Lightstone Value Plus REIT V, Inc. - Annual Report: 2016 (Form 10-K)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016
Commission File Number: 000-53650
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Maryland | 20-8198863 |
(State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization) | Identification No.) |
460 Park Avenue, New York, New York | 10022 |
(Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) |
(866) 655-3650
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:
None
Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act:
Common Stock, $.0001 par value per share
(Title of class)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act). Yes o No ý
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ý No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 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. ý
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 o Accelerated filer o
Non-accelerated filer (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) o Smaller reporting company ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No ý
There is no established market for the Registrant’s common stock. The Registrant has adopted an Amended and Restated Policy for Estimation of Common Stock Value (the “Valuation Policy”) pursuant to which it has estimated the per share value of its common stock. As of October 31, 2015, the estimated per share value was $9.19. As of December 31, 2015, in accordance with the Valuation Policy, the Registrant’s estimated per share value was reduced to $7.69 to give effect to the $1.50 per share cash distribution paid to stockholders of record as of December 31, 2015. As of October 31, 2016, the estimated per share value was $7.80. For a full description of the methodologies used to estimate the value of the Registrant’s common stock as of October 31, 2015 and October 31, 2016, see Part II, Item 5, “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities-Market Information” included in the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 and this Annual Report on Form 10-K, respectively. There were approximately 25,453,730 shares of common stock held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2016, the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter. As of February 28, 2017, the registrant had 25,086,778 shares of common stock outstanding.
BEHRINGER HARVARD OPPORTUNITY REIT II, INC.
FORM 10-K
Year Ended December 31, 2016
Page | ||
Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K constitute “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”). These forward-looking statements include discussion and analysis of the financial condition of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. and our subsidiaries (which may be referred to herein as the “Company,” “we,” “us” or “our”), including our ability to rent space on favorable terms, to address our debt maturities and to fund our liquidity requirements, to sell our assets when we believe advantageous to achieve our investment objectives, our anticipated capital expenditures, the amount and timing of anticipated future cash distributions to our stockholders, the estimated per share value of our common stock, and other matters. Words such as “may,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates,” “would,” “could,” “should” and variations of these words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements are not historical facts but reflect the intent, belief or current expectations of our management based on their knowledge and understanding of the business and industry, the economy and other future conditions. These statements are not guarantees of future performance, and we caution stockholders not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or forecasted in the forward-looking statements due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including but not limited to the factors listed and described under “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the factors described below:
• | market and economic challenges experienced by the U.S. and global economies or real estate industry as a whole and the local economic conditions in the markets in which our investments are located; |
• | the availability of cash flow from operating activities for distributions, if any; |
• | conflicts of interest arising out of our relationships with our advisor and its affiliates; |
• | our ability to retain our executive officers and other key individuals who provide advisory and property management services to us; |
• | the successful transition of advisory services to our new advisor; |
• | our level of debt and the terms and limitations imposed on us by our debt agreements; |
• | the availability of credit generally, and any failure to obtain debt financing at favorable terms or a failure to satisfy the conditions and requirements of that debt; |
• | our ability to make accretive investments in a diversified portfolio of assets; |
• | future changes in market factors that could affect the ultimate performance of our development or redevelopment projects, including but not limited to construction costs, plan or design changes, schedule delays, availability of construction financing, performance of developers, contractors and consultants and growth in rental rates and operating costs; |
• | our ability to secure leases at favorable rental rates; |
• | our ability to sell our assets at a price and on a timeline consistent with our investment objectives; |
• | impairment charges; |
• | unfavorable changes in laws or regulations impacting our business, our assets or our key relationships; and |
• | factors that could affect our ability to qualify as a real estate investment trust. |
Forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K reflect our management’s view only as of the date of this Report, and may ultimately prove to be incorrect. We undertake no obligation to update or revise forward-looking statements to reflect changed assumptions, the occurrence of unanticipated events or changes to future operating results, except as required by applicable law. We intend for these forward-looking statements to be covered by the applicable safe harbor provisions created by Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act.
Cautionary Note
The representations, warranties, and covenants made by us in any agreement filed as an exhibit to this Annual Report on Form 10-K are made solely for the benefit of the parties to the agreement, including, in some cases, for the purpose of allocating risk among the parties to the agreement, and should not be deemed to be representations, warranties, or covenants to or with any other parties. Moreover, these representations, warranties, or covenants should not be relied upon as accurately describing or reflecting the current state of our affairs.
PART I
Item 1. Business.
Organization
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. (which may be referred to as the “Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our”) was organized as a Maryland corporation on January 9, 2007 and has elected to be taxed, and currently qualifies, as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) for federal income tax purposes.
We were formed primarily to acquire and operate commercial real estate and real estate-related assets on an opportunistic and value-add basis. In particular, we have focused generally on acquiring commercial properties with significant possibilities for capital appreciation, such as those requiring development, redevelopment, or repositioning, those located in markets and submarkets with high growth potential, and those available from sellers who are distressed or face time-sensitive deadlines. We have acquired a wide variety of commercial properties, including office, industrial, retail, hospitality, and multifamily. We have purchased existing, income-producing properties, and newly-constructed properties. We have also invested in a mortgage loan and a mezzanine loan. We intend to hold the various real properties in which we have invested until such time as our board of directors determines that a sale or other disposition appears to be advantageous to achieve our investment objectives or until it appears that the objectives will not be met. Consistent with our investment objectives, our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders.
As of December 31, 2016, we had acquired 21 investments, including a mezzanine loan and a mortgage loan. Of these 21 investments, we have disposed of 13 investments through December 31, 2016, including the early repayment of a mortgage loan that we had originated. We sold eight of the nine medical office buildings comprising the Florida MOB Portfolio investment during 2013. This sale will not be counted as the disposition of an investment until we sell the ninth medical office building in the Florida MOB Portfolio, Gardens Medical Building.
Substantially all of our business is conducted through Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II LP, a limited partnership organized in Delaware (the “Operating Partnership”). As of December 31, 2016, our wholly-owned subsidiary, BHO II, Inc., a Delaware corporation, owned a 0.1% partnership interest in the Operating Partnership as its sole general partner. As of December 31, 2016, our wholly-owned subsidiary, BHO Business Trust II, a Maryland business trust, was the sole limited partner of the Operating Partnership and owned the remaining 99.9% interest in the Operating Partnership.
Our business has been managed by an external advisor since the commencement of our initial public offering and we have no employees. From January 4, 2008 through February 10, 2017, an affiliate of Stratera Services, LLC, formerly known as “Behringer Harvard Holdings, LLC” (“Behringer”), acted as our external advisor (the “Behringer Advisor”). On February 10, 2017, we terminated our engagement of Behringer Advisor and engaged affiliates of the Lightstone Group (“Lightstone”), LSG-BH II Advisor LLC and LSG Development Advisor LLC (collectively, the “Advisor”), to provide advisory services to us. The external advisor is responsible for managing our day-to-day affairs and for services related to the sale of our assets.
Our office is located at 460 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10022, and our toll-free telephone number is (866) 655-3650. The name Behringer Harvard is the property of Behringer and is used by permission.
Public Offerings of Common Stock
From January 21, 2008 until March 15, 2012 (for shares sold pursuant to our primary offering) and April 3, 2012 (for shares sold pursuant to our distribution reinvestment plan (the “DRP”)), we conducted a public offering of our shares. Pursuant to our public offering, we raised gross offering proceeds of approximately $265.3 million from the sale of approximately 26.7 million shares, including shares sold pursuant to the DRP.
In connection with our initial capitalization, we issued 22,471 shares of our common stock and 1,000 shares of our convertible stock to Behringer on January 19, 2007. Behringer transferred its shares of convertible stock to one of its affiliates on April 2, 2010.
As of April 2012, when we terminated the offering, we had issued 26.7 million shares of our common stock, including 22,471 shares owned by Behringer and 2.2 million shares issued through the DRP. As of December 31, 2016, we had redeemed 1.5 million shares of our common stock and had 25.2 million shares of common stock outstanding. As of December 31, 2016, we had 1,000 shares of convertible stock outstanding held by an affiliate of Behringer. Behringer transferred its shares of convertible stock to an affiliate of Lightstone on February 10, 2017.
4
Our common stock is not currently listed on a national securities exchange. The timing of a liquidity event will depend upon then prevailing market conditions. Our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders, and we can provide no assurances as to the timing of our ultimate liquidation. We will seek stockholder approval prior to liquidating our entire portfolio.
2016 Highlights
During 2016, we completed the following key transactions:
• | We sold Lakewood Flats on August 16, 2016 for a contract sales price of $68.8 million, resulting in a gain on sale of real estate of $11.5 million and a deferred gain of approximately $1.2 million. The deferred gain represents the amount of monies held in escrow to be reimbursed upon completion of the property’s outstanding insurance claim. A portion of the proceeds from the sale were used to pay off in full the existing indebtedness of approximately $33.5 million secured by the property. |
• | On January 5, 2016 we paid a special cash distribution of $38.4 million, or $1.50 per share of common stock, funded from proceeds of asset sales. |
For further information regarding our consolidated real estate properties, see Item 2.
Investment Objectives
Our primary investment objectives are:
• | to realize growth in the value of our investments to enhance the value received upon our ultimate sale of such investments; |
• | to preserve, protect and return our investors’ capital contribution; and |
• | to enable our investors to realize a return of their investment by liquidating and distributing net sales proceeds to investors. |
Investment Policies
We have invested in commercial properties, such as office, industrial, retail, hospitality, multifamily, existing, income-producing properties, and newly-constructed properties that were initially identified as opportunistic and value-add investments with significant possibilities for capital appreciation due to their property-specific characteristics or their market characteristics.
We have disposed of 13 of our original portfolio assets through December 31, 2016, including the early repayment of a mortgage loan that we had originated. Our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders. Economic or market conditions may cause us to hold our investments for longer periods of time or sell an investment at a lower than anticipated price. We will seek stockholder approval prior to liquidating our entire portfolio.
We have generally made our real estate investments in fee title or a long-term leasehold estate through the Operating Partnership or indirectly through special purpose limited liability companies or through investments in joint ventures, partnerships, co-tenancies, or other co-ownership arrangements with the developers of the properties or other persons.
Borrowing Policies
There is no limitation on the amount we may invest in or borrow related to any single property or other investment. Under our charter, the maximum amount of our indebtedness cannot exceed 300% of our “net assets” (as defined by the Statement of Policy Regarding Real Estate Investment Trusts adopted by the North American Securities Administrators Association on May 7, 2007) as of the date of any borrowing; however, we may exceed that limit if approved by a majority of our independent directors. In addition to our charter limitation, our board of directors has adopted a policy to generally limit our aggregate borrowings to approximately 75% of the aggregate value of our assets unless substantial justification exists that borrowing a greater amount is in our best interests. Our board of directors must review our aggregate borrowings at least quarterly. As of December 31, 2016, we had an aggregate debt leverage ratio of approximately 45.4% of the aggregate value of our assets.
Disposition Policies
As each of our investments reaches what we believe to be the asset’s optimum value during the expected life of the program, we will consider disposing of the investment and may do so for the purpose of distributing the net sale proceeds to our stockholders or satisfying our obligations. Consistent with our investment objectives, our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders. We can provide no assurances, however, as to the timing of our ultimate liquidation, as
5
economic or market conditions may result in different holding periods. A property may be sold before or after the expected holding period if, in the judgment of our Advisor and the independent board, the sale of the property is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.
Distribution Policy
In order to qualify as a REIT, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income to our stockholders. Distributions are authorized at the discretion of our board of directors based on its analysis of our performance over the previous periods and expectations of performance for future periods. These analyses may include actual and anticipated operating cash flow, capital expenditure needs, general financial and market conditions, proceeds from asset sales and other factors that our board deems relevant. The board’s decision will be substantially influenced by its obligation to ensure that we maintain our federal tax status as a REIT. We cannot provide assurance that we will pay distributions at any particular level, or at all.
Prior to 2012, our board of directors declared distributions on a quarterly basis based on daily record dates, portions of which were paid on a monthly basis. During the first quarter of 2012, our board of directors determined to cease regular, monthly distributions in favor of payment of periodic special distributions.
Since 2012, our board of directors has declared a total of $77.1 million, or $3.00 per share of common stock, in special cash distributions, all of which were paid to stockholders in 2014, 2015, and 2016. These special cash distributions were paid with a portion of proceeds from asset sales.
Competition
We are subject to significant competition in seeking tenants for the leasing of our properties and buyers for the sale of our properties. The competition for creditworthy tenants is intense, and we have been required to provide rent concessions, incur charges for tenant improvements, and provide other inducements in order to lease vacant space at our properties. Without these inducements, we may not be able to continue to lease vacant space timely, or at all, which would adversely impact our results of operations. We also compete with sellers of similar properties when we sell properties, which may result in our receiving lower proceeds from the sale of our properties or not being able to sell our properties at prices that will achieve our original return objectives. We compete for buyers and tenants with many third parties engaged in real estate investment activities, including other REITs, specialty finance companies, savings and loan associations, banks, mortgage bankers, insurance companies, mutual funds, institutional investors, investment banking firms, lenders, hedge funds, governmental bodies, and other entities. Many of our competitors, including larger REITs, have greater financial resources than we have and generally may be able to accept more risk. They also may enjoy competitive advantages that result from, among other things, a lower cost of capital and enhanced operating efficiencies.
Regulations
Our investments are subject to various federal, state and local laws, ordinances, and regulations, including, among other things, zoning regulations, land use controls, environmental controls relating to air and water quality, noise pollution, and indirect environmental impacts such as increased motor vehicle activity. We believe that we have all permits and approvals necessary under current law to operate our investments.
Environmental
As an owner of real estate, we are subject to various environmental laws of federal, state, and local governments. Compliance with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations, and management does not believe it will have such an impact in the future. However, we cannot predict the impact of unforeseen environmental contingencies or new or changed laws or regulations on properties in which we hold an interest.
Employees
We have no employees. Our external advisor and its affiliates perform a full range of real estate services for us, including asset management, accounting, legal, property management, and investor relations services.
We are dependent on affiliates of the Advisor for services that are essential to us, including asset management and disposition decisions, and other general administrative responsibilities. If these companies were unable to provide these services to us, we would be required to provide the services ourselves or obtain the services from other sources.
6
Financial Information About Industry Segments
Our current business consists of owning, managing, operating, leasing, developing, investing in, and disposing of real estate assets. We internally evaluate all of our real estate assets as one reportable segment, and, accordingly, we do not report segment information.
Available Information
We electronically file annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports with the Securities Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). We also have filed with the SEC registration statements in connection with the Offerings. Copies of our filings with the SEC may be obtained from our website at www.behringerinvestments.com or at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Access to these filings is free of charge. We are not incorporating our website or any information from the website into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
The factors described below represent the principal risks of an investment in our shares and that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those presented in our forward-looking statements. Other factors may exist that we do not consider to be significant based on information that is currently available or that we are not currently able to anticipate. Our stockholders may be referred to as “you” or “your” in this Item 1A. “Risk Factors” section.
Risks Related to an Investment in Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
There is no public trading market for your shares; therefore, it will be difficult for you to sell your shares. If you are able to sell your shares, you may have to sell them at a substantial discount from the estimated value per share.
There is no public market for your shares and our charter does not require our directors to provide liquidity to our stockholders by a specified date, or at all. In addition, if you are able to sell your shares, the price you receive for the sale of any shares of our common stock is likely to be less than the estimated value per share.
We have adopted a share redemption program; however, our share redemption program includes numerous restrictions on your ability to sell your shares to us, and our board of directors may reject any request for redemption of shares or amend, suspend or terminate our share redemption program at any time. From April 1, 2012 through May 15, 2014, our board of directors suspended accepting “Ordinary Redemptions”, or those redemptions not submitted upon a stockholder’s death, qualifying disability or confinement to a long-term care facility (which are defined in the share redemption program and are referred to as “Exceptional Redemptions”). Although our board of directors has resumed consideration of requests for Ordinary Redemptions, the cash available for redemptions (Ordinary and Exceptional) is limited to no more than $10 million in any twelve-month period. Our board of directors may determine to suspend accepting Ordinary Redemptions again or reduce the dollar amount of redemptions in any twelve-month period, and we can provide no assurances that the $10 million of funds available for redemptions will be sufficient to honor all redemption requests submitted.
Therefore, it will be difficult for you to sell your shares promptly or at all. You may not be able to sell your shares in the event of an emergency, and, if you are able to sell your shares, you may have to sell them at a substantial discount from the estimated value per share. It is also likely that your shares would not be accepted as the primary collateral for a loan.
We may not successfully implement our exit strategy, in which case you may have to hold your investment for an indefinite period.
Consistent with our investment objectives, our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders. If we do not begin the process of liquidating (or listing our shares on a national securities exchange) by July 2017, our charter requires that we hold a stockholders meeting to vote on a proposal for our orderly liquidation unless a majority of our board of directors and a majority of our independent directors vote to defer the meeting.
Market conditions and other factors could cause our board of directors and our independent directors to conclude that it is not in our best interests to hold a stockholders meeting for the purpose of voting on a proposal for our orderly liquidation in 2017. Our charter permits our board of directors, with the concurrence of a majority of our independent directors, to defer such a stockholder vote indefinitely. Therefore, if we are not successful in implementing our exit strategy, your shares will continue to be illiquid and you may, for an indefinite period of time, be unable to convert your investment into cash easily with minimum loss.
7
The estimated value per share of our common stock may not reflect the value that stockholders will receive for their investment.
On November 18, 2016, our board of directors approved an estimated per share value of our common stock of $7.80 based on the estimated value of our assets less the estimated value of our liabilities, divided by the number of shares outstanding, all as of October 31, 2016, as described under “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities-Market Information” included in Part II, Item 5.
The estimated value per share was based upon consultation with the Behringer Advisor and an independent, third-party valuation advisory firm engaged by us, using what the board of directors deemed to be appropriate valuation methodologies and assumptions under current circumstances in accordance with the Amended and Restated Policy for Estimation of Common Stock Value (the “Valuation Policy”).
As with any valuation methodology, our methodology is based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that may prove later to be inaccurate or incomplete. Further, different parties using different assumptions and estimates could derive a different estimated value per share, which could be significantly different from our board’s estimated value per share. The estimated per share value determined by our board of directors neither represents the fair value of our assets less liabilities in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. (“GAAP”), nor does it represent the amount our shares would trade at on a national securities exchange or the amount a shareholder would obtain if he tried to sell his shares or if we liquidated our assets. Accordingly, with respect to the estimated value per share, the Company can give no assurance that:
• | a stockholder would be able to resell his or her shares at this estimated value; |
• | a stockholder would ultimately realize distributions per share equal to our estimated value per share upon liquidation of our assets and settlement of our liabilities or a sale of us; |
• | our shares would trade at the estimated value per share on a national securities exchange; or |
• | the methodologies used to estimate our value per share would be acceptable to FINRA or under ERISA for compliance with their respective reporting requirements. |
Further, the value of our shares will fluctuate over time in response to developments related to individual assets in our portfolio and the management of those assets and in response to the real estate and finance markets. Our primary investment objectives currently are to focus on providing liquidity to our stockholders while continuing to preserve capital and sustain and enhance property value. For a full description of the methodologies used to value our assets and liabilities in connection with the calculation of the estimated value per share, see Part II, Item 5, “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities - Market Information.”
Because we rely on affiliates of Lightstone for advisory and property management services, if Lightstone or its majority owner are unable to meet their obligations, we may be required to find alternative providers for these services, which could result in a significant and costly disruption of our business.
David Lichtenstein, the majority owner of Lightstone, directly or indirectly owns the Advisor and our property manager. The operations of the Advisor and our property manager rely substantially on Mr. Lichtenstein and on Lightstone. Lightstone and its majority owner are dependent on fee income from their other sponsored real estate programs. Any real estate market disruptions could adversely affect the amount of such fee income. If Lightstone or its majority owner become unable to meet their obligations as they become due, we might be required to find alternative service providers, which could result in a significant disruption of our business and would likely adversely affect the value of your investment in us.
During a transition period, we will continue to rely on affiliates of Behringer including the Behringer Advisor to provide support for the management of our operations and our portfolio of real estate assets and any adverse changes in the financial health of Behringer could hinder the Behringer Advisor’s ability to provide these services to us and consequently impair our operating results.
Behringer, through one or more of its subsidiaries, owns and controls the Behringer Advisor, and the operations of the Behringer Advisor rely substantially on Behringer. During a transition period, the Behringer Advisor will provide certain services to the Advisor in connection with transitioning the advisory function from the Behringer Advisor to the Advisor. If Behringer’s income and other resources are inadequate to cover its operating expenses, Behringer may need to secure additional capital or it may become unable to meet its obligations or it may be forced to scale back its operations and may not be able to provide adequate services in connection with the transition. If this occurs, the transition to the Advisor could result in a significant disruption of our business and may adversely affect the value of your investment in us.
8
If we lose or are unable to retain key personnel, our ability to implement our investment strategies could be delayed or hindered.
Our success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of certain executive officers and other key personnel, of us, the Behringer Advisor and its affiliates, including Thomas P. Kennedy, S. Jason Hall and Terri Warren Reynolds, each of whom would be difficult to replace. We do not directly employ our executive officers and other key personnel, and we cannot guarantee that they will remain affiliated with us. Also, our executive officers and key personnel do not have employment agreements with the Behringer Advisor (or the Advisor), and we cannot guarantee that such persons will remain affiliated with the Behringer Advisor. Under the terms of a transition services agreement between the Advisor and the Behringer Advisor, the Behringer Advisor is obligated to use its commercially reasonable efforts to retain each of Thomas P. Kennedy, S. Jason Hall and Terri Warren Reynolds for a period of time following our engagement of the Advisor. The departure of any of our key personnel prior to a successful transition to their successors at the Advisor could cause our operating results to suffer. We do not separately maintain key person life insurance on any of our key personnel.
In addition, to the extent the key personnel at the Behringer Advisor, in particular, our executive officers do not continue to serve as our executive officers after the transition period we will rely on the Advisor or its affiliates to identify and employ qualified individuals to serve in these positions. Further, we believe that our future success depends, in large part, upon the Advisor’s and its affiliates’ ability to hire and retain highly skilled managerial and operational personnel. Competition for persons with these skills is intense, and we cannot assure you that the Advisor will be successful in attracting and retaining such skilled personnel.
We are restricted in our ability to replace our property manager, an affiliate of the Advisor.
Under the terms of our property management agreement, we may terminate the agreement upon 30 days’ notice in the event of, and only in the event of, a showing of willful misconduct, gross negligence, or deliberate malfeasance by the property manager in performing its duties. Our board of directors may find the performance of our property manager to be unsatisfactory. However, unsatisfactory performance by the property manager may not constitute “willful misconduct, gross negligence, or deliberate malfeasance.” As a result, we may be unable to terminate the property management agreement, which may have an adverse effect on the management and profitability of our properties.
Payment of fees and reimbursement of expenses to the Advisor and its affiliates will reduce cash available for investment and may adversely affect the return on your investment.
The Advisor and its affiliates will perform services for us in connection with the management and leasing of our properties, the servicing of our mezzanine loan, the administration of our other investments and the disposition of our assets. They will be paid substantial fees for these services. In addition, we reimburse our advisor a flat fee for expenses it incurs with respect to administrative services. These fees and expense reimbursements will reduce the amount of cash available for investment and may adversely affect the return on your investment.
Our stockholders may not be able to sell their shares under our share redemption program and, if our stockholders are able to sell their shares under the program, they may not be able to recover the amount of their investment in our shares.
Our board of directors has adopted a share redemption program that permits stockholders to sell their shares back to us, subject to the significant conditions and limitations of the program. Our board of directors can amend the provisions of our share redemption program without the approval of our stockholders. The terms on which we redeem shares may differ between Ordinary Redemptions and Exceptional Redemptions. From April 1, 2012 to May 15, 2014 our board of directors suspended accepting Ordinary Redemptions. Although our board of directors has resumed considering Ordinary Redemption requests, the cash available for redemptions (Ordinary and Exceptional) is limited to no more than $10 million in any twelve-month period. Our board of directors may determine to suspend accepting redemptions at any time, and we can provide no assurances that the $10 million of funds available for redemptions will be sufficient to honor all redemption requests submitted.
Any shares approved for redemption will be redeemed on a periodic basis as determined from time to time by our board of directors, and no less frequently than annually. We will not redeem, during any twelve-month period, more than 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the twelve-month period immediately prior to the date of redemption. Further, we have no obligation to redeem shares if the redemption would violate the restrictions on distributions under Maryland law, which prohibits distributions that would cause a corporation to fail to meet statutory tests of solvency. The redemption limitations apply to all redemptions, whether Ordinary or Exceptional Redemptions. These limits may prevent us from accommodating all redemption requests made in any year or for a specific redemption date.
9
Under our share redemption program, the purchase price per share for the redeemed shares submitted as an Ordinary Redemption and an Exceptional Redemption will equal the lesser of 80% and 90%, respectively, of:
• | the current estimated value per share (the “Valuation”) as determined in accordance with the Valuation Policy; and |
• | the difference of (a) the average price per share the original purchaser or purchasers of shares paid to us for all of his or her shares (as adjusted for any stock dividends, combinations, splits, recapitalizations and the like with respect to our common stock) less (b) the aggregate distributions per share of any net sale proceeds from the sale of one or more of our assets, or other special distributions so designated by the board of directors, distributed to stockholders prior to the redemption date and declared from the date of first issue of such redeemed shares. |
On November 18, 2016, our board of directors approved an estimated per share value of our common stock as of October 31, 2016 of $7.80. For a full description of the methodologies and assumptions used to value our assets and liabilities in connection with the calculation of the estimated value per share, see Part II, Item 5, “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities - Market Information.” The value of our shares will fluctuate over time in response to developments related to individual assets in our portfolio and the management of those assets and in response to the real estate and finance markets. As such, other than with respect to the payment of any special cash distributions, which will reduce the estimated per share value, the estimated value per share does not take into account developments in our portfolio since November 18, 2016.
We currently expect to engage our Advisor and/or an independent valuation firm to update our estimated value per share annually. Upon updating our estimated value per share, the redemption price per share will also change. Because of the restrictions of our share redemption program, our stockholders may not be able to sell their shares under the program, and if stockholders are able to sell their shares, depending upon the then current redemption price, they may not recover the amount of their investment in us.
Risks Related to Our Business
Development projects in which we invest may not be completed successfully or on time, and guarantors of the projects may not have the financial resources to perform their obligations under the guaranties they provide.
We provided a mezzanine loan for a multifamily development project located in Denver, Colorado (“Prospect Park”). The initial loan amount was $13.7 million. The loan is secured by all of the membership interests of the borrower and subordinate to the senior construction lender (the “Senior Lender”). To help ensure performance by the developers of Prospect Park, the owners of the developer provided us with a personal guaranty guaranteeing completion of the project and payment of cost overruns.
We cannot, however, ensure that the guarantors will have the financial resources to perform their obligations under the guaranty they provided. We have managed this risk by ensuring, to the best of our ability, that we invested in a project with a reputable, experienced and resourceful developer. If we are unable to manage these risks effectively, our results of operations, financial condition and your overall investment return will be adversely affected.
Due to projected cost overruns in excess of the initial construction budget, an event of default was declared by the Senior Lender on April 28, 2014, and in accordance with our rights, we also declared an event of default. In order to remedy the events of default, the following terms were agreed upon, based on negotiations between the developer and borrower, the Senior Lender and us: (i) the borrower and developer covered cost overruns totaling $6.6 million; (ii) we increased our financing by $1.5 million to $15.3 million; and (iii) the Senior Lender increased the amount they financed by $4.4 million to $40 million. As of December 31, 2016, the outstanding principal balance under our mezzanine loan was $15.3 million. Both the senior loan and our mezzanine loan were in technical default at December 31, 2016 due to a delay in completion of the project by the date specified in the loan agreement. Both we and the Senior Lender have stated the intention to not call the loan and currently plan to amend the loan agreements. The borrower has funded any cost overruns. The project was complete in January 2017. See Note 8, Investment in Unconsolidated Joint Venture, for additional information.
We are uncertain of our sources for funding of future capital needs, which could adversely affect the value of our investments.
Our ability to fund future property capital needs, such as tenant improvements, leasing commissions, and capital expenditures, will depend on our ability to borrow, to sell assets or interests in assets, and to generate additional cash flows from operations. We will establish capital reserves on a property-by-property basis, as we deem appropriate. In addition to any reserves we establish, a lender may require escrow of capital reserves in excess of our established reserves. If these reserves are insufficient to meet our cash needs, we may have to obtain financing from either affiliated or unaffiliated sources to fund our cash requirements. Accordingly, in the event that we develop a need for additional capital in the future for the improvement of
10
our properties or for any other reason, we have not identified any sources for such funding, and we cannot assure you that such sources of funding will be available to us for potential capital needs.
Market disruptions may adversely impact aspects of our operating results and operating condition.
Our business may be affected by adverse market and economic challenges experienced by the U.S. and global economies or the real estate industry as a whole or by the local economic conditions in the markets which our properties are located. These conditions may materially affect the value and performance of our properties, and may affect our ability to pay cash distributions, the availability or the terms of financing that we have or may anticipate utilizing, and our ability to make principal and interest payments on, or refinance, any outstanding debt when due. These challenging economic conditions may also impact the ability of certain of our tenants to enter into new leasing transactions or satisfy rental payments under existing leases. Specifically, global market disruptions may have many consequences including, but not limited to, these listed below:
• | the financial condition of our tenants may be adversely affected, which may result in us having to increase concessions, reduce rental rates or make capital improvements beyond those contemplated at the time we acquired the properties in order to maintain occupancy levels or to negotiate for reduced space needs, which may result in a decrease in our occupancy levels; |
• | significant job losses may occur, which may decrease demand for our office space, our multifamily communities and our hospitality properties and result in lower occupancy levels, which will result in decreased revenues and which could diminish the value of our properties, which depend, in part, upon the cash flow generated by our properties; |
• | an increase in the number of bankruptcies or insolvency proceedings of our tenants and lease guarantors, which could delay our efforts to collect rent and any past due balances under the relevant leases and ultimately could preclude collection of these sums; |
• | credit spreads for major sources of capital may widen as investors demand higher risk premiums, resulting in lenders increasing the cost for debt financing; |
• | our ability to borrow on terms and conditions that we find acceptable, or at all, may be limited, which could result in our investment operations generating lower overall economic returns and a reduced level of cash flow, which could potentially impact our ability to make cash distributions to our stockholders and increase our interest expense; |
• | a reduction in the amount of capital that is available to finance real estate, which, in turn, could lead to a decline in real estate values generally, slow real estate transaction activity, reduce the loan to value ratio upon which lenders are willing to lend, and result in difficulty refinancing our debt; |
• | the value of certain of our properties may have decreased below the amounts we paid for them, which may limit our ability to dispose of assets at attractive prices or to obtain debt financing secured by our properties and may reduce the availability of unsecured loans; |
• | one or more counterparties to our derivative financial instrument could default on their obligations to us, or could fail, increasing the risk that we may not realize the benefits of this instrument; and |
• | the value and liquidity of our short-term investments could be reduced as a result of the dislocation of the markets for our short-term investments and increased volatility in market rates for such investments or other factors. |
Disruptions in the financial markets and adverse economic conditions in the geographic regions where our properties are located could adversely affect the value of our investments.
Market volatility will likely make the valuation of our investment properties more difficult. There may be significant uncertainty in the valuation, or in the stability of the value, of our properties that could result in a substantial decrease in the value of our properties. As a result, we may not be able to recover the carrying amount of our properties, and we may be required to recognize impairment charges, which will reduce our reported earnings.
If our advisor were to waive or defer certain fees due to them, our results of operations may be artificially high.
Our advisor may agree to waive or defer all or a portion of the acquisition, asset management or other fees, compensation or incentives due to them, pay general administrative expenses, or otherwise supplement stockholder returns in order to increase the amount of cash available to support our operations. As a result, our net income may be artificially higher than normal and could be misleading in years when our advisor waives or defers such fees and incentives.
Your interest in us will be diluted if we or the Operating Partnership issues additional securities.
Stockholders do not have preemptive rights to any shares issued by us in the future. Our charter currently has authorized 400,001,000 shares of capital stock, of which 350,000,000 shares are designated as common stock, 1,000 shares are designated as convertible stock and 50,000,000 are designated as preferred stock. Subject to any limitations set forth under Maryland law, our board of directors may amend our charter to increase the number of authorized shares of capital stock, increase or decrease
11
the number of shares of any class or series of stock designated, and may classify or reclassify any unissued shares without the necessity of obtaining stockholder approval. Shares will be issued in the discretion of our board of directors. Stockholders will likely experience dilution of their equity investment in us in the event that we: (i) sell shares of our common stock in the future; (ii) sell securities that are convertible into shares of our common stock; (iii) issue shares of our common stock in a private offering of securities to institutional investors; (iv) issue shares of common stock upon the conversion of our convertible stock; (v) issue shares of common stock upon the exercise of any options granted to our independent directors or employees of our advisor or property manager and an affiliate of our advisor or property manager or their affiliates; (vi) issue shares to our advisor, its successors or assigns, in payment of an outstanding fee obligation as set forth under our advisory management agreement; or (vii) issue shares of our common stock to sellers of properties acquired by us in connection with an exchange of limited partnership interests of the Operating Partnership. In addition, the partnership agreement for the Operating Partnership contains provisions that allow, under certain circumstances, other entities to merge into or cause the exchange or conversion of their interest for interests of the Operating Partnership. Because the limited partnership interests of the Operating Partnership may be exchanged for shares of our common stock, any merger, exchange or conversion between the Operating Partnership and another entity ultimately could result in the issuance of a substantial number of shares of our common stock, thereby diluting the percentage ownership interest of other stockholders.
Risks Related to Conflicts of Interest
We will be subject to conflicts of interest arising out of our relationships with the Advisor and its affiliates, including the material conflicts discussed below.
The Advisor and its affiliates, including our affiliated director and any executive officer who is also an employee of the Advisor or its affiliates, will face conflicts of interest caused by their compensation arrangements with us, which could result in actions that are not in the long-term best interests of our stockholders.
Our Advisor and its affiliates and our property manager, are entitled to substantial fees from us under the terms of the advisory management agreement and property management agreement. These fees could influence our Advisor’s advice to us, as well as the judgment of affiliates of our Advisor performing services for us. Among other matters, these compensation arrangements could affect their judgment with respect to:
• | the continuation, renewal or enforcement of our agreements with our Advisor and its affiliates, including the advisory management agreement and the property management agreement; |
• | property sales, which reduce the asset management fee payable to our Advisor; |
• | borrowings to refinance our existing indebtedness, which increases the debt financing fees payable to our Advisor; |
• | determining the compensation paid to employees for services provided to us, which could be influenced in part by whether or not the Advisor is reimbursed by us for the related salaries and benefits; and |
• | whether and when we seek to sell the company or its assets, which sale would eliminate asset management fees payable to our Advisor. |
The fees the Behringer Advisor received in connection with transactions involving the purchase and management of an asset are based on the value of the investment, and not based on the quality of the investment or the quality of the services rendered to us. This may have influenced the Behringer Advisor to recommend riskier transactions to us.
Our officers face conflicts of interest related to the positions they hold with Behringer and with entities affiliated with Behringer, which could diminish the value of the services they provide to us.
Certain of our executive officers are also officers of Behringer and other entities affiliated with Behringer, including the advisors and fiduciaries to other Behringer-sponsored programs. As a result, these individuals owe duties to these other entities and their investors, which may conflict with the duties that they owe to us and our stockholders. Their loyalties to these other entities and investors could result in action or inaction that is detrimental to our business, which could harm the implementation of our business strategy and our investment and leasing opportunities. Conflicts with our business and interests are most likely to arise from involvement in activities related to (i) allocation of management time and services between us and the other entities, and (ii) the timing and terms of the sale of an asset. If we do not successfully implement our business strategy, we may be unable to maintain or increase the value of our assets and the overall return on your investment may be reduced.
The key personnel that conduct our day-to-day operations will face competing demands on their time, and this may cause our investment returns to suffer.
We rely upon our executive officers and the employees of our Advisor and its affiliates (and for a transition period, the employees of the Behringer Advisor) to conduct our day-to-day operations. These persons also conduct the day-to-day operations of other Lightstone-sponsored or Behringer-sponsored programs and may have other business interests as well. Because these persons have competing interests on their time and resources, they may have conflicts of interest in allocating
12
their time between our business and these other activities. During times of intense activity in other programs and ventures, they may devote less time and resources to our business than is necessary or appropriate. If this occurs, the returns on our investments may suffer.
General Risks Related to Investments in Real Estate
Our opportunistic and value-add property-acquisition strategy involved a higher risk of loss than more conservative investment strategies.
Our strategy for acquiring properties involved the acquisition of properties in markets that are depressed or overbuilt, and/or have high growth potential in real estate lease rates and sale prices. As a result of our investment in these types of markets, we face increased risks relating to changes in local market conditions and increased competition for similar properties in the same market, as well as increased risks that these markets will not recover and the value of our properties in these markets will not increase, or will decrease, over time. For these and other reasons, we cannot assure you that we will be profitable or that we will realize growth in the value of our real estate properties, and as a result, your overall investment return may be adversely affected. Our approach to acquiring and operating income-producing properties involved more risk than comparable real estate programs that have a targeted holding period for investments that is longer than ours, utilize leverage to a lesser degree and/or employ more conservative investment strategies.
Our revenue and net income may vary significantly from one period to another due to opportunity oriented investments, which could increase the variability of our cash available to support our operations.
Our opportunistic and value-add property investment strategy has included investments in properties in various phases
of development, redevelopment or repositioning, which may cause our revenues and net income to fluctuate significantly
from one period to another. Projects do not produce revenue while in development or redevelopment. During any period
when our projects in development or redevelopment or those with significant capital requirements increase without a
corresponding increase in stable revenue-producing properties, our revenues and net income will likely decrease. Many
factors may have a negative impact on the level of revenues or net income produced by our portfolio of properties and
projects, including higher than expected construction costs, failure to complete projects on a timely basis, failure of the
properties to perform at expected levels upon completion of development or redevelopment, and increased borrowings
necessary to fund higher than expected construction or other costs related to the project. Further, our net income and
shareholders’ equity could be negatively affected during periods with large portfolio investments, which generally require
large cash outlays and may require the incurrence of additional financing. Any such reduction in our revenues and net
income during such periods could cause a resulting decrease in our cash available to support our operations during the same
periods.
Our operating results will be affected by economic and regulatory changes that have an adverse impact on the real estate market in general, and we cannot assure you that we will be profitable or that we will be able to sustain or enhance the value of our real estate properties.
Our operating results will be subject to risks generally incident to the ownership of real estate, including:
• | changes in general economic or local conditions; |
• | changes in supply of or demand for similar or competing properties in an area; |
• | changes in interest rates and availability of permanent mortgage funds that may render the sale of a property difficult or unattractive; |
• | the illiquidity of real estate investments generally; |
• | changes in tax, real estate, environmental and zoning laws; and |
• | periods of high interest rates and tight money supply. |
For these and other reasons, we cannot assure you that we will be profitable or that we will be able to sustain or enhance the value of our real estate properties.
If our investment portfolio lacks diversification, downturns relating to certain geographic regions, types of assets, industries or business sectors may have a more significant adverse impact on our assets and your overall investment return than if we had a diversified investment portfolio.
We are not required to observe specific diversification criteria. Therefore, our investments in target assets may be concentrated in certain asset types that are subject to higher risk of foreclosure, or secured by assets concentrated in a limited number of geographic locations or industries. For the year ended December 31, 2016, excluding sold assets, 44% of our total revenues were derived from our Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel in Hawaii. To the extent that our portfolio is concentrated in limited geographic regions, types of assets, industries or business sectors, downturns relating generally to such
13
region, type of asset, industry or business sector may leave our profitability vulnerable to a downturn in such areas as a result of tenants defaulting on their lease obligations at a number of our properties within a short time period, which may reduce our net income and the value of our common stock and accordingly reduce our stockholders’ overall return.
Properties that have significant vacancies could be difficult to sell, which could diminish the return on your investment.
A property may incur vacancies either by the continued default of tenants under their leases or the expiration of tenant leases. If vacancies continue for a long period of time, we may suffer reduced revenues. In addition, the value of the property could be diminished because the market value of a particular property will depend principally upon the value of the leases of such property.
Many of our investments will be dependent on tenants for revenue; lease expirations and terminations could adversely affect our operations and your overall investment return.
The success of our real property investments often will be materially dependent on the occupancy rates of our properties and the financial stability of our tenants. We have one office building that accounted for 5% of our total revenue, excluding our sold properties, for the year ended December 31, 2016. If we are unable to renew or extend significant expiring leases at our office building under similar terms or are unable to negotiate new leases, or if our tenants default on lease payments, it could negatively impact our liquidity and consequently adversely affect our ability to fund our ongoing operations. A default by a significant tenant on its lease payments to us would cause us to lose the revenue associated with such lease and cause us to have to find an alternative source of revenue to meet mortgage payments and prevent a foreclosure. In the event of a tenant default, we may experience delays in enforcing our rights as landlord and may incur substantial costs in protecting our investment and re-letting our property. If significant leases are terminated, we cannot assure you that we will be able to lease the property for the rent previously received or sell the property without incurring a loss. Additionally, loans that we make generally will relate to real estate. As a result, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be dependent on the financial stability of the tenants leasing the related real estate.
We may be unable to sell a property if or when we decide to do so, which could adversely impact our cash flow and results of operations.
We intend to hold the various real properties in which we invest until such time as we determine that a sale or other disposition appears to be advantageous to achieve our investment objectives or until it appears that such objectives will not be met. We have no obligation to sell properties at any particular time, except upon our liquidation. If we do not begin the process of liquidating our assets or listing our shares by July 2017, our charter requires that we hold a stockholders meeting to vote on a proposal for our orderly liquidation unless a majority of our board of directors and a majority of our independent directors vote to defer such a meeting beyond July 2017. Market conditions and other factors could cause our board of directors and our independent directors to conclude that it is not in our best interests to hold a stockholders meeting for the purpose of voting on a proposal for our orderly liquidation in 2017. Therefore, if we are not successful in implementing our exit strategy, your shares will continue to be illiquid and you may, for an indefinite period of time, be unable to convert your investment into cash easily with minimum loss.
The real estate market is affected, as discussed above, by many factors, such as general economic conditions, availability of financing, interest rates and other factors, including supply and demand, that are beyond our control. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any asset for the price or on the terms set by us, or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of an asset. If we are unable to sell an asset when we determine to do so, it could have a significant adverse effect on our cash flow and results of operations.
Our co-venture partners, co-tenants or other partners in co-ownership arrangements could take actions that decrease the value of an investment to us and lower your overall return.
We have entered into joint ventures with third parties for the acquisition, development or improvement of properties.
Such investments may involve risks not otherwise present with other forms of real estate investment, including, for example:
• | the possibility that our co-venturer, co-tenant or partner in an investment might become bankrupt; |
• | the possibility that the investment requires additional capital that we and/or our partner do not have, which lack of capital could affect the performance of the investment and/or dilute our interest if the partner were to contribute our share of the capital; |
• | the possibility that a co-venturer, co-tenant or partner in an investment might breach a loan agreement or other agreement or otherwise, by action or inaction, act in a way detrimental to us or the investment; |
14
• | that such co-venturer, co-tenant or partner may at any time have economic or business interests or goals that are or that become inconsistent with our business interests or goals; |
• | the possibility that we may incur liabilities as the result of the action taken by our partner or co-investor; |
• | that such co-venturer, co-tenant or partner may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions or requests or contrary to our policies or objectives, including our policy with respect to qualifying and maintaining our qualification as a REIT; or |
• | that such partner may exercise buy/sell rights that force us to either acquire the entire investment, or dispose of our share, at a time and price that may not be consistent with our investment objectives. |
Any of the above might subject a property to liabilities in excess of those contemplated and thus reduce our returns on that investment.
Uninsured losses relating to real property or excessively expensive premiums for insurance coverage may adversely affect your returns.
Our Advisor will attempt to ensure that all of our properties are adequately insured to cover casualty losses. The nature of the activities at certain properties we have invested in, such as student housing, will expose us and our operators to potential liability for personal injuries and property damage claims. In addition, there are types of losses, generally catastrophic in nature, such as losses due to wars, acts of terrorism, earthquakes, pollution, environmental matters or extreme weather conditions such as hurricanes, floods and snowstorms that are uninsurable or not economically insurable, or may be insured subject to limitations, such as large deductibles or co-payments. Insurance risks associated with potential terrorist acts could sharply increase the premiums we pay for coverage against property and casualty claims. Mortgage lenders generally insist that specific coverage against terrorism be purchased by commercial property owners as a condition for providing mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans. It is uncertain whether such insurance policies will be available, or available at reasonable cost, which could inhibit our ability to finance or refinance our properties. In such instances, we may be required to provide other financial support, either through financial assurances or self-insurance, to cover potential losses. We cannot assure you that we will have adequate coverage for such losses. In the event that any of our properties incurs a casualty loss that is not fully covered by insurance, the value of our assets will be reduced by the amount of any such uninsured loss. In addition, other than the capital reserve or other reserves we may establish, we have no source of funding to repair or reconstruct any uninsured damaged property, and we cannot assure you that any such sources of funding will be available to us for such purposes in the future. Also, to the extent we must pay unexpectedly large amounts for insurance, we could suffer reduced earnings that may adversely affect the overall return on your investment.
Our operating results may be negatively affected by potential development and construction delays and result in increased costs and risks, which could diminish the return on your investment.
We have invested in the acquisition, development and/or redevelopment of properties upon which we, or a borrower,
will develop and construct improvements. We could incur substantial capital obligations in connection with these types of
investments. We will be subject to risks relating to uncertainties associated with rezoning for development and environmental
concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups and our builder’s ability to control construction costs or to build
in conformity with plans, specifications and timetables. The builder’s failure to perform may necessitate legal action by us to
rescind the purchase or the construction contract or to compel performance. Performance may also be affected or delayed by
conditions beyond the builder’s control. Delays in completion of construction could also give tenants the right to terminate
preconstruction leases for space at a newly developed project. We may incur additional risks when we make periodic
progress payments or other advances to such builders prior to completion of construction. These and other such factors can
result in increased costs of a project or loss of our investment. In addition, we will be subject to normal lease-up risks
relating to newly constructed projects. Furthermore, we must rely upon projections of rental income and expenses and
estimates of the fair market value of property upon completion of construction when agreeing upon a price to be paid for the
property at the time of acquisition of the property. If our projections are inaccurate, we may pay too much for a property,
and the return on our investment could suffer.
If we set aside insufficient capital reserves, we may be required to defer necessary capital improvements.
If we do not have enough capital reserves to supply needed funds for capital improvements throughout the life of the investment in a property, and there is insufficient cash available from our operations, we may be required to defer necessary improvements to the property, which may cause the property to suffer from a greater risk of obsolescence or a decline in value, or a greater risk of decreased cash flow as a result of fewer potential tenants being attracted to the property. If this happens we may not be able to maintain projected rental rates for affected properties, and our results of operations may be negatively impacted.
15
Our student-housing properties are subject to an annual leasing cycle, short lease-up period, seasonal cash flows, changing university admission and housing policies, and other risks inherent in the student-housing industry, any of which could have a negative impact on your investment.
Student-housing properties generally have short-term leases of 12 months, ten months, nine months, or shorter. As a result, we may experience significantly reduced cash flows during the summer months from student-housing properties while most students are on vacation. Furthermore, student-housing properties must be almost entirely re-leased each year, exposing us to increased leasing risk. Student-housing properties are also typically leased during a limited leasing season that usually begins in August and ends in June of the following year. We would, therefore, be highly dependent on the effectiveness of our marketing and leasing efforts and personnel during this season.
Changes in university admission policies could also adversely affect us. For example, if a university reduces the number of student admissions or requires that a certain class of students, such as freshman, live in a university-owned facility, the demand for units at our student-housing properties may be reduced and our occupancy rates may decline. We rely on our relationships with colleges and universities for referrals of prospective student residents or for mailing lists of prospective student residents and their parents. Many of these colleges and universities own and operate their own competing on-campus facilities. Any failure to maintain good relationships with these colleges and universities could therefore have a material adverse effect on our ability to market our properties to students and their families.
Federal and state laws require colleges to publish and distribute reports of on-campus crime statistics, which may result in negative publicity and media coverage associated with crimes occurring on or in the vicinity of any student-housing properties. Reports of crime or other negative publicity regarding the safety of the students residing on, or near, our student-housing properties may have an adverse effect on our business.
We may face significant competition from university-owned student housing and from other residential properties that are in close proximity to student-housing properties we own, which could have a negative impact on our results of operations.
On-campus student housing has certain inherent advantages over off-campus student housing in terms of physical proximity to the university campus and integration of on-campus facilities into the academic community. Colleges and universities can generally avoid real estate taxes and borrow funds at lower interest rates than us.
We have invested in apartment communities with short-term apartment leases, which may expose us to the effects of declining market rent more quickly and could have a negative impact on our results of operations.
We expect that substantially all of our apartment leases will be for a term of one year or less. Because these leases generally permit the residents to leave at the end of the lease term without penalty, our rental revenues may be impacted by declines in market rents more quickly than if our leases were for longer terms.
We face competition from other apartment communities and the increased affordability of single-family homes, which may limit our profitability and returns to our stockholders.
The apartment communities we have acquired most likely compete with numerous housing alternatives in attracting residents, including other apartment communities, as well as single family homes and condominiums available to rent or purchase.
The residential apartment community industry is highly competitive. This competition could reduce occupancy levels and revenues at our apartment communities, which would adversely affect our operations. We expect to face competition from many sources, including from other apartment communities both in the immediate vicinity and the broader geographic market where our apartment communities are located. Overbuilding of apartment communities may occur. If so, this will increase the number of apartment units available and may decrease occupancy and apartment rental rates. In addition, increases in operating costs due to inflation may not be offset by increased apartment rental rates. We may be required to expend substantial sums to attract new residents.
We face increased competition from single-family homes and condominiums for rent or purchase, which could limit our ability to retain residents, lease apartment units or increase or maintain rents at our apartment communities.
The apartment communities we have invested in may compete with numerous housing alternatives in attracting residents, including single-family homes and condominiums available for rent or purchase. Such competitive housing alternatives may become more prevalent in a particular area because of the tightening of mortgage lending underwriting criteria, homeowner foreclosures, the decline in single-family home and condominium sales, and the lack of available credit. The number of single-family homes and condominiums for rent in a particular area could limit our ability to retain residents, lease apartment units, or increase or maintain rents.
16
In addition, the increasing affordability of single-family homes and condominiums available to purchase caused by declining mortgage interest rates and government programs to promote home ownership could adversely affect our ability to retain our residents, lease apartment units and increase or maintain rental rates.
Our property manager’s failure to integrate its subcontractors into its operations in an efficient manner could reduce the return on your investment.
Our property manager may rely on multiple subcontractors for on-site property management of our properties. If our property manager is unable to integrate these subcontractors into its operations in an efficient manner, our property manager may have to expend substantial time and money coordinating with these subcontractors, which could be a negative impact on the revenues generated from such properties.
We are dependent on a third-party manager at our hotel property.
In order to qualify as a REIT, we are unable to operate a hotel property or participate in the decisions affecting the daily operations of the hotel. We lease our hotel to a taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”) in which we own a 100% interest. Our TRS has entered a management agreement with an eligible independent contractor that is not our subsidiary or otherwise controlled by us to manage the hotel. Thus, an independent hotel operator, under a management agreement with our TRS, controls the daily operations of our hotel.
We depend on the independent management company to adequately operate our hotel as provided in the management agreement. We do not have the authority to require our hotel to be operated in a particular manner or to govern any particular aspect of the daily operations of the hotel (for instance, setting room rates). Thus, even if we believe our hotel is being operated inefficiently or in a manner that does not result in satisfactory occupancy rates, average daily rates (“ADR”), and resulting revenue per available room (“RevPar”), we may not be able to force the management company to change its method of operation of our hotel. We can only seek redress if a management company violates the terms of the applicable management agreement with the TRS, and then only to the extent of the remedies provided for under the terms of the management agreement. In the event that we need to replace our management company, we may be required by the terms of the management agreement to pay substantial termination fees and may experience significant disruptions at the hotel.
We may have to make significant capital expenditures to maintain our hotel.
Hotels have an ongoing need for renovations and other capital improvements, including replacements of furniture, fixtures and equipment. Generally, we will be responsible for the costs of these capital improvements, which give rise to the following risks:
• | cost overruns and delays; |
• | renovations can be disruptive to operations and can displace revenue at the hotels, including revenue lost while rooms under renovation are out of service; |
• | the cost of funding renovations and the possibility that financing for these renovations may not be available on attractive terms; and |
• | the risk that the return on our investment in these capital improvements will not be what we expect. |
If we have insufficient cash flow from operations to fund needed capital expenditures, then we will need to borrow to fund future capital improvements.
General economic conditions and discretionary consumer spending may affect the hotel property we have acquired and lower the return on your investment.
The operations of the hotel property in which we have invested, depend upon a number of factors relating to discretionary consumer spending. Unfavorable local, regional or national economic developments or uncertainties regarding future economic prospects as a result of terrorist attacks, military activity or natural disasters could reduce consumer spending in the market in which we own our hotel property and adversely affect its operations. Consumer spending on luxury goods, travel and other leisure activities such as boating, skiing and health and spa activities may decline as a result of lower consumer confidence levels, even if prevailing economic conditions are favorable. In an economic downturn, consumer discretionary spending levels generally decline, at times resulting in disproportionately large reductions in expenditures on luxury goods, travel and other leisure activities. Our hotel may be unable to maintain its profitability during periods of adverse economic conditions or low consumer confidence, which could in turn affect the ability of the operator to make scheduled rent payments to us.
17
Seasonal revenue variations at our hotel property will require the operator to manage cash flow properly over time to meet its non-seasonal scheduled rent payments to us.
Our hotel property is seasonal in nature. As a result of the seasonal nature, the hotel will experience seasonal variations in revenues that may require the operator to supplement revenue at the hotel in order to be able to make scheduled rent payments to us. The failure of an operator to manage its cash flow properly may result in the operator having insufficient cash on hand to make its scheduled payments to us during seasonally slow periods, which may adversely affect our cash flow from operations.
Adverse weather conditions at our hotel may affect its operations or reduce our operators’ ability to make scheduled rent payments to us, which could reduce our cash flow from our hotel.
Adverse weather conditions may influence revenues at our hotel investment. These adverse weather conditions include hurricanes, tropical storms, high winds, heat waves, drought (or merely reduced rainfall levels), excessive rain and floods. For example, adverse weather could reduce the number of people that visit our hotel property. Our hotel property may be susceptible to damage from weather conditions such as hurricanes, which damage (including but not limited to property damage and loss of revenue) is not generally insurable at commercially reasonable rates. Poor weather conditions could also disrupt operations at our hotel property and may adversely affect both the value of our investment and the ability of our operator to make their scheduled rent payments to us.
Security breaches through cyber-attacks, cyber-intrusions, or otherwise, could disrupt our IT networks and related systems.
Risks associated with security breaches, whether through cyber-attacks or cyber-intrusions over the Internet, malware, computer viruses, attachments to e-mails, or otherwise, against persons inside our organization, persons with access to systems inside our organization, the U.S. government, financial markets or institutions, or major businesses, including tenants, could disrupt or disable networks and related systems, other critical infrastructures, and the normal operation of business. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attack or cyber-intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments, and cyber-terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity, and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Even though we may not be specifically targeted, cyber-attacks on the U.S. government, financial markets, financial institutions, or other major businesses, including tenants, could disrupt our normal business operations and networks, which may in turn have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.
Our information technology (“IT”) networks and related systems are essential to the operation of our business and our ability to perform day-to-day operations and they are subject to cybersecurity risks and threats. They also may be critical to the operations of certain of our tenants. Further, our Advisor provides our IT services, and there can be no assurance that their security efforts and measures will be effective or that attempted security breaches or disruptions would not be successful or damaging. It has been reported that unknown entities or groups have mounted cyber-attacks on businesses and other organizations solely to disable or disrupt computer systems, disrupt operations and, in some cases, steal data. Even the most well protected information, networks, systems, and facilities remain potentially vulnerable because the techniques used in such attempted security breaches evolve and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not to be detected and, in fact, may not be detected. Due to the nature of cyber-attacks, breaches to our systems could go unnoticed for a prolonged period of time. These cybersecurity risks could disrupt our operations and result in downtime, loss of revenue, or the loss of critical data as well as result in higher costs to correct and remedy the effects of such incidents. If our systems for protecting against cyber incidents or attacks prove to be insufficient and an incident were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. While, to date, we have not experienced a cyber-attack or cyber-intrusion, neither our Advisor nor we may be able to anticipate or implement adequate security barriers or other preventive measures. A security breach or other significant disruption involving our IT networks and related systems could:
• | disrupt the proper functioning of our networks and systems and therefore our operations and/or those of certain of our tenants; |
• | result in misstated financial reports, violations of loan covenants, missed reporting deadlines and/or missed permitting deadlines; |
• | result in our inability to properly monitor our compliance with the rules and regulations regarding our qualification as a REIT; |
• | result in the unauthorized access to, and destruction, loss, theft, misappropriation, or release of proprietary, confidential, sensitive, or otherwise valuable information of ours or others, which others could use to compete against us or for disruptive, destructive, or otherwise harmful purposes and outcomes; |
• | result in our inability to maintain the building systems relied upon by our tenants for the efficient use of their leased space; |
• | require significant management attention and resources to remedy any damages that result; |
18
• | subject us to claims for breach of contract, damages, credits, penalties, or termination of leases or other agreements; or |
• | damage our reputation among our tenants and stockholders generally. |
Any or all of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.
The costs of compliance with environmental laws and other governmental laws and regulations may adversely affect our income.
All real property and the operations conducted on real property are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to environmental protection and human health and safety. These laws and regulations generally govern wastewater discharges, air emissions, the operation and removal of underground and above-ground storage tanks, the use, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous materials, and the remediation of contamination associated with disposals. Some of these laws and regulations may impose joint and several liability on tenants, owners or operators for the costs of investigation or remediation of contaminated properties, regardless of fault or the legality of the original disposal. In addition, the presence of these substances, or the failure to properly remediate these substances, may adversely affect our ability to sell or rent such property or to use the property as collateral for future borrowing.
Compliance with new or more stringent laws or regulations or stricter interpretation of existing laws may require material expenditures by us. For example, various federal, regional and state laws and regulations have been implemented or are under consideration to mitigate the effects of climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Among other things, “green” building codes may seek to reduce emissions through the imposition of standards for design, construction materials, water and energy usage and efficiency, and waste management. We are not aware of any such existing requirements that we believe will have a material impact on our current operations. However, future requirements could increase the costs of maintaining or improving our existing properties or developing new properties.
Discovery of previously undetected environmentally hazardous conditions may adversely affect our operating results.
Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations (including those of foreign jurisdictions), a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be liable for the cost of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in such property. The costs of removal or remediation could be substantial. Such laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. Environmental laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which property may be used or businesses may be operated, and these restrictions may require substantial expenditures. Environmental laws provide for sanctions in the event of noncompliance and may be enforced by governmental agencies or, in certain circumstances, by private parties. Certain environmental laws and common law principles could be used to impose liability for release of and exposure to hazardous substances, including asbestos-containing materials into the air, and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real properties for personal injury or property damage associated with exposure to released hazardous substances.
In addition, when excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials, mold growth may occur, particularly if the moisture problem remains undiscovered or is not addressed over a period of time. Some molds may produce airborne toxins or irritants. Concern about indoor exposure to mold has been increasing, as exposure to mold may cause a variety of adverse health effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions. As a result, the presence of significant mold at any of our projects could require us to undertake a costly remediation program to contain or remove the mold from the affected property or development project, which would reduce our operating results.
The cost of defending against claims of liability, of compliance with environmental regulatory requirements, of remediating any contaminated property, or of paying personal injury claims could materially adversely affect our business, assets or results of operations and, consequently, amounts available for distributions to stockholders.
We must comply with the Fair Housing Amendment Act, with respect to our investments in apartment communities, which may decrease our cash flow from operations.
We must comply with the Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988 (“FHAA”), which requires that apartment communities first occupied after March 13, 1991 be accessible to handicapped residents and visitors. Compliance with the FHAA could require removal of structural barriers to handicapped access in a community, including the interiors of apartment units covered under the FHAA. Recently, there has been heightened scrutiny of multifamily housing communities for compliance with the requirements of the FHAA and an increasing number of substantial enforcement actions and private lawsuits have been brought against apartment communities to ensure compliance with these requirements. Noncompliance with the FHAA could result in the imposition of fines, awards of damages to private litigants, payment of attorneys’ fees and other costs to plaintiffs, substantial litigation costs and substantial costs of remediation.
19
Risks Associated with Debt Financing
We incur mortgage indebtedness and other borrowings, which increases our business risks.
We have acquired real properties and other real estate-related investments by using either existing financing or borrowing new funds. We also may borrow funds for payment of cash distributions to stockholders, in particular if necessary to satisfy the requirement that we distribute to stockholders at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income, or otherwise as is necessary or advisable to assure that we maintain our qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and/or avoid federal income tax.
There is no limitation on the amount we may invest in or borrow related to any single property or other investment. Under our charter, the maximum amount of our indebtedness shall not exceed 300% of our “net assets” (as defined in our charter) as of the date of any borrowing; however, we may exceed that limit if approved by a majority of our independent directors.
In addition to our charter limitation, our board of directors has adopted a policy to generally limit our aggregate borrowings to approximately 75% of the aggregate value of our assets unless substantial justification exists that borrowing a greater amount is in our best interests. Our policy limitation, however, does not apply to individual real estate assets. For these purposes, the value of our assets is based on methodologies and policies determined by the board of directors and may include, but do not require, independent appraisals.
We do not intend to incur mortgage debt on a particular real property unless we believe the property’s projected cash flow is sufficient to service the mortgage debt. However, if there is a shortfall in cash flow available to service our mortgage debt, then our cash flow from operations will be adversely affected. In addition, incurring mortgage debt increases the risk of loss because (i) loss in investment value is generally borne entirely by the borrower until such time as the investment value declines below the principal balance of the associated debt and (ii) defaults on indebtedness secured by a property may result in foreclosure actions initiated by lenders and our loss of the property securing the loan that is in default. For tax purposes, a foreclosure of any of our properties would be treated as a sale of the property for a purchase price equal to the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage. If the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage exceeds our tax basis in the property, we would recognize taxable income on foreclosure, but would not receive any cash proceeds from the foreclosure. We may give full or partial guarantees to lenders of mortgage debt to the entities that own our properties. When we give a guaranty on behalf of an entity that owns one of our properties, we will be responsible to the lender for satisfaction of the debt if it is not paid by such entity. If any mortgages contain cross-collateralization or cross-default provisions, there is a risk that more than one real property may be affected by a default. If any of our properties are foreclosed upon due to a default, your overall investment return will be adversely affected. In addition, because our goal is to be in a position to liquidate our assets within three to six years after the termination of the initial public offering, our approach to investing in properties utilizing leverage in order to accomplish our investment objectives over this period of time may present more risks to investors than comparable real estate programs that have a longer intended duration and that do not utilize borrowing to the same degree.
If mortgage debt is unavailable at reasonable rates, we may not be able to refinance our properties, which could reduce the overall return on your investment.
When we place mortgage debt on properties, we run the risk of being unable to refinance the properties when the loans come due, or of being unable to refinance on favorable terms. If interest rates are higher when the properties are refinanced, we may not be able to finance the properties at reasonable rates and our income could be reduced. If this occurs, it would reduce the overall return on your investment, and it may prevent us from borrowing more money.
Lenders may require us to enter into restrictive covenants relating to our operations, which could limit our ability to make cash distributions to our stockholders.
In connection with obtaining financing, a lender could impose restrictions on us that affect our ability to incur additional debt, to make distributions and operating policies. In general, we expect our loan agreements to restrict our ability to encumber or otherwise transfer our interest in the respective property without the prior consent of the lender. Loan documents we enter may contain other customary negative covenants that may limit our ability to further mortgage the property, discontinue insurance coverage, replace our Advisor or impose other limitations. Any such restriction or limitation may have an adverse effect on our operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Interest-only indebtedness may increase our risk of default and ultimately may reduce our funds available for cash distribution to our stockholders.
We have financed our property acquisitions using interest-only mortgage indebtedness. During the interest-only period, the amount of each scheduled payment will be less than that of a traditional amortizing mortgage loan. The principal balance of
20
the mortgage loan will not be reduced (except in the case of prepayments) because there are no scheduled monthly payments of principal during this period. After the interest-only period, we will be required either to make scheduled payments of amortized principal and interest or to make a lump-sum or “balloon” payment at maturity. These required principal or balloon payments will increase the amount of our scheduled payments and may increase our risk of default under the related mortgage loan. If the mortgage loan has an adjustable interest rate, the amount of our scheduled payments also may increase at a time of rising interest rates. Increased payments and substantial principal or balloon maturity payments will reduce the funds available for cash distribution to our stockholders because cash otherwise available for distributions will be required to pay principal and interest associated with these mortgage loans.
Increases in interest rates could increase the amount of our debt payments and adversely affect the overall return on your investment.
We have incurred indebtedness that bears interest at a variable rate. In addition, from time to time we may pay mortgage loans or finance and refinance our properties in a rising interest rate environment. Accordingly, increases in interest rates could increase our interest costs, which could have an adverse effect on our operating cash flow. In addition, if rising interest rates cause us to need additional capital to repay indebtedness in accordance with its terms or otherwise, we may need to liquidate one or more of our investments at times that may not permit realization of the maximum return on such investments. Prolonged interest rate increases could also negatively impact our ability to make investments with positive economic returns.
Financing arrangements involving balloon payment obligations may adversely affect the overall return on your investment.
Some of our financing arrangements require us to make a lump-sum or balloon payment at maturity. Our ability to make a balloon payment at maturity is uncertain and may depend upon our ability to obtain additional financing or our ability to sell the property. At the time the balloon payment is due, we may not be able to refinance the balloon payment on terms as favorable as the original loan or sell the property at a price sufficient to make the balloon payment. The effect of a refinancing or sale could affect the rate of return to stockholders and the projected time of disposition of our assets. In addition, payments of principal and interest made to service our debts may leave us with insufficient cash to pay the distributions that we are required to pay to maintain our qualification as a REIT and/or avoid federal income tax. Any of these results would have a significant, negative impact on your investment. As of February 1, 2017, the Company had balloon payments totaling $38 million associated with the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel and approximately $13 million associated with Gardens Medical Pavilion maturing in the next twelve months.
We have broad authority to incur debt, and high debt levels could decrease the value of your investment.
Our board of directors has adopted a policy to generally limit our aggregate borrowings to approximately 75% of the aggregate value of our assets, but we may exceed this limit under some circumstances. Such debt may be at a level that is higher than real estate investment trusts with similar investment objectives or criteria. High debt levels could cause us to incur higher interest charges, could result in higher debt service payments, and could be accompanied by restrictive covenants. These factors could result in a decline in the value of your investment.
Risks Associated with Investments in Mortgage, Bridge and Mezzanine Loans
Our mezzanine loan may be impacted by unfavorable real estate market conditions, which could decrease the value of the loan and the return on your investment.
We have invested in a mezzanine loan in a multifamily development located in the energy hub of Denver, Colorado, and we are at risk of defaults on the loan caused by many conditions beyond our control, including local and other economic conditions affecting real estate values and interest rate levels. The energy sector recently experienced a significant decline in oil prices, which could have an adverse impact on the results at this multifamily investment. Denver is headquarters to a number of energy companies. Job layoffs as a result of the downturn in oil prices could reduce the number of tenants available to lease a unit at the development project, which was completed in January 2017. We do not know whether the value of the property securing the loan will remain at the levels existing on the date we completed the underwriting of the loan. If the value of the underlying property declines, our risk will increase because of the lower value of the security associated with the loan.
Our mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans will be subject to interest rate fluctuations, which could reduce our returns as compared to market interest rates and reduce the value of the loans in the event we sell them.
We have invested in fixed-rate, long-term mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans. If interest rates rise, the loans could yield a return lower than then-current market rates. If interest rates decrease, we will be adversely affected to the extent that mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans are prepaid, because we may not be able to make new loans at the previously higher interest rate. If we invest in variable-rate loans and interest rates decrease, our revenues also decrease. When interest rates increase on our variable-rate loans, the value of the loans we own at such time would decrease, which would lower the proceeds
21
we would receive in the event we sell such assets. For these reasons, our returns on these types of loans and the value of your investment will be subject to fluctuations in interest rates.
Delays in liquidating a defaulted mezzanine loan could reduce our investment returns.
If there is a default under our mezzanine loan, we may not be able to repossess and quickly sell the property securing the loan. The resulting time delay could reduce the value of our investment in the defaulted loan. An action to foreclose on a property securing a loan is regulated by state statutes and regulations and is subject to many of the delays and expenses of any lawsuit brought in connection with the foreclosure if the defendant raises defenses or counterclaims. In the event of default by a mortgagor, these restrictions, among other things, may impede our ability to foreclose on or sell the mortgaged property or to obtain proceeds sufficient to repay all amounts due to us on the loan.
The mezzanine loan in which we have invested involves greater risks of loss than senior loans secured by income-producing real properties.
We have invested in a mezzanine loan secured by a pledge of the ownership interests of either the entity owning the real property or the entity that owns the interest in the entity owning the real property. This type of investment involves a higher degree of risk than long-term senior mortgage lending secured by income producing real property because the investment may become unsecured as a result of foreclosure by the senior lender. Further, the borrower of this loan is a real estate developer, and the investment may involve additional risks, including dependence for repayment on successful completion and operation of the project, difficulties in estimating construction or rehabilitation costs and loan terms that often require little or no amortization. In the event of a bankruptcy of the entity providing the pledge of its ownership interests as security, we may not have full recourse to the assets of the entity, or the assets of the entity may not be sufficient to satisfy our mezzanine loan. If a borrower defaults on our loan or on debt senior to our loan, or in the event of a borrower bankruptcy, our loan will be satisfied only after the senior debt is paid in full. Where debt senior to our loan exists, the presence of intercreditor arrangements may limit our ability to amend our loan documents, assign our loans, accept prepayments, exercise our remedies (through “standstill periods”), and control decisions made in bankruptcy proceedings relating to borrowers. As a result, we may not recover some or all of our investment.
Foreclosures create additional ownership risks that could adversely impact our returns on mortgage investments.
If we acquire property by foreclosure following a default under our mezzanine loan, we will have the economic and liability risks as the owner.
The liquidation of our assets may be delayed as a result of our investment in a mezzanine loan, which could delay cash distributions to our stockholders.
The mezzanine loan we originated is a particularly illiquid investment due to its short life, unsuitability for securitization and greater difficulty of recoupment in the event of a borrower’s default. Any intended liquidation of us may be delayed beyond the time of the sale of all of our properties until our mezzanine loan expires or is sold.
Risks Related to Our Operations
To hedge against exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations, we may use derivative financial instruments that may be costly and ineffective and may reduce the overall returns on your investment and affect cash available for distributions to our stockholders.
We may use derivative financial instruments to hedge exposures to changes in exchange rates and interest rates on loans secured by our assets. Derivative instruments may include interest rate swap contracts, interest rate cap or floor contracts, futures or forward contracts, options or repurchase agreements. Our actual hedging decisions will be determined in light of the facts and circumstances existing at the time of the hedge and may differ from time to time. Our hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us because, among other things:
• | interest rate hedging can be expensive, particularly during periods of rising and volatile interest rates; |
• | available interest rate hedging products may not correspond directly with the interest rate risk for which protection is sought; |
• | the duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the related liability or asset; |
• | the amount of income that a REIT may earn from hedging transactions to offset losses due to fluctuations in interest rates is limited by federal tax provisions governing REITs; |
• | the credit quality of the party owing money on the hedge may be downgraded to such an extent that it impairs our ability to sell or assign our side of the hedging transaction; |
• | the party owing money in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation to pay; and |
• | we may purchase a hedge that turns out not to be necessary, i.e., a hedge that is out of the money. |
22
Any hedging activity we engage in may adversely affect our earnings, which could adversely affect cash available for distributions to our stockholders. Therefore, while we may enter into such transactions to seek to reduce interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in interest rates may result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged or liabilities being hedged may vary materially. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not seek to establish a perfect correlation between such hedging instruments and the interest rate risk sought to be hedged. Any such imperfect correlation may prevent us from achieving the intended accounting treatment and may expose us to risk of loss.
To the extent that we use derivative financial instruments to hedge against exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations, we will be exposed to credit risk, basis risk and legal enforceability risks. In this context, credit risk is the failure of the counterparty to perform under the terms of the derivative contract. If the fair value of a derivative contract is positive, the counterparty owes us, which creates credit risk for us. Basis risk occurs when the index upon which the contract is based is more or less variable than the index upon which the hedged asset or liability is based, thereby making the hedge less effective. Finally, legal enforceability risks encompass general contractual risks, including the risk that the counterparty will breach the terms of, or fail to perform its obligations under, the derivative contract. If we are unable to manage these risks effectively, our results of operations, financial condition and your overall investment return will be adversely affected.
Hedging instruments often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities and involve risks and costs.
The cost of using hedging instruments increases as the period covered by the instrument increases and during periods of rising and volatile interest rates. We may increase our hedging activity and thus increase our hedging costs during periods when interest rates are volatile or rising and hedging costs have increased. In addition, hedging instruments involve risk since they often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities. Consequently, there are no requirements with respect to record keeping, financial responsibility or segregation of customer funds and positions. Furthermore, the enforceability of agreements underlying derivative transactions may depend on compliance with applicable statutory, commodity and other regulatory requirements and, depending on the identity of the counterparty, applicable international requirements. The business failure of a hedging counterparty with whom we enter into a hedging transaction will most likely result in a default. Default by a party with whom we enter into a hedging transaction may result in the loss of unrealized profits and force us to cover our resale commitments, if any, at the then current market price. It may not always be possible to dispose of or close out a hedging position without the consent of the hedging counterparty, and we may not be able to enter into an offsetting contract in order to cover our risk. We cannot be certain that a liquid secondary market will exist for hedging instruments purchased or sold, and we may be required to maintain a position until exercise or expiration, which could result in losses.
Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively.
The REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code may limit our ability to hedge our assets and operations. Under these provisions, any income that we generate from transactions intended to hedge our interest rate, inflation and/or currency risks will be excluded from gross income for purposes of the REIT 75% and 95% gross income tests if the instrument hedges (i) interest rate risk on liabilities incurred to carry or acquire real estate; (ii) risk of currency fluctuations with respect to any item of income or gain that would be qualifying income under the REIT 75% or 95% gross income tests; or (iii) to manage risk with respect to the termination of prior hedging transactions described in (i) and/or (ii) above, and in each case, such instrument is properly identified under applicable Treasury Regulations. Income from hedging transactions that do not meet these requirements will generally constitute nonqualifying income for purposes of both the REIT 75% and 95% gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may have to limit our use of hedging techniques that might otherwise be advantageous, which could result in greater risks associated with interest rate or other changes than we would otherwise incur.
There can be no assurance that the direct or indirect effects of the Dodd-Frank Act and other applicable non-U.S. regulations will not have an adverse effect on our interest rate hedging activities.
Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) imposed additional regulations on derivatives markets and transactions. Such regulations and, to the extent we trade with counterparties organized in non-US jurisdictions, any applicable regulations in those jurisdictions, are still being implemented, and will affect our interest rate hedging activities. While the full impact of the regulation on our interest rate hedging activities cannot be fully assessed until all final rules and regulations are implemented, such regulation may affect our ability to enter into hedging or other risk management transactions, may increase our costs in entering into such transactions, and/or may result in us entering into such transactions on less favorable terms than prior to implementation of such regulation. For example, but not by way of limitation, the Dodd-Frank Act and the rulemaking thereunder provides for significantly increased regulation of the derivative transactions used to affect our interest rate hedging activities, including: (i) regulatory reporting, (ii) subject to an exemption for
23
end-users of swaps upon which we and our subsidiaries generally rely, mandated clearing of certain derivatives transactions through central counterparties and execution on regulated exchanges or execution facilities and, (iii) to the extent we are required to clear any such transactions, margin and collateral requirements. The imposition, or the failure to comply with, any of the foregoing requirements may have an adverse effect on our business and our stockholders’ return.
Potential reforms to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could adversely affect us.
There is significant uncertainty surrounding the futures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Through their lender originator networks, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are significant lenders to buyers of multifamily real estate. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have a mandate to support multifamily housing through their financing activities and any changes to their mandates, further reductions in their size or the scale of their activities, or loss of their key personnel could have a significant impact on us and may, among other things, adversely affect values for multifamily assets, interest rates, capital availability, and potential sales of multifamily communities which in turn could adversely affect our ability to dispose of our multifamily assets. Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s regulator has set overall volume limits on most of Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s lending activities. The regulator in the future could require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to focus more of their lending activities on small borrowers or properties the regulator deems affordable, which may or may not include our assets, which could also adversely impact us.
Risks Related to Our Corporate Structure
A limit on the number of shares a person may own may discourage a takeover.
Our charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our directors to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT. Unless exempted by our board of directors, no person may own more than 9.8% of our outstanding shares of common or preferred stock. This restriction may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer or sale of all or substantially all of our assets) that might otherwise provide stockholders with the opportunity to receive a control premium for their shares.
Our charter permits our board of directors to issue stock with terms that may subordinate the rights of the holders of our current common stock or discourage a third party from acquiring us.
Our charter permits our board of directors to issue up to 400,001,000 shares of capital stock. Our board of directors, without any action by our stockholders, may (i) increase or decrease the aggregate number of shares, (ii) increase or decrease the number of shares of any class or series we have authority to issue, or (iii) classify or reclassify any unissued common stock or preferred stock and establish the preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to distributions, qualifications, or terms or conditions of redemption of any such stock. Thus, our board of directors could authorize the issuance of such stock with terms and conditions that could subordinate the rights of the holders of our current common stock or have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer or sale of all or substantially all of our assets) that might provide a premium price for holders of our common stock.
Maryland law prohibits certain business combinations, which may make it more difficult for us to be acquired.
Under Maryland law, “business combinations” between a Maryland corporation and an interested stockholder or an affiliate of an interested stockholder are prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. These business combinations include a merger, consolidation, share exchange, or, in circumstances specified in the statute, an asset transfer or issuance or reclassification of equity securities. An interested stockholder is defined as:
• | any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of the then outstanding voting stock of the corporation; or |
• | an affiliate or associate of the corporation who, at any time within the two-year period prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of the then outstanding voting stock of the corporation. |
A person is not an interested stockholder under the statute if the board of directors approved in advance the transaction by which he/she otherwise would have become an interested stockholder. However, in approving a transaction, the board of directors may provide that its approval is subject to compliance, at or after the time of approval, with any terms and conditions determined by the board.
After the expiration of the five-year period described above, any business combination between a Maryland corporation and an interested stockholder must generally be recommended by the board of directors of the corporation and approved by the affirmative vote of at least:
24
• | 80% of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of the then outstanding shares of voting stock of the corporation; and |
• | two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of voting stock of the corporation, other than shares held by the interested stockholder with whom or with whose affiliate the business combination is to be effected or held by an affiliate or associate of the interested stockholder. |
These super-majority vote requirements do not apply if the corporation’s common stockholders receive a minimum price, as defined under Maryland law, for their shares in the form of cash or other consideration in the same form as previously paid by the interested stockholder for its shares. Maryland law also permits various exemptions from these provisions, including business combinations that are exempted by the board of directors before the time that the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. The business combination statute may discourage others from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating any offer.
Maryland law also limits the ability of a third party to buy a large stake in us and exercise voting power in electing directors.
Maryland law provides a second anti-takeover statute, the Control Share Acquisition Act, which provides that “control shares” of a Maryland corporation acquired in a “control share acquisition” have no voting rights except to the extent approved by the corporation’s disinterested stockholders by a vote of two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. Shares of stock owned by interested stockholders, that is, by the acquirer, by officers or by directors who are employees of the corporation, are excluded from the vote on whether to accord voting rights to the control shares. “Control shares” are voting shares of stock that would entitle the acquirer to exercise voting power in electing directors within specified ranges of voting power. Control shares do not include shares the acquiring person is then entitled to vote as a result of having previously obtained stockholder approval. A “control share acquisition” means the acquisition of control shares. The control share acquisition statute does not apply to (i) shares acquired in a merger, consolidation or share exchange if the corporation is a party to the transaction or (ii) acquisitions approved or exempted by a corporation’s charter or bylaws. Our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the Control Share Acquisition Act any and all acquisitions by any person of shares of our stock. We can offer no assurance that this provision will not be amended or eliminated at any time in the future. This statute could have the effect of discouraging offers from third parties to acquire us and increasing the difficulty of successfully completing this type of offer by anyone other than our affiliates or any of their affiliates.
Our charter includes an anti-takeover provision that may discourage a stockholder from launching a tender offer for our shares.
Our charter provides that any tender offer made by a stockholder, including any “mini-tender” offer, must comply with most provisions of Regulation 14D of the Exchange Act. The offering stockholder must provide us notice of such tender offer at least ten business days before initiating the tender offer. If the offering stockholder does not comply with these requirements, we will have the right to redeem that stockholder’s shares and any shares acquired in such tender offer. In addition, the non-complying stockholder shall be responsible for all of our expenses in connection with that stockholder’s noncompliance. This provision of our charter may discourage a stockholder from initiating a tender offer for our shares and prevent a stockholder from receiving a premium price for his shares in such a transaction.
Stockholders have limited control over changes in our policies and operations.
Our board of directors determines our major policies, including our policies regarding financing, growth, debt capitalization, REIT qualification and distributions. Our board of directors may amend or revise these and other policies without a vote of the stockholders. Under our charter and the Maryland General Corporation Law, our stockholders currently have a right to vote only on the following matters:
• | the election or removal of directors; |
• | any amendment of our charter, except that our board of directors may amend our charter without stockholder approval to: |
• | change our name; |
• | increase or decrease the aggregate number of our shares; |
• | increase or decrease the number of our shares of any class or series that we have the authority to issue; |
• | classify or reclassify any unissued shares by setting or changing the preferences, conversion or other rights, restrictions, limitations as to distributions, qualifications or terms and conditions of redemption of such shares; |
• | effect reverse stock splits; and |
• | after the listing of our shares of common stock on a national securities exchange, opting into any of the provisions of Subtitle 8 of Title 3 of the Maryland General Corporation Law; |
• | our liquidation and dissolution; and |
25
• | our being a party to any merger, consolidation, sale or other disposition of substantially all of our assets (notwithstanding that Maryland law may not require stockholder approval). |
All other matters are subject to the discretion of our board of directors.
Our board of directors may change our investment policies and objectives generally and at the individual investment level without stockholder approval, which could alter the nature of your investment.
Our charter requires that our independent directors review our investment policies at least annually to determine that the policies we are following are in the best interests of the stockholders. In addition to our investment policies and objectives, we may also change our stated strategy for any investment in an individual property. These policies may change over time. The methods of implementing our investment policies may also vary, as new investment techniques are developed. Our investment policies, the methods for their implementation, and our other objectives, policies and procedures may be altered by our board of directors without the approval of our stockholders. As a result, the nature of your investment could change without your consent.
Our rights and the rights of our shareholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited.
Maryland law provides that a director or officer has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in our best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. In addition, our charter eliminates our directors’ and officers’ liability to us and our shareholders for money damages except for liability resulting from actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services or active and deliberate dishonesty established by a final judgment and which is material to the cause of action. In addition, our charter requires us to indemnify our directors and officers to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law for liability actually incurred in connection with any proceeding to which they may be made, or threatened to be made, a party, except to the extent that the act or omission of the director or officer was material to the matter giving rise to the proceeding and was either committed in bad faith or was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty, the director or officer actually received an improper personal benefit in money, property or services, or, in the case of any criminal proceeding, the director or officer had reasonable cause to believe that the act or omission was unlawful. As a result, we and our shareholders may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might otherwise exist under common law. In addition, we may be obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our directors and officers.
Federal Income Tax Risks
Failure to qualify as a REIT would adversely affect our operations and our ability to make cash distributions.
In order for us to qualify as a REIT, we must satisfy certain requirements set forth in the Internal Revenue Code and Treasury Regulations and various factual matters and circumstances that are not entirely within our control. We intend to structure our activities in a manner designed to satisfy all of these requirements. However, if certain of our operations were to be recharacterized by the Internal Revenue Service, such recharacterization could jeopardize our ability to satisfy all of the requirements for qualification as a REIT and may affect our ability to continue to qualify as a REIT. In addition, new legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly change the tax laws with respect to qualifying as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of qualifying.
Our qualification as a REIT depends upon our ability to meet, through investments, actual operating results, distributions and satisfaction of specific stockholder rules, the various tests imposed by the Internal Revenue Code. We cannot assure you that we will satisfy the REIT requirements in the future. If we fail to qualify as a REIT for any taxable year, we will be subject to federal income tax on our taxable income for that year at corporate rates. In addition, we would generally be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year of losing our REIT status. Losing our REIT status would reduce our net earnings available for investment or distribution to stockholders because of the additional tax liability. In addition, distributions to stockholders would no longer qualify for the dividends-paid deduction, and we would no longer be required to make distributions. If this occurs, we might be required to borrow funds or liquidate some investments in order to pay the applicable tax. Our failure to qualify as a REIT would adversely affect the return on your investment.
Qualification as a REIT is subject to the satisfaction of tax requirements and various factual matters and circumstances that are not entirely within our control. New legislation, regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could change the tax laws with respect to qualification as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of being a REIT. Our failure to qualify as a REIT would adversely affect your return on your investment.
26
Our investment strategy may cause us to incur penalty taxes, lose our REIT status, or own and sell properties through taxable REIT subsidiaries, each of which would diminish the return to our stockholders.
In light of our opportunistic and value-add investment strategy and our current disposition strategy, it is possible that one or more sales of our properties may be considered “prohibited transactions” under the Internal Revenue Code. Any subdivision of property, such as the sale of condominiums, would almost certainly be considered such a prohibited transaction. If we are deemed to have engaged in a “prohibited transaction” (i.e., we sell a property held by us primarily for sale in the ordinary course of our trade or business) all net income that we derive from such sale would be subject to a 100% penalty tax. The Internal Revenue Code sets forth a safe harbor for REITs that wish to sell property without risking the imposition of the 100% penalty tax. A principal requirement of the safe harbor is that the REIT must hold the applicable property for not less than two years prior to its sale. Given our opportunistic and value-add investment strategy, along with our current disposition strategy, the sale of one or more of our properties may not fall within the prohibited transaction safe harbor.
If we desire to sell a property pursuant to a transaction that does not fall within the safe harbor, we may be able to avoid the 100% penalty tax if we acquired the property through a TRS or acquired the property and transferred it to a TRS for a non-tax business purpose prior to the sale (i.e., for a reason other than the avoidance of taxes). However, there may be circumstances that prevent us from using a TRS in a transaction that does not qualify for the safe harbor. Additionally, even if it is possible to effect a property disposition through a TRS, we may decide to forgo the use of a TRS in a transaction that does not meet the safe harbor, based on our own internal analysis, the opinion of counsel or the opinion of other tax advisors that the disposition will not be subject to the 100% penalty tax. In cases where a property disposition is not effected through a TRS, the Internal Revenue Service could successfully assert that the disposition constitutes a prohibited transaction, in which event all of the net income from the sale of such property will be payable as a tax and none of the proceeds from such sale will be distributable by us to our stockholders or available for investment by us.
If we acquire a property that we anticipate will not fall within the safe harbor from the 100% penalty tax upon disposition, then we may acquire such property through a TRS in order to avoid the possibility that the sale of such property will be a prohibited transaction and subject to the 100% penalty tax. If we already own such a property directly or indirectly through an entity other than a TRS, we may contribute the property to a TRS if there is another, non-tax related business purpose for the contribution of such property to the TRS. Following the transfer of the property to a TRS, the TRS will operate the property and may sell such property and distribute the net proceeds from such sale to us, and we may distribute the net proceeds distributed to us by the TRS to our stockholders. Though a sale of the property by a TRS likely would eliminate the danger of the application of the 100% penalty tax, the TRS itself would be subject to a tax at the federal level, and potentially at the state and local levels, on the gain realized by it from the sale of the property, as well as on the income earned while the property is operated by the TRS. In addition, the REIT has to pay a 100% penalty tax on some payments that it receives or on some deductions taken by a TRS if the economic arrangements between the REIT, the REIT’s customers, and the TRS are not comparable to similar arrangements between unrelated parties. This tax obligation would diminish the amount of the proceeds from the sale of such property that would be distributable to our stockholders. As a result, the amount available for distribution to our stockholders would be substantially less than if the REIT had not operated and sold such property through the TRS and such transaction was not successfully characterized as a prohibited transaction. The maximum federal corporate income tax rate currently is 35%. Federal, state and local corporate income tax rates may be increased in the future, and any such increase would reduce the amount of the net proceeds available for distribution by us to our stockholders from the sale of property through a TRS after the effective date of any increase in such tax rates.
As a REIT, the value of the non-mortgage securities we hold in all of our TRSs may not exceed 25% (20% for taxable years after 2017) of the value of all of our assets at the end of any calendar quarter. If the Internal Revenue Service were to determine that the value of our interests in all of our TRSs exceeded this limit at the end of any calendar quarter, then we would fail to qualify as a REIT. If we determine it to be in our best interests to own a substantial number of our properties through one or more TRSs, then it is possible that the Internal Revenue Service may conclude that the value of our interests in our TRSs exceeds 25% (or 20%, as applicable) of the value of our total assets at the end of any calendar quarter and therefore cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT. Additionally, as a REIT, no more than 25% of our gross income with respect to any year may be from sources other than real estate. Distributions paid to us from a TRS are considered to be non-real estate income. Therefore, we may fail to qualify as a REIT if distributions from all of our TRSs, when aggregated with all other non-real estate income with respect to any one year, are more than 25% of our gross income with respect to such year. We will use all reasonable efforts to structure our activities in a manner intended to satisfy the requirements for our continued qualification as a REIT. Our failure to qualify as a REIT would adversely affect the return on your investment.
Certain fees paid to us may affect our REIT status.
Income received in the nature of fees or noncustomary services, in some cases, may not qualify as rental income and could be characterized by the Internal Revenue Service as non-qualifying income for purposes of satisfying the “income tests” required for REIT qualification. If this income were, in fact, treated as non-qualifying, and if the aggregate of such income and
27
any other non-qualifying income in any taxable year ever exceeded 5% of our gross revenues for such year, we could lose our REIT status for that taxable year and the four taxable years following the year of losing our REIT status. We will use commercially reasonable efforts to structure our activities in a manner intended to satisfy the requirements for our continued qualification as a REIT. Our failure to qualify as a REIT would adversely affect the return on your investment.
If our operating partnership fails to maintain its status as a partnership, its income may be subject to taxation, which would reduce the cash available to us for distributions to our stockholders.
We intend to maintain the status of the Operating Partnership as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. However, if the Internal Revenue Service were to successfully challenge the status of the operating partnership as an entity taxable as a partnership, the Operating Partnership would be taxable as a corporation. In such event, this would reduce the amount of distributions that the operating partnership could make to us. This could also result in our losing REIT status, and becoming subject to a corporate level tax on our income. This would substantially reduce the cash available to us to make distributions and the return on your investment. In addition, if any of the partnerships or limited liability companies through which the operating partnership owns its properties, in whole or in part, loses its characterization as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, it would be subject to taxation as a corporation, thereby reducing distributions to the operating partnership. Such a recharacterization of an underlying property owner could also threaten our ability to maintain REIT status.
In certain circumstances, we may be subject to federal, state and foreign taxes, which would reduce our cash available for distributions to our stockholders.
Even if we qualify and maintain our status as a REIT, we may become subject to federal and state taxes, including alternative minimum tax (“AMT”). In addition, we may be subject to foreign taxes on our investments. For example, if we have net income from a “prohibited transaction,” such income will be subject to a 100% penalty tax. We may not be able to make sufficient distributions to avoid excise taxes applicable to REITs. We may also decide to retain income we earn from the sale or other disposition of our assets and pay income tax directly on such income. In that event, our stockholders would be treated as if they earned that income and paid the tax on it directly. We may also be subject to state and local taxes, including potentially the “margin tax” in the State of Texas, on our income or property, either directly or at the level of the operating partnership or at the level of the other companies through which we indirectly own our assets. Any federal, state or foreign taxes paid by us will reduce the cash available to us for distributions to our stockholders.
For the year ended December 31, 2016, we had federal taxable income of approximately $7 million, which includes the disposal of Lakewood Flats. The Company paid special cash distributions of $38.4 million, or $1.50 per share of common stock, during the year and had remaining federal NOL carryovers of approximately $13.1 million at December 31, 2016. The Company has continued to establish a valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets as the utilization of any deferred tax asset is not at a level of more likely than not that they will be realized prior to their expiration.
The Company recorded a credit of less than $0.1 million to the provision for income tax based on the difference in the actual taxes due and the originally estimated taxes payable on the sale of Holstenplatz in 2015.
We originally estimated federal taxable income of $3.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Actual federal taxable income for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $4.8 million, which includes the disposal of our Babcock, Alte Jakobstraße (“AJS”), Holstenplatz, and Wimberly investments. On March 31, 2015 we paid a special cash distribution of $25.7 million, or $1.00 per share of common stock, funded from proceeds of asset sales. In addition, on November 20, 2015, our board of directors authorized a special cash distribution of $38.4 million, or $1.50 per share of common stock, payable to stockholders of record on December 31, 2015. This special cash distribution, which represents a portion of proceeds from asset sales, was paid on January 5, 2016. At December 31, 2015, we had remaining federal NOL carryovers of approximately $13.1 million.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, we had federal taxable income of $4.2 million, which includes the disposal of 1875 Lawrence. The Company made special cash distributions of $13 million during the year and had remaining federal NOL carryovers of $13.1 million at December 31, 2014. The Company recorded an income tax benefit of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2014 related to the overpayment of AMT tax for the year ended December 31, 2013. The Company recorded no provision for income tax, including AMT, during the year ended December 31, 2014.
If, in any taxable year, estimates of NOL (and amounts of NOL applied to reduce taxable income) are inaccurate, the Company may have to make adjusting distributions in the following taxable year. Such distributions are subject to complex and uncertain tax rules and may reduce cash available for distributions and/or cause the stockholders to incur tax.
28
Legislative or regulatory action could adversely affect the returns to our investors.
In recent years, numerous legislative, judicial and administrative changes have been made in the provisions of the federal income tax laws applicable to investments similar to an investment in shares of our common stock. Additional changes to the tax laws are likely to continue to occur, and we cannot assure you that any such changes will not adversely affect the taxation of a stockholder. Any such changes could have an adverse effect on an investment in our shares or on the market value or the resale potential of our assets. You are urged to consult with your own tax advisor with respect to the impact of recent legislation on your investment in our shares and the status of legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our shares. You also should note that our counsel’s tax opinion is based upon existing law and Treasury Regulations, applicable as of the date of its opinion, all of which are subject to change, either prospectively or retroactively.
The tax rate on certain “qualified dividend income” is 20% for certain individuals, trusts and estates. REIT distributions generally do not qualify for “qualified dividend income” tax rate, therefore individuals, trusts and estates may be subject to a maximum tax rate of 39.6% on ordinary REIT dividends. For corporate stockholders, the maximum corporate tax rate for such distributions is 35%. As a REIT, we generally would not be subject to federal or state corporate income taxes on that portion of our ordinary income or capital gain that we distribute currently to our stockholders, and we thus expect to avoid the “double taxation” to which other corporations are typically subject. It is possible that future legislation would result in a REIT having fewer tax advantages, and it could become more advantageous for a company that invests in real estate to elect to be taxed for federal income tax purposes as a corporation. As a result, our charter provides our board of directors with the power, under certain circumstances, to revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election and cause us to be taxed as a corporation, without the vote of our stockholders. Our board of directors has fiduciary duties to us and our stockholders and could only cause such changes in our tax treatment if it determines in good faith that such changes are in the best interests of our stockholders.
Reform proposals have been recently put forth by members of Congress and the President which, if ultimately proposed as legislation and enacted as law, would substantially change the U.S. federal taxation of (among other things) individuals and businesses. Their proposals set forth a variety of principles to guide potential tax reform legislation. As of the date of this annual report, no legislation has been introduced in Congress. If ultimately reduced to legislation enacted by Congress and signed into law by the President in a form that is consistent with those principles, such reform could change dramatically the U.S. federal taxation applicable to us and our stockholders. No reform proposal specifically addresses the taxation of REITs, but because any tax reform is likely to significantly reduce the tax rates applicable to corporations and dividends received by stockholders, the tax benefits applicable to the REIT structure may be diminished in relation to corporations. Furthermore, proposed tax reform could limit the deductibility of net interest expense and could allow for the immediate deduction of any investment in tangible property (other than land) and intangible assets. Finally, the tax reform proposals do not include any principles regarding how to transition from our current system of taxation to a new tax system based on the principles in such proposed reform. Given how dramatic the changes could be, transition rules are crucial. While it is impossible to predict whether and to what extent any tax reform legislation (or other legislative, regulatory or administrative change to the U.S. federal tax laws) will be proposed or enacted, any such change in the U.S. federal tax laws could affect materially the value of any investment in our stock. You are encouraged to consult with your tax advisor regarding possible legislative and regulatory changes and the potential effect of such changes on an investment in our shares.
Equity participation in mortgage, bridge, mezzanine or other loans may result in taxable income and gains from these properties that could adversely impact our REIT status.
If we participate under a loan in any appreciation of the properties securing the mortgage loan or its cash flow and the Internal Revenue Service characterizes this participation as “equity,” we might have to recognize income, gains and other items from the property for federal income tax purposes. This could affect our ability to qualify as a REIT.
Our investments in debt instruments may cause us to recognize “phantom income” for federal income tax purposes even though no cash payments have been received on the debt instruments.
We may acquire debt instruments in the secondary market for less than their face amount. The amount of such discount will generally be treated as “market discount” for federal income tax purposes. We may acquire distressed debt investments that are subsequently modified by agreement with the borrower. If the amendments to the outstanding debt are “significant modifications” under the applicable Treasury regulations, the modified debt may be considered to have been reissued to us in a debt-for-debt exchange with the borrower. This deemed reissuance may prevent the modified debt from qualifying as a good REIT asset if the underlying security has declined in value.
In general, we will be required to accrue original issue discount on a debt instrument as taxable income in accordance with applicable federal income tax rules even though no cash payments may be received on such debt instrument.
29
In the event a borrower with respect to a particular debt instrument encounters financial difficulty rendering it unable to pay stated interest as due, we may nonetheless be required to continue to recognize the unpaid interest as taxable income. Similarly, we may be required to accrue interest income with respect to investments in commercial mortgage-backed securities at the stated rate regardless of when their corresponding cash payments are received.
As a result of these factors, there is a significant risk that we may recognize substantial taxable income in excess of cash available for distribution. In that event, we may need to borrow funds or take other action to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements for the taxable year in which this “phantom income” is recognized.
REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.
We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, subject to certain adjustments and excluding any net capital gain, in order to maintain our REIT qualification. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed REIT taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we pay out to our stockholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under federal tax laws. We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the REIT requirements of the Internal Revenue Code.
From time to time, we may generate taxable income greater than our income for financial reporting purposes, or our taxable income may be greater than our cash flow available for distributions to stockholders (for example, where a borrower defers the payment of interest in cash pursuant to a contractual right or otherwise). If we do not have other funds available in these situations we could be required to borrow funds, sell investments at disadvantageous prices or find another alternative source of funds to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year. These alternatives could increase our costs or reduce our equity. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.
Risks Related to Investments by Benefit Plans Subject to ERISA and Certain Tax-Exempt Entities (including IRAs)
If the fiduciary of an employee pension benefit plan subject to ERISA (such as profit sharing, Section 401(k) or pension plan) or any other retirement plan or account fails to meet the fiduciary and other standards under ERISA or the Internal Revenue Code as a result of an investment in our stock, you could be subject to criminal and civil penalties.
There are special considerations that apply to employee benefit plans subject to ERISA (such as profit sharing, section 401(k) or pension plans) and other retirement plans or accounts subject to Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code (such as an IRA) that are investing in our shares. If you are investing the assets of such a plan or account in our common stock, you should satisfy yourself that:
• | your investment is consistent with your fiduciary obligations and other duties under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code; |
• | your investment is made in accordance with the documents and instruments governing your plan or IRA, including your plan’s or account’s investment policy; |
• | your investment satisfies the prudence and diversification requirements of Sections 404(a)(1)(B) and 404(a)(1)(C) of ERISA and other applicable provisions of ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code; |
• | your investment in our shares, for which no public trading market exists, is consistent with the liquidity needs of the plan or IRA; |
• | your investment will not produce an unrelated amount of “unrelated business taxable income” for the plan or IRA; |
• | you will be able to comply with the requirements under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code to value the assets of the plan or IRA annually; and |
• | your investment will not constitute a prohibited transaction under Section 406 of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code. |
With respect to the annual valuation requirements described above, we currently expect to provide an estimated value for our shares annually. For information regarding our estimated value per share, see Part II, Item 5, “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of equity Securities - Market Information” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We can make no claim whether such estimated value will or will not satisfy the applicable annual valuation requirements under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. The Department of Labor or the Internal Revenue Service may determine that a plan fiduciary or an IRA custodian is required to take further steps to determine the value of our common stock. In the absence of an appropriate determination of value, a plan fiduciary or an IRA custodian may be subject to damages, penalties or other sanctions.
30
Failure to satisfy the fiduciary standards of conduct and other applicable requirements of ERISA and the Code may result in the imposition of civil and criminal penalties and could subject the fiduciary to claims for damages or for equitable remedies. In addition, if an investment in our shares constitutes a prohibited transaction under ERISA or the Code, the fiduciary or IRA owner who authorized or directed the investment or a related party may be subject to the imposition of excise taxes with respect to the amount invested. In the case of a prohibited transaction involving an IRA owner, the IRA may be disqualified and all of the assets of the IRA may be deemed distributed and subjected to tax. ERISA plan fiduciaries and IRA custodians should consult with counsel before making an investment in our common shares.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
Not applicable.
31
Item 2. Properties.
General
The following table presents certain additional information about our consolidated investments in real estate as of December 31, 2016:
Property Name | Location | Date Acquired | Approximate Rentable Square Footage or Number of Units and Beds | Description | Encumbrances (in 000's) | Ownership Interest | Occupancy at the end of 2016 | Occupancy at the end of 2015 | Effective Monthly Rent per Square Foot/Unit/Bed for 2016(1) | Effective Monthly Rent per Square Foot/Unit/Bed for 2015(1) | ||||||||||||||
Gardens Medical Pavilion | Palm Beach Gardens, Florida | October 20, 2010 | 75,374 | Medical office | $12,899 | 81.8% | 72% | 62% | $ | 1.97 | $ | 2.11 | ||||||||||||
Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel | Kauai, Hawaii | October 20, 2010 | 311 Rooms | (2) | Hotel | 38,000 | 80% | 84% | (3) | 82% | (3) | n/a | n/a | |||||||||||
River Club and the Townhomes at River Club | Athens, Georgia | April 25, 2011 | 1,128 beds | (4) | Student housing | 23,917 | 85% | 98% | 96% | 401.68 | 383.62 | |||||||||||||
Lakes of Margate | Margate, Florida | October 19, 2011 | 280 units | Multifamily | 14,243 | 92.5% | 94% | 95% | 1,273.61 | 1,218.84 | ||||||||||||||
Arbors Harbor Town | Memphis, Tennessee | December 20, 2011 | 345 units | Multifamily | 24,653 | 94% | 94% | 91% | 1,213.26 | 1,144.39 | ||||||||||||||
22 Exchange | Akron, Ohio | April 16, 2013 | 471 beds / 22,104 sq ft retail space | Student housing | 19,307 | 90% | (5) | (5) | (6) | (6) | ||||||||||||||
Parkside Apartments (“Parkside”) | Sugar Land, Texas | August 8, 2013 | 240 units | Multifamily | 10,100 | 90% | 96% | 77% | 1,142.08 | 1,149.54 | ||||||||||||||
_______________________________________________________________________________
(1) | Effective monthly rent is calculated using leases in place as of December 31 and takes into account any rent concessions. |
(2) | The Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel has 311 rooms and approximately 6,200 square feet of meeting space. Occupancy is for the entire year and is based on standard industry metrics, including rooms available for rent. |
(3) | Represents average occupancy for the year ended December 31. |
(4) | River Club and the Townhomes at River Club consist of two student housing complexes with a total of 1,128 beds. |
(5) | 22 Exchange consists of a student housing complex with 471 beds and 22,104 square feet of retail space. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, occupancy for student housing was 89% and 94% and retail was 72% and 71%, respectively. |
(6) | Effective monthly rent per bed for student housing was $552.67 and $584.20 and effective monthly rent per square foot for the retail space was $1.51 and $1.40 at December 31, 2016 and 2015. |
The following information generally applies to our consolidated investments in our real estate properties:
• | we believe our real estate property is adequately covered by insurance and suitable for its intended purpose; |
• | our properties are located in markets where we are subject to competition in attracting new tenants and retaining current tenants; and |
• | depreciation is provided on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the buildings. |
32
Portfolio Diversification
As an opportunistic and value-add fund, we utilize a business model driven by investment strategy and expected performance characteristics. Accordingly, we have investments in several types of real estate, including office, hotel, multifamily, and student housing.
The following table shows the total revenue of our real estate portfolio for the properties we consolidated in our financial statements as of December 31, 2016 ($ in thousands):
Property | Description | 2016 Revenue(1) | Percentage of 2016 Revenue | ||||||
Gardens Medical Pavilion | Medical office building | $ | 2,041 | 4 | % | ||||
Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel | Hotel | 18,501 | 40 | % | |||||
Arbors Harbor Town | Multifamily | 5,003 | 11 | % | |||||
Lakes of Margate | Multifamily | 4,459 | 10 | % | |||||
Parkside | Multifamily | 3,129 | 7 | % | |||||
River Club and the Townhomes at River Club | Student housing | 5,368 | 11 | % | |||||
22 Exchange | Student housing | 3,498 | 8 | % | |||||
Total, excluding properties sold(2) | $ | 41,999 | 91 | % | |||||
Other(2) | 4,132 | 9 | % | ||||||
Total revenues | $ | 46,131 | 100 | % | |||||
_________________________________________
(1) | Includes revenues generated from tenant reimbursements. Tenant reimbursements generally include payment of real estate taxes, operating expenses, and common area maintenance and utility charges. |
(2) Represents Lakewood Flats, Alte Jakobstraße, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly. We sold Lakewood Flats in 2016. We sold Alte Jakobstraße, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly in 2015.
Geographic Diversification
The following table shows the geographic diversification of our real estate portfolio for those properties that we consolidate in our financial statements as of December 31, 2016. This table excludes revenues generated from tenant reimbursements and revenues for the investment we sold in 2016 ($ in thousands):
Location | 2016 Revenue(1)(2) | Percentage of 2016 Revenue | |||||
Hawaii | $ | 18,501 | 46 | % | |||
Florida | 5,418 | 14 | % | ||||
Tennessee | 4,787 | 12 | % | ||||
Georgia | 5,287 | 13 | % | ||||
Texas | 2,933 | 7 | % | ||||
Ohio | 3,329 | 8 | % | ||||
$ | 40,255 | 100 | % | ||||
_________________________________________
(1) | 2016 Revenue includes revenue from our multifamily, hotel, and student housing properties, excluding tenant reimbursements, without consideration of tenant contraction or termination rights. It also includes contractual base rental income of our office properties and does not take into account any rent concessions or prospective rent increases. Tenant reimbursements generally include payment of real estate taxes, operating expenses, and common area maintenance and utility charges. |
(2) | This table does not include revenues of $4.1 million from Lakewood Flats, located in Texas, which was sold during 2016. |
See Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, to our Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding how geographic concentration may be considered in the evaluation of our investments for impairment.
33
Future Lease Payments Table
The following table presents the future minimum base rental payments due to us under non-cancelable leases over the next ten years at our office property, Gardens Medical Pavilion, and the retail space at 22 Exchange as of December 31, 2016 (in thousands):
Year | Amount | |||
2017 | $ | 1,512 | ||
2018 | 1,171 | |||
2019 | 1,038 | |||
2020 | 971 | |||
2021 | 857 | |||
2022 | 739 | |||
2023 | 750 | |||
2024 | 685 | |||
2025 | 30 | |||
2026 | 28 | |||
Thereafter | — | |||
Portfolio Lease Expirations
The following table presents lease expirations for non-cancelable leases for our office property, Gardens Medical Pavilion, and the retail space at 22 Exchange as of December 31, 2016 ($ in thousands):
Year of Expiration | Number of Leases Expiring | Annualized Base Rent(1) | Percent of Annualized Base Rent Expiring | Leased Rentable Sq. Ft. | Percent of Rentable Sq. Ft. Expiring | |||||||||||
2017 | 4 | $ | 491 | 25 | % | 16,629 | 23 | % | ||||||||
2018 | 4 | 224 | 12 | % | 9,760 | 13 | % | |||||||||
2019 | 3 | 130 | 7 | % | 6,258 | 9 | % | |||||||||
2020 | 2 | 164 | 9 | % | 6,463 | 9 | % | |||||||||
2021 | 2 | 125 | 7 | % | 4,672 | 6 | % | |||||||||
2022 | 1 | 19 | 1 | % | 1,496 | 2 | % | |||||||||
2023 | — | — | — | % | — | — | % | |||||||||
2024 | 2 | 740 | 38 | % | 25,122 | 35 | % | |||||||||
2025 | — | — | — | % | — | — | % | |||||||||
2026 | — | — | — | % | — | — | % | |||||||||
Thereafter | 1 | 30 | 1 | % | 1,820 | 3 | % | |||||||||
Total | 19 | $ | 1,923 | 100 | % | 72,220 | 100 | % | ||||||||
_____________________________________
(1) | Represents the cash rental rate of base rents, excluding tenant reimbursements, in the final month prior to the expiration multiplied by 12, without consideration of tenant contraction or termination rights. Tenant reimbursements generally include payment of real estate taxes, operating expenses, and common area maintenance and utility charges. |
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
We are not party to, and none of our properties are subject to, any material pending legal proceedings.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosure.
None
34
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
Market Information
There is no established public trading market for our common stock. Therefore, there is a risk that a stockholder may not be able to sell our stock at a time or price acceptable to the stockholder. Unless and until our shares are listed on a national securities exchange, it is not expected that a public market for the shares will develop.
Determination of Estimated Per Share Value
On November 18, 2016, pursuant to the Amended and Restated Policy for Estimation of Common Stock Value (the “Estimated Valuation Policy”), our board of directors met and established an estimated per share value of our common stock as of October 31, 2016 of $7.80.
Process and Methodology
Our board of directors’ objective in determining an estimated value per share is to arrive at an estimated value that it believes is reasonable, after consultation with the Behringer Advisor (our external advisor as of the date we established the estimated per share value) and an independent, third-party valuation and advisory firm, Capright Property Advisors, LLC (“Capright”), using what the board of directors deems to be appropriate valuation methodologies and assumptions under current circumstances in accordance with the Estimated Valuation Policy.
In arriving at an estimated value per share, our board of directors reviewed and considered the valuation analyses prepared by the Behringer Advisor and Capright. The Behringer Advisor presented a report to the board of directors with an estimated per share value. Capright provided our board of directors an opinion that the resulting “as-is” market value for the Company’s properties, as calculated by the Behringer Advisor, and the other assets and liabilities as valued by the Behringer Advisor, along with the corresponding net asset value valuation methodologies and assumptions used by the Behringer Advisor to arrive at a recommended value of $7.80 per share as of October 31, 2016 were appropriate and reasonable. The board of directors conferred with the Behringer Advisor and a representative from Capright regarding the methodologies and assumptions used to reach their respective conclusions. The board of directors, which is responsible for determining the estimated per share value, considered all information provided in light of its own familiarity with our assets and unanimously approved an estimated value of $7.80 per share.
Capright’s opinion was subject to various limitations. In forming its opinion, Capright relied on information provided by the Behringer Advisor and third parties without independent verification. The Behringer Advisor provided Capright with information regarding lease terms and the physical condition and capital expenditure requirements of each property. Capright did not perform engineering or structural studies or environmental studies of any of the properties, nor did they perform an independent appraisal of the other assets and liabilities included in our estimated value per share.
In forming their conclusion as to the “as-is” value of the real estate investments held by the Company as of October 31, 2016, Capright’s opinion was subject to various limitations. For the appraisals of the Company’s seven properties and mezzanine loan investment performed by Capright, the scope of their work included:
• | Review of all property level information provided by the Behringer Advisor; |
• | Physical inspection of four of the consolidated properties to determine their physical condition and location attributes; |
• | Physical inspection of the property associated with the mezzanine loan investment and review of the Behringer Advisor’s valuation of the investment including accrued interest and the profit participation; |
• | Review of the historical performance of the Company’s real estate investments and business plans related to operations of the investments; and |
• | Review of the applicable markets by means of publications and other resources to measure current market conditions, supply and demand factors, and growth patterns. |
Capright also evaluated the following information to arrive at their opinion:
• | Review of key market assumptions for mezzanine investments and mortgage liabilities, including but not limited to interest rates and collateral; |
• | Review of the data models prepared by the Behringer Advisor supporting the valuation for each investment; |
• | Review of Behringer Advisor calculations related to value allocations to noncontrolling interests and joint venture interests, preferred equity interests, and promoted interests, based on contractual terms and market assessments; and |
• | Review of valuation methodology used by the Behringer Advisor for other assets and liabilities. |
35
Capright has acted as a valuation advisor to the Company in connection with this assignment. The compensation paid to Capright in connection with this assignment was not contingent upon the successful completion of any transaction or conclusion reached by Capright. Capright has rendered valuation advisory services to another Behringer-sponsored investment program previously for which it received usual and customary compensation. Capright may be engaged to provide financial advisory services to the Company, the Behringer Advisor, or other Behringer-sponsored investment programs or their affiliates in the future.
The estimated valuation of $7.80 per share as of October 31, 2016 reflects an increase from the estimated valuation of $7.69 per share, which was the estimated per share value established as of October 31, 2015 after adjustment for the $1.50 per share special cash distribution paid on January 5, 2016. The adjustment was effective as of December 31, 2015, the record date of the distribution. The major factors that contributed most to the increase in the adjusted estimated share value were:
• | the sale of Lakewood Flats during 2016 for a sales price in excess of its estimated value in the 2015 ESV calculation; and |
• | the increase in interest receivable and the value of our participation in the estimated residual profit of a multifamily development project in which we are the mezzanine lender. |
These increases were partially offset by a decline in the equity value of certain real estate investments as a result of changes in the local markets in which they are located.
The following is a summary of the valuation methodologies used for each type of asset:
Investments in Real Estate. The Company has focused on acquiring commercial real estate properties in different asset classes generally requiring development, redevelopment, or repositioning. Due to the opportunistic and value-added nature of the Company’s real estate investments, both Capright and the Behringer Advisor utilized a variety of valuation methodologies, each as appropriate for the asset type under consideration to assign an estimated value to each asset.
The Behringer Advisor estimated the value of our investments in real estate utilizing multiple valuation methods, as appropriate for each asset, including an income approach using discounted cash flow analysis and a sales comparable analysis. The key assumptions used in the discounted cash flow approach were specific to each property type, market location, and quality of each property and were based on similar investors’ return expectations and market assessments. The key assumptions are reflected in the table included under “Allocation of Estimated Value” below. In calculating values for our assets, the Behringer Advisor used balance sheet and cash flow estimates as of September 30, 2016.
In forming its opinion, Capright prepared appraisals on all seven of our consolidated investment properties and our mezzanine loan investment in connection with the valuation. The appraisals estimated values by using discounted cash flow, comparable sales, or a weighting of these approaches in determining each property’s value. The appraisals employed a range of terminal capitalization rates, discount rates, growth rates, and other variables that fell within ranges that Capright and the Behringer Advisor believed would be used by similar investors to value the properties we own. The assumptions used in developing these estimates were specific to each property (including holding periods) and were determined based upon a number of factors including the market in which the property is located, the specific location of the property within the market, property and market vacancy, tenant demand for space, and investor demand and return requirements.
While we and the Behringer Advisor believe that the approaches used by appraisers in valuing our real estate assets, including an income approach using discounted cash flow analysis and sales comparable analysis, is standard in the real estate industry, the estimated values for our investments in real estate may or may not represent current market values or fair values determined in accordance with GAAP. Real estate is currently carried at its amortized cost basis in our financial statements, subject to any adjustments applicable under GAAP.
Investment in Mezzanine Loan. The value of our mezzanine loan investment was valued at the outstanding principal balance plus accrued interest and the current estimated value of the profit participation. The value of the profit participation was derived by valuing the project using a discounted cash flow analysis. The loan is accounted for as an investment in unconsolidated joint venture on our consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2016.
Mortgage Loans. Values for mortgage loans were estimated by the Behringer Advisor and reviewed by Capright using a discounted cash flow analysis, which used inputs based on the remaining loan terms and estimated current market interest rates for mortgage loans with similar characteristics, including remaining loan term and loan-to-value ratios. The current market interest rate was generally determined based on market rates for available comparable debt. The estimated current market interest rates for mortgage loans ranged from 3.2% to 5.5%.
Other Assets and Liabilities. For a majority of our other assets and liabilities (consisting of cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts payable, and other liabilities), the carrying values as of September 30, 2016 as adjusted for
36
significant activity through October 31, 2016 were considered equal to fair value by the Behringer Advisor due to their cost-based characteristics or short maturities. In connection with our estimated valuation of operating properties, notes receivable, and mortgage loans payable, certain GAAP balances related to accumulated depreciation and amortization, straight-lining of rents, deferred revenues and expenses, and debt and notes receivable premiums and discounts have been eliminated as these accounts were already considered in the estimated values.
Noncontrolling Interests. In those situations where our consolidated assets and liabilities are held in joint venture structures in which other equity holders have an interest, the Behringer Advisor has valued those noncontrolling interests based on the terms of the joint venture agreement applied in the liquidation of the joint venture. The resulting noncontrolling interests are a deduction to the estimated value.
Common Stock Outstanding. In deriving an estimated per share value, the total estimated value was divided by 25.2 million, the total number of common shares outstanding as of October 31, 2016, on a fully diluted basis, which includes financial instruments that can be converted into a known or determinable number of common shares. As of the valuation date, none of the financial instruments that could be converted into common shares are currently convertible into a known or determinable number of common shares. The determination of the number of common shares outstanding used in the estimated value per share is the same as used in GAAP computations for per share amounts.
Our estimated value per share was calculated by aggregating the value of our assets, subtracting the value of our liabilities, and dividing the net total by the fully-diluted common stock outstanding. Our estimated value per share is effective as of October 31, 2016.
The estimated per share value does not reflect a liquidity discount for the fact that the shares are not traded on a national securities exchange, a discount for the non-assumability or prepayment obligations associated with certain of the Company’s debt, or a discount for our corporate level overhead and other costs that may be incurred, including any costs related to the sale of the Company’s assets. Different parties using different assumptions and estimates could derive a different estimated value per share, and these differences could be significant. The markets for real estate can fluctuate and values are expected to change in the future.
This value does not reflect “enterprise value,” which could include premiums or discounts for:
• | the size of our portfolio: although some buyers may pay more for a portfolio compared to prices for individual properties; |
• | the characteristics of our working capital, leverage, credit facility and other financial structures where some buyers may ascribe different values based on synergies, cost savings or other attributes; |
• | disposition and other expenses that would be necessary to realize the value; |
• | the provisions under our advisory agreement and our potential ability to secure the services of a management team on a long-term basis; or |
• | the potential difference in our share value if we were to list our shares on a national securities exchange. |
37
Allocation of Estimated Value
The table below sets forth the calculation of the Company’s estimated value per share as of October 31, 2016, as well as the calculation of the Company’s prior estimated value per share as of October 31, 2015. The estimated valuation of $7.80 per share as of October 31, 2016, reflects an increase from the estimated valuation of $7.69 per share, which was the adjusted estimated per share value established as of October 31, 2015 after adjustment for the $1.50 per share special cash distribution paid on January 5, 2016. The adjustment was effective as of December 31, 2015, the record date for the distribution.
Pursuant to the Estimated Valuation Policy the board of directors of the Company established an estimated per share valuation of the Company’s common stock as of October 31, 2015 of $9.19. The Company paid a special cash distribution of $1.50 per share on January 5, 2016. As a result, and in accordance with the Estimated Valuation Policy, the estimated share value established as of October 31, 2015 was reduced by $1.00 to $7.69 effective January 5, 2016 (the record date of distribution) to reflect this special cash distribution.
October 31, 2016 Estimated Value per Share | October 31, 2015 Estimated Value per Share | |||||||
Real estate: | ||||||||
Operating(1) | $ | 10.60 | $ | 13.06 | ||||
Mezzanine loan investment(2) | 1.00 | 0.82 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | 2.75 | 3.07 | ||||||
Restricted cash | 0.25 | 0.16 | ||||||
Notes payable(3) | (5.80 | ) | (7.03 | ) | ||||
Other assets and liabilities | (0.28 | ) | (0.30 | ) | ||||
Noncontrolling interests | (0.72 | ) | (0.59 | ) | ||||
Estimated net asset value per share | $ | 7.80 | $ | 9.19 | ||||
Estimated enterprise value premium | — | — | ||||||
Total estimated value per share, at October 31(4) | $ | 7.80 | $ | 9.19 | ||||
Less: Subsequent special cash distribution(5) | — | (1.50 | ) | |||||
Total estimated value per share, as adjusted | $ | 7.80 | $ | 7.69 | ||||
______________________________________________________________________
(1) The following are the key assumptions (shown on a weighted average basis) which are used in the discounted cash flow models to estimate the value of the real estate assets we currently own.
Hotel | Multifamily | Student Housing | Office | ||||
Exit capitalization rate | 7.50% | 6.32% | 6.52% | 7.00% | |||
Discount rate | 9.00% | 7.21% | 7.52% | 8.25% | |||
Annual market rent growth rate | 3.00% | 2.97% | 3.07% | 3.00% | |||
Average holding period | 10 years | 10 years | 10 years | 10 years | |||
The following are ranges of the key assumptions which are used in the discounted cash flow models to estimate the value of the real estate assets we currently own. The discounted cash flow analyses for our hotel asset is only one category as is our office asset, and therefore, no range of values is available.
Multifamily | Student Housing | ||
Exit capitalization rate | 6.00% - 6.50% | 6.25% - 7.00% | |
Discount rate | 7.00% - 7.75% | 7.25% - 8.00% | |
38
(2) Accounted for as an investment in unconsolidated joint venture on our condensed consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2016. The mezzanine loan investment as of October 31, 2016 includes $6.4 million associated with the valuation of the Company’s participation in the current estimated profit of the multifamily development project.
(3) October 31, 2016 notes payable net of $(2.8 million) mark-to-market adjustment.
(4) As of October 31, 2016, we had 25,219,770 shares outstanding. The potential dilutive effect of our common stock equivalents does not affect our estimated per share value as there were no potentially dilutive securities outstanding at October 31, 2016.
(5) On January 5, 2016, we paid a $1.50 per share special cash distribution to stockholders of record as of December 31, 2015.
The real estate assets we owned as of October 31, 2016 reflect an overall increase of 19.9% from the original purchase price (excluding acquisition costs and operating deficits), or amounts advanced under the mezzanine loan, plus post-acquisition capital investments.
While we believe that our assumptions utilized are reasonable, a change in these assumptions would affect the calculation of value of our real estate assets. The table below presents the estimated increase or decrease to our estimated value per share for a 25 basis point increase and decrease in the discount rates and capitalization rates. The table is only hypothetical to illustrate possible results if only one change in assumptions was made, with all other factors held constant. Further, each of these assumptions could change by more than 25 basis points or not change at all.
Change in Estimated Value per Share | ||||||||
Description | Increase of 25 basis points | Decrease of 25 basis points | ||||||
Capitalization rate | $ | (0.45 | ) | $ | 0.50 | |||
Discount rate | $ | (0.19 | ) | $ | 0.20 | |||
Historical Estimated Values per Share
The historical reported estimated values per share of the Company’s common stock approved by the board of directors are set forth below:
Estimated Value per Share | Effective Date of Valuation | Filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission | ||
$9.19(1) | October 31, 2015 | Current Report on Form 8-K filed December 7, 2015 | ||
$9.72(2) | October 31, 2014 | Current Report on Form 8-K filed December 2, 2014 | ||
$10.09(3) | August 1, 2013 | Current Report on Form 8-K filed August 15, 2013 | ||
______________________________________________________________________
(1) | Pursuant to our Estimated Valuation Policy, our estimated value per share was reduced to $7.69 in December 2015 as a result of the payment of a special cash distribution of $1.50 per share. |
(2) | Pursuant to our Estimated Valuation Policy, our estimated value per share was reduced to $8.72 in March 2015 as a result of the payment of a special cash distribution of $1.00 per share. |
(3) | Pursuant to our Estimated Valuation Policy, our estimated value per share was reduced to $9.59 in September 2014 as a result of the payment of a special cash distribution of $0.50 per share. |
Limitations of Estimated Value Per Share
As with any valuation methodology, our methodology is based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that may prove later to be inaccurate or incomplete. Further, different parties using different assumptions and estimates could derive a different estimated value per share, which could be significantly different from our board’s estimated value per share. The estimated per share value determined by our board of directors neither represents the fair value according to GAAP of our assets less liabilities, nor does it represent the amount our shares would trade at on a national securities exchange or the amount a shareholder would obtain if he tried to sell his shares or if we liquidated our assets. Accordingly, with respect to the estimated value per share, the Company can give no assurance that:
39
• | a stockholder would be able to resell his or her shares at this estimated value; |
• | a stockholder would ultimately realize distributions per share equal to the Company’s estimated value per share upon liquidation of the Company’s assets and settlement of its liabilities or a sale of the Company; |
• | the Company’s shares would trade at the estimated value per share on a national securities exchange; or |
• | the methodologies used to estimate the Company’s value per share would be acceptable to FINRA or under ERISA for compliance with their respective reporting requirements. |
For further information regarding the limitations of the estimated value per share, see the Estimated Valuation Policy filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 28, 2012. We currently intend to update our estimated per share value on an annual basis.
The estimated value of our shares was calculated as of a particular point in time. The value of the Company’s shares will fluctuate over time in response to developments related to individual assets in the portfolio and the management of those assets and in response to the real estate and finance markets. There is no assurance of the extent to which the current estimated valuation should be relied upon for any purpose after its effective date regardless that it may be published on any statement issued by the Company or otherwise.
The Company is diligently working to secure new leases with quality tenants to: increase net operating income and the ultimate value of our assets; complete, market, and sell development assets; execute on other value creation strategies; and minimize expenses when possible.
Holders
As of February 28, 2017, we had 25,086,778 shares of common stock outstanding held by approximately 10,700 stockholders.
Distributions
We made an election to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2008. As a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income to our stockholders annually.
Our board of directors declared two special cash distributions during 2015, one on March 18 for a total of $25.7 million and one on November 20 for a total of $38.4 million, for an aggregate of $64.1 million, or $2.50 per share of common stock. The Company paid the $25.7 million special cash distribution on March 31, 2015 and the $38.4 million special cash distribution on January 5, 2016. On August 8, 2014, our board of directors authorized a special cash distribution totaling $13 million, or $0.50 per share of common stock, which was paid on September 18, 2014. The special cash distributions paid during 2016, 2015, and 2014 were fully funded with a portion of proceeds from asset sales. For further discussion regarding our ability to sustain any level of our distributions, see Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors.”
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
During the three months ended December 31, 2016, we did not sell any equity securities that were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933.
Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans
The following table provides information regarding our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2016:
Plan Category | Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights | Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights | Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans | |||||||
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders | — | — | 10,000,000 | * | ||||||
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | — | — | — | |||||||
Total | — | — | 10,000,000 | * | ||||||
_________________
* All shares authorized for issuance pursuant to awards not yet granted under the Incentive Plan.
40
Share Redemption Program
Our board of directors has adopted a share redemption program that permits stockholders to sell their shares back to us, subject to the significant conditions and limitations of the program. Our board of directors can amend the provisions of our share redemption program at any time without the approval of our stockholders.
The terms on which we redeem shares may differ between redemptions upon a stockholder’s death, “qualifying disability” (as defined in the share redemption program) or confinement to a long-term care facility (collectively, Exceptional Redemptions) and all other redemptions or Ordinary Redemptions. From April 1, 2012 through May 15, 2014, our board of directors suspended accepting Ordinary Redemptions. On May 15, 2014, our board of directors adopted the Third Amended and Restated Share Redemption Program and reopened the share redemption program for Ordinary Redemptions, to be effective on that date.
The per share redemption price for Ordinary Redemptions and Exceptional Redemptions is equal to the lesser of 80% and 90%, respectively, of (i) the current estimated per share value and (ii) the average price per share the investor paid for all of his shares (as adjusted for any stock dividends, combinations, splits, recapitalizations and the like with respect to our common stock) less the Special Distributions (as defined in the share redemption program).
Effective November 18, 2016, our estimated value per share was $7.80. For a full description of the methodologies used to estimate the value of our common stock as of October 31, 2016, see “Determination of Estimated Per Share Value” disclosed above.
Notwithstanding the redemption prices set forth above, our board of directors may determine, whether pursuant to formulas or processes approved or set by our board of directors, the redemption price of the shares, which may differ between Ordinary Redemptions and Exceptional Redemptions; provided, however, that we must provide at least 30 days’ notice to stockholders before applying this new price determined by our board of directors.
Any shares approved for redemption will be redeemed on a periodic basis as determined from time to time by our board of directors, and no less frequently than annually. We will not redeem, during any twelve-month period, more than 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the twelve-month period immediately prior to the date of redemption. In addition, the cash available for redemptions is limited to no more than $10 million in any twelve-month period. The redemption limitations apply to all redemptions, whether Ordinary or Exceptional Redemptions.
Any redemption requests are honored pro rata among all requests received based on funds available and are not honored on a first come, first served basis. During the three months ended December 31, 2016, our board of directors redeemed all 47 Ordinary Redemption requests received that complied with the applicable requirements and guidelines of the share redemption program for an aggregate of 130,681 shares redeemed for $0.7 million (approximately $5.16 per share). All redemptions were funded with cash on hand.
During the three months ended December 31, 2016, our board of directors redeemed all four Exceptional Redemption requests received that complied with the applicable requirements and guidelines of the share redemption program for an aggregate of 11,160 shares redeemed for less than $0.1 million (approximately $5.80 per share). All redemptions were funded with cash on hand.
During the quarter ended December 31, 2016, we redeemed shares as follows (including both Ordinary Redemptions and Exceptional Redemptions):
2016 | Total Number of Shares Redeemed | Average Price Paid Per Share | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs | Maximum Number of Shares That May Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs | ||||||||
October | 141,841 | $ | 5.21 | 141,841 | (1) | |||||||
November | — | — | — | |||||||||
December | — | — | — | |||||||||
141,841 | $ | 5.21 | 141,841 | (1) | ||||||||
__________________________
(1) | A description of the maximum number of shares that may be purchased under our redemption program is included in the narrative preceding this table. |
41
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
As of December 31, 2016, we had eight real estate investments, seven of which were consolidated. One of our consolidated properties is wholly owned and six properties are consolidated through investments in joint ventures. During 2016, we sold one property, Lakewood Flats. The following data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Item 7.
The following table reflects a rollforward of the number of real estate investments we had beginning January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2016:
Year | Portfolio Beginning of Year | Acquisitions | Dispositions | Portfolio at Year-End | Unconsolidated at Year-End (1) | ||||||||||
2012(2) | 11 | 1 | 2 | 10 | — | ||||||||||
2013(3) | 10 | 4 | 1 | 13 | 1 | ||||||||||
2014 | 13 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 1 | ||||||||||
2015 | 13 | — | 4 | 9 | 1 | ||||||||||
2016 | 9 | — | 1 | 8 | 1 | ||||||||||
______________________________________________________________________
(1) | The number of unconsolidated investments at year-end is included in the number of investments in the Portfolio at Year-End. |
(2) | The number of dispositions in 2012 does not reflect the sale of one of four buildings in our Interchange Business Center investment. We sold the remaining three buildings at Interchange Business Center on April 12, 2013 and reflected the sale in 2013 upon the disposition of the remaining buildings. |
(3) | The number of dispositions in 2013 does not reflect the sale of the Original Florida MOB Portfolio. This investment and Gardens Medical Pavilion, collectively, the Florida MOB Portfolio, have been counted as one investment. As of December 31, 2016, we own an 81.8% interest in Gardens Medical Pavilion. |
The selected data below has been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements ($ in thousands, except per share amounts):
December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||
Total assets(1) | $ | 268,905 | $ | 342,189 | $ | 407,074 | $ | 411,190 | $ | 375,668 | |||||||||
Notes payable, net(1) | 142,332 | 177,036 | 213,677 | 208,852 | 179,910 | ||||||||||||||
Other liabilities(2) | 7,934 | 48,574 | 16,841 | 9,549 | 9,225 | ||||||||||||||
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. equity | 112,733 | 109,818 | 168,520 | 183,884 | 175,163 | ||||||||||||||
Noncontrolling interest | 5,906 | 6,761 | 8,036 | 8,905 | 11,370 | ||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and equity | $ | 268,905 | $ | 342,189 | $ | 407,074 | $ | 411,190 | $ | 375,668 | |||||||||
_____________________________________
(1) | Reflects our January 1, 2016, adoption of ASU 2015-03, which requires companies to present the debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related liability. |
(2) | Other liabilities as of December 31, 2015 of $48.6 million include distributions payable of $38.4 million for a special cash distribution authorized by the board of directors on November 20, 2015 and paid out on January 5, 2016. Other liabilities as of December 31, 2014 of $16.8 million include obligations associated with real estate held for sale of $9.2 million related to Babcock and AJS. |
42
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||
Revenues | $ | 46,131 | $ | 50,250 | $ | 48,597 | $ | 43,389 | $ | 32,718 | |||||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations, including gains on disposals(1) | 4,908 | 7,677 | (334 | ) | (17,553 | ) | (12,785 | ) | |||||||||||
Gains on disposals in continuing operations(1) | 11,341 | 22,771 | 11,454 | n/a | n/a | ||||||||||||||
Income from discontinued operations, including gains on disposal | — | — | — | 31,159 | 22,012 | ||||||||||||||
Impairment charge(2) | — | (1,417 | ) | — | — | — | |||||||||||||
Net income (loss) | 4,908 | 7,677 | (334 | ) | 13,606 | 9,227 | |||||||||||||
Add: Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interest | 35 | (699 | ) | 331 | (4,877 | ) | (7,562 | ) | |||||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to the Company | 4,943 | 6,978 | (3 | ) | 8,729 | 1,665 | |||||||||||||
Basic and diluted income (loss) per share | $ | 0.19 | $ | 0.27 | $ | — | $ | 0.34 | $ | 0.06 | |||||||||
Distributions declared per share | $ | — | $ | 2.50 | $ | 0.50 | $ | — | $ | 0.625 | |||||||||
________________________________________
(1) | Effective April 1, 2014, we early adopted the revised guidance for discontinued operations. The Company does not view the 2016 sale of Lakewood Flats, the sales of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly during 2015, or the sale of 1875 Lawrence in 2014 as a strategic shift. Therefore, the results of operations and gains on disposal of these investments are classified in income (loss) from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014. |
(2) | During 2015, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million on our investment in 22 Exchange, a student housing property, due to the local market decline in Akron, Ohio. |
43
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto.
Executive Overview
We were formed primarily to acquire and operate commercial real estate and real estate-related assets on an opportunistic and value-add basis. In particular, we have focused generally on acquiring commercial properties with significant possibilities for capital appreciation, such as those requiring development, redevelopment or repositioning, those located in markets and submarkets with high growth potential, and those available from sellers who were distressed or faced time-sensitive deadlines. In addition, our opportunistic and value-add investment strategy has included investments in real estate-related assets that present opportunities for higher current income. Since inception, we have acquired a wide variety of commercial properties, including office, industrial, retail, hospitality, and multifamily. We have purchased existing, income-producing properties and newly constructed properties. We have also invested in a mortgage loan and a mezzanine loan. We have made our investments in or in respect of real estate assets located in the United States and other countries based on our view of existing market conditions. Currently, our investments include multifamily and student housing communities, an office building, a hotel, and a mezzanine loan. All of our current investments are located in the United States. Consistent with our investment objectives, our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders.
Market Outlook
During 2016, the U.S. economy grew at a modest rate. The Gross Domestic Product for 2016 grew at a rate of 1.9%, which was lower than the 2.4% experienced in 2015 and less than the forecasted rate of 2.2%. Economists have forecasted economic growth of 2-3% during 2017. Consumer confidence remained strong as a result of low unemployment and reduced fuel prices during the year. The unemployment rate was 4.7% at the end of 2016 and is expected to drop slightly in 2017. Short-term interest rates increased in December of 2016 and many expect additional rate hikes in 2017.
As of December 31, 2016, we were invested in three multifamily properties. For the year ended December 31, 2016, excluding assets sold during the year, 30% of our total revenues were derived from our multifamily properties. The multifamily sector continued to see strong rent growth in 2016 and ended the year with the national multifamily vacancy rate at 4.1%. Rental rates are expected to increase nationwide in 2017, albeit at a slower pace. Rising construction costs and higher interest rates for construction lending are expected to slow the number of new units to the marketplace.
As of December 31, 2016, we owned an interest in one hotel property. For the year ended December 31, 2016, excluding assets sold during the year, 44% of our total revenues were derived from our hotel property. The lodging industry is expected to see continued performance growth in 2017, but at lower levels than those seen in 2016. Smith Travel Research indicates that during 2016 the U.S. hotel industry’s occupancy remained relatively flat at 65.5% while the national overall ADR increased 3.1% resulting in an increase in RevPar of 3.2%. During 2016, our hotel property, Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel located in Kauai, Hawaii, experienced a nominal increase in ADR of 0.3% while occupancy increased 2% year-over-year, resulting in an increase in RevPar of 2.3%. While Hawaii’s economy is dependent on conditions in other local U.S. economies and Japan, it is expected to experience slight economic growth in 2017.
As of December 31, 2016, a portion of our portfolio is invested in three public university student housing complexes, including two complexes located near the University of Georgia and one complex located adjacent to the University of Akron. Unlike traditional multifamily housing, most leases at a student housing property typically begin and end on the same dates, which for our student housing leases, typically coincide with the commencement of the fall academic term and terminating at the completion of the last summer school session of the academic year. As such, we must re-lease each property in its entirety each year during a highly compressed time period, resulting in significant turnover in our tenant population from year to year. As a result, we are highly dependent upon the effectiveness of our marketing and leasing efforts during the short annual leasing season that generally begins in January and ends in August of each year. Our properties’ occupancy rates are, therefore, relatively stable during the August to July academic year, but are susceptible to fluctuation at the commencement of each new academic year, which may be greater than the fluctuation in occupancy rates experienced by traditional multifamily properties. Although college enrollment is down nationwide, demand for student housing remains strong at the major universities. Many universities continue to face challenges, including lower enrollment and increased tuition costs. These challenges may lead to a decrease in occupancy and lower than anticipated revenues at our student housing properties.
Although the current outlook on financing trends appears relatively stable, there are risks. It is expected that the U.S. Federal Reserve will continue to increase interest rates during 2017, the timing and amount of the rate increase as well government spending levels and global economic concerns will affect the overall level of domestic economic growth. Any of these issues could slow growth, which could affect the amount of capital available or the costs charged for financings. As of December 31, 2016, our weighted average interest rate was 3.9%, compared to 3.5% at December 31, 2015.
44
Liquidity and Capital Resources
We had unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of $67.1 million at December 31, 2016. Our principal demands for funds going forward will be for the payment of (a) operating expenses, (b) interest and principal on our outstanding indebtedness, and (c) distributions. Generally, we expect to meet cash needs for the payment of operating expenses and interest on our outstanding indebtedness from our cash flow from operations and to fund distributions (if any) from our proceeds from asset sales. To the extent that our cash flow from operations is not sufficient to cover our operating expenses, interest on our outstanding indebtedness, or redemptions, we expect to use borrowings and asset sales to fund such needs.
We intend to hold our various real properties until such time as our board of directors determines that a sale or other disposition appears to be advantageous to achieve our investment objectives or until it appears that the objectives will not be met. We sold Lakewood Flats in the third quarter of 2016 and four properties in 2015.
On January 5, 2016, we paid a special cash distribution, which was declared in 2015, of $38.4 million, or $1.50 per share of common stock. On March 31, 2015, we paid a special cash distribution of $25.7 million, or $1.00 per share of common stock. Both distributions were funded from proceeds of asset sales completed in 2015.
We continually evaluate our liquidity and ability to fund future operations and debt obligations. As of February 1, 2017, the Company had debt of $38 million associated with Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel and approximately $13 million associated with Gardens Medical Pavilion maturing in the next twelve months. If we have not disposed of the associated properties by the maturity date, we expect to repay the outstanding balance with available cash or refinance all or a portion of the balance outstanding. In addition to our debt obligations, we consider other factors in evaluating our liquidity. For example, to the extent our portfolio is concentrated in certain geographic regions and types of assets, downturns relating generally to such regions and assets may result in tenants defaulting on their lease obligations at a number of our properties within a short time period. Such defaults could negatively affect our liquidity and adversely affect our ability to fund our ongoing operations. For the year ended December 31, 2016, excluding the investment we sold in 2016, 44% and 16% of our total revenues were derived from our properties located in Hawaii and Florida, respectively. Additionally, excluding our property sold in 2016, 44% of our total revenues were from our hotel property and 30% were from our multifamily properties.
We may, but are not required to, establish capital reserves from cash flow generated by operating properties and other investments, or net sales proceeds from the sale of our properties and other investments. Capital reserves are typically utilized for non-operating expenses such as tenant improvements, leasing commissions, and major capital expenditures. Alternatively, a lender may establish its own criteria for escrow of capital reserves.
We have borrowed money to acquire properties and make other investments. Under our charter, the maximum amount of our indebtedness is limited to 300% of our “net assets” (as defined by our charter) as of the date of any borrowing; however, we may exceed that limit if approved by a majority of our independent directors. In addition to our charter limitation, our board of directors has adopted a policy to generally limit our aggregate borrowings to approximately 75% of the aggregate value of our assets unless substantial justification exists that borrowing a greater amount is in our best interests. Our policy limitation, however, does not apply to individual real estate assets.
Commercial real estate debt markets may experience volatility and uncertainty as a result of certain related factors, including the tightening of underwriting standards by lenders and credit rating agencies, macro-economic issues related to fiscal, tax and regulatory policies, and global financial issues. Should the overall cost of borrowings increase, either by increases in the index rates or by increases in lender spreads, we will need to factor such increases into the economics of our developments and investments. This may result in our investment operations generating lower overall economic returns and a reduced level of cash flow, which could potentially impact our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. In addition, disruptions in the debt markets may reduce the amount of capital that is available to finance real estate, which in turn could: (i) lead to a decline in real estate values generally; (ii) slow real estate transaction activity; (iii) reduce the loan to value ratio upon which lenders are willing to extend debt; and (iv) result in difficulty in refinancing debt as it becomes due, all of which may reasonably be expected to have a material adverse impact on the value of real estate investments and the revenues, income or cash flow from the operations of real properties and mortgage loans.
Debt Financings
From time to time, we have obtained mortgage, bridge, or mezzanine loans for acquisitions and investments, as well as property development. In the future, we may obtain financing for property development or to refinance our existing real estate assets, depending on multiple factors.
At December 31, 2016, our notes payable balance was $142.3 million, net of deferred financing fees of $0.8 million, and had a weighted average interest rate of 3.9%. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had notes payable of $177 million, net of deferred financing fees of $1.7 million, with a weighted average interest rate of 3.5%. We have guaranteed payment of
45
certain recourse liabilities with respect to certain customary nonrecourse carveouts as set forth in the guaranties in favor of the unaffiliated lenders with respect to the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel, 22 Exchange, and Parkside notes payable.
During the year ended December 31, 2016, we used a portion of the proceeds from the sale of Lakewood Flats to pay off in full the existing indebtedness of approximately $33.5 million.
Our loan agreements stipulate that we comply with certain reporting and financial covenants. These covenants include, among other things, maintaining minimum debt service coverage ratios, loan to value ratios, and liquidity. As of December 31, 2016, we believe we were in compliance with the debt covenants under our loan agreements.
One of our principal short-term and long-term liquidity requirements includes the repayment of maturing debt. The following table provides information with respect to the contractual maturities and scheduled principal repayments of our indebtedness as of December 31, 2016. Interest payments on variable rate debt are based on rates in effect as of December 31, 2016. The table does not represent any extension options (in thousands):
Payments Due by Period(1)(2) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | Thereafter | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||
Principal payments—fixed rate debt | $ | 2,150 | $ | 46,808 | $ | 24,307 | $ | 13,771 | $ | 404 | $ | 17,441 | $ | 104,881 | ||||||||||||||
Principal payments—variable rate debt | 38,000 | — | — | — | — | — | 38,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Interest payments—fixed rate debt | 4,924 | 3,306 | 1,581 | 786 | 704 | 967 | 12,268 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Interest payments—variable rate debt | 236 | — | — | — | — | — | 236 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Total(3) | $ | 45,310 | $ | 50,114 | $ | 25,888 | $ | 14,557 | $ | 1,108 | $ | 18,408 | $ | 155,385 | ||||||||||||||
_____________________________
(1) | Does not include approximately $0.2 million of unamortized premium related to debt we assumed on our acquisition of Parkside. |
(2) | Effective January 1, 2016, we adopted ASU 2015-03, which requires companies to present debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability as a direct reduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability. See Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, for further details. |
(3) | Does not include assumptions for any available extension options. |
46
Results of Operations
Year ended December 31, 2016 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2015
As of December 31, 2016, we had eight real estate investments, seven of which were consolidated (one wholly owned and six properties consolidated through investments in joint ventures). We sold one property during 2016.
As of December 31, 2015, we had nine real estate investments, eight of which were consolidated (one wholly owned and seven properties consolidated through investments in joint ventures). We sold four properties during 2015.
The following table provides summary information about our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 ($ in thousands):
Year ended December 31, | Increase (Decrease) | Percentage Change | $ Change due to Dispositions(1) | $ Change due to Same Store(2) | |||||||||||||||||||
Description | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rental revenue | $ | 27,630 | $ | 32,556 | $ | (4,926 | ) | (15.1 | )% | $ | (6,252 | ) | $ | 1,326 | |||||||||
Hotel revenue | 18,501 | 17,694 | 807 | 4.6 | % | — | 807 | ||||||||||||||||
Property operating expenses | 9,496 | 11,503 | (2,007 | ) | (17.4 | )% | (2,071 | ) | 64 | ||||||||||||||
Hotel operating expenses | 13,608 | 12,498 | 1,110 | 8.9 | % | — | 1,110 | ||||||||||||||||
Interest expense | 6,164 | 6,791 | (627 | ) | (9.2 | )% | (918 | ) | 291 | ||||||||||||||
Real estate taxes | 5,173 | 6,127 | (954 | ) | (15.6 | )% | (1,001 | ) | 47 | ||||||||||||||
Impairment charge | — | 1,417 | (1,417 | ) | (100.0 | )% | — | (1,417 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Property management fees | 1,512 | 1,650 | (138 | ) | (8.4 | )% | (219 | ) | 81 | ||||||||||||||
Asset management fees(3) | 2,264 | 2,702 | (438 | ) | (16.2 | )% | (343 | ) | (95 | ) | |||||||||||||
General and Administrative | 3,139 | 3,620 | (481 | ) | (13.3 | )% | n/a | n/a | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization | 11,014 | 14,950 | (3,936 | ) | (26.3 | )% | (4,380 | ) | 444 | ||||||||||||||
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | 500 | 732 | (232 | ) | (31.7 | )% | (232 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||
Other income (loss) | 122 | (777 | ) | 899 | (115.7 | )% | 899 | — | |||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of real estate | 11,341 | 22,771 | (11,430 | ) | (50.2 | )% | (11,430 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||
Income tax benefit (expense) | 47 | (2,726 | ) | 2,773 | n/a | n/a | n/a | ||||||||||||||||
_____________
(1) | Represents the dollar amount decrease for the year ended December 31, 2016 compared to the year ended December 31, 2015 related to the 2016 disposition of Lakewood Flats and the 2015 dispositions of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly. |
(2) | Represents the dollar amount increase (decrease) for the year ended December 31, 2016 compared to the year ended December 31, 2015 with respect to real estate and real estate-related investments owned by us during the entire periods presented, excluding any we have classified as held for sale (“Same Store”). Same Store for the periods ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 include Gardens Medical Pavilion, River Club and the Townhomes at River Club, Lakes of Margate, Arbors Harbor Town, Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel, 22 Exchange, and Parkside. |
(3) | Asset management fees payable to the advisor are an obligation of the Company, and as such, asset management fees associated with all investments owned during the period are classified in continuing operations. Therefore, the amounts above include asset management fees associated with any property owned during a particular period, including those related to our disposed properties. |
47
The following table reflects rental revenue and property operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 for (i) our Same Store operating portfolio; and (ii) our disposition of Lakewood Flats on August 16, 2016 and our 2015 dispositions of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
Description | 2016 | 2015 | Change | |||||||||
Rental revenue | ||||||||||||
Same Store | $ | 23,498 | $ | 22,172 | $ | 1,326 | ||||||
Dispositions | 4,132 | 10,384 | (6,252 | ) | ||||||||
Total rental revenue | $ | 27,630 | $ | 32,556 | $ | (4,926 | ) | |||||
Property operating expenses | ||||||||||||
Same Store | $ | 8,389 | $ | 8,325 | $ | 64 | ||||||
Dispositions | 1,107 | 3,178 | (2,071 | ) | ||||||||
Total property operating expenses | $ | 9,496 | $ | 11,503 | $ | (2,007 | ) | |||||
The tables below reflect occupancy and effective monthly rental rates for our Same Store operating properties and occupancy and ADR for Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel:
Occupancy (%) | Effective Monthly Rent per Square Foot/Unit/Bed ($)(1) | |||||||||||||||
Year Ended December 31, | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||
Property | 2016 | 2015 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||||
Gardens Medical Pavilion | 72 | % | 62 | % | $ | 1.97 | $ | 2.11 | per sq ft | |||||||
River Club and the Townhomes at River Club | 98 | % | 96 | % | 401.68 | 383.62 | per bed | |||||||||
Lakes of Margate | 94 | % | 95 | % | 1,273.61 | 1,218.84 | per unit | |||||||||
Arbors Harbor Town | 94 | % | 91 | % | 1,213.26 | 1,144.39 | per unit | |||||||||
22 Exchange | 89 | % | 94 | % | 552.67 | 584.20 | per bed | |||||||||
Parkside | 96 | % | 77 | % | 1,142.08 | 1,149.54 | per unit | |||||||||
______________________________
(1) | Effective monthly rent is calculated as in-place contracted monthly rental revenue, including any premiums due for short-term or month-to-month leases, less any concessions or discounts. |
Occupancy (%)(1) | ADR ($) | |||||||||||||
Year Ended December 31, | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||
Property | 2016 | 2015 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel | 84 | % | 82 | % | $ | 140.75 | $ | 140.34 | ||||||
_______________________________________
(1) | Represents average occupancy for the year ended December 31. The Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel has 311 rooms and approximately 6,200 square feet of meeting space. Occupancy is for the entire year and is based on standard industry metrics, including rooms available for rent. |
48
Continuing Operations
Our results of operations for the respective periods presented reflect decreases in most categories. During the year ended December 31, 2016, we had decreases in rental revenue and property operating expenses of $6.3 million and $2.1 million, respectively, from the impact of our dispositions in 2016 and 2015. Management expects decreases in most categories in the future as we dispose of additional real estate and real estate-related assets.
Revenues. Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2016, including Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel, were $46.1 million, a decrease of $4.1 million from the year ended December 31, 2015. Same Store rental revenue (including our hotel revenue) for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 was $42 million and $39.9 million, respectively. Rental revenue from Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly disposed of in 2015 and Lakewood Flats disposed of in 2016 was $4.1 million and $10.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
The change in revenue is primarily due to:
• | a decrease in rental revenue of $6.3 million as a result of our 2016 and 2015 dispositions. This decrease was partially offset by an increase of approximately $1.3 million related to our Same Store operations; and |
• | an increase in hotel revenue of $0.8 million, or 4.6%, at the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel due to a 2% increase in occupancy. In addition, food and beverage revenue increased $0.5 million. |
Property Operating Expenses. Property operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were $9.5 million and $11.5 million, respectively. The decrease of $2.1 million related to our 2016 and 2015 dispositions was partially offset by an increase of less than $0.1 million related to our Same Store operations.
Hotel Operating Expenses. Hotel operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were $13.6 million and $12.5 million, respectively. The increase in hotel operating expenses was primarily due to increases of $0.9 million in food and beverage costs and sales and marketing costs incurred during 2016 at the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel.
Interest Expense. Interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 was $6.2 million and $6.8 million, respectively. The approximate $0.6 million decrease was primarily due to our dispositions in 2016 and 2015. For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, we capitalized interest of approximately $0.1 million and $0.5 million, respectively, in connection with our equity method investment in Prospect Park.
Real Estate Taxes. Real estate taxes were $5.1 million and $6.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Our dispositions in 2016 and 2015 accounted for a $1 million decrease.
Impairment Charge. Due to the local market decline in Akron, Ohio, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million on our investment in 22 Exchange, a student housing property, during the year ended December 31, 2015. In estimating the fair value of 22 Exchange, we used management’s internal discounted cash flow analysis prepared with consideration of the local market. There were no impairment charges recorded during the year ended December 31, 2016.
Property Management Fees. Property management fees, which are based on revenues, were $1.5 million and $1.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and were composed of property management fees paid to unaffiliated third parties and our affiliated property manager.
Asset Management Fees. Asset management fees for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were $2.3 million and $2.7 million, respectively, and were composed of asset management fees paid to the Behringer Advisor and third parties with respect to our investments. We pay our external advisor or its affiliates a monthly asset management fee of one-twelfth of 0.7% of the value for each asset as determined in connection with our establishment and publication of an estimated value per share. Asset management fees for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 include fees related to our disposed properties. We expensed $0.3 million and $0.7 million in asset management fees related to disposed properties during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were $3.1 million and $3.6 million, respectively, and were composed of audit fees, legal fees, board of directors’ fees, and other administrative expenses. The decrease of approximately $0.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2016 was primarily due to decreases of $0.3 million and $0.2 million in administrative service fees payable to the Behringer Advisor and legal fees, respectively.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were $11 million and $14.9 million, respectively. The decrease of $3.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2016 was
49
primarily due to a $4.4 million decrease related to our 2016 and 2015 dispositions. This decrease was partially offset by a period-over-period increase of $0.4 million related to our Same Store operations.
Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt. We recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $0.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2016 as a result of the pay off in full of Lakewood Flat’s existing indebtedness when we sold the property in September 2016. The $0.5 million loss was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.4 million and an early termination fee of $0.1 million. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded losses on early extinguishment of debt totaling $0.7 million as a result of the payoff of debt secured by three investments we sold during 2015. The total charge of $0.7 million was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.3 million and early termination fees of $0.4 million.
Other loss. During 2015, we recorded currency translation adjustments totaling approximately $0.8 million related to the cash proceeds from the sale of our foreign assets during the year ended December 31, 2015.
Gain on Sale of Real Estate. During the year ended December 31, 2016, we recorded a gain on sale of approximately $11.5 million and a deferred gain of approximately $1.2 million for Lakewood Flats. In addition to the sale of Lakewood Flats, we recorded a $0.1 million loss related to the final settlement of certain fees associated with our 2015 disposal of AJS. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded gains on sale for our 2015 dispositions of $22.8 million. The gain on sale of AJS, which was located in Berlin, Germany, is net of a cumulative translation adjustment (“CTA”) of $0.6 million. The gain on sale of Holstenplatz, which was located in Hamburg, Germany, includes a CTA credit of $0.4 million.
Income Tax Benefit (Expense). During 2015, we recorded a provision for income tax of approximately $1.7 million as a result of foreign income tax related to the sale of AJS. In addition, we recorded a provision for income tax of approximately $1 million as a result of foreign income tax related to the sale of Holstenplatz during 2015. The foreign income tax related to both dispositions was calculated on gains recognized at the exchange rate in effect on the date of sale and calculated using current tax rates. We had less than $0.1 million income tax benefit in the third quarter of 2016, related to the difference in actual income taxes paid and the originally estimated income taxes payable on the sale of Holstenplatz.
50
Year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2014
As of December 31, 2015, we had nine real estate investments, eight of which were consolidated (one wholly owned and seven properties consolidated through investments in joint ventures). We sold four properties during 2015.
As of December 31, 2014, we had 13 real estate investments, including AJS and Babcock, which were classified as held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet, 12 of which were consolidated (two wholly owned and ten properties consolidated through investments in joint ventures). We completed one acquisition and sold one property during 2014.
The following table provides summary information about our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 ($ in thousands):
Year ended December 31, | Increase (Decrease) | Percentage Change | $ Change due to Acquisitions(1) | $ Change due to Dispositions(2) | $ Change due to Same Store(3) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Description | 2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rental revenue | $ | 32,556 | $ | 32,226 | $ | 330 | 1.0 | % | $ | 4,956 | $ | (4,494 | ) | $ | (132 | ) | |||||||||||
Hotel revenue | 17,694 | 16,371 | 1,323 | 8.1 | % | — | — | 1,323 | |||||||||||||||||||
Property operating expenses | 11,503 | 11,288 | 215 | 1.9 | % | 1,087 | (1,111 | ) | 239 | ||||||||||||||||||
Hotel operating expenses | 12,498 | 11,954 | 544 | 4.6 | % | — | — | 544 | |||||||||||||||||||
Interest expense | 6,791 | 7,833 | (1,042 | ) | (13.3 | )% | 527 | (1,410 | ) | (159 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Real estate taxes | 6,127 | 5,388 | 739 | 13.7 | % | 1,138 | (583 | ) | 184 | ||||||||||||||||||
Impairment charge | 1,417 | — | 1,417 | (100.0 | )% | — | — | 1,417 | |||||||||||||||||||
Property management fees | 1,650 | 1,642 | 8 | 0.5 | % | 135 | (153 | ) | 26 | ||||||||||||||||||
Asset management fees(4) | 2,702 | 2,368 | 334 | 14.1 | % | 332 | (272 | ) | 274 | ||||||||||||||||||
General and Administrative | 3,620 | 4,076 | (456 | ) | (11.2 | )% | n/a | n/a | n/a | ||||||||||||||||||
Acquisition expense | — | 1,307 | (1,307 | ) | (100.0 | )% | (1,307 | ) | — | — | |||||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization | 14,950 | 14,362 | 588 | 4.1 | % | 2,448 | (2,072 | ) | 212 | ||||||||||||||||||
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | 732 | 454 | 278 | 61.2 | % | — | 278 | — | |||||||||||||||||||
Other loss | 777 | 38 | 739 | 1,944.7 | % | — | 739 | — | |||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of real estate | 22,771 | 11,454 | 11,317 | 98.8 | % | — | 11,317 | — | |||||||||||||||||||
Income tax benefit (expense) | (2,726 | ) | 101 | (2,827 | ) | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | ||||||||||||||||||
_____________
(1) | Represents the dollar amount increase (decrease) for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 related to the acquisition of Lakewood Flats on October 10, 2014. |
(2) | Represents the dollar amount increase (decrease) for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 related to the dispositions of 1875 Lawrence on May 30, 2014, Babcock on January 8, 2015, AJS on February 21, 2015, Holstenplatz on September 1, 2015, and Wimberly on September 9, 2015. |
(3) | Represents the dollar amount increase (decrease) for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 with respect to real estate and real estate-related investments owned by us during the entire periods presented (“Same Store”). Same Store for the periods ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 include Gardens Medical Pavilion, River Club and the Townhomes at River Club, Lakes of Margate, Arbors Harbor Town, Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel, 22 Exchange, and Parkside. |
(4) | Asset management fees payable to our external advisor are an obligation of the Company, and as such, asset management fees associated with all investments owned during the period are classified in continuing operations. Therefore, the amounts above include asset management fees associated with any property owned during a particular period, including those related to our disposed properties. |
51
The following table reflects rental revenue and property operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 for (i) our Same Store operating portfolio; (ii) our acquisition of Lakewood Flats in 2014; (iii) our dispositions of four properties in 2015 and one property in 2014 (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
Description | 2015 | 2014 | Change | |||||||||
Rental revenue | ||||||||||||
Same Store | $ | 22,172 | $ | 22,304 | $ | (132 | ) | |||||
Acquisition | 6,341 | 1,385 | 4,956 | |||||||||
Dispositions | 4,043 | 8,537 | (4,494 | ) | ||||||||
Total rental revenue | $ | 32,556 | $ | 32,226 | $ | 330 | ||||||
Property operating expenses | ||||||||||||
Same Store | $ | 8,325 | $ | 8,086 | $ | 239 | ||||||
Acquisition | 1,408 | 321 | 1,087 | |||||||||
Dispositions | 1,770 | 2,881 | (1,111 | ) | ||||||||
Total property operating expenses | $ | 11,503 | $ | 11,288 | $ | 215 | ||||||
The tables below reflect occupancy and effective monthly rental rates for our Same Store operating properties and occupancy and ADR for Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel:
Occupancy (%) | Effective Monthly Rent per Square Foot/Unit/Bed ($)(1) | |||||||||||||||
Year Ended December 31, | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||
Property | 2015 | 2014 | 2015 | 2014 | ||||||||||||
Gardens Medical Pavilion | 62 | % | 60 | % | $ | 2.11 | $ | 1.21 | per sq ft | |||||||
River Club and the Townhomes at River Club | 96 | % | 97 | % | 383.62 | 362.72 | per bed | |||||||||
Lakes of Margate | 95 | % | 90 | % | 1,218.84 | 1,127.98 | per unit | |||||||||
Arbors Harbor Town | 91 | % | 91 | % | 1,144.39 | 1,169.66 | per unit | |||||||||
22 Exchange | 94 | % | 83 | % | 584.20 | 524.41 | per bed | |||||||||
Parkside | 77 | % | 83 | % | 1,149.54 | 1,066.50 | per unit | |||||||||
______________________________
(1) | Effective monthly rent is calculated as in-place contracted monthly rental revenue, including any premiums due for short-term or month-to-month leases, less any concessions or discounts. |
Occupancy (%)(1) | ADR ($) | |||||||||||||
Year Ended December 31, | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||
Property | 2015 | 2014 | 2015 | 2014 | ||||||||||
Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel | 82 | % | 82 | % | $ | 140.34 | $ | 133.50 | ||||||
_______________________________________
(1) | Represents average occupancy for the year ended December 31. The Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel has 311 rooms and approximately 6,200 square feet of meeting space. Occupancy is for the entire year and is based on standard industry metrics, including rooms available for rent. |
52
Continuing Operations
Our results of operations for the respective periods presented reflect decreases in some categories and increases in others. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we had decreases in rental revenue and property operating expenses of $4.5 million and $1.1 million, respectively, from the impact of the five dispositions in 2014 and 2015. Our rental revenue and property operating expenses increased $5 million and $1.1 million, respectively, due to the acquisition of Lakewood Flats in October 2014.
Revenues. Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015, including Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel, were $50.3 million, an increase of $1.7 million from the year ended December 31, 2014. Same Store rental revenue (including our hotel revenue) for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was $39.9 million and $38.7 million, respectively, while rental revenue from our Lakewood Flats acquisition in 2014 was $6.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the 2014 partial year of $1.4 million. Rental revenue from our 2015 and 2014 dispositions was $4 million and $8.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The change in revenue is primarily due to:
• | an increase in rental revenue of $5 million as a result of our 2014 acquisition of Lakewood Flats. This increase was partially offset by decreases of approximately $4.5 million related to our dispositions in 2014 and 2015 and $0.1 million related to our Same Store operations; and |
• | an increase in hotel revenue of $1.3 million, or 8%, at the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel due to a 5.1% increase in ADR, resulting in a 5.9% increase in RevPar year-over-year. The occupancy rate remained constant. The improvements in ADR and RevPar are primarily the result of improved operating performance. |
Property Operating Expenses. Property operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were $11.5 million and $11.3 million, respectively. The increase of $0.2 million was primarily due to increases of $1.1 million and $0.2 million for the acquisition of Lakewood Flats and our Same Store operations, respectively. These increases were partially offset by a decrease of $1.1 million related to our 2014 and 2015 dispositions.
Hotel Operating Expenses. Hotel operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were $12.5 million and $12 million, respectively. The increase in hotel operating expenses was primarily due to increases of $0.2 million in food and beverage costs and sales and marketing costs incurred during 2015 at the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel.
Interest Expense. Interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was $6.8 million and $7.8 million, respectively. The approximate $1 million decrease was primarily due to a decrease of $1.4 million related to our dispositions in 2014 and 2015 and a decrease of $0.2 million related to our Same Store operations. These decreases were partially offset by an increase of $0.5 million related to our acquisition of Lakewood Flats in the fourth quarter of 2014. For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we capitalized interest of $0.5 million in connection with our equity method investment in Prospect Park.
Real Estate Taxes. Real estate taxes were $6.1 million and $5.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Our 2014 acquisition accounted for an increase of $1.1 million in real estate taxes while the five dispositions in 2014 and 2015 accounted for a $0.6 million decrease.
Impairment Charge. Due to the local market decline in Akron, Ohio, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million on our investment in 22 Exchange, a student housing property, during the year ended December 31, 2015. In estimating the fair value of 22 Exchange, we used management’s internal discounted cash flow analysis prepared with consideration of the local market. There were no impairment charges recorded during the year ended December 31, 2014.
Property Management Fees. Property management fees, which are based on revenues, were $1.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and were composed of property management fees paid to unaffiliated third parties and our affiliated property manager.
Asset Management Fees. Asset management fees for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were $2.7 million and $2.4 million, respectively, and were composed of asset management fees paid to our Advisor and third parties with respect to our investments. The $0.3 million increase in asset management fees for the year ended December 31, 2015 was due to $0.3 million of fees waived by the Behringer Advisor in the second quarter of 2014 for fees previously accrued during 2013. Without this one-time adjustment, asset management fees for the year ended December 31, 2014 would have been approximately $2.7 million. Asset management fees for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 include fees related to our disposed properties. We expensed $0.3 million and $0.6 million in asset management fees related to disposed properties during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
53
General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were $3.6 million and $4.1 million, respectively, and were composed of audit fees, legal fees, board of directors’ fees, and other administrative expenses. The decrease of approximately $0.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2015 was primarily due to decreases of $0.2 million and $0.1 million in legal fees associated with our joint ventures and administrative service fees payable to our external advisor, respectively.
Acquisition Expense. Acquisition expense for the year ended December 31, 2014 of $1.3 million was primarily due to expenses incurred as a result of our acquisition of Lakewood Flats. We did not have any acquisitions in 2015.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were $15 million and $14.4 million, respectively. We had year-over-year increases of approximately $2.5 million for the acquisition of Lakewood Flats in 2014 and $0.2 million related to our Same Store operations. These increases were partially offset by a year-over-year decrease of $2.1 million due to the 2014 and 2015 dispositions.
Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded losses on early extinguishment of debt totaling $0.7 million as a result of the payoff of debt secured by three investments we sold during 2015. We recorded $0.6 million on our Wimberly investment and less than $0.1 million on our AJS and Babcock investments. The total charge of $0.7 million was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.3 million and early termination fees of $0.4 million. During the year ended December 31, 2014, we recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $0.5 million related to the sale of our 1875 Lawrence property which was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.4 million and an early termination fee of $0.1 million.
Other loss. During 2015, we recorded currency translation adjustments totaling approximately $0.8 million related to the cash proceeds from the sale of our foreign assets during the year ended December 31, 2015.
Gain on Sale of Real Estate. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded gains on sale for our 2015 dispositions of $22.8 million. The gain on sale of AJS, which was located in Berlin, Germany, is net of a CTA of $0.6 million. The gain on sale of Holstenplatz, which was located in Hamburg, Germany, includes a CTA credit of $0.4 million. During the year ended December 31, 2014, we recorded a gain on sale of approximately $11.5 million for 1875 Lawrence. As discussed in Note 6, Real Estate and Real Estate-Related Investments, we did not view the disposals of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, Wimberly, and 1875 Lawrence as a strategic shift and the results of operations are presented in continuing operations.
Income Tax Benefit (Expense). During 2015, we recorded a provision for income tax of approximately $1.7 million as a result of foreign income tax related to the sale of AJS. In addition, we recorded a provision for income tax of approximately $1 million as a result of foreign income tax related to the sale of Holstenplatz during 2015. The foreign income tax related to both dispositions was calculated on gains recognized at the exchange rate in effect on the date of sale and calculated using current tax rates. We recorded an income tax benefit of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to a partial recovery of estimated alternative minimum tax expense of $0.2 million recorded in 2013.
54
Cash Flow Analysis
Fiscal year ended December 31, 2016 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2015
During the year ended December 31, 2016, net cash provided by operating activities was $2.9 million compared to $5.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The primary reason for the decrease in cash flow from operating activities was the changes in working capital.
During the year ended December 31, 2016, net cash provided by investing activities was $65.7 million compared to $74.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2015. The year over year difference is primarily due to the $68.5 million of proceeds from the sale of Lakewood Flats during 2016 compared to $79.1 million from the sales of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly during 2015. In addition to the 2016 gain on sale of Lakewood Flats of $68.5 million, we recorded a $0.1 million loss related to the final settlement of certain fees associated with our 2015 disposal of AJS.
During the year ended December 31, 2016, net cash used in financing activities was $76.7 million compared $74.7 million for the same period of 2015. We paid special cash distributions to our stockholders totaling $38.4 million and $25.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2016, we paid off the existing indebtedness totaling approximately $33.5 million associated with the Lakewood Flats investment, with proceeds from the sale. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we paid off the existing indebtedness totaling approximately $35.2 million associated with the Babcock, AJS, and Wimberly investments with proceeds from the sales of the three investments. In addition, we paid off the Holstenplatz debt of approximately $8.1 million on the maturity date of April 30, 2015.
Fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2014
During the year ended December 31, 2015, net cash provided by operating activities was $5.1 million compared to net cash provided of $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. The favorable increase of $3.6 million is primarily due to $1.3 million in acquisition expense incurred in 2014 for the acquisition of Lakewood Flats and an increase in working capital items. We acquired one asset in 2014 compared to none in 2015.
During the year ended December 31, 2015, net cash provided by investing activities was $74.3 million compared to net cash used of $24.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2014. In 2015, we received aggregate sales proceeds of $79.1 million from the sales of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly. During 2014, we purchased Lakewood Flats for $60.4 million and sold 1875 Lawrence for $46.3 million.
During the year ended December 31, 2015, net cash used in financing activities was $74.7 million compared to net cash used of $0.1 million for the same period of 2014. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we paid off the existing indebtedness totaling approximately $35.2 million associated with the Babcock, AJS, and Wimberly investments with proceeds from the sales of the three investments. In addition, we paid off the Holstenplatz debt of approximately $8.1 million on the maturity date of April 30, 2015. During the year ended December 31, 2014, we received proceeds from notes payable of $33.5 million related to the acquisition of Lakewood Flats on October 10, 2014. This receipt was partially offset by the pay-off of existing indebtedness of approximately $15.6 million from the sale of 1875 Lawrence on May 30, 2014. On March 30, 2015, we paid a special cash distribution to stockholders totaling $25.7 million and on September 18, 2014, we paid a special cash distribution to stockholders totaling $13 million.
Funds from Operations
Funds from operations (“FFO”) is a non-GAAP financial measure that is widely recognized as a measure of REIT operating performance. We use FFO as defined by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) in the April 2002 “White Paper of Funds From Operations” which is net income (loss), computed in accordance with GAAP, excluding extraordinary items, as defined by GAAP, and gains (or losses) from sales of property and impairments of depreciable real estate (including impairments of investments in unconsolidated joint ventures and partnerships which resulted from measurable decreases in the fair value of the depreciable real estate held by the joint venture or partnership), plus depreciation and amortization on real estate assets, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships, joint ventures, subsidiaries, and noncontrolling interests as one measure to evaluate our operating performance. In October 2011, NAREIT clarified the FFO definition to exclude impairment charges of depreciable real estate (including impairments of investments in unconsolidated joint ventures and partnerships which resulted from measurable decreases in the fair value of the depreciable real estate held by the joint venture or partnership).
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets in accordance with GAAP implicitly assumes that the value of real estate diminishes predictably over time. Since real estate values have historically risen or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors and analysts have considered the presentation of operating results for real estate companies that use historical
55
cost accounting alone to be insufficient. As a result, our management believes that the use of FFO, together with the required GAAP presentations, provides a more complete understanding of our performance.
We believe that FFO is helpful to investors and our management as a measure of operating performance because it excludes depreciation and amortization, gains and losses from property dispositions, impairments of depreciable assets, and extraordinary items, and as a result, when compared year to year, reflects the impact on operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, development activities, general and administrative expenses, and interest costs, which is not immediately apparent from net income.
FFO should not be considered as an alternative to net income (loss), as an indication of our liquidity, nor as an indication of funds available to fund our cash needs, including our ability to make distributions and should be reviewed in connection with other GAAP measurements. Additionally, the exclusion of impairments limits the usefulness of FFO as a historical operating performance measure since an impairment charge indicates that operating performance has been permanently affected. FFO is not a useful measure in evaluating net asset value because impairments are taken into account in determining net asset value but not in determining FFO. Our FFO as presented may not be comparable to amounts calculated by other REITs that do not define these terms in accordance with the current NAREIT definition or that interpret the definition differently.
Our calculation of FFO for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 is presented below (in thousands, except per share amounts):
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Description | Amount | Per Share | Amount | Per Share | Amount | Per Share | ||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to the Company | $ | 4,943 | $ | 0.19 | $ | 6,978 | $ | 0.27 | $ | (3 | ) | $ | — | |||||||||||
Adjustments for: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Real estate depreciation and amortization(1) | 9,772 | 0.39 | 13,556 | 0.53 | 13,056 | 0.50 | ||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of real estate(2) | (11,342 | ) | (0.45 | ) | (21,579 | ) | (0.84 | ) | (11,454 | ) | (0.44 | ) | ||||||||||||
Impairment expense(3) | — | — | 1,263 | 0.05 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense (benefit) associated with real estate sale(4) | (23 | ) | — | 2,662 | 0.10 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||
NAREIT Defined Funds from Operations (FFO) attributable to common stockholders | $ | 3,350 | $ | 0.13 | $ | 2,880 | $ | 0.11 | $ | 1,599 | $ | 0.06 | ||||||||||||
GAAP weighted average shares: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic and diluted | 25,418 | 25,688 | 25,943 | |||||||||||||||||||||
_________________________________
(1) | Includes our consolidated amount, as well as our pro rata share of those unconsolidated investments which we account for under the equity method of accounting, and the noncontrolling interest adjustment for the third-party partners’ share. |
(2) | The gain on sale for the year ended December 31, 2016 is primarily related to the sale of Lakewood Flats and includes a 2016 adjustment for trade taxes related to the 2015 sale of AJS. For the year ended December 31, 2015, includes our proportionate share of the gain on sale of real estate related to the Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly investments. The gain on sale of AJS is net of a cumulative foreign currency translation loss of approximately $0.6 million due to the substantial liquidation of AJS. The gain on sale of Holstenplatz includes a CTA credit of approximately $0.4 million due to the substantial liquidation of Holstenplatz. For the year ended December 31, 2014, includes our gain on sale of the 1875 Lawrence office building. |
(3) | During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded a $1.4 million non-cash impairment charge to reduce the carrying value of 22 Exchange, one of our student housing investments, to its estimated fair value. The noncontrolling interest portion of the charge was approximately $0.2 million. |
(4) | During 2015, we recorded estimated provision for income tax of approximately $1.7 million and $1 million as a result of foreign income tax related to the sales of AJS and Holstenplatz, respectively. We had less than $0.1 million income tax benefit in 2016, related to the difference in actual income taxes due and the originally estimated income taxes payable on the sale of Holstenplatz. |
Provided below is additional information related to selected items included in net income (loss) above, which may be helpful in assessing our operating results.
• | Straight-line rental revenue of less than $0.1 million, $0.1 million, and $0.2 million was recognized for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The noncontrolling interest portion of straight-line rental revenue for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 was less than $0.1 million. |
• | Net above-market lease amortization of less than $0.1 million was recognized as a decrease to rental revenue for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2014. Net below-market lease amortization of less than $0.1 million was recognized as an increase to rental revenue for the year ended December 31, 2015. The noncontrolling interest portion of the net above-market lease amortization for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2014 and the net below-market lease amortization for the year ended December 31, 2015 was less than $0.1 million. |
56
• | Amortization of deferred financing costs of $0.5 million, $0.7 million, and $0.8 million was recognized as interest expense for our notes payable for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014, respectively. |
• | During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014, we recognized loss on early extinguishment of debt of $0.5 million, $0.7 million, and $0.5 million, respectively, comprised of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.4 million, $0.3 million, and $0.4 million and an early termination fee of $0.1 million, $0.4 million, and $0.1 million, respectively. |
• | We recognized acquisition expense of $1.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2014 due to expenses incurred as a result of our acquisition of Lakewood Flats. We did not acquire any properties during the years ended December 31, 2016 or 2015. |
In addition, cash flows generated from FFO may be used to fund all or a portion of certain capitalizable items that are excluded from FFO, such as capital expenditures and payments of principal on debt, each of which may impact the amount of cash available for distributions to our stockholders.
Distributions
Distributions are authorized at the discretion of our board of directors based on its analysis of our performance over the previous periods and expectations of performance for future periods. These analyses may include actual and anticipated operating cash flow, capital expenditure needs, general financial and market conditions, proceeds from asset sales, and other factors that our board deems relevant. The board’s decision will be substantially influenced by its obligation to ensure that we maintain our federal tax status as a REIT. We cannot provide assurance that we will pay distributions at any particular level, or at all.
On November 20, 2015, our board of directors authorized a special cash distribution of $38.4 million, or $1.50 per share of common stock, payable to stockholders of record as of December 31, 2015. The Company paid this special cash distribution on January 5, 2016. On March 18, 2015, our board of directors authorized a special cash distribution of $25.7 million, or $1.00 per share of common stock, payable to stockholders of record as of March 30, 2015. This special cash distribution was paid on March 31, 2015. These special cash distributions represented a portion of proceeds from asset sales.
Total distributions paid to stockholders during the year ended December 31, 2016 were $38.4 million and were fully funded with proceeds from asset sales. Total distributions paid to stockholders during the year ended December 31, 2015 were $25.7 million and were fully funded with proceeds from asset sales. For further discussion on distribution payments, see Item 5, “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities—Distributions.”
During 2016 and 2015, our special cash distributions paid were classified as follows for federal income tax purposes:
Description | 2016 | 2015 | ||||
Ordinary income | — | — | ||||
Capital gains | 25.4 | % | 25.8 | % | ||
Return of capital | 74.6 | % | 74.2 | % | ||
Total | 100.0 | % | 100.0 | % | ||
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements that are reasonably likely to have a current or future material effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures, or capital resources.
57
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. These estimates include such items as purchase price allocation for real estate acquisitions, impairment of long-lived assets, depreciation and amortization, and allowance for doubtful accounts. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Below is a discussion of the accounting policies that we consider to be critical in that they may require complex judgment in their application or require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain.
Principles of Consolidation and Basis of Presentation
Our consolidated financial statements include our accounts and the accounts of other subsidiaries over which we have control. All inter-company transactions, balances, and profits have been eliminated in consolidation. In addition, interests in entities acquired are evaluated based on applicable GAAP, and deemed to be variable interest entities (“VIE”) in which we are the primary beneficiary are also consolidated. If the interest in the entity is determined not to be a VIE, then the entity is evaluated for consolidation based on legal form, economic substance, and the extent to which we have control, substantive participating rights or both under the respective ownership agreement. For entities in which we have less than a controlling interest or entities which we are not deemed to be the primary beneficiary, we account for the investment using the equity method of accounting.
There are judgments and estimates involved in determining if an entity in which we have made an investment is a VIE and, if so, whether we are the primary beneficiary. The entity is evaluated to determine if it is a VIE by, among other things, calculating the percentage of equity being risked compared to the total equity of the entity. Determining expected future losses involves assumptions of various possibilities of the results of future operations of the entity, assigning a probability to each possibility and using a discount rate to determine the net present value of those future losses. A change in the judgments, assumptions, and estimates outlined above could result in consolidating an entity that should not be consolidated or accounting for an investment using the equity method that should in fact be consolidated, the effects of which could be material to our financial statements.
In February 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an update (“ASU 2015-02”) to ASC Topic 810, Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis. ASU 2015-02 makes several modifications to the consolidation guidance for VIEs and general partners’ investments in limited partnerships, as well as modifications to the evaluation of whether limited partnerships are VIEs or voting interest entities. The adoption of ASU 2015-02, effective January 1, 2016, did not impact our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
Real Estate
Upon the acquisition of real estate properties, we recognize the assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest as of the acquisition date, measured at their fair values. The acquisition date is the date on which we obtain control of the real estate property. The assets acquired and liabilities assumed may consist of land, inclusive of associated rights, buildings, assumed debt, identified intangible assets and liabilities, and asset retirement obligations. Identified intangible assets generally consist of above-market leases, in-place leases, in-place tenant improvements, in-place leasing commissions, and tenant relationships. Identified intangible liabilities generally consist of below-market leases. Goodwill is recognized as of the acquisition date and measured as the aggregate fair value of consideration transferred and any noncontrolling interests in the acquiree over the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired. Likewise, a bargain purchase gain is recognized in current earnings when the aggregate fair value of consideration transferred and any noncontrolling interests in the acquiree is less than the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired. Acquisition-related costs are expensed in the period incurred. Initial valuations are subject to change until our information is finalized, which is no later than twelve months from the acquisition date.
The fair value of the tangible assets acquired, consisting of land and buildings, is determined by valuing the property as if it were vacant, and the “as-if-vacant” value is then allocated to land and buildings. Land values are derived from appraisals, and building values are calculated as replacement cost less depreciation or management’s estimates of the fair value of these assets using discounted cash flow analyses or similar methods believed to be used by market participants. The value of hotels and all other buildings is depreciated over the estimated useful lives of 39 years and 25 years, respectively, using the straight-line method.
We determine the fair value of assumed debt by calculating the net present value of the scheduled mortgage payments using interest rates for debt with similar terms and remaining maturities that management believes we could obtain at the date
58
of the debt assumption. Any difference between the fair value and stated value of the assumed debt is recorded as a discount or premium and amortized over the remaining life of the loan using the effective interest method.
We determine the value of above-market and below-market leases for acquired properties based on the present value (using an interest rate that reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (1) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (2) management’s estimate of current market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases, measured over a period equal to (a) the remaining non-cancelable lease term for above-market leases, or (b) the remaining non-cancelable lease term plus any below-market fixed rate renewal options that, based on a qualitative assessment of several factors, including the financial condition of the lessee, the business conditions in the industry in which the lessee operates, the economic conditions in the area in which the property is located, and the ability of the lessee to sublease the property during the renewal term, are reasonably assured to be exercised by the lessee for below-market leases. We record the fair value of above-market and below-market leases as intangible assets or intangible liabilities, respectively, and amortize them as an adjustment to rental income over the determined lease term.
The total value of identified real estate intangible assets acquired is further allocated to in-place leases, in-place tenant improvements, in-place leasing commissions, and tenant relationships based on our evaluation of the specific characteristics of each tenant’s lease and our overall relationship with that respective tenant. The aggregate value for tenant improvements and leasing commissions is based on estimates of these costs incurred at inception of the acquired leases, amortized through the date of acquisition. The aggregate value of in-place leases acquired and tenant relationships is determined by applying a fair value model. The estimates of fair value of in-place leases include an estimate of carrying costs during the expected lease-up periods for the respective spaces considering existing market conditions. In estimating the carrying costs that would have otherwise been incurred had the leases not been in place, we include such items as real estate taxes, insurance, and other operating expenses as well as lost rental revenue during the expected lease-up period based on existing market conditions. The estimates of the fair value of tenant relationships also include costs to execute similar leases, including leasing commissions, legal fees, and tenant improvements as well as an estimate of the likelihood of renewal as determined by management on a tenant-by-tenant basis.
We amortize the value of in-place leases, in-place tenant improvements, and in-place leasing commissions to expense over the initial term of the respective leases. In no event does the amortization period for intangible assets or liabilities exceed the remaining depreciable life of the building. Should a tenant terminate its lease, the unamortized portion of the acquired lease intangibles related to that tenant would be charged to expense.
Real Estate Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations
We classify properties as held for sale when certain criteria are met, in accordance with GAAP. At that time, we present the assets and obligations of the property held for sale separately in our consolidated balance sheet and we cease recording depreciation and amortization expense related to that property. Properties held for sale are reported at the lower of their carrying amount or their estimated fair value, less estimated costs to sell. We did not have any properties classified as held for sale at December 31, 2016 or 2015.
Effective as of April 1, 2014, we early adopted the revised guidance in Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-08 regarding discontinued operations. For sales of real estate or assets classified as held for sale after April 1, 2014, we evaluate whether a disposal transaction meets the criteria of a strategic shift and will have a major effect on our operations and financial results to determine if the results of operations and gains on sale of real estate will be presented as part of our continuing operations or as discontinued operations in our consolidated statements of operations. If the disposal represents a strategic shift, it will be classified as discontinued operations for all periods presented; if not, it will be presented in continuing operations.
Investment in Unconsolidated Joint Venture
We provide funding to third party developers for the acquisition, development, and construction of real estate (“ADC Arrangement”). Under an ADC Arrangement, we may participate in the residual profits of the project through the sale or refinancing of the property. We evaluate this arrangement to determine if it has characteristics similar to a loan or if the characteristics are more similar to a joint venture or partnership such as participating in the risks and rewards of the project as an owner or an investment partner. When we determine that the characteristics are more similar to a jointly-owned investment or partnership, we account for the arrangement as an investment in an unconsolidated joint venture under the equity method of accounting or a direct investment (consolidated basis of accounting) instead of applying loan accounting. The ADC Arrangement is reassessed at each reporting period.
59
Investment Impairment
For all of our real estate and real estate-related investments, we monitor events and changes in circumstances indicating that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets may not be recoverable. Examples of the types of events and circumstances that would cause management to assess our assets for potential impairment include, but are not limited to: a significant decrease in the market price of an asset; a significant adverse change in the manner in which the asset is being used; an accumulation of costs in excess of the acquisition basis plus construction of the property; major vacancies and the resulting loss of revenues; natural disasters; a change in the projected holding period; legitimate purchase offers; and changes in the global and local markets or economic conditions. To the extent that our portfolio is concentrated in limited geographic locations, downturns specifically related to such regions may result in tenants defaulting on their lease obligations at those properties within a short time period, which may result in asset impairments. When such events or changes in circumstances are present, we assess potential impairment by comparing estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows expected to be generated over the life of the asset and from its eventual disposition to the carrying amount of the asset. These projected cash flows are prepared internally by the Advisor and reflect in-place and projected leasing activity, market revenue and expense growth rates, market capitalization rates, discount rates, and changes in economic and other relevant conditions. The Company’s Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer review these projected cash flows to assure that the valuation is prepared using reasonable inputs and assumptions that are consistent with market data or with assumptions that would be used by a third-party market participant and assume the highest and best use of the investment. We consider trends, strategic decisions regarding future development plans, and other factors in our assessment of whether impairment conditions exist. In the event that the carrying amount exceeds the estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows, we recognize an impairment loss to adjust the carrying amount of the asset to estimated fair value. While we believe our estimates of future cash flows are reasonable, different assumptions regarding factors such as market rents, economic conditions, and occupancy rates could significantly affect these estimates.
In evaluating our investments for impairment, management may use appraisals and make estimates and assumptions, including, but not limited to, the projected date of disposition of the properties, the estimated future cash flows of the properties during our ownership, and the projected sales price of each of the properties. A future change in these estimates and assumptions could result in understating or overstating the carrying value of our investments, which could be material to our financial statements. In addition, we may incur impairment charges on assets classified as held for sale in the future if the carrying amount of the asset upon classification as held for sale exceeds the estimated fair value, less costs to sell.
We also evaluate our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures at each reporting date. If we believe there is an other than temporary decline in market value, we will record an impairment charge based on these evaluations. We assess potential impairment by comparing our portion of estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows expected to be generated by the joint venture over the life of the joint venture’s assets to the carrying amount of the joint venture. In the event that the carrying amount exceeds our portion of estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows, we recognize an impairment loss to adjust the carrying amount of the joint venture to its estimated fair value.
During 2015, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million on our investment in 22 Exchange, a student housing property, due to the local market decline in Akron, Ohio. In estimating the fair value of 22 Exchange, we used management’s internal discounted cash flow analysis prepared with consideration of the local market. There were no impairment charges recorded during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2014.
We believe the carrying value of our operating real estate assets and our investment in an unconsolidated joint venture is currently recoverable. However, if market conditions worsen unexpectedly or if changes in our strategy significantly affect any key assumptions used in our fair value calculations, we may need to take charges in future periods for impairments related to our existing investments. Any such non-cash charges would have an adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and results of operations.
New Accounting Pronouncements
New Accounting Pronouncements to be Adopted
In May 2014, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2014-09”) to ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. ASU 2014-09 outlines a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and supersedes most of the existing revenue recognition guidance. The new guidance will require companies to apply a five-step model in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers, as well as enhance disclosures regarding revenue recognition. Lease contracts will be excluded from this revenue recognition criteria; however, the sale of real estate will be required to follow the new model. ASU 2014-09 is effective for public companies for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. In addition, early adoption will be permitted beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within those annual periods. Either full retrospective adoption or modified
60
retrospective adoption is permitted. We do not expect that the adoption of this pronouncement will have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements; however, we will continue to evaluate this assessment until the guidance becomes effective.
During the quarter ended June 30, 2016, the FASB issued subsequent updates to ASU 2014-09. In April 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-10”) to ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing. In May 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-12”) to ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Narrow-Scope Improvement and Practical Expedients. The amendments in these updates did not change the core principle of the guidance in Topic 606; rather, they added improvements to reduce the diversity in practice at initial application and the cost and complexity of applying Topic 606 both at transition and an ongoing basis. The areas affected include: assessing the collectability criteria; presentation of sales taxes and other similar taxes collected from customers; noncash consideration; contract modification and completed contracts at transition; and technical correction as it relates to retrospective application and disclosure. The new guidance is effective January 1, 2018, with early adoption permitted beginning January 1, 2017, and allows full or modified retrospective application. We do not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-10 and ASU 2016-12 to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements; however, we will continue to evaluate this assessment until the guidance becomes effective.
In February 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-02”) to ASC Topic 842, Leases. ASU 2016-02 supersedes the existing lease accounting model, and modifies both lessee and lessor accounting. The new guidance will require lessees to recognize a liability to make lease payments and a right-of-use asset, initially measured at the present value of lease payments, for both operating and financing leases. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, lessees will be permitted to make an accounting policy election by class of underlying asset to not recognize lease liabilities and lease assets. Under this new pronouncement, lessor accounting will be largely unchanged from existing GAAP. The new standard will be effective January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We do not expect that the adoption of this pronouncement will have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements; however, we will continue to evaluate this assessment until the guidance becomes effective.
In June 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-13”) to ASC Topic 326, Credit Losses. This amended guidance requires measurement and recognition of expected credit losses for financial assets held at the reporting date based on historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. This is different from the current guidance as this will require immediate recognition of estimated credit losses expected to occur over the remaining life of many financial assets. Financial assets that are measured at amortized cost will be required to be presented at the net amount expected to be collected with an allowance for credit losses deducted from the amortized cost basis. Generally, the pronouncement requires a modified retrospective method of adoption. This guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial statements when adopted.
In January 2017, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2017-01”) to ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations, Clarifying the Definition of a Business. The guidance clarifies the definition of a business and assists in the evaluation of whether a transaction will be accounted for as an acquisition of an asset or as a business combination. The guidance provides a test to determine when a set of assets and activities acquired is not a business. When substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets, the set is not a business. Under the updated guidance, an acquisition of a single property will likely be treated as an asset acquisition as opposed to a business combination and associated transaction costs will be capitalized rather than expensed as incurred. Additionally, assets acquired, liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest will be measured at their relative fair values. This guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted, including for interim or annual periods for which financial statements have not yet been issued. Upon adoption of this guidance, we anticipate future acquisitions of real estate assets, if any, will likely qualify as an asset acquisition. Therefore, any future transactions costs associated with an asset acquisition will be capitalized and accounted for in accordance with the guidance in ASU 2017-01.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In August 2014, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2014-15”) to ASC Topic 205, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. ASU 2014-15 requires management’s assessment of a company’s ability to continue as a going concern and provide related footnote disclosures when conditions give rise to substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the financial statement issuance date. ASU 2014-15 applies to all companies and is effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and all annual and interim periods thereafter. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on our disclosures.
61
In August 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-15”) to ASC Topic 230, Statement of Cash Flows, Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments. The objective of this amendment is to reduce the diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statements of cash flows. Of the eight types of cash flows discussed in the new standard, the classification of debt prepayment, distributions received from equity method investees, and debt extinguishment costs as financing outflows may impact the Company. ASU 2016-15 is effective for public companies for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. The amendment in the update should be applied using the retrospective transition method for each period presented. We adopted this guidance on December 31, 2016 and the adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements or disclosures.
In November 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-18”) to ASC Topic 230, Statement of Cash Flows, Restricted Cash. This new guidance requires amounts that are generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents to be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-18 is effective for public companies for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted and the pronouncement requires a retrospective transition method of adoption. We early adopted this guidance on December 31, 2016 and included amounts generally described as restricted cash within the beginning-of-period, change, and end-of-period total amounts on the statement of cash flows rather than within an activity on the statement of cash flows. This adoption changes our statements of cash flows and related disclosure for all period presented.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk
As of December 31, 2016, we maintained approximately $3.6 million in Euro-denominated accounts, which are composed primarily of the remaining proceeds from the 2015 sales of AJS and Holstenplatz.
Interest Rate Risk
We may be exposed to interest rate changes primarily as a result of long-term debt used to acquire properties and make loans and other permitted investments. Our management’s objectives, with regard to interest rate risks, are to limit the impact of interest rate changes on earnings and cash flows and to lower overall borrowing costs. To achieve these objectives, we will borrow primarily at fixed rates or variable rates with the lowest margins available and in some cases, with the ability to convert variable rates to fixed rates. With regard to variable rate financing, we will assess interest rate cash flow risk by continually identifying and monitoring changes in interest rate exposures that may adversely impact expected future cash flows and by evaluating hedging opportunities. We may enter into derivative financial instruments such as options, forwards, interest rate swaps, caps, or floors to mitigate our interest rate risk on a related financial instrument or to effectively lock the interest rate portion of our variable rate debt. Of our $142.3 million in notes payable at December 31, 2016, $38 million represented debt subject to variable interest rates. If our variable interest rates increased 100 basis points, we estimate that total annual interest cost, including interest expensed and interest capitalized, would increase by $0.4 million.
Our interest rate cap, which is classified as an asset, had a nominal fair value within prepaid expenses and other assets at December 31, 2016. A 100 basis point decrease or increase in interest rates would not result in a change in the fair value of our remaining interest rate cap.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
The information required by this Item 8 is included in our Consolidated Financial Statements beginning on page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
None.
62
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As required by Rule 13a-15(b) and Rule 15d-15(b) under the Exchange Act, our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, evaluated, as of December 31, 2016, the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e) and Rule 15d-15(e). Based on that evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective, as of December 31, 2016, to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in this report is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified by the rules and forms of the Exchange Act and is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.
We believe, however, that a controls system, no matter how well designed and operated, cannot provide absolute assurance that the objectives of the controls system are met, and no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud or error, if any, within a company have been detected.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)). Our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, evaluated, as of December 31, 2016, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting using the criteria established in Internal Control—New Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on that evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that our internal controls, as of December 31, 2016, were effective.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There has been no change in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2016 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other Information.
None.
63
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
Directors
Because our directors take a critical role in guiding our strategic direction and overseeing our management, they must demonstrate broad-based business and professional skills and experiences, concern for the long-term interests of our stockholders, and personal integrity and judgment. In addition, our directors must have time available to devote to board activities and to enhance their knowledge of our industry. As described further below, we believe our directors have the appropriate mix of experiences, qualifications, attributes, and skills required of our board members in the context of the current needs of our company.
Robert S. Aisner, 70, has served as one of our directors since inception, and as Chairman of the Board since February 2013. Mr. Aisner served as our Principal Executive Officer from January 2015 through March 2015, our Chief Executive Officer from June 2008 through January 2012, as our President from our inception in January 2007 through January 2012, and as Vice Chairman of the Board from January 2012 through February 2013 when he was appointed as Chairman of the Board. From July 2005 through June 2008, Mr. Aisner served as our Chief Operating Officer. In addition, Mr. Aisner serves as a director of Monogram Residential Trust, Inc. (formerly Behringer Harvard Multifamily REIT I, Inc.), a New York Stock Exchange-listed REIT (MORE-NYSE), and served as a director of TIER REIT, Inc. (formerly, Behringer Harvard REIT I, Inc.) from 2003 through February 23, 2016. Furthermore, Mr. Aisner serves as a Class II Director of Priority Senior Secured Income Fund, Inc., a closed-end management investment company jointly advised by Behringer and Prospect Capital Management, LLC. Mr. Aisner served as Chief Executive Officer and President of our sponsor Behringer from September 2011 through October 2016.
Mr. Aisner has over 40 years of commercial real estate experience with acquiring, managing and disposing of properties located in the United States and other countries, including Germany, the Netherlands, England, the Bahamas, and Australia. In addition to Mr. Aisner’s commercial real estate experience, as an officer and director of Behringer-sponsored programs and their advisors, Mr. Aisner has overseen the acquisition, structuring, and management of various types of real estate-related loans, including mortgages and mezzanine loans. From 1996 until joining Behringer in 2003, Mr. Aisner served as: (i) Executive Vice President of AMLI Residential Properties Trust, formerly a New York Stock Exchange-listed REIT that focused on the development, acquisition and management of upscale apartment communities and an advisor and asset manager for institutional investors with respect to their multifamily real estate investment activities; (ii) President of AMLI Management Company, which oversaw all of AMLI’s apartment operations in 80 communities; (iii) President of the AMLI Corporate Homes division that managed AMLI’s corporate housing properties; (iv) Vice President of AMLI Residential Construction, a division of AMLI that performed real estate construction services; and (v) Vice President of AMLI Institutional Advisors, the AMLI division that served as institutional advisor and asset manager for institutional investors with respect to their multifamily real estate activities. Mr. Aisner also served on AMLI’s Executive Committee and Investment Committee. From 1994 until 1996, Mr. Aisner owned and operated Regents Management, Inc., which had both a multifamily development and construction group and a general commercial property management group. Mr. Aisner is a member of the Board of Directors of the Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate (AFIRE), the Board of Directors of the National Multi-Housing Council (NMHC), the Urban Land Institute (ULI) and the Pension Real Estate Association (PREA). From 1984 to 1994, Mr. Aisner served as Vice President of HRW Resources, Inc., a real estate development and management company. Mr. Aisner received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Colby College and a Masters of Business Administration degree from the University of New Hampshire.
Our board of directors has concluded that Mr. Aisner is qualified to serve as one of our directors for reasons including his more than 40 years of commercial real estate experience. This experience allows him to offer valuable insight and advice with respect to our investments and investment strategies. In addition, with prior experience as an executive officer of a New York Stock Exchange-listed REIT, Mr. Aisner is able to direct the board of directors to the critical issues facing our company. Further, as a director of Monogram Residential Trust, Inc., and a former director of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT I, Inc. and TIER REIT, Inc., he has an understanding of the requirements of serving on a public company board.
Andreas K. Bremer, 60, has served as one of our independent directors since November 2007. Mr. Bremer currently serves as Executive Vice President of International Capital, LLC, a position he has held since 2005. Mr. Bremer joined International Capital as its Chief Financial Officer in October 2002. International Capital specializes in acquisition, disposition, management and administration of commercial investment properties, and Mr. Bremer is responsible for all financial aspects of the company’s operations. Before joining International Capital, Mr. Bremer was the Chief Financial Officer of ATLASwerks®, a leading communication software company in Dallas. He acted as a corporate finance consultant for two years at McKinsey & Co. in both the Dallas and New York offices and served as Vice President of Finance and Treasurer at Paging Network, Inc. Mr. Bremer started his career at COMMERZBANK AG in Germany and spent seven of his
64
13-year tenure at the company’s New York and Atlanta offices. Mr. Bremer has over 25 years of financial and general management experience with extensive knowledge of corporate finance and commercial lending both in the United States and other countries, particularly Germany and holds a degree as CCIM. Mr. Bremer has served as Chairman of the German International School in Dallas since 2009. He was the Director of the Texas Warburg Chapter of the American Council on Germany in Dallas and, as Knight of Justice, is a member of the Order of St. John. Mr. Bremer received a law degree from the Johannes-Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany.
Our board of directors has concluded that Mr. Bremer is qualified to serve as one of our directors for reasons including his more than 25 years of financial and general management experience, including international corporate finance and commercial lending. Mr. Bremer has served in various financial management positions and has significant experience in acquisition, disposition, management, and administration of commercial real estate investments. In addition, Mr. Bremer’s international background brings a unique perspective to our board.
Michael D. Cohen, 42, has served as one of our directors since February 2013. Mr. Cohen also serves as a director of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT I Inc., a director of Monogram Residential Trust, Inc., a New York Stock Exchange-listed REIT (MORE-NYSE), as President of Vertical Capital Income Fund (VCAPX), a closed-end interval mutual fund, as President of Behringer and as Executive Vice President of our Behringer Advisor. Mr. Cohen also works closely with Behringer Securities to develop institutional investments and manage relationships with the company’s institutional investors. Mr. Cohen joined Behringer in 2005 from Crow Holdings, the investment office of the Trammell Crow family, where he concentrated on the acquisition and management of the firm’s office, retail, and hospitality assets. Mr. Cohen began his career in 1997 at Harvard Property Trust and Behringer Partners, predecessor companies to Behringer. He received a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from the University of the Pacific in Stockton, California, and a Master of Business Administration degree from Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, Texas. He is a member of the Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate.
Our board of directors has concluded that Mr. Cohen is qualified to serve as one of our directors for reasons including his significant experience in commercial real estate, which allows him to provide valuable investment advice.
Diane S. Detering-Paddison, 57, has served as one of our independent directors since June 2009. Ms. Detering-Paddison serves as President of 4word, www.4wordwomen.org, a not-for-profit organization she founded that connects, leads and supports professional Christian women and enables them to reach their potential. From February 2010 until June 2014, Ms. Detering-Paddison served as Chief Strategy Officer of Cassidy Turley, one of the nation’s largest commercial real estate service providers. Prior to joining Cassidy Turley, Ms. Detering-Paddison served as the Chief Operating Officer of ProLogis, an owner, manager, and developer of distribution facilities, from June 2008 until January 2009. Prior to that, Ms. Detering-Paddison was with CB Richard Ellis and Trammell Crow Company for over 20 years. During her time there, she served as Senior Vice President, Corporate and Investor Client Accounts from April 2001 until December 2004, Chief Operating Officer, Global Services from January 2005 until December 2006, and President, Global Corporate Services - Client Accounts from December 2006 until May 2008. Ms. Detering-Paddison was part of a ten member executive team that managed the merger between Trammell Crow Company and CB Richard Ellis in December 2006. Ms. Detering-Paddison serves on the Salvation Army national advisory board. Ms. Detering-Paddison is the author of “Work, Love, Pray.” Ms. Detering-Paddison holds a Master of Business Administration degree from the Harvard Graduate School of Business and a Bachelor of Science degree from Oregon State University where she graduated as Valedictorian.
Our board of directors has concluded that Ms. Detering-Paddison is qualified to serve as one of our directors for reasons including her more than 20 years of management experience with large commercial real estate companies, including Trammell Crow Company, CB Richard Ellis, ProLogis, and Cassidy Turley. With her background, Ms. Detering-Paddison brings substantial insight and experience with respect to the commercial real estate industry.
Alan Liu, 33, has served as one of our directors since February 2017. Mr. Liu is currently a Senior Vice President and the Head of Alternative Investments at Lightstone. Mr. Liu is responsible for overseeing the development and execution of investment strategies to enhance Lightstone’s profitability and investment returns. Prior to joining Lightstone in April 2016, Mr. Liu was a Managing Director at Mount Kellett Capital Management LP (“Mount Kellett”), a multi-strategy private investment firm focused on global value, special situations and opportunistic investing with $5 billion of assets under management. He was with Mount Kellett from November 2011 to August 2015 and thereafter joined Fortress Investment Group LLC (“Fortress”), a global investment manager with $70.1 billion of assets under management, as Managing Director until March 2016 as part of a strategic transaction between Mount Kellett and Fortress. Prior to Mount Kellett, Mr. Liu was a member of the investment team at Strategic Value Partners LLC, a global alternative investment firm focused on distressed and deep value opportunities with assets of approximately $4.9 billion, from October 2007 to October 2011. Mr. Liu began his career with Tri-Artisan Capital Partners, LLC. Mr. Liu received a Bachelor’s Degree in Honors Business Administration and a Bachelor’s Degree in Economics from the Richard Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario. He is a member of the Urban Land Institute and mentor in the organization’s mentorship program.
65
Our board of directors has concluded that Mr. Liu is qualified to serve as one of our directors for reasons including his experience in commercial real estate and background at Lightstone which allows him to provide valuable investment advice to us.
Jeffrey P. Mayer, 60, has served as one of our independent directors since November 2007 and is chairman of our audit committee. Mr. Mayer is currently a consultant serving the real estate industry. He also is the owner of Mayer Financial Consulting, LLC and is the firm’s sole employee. This firm was started in 2011 to provide consulting services to individuals and businesses primarily dealing with financial investments and real estate. From 2000 until 2007, Mr. Mayer was the Chief Financial Officer of ClubCorp, Inc., a holding company that owns and operates premier golf and business clubs and destination golf resorts. He previously served as Chief Financial Officer of Bristol Hotels & Resorts in Dallas, a position he held from 1996 until the company’s acquisition by Bass PLC in early 2000. Prior to joining Bristol, he was Corporate Controller at Host Marriott Corporation (formerly Marriott Corporation) and, prior to that, held various senior financial positions at Marriott Corporation. Mr. Mayer is a member of the National Association of Corporate Directors. He also serves as treasurer and board member of the Georgia Chapter of The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. He was a board member of the Dallas Children’s Advocacy Center and chairman of its audit committee. A graduate of the College of William & Mary, he began his career as an accountant with Arthur Andersen LLP.
Our board of directors has concluded that Mr. Mayer is qualified to serve as one of our directors and as Chairman of our Audit Committee for reasons including his more than 30 years of accounting and finance experience in the commercial real estate industry. In particular, Mr. Mayer has served as Chief Financial Officer for two commercial real estate companies and has significant management experience relating to preparing and reviewing financial statements and coordinating with external auditors. Mr. Mayer continues to provide consulting services to the commercial real estate industry and is in tune with current industry trends and issues.
Cynthia Pharr Lee, 68, has served as one of our independent directors since November 2007. Ms. Lee has served as President of C. Pharr & Company, a marketing communications consulting firm since 1993, providing strategic brand, marketing and public relations services to many real estate, construction and design firms, in addition to other corporate clients. From 1994 through February 2014, Ms. Lee served as a member of the board of directors of CEC Entertainment, Inc. (CEC-NYSE) and its audit and compensation committees. A co-founder of Texas Women Ventures Fund, Ms. Lee serves on the Fund’s Investment Advisory Committee. Ms. Lee is a former president of Executive Women of Dallas and former national chairman of the Counselor’s Academy of the Public Relations Society of America. From May 1989 through February 1993, Ms. Lee was President and Chief Executive Officer of Tracy Locke/Pharr Public Relations, a division of Omnicom (NYSE). She received her Bachelor of Science degree in English (summa cum laude) and her Master of Arts degree in English from Mississippi State University.
Our board of directors has concluded that Ms. Lee is qualified to serve as one of our directors for reasons including her more than 20 years of management experience in the public relations and marketing communications industry, with significant experience working with commercial real estate and construction firms. Ms. Lee has also served on the board of directors and audit committee of a New York Stock Exchange listed company, which allows her to provide valuable knowledge and insight into management issues. In addition, Ms. Lee’s background complements that of our other board members and brings a unique perspective to our board.
Executive Officers
In addition, the following individuals serve as our executive officers:
Thomas P. Kennedy, 59, has served as the Company’s President since April 2015. Mr. Kennedy also serves as President of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT I, Inc. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Kennedy served as Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of UrbanAmerica Advisors, LLC, a registered investment advisor that focuses on renewing and redeveloping neglected metropolitan districts across the United States (“UAA”) since March 2008. From March 2006 through March 2008, Mr. Kennedy served as a Manager of an investment fund managed by TriLyn Investment Management, LLC, a privately held investment management firm. From January 2004 through February 2006, Mr. Kennedy served as a Managing Director of The Greenwich Group International, LLC, a real estate investment banking company. Mr. Kennedy began his career in 1982 at Equitable Real Estate Management, Inc. (a predecessor of Lend Lease Real Estate Advisors—US) as an accountant and rose to become Principal Managing Director and a member the management committee of Lend Lease Real Estate Advisors—US, a position he held through February 2003. Mr. Kennedy holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting from Manhattan College.
S. Jason Hall, 50, was elected our Chief Financial Officer in October 2014. Mr. Hall also serves as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, positions he has held since September 2013 and as Treasurer, a position he has held since January 2012. From 2010 to 2012, Mr. Hall also served as the Company’s Senior Controller and Director of
66
Financial Reporting. He also serves in similar positions for other Behringer Harvard-sponsored programs and as Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer of Vertical Capital Income Fund (VCAPX), a closed-end interval mutual fund. He began his tenure with the Company in January 2005 as an SEC Reporting Manager. Prior to joining Behringer, from 2000 to 2004, Mr. Hall served in various accounting positions including two years as Corporate Controller for Aegis Communications Group, Inc. At that time, Aegis Communications was publicly traded on the NASDAQ exchange and was the seventh-largest provider of outsourced customer care services in the United States. From 1991 to 2000, Mr. Hall was Corporate Controller of a private distribution company for five years and also spent three years in public accounting. Mr. Hall holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in Finance from Angelo State University and a Master of Business Administration degree in Accounting from Tarleton State University. Mr. Hall is a Certified Public Accountant in the State of Texas.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires each director, officer, and individual beneficially owning more than 10% of a registered security of the Company to file with the SEC, within specified time frames, initial statements of beneficial ownership (Form 3) and statements of changes in beneficial ownership (Forms 4 and 5) of common stock of the Company. These specified time frames require the reporting of changes in ownership within two business days of the transaction giving rise to the reporting obligation. Reporting persons are required to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) forms filed with the SEC. Based solely on a review of the copies of such forms furnished to the Company during and with respect to the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016 or written representations that no additional forms were required, to the best of our knowledge, all required Section 16(a) filings were timely and correctly made by reporting persons during 2016.
Code of Ethics
Our board of directors has adopted a Code of Business Conduct Policy that is applicable to all members of our board of directors, our executive officers and employees of our Advisor and its affiliates. We have posted the policy on the website maintained for us at www.behringerinvestments.com. If, in the future, we amend, modify or waive a provision in the Code of Business Conduct Policy, we may, rather than filing a Current Report on Form 8-K, satisfy the disclosure requirement by promptly posting such information on the website maintained for us as necessary.
Audit Committee Financial Expert
The Audit Committee consists of independent directors Jeffrey P. Mayer, the chairman, Andreas K. Bremer, Diane S. Detering-Paddison, and Cynthia Pharr Lee. Our board of directors has determined that Mr. Mayer is an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined by the rules of the SEC. The biography of Mr. Mayer, including his relevant qualifications, is previously described in this Item 10.
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
Executive Compensation
We do not directly compensate our named executive officers, nor do we reimburse our external advisor for compensation paid to our named executive officers, for services rendered to us. We pay certain management fees to our external advisor to compensate the external advisor for the services it provides in our day-to-day management. In addition, we reimburse certain expenses of the external advisor, including reimbursement for the costs of salaries and benefits of certain of their employees.
Reimbursement for the costs of salaries and benefits of our external advisor’s employees relate to compensation paid to our external advisor’s employees that provide services to us such as accounting, administrative or legal, for which our external advisor or its affiliates are not entitled to compensation in the form of a separate fee. A description of the fees that we pay to our external advisor and other affiliates is found in Item 13 below. Therefore, we do not have, nor has our board of directors or compensation committee considered, a compensation policy or program for our executive officers, and thus we have not included a Compensation Discussion and Analysis in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Directors’ Compensation
We pay each of our independent directors an annual retainer of $25,000. In addition, we pay the chairperson of the Audit Committee an annual retainer of $10,000 and the chairpersons of our Nominating and Compensation Committees annual retainers of $5,000 each. These retainers are payable quarterly in arrears. In addition, we pay each non-employee director (a) $1,000 for each board of directors or committee meeting attended in person, (b) $500 for each board of directors or committee meeting attended by telephone, and (c) $500 for each written consent considered by the director.
67
All directors receive reimbursement of reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attendance at meetings of our board of directors. If a director is also an affiliate director, we do not pay compensation for services rendered as a director.
Director Compensation Table
The following table sets forth certain information with respect to our director compensation during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016:
Name | Fees Earned(1) | |||
Robert S. Aisner | $ | — | ||
Michael D. Cohen | $ | — | ||
Andreas K. Bremer | $ | 54,000 | ||
Diane S. Detering-Paddison | $ | 43,000 | ||
Alan Liu(2) | $ | — | ||
Jeffrey P. Mayer | $ | 53,500 | ||
Cynthia Pharr Lee | $ | 49,500 | ||
_______________________________________________________________________________
(1) | Includes fees earned for services rendered in 2016, regardless of when paid. |
(2) | Alan Liu was appointed to our board of directors on February 10, 2017. |
Incentive Award Plan
Our 2007 Amended and Restated Incentive Award Plan (the “Incentive Award Plan”) was approved by the board of directors and stockholders on December 19, 2007. The Incentive Award Plan is administered by our Compensation Committee and provides for equity awards to our employees, directors and consultants and those of our Advisor and its affiliates. The Incentive Award Plan authorizes the grant of non-qualified and incentive stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights, dividend equivalents, and other stock-based awards. A total of 10,000,000 shares have been authorized and reserved for issuance under our Incentive Award Plan. No awards have been issued under the Incentive Award Plan, and we currently have no plans to issue any awards under the Incentive Award Plan.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
No member of our compensation committee served as an officer or employee of the Company or any of our subsidiaries during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016 or formerly served as an officer of the Company or any of our subsidiaries. In addition, during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, none of our executive officers served as a director or member of a compensation committee (or other board committee performing equivalent functions or, in the absence of any such committee, the entire board of directors) of any entity that has one or more executive officers or directors serving as a member of our board of directors or compensation committee.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides information regarding our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2016:
Plan Category | Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights | Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights | Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans | ||||||
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders | — | — | 10,000,000* | ||||||
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | — | — | — | ||||||
Total | — | — | 10,000,000* | ||||||
________________________
* All shares authorized for issuance pursuant to awards not yet granted under the Incentive Award Plan.
68
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
The following table sets forth information as of February 28, 2017 regarding the beneficial ownership of our common stock by each person known by us to own 5% or more of the outstanding shares of common stock, each of our directors, each of our executive officers, and our directors and executive officers as a group:
Name of Beneficial Owner | Amount and Nature of Beneficial Ownership(1) | Percentage of Class | |||
Robert S. Aisner(2) | — | — | |||
Andreas K. Bremer(2) | — | — | |||
Michael D. Cohen(2)(3) | 2,762 | * | |||
Diane S. Detering-Paddison(2) | — | — | |||
Alan Liu(2) | — | — | |||
Jeffrey P. Mayer(2) | — | — | |||
Cynthia Pharr Lee(2) | — | — | |||
Thomas P. Kennedy(2) | — | — | |||
S. Jason Hall(2) | — | — | |||
All directors and executive officers as a group (nine persons) | 2,762 | * | |||
________________________
* Represents less than 1%
(1) | Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities and shares issuable pursuant to options, warrants and similar rights held by the respective person or group that may be exercised within 60 days following February 28, 2017. Except as otherwise indicated by footnote, and subject to community property laws where applicable, the persons named in the table above have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common stock shown as beneficially owned by them. |
(2) | The address of Messrs. Aisner, Bremer, Cohen, Liu, Mayer, and Hall, and Mmes. Detering-Paddison and Pharr Lee is c/o Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc., 460 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10022. |
(3) | Includes 2,762 shares owned by a trust for the benefit of Mr. Cohen’s spouse. Mr. Cohen disclaims beneficial ownership of such shares. |
69
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.
Policies and Procedures for Transactions with Related Persons
We do not currently have written formal policies and procedures for the review, approval or ratification of transactions with related persons, as defined by Item 404 of Regulation S-K of the Exchange Act. Under that definition, transactions with related persons are transactions in which we were or are a participant and the amount involved exceeds $120,000 and in which any related person had or will have a direct or indirect material interest. Related parties include any executive officers, directors, director nominees, beneficial owners of more than 5% of our voting securities, immediate family members of any of the foregoing persons, and any firm, corporation or other entity in which any of the foregoing persons is employed and in which such person has 10% or greater beneficial ownership interest.
However, in order to reduce or eliminate certain potential conflicts of interest, our charter contains a number of restrictions relating to (1) transactions we enter into with our Advisor and its affiliates, (2) certain future offerings, and (3) allocation of investment opportunities among affiliated entities. As a general rule, any related party transactions must be approved by a majority of the directors (including a majority of independent directors) not otherwise interested in the transaction. In determining whether to approve or authorize a particular related party transaction, these persons will consider whether the transaction between us and the related party is fair and reasonable to us.
Related Party Transactions
Advisor
Our external advisor and certain of its affiliates may receive fees and compensation in connection with the management and sale of our assets based on an advisory management agreement, as amended and restated.
From January 4, 2008 through February 10, 2017, we were party to successive advisory management agreements, each with a term of one year or less, with the Behringer Advisor. The most recently executed advisory management agreement was the Fifth Amended and Restated Advisory Management Agreement (the “Fifth Advisory Agreement”) entered into on July 25, 2016 and effective as of June 6, 2016. On February 10, 2017, we entered into a Termination of Advisory Management Agreement with the Behringer Advisor and (solely with respect to certain sections) Stratera (the “Advisory Termination Agreement”) pursuant to which the Fifth Advisory Agreement was terminated as of the close of business on February 10, 2017.
Concurrently with our entry into the Advisory Termination Agreement, we engaged the Advisor to provide us with advisory services pursuant to two separate advisory management agreements (collectively, the “Lightstone Advisory Agreement”). With the exception of the Administrative Services Fee, the fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Advisor pursuant to the Lightstone Advisory Agreement are identical to the fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Behringer Advisor pursuant to the Fifth Advisory Agreement. The following discussion describes the fees and expenses payable to our external advisor and its respective affiliates under both the Fifth Advisory Agreement (in effect from June 6, 2016 through February 10, 2017) and the Lightstone Advisory Agreement (in effect as of February 10, 2017).
We pay acquisition and advisory fees of 1.5% of the amount paid in respect of the purchase, development, construction, or improvement of each asset we acquire, including any debt attributable to those assets. In addition, we pay acquisition and advisory fees of 1.5% of the funds advanced in respect of a loan investment. No acquisition and advisory fees were payable to the Behringer Advisor for the year ended December 31, 2016. We incurred acquisition and advisory fees payable to the Behringer Advisor of less than $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 as a result of improvements made to our assets. We had no acquisitions during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We also pay an acquisition expense reimbursement in the amount of (i) 0.25% of the funds paid for purchasing an asset, including any debt attributable to the asset, plus 0.25% of the funds budgeted for development, construction, or improvement in the case of assets that we acquire and intend to develop, construct, or improve or (ii) 0.25% of the funds advanced in respect of a loan investment. We also pay third parties, or reimburse our external advisor or its affiliates, for any investment-related expenses due to third parties in the case of a completed investment, including, but not limited to, legal fees and expenses, travel and communication expenses, costs of appraisals, accounting fees and expenses, third-party brokerage or finder's fees, title insurance, premium expenses, and other closing costs.
Our external advisor and its affiliates are also responsible for paying all of the investment-related expenses that we or our external advisor or its affiliates incur that are due to third parties or related to the additional services provided by our external advisor as described above with respect to investments we do not make, other than certain non-refundable payments made in connection with any acquisition. For the year ended December 31, 2016, we incurred no acquisition expense reimbursements. For the year ended December 31, 2015, we incurred less than $0.1 million in acquisition expense reimbursements payable to the Behringer Advisor.
70
We pay a debt financing fee of 0.5% of the amount available under any loan or line of credit made available to us and pay directly all third-party costs associated with obtaining the debt financing. We incurred no debt financing fees for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We pay a development fee in an amount that is usual and customary for comparable services rendered to similar projects in the geographic market of the project if such affiliate provides the development services and if a majority of our independent directors determines that such development fee is fair and reasonable to us. We incurred no such fees for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We pay a monthly asset management fee of one-twelfth of 0.7% of the value of each asset. The value of our assets will be the value as determined in connection with the establishment and publication of an estimated value per share unless the asset was acquired after our publication of an estimated value per share (in which case the value of the asset will be the contract purchase price of the asset). For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, we expensed $2.1 million and $2.5 million, respectively, of asset management fees payable to the Behringer Advisor. The totals for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 include asset management fees related to our disposed properties.
Our external advisor is responsible for paying all of the expenses it incurs associated with persons employed by our external advisor to the extent that they provide services related to us for which our external advisor receives an acquisition, asset management, or debt financing fee, including wages and benefits of the personnel. Instead of reimbursing the external advisor for specific expenses paid or incurred in connection with providing services to us, we pay our external advisor an administrative services fee (renamed an administrative services reimbursement under the Lightstone Advisory Agreement) based on a budget of expenses prepared by the Behringer Advisor. The administrative services fee is intended to reimburse for all costs associated with providing services to us. Under the Fifth Advisory Agreement, for the calendar year ending December 31, 2016, the administrative services fee was the lesser of (i) $1.325 million, and (ii) the actual costs of providing administrative services to us under the Fifth Advisory Agreement, payable in four equal quarterly installments within 45 days of the end of each calendar quarter. For the calendar year ending December 31, 2015, the administrative services fee was $1.5 million. For the calendar year ending December 31, 2017, the administrative services fee is $1.325 million annually, pro-rated for the first six months of the year and $1.30 million annually, pro-rated for the second six months of the year. For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, we incurred and expensed such costs for administrative services and due diligence services of approximately $1.2 million and $1.5 million, respectively. Included in that amount is less than $0.1 million related to certain due diligence services provided in connection with asset dispositions during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
Notwithstanding the fees and cost reimbursements payable to our external advisor, under our charter we may not reimburse our external advisor for any amount by which our operating expenses (including the asset management fee) at the end of the four preceding fiscal quarters exceeds the greater of: (i) 2% of our average invested assets, or (ii) 25% of our net income determined without reduction for any additions to reserves for depreciation, bad debts, or other similar non-cash reserves and excluding any gain from the sale of our assets for that period unless a majority of our independent directors determines that such excess expenses are justified based on unusual and non-recurring factors. For the four fiscal quarters ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, our total operating expenses (including the asset management fee) were not excessive.
Property Manager
From January 4, 2008 through February 10, 2017, we were party to a property management and leasing agreement (as amended and restated, the “Behringer Property Management Agreement”) between us, our operating partnership, Behringer Harvard Opportunity Management Services, LLC, and Behringer Harvard Real Estate Services, LLC (collectively, the “Behringer Manager”). On February 10, 2017, we entered into a Termination of Property Management and Leasing Agreement with the Behringer Manager and (solely with respect to certain sections) Stratera (the “Property Management Termination Agreement”) pursuant to which the Behringer Property Management Agreement was terminated as of the close of business on February 10, 2017.
Concurrently with our entry into the Property Management Termination Agreement, we engaged LSG-BH II Property Manager LLC (the “Lightstone Manager”) pursuant to a property management and leasing agreement (the “Lightstone Property Management Agreement”). The fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Lightstone Manager pursuant to the Lightstone Property Management Agreement are identical to the fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Behringer Manager Advisor pursuant to the Behringer Property Management Agreement. The following discussion describes the fees and expenses payable to our affiliated property manager and its respective affiliates under both the Behringer Property Management Agreement (in effect from August 13, 2008 through February 10, 2017) and the Lightstone Property Management Agreement (in effect as of February 10, 2017).
71
We pay our property manager and affiliate of our external advisor for the management, leasing, and construction supervision of our properties which is 4.0% of gross revenues of the properties managed by our property manager. We pay our property manager an oversight fee equal to 0.5% of the gross revenues of the property managed for any property for which we contract directly with a third-party property manager. In no event will our property manager receive both a property management fee and an oversight fee with respect to any particular property. In the event we own a property through a joint venture that does not pay our property manager directly for its services, we will pay our property manager a management fee or oversight fee, as applicable, based only on our economic interest in the property. We incurred and expensed property management fees or oversight fees to the Behringer Property Manager of approximately $0.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We pay our property manager a construction management fee in an amount not to exceed 5% of all hard construction costs incurred in connection with, but not limited to capital repairs and improvements, major building reconstruction and tenant improvements, if such affiliate supervises construction performed by or on behalf of us or our affiliates. We incurred no construction management fees for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We are dependent on our external advisor and our property manager for certain services that are essential to us, including asset disposition decisions, property management and leasing services, and other general administrative responsibilities. In the event that these companies were unable to provide us with their respective services, we would be required to obtain such services from other sources.
Independence
Although our shares are not listed for trading on any national securities exchange and therefore our board of directors is not subject to the independence requirements of the NYSE or any other national securities exchange, our board has evaluated whether our directors are “independent” as defined by the NYSE. The NYSE standards provide that to qualify as an independent director, in addition to satisfying certain bright-line criteria, the board of directors must affirmatively determine that a director has no material relationship with us (either directly or as a partner, stockholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with us).
Consistent with these considerations, after review of all relevant transactions or relationships between each director, or any of his or her family members, and the Company, our senior management and our independent registered public accounting firm, the board has determined that the majority of the members of our board, and each member of our audit committee, compensation committee and nominating committee, is “independent” as defined by the NYSE.
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services.
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Deloitte & Touche LLP has served as our independent registered public accounting firm since January 2007. Our management believes that it is knowledgeable about our operations and accounting practices and well qualified to act as our independent registered public accounting firm.
Audit and Non-Audit Fees
The following table presents fees for professional services rendered by our independent registered public accounting firm, Deloitte & Touche LLP, the member firms of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, and their respective affiliates (collectively, “Deloitte & Touche”) for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):
2016 | 2015 | ||||||
Audit Fees(1) | $ | 541 | $ | 557 | |||
Audit-Related Fees(2) | 6 | 7 | |||||
Tax Fees(3) | 15 | 6 | |||||
All Other Fees | — | — | |||||
Total Fees | $ | 562 | $ | 570 | |||
___________________________
(1) | Audit fees consist principally of fees for the audit of our annual consolidated financial statements and review of our consolidated financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. |
(2) | Audit-related fees consist of professional services performed in connection with our filing on Form 8-K in connection with certain property dispositions. |
(3) | Tax fees consist principally of assistance with matters related to tax compliance, tax planning and tax advice. |
72
Our audit committee considers the provision of these services to be compatible with maintaining the independence of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
Audit Committee’s Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures
Our audit committee must approve any fee for services to be performed by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm in advance of the service being performed. For proposed projects using the services of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm that are expected to cost under $100,000, our audit committee will be provided information to review and must approve each project prior to commencement of any work. For proposed projects using the services of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm that are expected to cost $100,000 and over, our audit committee will be provided with a detailed explanation of what is being included, and asked to approve a maximum amount for specifically identified services in each of the following categories: (1) audit fees; (2) audit-related fees; (3) tax fees; and (4) all other fees for any services allowed to be performed by the independent registered public accounting firm. If additional amounts are needed, our audit committee must approve the increased amounts prior to the previously approved maximum being reached and before the work may continue. Approval by our audit committee may be made at its regularly scheduled meetings or otherwise, including by telephonic or other electronic communications. The Company will report the status of the various types of approved services and fees, and cumulative amounts paid and owed, to our audit committee on a regular basis. Our audit committee has considered the independent registered public accounting firm’s non-audit services provided to the Company and has determined that such services are compatible with maintaining its independence.
Our audit committee approved all of the services provided by, and fees paid to, Deloitte & Touche LLP during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
73
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.
(a) | List of Documents Filed. |
1. | Financial Statements |
The list of the financial statements filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is set forth on page F-1 herein.
2. | Financial Statement Schedules |
Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves
Schedule III—Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
3. | Exhibits |
The list of exhibits filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is submitted in the Exhibit Index following the financial statements in response to Item 601 of Regulation S-K.
(b) | Exhibits. |
The exhibits filed in response to Item 601 of Regulation S-K are listed in the Exhibit Index attached hereto.
(c) | Financial Statement Schedules. |
All financial statement schedules, except for Schedules II, and III (see (a) 2. above), have been omitted because the required information of such schedules is not present, is not present in amounts sufficient to require a schedule, or is included in the financial statements.
74
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. | |||
Dated: March 16, 2017 | By: | /s/ THOMAS P. KENNEDY | |
Thomas P. Kennedy President Principal Executive Officer | |||
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
March 16, 2017 | /s/ THOMAS P. KENNEDY |
Thomas P. Kennedy President Principal Executive Officer | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ ROBERT S. AISNER |
Robert S. Aisner Chairman of the Board of Directors | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ S. JASON HALL |
S. Jason Hall Chief Financial Officer Principal Financial Officer | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ MICHAEL D. COHEN |
Michael D. Cohen Director | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ ANDREAS K. BREMER |
Andreas K. Bremer Director | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ ALAN LIU |
Alan Liu Director | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ JEFFREY P. MAYER |
Jeffrey P. Mayer Director | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ CYNTHIA PHARR LEE |
Cynthia Pharr Lee Director | |
March 16, 2017 | /s/ DIANE S. DETERING-PADDISON |
Diane S. Detering-Paddison Director | |
75
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page | |
Financial Statements | |
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 | |
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 | |
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 | |
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 | |
Financial Statement Schedules | |
F-1
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Dallas, Texas
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss), equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016. Our audits also included the financial statement schedules listed in the Index at Item 15. These financial statements and financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements and financial statement schedules based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion, such financial statement schedules, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Dallas, Texas
March 16, 2017
F-2
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
As of December 31, 2016 and 2015
(in thousands, except shares)
2016 | 2015 | ||||||
Assets | |||||||
Real estate | |||||||
Land and improvements, net | $ | 42,710 | $ | 51,382 | |||
Buildings and improvements, net | 132,359 | 185,213 | |||||
Real estate under development | — | 176 | |||||
Total real estate | 175,069 | 236,771 | |||||
Cash and cash equivalents | 67,111 | 76,815 | |||||
Restricted cash | 6,101 | 4,581 | |||||
Accounts receivable, net | 1,415 | 2,426 | |||||
Prepaid expenses and other assets | 1,051 | 1,078 | |||||
Investment in unconsolidated joint venture | 14,658 | 14,482 | |||||
Furniture, fixtures and equipment, net | 3,148 | 5,702 | |||||
Lease intangibles, net | 352 | 334 | |||||
Total assets | $ | 268,905 | $ | 342,189 | |||
Liabilities and Equity | |||||||
Notes payable, net | $ | 142,332 | $ | 177,036 | |||
Accounts payable | 491 | 479 | |||||
Payables to related parties | 370 | 433 | |||||
Acquired below-market leases, net | 65 | 80 | |||||
Distributions payable to noncontrolling interest | 21 | 52 | |||||
Distributions payable | — | 38,378 | |||||
Income taxes payable | 38 | 986 | |||||
Deferred gain | 1,247 | — | |||||
Accrued and other liabilities | 5,702 | 8,166 | |||||
Total liabilities | 150,266 | 225,610 | |||||
Commitments and contingencies | — | — | |||||
Equity | |||||||
Preferred stock, $.0001 par value per share; 50,000,000 shares authorized, none outstanding | — | — | |||||
Convertible stock, $.0001 par value per share; 1,000 shares authorized, 1,000 outstanding | — | — | |||||
Common stock, $.0001 par value per share; 350,000,000 shares authorized, 25,218,770 and 25,585,198 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively | 3 | 3 | |||||
Additional paid-in capital | 227,891 | 229,796 | |||||
Accumulated distributions and net loss | (114,666 | ) | (119,609 | ) | |||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (495 | ) | (372 | ) | |||
Total Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. equity | 112,733 | 109,818 | |||||
Noncontrolling interest | 5,906 | 6,761 | |||||
Total equity | 118,639 | 116,579 | |||||
Total liabilities and equity | $ | 268,905 | $ | 342,189 | |||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
F-3
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss)
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |||||||||
Revenues | |||||||||||
Rental revenue | $ | 27,630 | $ | 32,556 | $ | 32,226 | |||||
Hotel revenue | 18,501 | 17,694 | 16,371 | ||||||||
Total revenues | 46,131 | 50,250 | 48,597 | ||||||||
Expenses: | |||||||||||
Property operating expenses | 9,496 | 11,503 | 11,288 | ||||||||
Hotel operating expenses | 13,608 | 12,498 | 11,954 | ||||||||
Interest expense | 6,164 | 6,791 | 7,833 | ||||||||
Real estate taxes | 5,173 | 6,127 | 5,388 | ||||||||
Impairment charge | — | 1,417 | — | ||||||||
Property management fees | 1,512 | 1,650 | 1,642 | ||||||||
Asset management fees | 2,264 | 2,702 | 2,368 | ||||||||
General and administrative | 3,139 | 3,620 | 4,076 | ||||||||
Acquisition expense | — | — | 1,307 | ||||||||
Depreciation and amortization | 11,014 | 14,950 | 14,362 | ||||||||
Total expenses | 52,370 | 61,258 | 60,218 | ||||||||
Interest income, net | 137 | 149 | 224 | ||||||||
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | (500 | ) | (732 | ) | (454 | ) | |||||
Other income (loss) | 122 | (777 | ) | (38 | ) | ||||||
Loss before gain on sale of real estate and income taxes | (6,480 | ) | (12,368 | ) | (11,889 | ) | |||||
Gain on sale of real estate | 11,341 | 22,771 | 11,454 | ||||||||
Income tax benefit (expense) | 47 | (2,726 | ) | 101 | |||||||
Net income (loss) | 4,908 | 7,677 | (334 | ) | |||||||
Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interest | 35 | (699 | ) | 331 | |||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to the Company | $ | 4,943 | $ | 6,978 | $ | (3 | ) | ||||
Weighted average shares outstanding: | |||||||||||
Basic and diluted | 25,418 | 25,688 | 25,943 | ||||||||
Basic and diluted income per share | $ | 0.19 | $ | 0.27 | $ | — | |||||
Comprehensive income (loss): | |||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | 4,908 | $ | 7,677 | $ | (334 | ) | ||||
Other comprehensive loss: | |||||||||||
Reclassification of unrealized loss on interest rate derivatives to net income | — | — | 58 | ||||||||
Reclassification of unrealized loss on currency translation to net income | — | 250 | — | ||||||||
Foreign currency translation loss | (123 | ) | (376 | ) | (791 | ) | |||||
Total other comprehensive loss | (123 | ) | (126 | ) | (733 | ) | |||||
Comprehensive income (loss) | 4,785 | 7,551 | (1,067 | ) | |||||||
Comprehensive (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interest | 35 | (699 | ) | 320 | |||||||
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to common shareholders | $ | 4,820 | $ | 6,852 | $ | (747 | ) | ||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
F-4
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Equity
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(in thousands)
Convertible Stock | Common Stock | Additional Paid-in Capital | Accumulated Distributions and Net (Loss) | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) | Noncontrolling Interest | Total Equity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Number of Shares | Par Value | Number of Shares | Par Value | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at January 1, 2014 | 1 | $ | — | 26,016 | $ | 3 | $ | 232,903 | $ | (49,520 | ) | $ | 498 | $ | 8,905 | $ | 192,789 | ||||||||||||||||
Net loss | (3 | ) | (331 | ) | (334 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Redemption of common stock | (214 | ) | (1,663 | ) | (1,663 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distributions declared on common stock ($0.50 per share) | (12,954 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contributions from noncontrolling interest | 273 | 273 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distributions to noncontrolling interest | (822 | ) | (822 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income (loss): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reclassification of unrealized loss on interest rate derivatives to net income | 47 | 11 | 58 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation loss | (791 | ) | (791 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2014 | 1 | $ | — | 25,802 | $ | 3 | $ | 231,240 | $ | (62,477 | ) | $ | (246 | ) | $ | 8,036 | $ | 176,556 | |||||||||||||||
Net income | 6,978 | 699 | 7,677 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Redemption of common stock | (217 | ) | (1,444 | ) | (1,444 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distributions declared on common stock ($2.50 per share) | (64,110 | ) | (64,110 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contributions from noncontrolling interest | 538 | 538 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distributions to noncontrolling interest | (2,512 | ) | (2,512 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income (loss): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reclassification of unrealized loss on currency translation to net income | 250 | 250 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation loss | (376 | ) | (376 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2015 | 1 | $ | — | 25,585 | $ | 3 | $ | 229,796 | $ | (119,609 | ) | $ | (372 | ) | $ | 6,761 | $ | 116,579 | |||||||||||||||
Net income | 4,943 | (35 | ) | 4,908 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Redemption of common stock | (366 | ) | (1,905 | ) | (1,905 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contributions from noncontrolling interest | 92 | 92 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distributions to noncontrolling interest | (912 | ) | (912 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive loss: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation loss | (123 | ) | (123 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2016 | 1 | $ | — | 25,219 | $ | 3 | $ | 227,891 | $ | (114,666 | ) | $ | (495 | ) | $ | 5,906 | $ | 118,639 | |||||||||||||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
F-5
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(in thousands)
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |||||||||
Cash flows from operating activities: | |||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | 4,908 | $ | 7,677 | $ | (334 | ) | ||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash | |||||||||||
flows provided by operating activities: | |||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization | 10,856 | 14,762 | 14,217 | ||||||||
Amortization of deferred financing fees | 503 | 689 | 779 | ||||||||
Gain on sale of real estate | (11,341 | ) | (22,771 | ) | (11,454 | ) | |||||
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | 500 | 732 | 454 | ||||||||
Loss on derivatives | 2 | 26 | 215 | ||||||||
Impairment charge | — | 1,417 | — | ||||||||
Change in operating assets and liabilities: | |||||||||||
Accounts receivable | 1,043 | 384 | (235 | ) | |||||||
Prepaid expenses and other assets | 26 | 297 | (358 | ) | |||||||
Accounts payable | (1 | ) | (223 | ) | 210 | ||||||
Income taxes payable | (924 | ) | 1,121 | — | |||||||
Accrued and other liabilities | (2,494 | ) | 1,099 | (1,305 | ) | ||||||
Net payables to related parties | (63 | ) | (33 | ) | (375 | ) | |||||
Addition of lease intangibles | (118 | ) | (80 | ) | (313 | ) | |||||
Cash provided by operating activities | 2,897 | 5,097 | 1,501 | ||||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: | |||||||||||
Acquisition deposits reimbursed | — | — | 500 | ||||||||
Purchase of real estate | — | — | (60,433 | ) | |||||||
Investment in unconsolidated joint venture | (176 | ) | (509 | ) | (1,988 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from sale of real estate | 68,399 | 79,075 | 46,300 | ||||||||
Additions of property and equipment | (2,474 | ) | (4,258 | ) | (8,566 | ) | |||||
Cash provided by (used in) investing activities | 65,749 | 74,308 | (24,187 | ) | |||||||
Cash flows from financing activities: | |||||||||||
Financing costs | (135 | ) | (492 | ) | (670 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from notes payable | — | — | 33,500 | ||||||||
Payments on notes payable | (35,404 | ) | (45,094 | ) | (17,791 | ) | |||||
Purchase of interest rate derivatives | — | (6 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||||
Redemptions of common stock | (1,905 | ) | (1,444 | ) | (1,663 | ) | |||||
Distributions paid to common shareholders | (38,378 | ) | (25,732 | ) | (12,954 | ) | |||||
Contributions received from noncontrolling interest holders | 92 | 538 | 273 | ||||||||
Distributions paid to noncontrolling interest holders | (943 | ) | (2,480 | ) | (822 | ) | |||||
Cash used in financing activities | (76,673 | ) | (74,710 | ) | (134 | ) | |||||
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash | (157 | ) | (447 | ) | (252 | ) | |||||
Net change in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash | (8,184 | ) | 4,248 | (23,072 | ) | ||||||
Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash at beginning of year | 81,396 | 77,148 | 100,220 | ||||||||
Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash at end of year | $ | 73,212 | $ | 81,396 | $ | 77,148 | |||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
F-6
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
1. Business and Organization
Business
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. (which may be referred to as the “Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our”) was organized as a Maryland corporation on January 9, 2007 and has elected to be taxed, and currently qualifies, as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) for federal income tax purposes.
We were formed primarily to acquire and operate commercial real estate and real estate-related assets on an opportunistic and value-add basis. In particular, we have focused generally on acquiring commercial properties with significant possibilities for capital appreciation, such as those requiring development, redevelopment, or repositioning, those located in markets and submarkets with high growth potential, and those available from sellers who are distressed or face time-sensitive deadlines. We have acquired a wide variety of commercial properties, including office, industrial, retail, hospitality, and multifamily. We have purchased existing, income-producing properties, and newly-constructed properties. We have also invested in a mortgage loan and a mezzanine loan. We intend to hold the various real properties in which we have invested until such time as our board of directors determines that a sale or other disposition appears to be advantageous to achieve our investment objectives or until it appears that the objectives will not be met. Consistent with our investment objectives, our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders.
As of December 31, 2016, we had eight real estate investments, seven of which were consolidated in our consolidated financial statements (one wholly owned and six properties consolidated through investments in joint ventures). We sold one property, Lakewood Flats on August 16, 2016.
Substantially all of our business is conducted through Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II LP, a limited partnership organized in Delaware (the “Operating Partnership”). As of December 31, 2016, our wholly-owned subsidiary, BHO II, Inc., a Delaware corporation, owned a 0.1% partnership interest in the Operating Partnership as its sole general partner. As of December 31, 2016, our wholly-owned subsidiary, BHO Business Trust II, a Maryland business trust, was the sole limited partner of the Operating Partnership and owned the remaining 99.9% interest in the Operating Partnership.
Our business has been managed by an external advisor since the commencement of our initial public offering and we have no employees. From January 4, 2008 through February 10, 2017, an affiliate of Behringer Harvard Holdings, LLC (“Behringer”) acted as our external advisor (the “Behringer Advisor”). On February 10, 2017, we terminated our engagement of Behringer Advisor and engaged affiliates of the Lightstone Group (“Lightstone”), LSG-BH II Advisor LLC and LSG Development Advisor LLC (collectively, the “Advisor”), to provide advisory services to us. The external advisor is responsible for managing our day-to-day affairs and for services related to the sale of our assets.
Organization
We commenced a public offering of our common stock on January 21, 2008, including shares offered pursuant to our distribution reinvestment plan (the “DRP”). We terminated the primary component of the public offering effective March 15, 2012 and the DRP component of the offering effective April 3, 2012. We raised gross offering proceeds of approximately $265.3 million from the sale of approximately 26.7 million shares under the offering.
In connection with our initial capitalization, we issued 22,471 shares of our common stock and 1,000 shares of our convertible stock to Behringer on January 19, 2007. Behringer transferred its shares of convertible stock to one of its affiliates on April 2, 2010.
As of December 31, 2016, we had issued 26.7 million shares of our common stock, including 22,471 shares owned by Behringer and 2.2 million shares issued through the distribution reinvestment plan. As of December 31, 2016, we had redeemed 1.5 million shares of our common stock and had 25.2 million shares of common stock outstanding. As of December 31, 2016, we had 1,000 shares of convertible stock outstanding held by an affiliate of Behringer. Behringer transferred its shares of convertible stock to an affiliate of Lightstone on February 10, 2017.
Our common stock is not currently listed on a national securities exchange. The timing of a liquidity event will depend upon then prevailing market conditions. Our board of directors is considering liquidity options for our stockholders, and we can provide no assurances as to the timing of our ultimate liquidation.
F-7
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. These estimates include such items as impairment of long-lived assets, depreciation and amortization, and allowance for doubtful accounts. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Principles of Consolidation and Basis of Presentation
Our consolidated financial statements include our accounts and the accounts of other subsidiaries over which we have control. All inter-company transactions, balances, and profits have been eliminated in consolidation. In addition, interests in entities acquired are evaluated based on applicable GAAP, and entities deemed to be variable interest entities (“VIE”) in which we are the primary beneficiary are also consolidated. If the interest in the entity is determined not to be a VIE, then the entity is evaluated for consolidation based on legal form, economic substance, and the extent to which we have control, substantive participating rights or both under the respective ownership agreement. For entities in which we have less than a controlling interest or entities which we are not deemed to be the primary beneficiary, we account for the investment using the equity method of accounting.
There are judgments and estimates involved in determining if an entity in which we have made an investment is a VIE and, if so, whether we are the primary beneficiary. The entity is evaluated to determine if it is a VIE by, among other things, calculating the percentage of equity being risked compared to the total equity of the entity. Determining expected future losses involves assumptions of various possibilities of the results of future operations of the entity, assigning a probability to each possibility, and using a discount rate to determine the net present value of those future losses. A change in the judgments, assumptions, and estimates outlined above could result in consolidating an entity that should not be consolidated or accounting for an investment using the equity method that should in fact be consolidated, the effects of which could be material to our financial statements.
In February 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an update (“ASU 2015-02”) to ASC Topic 810, Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis. ASU 2015-02 makes several modifications to the consolidation guidance for VIEs and general partners’ investments in limited partnerships, as well as modifications to the evaluation of whether limited partnerships are VIEs or voting interest entities. The adoption of ASU 2015-02, effective January 1, 2016, did not impact our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. See Note 9 for further details.
In the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, all dollar and share amounts in tabulation are in thousands of dollars and shares, respectively, unless otherwise noted.
Real Estate
Upon the acquisition of real estate properties, we recognize the assets acquired, the liabilities assumed and any noncontrolling interest as of the acquisition date, measured at their fair values. The acquisition date is the date on which we obtain control of the real estate property. The assets acquired and liabilities assumed may consist of land, inclusive of associated rights, buildings, assumed debt, identified intangible assets and liabilities, and asset retirement obligations. Identified intangible assets generally consist of above-market leases, in-place leases, in-place tenant improvements, in-place leasing commissions, and tenant relationships. Identified intangible liabilities generally consist of below-market leases. Goodwill is recognized as of the acquisition date and measured as the aggregate fair value of the consideration transferred and any noncontrolling interests in the acquiree over the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired. Likewise, a bargain purchase gain is recognized in current earnings when the aggregate fair value of the consideration transferred and any noncontrolling interests in the acquiree is less than the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired. Acquisition-related costs are expensed in the period incurred. Initial valuations are subject to change until our information is finalized, which is no later than 12 months from the acquisition date.
The fair value of the tangible assets acquired, consisting of land and buildings, is determined by valuing the property as if it were vacant, and the “as-if-vacant” value is then allocated to land and buildings. Land values are derived from appraisals, and building values are calculated as replacement cost less depreciation or management’s estimates of the fair value of these assets using discounted cash flow analyses or similar methods believed to be used by market participants. The value of hotels and all other buildings is depreciated over the estimated useful lives of 39 years and 25 years, respectively, using the straight-line method.
F-8
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
We determine the fair value of assumed debt by calculating the net present value of the scheduled mortgage payments using interest rates for debt with similar terms and remaining maturities that management believes we could obtain at the date of the debt assumption. Any difference between the fair value and stated value of the assumed debt is recorded as a discount or premium and amortized over the remaining life of the loan using the effective interest method.
We determine the value of above-market and below-market leases for acquired properties based on the present value (using an interest rate that reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (1) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (2) management’s estimate of current market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases, measured over a period equal to (a) the remaining non-cancelable lease term for above-market leases, or (b) the remaining non-cancelable lease term plus any below-market fixed rate renewal options that, based on a qualitative assessment of several factors, including the financial condition of the lessee, the business conditions in the industry in which the lessee operates, the economic conditions in the area in which the property is located, and the ability of the lessee to sublease the property during the renewal term, are reasonably assured to be exercised by the lessee for below-market leases. We record the fair value of above-market and below-market leases as intangible assets or intangible liabilities, respectively, and amortize them as an adjustment to rental income over the determined lease term.
The total value of identified real estate intangible assets acquired is further allocated to in-place leases, in-place tenant improvements, in-place leasing commissions, and tenant relationships based on our evaluation of the specific characteristics of each tenant’s lease and our overall relationship with that respective tenant. The aggregate value for tenant improvements and leasing commissions is based on estimates of these costs incurred at inception of the acquired leases, amortized through the date of acquisition. The aggregate value of in-place leases acquired and tenant relationships is determined by applying a fair value model. The estimates of fair value of in-place leases include an estimate of carrying costs during the expected lease-up periods for the respective spaces considering existing market conditions. In estimating the carrying costs that would have otherwise been incurred had the leases not been in place, we include such items as real estate taxes, insurance and other operating expenses as well as lost rental revenue during the expected lease-up period based on existing market conditions. The estimates of the fair value of tenant relationships also include costs to execute similar leases including leasing commissions, legal fees, and tenant improvements as well as an estimate of the likelihood of renewal as determined by management on a tenant-by-tenant basis.
We amortize the value of in-place leases, in-place tenant improvements, and in-place leasing commissions to expense over the initial term of the respective leases. In no event does the amortization period for intangible assets or liabilities exceed the remaining depreciable life of the building. Should a tenant terminate its lease, the unamortized portion of the acquired lease intangibles related to that tenant would be charged to expense.
As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, accumulated depreciation and amortization related to our consolidated investments in real estate assets and intangibles were as follows:
December 31, 2016 | Buildings and Improvements | Land and Improvements | Lease Intangibles | Acquired Below-Market Leases | |||||||||||
Cost | $ | 164,087 | $ | 45,885 | $ | 1,599 | $ | (137 | ) | ||||||
Less: depreciation and amortization | (31,728 | ) | (3,175 | ) | (1,247 | ) | 72 | ||||||||
Net | $ | 132,359 | $ | 42,710 | $ | 352 | $ | (65 | ) | ||||||
December 31, 2015 | Buildings and Improvements | Land and Improvements | Lease Intangibles | Acquired Below-Market Leases | |||||||||||
Cost | $ | 211,635 | $ | 54,068 | $ | 3,083 | $ | (184 | ) | ||||||
Less: depreciation and amortization | (26,422 | ) | (2,686 | ) | (2,749 | ) | 104 | ||||||||
Net | $ | 185,213 | $ | 51,382 | $ | 334 | $ | (80 | ) | ||||||
F-9
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Anticipated net amortization expense (accretion) associated with the acquired lease intangibles for each of the following five years ended December 31 is as follows:
Year | Lease / Other Intangibles | |||
2017 | $ | 20 | ||
2018 | (14 | ) | ||
2019 | (12 | ) | ||
2020 | (10 | ) | ||
2021 | (10 | ) | ||
Real Estate Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations
We classify properties as held for sale when certain criteria are met in accordance with GAAP. At that time, we present the assets and obligations of the property held for sale separately in our consolidated balance sheet and we cease recording depreciation and amortization expense related to that property. Properties held for sale are reported at the lower of their carrying amount or their estimated fair value, less estimated costs to sell. We did not have any real estate assets classified as held for sale at December 31, 2016 or 2015.
Effective as of April 1, 2014, we early adopted the revised guidance in Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-08 regarding discontinued operations. For sales of real estate or assets classified as held for sale after April 1, 2014, we will evaluate whether a disposal transaction meets the criteria of a strategic shift and will have a major effect on our operations and financial results to determine if the results of operations and gains on sale of real estate will be presented as part of our continuing operations or as discontinued operations in our consolidated statements of operations. If the disposal represents a strategic shift, it will be classified as discontinued operations for all periods presented; if not, it will be presented in continuing operations.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
We consider investments in highly liquid money market funds or investments with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents. The carrying amount of cash and cash equivalents reported on the balance sheet approximates fair value.
Restricted Cash
As required by our lenders, restricted cash is held in escrow accounts for anticipated capital expenditures, real estate taxes, and other reserves for our consolidated properties. Capital reserves are typically utilized for non-operating expenses such as tenant improvements, leasing commissions, and major capital expenditures. Alternatively, a lender may require its own formula for an escrow of capital reserves.
We early adopted new FASB guidance on December 31, 2016, which changes the presentation of our statements of cash flows and related disclosures for all periods presented and accordingly, the following is a summary of our cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash total as presented in our statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 (in thousands):
December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 | December 31, 2014 | |||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 67,111 | $ | 76,815 | $ | 72,949 | |||||
Restricted cash | 6,101 | 4,581 | 4,199 | ||||||||
Total cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash | $ | 73,212 | $ | 81,396 | $ | 77,148 | |||||
Investment Impairment
For all of our real estate and real estate related investments, we monitor events and changes in circumstances indicating that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets may not be recoverable. Examples of the types of events and circumstances that would cause management to assess our assets for potential impairment include, but are not limited to: a significant decrease in the market price of an asset; a significant adverse change in the manner in which the asset is being used; an accumulation of costs in excess of the acquisition basis plus construction of the property; major vacancies and the resulting loss of revenues; natural disasters; a change in the projected holding period; legitimate purchase offers; and changes in the global and local
F-10
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
markets or economic conditions. To the extent that our portfolio is concentrated in limited geographic locations, downturns specifically related to such regions may result in tenants defaulting on their lease obligations at those properties within a short time period, which may result in asset impairments. When such events or changes in circumstances are present, we assess potential impairment by comparing estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows expected to be generated over the life of the asset and from its eventual disposition to the carrying amount of the asset. These projected cash flows are prepared internally by the Advisor and reflect in-place and projected leasing activity, market revenue and expense growth rates, market capitalization rates, discount rates, and changes in economic and other relevant conditions. The Company’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer review these projected cash flows to assure that the valuation is prepared using reasonable inputs and assumptions that are consistent with market data or with assumptions that would be used by a third-party market participant and assume the highest and best use of the investment. We consider trends, strategic decisions regarding future development plans, and other factors in our assessment of whether impairment conditions exist. In the event that the carrying amount exceeds the estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows, we recognize an impairment loss to adjust the carrying amount of the asset to estimated fair value. While we believe our estimates of future cash flows are reasonable, different assumptions regarding factors such as market rents, economic conditions, and occupancy rates could significantly affect these estimates.
In evaluating our investments for impairment, management may use appraisals and make estimates and assumptions, including, but not limited to, the projected date of disposition of the properties, the estimated future cash flows of the properties during our ownership, and the projected sales price of each of the properties. A future change in these estimates and assumptions could result in understating or overstating the carrying value of our investments, which could be material to our financial statements. In addition, we may incur impairment charges on assets classified as held for sale in the future if the carrying amount of the asset upon classification as held for sale exceeds the estimated fair value, less costs to sell.
We also evaluate our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures at each reporting date. If we believe there is an other than temporary decline in market value, we will record an impairment charge based on these evaluations. We assess potential impairment by comparing our portion of estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows expected to be generated by the joint venture over the life of the joint venture’s assets to the carrying amount of the joint venture. In the event that the carrying amount exceeds our portion of estimated future undiscounted operating cash flows, we recognize an impairment loss to adjust the carrying amount of the joint venture to its estimated fair value.
During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million to reduce the carrying value of 22 Exchange, one of our student housing investments, to its estimated fair value. In estimating the fair value of 22 Exchange, we used management’s internal discounted cash flow analysis prepared with consideration of the local market. There were no impairment charges recorded during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2014.
We believe the carrying value of our operating real estate assets and our investment in an unconsolidated joint venture is currently recoverable. However, if market conditions worsen unexpectedly or if changes in our strategy significantly affect any key assumptions used in our fair value calculations, we may need to take charges in future periods for impairments related to our existing investments. Any such non-cash charges would have an adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and results of operations.
Investment in Unconsolidated Joint Venture
We provide funding to third-party developers for the acquisition, development, and construction of real estate (“ADC Arrangement”). Under an ADC Arrangement, we may participate in the residual profits of the project through the sale or refinancing of the property. We evaluate this arrangement to determine if it has characteristics similar to a loan or if the characteristics are more similar to a joint venture or partnership such as participating in the risks and rewards of the project as an owner or an investment partner. When we determine that the characteristics are more similar to a jointly-owned investment or partnership, we account for the arrangement as an investment in an unconsolidated joint venture under the equity method of accounting or a direct investment (consolidated basis of accounting) instead of applying loan accounting. The ADC Arrangement is reassessed at each reporting period. See Note 7, Investment in Unconsolidated Joint Venture, for further discussion.
F-11
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Revenue Recognition
We recognize rental income generated from leases of our operating properties on a straight-line basis over the terms of the respective leases, including the effect of rent holidays, if any. Straight-line rent was income of less than $0.1 million recognized in rental revenues for the year ended December 31, 2016. Straight-line rent was income of less than $0.1 million and $0.2 million recognized in rental revenues for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Leases associated with our multifamily, student housing, and hotel assets are generally short-term in nature, and thus have no straight-line rent. Net below-market lease amortization of less than $0.1 million was recognized in rental revenues for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015. Net above-market lease amortization of less than $0.1 million was recognized in rental revenues for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Hotel revenue is derived from the operations of the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel and consists primarily of guest room, food and beverage, and other ancillary revenues such as laundry and parking. Hotel revenue is recognized as the services are rendered.
Accounts Receivable
Accounts receivable primarily consist of receivables related to our consolidated properties of $1.4 million and $2.4 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and included straight-line rental revenue receivables of $0.4 million and $0.3 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets
Prepaid expenses and other assets of $1.1 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, included prepaid directors’ and officers’ insurance, as well as prepaid insurance of our consolidated properties.
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment
Furniture, fixtures, and equipment are recorded at cost and are depreciated according to the Company’s capitalization policy, which uses the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives of five to seven years. Furniture, fixtures, and equipment associated with properties classified as held for sale are not depreciated. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred. Accumulated depreciation associated with our furniture, fixtures, and equipment was $9.9 million and $8.1 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Deferred Financing Fees
Deferred financing fees are recorded at cost and are amortized to interest expense using a straight-line method that approximates the effective interest method over the life of the related debt. Deferred financing fees, net of accumulated amortization, were $0.8 million and $1.7 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Accumulated amortization of deferred financing fees were $1.9 million and $2.5 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. In April 2015, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2015-03”) to ASC Topic 835, Interest - Imputation of Interest, Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. The adoption of ASU 2015-03, effective January 1, 2016, requires companies to present debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability as a direct reduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability, retrospectively.
The adoption of the new standard resulted in the following reclassifications of unamortized deferred financing fees as of December 31, 2015:
December 31, 2015 | Originally Reported | Reclassification | Adjusted | ||||||||
Deferred financing fees, net | $ | 1,656 | $ | (1,656 | ) | $ | — | ||||
Notes payable | 178,692 | (1,656 | ) | 177,036 | |||||||
Derivative Financial Instruments
Our objective in using derivatives is to add stability to interest expense and to manage our exposure to interest rate movements or other identified risks and to minimize the variability caused by foreign currency translation risk related to our net investment in foreign real estate. To accomplish these objectives, we use various types of derivative instruments to manage fluctuations in cash flows resulting from interest rate risk attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate of London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”). These instruments include LIBOR-based interest rate swaps and caps. For our net investments in foreign real estate, we may use foreign exchange put/call options to eliminate the impact of foreign currency exchange movements on our financial position.
F-12
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
We measure our derivative instruments and hedging activities at fair value and record them as an asset or liability, depending on our rights or obligations under the applicable derivative contract. Changes in fair value of derivative instruments not designated as hedges are recognized in earnings in the affected period.
As of December 31, 2016, we do not have any derivatives designated as net investment hedges, fair value hedges or cash flow hedges. No derivatives were being used for trading or speculative purposes. See Note 4, Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value, and Note 11, Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, for further information regarding our derivative financial instruments.
Income Taxes
We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and have qualified as a REIT since the year ended December 31, 2008. To qualify as a REIT, we must meet a number of organizational and operational requirements, including a requirement that we distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income to our stockholders. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax at the corporate level. We are organized and operate in such a manner as to qualify for taxation as a REIT under the Code and intend to continue to operate in such a manner, but no assurance can be given that we will operate in a manner so as to qualify or remain qualified as a REIT. Taxable income from non-REIT activities managed through a taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”) is subject to applicable federal, state, and local income and margin taxes. We currently have no taxable income associated with a TRS. Our operating partnerships are flow-through entities and are not subject to federal income taxes at the entity level.
As a result of the sale of two foreign investments during 2015, Alte Jakobstraße (“AJS”) and Holstenplatz, we recorded estimated foreign income tax of approximately $2.7 million. During the third quarter of 2016, we recorded a credit of approximately $0.1 million to the provision for income tax based on the difference in the actual taxes due and the originally estimated taxes payable on the sale of Holstenplatz. The foreign income tax recorded during 2015 was calculated on gains recognized at the exchange rate in effect on the date of sale and calculated using current tax rates.
We have reviewed our tax positions under GAAP guidance that clarify the relevant criteria and approach for the recognition and measurement of uncertain tax positions. The guidance prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition of a tax position taken, or expected to be taken, in a tax return. A tax position may only be recognized in the financial statements if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained upon examination. We believe it is more likely than not that the tax positions taken relative to our federal tax status as a REIT will be sustained in any tax examination.
Foreign Currency Translation
For our international investments where the functional currency is other than the U.S. dollar, assets and liabilities are translated using period-end exchange rates, while the statement of operations amounts are translated using the average exchange rates for the respective period. Gains and losses resulting from the change in exchange rates from period to period are reported separately as a component of other comprehensive income (loss) (“OCI”). Gains and losses resulting from foreign currency transactions are included in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss).
The Euro is the functional currency for the operations of AJS and Holstenplatz, which were both sold in 2015. We maintain a Euro-denominated bank account that is comprised primarily of the remaining proceeds from the sale of these properties and is translated into U.S. dollars at the current exchange rate at each reporting period. For the three years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014, the cumulative foreign currency translation adjustment was a loss of $0.1 million, a loss of $0.4 million, and a loss of $0.8 million, respectively.
When the Company has substantially liquidated its investment in a foreign entity, the cumulative translation adjustment (“CTA”) balance is required to be released into earnings. In accordance with ASU 2013-05, upon disposal of the property, we would recognize the CTA as an adjustment to the gain on sale. During the first quarter of 2015, we recognized a CTA of approximately $0.6 million as a reduction to the gain on sale of our AJS office building, which we sold on February 21, 2015. We sold our wholly owned investment in the Holstenplatz office building, located in Hamburg, Germany, on September 1, 2015. We recognized a CTA credit of approximately $0.4 million as an increase to the gain on sale of Holstenplatz. With the sale of Holstenplatz, we no longer have foreign operations.
Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Items of other comprehensive income (loss) consist of gains and losses affecting equity that are excluded from net income (loss) under GAAP. The components of OCI consist of cumulative foreign currency translation gains and losses and the unrealized gain on derivative instruments.
F-13
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Stock-Based Compensation
We have adopted a stock-based incentive award plan for our directors and consultants and for employees, directors, and consultants of our affiliates. We have not issued any stock-based awards under the plan as of December 31, 2016.
Concentration of Credit Risk
At December 31, 2016 and 2015, we had cash and cash equivalents deposited in certain financial institutions in excess of federally insured levels. We have diversified our cash and cash equivalents among several banking institutions in an attempt to minimize exposure to any one of these entities. We regularly monitor the financial stability of these financial institutions and believe that we are not exposed to any significant credit risk in cash and cash equivalents or restricted cash.
Geographic and Asset Type Concentration
Our investments may at times be concentrated in certain asset types that are subject to higher risk of foreclosure, or secured by assets concentrated in a limited number of geographic locations. For the year ended December 31, 2016, excluding sold assets, 44% and 16% of our total revenues were derived from our properties located in Hawaii and Florida, respectively. Additionally, excluding our property sold in 2016, 44%, 30%, and 21% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2016 were from our hotel, multifamily, and student housing investments, respectively. To the extent that our portfolio is concentrated in limited geographic regions or types of assets, downturns relating generally to such region or type of asset may result in defaults on a number of our investments within a short time period, which may reduce our net income and the value of our common stock and accordingly limit our ability to fund our operations.
Noncontrolling Interest
Noncontrolling interest represents the noncontrolling ownership interest’s proportionate share of the equity in our consolidated real estate investments. Income and losses are allocated to noncontrolling interest holders based generally on their ownership percentage. In certain instances, our joint venture agreement provides for liquidating distributions based on achieving certain return metrics (“promoted interest”). If a property reaches a defined return threshold, then it will result in distributions to noncontrolling interest which is different from the standard pro-rata allocation percentage.
Earnings per Share
Net income (loss) per share is calculated based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during each period. The weighted average shares outstanding used to calculate both basic and diluted income (loss) per share were the same for each of the three years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014, as there were no potentially dilutive securities outstanding.
Reportable Segments
GAAP establishes standards for reporting financial and descriptive information about an enterprise’s reportable segments. We have determined that we have one reportable segment, with activities related to the ownership, development, and management of real estate assets. Our chief operating decision maker evaluates operating performance on an individual property level. Therefore, our properties are aggregated into one reportable segment.
Subsequent Events
We have evaluated subsequent events for recognition or disclosure in our consolidated financial statements.
3. New Accounting Pronouncements
New Accounting Pronouncements to be Adopted
In May 2014, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2014-09”) to ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. ASU 2014-09 outlines a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and supersedes most of the existing revenue recognition guidance. The new guidance will require companies to apply a five-step model in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers, as well as enhance disclosures regarding revenue recognition. Lease contracts will be excluded from this revenue recognition criteria; however, the sale of real estate will be required to follow the new model. ASU 2014-09 is effective for public companies for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. In addition, early adoption will be permitted beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within those annual periods. Either full retrospective adoption or modified retrospective adoption is permitted. We do not expect that the adoption of this pronouncement will have a material effect on
F-14
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
our consolidated financial statements; however, we will continue to evaluate this assessment until the guidance becomes effective.
During the quarter ended June 30, 2016, the FASB issued subsequent updates to ASU 2014-09. In April 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-10”) to ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing. In May 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-12”) to ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Narrow-Scope Improvement and Practical Expedients. The amendments in these updates did not change the core principle of the guidance in Topic 606; rather, they added improvements to reduce the diversity in practice at initial application and the cost and complexity of applying Topic 606 both at transition and an ongoing basis. The areas affected include: assessing the collectability criteria; presentation of sales taxes and other similar taxes collected from customers; noncash consideration; contract modification and completed contracts at transition; and technical correction as it relates to retrospective application and disclosure. The new guidance is effective January 1, 2018, with early adoption permitted beginning January 1, 2017, and allows full or modified retrospective application. We do not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-10 and ASU 2016-12 to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements; however, we will continue to evaluate this assessment until the guidance becomes effective.
In February 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-02”) to ASC Topic 842, Leases. ASU 2016-02 supersedes the existing lease accounting model, and modifies both lessee and lessor accounting. The new guidance will require lessees to recognize a liability to make lease payments and a right-of-use asset, initially measured at the present value of lease payments, for both operating and financing leases. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, lessees will be permitted to make an accounting policy election by class of underlying asset to not recognize lease liabilities and lease assets. Under this new pronouncement, lessor accounting will be largely unchanged from existing GAAP. The new standard will be effective January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We do not expect that the adoption of this pronouncement will have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements; however, we will continue to evaluate this assessment until the guidance becomes effective.
In June 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-13”) to ASC Topic 326, Credit Losses. This amended guidance requires measurement and recognition of expected credit losses for financial assets held at the reporting date based on historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. This is different from the current guidance as this will require immediate recognition of estimated credit losses expected to occur over the remaining life of many financial assets. Financial assets that are measured at amortized cost will be required to be presented at the net amount expected to be collected with an allowance for credit losses deducted from the amortized cost basis. Generally, the pronouncement requires a modified retrospective method of adoption. This guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial statements when adopted.
In January 2017, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2017-01”) to ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations, Clarifying the Definition of a Business. The guidance clarifies the definition of a business and assists in the evaluation of whether a transaction will be accounted for as an acquisition of an asset or as a business combination. The guidance provides a test to determine when a set of assets and activities acquired is not a business. When substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets, the set is not a business. Under the updated guidance, an acquisition of a single property will likely be treated as an asset acquisition as opposed to a business combination and associated transaction costs will be capitalized rather than expensed as incurred. Additionally, assets acquired, liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest will be measured at their relative fair values. This guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted, including for interim or annual periods for which financial statements have not yet been issued. Upon adoption of this guidance, we anticipate future acquisitions of real estate assets, if any, will likely qualify as an asset acquisition. Therefore, any future transactions costs associated with an asset acquisition will be capitalized and accounted for in accordance with the guidance in ASU 2017-01.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In August 2014, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2014-15”) to ASC Topic 205, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. ASU 2014-15 requires management’s assessment of a company’s ability to continue as a going concern and provide related footnote disclosures when conditions give rise to substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the financial statement issuance date. ASU 2014-15 applies to all companies and is effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and all annual and interim periods thereafter. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on our disclosures.
F-15
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
In August 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-15”) to ASC Topic 230, Statement of Cash Flows, Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments. The objective of this amendment is to reduce the diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statements of cash flows. Of the eight types of cash flows discussed in the new standard, the classification of debt prepayment, distributions received from equity method investees, and debt extinguishment costs as financing outflows may impact the Company. ASU 2016-15 is effective for public companies for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. The amendment in the update should be applied using the retrospective transition method for each period presented. We adopted this guidance on December 31, 2016 and the adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements or disclosures.
In November 2016, the FASB issued an update (“ASU 2016-18”) to ASC Topic 230, Statement of Cash Flows, Restricted Cash. This new guidance requires amounts that are generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents to be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-18 is effective for public companies for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted and the pronouncement requires a retrospective transition method of adoption. We early adopted this guidance on December 31, 2016 and included amounts generally described as restricted cash within the beginning-of-period, change, and end-of-period total amounts on the statement of cash flows rather than within an activity on the statement of cash flows. This adoption changes our statements of cash flows and related disclosure for all period presented.
4. Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value
Fair value measurements are determined based on the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs that are classified within Levels 1 and 2 of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within Level 3 of the hierarchy) has been established.
Level 1 inputs utilize quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets and liabilities that we have the ability to access. Level 2 inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, as well as inputs that are observable for the asset or liability (other than quoted prices), such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and yield curves that are observable at commonly quoted intervals. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability that are typically based on an entity’s own assumptions, as there is little, if any, related market activity. In instances where the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the fair value hierarchy, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement falls is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.
Recurring Fair Value Measurements
Currently, we use interest rate swaps and caps to manage our interest rate risk. The valuation of these instruments is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each derivative. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the derivatives, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate curves, implied volatilities, and foreign currency exchange rates.
We incorporate credit valuation adjustments to appropriately reflect both our own nonperformance risk and the respective counterparty’s nonperformance risk in the fair value measurements. Although we have determined that the majority of the inputs used to value our derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with our derivatives utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads, to evaluate the likelihood of default by itself and its counterparties. However, as of December 31, 2016, we have assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of our derivative positions and have determined that the credit valuation adjustments are not significant to the overall valuation of our derivatives. As a result, we have determined that our derivative valuations in their entirety are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy
As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel was our only remaining asset with an interest rate cap and it had a nominal value.
Derivative financial instruments classified as assets are included in prepaid expenses and other assets on the balance sheet.
F-16
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements
During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded a $1.4 million non-cash impairment charge as a result of a measurable decrease in the fair value of 22 Exchange, one of our student housing investments. In estimating the fair value of 22 Exchange, we used management’s internal discounted cash flow analysis prepared with consideration of the local market. The discounted cash flow estimate is considered Level 3 under the fair value hierarchy described above.
The following fair value hierarchy table presents information about our assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2015:
For the year ended December 31, 2015 | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total Fair Value | Loss | |||||||||||||||
Assets | ||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings and improvements, net(1) | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 25,000 | $ | 25,000 | $ | (1,417 | ) | |||||||||
______________________________________
(1) | We recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2015 as a result of a measurable decrease in the fair value of 22 Exchange, one of our student housing investments. |
Quantitative Information about Level 3 Fair Value Measurements
Description | Fair Value for the year ended December 31, 2015 (in 000s) | Valuation Techniques | Unobservable Input | Range (Weighted Average) | ||||||
Buildings and improvements, net(1) | $ | 25,000 | Discounted cash flow | Discount rate Terminal capitalization rate | 7.5% - 8.0% 6.5% - 7.5% | |||||
______________________________________
(1) | Due to the local market decline in Akron, Ohio, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million on our investment in 22 Exchange, a student housing property, during the year ended December 31, 2015. |
There were no impairment charges recorded during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2014.
5. Financial Instruments not Reported at Fair Value
We determined the following disclosure of estimated fair values using available market information and appropriate valuation methodologies. However, considerable judgment is necessary to interpret market data and develop the related estimates of fair value. The use of different market assumptions or only estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, management estimated that the carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable, prepaid expenses and other assets, accounts payable, accrued expenses, other liabilities, payables/receivables from related parties, and distributions payable to noncontrolling interests were at amounts that reasonably approximated their fair value based on their highly-liquid nature and short-term maturities. The fair value of the notes payable is categorized as a Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. The fair value was estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis valuation on the borrowing rates currently available for loans with similar terms and maturities. The fair value of the notes payable was determined by discounting the future contractual interest and principal payments by a market rate. Disclosure about fair value of financial instruments is based on pertinent information available to management as of December 31, 2016 and 2015.
Carrying amounts of our notes payable and the related estimated fair value as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 are as follows:
December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 | |||||||||||||||
Carrying Amount | Fair Value | Carrying Amount | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Notes payable | $ | 143,119 | $ | 146,790 | $ | 178,692 | $ | 179,306 | ||||||||
Less: unamortized debt issuance costs | (787 | ) | (1,656 | ) | ||||||||||||
Notes payable, net | $ | 142,332 | $ | 177,036 | ||||||||||||
F-17
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
6. Real Estate and Real Estate-Related Investments
As of December 31, 2016, we consolidated seven real estate assets. The following table presents certain information about our consolidated investments as of December 31, 2016:
Property Name | Description | Location | Date Acquired | Ownership Interest | |||||
Gardens Medical Pavilion | Medical office building | Palm Beach Gardens, Florida | October 20, 2010 | 81.8 | % | ||||
Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel | Hotel | Kauai, Hawaii | October 20, 2010 | 80 | % | ||||
River Club and the Townhomes at River Club | Student housing | Athens, Georgia | April 25, 2011 | 85 | % | ||||
Lakes of Margate | Multifamily | Margate, Florida | October 19, 2011 | 92.5 | % | ||||
Arbors Harbor Town | Multifamily | Memphis, Tennessee | December 20, 2011 | 94 | % | ||||
22 Exchange | Student housing | Akron, Ohio | April 16, 2013 | 90 | % | ||||
Parkside Apartments (“Parkside”) | Multifamily | Sugar Land, Texas | August 8, 2013 | 90 | % | ||||
Real Estate Asset Dispositions
1875 Lawrence
On May 30, 2014, we sold 1875 Lawrence for a contract sales price of approximately $46.7 million. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate property of $11.5 million and loss on early extinguishment of debt of $0.5 million, which was comprised of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.4 million and an early termination fee of $0.1 million. A portion of the proceeds from the sale were used to pay off in full the existing indebtedness of approximately $15.6 million associated with the office building.
Babcock Self Storage
On January 8, 2015, we sold Babcock Self Storage (“Babcock”) for a contract sales price of approximately $5.4 million. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of $2 million and loss on early extinguishment of debt of less than $0.1 million, which was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees and an early termination fee. A portion of the proceeds from the sale were used to pay off in full the existing indebtedness of approximately $2.1 million associated with the storage facility. Babcock was classified as held for sale on our consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2014.
Alte Jakobstraße
On February 21, 2015, we sold AJS, which is located in Berlin, Germany, for a contract sales price of approximately €12.4 million (approximately $14.1 million). We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of approximately $3.3 million, which is net of a CTA charge of approximately $0.6 million. We recognized a loss on early extinguishment of debt of less than $0.1 million, which was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees and an early termination fee. A portion of the proceeds from the sale were used to fully satisfy the existing indebtedness associated with the property of approximately €5.7 million (approximately $6.5 million). The Company recorded a provision for income tax of approximately $1.7 million during 2015 as a result of foreign income tax related to the sale. AJS was classified as held for sale on our consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2014. Additionally, in 2016, we recorded a $0.1 million loss related to the final settlement of certain fees associated with our 2015 disposal of AJS.
Holstenplatz
On September 1, 2015, we sold Holstenplatz, which is located in Hamburg, Germany, for a contract sales price of approximately €16.4 million (approximately $18.4 million). We paid off the balance of the Holstenplatz debt of $8.1 million on its maturity date of April 30, 2015. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of approximately $8.6 million, which includes a CTA credit of approximately $0.4 million. The Company recorded a provision for income tax of approximately $1 million as a result of foreign income tax related to the sale.
The foreign income tax for our AJS and Holstenplatz sales were calculated on gains recognized at the exchange rate in effect on the sale dates of February 21, 2015 and September 1, 2015, respectively, and were calculated using current tax rates. All U.S. dollar amounts related to the AJS and Holstenplatz sales were based on the exchange rate in effect on their respective sale dates.
F-18
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Wimberly at Deerwood
On September 9, 2015, we sold Wimberly at Deerwood (“Wimberly”), a 322-unit multifamily community in Jacksonville, Florida, for a contract sales price of approximately $43.5 million. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of $8.9 million and loss on early extinguishment of debt of $0.6 million, which was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.3 million and an early termination fee of $0.3 million. A portion of the proceeds from the sale of the asset were used to pay off in full the existing indebtedness of approximately $26.4 million secured by the property.
Lakewood Flats
On August 16, 2016, we sold Lakewood Flats for a contract sales price of approximately $68.8 million, resulting in a gain on sale of real estate of $11.5 million and a deferred gain of approximately $1.2 million. The deferred gain represents the amount of monies held in escrow to be reimbursed upon completion of the property’s outstanding insurance claim. We recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $0.5 million, which was composed of the write-off of deferred financing fees of $0.4 million and an early termination fee of $0.1 million. A portion of the proceeds from the sale were used to pay off in full the existing indebtedness of approximately $33.5 million secured by the property.
Sales of Real Estate Reported in Continuing Operations
The following table presents our sale of real estate for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 (in millions):
Date of Sale | Property | Ownership Interest | Sales Contract Price | Net Cash Proceeds(1) | Gain on Sale of Real Estate | ||||||||||||
May 30, 2014 | 1875 Lawrence | 100% | $ | 46.7 | $ | 46.3 | $ | 11.5 | |||||||||
January 8, 2015 | Babcock Self Storage | 85% | $ | 5.4 | $ | 5.2 | $ | 2.0 | |||||||||
February 21, 2015 | Alte Jakobstraße | 99.7% | $ | 14.1 | $ | 13.0 | $ | 3.3 | (2) | ||||||||
September 1, 2015 | Holstenplatz | 100% | $ | 18.4 | $ | 18.0 | $ | 8.6 | |||||||||
September 9, 2015 | Wimberly | 95% | $ | 43.5 | $ | 42.9 | $ | 8.9 | |||||||||
August 16, 2016 | Lakewood Flats | 100% | $ | 68.8 | $ | 68.5 | $ | 11.5 | |||||||||
______________________________________
(1) | A portion of the net cash proceeds was used to pay off the property-associated debt of $15.6 million, $2.1 million, $6.5 million, $26.4 million, and $33.5 million for 1875 Lawrence, Babcock, AJS, Wimberly, and Lakewood Flats, respectively. The Holstenplatz debt was paid off on April 30, 2015. |
(1) | The 2015 gain on sale for AJS of $3.3 million does not include an additional $0.1 million loss recorded in 2016 related to the final settlement of certain fees associated with our disposal of AJS. |
The Company does not view the 2016, 2015, or 2014 disposals as a strategic shift. Therefore, the results of operations for Lakewood Flats are presented in continuing operations in the consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014. The results of operations for Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly are presented in continuing operations in the consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the results of operations for 1875 Lawrence are included in continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2014.
The following table presents net income attributable to the Company for the three years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 related to Lakewood Flats, Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, Wimberly, and 1875 Lawrence. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2016 includes the gain on sale of Lakewood Flats of $11.5 million. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2015 includes the gains on sale of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly for a total of $22.8 million. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2014 includes the gain on sale of 1875 Lawrence of $11.5 million (in millions):
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
Description | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to the Company | $ | 11.8 | $ | 16.7 | $ | 8.7 | ||||||
F-19
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Discontinued Operations
Effective as of April 1, 2014, we early adopted the revised guidance in Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-08 regarding discontinued operations. Accordingly, we have no discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014.
7. Investment in Unconsolidated Joint Venture
We provided mezzanine financing totaling $15.3 million to an unaffiliated third-party entity (the “Borrower”) that owns an apartment complex under development in Denver, Colorado (“Prospect Park”). The Borrower also has a senior construction loan with a third-party construction lender (the “Senior Lender”) in an aggregate original principal amount of $40 million. The senior construction loan is guaranteed by the owners of the developer. We also have a personal guaranty from the owners of the developer guaranteeing completion of the project and payment of cost overruns. Our mezzanine loan is secured by all of the membership interests of the Borrower and is subordinate to the senior construction loan. Our advances of $15.3 million have annual stated interest rates ranging from 10% to 18%. We evaluated this ADC Arrangement and determined that the characteristics are similar to a jointly-owned investment or partnership. Accordingly, the investment was accounted for as an unconsolidated joint venture under the equity method of accounting instead of loan accounting since we will participate in the residual interests through the sale or refinancing of the property.
Both the senior loan and our mezzanine loan were in technical default at December 31, 2016 due to a delay in completion of the project. The Senior Lender and the Company have stated their intention to not call the loan and currently plan to amend the loan agreements. The project was completed in January 2017. As of December 31, 2016, the outstanding principal balance under the mezzanine loan was $15.3 million. The Borrower has funded any cost overruns.
We considered the impact of these events on the accounting treatment and determined the ADC Arrangement will continue to be accounted for as an unconsolidated joint venture under the equity method of accounting. We will continue to monitor this situation and any impact these events might have on our ability to ultimately realize the investment. The ADC Arrangement is reassessed at each reporting period.
In connection with this investment, interest capitalized for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 was $0.2 million, $0.5 million, and $0.5 million, respectively. For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014, we recorded no equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated joint venture related to our investment in Prospect Park. The Company’s maximum exposure to losses associated with its unconsolidated joint venture is limited to its carrying value in this investment.
The following table sets forth our ownership interest in Prospect Park:
Property Name | Ownership Interest at December 31, | Carrying Amount at December 31, | ||||||
2016 | 2015 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||
Prospect Park | N/A | N/A | $14,658 | $14,482 | ||||
Summarized balance sheet information for the unconsolidated joint venture as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, shown at 100%, is as follows (in thousands):
December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 | |||||||
Total assets | $ | 72,272 | $ | 61,528 | ||||
Total debt, net | $ | 56,638 | $ | 43,944 | ||||
Total equity | $ | 11,957 | $ | 14,976 | ||||
Summarized statement of operations information for the unconsolidated joint venture for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014, shown at 100%, is as follows (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | ||||||||||
Total revenues | $ | 600 | $ | 25 | $ | 101 | ||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | (4,135 | ) | $ | (329 | ) | $ | 92 | ||||
F-20
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
8. Variable Interest Entities
As discussed in Note 2, effective January 1, 2016, we have adopted the guidance in ASU 2015-02. As a result, the Operating Partnership (see Note 1) and each of our less than wholly-owned real estate partnerships (22 Exchange, LLC, Gardens Medical Pavilion, LLC, SL Parkside Apartments, LLC, and the ADC Arrangement associated with Prospect Park) have been deemed to have the characteristics of a VIE. However, we were not required to consolidate any previously unconsolidated entities or deconsolidate any previously consolidated entities as a result of the change in classification. Accordingly, there has been no change to the amounts reported in our consolidated balance sheets and statements of cash flows or amounts recognized in our consolidated statements of operations.
Consolidated VIEs
The Company consolidates the Operating Partnership, 22 Exchange, LLC, Gardens Medical Pavilion, LLC through BH-AW-Florida MOB Venture, LLC, and SL Parkside Apartments, LLC, which are variable interest entities, or VIEs, for which we are the primary beneficiary. Generally, a VIE is a legal entity in which the equity investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest or the equity investors lack sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support. A limited partnership, or legal entities such as an LLC, are considered a VIE when the majority of the limited partners unrelated to the general partner possess neither the right to remove the general partner without cause, nor certain rights to participate in the decisions that most significantly affect the financial results of the partnership. In determining whether we are the primary beneficiary of a VIE, we consider qualitative and quantitative factors, including, but not limited to: which activities most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and which party controls such activities; the amount and characteristics of our investment; the obligation or likelihood for us or other investors to provide financial support; and the similarity with and significance to our business activities and the business activities of the other investors. Significant judgments related to these determinations include estimates about the current and future fair values and performance of real estate held by these VIEs and general market conditions.
Unconsolidated VIEs
Included in the Company’s joint venture investments at December 31, 2016 is the ADC Arrangement associated with Prospect Park, which is accounted for as an unconsolidated joint venture and is a VIE. Refer to Note 7 for further details on the ADC Arrangement. This arrangement was established to provide mezzanine financing to an unaffiliated third party that owns Prospect Park, an apartment complex under development in Denver, Colorado. Based on our reevaluation under ASU 2015-02, we determined that we are not the primary beneficiary of this VIE based on the rights of the general partner. The arrangement does not allow for substantive kick-out rights over the general partner and we do not have the power to direct the activities of Prospect Park that most significantly affect the entity’s economic performance. Accordingly, we have determined it is appropriate, consistent with past accounting, that the Prospect Park ADC Arrangement will continue to be accounted for under the equity method.
F-21
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
9. Notes Payable
The following table sets forth information on our notes payable as of December 31, 2016 and 2015:
Description | 2016 | 2015 | Interest Rate | Maturity Date | ||||||||
Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel | $ | 38,000 | $ | 38,000 | 30-day LIBOR + .95% | (1) | 5/9/2017 | |||||
Gardens Medical Pavilion | 12,899 | 13,298 | 4.9% | 1/1/2018 | ||||||||
River Club and the Townhomes at River Club | 23,917 | 24,299 | 5.26% | 5/1/2018 | ||||||||
Lakes of Margate | 14,243 | 14,496 | 5.49% and 5.92% | 1/1/2020 | ||||||||
Arbors Harbor Town | 24,653 | 25,130 | 3.985% | 1/1/2019 | ||||||||
22 Exchange | 19,307 | 19,500 | 3.93% | 5/5/2023 | ||||||||
Parkside(2) | 10,100 | 10,469 | 5% | 6/1/2018 | ||||||||
Lakewood Flats(3) | — | 33,500 | 30-day LIBOR + 1.5% | (1) | 11/5/2019 | |||||||
Total debt | 143,119 | 178,692 | ||||||||||
Deferred financing fees(4) | (787 | ) | (1,656 | ) | ||||||||
Total notes payable, net | $ | 142,332 | $ | 177,036 | ||||||||
_____________________________
(1) | 30-day London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) was 0.77% at December 31, 2016. |
(2) Includes approximately $0.2 million of unamortized premium related to debt we assumed at acquisition.
(3) On August 16, 2016, we sold Lakewood Flats to an unaffiliated third party. A portion of the proceeds from the sale were used to payoff the existing indebtedness associated with the property.
(4) Effective January 1, 2016, we adopted ASU 2015-03, which requires companies to present the debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability. See Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, for further details.
At December 31, 2016, our notes payable balance was $142.3 million, net of deferred financing fees of $0.8 million. We have guaranteed payment of certain recourse liabilities with respect to certain customary nonrecourse carveouts as set forth in the guaranties in favor of the unaffiliated lenders with respect to the Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel, 22 Exchange, and Parkside notes payable. Interest capitalized in connection with our equity method investment in Prospect Park for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 was $0.2 million, $0.5 million, and $0.5 million respectively.
On August 16, 2016, we sold Lakewood Flats to an unaffiliated third party and used a portion of the proceeds from the sale to fully satisfy the existing indebtedness of approximately $33.5 million.
We used a portion of the proceeds from the 2015 sales of Babcock and Wimberly to fully satisfy their existing indebtedness of approximately $2.1 million and $26.4 million, respectively. In 2015, we also sold AJS, located in Germany, and used a portion of the proceeds to fully satisfy the existing indebtedness of approximately €5.7 million, or approximately $6.5 million based on the exchange rate in effect on the date of sale. We paid off the Holstenplatz debt of approximately $8.1 million on its maturity date of April 30, 2015.
We are subject to customary affirmative, negative, and financial covenants and representations, warranties, and borrowing conditions, all as set forth in our loan agreements, including, among other things, maintaining minimum debt service coverage ratios, loan to value ratios, and liquidity. As of December 31, 2016, we believe we were in compliance with the covenants under our loan agreements.
F-22
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations for principal payments as of December 31, 2016:
Year | Amount Due | |||
2017 | $ | 40,151 | ||
2018 | 46,807 | |||
2019 | 24,307 | |||
2020 | 13,771 | |||
2021 | 404 | |||
Thereafter | 17,441 | |||
Total contractual obligations for principal payments | 142,881 | |||
Unamortized premium | 238 | |||
Total notes payable | 143,119 | |||
Less: Deferred financing fees, net | (787 | ) | ||
Notes payable, net | $ | 142,332 | ||
10. Leasing Activity
Future minimum base rental payments of our office property, Gardens Medical Pavilion, and the retail space at 22 Exchange due to us under non-cancelable leases in effect as of December 31, 2016 are as follows:
Year | Amount Due | |||
2017 | $ | 1,512 | ||
2018 | 1,171 | |||
2019 | 1,038 | |||
2020 | 971 | |||
2021 | 857 | |||
Thereafter | 2,232 | |||
Total | $ | 7,781 | ||
The schedule above does not include rental payments due to us from our multifamily, hotel, and student housing properties, as leases associated with these properties typically are for periods of one year or less.
11. Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
We may be exposed to the risk associated with variability of interest rates that might impact our cash flows and the results of operations. The hedging strategy of entering into interest rate caps and swaps, therefore, is to eliminate or reduce, to the extent possible, the volatility of cash flows.
As of December 31, 2016, we had one remaining interest rate cap related to Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel, which was not designated as a hedging instrument. Our remaining interest rate cap matures on May 15, 2017 and has a notional value of $38 million at a rate of 30-day LIBOR + 3%. The notional value provides an indication of the extent of our involvement in this instrument, but does not represent exposure to credit, interest rate, or market risks.
The table below presents the effect of our derivative financial instrument on the consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015:
Derivative Not Designated as Hedging Instruments | |
Amount of Loss | |
Year ended December 31, | |
2016 | 2015 |
$2 | $26 |
F-23
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
12. Commitments and Contingencies
Income Taxes
We have maintained and intend to maintain our election as a REIT under the Code. In order for us to continue to qualify as a REIT we must meet a number of organizational and operational requirements, including a requirement to distribute annual dividends to our shareholders equal to a minimum of 90% of our REIT taxable income, computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and our net capital gains. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on our taxable income at the corporate level to the extent such income is distributed to our shareholders annually. Any current year taxable income generated by the Company may be offset by carrying forward unused prior year net operating losses (“NOLs”). If our taxable income after application of NOL carryforwards exceeds our dividends in a tax year, REIT tax rules allow us to designate dividends from the subsequent tax year in order to avoid current taxation on undistributed income. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we will be subject to federal and state income taxes at regular corporate rates, including any applicable alternative minimum tax (“AMT”). In addition, we may not be able to requalify as a REIT for the four subsequent taxable years. Taxable income from non-REIT activities managed through taxable REIT subsidiaries is subject to applicable federal, state, and local income and margin taxes. Our operating partnerships are flow-through entities and are not subject to federal income taxes at the entity level.
For the year ended December 31, 2016, we had federal taxable income of approximately $7 million, which includes the disposal of Lakewood Flats. The Company paid special cash distributions of $38.4 million during the year and had remaining federal NOL carryovers of approximately $13.1 million at December 31, 2016. The Company has continued to establish a valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets as the utilization of any deferred tax asset is not at a level of more likely than not that they will be realized prior to their expiration. The Company recorded a credit of less than $0.1 million to the provision for income tax based on the difference in the actual taxes due and the originally estimated taxes payable on the sale of Holstenplatz in 2015.
We originally estimated federal taxable income of $3.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Actual federal taxable income for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $4.8 million, which includes the disposals of Babcock, AJS, Holstenplatz, and Wimberly. The Company paid special cash distributions of $25.7 million during the year and had remaining federal NOL carryovers of approximately $13.1 million at December 31, 2015. During 2015, we recorded provision for income tax of approximately $2.7 million as a result of estimated foreign income tax related to the sales of AJS and Holstenplatz which were both located in Germany. The foreign income tax related to both dispositions was calculated on gains recognized at the exchange rate in effect on the date of sale and calculated using current tax rates.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, we had federal taxable income of $4.2 million, which includes the disposal of 1875 Lawrence. The Company made special cash distributions of $13 million during the year and had remaining federal NOL carryovers of $13.1 million at December 31, 2014. The Company recorded an income tax benefit of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2014 related to the overpayment of AMT tax for the year ended December 31, 2013. We recorded estimated AMT tax of $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 as a result of gains recognized on the sale of investments during the year. The Company recorded no provision for income tax, including AMT, during the year ended December 31, 2014.
We have a TRS which is subject to federal and state income taxes. At December 31, 2016, our TRS had NOL carryforwards of approximately $4.5 million which expire in years 2030 to 2035. Because NOL’s are subject to certain change of ownership, continuity of business, and separate return year limitations, and because it is unlikely the available NOL’s will be utilized or because we consider any amounts possibly utilized to be immaterial, no benefits related to these NOL’s have been recognized in our consolidated financial statements. We have no significant temporary differences or tax credits associated with our TRS.
Taxable income differs from net income for financial reporting purposes principally because of differences in the timing of recognition of depreciation, rental revenue, compensation expense, impairment losses and gain from sales of property. As a result of these differences, the tax basis of our fixed assets exceeds the book value by approximately $2.4 million at December 31, 2016.
We and our subsidiaries’ income tax returns are subject to examination by federal, state, and local tax jurisdictions for years 2013 through 2016. If a return filed was examined and a substantial error was discovered, the Internal Revenue Service has the right to add additional years to their audit, but will not go back more than six years. Net income tax loss carry forwards and other tax attributes generated in years prior to 2013 are also subject to challenge in any examination of those tax years. The Company and its subsidiaries are not under any notice of audit from any taxing authority at year end 2016. We have reviewed our tax positions under GAAP guidance that clarifies the relevant criteria and approach for the recognition and measurement of
F-24
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
uncertain tax positions. The guidance prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition of a tax position taken, or expected to be taken, in a tax return. A tax position may only be recognized in the financial statements if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained upon examination. We believe it is more likely than not that the tax positions taken relative to our status as a REIT will be sustained in any tax examination.
13. Stockholders’ Equity
Capitalization
As of December 31, 2016, our authorized capital was 350,000,000 shares of common stock, 50,000,000 shares of preferred stock, and 1,000 shares of convertible stock. All shares of such stock have a par value of $.0001 per share.
As of December 31, 2016, we had issued 26.7 million shares of our common stock, including 22,471 shares owned by the Behringer Advisor and 2.2 million shares issued through the DRP. As of December 31, 2016, we had redeemed 1.5 million shares of our common stock and had 25,218,770 shares of common stock outstanding. As of December 31, 2016, we had 1,000 shares of convertible stock held by an affiliate of Behringer.
The shares of convertible stock will be converted into shares of common stock automatically if (1) we have made total distributions on then outstanding shares of our common stock equal to the issue price of those shares plus a 10% cumulative, non-compounded, annual return on the issue price of those outstanding shares, or (2) we list our common stock for trading on a national securities exchange if the sum of the prior distributions on then outstanding shares of the common stock plus the aggregate market value of the common stock (based on the 30-day average closing price) meets the same 10% performance threshold. In general, the convertible stock will convert into shares of common stock with a value equal to the lesser of (A) 20% of the excess of our enterprise value plus the aggregate value of distributions paid to date on then outstanding shares of our common stock over the aggregate issue price of those outstanding shares plus a 10% cumulative, non-compounded, annual return on the issue price of those outstanding shares, or (B) 15% of the excess of our enterprise value plus the aggregate value of distributions paid to date on then outstanding shares of the common stock over the aggregate issue price of those outstanding shares plus a 6% cumulative, non-compounded, annual return on the issue price of those outstanding shares. At the date of issuance of the shares of convertible stock, management determined the fair value under GAAP was less than the nominal value paid for the shares; therefore, the difference is not material.
The timing of the conversion of any or all of the convertible stock may be deferred by our board of directors if it determines that full conversion may jeopardize our qualification as a REIT. Any such deferral will in no event otherwise alter the terms of the convertible stock, and such stock shall be converted at the earliest date after our board of directors determines that such conversion will not jeopardize our qualification as a REIT. Our board of directors is authorized to amend our charter, without the approval of the stockholders, to increase the aggregate number of authorized shares of capital stock or the number of shares of any class or series that we have authority to issue.
Share Redemption Program
Our board of directors has adopted a share redemption program that permits stockholders to sell their shares back to us, subject to the significant conditions and limitations of the program. Our board of directors can amend the provisions of our share redemption program at any time without the approval of our stockholders.
The terms on which we redeem shares may differ between redemptions upon a stockholder’s death, “qualifying disability” (as defined in the share redemption program) or confinement to a long-term care facility (collectively, “Exceptional Redemptions”) and all other redemptions (“Ordinary Redemptions”). From April 1, 2012 through May 15, 2014, our board of directors suspended accepting Ordinary Redemptions. On May 15, 2014, our board of directors adopted the Third Amended and Restated Share Redemption Program and reopened the share redemption program for Ordinary Redemptions, to be effective on that date. In addition, for periods beginning on or after May 15, 2014, the cash available for redemptions was increased from $1 million to no more than $10 million in any twelve-month period. The redemption limitations apply to all redemptions, whether Ordinary or Exceptional Redemptions.
The per share redemption price for Ordinary Redemptions and Exceptional Redemptions is equal to the lesser of 80% and 90%, respectively, of (i) the current estimated per share value and (ii) the average price per share the investor paid for all of his shares (as adjusted for any stock dividends, combinations, splits, recapitalizations and the like with respect to our common stock) less the Special Distributions (as defined in the share redemption program).
Notwithstanding the redemption prices set forth above, our board of directors may determine, whether pursuant to formulas or processes as approved or set by our board of directors, the redemption price of the shares, which may differ
F-25
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
between Ordinary Redemptions and Exceptional Redemptions; provided, however, that we must provide at least 30 days’ notice to stockholders before applying this new price determined by our board of directors.
Any shares approved for redemption will be redeemed on a periodic basis as determined from time to time by our board of directors, and no less frequently than annually. We will not redeem, during any twelve-month period, more than 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the twelve-month period immediately prior to the date of redemption. In addition, the cash available for redemptions is limited to no more than $10 million in any twelve-month period. The redemption limitations apply to all redemptions, whether Ordinary or Exceptional Redemptions.
Any Ordinary Redemption requests submitted while Ordinary Redemptions were suspended were returned to investors and must be resubmitted. We gave all stockholders notice that we were resuming Ordinary Redemptions, so that all stockholders would have an equal opportunity to submit shares for redemption. Any redemption requests are honored pro rata among all requests received based on funds available and are not honored on a first come, first served basis.
Distributions
Distributions are authorized at the discretion of our board of directors based on its analysis of our performance over the previous periods and expectations of performance for future periods. These analyses may include actual and anticipated operating cash flow, changes in market capitalization rates for investments suitable for our portfolio, capital expenditure needs, general financial and market conditions, proceeds from asset sales, and other factors that our board deems relevant. The board’s decision will be substantially influenced by its obligation to ensure that we maintain our federal tax status as a REIT. We cannot provide assurance that we will pay distributions at any particular level, or at all.
On November 20, 2015, our board of directors authorized a special cash distribution of $1.50 per share of common stock, payable to our stockholders of record as of December 31, 2015. On March 18, 2015, our board of directors authorized a special cash distribution of $1.00 per share of common stock, payable to our stockholders of record as of March 30, 2015. On August 8, 2014, our board of directors authorized a special cash distribution of $0.50 per share of common stock, payable to our stockholders of record as of September 15, 2014.
The following table sets forth information on the distributions declared and distributions paid during the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 (in millions):
Year | Distributions Declared | Distributions Paid | ||||||
2014 | $ | 13.0 | $ | 13.0 | ||||
2015(1) | 64.1 | 25.7 | ||||||
2016 | — | 38.4 | ||||||
________________________________________
(1) | Our board of directors declared two special cash distributions during 2015, one on March 18 for a total of $25.7 million and one on November 20 for a total of $38.4 million, for an aggregate total of $64.1 million. The Company paid the $25.7 million special cash distribution on March 31, 2015 and the $38.4 million special cash distribution on January 5, 2016. |
Total distributions paid to stockholders during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were $38.4 million and $25.7 million, respectively, and represented special cash distributions. Distributions during both of the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were fully funded with proceeds from asset sales.
During 2016 and 2015, our distributions were classified as follows for federal income tax purposes:
Description | 2016 | 2015 | ||||
Ordinary income | — | — | ||||
Capital gains | 25.4 | % | 25.8 | % | ||
Return of capital | 74.6 | % | 74.2 | % | ||
Total | 100.0 | % | 100.0 | % | ||
F-26
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
14. Related Party Transactions
Advisor
Our external advisor and certain of its affiliates may receive fees and compensation in connection with the management and sale of our assets based on an advisory management agreement, as amended and restated.
From January 4, 2008 through February 10, 2017, we were party to successive advisory management agreements, each with a term of one year or less, with the Behringer Advisor. The most recently executed advisory management agreement was the Fifth Amended and Restated Advisory Management Agreement (the “Fifth Advisory Agreement”) entered into on July 25, 2016 and effective as of June 6, 2016. On February 10, 2017, we entered into a Termination of Advisory Management Agreement with the Behringer Advisor and (solely with respect to certain sections) Stratera (the “Advisory Termination Agreement”) pursuant to which the Fifth Advisory Agreement was terminated as of the close of business on February 10, 2017.
Concurrently with our entry into the Advisory Termination Agreement, we engaged the Advisor to provide us with advisory services pursuant to two separate advisory management agreements (collectively, the “Lightstone Advisory Agreement”). With the exception of the Administrative Services Fee, the fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Advisor pursuant to the Lightstone Advisory Agreement are identical to the fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Behringer Advisor pursuant to the Fifth Advisory Agreement. The following discussion describes the fees and expenses payable to our external advisor and its respective affiliates under both the Fifth Advisory Agreement (in effect from June 6, 2016 through February 10, 2017) and the Lightstone Advisory Agreement (in effect as of February 10, 2017).
We pay acquisition and advisory fees of 1.5% of the amount paid in respect of the purchase, development, construction, or improvement of each asset we acquire, including any debt attributable to those assets. In addition, we pay acquisition and advisory fees of 1.5% of the funds advanced in respect of a loan investment. No acquisition and advisory fees were paid to the Behringer Advisor for the year ended December 31, 2016. We incurred acquisition and advisory fees payable to the Behringer Advisor of less than $0.1 million and $1 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, as a result of acquisitions and improvements made to our assets. We had one acquisition in the year ended December 31, 2014. We had no acquisitions during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We also pay an acquisition expense reimbursement in the amount of (i) 0.25% of the funds paid for purchasing an asset, including any debt attributable to the asset, plus 0.25% of the funds budgeted for development, construction, or improvement in the case of assets that we acquire and intend to develop, construct, or improve or (ii) 0.25% of the funds advanced in respect of a loan investment. We also pay third parties, or reimburse our external advisor or its affiliates, for any investment-related expenses due to third parties in the case of a completed investment, including, but not limited to, legal fees and expenses, travel and communication expenses, costs of appraisals, accounting fees and expenses, third-party brokerage or finder’s fees, title insurance, premium expenses, and other closing costs.
Our external advisor and its affiliates are also responsible for paying all of the investment-related expenses that we or the external advisor or its affiliates incur that are due to third parties or related to the additional services provided by our external advisor as described above with respect to investments we do not make, other than certain non-refundable payments made in connection with any acquisition. For the year ended December 31, 2016, we incurred no acquisition expense reimbursements. For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we incurred acquisition expense reimbursements of less than $0.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively, payable to the Behringer Advisor.
We pay a debt financing fee of 0.5% of the amount available under any loan or line of credit made available to us and pay directly all third-party costs associated with obtaining the debt financing. We incurred debt financing fees of $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. We incurred no financing fees for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We pay a development fee in an amount that is usual and customary for comparable services rendered to similar projects in the geographic market of the project if such affiliate provides the development services and if a majority of our independent directors determines that such development fee is fair and reasonable to us. We incurred no such fees for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 or 2014.
We pay a monthly asset management fee of one-twelfth of 0.7% of the value of each asset. The value of our assets will be the value as determined in connection with the establishment and publication of an estimated value per share unless the asset was acquired after our publication of an estimated value per share (in which case the value of the asset will be the contract purchase price of the asset). For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, we expensed $2.1 million, $2.5 million and $2.2 million, respectively, of asset management fees payable to the Behringer Advisor. The totals for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 include asset management fees related to our disposed properties.
F-27
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Our external advisor is responsible for paying all of the expenses it incurs associated with persons employed by the external advisor to the extent that they provide services related to us for which our external advisor receives an acquisition, asset management, or debt financing fee, including wages and benefits of the personnel. Instead of reimbursing our external advisor for specific expenses paid or incurred in connection with providing services to us, we pay our external advisor an administrative services fee (renamed an administrative services reimbursement under the Lightstone Advisory Agreement) based on a budget of expenses prepared by the Behringer Advisor. The administrative services fee is intended to reimburse for all costs associated with providing services to us. Under the Fifth Advisory Agreement, for the calendar year ended December 31, 2016, the administrative services fee was the lesser of (i) $1.325 million per calendar year, and (ii) the actual costs of providing administrative services to us under the Fifth Advisory Agreement, payable in four equal quarterly installments within 45 days of the end of each calendar quarter. For the calendar year ending December 31, 2015, the administrative services fee was $1.5 million. In addition, under the advisory management agreement, we are to reimburse the Advisor for certain due diligence services provided in connection with asset dispositions or debt financings separately from the administrative services fee. For the calendar year ending December 31, 2017, the administrative services fee is $1.325 million annually, pro-rated for the first six months of the year and $1.30 million annually, pro-rated for the second six months of the year. For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, we incurred and expensed such costs for administrative services and due diligence services of approximately $1.2 million, $1.5 million, and $1.8 million, respectively. Included in that amount is less than $0.1 million related to certain due diligence services provided in connection with asset dispositions during the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014.
Notwithstanding the fees and cost reimbursements payable to our external advisor pursuant to our advisory management agreement, under our charter we may not reimburse the external advisor for any amount by which our operating expenses (including the asset management fee) at the end of the four preceding fiscal quarters exceeds the greater of: (i) 2% of our average invested assets, or (ii) 25% of our net income determined without reduction for any additions to reserves for depreciation, bad debts or other similar non-cash reserves and excluding any gain from the sale of our assets for that period unless a majority of our independent directors determines that such excess expenses are justified based on unusual and non-recurring factors. For the four fiscal quarters ended December 31, 2016, our total operating expenses (including the asset management fee) were not excessive.
Property Manager
From January 4, 2008 through February 10, 2017, we were party to a property management and leasing agreement (as amended and restated, the “Behringer Property Management Agreement”) between us, our operating partnership, Behringer Harvard Opportunity Management Services, LLC, and Behringer Harvard Real Estate Services, LLC (collectively, the “Behringer Manager”). On February 10, 2017, we entered into a Termination of Property Management and Leasing Agreement with the Behringer Manager and (solely with respect to certain sections) Stratera (the “Property Management Termination Agreement”) pursuant to which the Behringer Property Management Agreement was terminated as of the close of business on February 10, 2017.
Concurrently with our entry into the Property Management Termination Agreement, we engaged LSG-BH II Property Manager LLC (the “Lightstone Manager”) pursuant to a property management and leasing agreement (the “Lightstone Property Management Agreement”). The fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Lightstone Manager pursuant to the Lightstone Property Management Agreement are identical to the fees earned by and expenses reimbursed to the Behringer Manager pursuant to the Behringer Property Management Agreement. The following discussion describes the fees and expenses payable to our affiliated property manager and its respective affiliates under both the Behringer Property Management Agreement (in effect from August 13, 2008 through February 10, 2017) and the Lightstone Property Management Agreement (in effect as of February 10, 2017).
We pay our property manager and affiliate of our external advisor, fees for the management, leasing, and construction supervision of our properties which is 4.0% of gross revenues of the properties managed by our property manager. We pay our property manager an oversight fee equal to 0.5% of the gross revenues of the property managed for any property for which we contract directly with a third-party property manager. In no event will our property manager or its affiliates receive both a property management fee and an oversight fee with respect to any particular property. In the event we own a property through a joint venture that does not pay our property manager directly for its services, we will pay our property manager a management fee or oversight fee, as applicable, based only on our economic interest in the property. We incurred and expensed property management fees or oversight fees to the Behringer Property Manager of approximately $0.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014.
We pay our property manager a construction management fee in an amount not to exceed 5% of all hard construction costs incurred in connection with, but not limited to capital repairs and improvements, major building reconstruction and tenant improvements, if such affiliate supervises construction performed by or on behalf of us or our affiliates. We incurred
F-28
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
construction management fees of $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. We incurred no construction management fees for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
We are dependent on our external advisor and our property manager for certain services that are essential to us, including asset disposition decisions, property management and leasing services, and other general administrative responsibilities. In the event that these companies were unable to provide us with their respective services, we would be required to obtain such services from other sources.
15. Supplemental Cash Flow Information
Supplemental cash flow information is summarized below:
Twelve Months ended December 31, | |||||||||||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |||||||||
Interest paid, net of amounts capitalized | $ | 5,876 | $ | 6,286 | $ | 7,443 | |||||
Income tax paid, net of overpayment | 932 | 1,703 | 29 | ||||||||
Non-cash investing activities and financing activities: | |||||||||||
Proceeds held in escrow through sale of real estate interests | — | 912 | — | ||||||||
Capital expenditures for real estate in accounts payable | 12 | — | — | ||||||||
Capital expenditures for real estate in accrued liabilities | 256 | 224 | 237 | ||||||||
Accrued distributions payable | — | 38,378 | — | ||||||||
Accrued distributions to noncontrolling interest | 21 | 52 | 19 | ||||||||
16. Quarterly Results (Unaudited)
Presented below is a summary of the unaudited quarterly financial information for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 ($ in thousands, except per share amounts):
2016 Quarters Ended | |||||||||||||||||
Description | March 31 | June 30 | September 30 | December 31 | |||||||||||||
Revenue | $ | 12,450 | $ | 11,693 | $ | 11,393 | $ | 10,595 | |||||||||
Net income (loss)(1) | (967 | ) | (1,226 | ) | 9,324 | (2,223 | ) | ||||||||||
Add: Net (income)/loss attributable to noncontrolling interest | (106 | ) | 61 | 59 | 21 | ||||||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders | $ | (1,073 | ) | $ | (1,165 | ) | $ | 9,383 | $ | (2,202 | ) | ||||||
Basic and diluted weighted average shares outstanding | 25,553 | 25,466 | 25,391 | 25,266 | |||||||||||||
Basic and diluted income (loss) per share | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | $ | 0.37 | $ | (0.09 | ) | ||||||
2015 Quarters Ended | ||||||||||||||||||
Description | March 31 | June 30 | September 30 | December 31 | ||||||||||||||
Revenue | $ | 13,314 | $ | 12,779 | $ | 12,539 | $ | 11,618 | ||||||||||
Net income (loss)(2) | 338 | (1,878 | ) | 13,117 | (3,900 | ) | (3 | ) | ||||||||||
Add: Net (income)/loss attributable to noncontrolling interest | (511 | ) | (82 | ) | (262 | ) | 156 | |||||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders | $ | (173 | ) | $ | (1,960 | ) | $ | 12,855 | $ | (3,744 | ) | |||||||
Basic and diluted weighted average shares outstanding | 25,776 | 25,704 | 25,667 | 25,607 | ||||||||||||||
Basic and diluted income (loss) per share | $ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.07 | ) | $ | 0.50 | $ | (0.15 | ) | |||||||
__________________________________________
(1) | Income from continuing operations for the quarter ended September 30, 2016 includes gain on the sale of Lakewood Flats of $11.5 million. See Note 6, Real Estate and Real Estate-Related Investments. |
(2) | Income from continuing operations for the quarter ended March 31, 2015 includes gains on the sale of Babcock and AJS totaling $5.3 million. Income from continuing operations for the quarter ended September 30, 2015 includes gains on the sale of Holstenplatz and Wimberly totaling $17.5 million. See Note 6, Real Estate and Real Estate-Related Investments. |
(3) | Loss from continuing operations for the quarter ended December 31, 2015 includes a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million on our investment in 22 Exchange due to the local market decline in Akron, Ohio. |
F-29
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
17. Subsequent Events
Share Redemption Program
On March 8, 2017, our board of directors approved redemptions for the first quarter of 2017 totaling 131,991 shares with an aggregate redemption payment of approximately $0.7 million.
Termination of Behringer Advisory Agreement
On February 10, 2017, the Company entered into the Advisory Termination Agreement with the Behringer Advisor, and (solely with respect to certain sections) Stratera. The Advisory Termination Agreement, among other things, terminated the Fifth Advisory Agreement between the Company and the Behringer Advisor as of the close of business on February 10, 2017.
The Advisory Termination Agreement also provided that: (a) the non-solicitation period contemplated under the Fifth Advisory Agreement is reduced from one year to six months; (b) the Company and its affiliates are permitted to continue use of the name “Behringer Harvard” until dissolution of the Company; and (c) the Company will maintain the coverage provided to the Behringer Advisor under its current directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policies until the termination of the policies.
Finally, the Advisory Termination Agreement also provided that Stratera and its subsidiaries, including the Behringer Advisor, agree not to sue the Company for claims arising under or pursuant to the Fifth Advisory Agreement, except with respect to third-party claims. In addition, any rights of the Behringer Advisor to indemnification from the Company with respect to third-party claims are preserved.
Termination of Behringer Management Agreement
The Company, the Operating Partnership, and several special purpose entities formed to directly own the properties in which the Company has invested (each individually an “SPE” and collectively, the “SPEs”), entered into the Property Management Termination Agreement with the Behringer Manager, and (solely with respect to certain sections) Stratera.
The Property Management Termination Agreement, among other things, terminated the Behringer Property Management Agreement as of the close of business on February 10, 2017 with respect to the Company, the Operating Partnership, and those SPEs that own properties that do not require consent by a joint venture partner or lender to change the property manager. For SPEs that own properties that require approval by a joint venture partner to change the property manager (the “Joint Venture SPEs”), the termination of the Behringer Property Management Agreement will occur for each Joint Venture SPE as of the close of business on the date of execution of a joinder to the Property Management Termination Agreement by the joint venture partner on behalf of the SPE. For SPEs that own properties that secure loans that require lender consent or notice to change the property manager (the “Lender SPEs”), the termination of the Behringer Management Agreement will occur for each Lender SPE as of the close of business on the date following receipt of any required lender consent or notice.
The Property Management Termination Agreement also provides that the non-solicitation period contemplated in the Behringer Property Management Agreement is reduced from one year to six months. Finally, the Property Management Termination Agreement provides that Stratera and its subsidiaries, including the Behringer Manager, agree not to sue the Company for claims arising under or pursuant to the Behringer Management Agreement, except with respect to third-party claims and certain other limited exceptions. In addition, any rights of the Behringer Manager to indemnification from the Company with respect to third-party claims are preserved.
Entry into Lightstone Advisory Agreement
The Company and the Operating Partnership entered into an Advisory Management Agreement (the “Advisory Management Agreement”) with LSG-BH II Advisor LLC (“LSG-BH II Advisor”) and an Advisory Agreement (the “Advisory Agreement,” and together with the Advisory Management Agreement, the “Lightstone Advisory Agreement”) with LSG Development Advisor LLC (“LSG Development Advisor,” and together with LSG -BH II Advisor, the “Lightstone Advisor”) pursuant to which the Lightstone Advisor agreed to provide advisory services to the Company.
The Lightstone Advisory Agreement is substantially similar to the Fifth Advisory Agreement except for certain changes related to the indemnification rights of the Lightstone Advisor, certain other immaterial changes and the following changes. In addition, the “Administrative Services Fee” has been renamed the “Administrative Services Reimbursement” and has been reduced in the second six months of 2017 from a pro-rated annual fee of $1,325,000 to a pro-rated annual fee of $1,300,000. The term of the Lightstone Advisory Agreement is one year, but may be renewed for successive one-year terms upon the mutual consent of parties to the agreement.
F-30
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Entry into Lightstone Property Management Agreement
On February 10, 2017, the Company, the Operating Partnership, and the SPEs entered into the Lightstone Property Management Agreement with the Lightstone Manager. Under the Lightstone Property Management Agreement, the Lightstone Manager agreed to provide property management and leasing services to the Company, the Operating Partnership, and the SPEs. The Lightstone Property Management Agreement is effective as of February 10, 2017 for the Company, the Operating Partnership, and all SPEs other than the Joint Venture SPEs and the Lender SPEs. For the Joint Venture SPEs, the Lightstone Property Management Agreement will be effective for each Joint Venture SPE as of the date of execution of a joinder to the Lightstone Property Management Agreement by the joint venture partner on behalf of the Joint Venture SPE. For the Lender SPEs, the Lightstone Property Management Agreement will be effective for each Lender SPE as of the date following receipt or waiver of any required lender consent.
The Lightstone Property Management Agreement is substantially similar to the terminated Behringer Property Management Agreement except for the indemnification rights provided to the Lightstone Manager, certain immaterial changes and the additional changes as described in this paragraph. The term of the agreement is five years, subject to successive five-year renewal periods unless notice of termination is provided on or before one year prior to the expiration date. Under the Lightstone Property Management Agreement, the Manager must use commercially reasonable efforts to perform its duties.
*****
F-31
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves
Schedule II
December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(in thousands)
Balance at Beginning of Period | Charged to Costs and Expenses | Charged to Other Accounts | Deductions | Balance at End of Period | |||||||||||||||
As of December 31, 2016 | |||||||||||||||||||
Allowance for doubtful accounts | $ | 111 | $ | 57 | $ | — | $ | 168 | $ | — | |||||||||
As of December 31, 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||
Allowance for doubtful accounts | 2 | 369 | — | 260 | 111 | ||||||||||||||
As of December 31, 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||
Allowance for doubtful accounts | 46 | 304 | — | 348 | 2 | ||||||||||||||
F-32
Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc.
Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
Schedule III
December 31, 2016
(in thousands)
Initial cost | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Property Name | Location | Encumbrances | Land and Improvements | Building and Improvements | Cost capitalized subsequent to acquisition (1) | Gross amount carried at close of period (2) | Accumulated Depreciation | Year of Construction | Date Acquired | Depreciable Life | |||||||||||||||||||||
Gardens Medical Pavilion | Palm Beach Gardens, Florida | $ | 12,899 | $ | 5,675 | $ | 13,158 | $ | 5,324 | $ | 24,157 | $ | 4,764 | 1995 | 10/20/2010 | (3) | |||||||||||||||
Courtyard Kauai Coconut Beach Hotel | Kauai, Hawaii | 38,000 | 11,801 | 20,948 | 10,614 | 43,363 | 6,257 | 1977 | 10/20/2010 | (4) | |||||||||||||||||||||
River Club and the Townhomes at River Club | Athens, Georgia | 23,917 | 6,639 | 24,789 | 2,749 | 34,177 | 8,238 | 1996 & 1989 | 4/25/2011 | (3) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lakes of Margate | Margate, Florida | 14,243 | 9,776 | 13,061 | 4,294 | 27,131 | 4,961 | 1987 | 10/19/2011 | (3) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Arbors Harbor Town | Memphis, Tennessee | 24,653 | 5,413 | 24,713 | 2,843 | 32,969 | 6,506 | 1991 | 12/20/2011 | (3) | |||||||||||||||||||||
22 Exchange | Akron, Ohio | 19,307 | 2,380 | 24,786 | (2,233 | ) | 24,933 | 1,097 | 2010 | 4/16/2013 | (3) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Parkside Apartments | Sugar Land, Texas | 10,100 | 3,143 | 18,148 | 1,951 | 23,242 | 3,080 | 1998 | 8/8/2013 | (3) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Totals | 143,119 | 44,827 | 139,603 | 25,542 | 209,972 | 34,903 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
__________________
(1) | Includes adjustment to basis, such as impairment losses. |
(2) | The aggregate cost for federal income tax purposes is approximately $229 million. |
(3) | Buildings are depreciated according to Company policy, which uses the straight-line method over their estimated useful life of 25 years. |
(4) | Hotels are depreciated according to Company policy, which uses the straight-line method over their estimated useful life of 39 years. |
F-33
A summary of activity for real estate and accumulated depreciation for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 is as follows (in thousands):
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |||||||||
Real Estate: | |||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period | $ | 265,879 | $ | 329,643 | $ | 308,808 | |||||
Acquisitions | — | — | 57,899 | ||||||||
Improvements(1) | 2,190 | 2,044 | 4,477 | ||||||||
Disposals/written-off | — | (77 | ) | (19 | ) | ||||||
Reclassification(2) | (105 | ) | (390 | ) | (689 | ) | |||||
Establishment of new basis for impaired asset(3) | — | (4,149 | ) | — | |||||||
Cost of real estate sold | (57,992 | ) | (61,192 | ) | (40,833 | ) | |||||
Balance at end of the period(4) | $ | 209,972 | $ | 265,879 | $ | 329,643 | |||||
Accumulated depreciation: | |||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period | $ | 29,108 | $ | 27,569 | $ | 23,779 | |||||
Depreciation expense | 8,759 | 11,109 | 11,077 | ||||||||
Disposals/written-off | (2,964 | ) | (6,838 | ) | (7,287 | ) | |||||
Accumulated depreciation on impaired asset(3) | — | (2,732 | ) | — | |||||||
Balance at end of the period(4) | $ | 34,903 | $ | 29,108 | $ | 27,569 | |||||
_______________________________________________________________________________
(1) | For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, includes foreign currency translation losses of $1.6 million and $3 million, respectively. |
(2) | For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, includes reclassification from improvements to furniture, fixtures, and equipment of $0.1 million, $0.4 million, and $0.7 million, respectively. |
(3) | Due to the local market decline in Akron, Ohio, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $1.4 million on our investment in 22 Exchange, a student housing property, during the year ended December 31, 2015. The accumulated depreciation for the asset, of $2.7 million, was offset against the basis of the asset. |
(4) | For the year ended December 31, 2014, includes Alte Jakobstraße and Babcock Self Storage which were classified as held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet. |
F-34
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit No. | Description | ||
3.1 | Third Articles of Amendment and Restatement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Form 10-Q on November 14, 2012) | ||
3.2 | Second Amended and Restated Bylaws, as amended by Amendment No. 1 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Form 10-Q filed on November 13, 2013) | ||
4.1 | Statement regarding restrictions on transferability of shares of common stock (to appear on stock certificate or to be sent upon request and without charge to stockholders issued shares without certificates) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Form 10-K filed on March 28, 2013) | ||
10.1 | Contract of Sale between 7425 La Vista LLC, as seller, and DFW Lakewood Flats Apartments LLC, as purchaser, effective as of April 7, 2016 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K filed on July 27, 2016) | ||
10.2 | First Amendment to Contract of Sale between 7425 La Vista LLC and DFW Lakewood Flats Apartments LLC, effective as of May 23, 2016 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Form 8-K filed on July 27, 2016) | ||
10.3 | Reinstatement and Second Amendment to Contract of Sale between 7425 La Vista LLC and DFW Lakewood Flats Apartments LLC dated July 22, 2016 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to Form 8-K filed on July 27, 2016) | ||
10.4 | Fifth Amended and Restated Advisory Management Agreement between Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. and Behringer Harvard Opportunity Advisors II, LLC dated July 25, 2016 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Form 8-K filed on July 27, 2016) | ||
10.5 | Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Property Management and Leasing Agreement by and among Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc., Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II, LP, and several affiliated special purpose entities and Behringer Harvard Opportunity Management Services, LLC and Behringer Harvard Real Estate Services, LLC dated July 25, 2016 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to Form 8-K filed on July 27, 2016) | ||
10.6* | Termination of Advisory Management Agreement among Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc., Behringer Harvard Opportunity Advisors II, LLC, and Stratera Services, LLC effective as of February 10, 2017. | ||
10.7* | Termination of Property Management and Leasing Agreement among Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc., Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II, LP and several affiliated special purpose entities, Behringer Harvard Opportunity Management Services, LLC, and Behringer Harvard Real Estate Services, LLC, and Stratera Services, LLC effective as of February 10, 2017. | ||
10.8* | Advisory Management Agreement among Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc., Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II, LP and LSG-BH II Advisor LLC (“LSG-BH II Advisor”) effective as of February 10, 2017. | ||
10.9* | Advisory Agreement among Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc., Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II, LP and LSG Development Advisor LLC (“LSG-BH II Advisor”) effective as of February 10, 2017. | ||
10.10* | Property Management and Leasing Agreement among Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc., Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II, LP and several affiliated special purpose entities, and LSG-BH II Property Manager LLC effective as of February 10, 2017. | ||
99.1 | Third Amended and Restated Share Redemption Program of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT II, Inc. adopted as of May 15, 2014 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to Form 8-K filed on May 16, 2014) | ||
21.1* | List of Subsidiaries | ||
31.1* | Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification | ||
31.2* | Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification | ||
32.1* | Section 1350 Certification** | ||
32.2* | Section 1350 Certification** | ||
101* | The following financial statements from the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, filed on March 16, 2017, formatted in XBRL: (i) Consolidated Balance Sheets, (ii) Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss), (iii) Consolidated Statements of Equity, (iv) Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and (v) the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | ||
________________________________
* Filed or furnished herewith.
** In accordance with Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K, this Exhibit is not deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section. Such certifications will not be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.
F-35