwest One, L.P. et al. v. Betty Yvon Lesley et al., in the 11th Court of Appeals, Eastland, Texas, the Appellate Court reversed the trial court’s decision and ruled in Southwest’s favor and determined that all executive rights were owned by Southwest and then transferred to the individual property owners in connection with the sales of land. All property owner claims were decided in favor of Southwest. It was also decided that Southwest did not breach a fiduciary duty to the plaintiffs as an executive rights holder. On May 14, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Texas Supreme Court asking the Court to reverse the Appellate Court’s decision in favor of Southwest. On August 26, 2011, the Texas Supreme Court issued its opinion affirming the Appellate Court’s decision in part and reversing it in part. The Texas Supreme Court held that Southwest did not breach any covenants in the deed, but did breach a duty to the plaintiffs by filing restrictive covenants in connection with the development of the property which prohibited mineral development, and that the appropriate remedy was cancellation of the restrictive covenants. The Texas Supreme Court further ruled that the plaintiffs have no right of ingress to, or egress from, the subdivision, and that Southwest did not breach a duty to the plaintiffs by not leasing the mineral rights. The Texas Supreme Court remanded the case to the trial court for disposition consistent with its decision. On January 17, 2013, the trial court issued a partial judgment on remand.  In its partial judgment, the trial court entered judgment on the issues rendered by the Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court; including a finding that Bluegreen’s filing of restrictive covenants that attempted to prevent or restrict mineral development was a breach of a duty owed to the non-executive mineral rights owners.  As such, the trial court canceled and declared void the section of the restrictive covenants preventing mineral development. However, the trial court also declared that the remaining provisions of the restrictive covenants remain in full force, and the filing of the restrictive covenants by Bluegreen was not a breach of contract.  The trial court also held that the claims by the plaintiffs for reformation of the original deeds dealing with the quantum of mineral reserved therein should be severed from this case and proceed to a separate trial, which is currently scheduled to begin in October 2013.

 

Separately, as a result of the Texas Supreme Court’s decision invalidating the restrictive covenants prohibiting mineral development within the subdivision, certain lot owners within Mountain Lakes filed a cross-claim against Southwest alleging fraud, negligence and a violation of deceptive trade practices laws based on a claim that the invalidation of the restrictive covenants has caused devaluation of their residential lots and other economic damages. During mediation held in June 2012, Southwest and the named plaintiffs (Lesley) reached agreement to settle their disputes with Southwest agreeing to pay Lesley $200,000 for dismissal of their claims.  Similarly, during the same mediation Southwest settled with seven of the lot owners claiming diminution of lot values for $5,000 collectively.  Since that time, Southwest has also settled the claims of several other lot owners for a total of $2,000.  However, settlement has not been reached with the other landowners possessing reserved mineral rights, nor with the majority of lot owners who filed the cross-claim against Southwest. The trial court has set a trial date of October 7, 2013 for this matter. Southwest intends to vigorously defend itself with respect to the pending matters.

 

In addition to the legal proceedings described above for Bluegreen, see “In Re Bluegreen Corporation Shareholder Litigation” above, which describes the pending litigation relating to Bluegreen’s proposed merger transaction with BFC.

 

BBX Capital

 

BBX Capital and its subsidiaries are parties to lawsuits as plaintiff or defendant involving its bank operations, lending and tax certificates. Although BBX Capital believes it has meritorious defenses in all current legal actions, the outcome of litigation and regulatory matters and timing of ultimate resolution are inherently difficult to predict and uncertain.

 

Securities and Exchange Commission v. BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. and Alan B. Levan, Case No. 12-60082-CV-SCOLA, United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

 

On January 18, 2012, the SEC brought an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against BBX Capital and Alan B. Levan, BBX Capital’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, alleging that they violated securities laws by not timely disclosing known adverse trends in BankAtlantic’s commercial real estate loans, selectively disclosing problem loans and engaging in improper accounting treatment of certain specific loans which may have resulted in a material understatement of its net loss in BBX Capital’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007. Further, the complaint alleges that Mr. Alan B. Levan intentionally misled investors in related earnings calls. The SEC is seeking a finding by the court of violations of securities laws,

---

 

a permanent injunction barring future violations, civil money penalties and, in the case of Mr. Alan B. Levan, an order barring him from serving as an officer or director of a public company.  Discovery is on-going, and the case is currently set for trial during the two-week period beginning on August 26, 2013. BBX Capital believes the claims to be without merit and intends to vigorously defend the actions.

 

In re:  New Jersey Tax Sales Certificates Antitrust Litigation v. BBX Capital Corporation f/k/a BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc., Fidelity Tax, LLC, Gary I. Branse, Michael Deluca and BB&T Corporation, and multiple other individuals and entities who purchased New Jersey tax certificates between 1998 to February 2009, Case No.12-CV-01893-MAS-TJB, United States District Court, District of New Jersey (Trenton)

 

On December 21, 2012, plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint in an existing purported class action filed in Federal District Court in New Jersey adding BBX Capital and Fidelity Tax, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of CAM, among others as defendants.  BBX Capital and Fidelity Tax were served with the complaint January 8, 2013.  The class action complaint is brought on behalf of a class defined as “all persons who owned real property in the State of New Jersey and who had a Tax Certificate issued with respect to their property that was purchased by a Defendant during the Class Period at a public auction in the State of New Jersey at an interest rate above 0%.”  Plaintiffs allege that beginning in January 1998 and at least through February 2009, the Defendants were part of a statewide conspiracy to manipulate interest rates associated with tax certificates sold at public auction from at least January 1, 1998, through February 28, 2009, all in violation of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1, the New Jersey Antitrust Act, N.J.S.A. 56:9-3, and the New Jersey Tax Lien Law, N.J.S.A. Section 54:5-1.  During this time period, Fidelity Tax was a subsidiary of BankAtlantic.  Fidelity Tax was contributed to CAM in connection with the sale of BankAtlantic in the BB&T Transaction. BBX Capital and Fidelity Tax filed a Motion to Dismiss in March 2013.  BBX Capital believes the claims to be without merit and intends to vigorously defend the actions.

 

 

 

ITEM 4.  MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

 

Not Applicable.

 

 

---

 

 

PART II

 

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

 

Our Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock have substantially identical terms, except as follows:

 

 

In addition to any other approval required by Florida law, the voting structure described in the first bullet point above may not be amended without the approval of holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of our Class B Common Stock, voting as a separate class.

 

Market Information

 

Our Class A Common Stock is quoted on the OTCQB market tier of the OTC Markets (“OTCQB”) under the ticker symbol “BFCF.” Our Class B Common Stock is quoted on the OTCQB under the ticker symbol “BFCFB.” 

 

The following table sets forth, for the indicated periods, the high and low trading prices for our Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock as quoted on the OTCQB. .

 

 

Holders

 

On March 26, 2013, there were approximately 666 record holders of our Class A Common Stock and approximately 418 record holders of our Class B Common Stock.

 

Dividends

 

BFC has never paid cash dividends on its Class A Common Stock or Class B Common Stock.  Future declaration and payment of cash dividends with respect to BFC’s Common Stock, if any, will be determined in light of the then-current financial condition of BFC and other factors deemed relevant by the board of directors of BFC.

 

---

 

See the “BFC-Liquidity and Capital Resources” section of “Item 7 - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for a discussion regarding the ability of BBX Capital and Bluegreen to pay dividends to holders of their capital stock, including BFC.

 

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

On September 21, 2009, our board of directors approved a share repurchase program which authorizes the repurchase of up to 20,000,000 shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock at an aggregate cost of up to $10 million.  The share repurchase program replaced our $10 million repurchase program that our board of directors approved in October 2006 which placed a limitation on the number of shares which could be repurchased under the program at 1,750,000 shares of Class A Common Stock.  The current program, like the prior program, authorizes management, at its discretion, to repurchase shares from time to time subject to market conditions and other factors.  No shares have been repurchased under the current program.

 

 

---

 

 

ITEM 6.  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

 

The following table sets forth selected consolidated financial data as of and for the years ended December 31, 2008 through 2012.  Certain selected financial data presented below is derived from our consolidated financial statements.  This table is a summary and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto include in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

 

---

 

 

---

 

 

ITEM 7.  MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

Overview

 

BFC Financial Corporation (“BFC” or, unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, “we”, “us”, “our” or the “Company”) is a holding company whose principal holdings include direct or indirect controlling interests in BBX Capital Corporation (formerly BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.) and its subsidiaries (“BBX Capital”) and Bluegreen Corporation and its subsidiaries (“Bluegreen”). We currently hold shares of BBX Capital’s Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock representing an approximately 75% voting interest and 53% equity interest in BBX Capital.  BBX Capital’s principal asset until July 31, 2012 was its investment in BankAtlantic, a federal savings bank headquartered in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. As described in further detail below under “Recent Developments – Sale of BankAtlantic,” on July 31, 2012, BBX Capital completed its sale to BB&T Corporation (“BB&T”) of all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of BankAtlantic. Following the sale of BankAtlantic to BB&T, BBX Capital has managed, and plans to continue to manage, the assets retained by it in the sales transaction and engage in investments in real estate and other business opportunities as well as specialty finance activities over time as such assets are monetized.  In addition, as described in further detail below under “Recent Developments – Proposed Bluegreen Merger,” it is contemplated that BBX Capital will invest $71.75 million in our subsidiary, Woodbridge Holdings, LLC (“Woodbridge”), upon consummation of Woodbridge’s acquisition of Bluegreen, in exchange for a 46% equity interest in Woodbridge.  We will continue to hold the remaining 54% of Woodbridge’s outstanding equity interests.

 

We currently hold shares of Bluegreen’s common stock representing approximately 54% of the issued and outstanding shares of such stock. Bluegreen is a sales, marketing and management company focused on the vacation ownership industry. Bluegreen markets, sells and manages vacation ownership interests (“VOIs”) in resorts, which are generally located in popular, high-volume, “drive-to” vacation destinations, and were either developed or acquired by Bluegreen or developed and owned by others, in which case Bluegreen earns fees for providing such services. Bluegreen also provides property association management services, mortgage servicing, VOI title services, reservation services, and construction design and development services. In addition, Bluegreen provides financing to individual purchasers of VOIs, which provides significant interest income to Bluegreen.  As described in further detail below under “Recent Developments – Proposed Bluegreen Merger,” we are currently party to a merger agreement with Bluegreen which provides for the acquisition of Bluegreen by Woodbridge in a cash merger.

 

BFC also holds interests in other investments and subsidiaries as described herein.  In addition, BFC held a significant investment in Benihana Inc. (“Benihana”) until the acquisition of Benihana by Safflower Holdings Corp. (“Safflower”) during August 2012. 

 

As of December 31, 2012, we had total consolidated assets of approximately $1.5 billion and shareholders’ equity attributable to BFC of approximately $299.0 million. Net income attributable to BFC for the year ended December 31, 2012 was approximately $166.0 million, including a gain on sale of BankAtlantic of approximately $293 million. Net loss attributable to BFC was approximately $11.3 million and $103.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

 

BFC’s business strategy has been to invest in and acquire businesses in diverse industries either directly or through controlled subsidiaries. However, in the short-term, BFC has focused on providing strategic support to its existing investments with a view to the improved performance of the organization as a whole. In addition to the currently proposed merger with Bluegreen, we expect to consider other opportunities that could alter our ownership in our affiliates.  We may also seek to make opportunistic investments outside of our existing portfolio.  However, we do not currently have pre-determined parameters as to the industry or structure of any future investment. In furtherance of our goals, we will continue to evaluate various financing transactions, including raising additional debt or equity as well as other alternative sources of new capital.

 

The following events had a significant financial impact on BFC during 2012:

 

---

 

 

GAAP requires that BFC consolidate the financial results of the entities in which it has controlling interest. As a consequence, the assets and liabilities of all such entities are presented on a consolidated basis in BFC’s financial statements. However, except as otherwise noted, the debts and obligations of the consolidated entities, including BBX Capital, Woodbridge, and Bluegreen, are not direct obligations of BFC and are non-recourse to BFC. Similarly, the assets of those entities are not available to BFC absent a dividend or distribution from those entities. The recognition by BFC of income from controlled entities is determined based on the total percent of economic ownership in those entities. At December 31, 2012, BFC had an approximately 53% economic ownership interest in BBX Capital and, through Woodbridge, an approximately 54% economic ownership interest in Bluegreen.

 

We currently report the results of our business activities through four segments: Real Estate Operations; Bluegreen Resorts; BBX; and Florida Asset Resolution Group.

 

Discontinued operations include BankAtlantic’s Community Banking, Investments, Tax Certificates, and Capital Services components, Bluegreen Communities, Core’s commercial leasing projects, and Cypress Creek Holdings.  See Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this report for additional information regarding discontinued operations.

 

 

Recent Events

 

Proposed Bluegreen Merger

 

On November 11, 2011, BFC entered into a definitive merger agreement with Bluegreen (the “2011 merger agreement”).  Pursuant to the terms of the 2011 merger agreement and subject to the conditions set forth therein, if the merger contemplated by the 2011 merger agreement (the “2011 merger”) had been consummated, Bluegreen would have become a wholly-owned subsidiary of BFC, and Bluegreen’s shareholders (other than BFC) would have been entitled to receive eight shares of BFC’s Class A Common Stock for each share of Bluegreen’s common stock that they held at the effective time of the merger.  Consummation of the 2011 merger was subject to certain closing conditions, including the listing of BFC’s Class A Common Stock on a national securities exchange at the effective time of the merger. Due to the inability to satisfy all required closing conditions, specifically the listing of BFC’s Class A Common Stock on a national securities exchange, effective November 14, 2012, the parties agreed to terminate the 2011 merger agreement and entered into the 2012 merger agreement described below.

 

On November 14, 2012, BFC and Woodbridge entered into a new definitive merger agreement with Bluegreen (the “2012 merger agreement”) providing for the acquisition of Bluegreen by Woodbridge in a cash merger (the “2012 merger”) pursuant to which Bluegreen’s shareholders (other than BFC, directly or indirectly through Woodbridge, and shareholders of Bluegreen who duly exercise appraisal rights in accordance with Massachusetts law) will receive consideration of $10.00 in cash for each share of Bluegreen’s common stock that they hold at the effective time of the merger.  Consummation of the 2012 merger is subject to, among other things, the parties’ obtaining the financing necessary to consummate the transaction.  The aggregate merger consideration is expected to be

---

 

approximately $150 million.  If the 2012 merger is consummated, Bluegreen will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Woodbridge, and Bluegreen’s common stock will no longer be listed for trading on the NYSE or registered under the Exchange Act.

 

In connection with the financing of the 2012 merger, BFC and BBX Capital entered into a letter agreement relating to a proposed investment by BBX Capital of $71.75 million in Woodbridge. It is contemplated that the proposed investment, which is subject to the execution of definitive agreements by BBX Capital and BFC, would be made by BBX Capital at the effective time of the merger in exchange for a 46% equity interest in Woodbridge. BFC would continue to hold the remaining 54% of Woodbridge’s equity interests. It is anticipated that BBX Capital’s investment in Woodbridge will consist of approximately $60 million in cash and a promissory note in Woodbridge’s favor in the principal amount of approximately $11.75 million. The cash proceeds from the investment are expected to be utilized to pay a portion of the aggregate merger consideration. It is also contemplated that, in connection with the investment, Woodbridge’s operating agreement will be amended to set forth BFC’s and BBX Capital’s respective rights as members of Woodbridge following the investment and provide, among other things, for unanimity on certain specified “major decisions.” 

 

On March 26, 2013, Bluegreen issued $75 million of senior secured notes in a private transaction, the proceeds of which will be used to fund a portion of the merger consideration.  To the extent that Bluegreen uses its resources to fund a portion of the merger consideration, BFC anticipates that its shareholders’ equity will be reduced accordingly.  See the “Bluegreen Resorts Liquidity” section below for further information regarding this financing transaction. There is no assurance that the 2012 merger will be consummated on the contemplated terms, or at all. 

 

Following the announcement of the 2011 merger agreement, seven purported class action lawsuits were filed seeking to enjoin the 2011 merger or, if it was completed, to recover relief as determined by the applicable presiding court. Four of these lawsuits were filed in Florida and have been consolidated into a single action. The other three lawsuits, which were filed in Massachusetts, have also been consolidated into a single action, which has been stayed in favor of the consolidated action in Florida. Following the announcement of the termination of the 2011 merger agreement and entry into the 2012 merger agreement, the plaintiffs in the Florida action filed a supplemental complaint alleging that the consideration to be received by Bluegreen’s shareholders pursuant to the 2012 merger agreement remains inadequate and continues to be unfair to Bluegreen’s minority shareholders. See “Item 3 – Legal Proceedings” for additional information regarding the litigation.

 

Sale of Bluegreen Communities

 

On May 4, 2012, Bluegreen sold substantially all of the assets that comprised its residential communities business, Bluegreen Communities, to Southstar Development Partners, Inc. (“Southstar”) for a purchase price of $29.0 million in cash. Southstar also agreed to pay an amount equal to 20% of the net proceeds (as calculated in accordance with the terms of the agreement), of its sale, if any, of two specified parcels of real estate purchased by Southstar under the agreement. Southstar sold one of such parcels during 2012 and paid to Bluegreen the proceeds of the sale to which Bluegreen was entitled, which was insignificant.  Assets excluded from the sale included primarily Bluegreen’s Communities notes receivable portfolio. Bluegreen Communities is classified as a discontinued operation for all periods presented in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. See Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements included herein for additional information regarding discontinued operations.

 

Benihana’s Acquisition by Safflower

 

As previously described, BFC held a significant investment in Benihana prior to the merger between Benihana and Safflower during August 2012.  Pursuant to the merger agreement, Safflower acquired Benihana for a cash purchase price of $16.30 per share of Benihana’s common stock.  BFC received approximately $24.5 million in exchange for the 1,505,330 shares of Benihana’s common stock that it held at the effective time of the transaction. 

 

Prior to Safflower’s acquisition of Benihana, BFC sold approximately 77,000 shares of Benihana’s common stock during July and August 2012 pursuant to the terms of a Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan and received net proceeds from such sales of approximately $1.25 million. 

 

BFC recognized a gain on sale of approximately $9.3 million in connection with its sales of shares of Benihana’s common stock during July and August 2012 and disposition of its remaining shares of Benihana’s common stock pursuant to the merger between Benihana and Safflower during August 2012. In addition, during each of the first three quarters of 2012, BFC received approximately $127,000 of dividend payments with respect to its shares of Benihana’s common stock.

---

 

 

Sale of BankAtlantic    

 

On July 31, 2012 BBX Capital completed the sale to BB&T Corporation (“BB&T”) of all of the shares of BankAtlantic (the sale and related transactions, the “BankAtlantic Sale”).  In connection with the BankAtlantic Sale, BankAtlantic’s Community Banking, Investments, Tax Certificates and Capital Services reporting units are reported as discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. BBX Capital’s activities during each of the years in the three year period ended December 31, 2012 consisted of managing a commercial loan portfolio which included construction, residential development, land acquisition and commercial business loans. The activities of managing these loan portfolios included renewing, modifying, increasing, extending, refinancing and making protective advances on these loans, as well as managing and liquidating real estate properties acquired through foreclosure.

 

Pursuant to the terms of the BB&T Agreement, prior to the closing of the Transaction BankAtlantic formed two subsidiaries, BBX Capital Asset Management, LLC (“CAM”) and Florida Asset Resolution Group, LLC (“FAR”).  BankAtlantic contributed to FAR certain performing and non-performing loans, tax certificates, and real estate owned that had an aggregate carrying value on BankAtlantic’s balance sheet of approximately $346 million at July 31, 2012 (the date the BB&T transaction was consummated). FAR assumed all liabilities related to these assets. BankAtlantic also contributed approximately $50 million in cash to FAR on July 31, 2012 and thereafter distributed all of the membership interests in FAR to BBX Capital.  At the closing of the Transaction, BBX Capital transferred to BB&T 95% of the outstanding preferred membership interests in FAR in connection with BB&T’s assumption of BBX Capital’s outstanding TruPs obligations, as described in further detail below. BBX Capital continues to hold the remaining 5% of FAR’s preferred membership interests.  Under the terms of the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company of FAR, which was entered into by BBX Capital and BB&T at the closing, BB&T will hold its 95% preferred interest in the net cash flows of FAR until such time as it has recovered $285 million in preference amount plus a priority return of LIBOR + 200 basis points per annum on any unpaid preference amount. At that time, BB&T’s interest in FAR will terminate, and BBX Capital will thereafter be entitled to any and all residual proceeds from FAR.  It is expected that the assets (other than cash) contributed to FAR will be monetized over a period of seven years, or longer provided BB&T’s preference amount is repaid within such seven-year period. BBX Capital entered into an incremental $35 million guarantee in BB&T’s favor to further assure BB&T’s recovery of the $285 million preference amount within seven years. As such, FAR is considered a variable interest entity (“VIE”) and in accordance with the applicable guidance for VIE’s, BBX Capital, as the primary beneficiary, is required to consolidate the financial statements of FAR. BB&T’s preferred interest in FAR was $197 million as of December 31, 2012.

 

Prior to the closing of the Transaction, BankAtlantic contributed to CAM certain non-performing commercial loans, commercial real estate owned and previously written off assets that had an aggregate carrying value on BankAtlantic’s balance sheet of $125 million as of July 31, 2012. CAM assumed all liabilities related to these assets. BankAtlantic also contributed approximately $82 million in cash to CAM. Prior to the closing of the Transaction, BankAtlantic distributed all of the membership interests in CAM to BBX Capital.  CAM remains a wholly owned subsidiary of BBX Capital.

 

BB&T made a cash payment in connection with the closing of the Transaction of approximately $6.4 million to BBX Capital which was based on a deposit premium of $315.9 million and the net asset value of BankAtlantic as of June 30, 2012, in each case as calculated pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, including, with respect to the net asset value of BankAtlantic, after giving effect to the asset contributions and membership interest distributions by BankAtlantic to BBX Capital. 

 

In connection with the BankAtlantic Sale, BFC recognized a gain on sale of approximately $293.4 million, including approximately $2.8 million of purchase accounting adjustments related to BFC’s acquisitions during 2008 of shares of BBX Capital’s Class A Common Stock which were accounted for as step acquisitions under the purchase method of accounting then in effect.

 

At the closing of the Transaction, BB&T assumed the obligations with respect to BBX Capital’s approximately $285 million in principal amount of outstanding TruPs, and BBX Capital paid BB&T approximately $51.3 million, representing all accrued and unpaid interest on the TruPs through closing.  BBX Capital also paid approximately $2.3 million for certain legal fees and expenses incurred by trustees with respect to the now resolved litigation relating to the Transaction brought by certain trustees and holders of the TruPs.  BBX Capital used proceeds received in the Transaction to make these payments.

 

---

 

As a result of their respective historic direct and indirect ownership interests in BankAtlantic, both BBX Capital and BFC were unitary savings and loan holding companies subject to examination and regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”). Effective July 31, 2012, BBX Capital and BFC were released from registration as savings and loan holding companies because, as a result of the Transaction, they no longer directly or indirectly control a financial institution.  As such, both BBX Capital and BFC are no longer subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve or restrictions applicable to financial institution holding companies.  

 

Summary of Consolidated Results of Operations

The table below sets forth the Company’s summarized results of operations (in thousands):

 

 

 

The Company reported consolidated net income attributable to BFC of $166.0 million in 2012, which included a $293 million gain realized in connection with BBX Capital’s sale of BankAtlantic (which gain is included in discontinued operations).  Net loss attributable to BFC for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 of $11.3 million and $103.8 million, respectively.  Discontinued operations include the results of BankAtlantic’s community banking, investment, capital services and tax certificate reporting units, including the gain on sale of BankAtlantic of approximately $293 million, as well as Bluegreen Communities, Core’s commercial leasing projects, and Cypress Creek Holdings.  See Note 5 to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this report for additional information about our discontinued operations. The 5% preferred stock dividend represents the dividend obligations of the Company with respect to its mandatorily redeemable 5% Cumulative Preferred Stock.

 

 

Consolidated Financial Condition

 

Consolidated Assets and Liabilities

 

Total assets at December 31, 2012 and 2011 were $1.5 billion and $4.8 billion, respectively.  The primary changes in components of total assets are summarized below:

 

 

---

 

 

 

Noncontrolling Interests

 

The following table summarizes the noncontrolling interests held by others in our subsidiaries (in thousands):

 

 

 

Consolidated Cash Flows

 

A summary of our consolidated cash flows is set forth below (in thousands):

 

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities – The decrease in cash flows from operating activities during 2012 compared to 2011 primarily reflects a decline in proceeds on  the sales of loans held for sale  and lower interest income on VOI notes receivable due to  a decreasing portfolio balance partially offset by higher cash from VOI sales and fee-based services revenue.

 

The decrease in cash flows from operating activities during 2011 compared to 2010 primarily reflects a decline in proceeds on the sales of loans and net interest income as well as lower customer fee income, partially offset by the generation of more cash from VOI sales and fee-based services, and a reduction of inventory development spending.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities – The decrease in cash flows from investing activities during 2012 compared to 2011 primarily resulted from BBX Capital’s sale of BankAtlantic during July 2012 and lower proceeds from the sales of securities available for sale.

 

The increase in cash flows from investing activities during 2011 compared to 2010 resulted primarily from maturities of short-term securities available for sale and a decrease in the purchase of securities available for sale, partially offset by cash outflows from the sale of BankAtlantic’s Tampa branches and Bluegreen’s expenses related to upgrading certain of its information technology.

---

 

 

Cash Flows from Financing Activities – The decrease in cash flows used in financing activities during 2012 compared to 2011 primarily resulted from a net increase in deposits and lower repayments of borrowers due to BBX Capital’s sale of BankAtlantic during July 2012 and a net increase in Bluegreen’s receivable-backed debt partially offset by the repayment of lines-of-credit facilities and the full repayment of Bluegreen’s H4BG Communities Facility.

 

The increase in cash flows used from financing activities during 2011 compared to 2010 resulted primarily from deposit outflows at BankAtlantic. In order to improve regulatory capital ratios, BankAtlantic reduced its assets by decreasing its public deposit, short-term borrowings and FHLB advances. The decrease in cash flows used from financing activities was partially offset by lower payments required to service Bluegreen’s lines of credit and notes payable.

 

Critical Accounting Policies

 

Management views critical accounting policies as accounting policies that are important to the understanding of our financial statements and also involve estimates and judgments about inherently uncertain matters. In preparing the financial statements, management is required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the consolidated statements of financial condition and assumptions that affect the recognition of income and expenses on the consolidated statements of operations for the periods presented. On an ongoing basis, management evaluates its estimates, including those that relate to the determination of the allowance for loan losses, the estimated future sales value of inventory, the recognition of revenue, including revenue recognition under the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, the recovery of the carrying value of real estate inventories, the fair value of assets measured at, or compared to, fair value on a non-recurring basis such as assets held for sale, intangible assets and other long-lived assets, the evaluation of goodwill, the valuation of securities, as well as the determination of other-than-temporary declines in value, the valuation of real estate acquired in connection with foreclosure or in satisfaction of loans, the determination of the fair value of assets and liabilities in the application of the acquisition method of accounting, the estimate of contingent liabilities related to litigation and other claims and assessments, and assumptions used in the valuation of stock based compensation. The accounting policies that we have identified as critical accounting policies are: (i) revenue recognition and inventory cost allocation; (ii) the carrying value of completed VOI inventory; (iii) the carrying value of VOIs held for and under development; (iv) allowance for credit and loan losses, including with respect to notes receivable secured by VOIs; (v) the impairment of long-lived assets, including intangible assets; and (vi) the valuation of Bluegreen’s notes receivable which for accounting purposes were treated as having been acquired by BFC during 2009 in connection with our purchase of additional shares of Bluegreen’s common stock at that time.  Management bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that it believes to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates under different assumptions and conditions. If actual results significantly differ from management’s estimates, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely impacted.

 

Revenue Recognition and Inventory Cost Allocation

 

Sales of Real Estate 

In accordance with the requirements of Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Codification Standards (“ACS”) 970-605, Real Estate-Revenue Recognition, we recognize revenue on VOI and homesite sales when a minimum of 10% of the sales price has been received in cash (buyer’s commitment), the legal rescission period has expired, collectibility of the receivable representing the remainder of the sales price is reasonably assured and Bluegreen has completed substantially all of its obligations with respect to any development related to the real estate sold. Bluegreen believes that it uses a reasonably reliable methodology to estimate the collectibility of the receivables representing the remainder of the sales price of real estate sold. See the further discussion of Bluegreen’s policies regarding the estimation of credit losses on Bluegreen’s notes receivable below. Should Bluegreen become unable to reasonably estimate the collectability of its receivables, Bluegreen may have to defer the recognition of sales and Bluegreen’s results of operations could be negatively impacted. Under timeshare accounting rules, the buyer’s minimum cash down payment towards the purchase of Bluegreen’s VOIs is met only if the cash down payment received, reduced by the value of certain incentives provided to the buyer at the time of sale, is at least 10% of the sales price. If, after consideration of the value of the incentive, the total down payment received from the buyer is less than 10% of the sales price, the VOI sale, and the related cost of sales and direct selling expenses, are deferred until such time that sufficient cash is received from the customer, generally through receipt of mortgage

---

 

payments. Changes to the quantity, type or value of sales incentives that Bluegreen provides to buyers of its VOIs may increase the number of VOI sales being deferred or extend the period during which a sale is deferred, which could materially adversely impact Bluegreen’s results of operations.

 

In cases where development has not been substantially completed, Bluegreen recognizes revenue in accordance with the percentage-of-completion method of accounting. Should Bluegreen’s estimates of the total anticipated cost of completing projects increase, Bluegreen may be required to defer a greater amount of revenue or may be required to defer revenue for a longer period of time than expected, which could materially adversely impact Bluegreen’s results of operations.

 

Timeshare accounting rules require the use of an industry-specific relative sales value method for relieving VOI inventory and recording cost of sales. Under the relative sales value method, cost of sales is calculated as a percentage of net sales using a cost-of-sales percentage — the ratio of total estimated development cost to total estimated VOI revenue, including the estimated incremental revenue from the resale of repossessed VOI inventory, generally as a result of the default of the related receivable.

 

As a result of the sale of substantially all of the assets that comprised Bluegreen Communities in May 2012, the revenues of Bluegreen Communities, including homesite sales, are included within the results of discontinued operations for all periods presented in our consolidated statements of operations contained in this Annual Report.

 

Fee-Based Sales Commissions and Other Revenue

In addition to sales of real estate, Bluegreen also generates revenue from the activities listed below. The table provides a brief description of the applicable revenue recognition policy:  

 

 

 

Carrying Value of Completed VOI Inventory.  Bluegreen carries its completed VOIs at the lower of i) cost, including costs of improvements and amenities incurred subsequent to acquisition, capitalized interest, real estate taxes and other costs incurred during construction, or ii) estimated fair value, less costs to sell.

 

Carrying Value of VOIs Held for Development and Under Development and Long-Lived Assets. Bluegreen evaluates the recovery of its long-lived assets, and Bluegreen’s undeveloped real estate properties or real estate properties under development, if certain trigger events occur. If the estimated undiscounted future cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, the asset is written down to its estimated fair value.

 

---

 

Allowance for Credit and Loan Losses

Allowance for Credit Losses on Bluegreen’s VOI Notes Receivable. Bluegreen records an estimate of expected uncollectibility on its VOI notes receivable as a reduction of revenue at the time Bluegreen recognizes a timeshare sale. Bluegreen estimates uncollectible VOI notes receivable based on historical uncollectibles for similar VOI notes receivable over the applicable historical period, using a technique referred to as a static pool analysis, which tracks uncollectibles for each year’s sales over the entire life of those notes.

 

Bluegreen also considers certain qualitative data, including the aging of the respective receivables, current default trends by origination year, current economic conditions, and the FICO^® scores of the borrowers. Additionally, under timeshare accounting requirements, no consideration is given for future recoveries of defaulted inventory in the estimate of uncollectible VOI notes receivable. Bluegreen reviews its reserves for credit losses on at least a quarterly basis. If defaults increase, Bluegreen’s results of operations could be materially adversely impacted. During 2012, 2011, and 2010, in addition to recognizing an estimate of credit losses on current loan originations, Bluegreen recorded $3.8 million, $7.2 million and $21.2 million, respectively, of charges as a result of changing our estimate of future credit losses on loans originated prior to its implementation of FICO^® score-based credit underwriting standards during December 2008.

 

Allowance for Loan Losses-BBX Capital.  The allowance for loan losses is maintained at an amount that BBX Capital believes to be a reasonable estimate of probable losses inherent in BankAtlantic Bancorp’s loan portfolio as of the date of the financial statements presented. Policies and procedures have been developed for evaluating BBX Capital’s allowance for loan losses which considers all information available to it.  However, BBX Capital relies on estimates and judgments regarding issues where the outcome is unknown. As a consequence, if circumstances differ from its estimates and judgments, the allowance for loan losses may decrease or increase significantly and the amount of losses actually realized in BBX Capital’s loan portfolio could be significantly higher or lower.

The calculation of BBX Capital’s allowance for loan losses consists of two components.  The first component requires BBX Capital to identify impaired loans based on management classification and, if necessary, assign a valuation allowance to the impaired loans. Valuation allowances are established using management estimates of the fair value of collateral or based on valuation models that present value estimated expected future cash flows discounted at the loans effective interest rate. These valuations are based on available information and require estimates and subjective judgments about fair values of the collateral or expected future cash flows.  Most of BBX Capital’s loans do not have an observable market price, and an estimate of the collection of contractual cash flows is based on the judgment of management. It is likely that BBX Capital would obtain materially different results if different assumptions or conditions were to prevail.  As a consequence of the estimates and assumptions required to calculate the first component of BBX Capital’s allowance for loan losses, a change in these highly uncertain estimates could have a materially favorable or unfavorable impact on BBX Capital’s financial condition and results of operations.

 

The second component of the allowance for loan losses requires BBX Capital to group loans that have similar credit risk characteristics so as to form a basis for estimating probable losses inherent in the group of loans based on historical loss percentages and delinquency trends as it relates to the group.  Management assigns a quantitative allowance to these groups of loans by utilizing historical loss experiences.  Management uses a historical loss experience by portfolio between six months and one year.  The historical loss period is selected based on management’s judgment and a change in this loss period may result in material changes to the quantitative loss allowance.  Management also assigns a qualitative allowance to these groups of loans in order to adjust the historical data, if necessary, for qualitative factors that exist currently that were not present in the historical data. These qualitative factors include delinquency trends, actual loan classification migration trends, economic and business conditions, concentration of credit risk, loan-to-value ratios, credit scores, non-performing loan trends and external factors. In deriving the qualitative allowance, management uses significant judgment to qualitatively adjust the historical loss experiences for current trends that existed at period end that were not reflected in the calculated historical loss ratios and to adjust the allowance for the changes in the current economic climate compared to the economic environment that existed historically. A subsequent change in data trends or the external environment may result in material changes in this component of the allowance from period to period. 

 

Management believes that the allowance for loan losses reflects a reasonable estimate of incurred credit losses as of the statement of financial condition date. As of December 31, 2012, BBX Capital’s allowance for loan losses was $5.3 million. See “Provision for Loan Losses” for a discussion of the amounts of BBX Capital’s allowance assigned to each loan product. The majority of the Company’s loans are collateral dependent and resulted in BBX Capital recognizing a charge-off for the amount that the recorded investment in the loan exceeded the fair value of the collateral less cost to sell.  The estimated allowance, which was derived from the above methodology, may be significantly different from actual realized losses. Actual losses incurred in the future are highly dependent upon

---

 

future events, including the economies of geographic areas where BBX Capital’s borrowers or the collateral for BBX Capital’s loans are located, especially in Florida.  These factors are beyond management’s control.  Accordingly, BBX Capital may incur credit losses in excess of the amounts estimated by BBX Capital’s allowance for loan losses.

 

BBX Capital analyzes its loan portfolio quarterly by monitoring the credit quality, loan-to-value ratios, credit scores, historical trends, delinquency trends and economic conditions. As a consequence, BBX Capital’s allowance for loan losses estimates will change from period to period. BBX Capital believes that its performance in subsequent periods will be highly sensitive to changes in the Florida real estate market as well as the recovery of the Florida economy, availability of mortgage financing and the severity of unemployment in Florida and nationally.  If real estate and economic conditions deteriorate, BBX Capital is likely to experience significantly increased credit losses. 

 

Impairment of Long Lived Assets, Including Intangible Assets. Long lived assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable.  When testing a long-lived asset for recoverability, it may be necessary to review estimated lives and adjust the depreciation period.  Changes in circumstances and the estimates of future cash flows, as well as evaluating estimated lives of long-lived assets, are subjective and involve a significant amount of judgment.  A change in the estimated life of a long-lived asset may substantially change depreciation or amortization expense in subsequent periods. For purposes of recognition and measurement of an impairment loss, we are required to group long-lived assets at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are independent of other assets.  These cash flows are based on projections from management reports which are based on subjective interdepartmental allocations. Fair values are not available for many of our long-lived assets, and estimates must be based on available information, including prices of similar assets and present value valuation techniques using Level 3 unobservable inputs.  Long-lived assets subject to the above impairment analysis include property and equipment, inventory, real estate held for sale and real estate owned.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, BBX Capital recognized impairment on real estate owned of $9.1 million and $14.2 million, respectively. BBX Capital generally utilizes broker price opinions and third party appraisals to assist BBX Capital in determining the fair value of real estate owned.  The appraisers or brokers use professional judgment in determining the fair value of the properties and BBX Capital may also adjust these values for changes in market conditions subsequent to the valuation date when current appraisals are not available.  The assumptions used to calculate the fair values are generally Level 3 inputs and are highly subjective and extremely sensitive to changes in market conditions. The assumptions used are representative of assumptions that BBX Capital believes market participants would use in fair valuing these assets or lease contracts, but different assumptions may result in significantly different results. BBX Capital validates its assumptions by comparing completed transactions with its prior period fair value estimates and BBX Capital may check its assumptions against multiple valuation sources. The outstanding balance of real estate owned was $82.2 million and $87.2 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The amount ultimately realized upon the sale of these properties may be significantly different than the recorded amounts. Future events, including volatility in real estate values, may cause BBX Capital to have additional impairments or recoveries of long-lived assets in the foreseeable future.

 

Intangible Assets -  We evaluate our intangible assets when events and circumstances indicate that assets may be impaired and when the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than their carrying amounts. The carrying value of these assets is dependent upon estimates of future earnings that they are expected to generate. If cash flows decrease significantly, intangible assets may be impaired, in which case they would be written down to their fair value. The estimates of useful lives and expected cash flows require us to make significant judgments regarding future periods that are subject to a number of factors, many of which may be beyond our control.

 

Intangible assets include management contracts in the amount of $63 million at each of December 31, 2012 and 2011, which were originated in connection with the November 16, 2009 acquisition of a controlling interest in Bluegreen described below. Such management contracts are not amortized, but instead are reviewed for impairment at least annually, or if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the related carrying amounts may not be recoverable.  

 

Acquired Notes Receivable – During November 2009, we acquired additional shares of Bluegreen’s common stock which increased our ownership interest in Bluegreen at that time from approximately 29% to 52%.  In connection with that share acquisition, the Company was deemed under applicable accounting guidance to have acquired certain of Bluegreen’s assets, including a pool of notes receivable consisting principally of homogenous consumer timeshare loans originated by Bluegreen.  Consistent with the accounting guidance, the Company elected an

---

 

accounting policy based on expected cash flows, which includes guidance on maintaining the integrity of a pool of multiple loans accounted for as a single asset.  The loans have common risk characteristics as defined in the accounting guidance, Loans and Debt Securities with Deteriorated Credit Quality, including similar risk ratings, as defined and monitored by risk rating agencies, as well as similar terms, purposes and types of VOIs serving as collateral.  The Company evaluates the pool of loans accounted for as a single asset for indications of impairment. Purchased loans are considered to be impaired if it is not expected that all contractually required cash flows will be received due to concerns about credit quality. The excess of the cash flows expected to be collected measured as of the acquisition date over the estimated fair value is referred to as the accretable yield and is recognized into interest income over the remaining life of the loan using a level yield methodology. The difference between contractually required payments as of the acquisition date and the cash flows expected to be collected is referred to as the nonaccretable difference.

 

Subsequent decreases to expected principal cash flows result in a charge to provision for credit losses and a corresponding increase to a valuation allowance included in the allowance for loan losses. Subsequent increases in expected principal cash flows result in a recovery of any previously recorded allowance for loan losses, to the extent applicable, and a reclassification from nonaccretable difference to accretable yield for any remaining increase. Changes in expected interest cash flows may result in reclassifications to or from the nonaccretable difference. Loan disposals, which may include receipt of payments in full from the borrower or foreclosure, result in the removal of the loan from the loan pool at its allocated carrying amount.

 

Impact of Inflation

The financial statements and related financial data and notes presented herein have been prepared in accordance with GAAP, which requires the measurement of financial position and operating results in terms of historical dollars without considering changes in the relative purchasing power of money over time due to inflation.

The Company is subject to significant interest rate risk on BBX Capital’s accruing loans and Bluegreen’s VOI receivables and outstanding debt. As a result, interest rates have a more significant impact on our performance than the effects of general price levels. Although interest rates generally move in the same direction as inflation, the magnitude of such changes varies. Furthermore, as it relates to Bluegreen, increases in Bluegreen’s construction and development costs would likely result in increases in the sales prices of its VOIs. There is no assurance that Bluegreen will be able to increase or maintain the current level of its sales prices or that increased construction costs will not have a material adverse impact on Bluegreen’s gross margin. In addition, inflation is often accompanied by higher interest rates which could have a negative impact on consumer demand and the costs of financing activities. Rising interest rates as well as increased materials and labor costs may reduce margins.