Retail Value Inc. - Annual Report: 2019 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019

OR

For the transition period from                to               

Commission file number 1-38517

RETAIL VALUE INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (216) 755-5500

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

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

None

(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 ☐     No ☑

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  Yes ☐     No ☑

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 ☑     No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted 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 such files).  Yes ☑     No ☐

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

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☑

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes ☐     No ☑

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant at June 28, 2019, was $513.4 million.

(APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE REGISTRANTS)

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.  

19,816,022 common shares outstanding as of February 14, 2020

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

The registrant incorporates by reference in Part III hereof portions of its definitive Proxy Statement for its 2020 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.  

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3

PART I

General Development and Narrative Description of Business

Retail Value Inc. is an Ohio corporation (the “Company” or “RVI”) formed in December 2017.  As of December 31, 2017, RVI did not conduct any business and did not have any material assets or liabilities. As of December 31, 2019, RVI owned and operated a portfolio of 28 assets, composed of 16 continental United States assets and 12 assets in Puerto Rico.  As of December 31, 2019, these properties consisted of retail shopping centers composed of 11.4 million square feet of gross leasable area (“GLA”) located in 11 states and Puerto Rico.  The Company’s continental U.S. assets comprised 55% and the properties in Puerto Rico comprised 45% of its total consolidated revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019.  RVI’s centers have a diverse tenant base that includes national retailers such as Walmart/Sam’s Club, Bed, Bath & Beyond, PetSmart, the TJX Companies (T.J. Maxx, Marshalls and HomeGoods), Kohl’s, Best Buy and Gap.  Prior to July 1, 2018, RVI was a consolidated, wholly-owned subsidiary of SITE Centers Corp. (“SITE Centers”) and was presented on a carve-out basis in accordance with the guidelines established by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

The Company focuses on realizing value in its business through operations and sales of its assets, the proceeds of which are expected to be used for operating expenses, repayment of indebtedness and distributions to the Company’s preferred and common shareholders.  The Company is a Real Estate Investment Trust (“REIT”) which is externally managed and advised by one or more wholly-owned subsidiaries of SITE Centers (collectively with such wholly-owned subsidiaries, the “Manager”), a self-administered and self-managed REIT in the business of acquiring, owning, developing, redeveloping, expanding, leasing, financing and managing shopping centers and the Company’s parent prior to its spin-off into a separate, publicly traded company on July 1, 2018.  In February 2018, the Company and the Manager entered into three amended and restated management and leasing agreements for the provision of property management services for (a) properties held in the continental United States directly by the Company, (b) properties held in the continental United States by a taxable REIT subsidiary (a “TRS”) of the Company and (c) properties held in Puerto Rico (together, the “Property Management Agreements”).  In addition, on July 1, 2018, the Company and the Manager entered into a corporate management agreement (the “External Management Agreement” and, collectively with the Property Management Agreements, the “Management Agreements”) pursuant to which the Manager provides corporate management services to the Company.

Recent Developments

See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in Item 7 and the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, for information on certain recent developments of the Company, which is incorporated herein by reference to such information.  

Retail Environment

Though leasing prospects are heavily dependent on local conditions, in general the Company continues to see demand from a broad range of tenants for its continental U.S. space, as many tenants continue to adapt to an omni-channel retail environment. Value-oriented tenants continue to take market share from conventional and national chain department stores.  Some conventional department stores and national chains have announced bankruptcies, store closures and/or reduced expansion plans in recent years leading to a smaller overall number of tenants requiring large store formats. New demand for space at the Company’s Puerto Rico properties is somewhat more limited, especially with respect to big box and national tenants.  

4

At December 31, 2019, the Company had 170 leases expiring in 2020 with an average base rent per square foot of $21.87.  The following table summarizes the portfolio’s leased rate and leasing spreads for the comparable leases executed for the periods presented, as well as the weighted-average cost of tenant improvements and lease costs:

The decrease in the leased rate reflects the impact of continental U.S. asset dispositions as well as a combination of anchor and store tenant expirations and tenant bankruptcies.  The Company’s leasing spread calculation includes only those deals that were executed within one year of the date the prior tenant vacated and, as a result, is a good benchmark to compare the average annualized base rent of expiring leases with the comparable executed market rental rates. The continental U.S. new lease spreads of negative 2.1% were negatively impacted by one new lease with a ten-year term offset by other new leases with a positive spread of 14.4%. The continental U.S. renewal spreads were negative due to several anchor tenant leases, one of which extended the term by 15 years.  Puerto Rico new lease spreads were primarily impacted by entering into new leases at lower rents with nominal capital expenditures.  The Company expects continued volatility in the Puerto Rico leasing spreads as the Company prioritizes maintaining and increasing occupancy.  In addition, the Company’s overall total reported leasing spreads could vary significantly from year to year depending upon both the volume and size of leases executed in each period, particularly as the size of the portfolio gets smaller due to asset sales. For more information, see “Risk Factors—The Company’s Dependence on Rental Income May Adversely Affect Its Ability to Meet Its Debt Obligations and Make Distributions to Shareholders.”

Competition

Numerous real estate companies and developers, private and public, compete with the Company in leasing space in shopping centers to tenants. The Company competes with other real estate companies and developers in terms of rental rate, property location, availability of other space and maintenance.

Insurance

The Company has comprehensive liability, casualty, flood, terrorism and rental loss insurance policies on its properties. The Company believes the policy specifications and insured limits are appropriate and adequate for its properties given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage and industry practice; however, the Company’s insurance coverage may not be sufficient to fully cover its losses. For additional information, please refer to the discussion in this section, “Risk Factors.”

Governmental Regulations

The Company’s business is subject to numerous governmental regulations, including regulations relating to the ownership of real estate, environmental law, regulations governing REITs and others.  For additional information, please refer to the discussion in this section, “Risk Factors.”

Compliance with Environmental Laws

As an owner of real estate, the Company is subject to various federal, state, territorial and local laws, ordinances and regulations. See the detailed discussion of these and other risks related to environmental matters in “Risk Factors— The Company’s Real Estate Investments May Contain Environmental Risks That Could Adversely Affect Its Results of Operations” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

5

Qualification as a Real Estate Investment Trust

The Company met the qualification requirements of a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, commencing with the taxable year ended December 31, 2018. Accordingly, the Company generally is not subject to federal income tax, provided that it makes distributions to its shareholders equal to at least 90% of its REIT taxable income as defined under Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and continues to satisfy certain other requirements.  As a result, the Company, with the exception of its TRS, is not subject to federal income tax to the extent it meets certain requirements of the Code.  

The Company holds a number of properties indirectly through a TRS.  Income from operations and gains from the sale of property by a TRS are subject to tax at the TRS level at corporate tax rates.  The current U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to corporations is 21%.

Employees

The Company is managed by the Manager pursuant to the Management Agreements. All of the Company’s executive officers are employees of the Manager or its affiliates. The Company does not have any employees.

Corporate Information

The Company is an Ohio corporation and was incorporated in 2017.  The Company’s principal executive offices are located at 3300 Enterprise Parkway, Beachwood, Ohio, 44122, and its telephone number is (216) 755-5500. The Company’s website is www.retailvalueinc.com.  The Company uses the Investors section of its website as a channel for routine distribution of important information, including press releases and financial information.  The information the Company posts to its website may be deemed to be material, and investors and others interested in the Company are encouraged to routinely monitor and review the information that the Company posts on its website in addition to following the Company’s press releases, SEC filings and public conference calls and webcasts.  The Company posts filings made with the SEC to its website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC, including the Company’s annual, quarterly and current reports on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K, the Company’s proxy statements and any amendments to those reports or statements.  All such postings and filings are available on the Company’s website free of charge.  In addition, this website allows investors and other interested persons to sign up to automatically receive e-mail alerts when the Company posts news releases and financial information on its website.  The SEC also maintains a website (https://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC.  The content on, or accessible through, any website referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019, is not incorporated by reference into, and shall not be deemed part of, this Annual Report on Form 10-K unless expressly noted.  

Information About the Company’s Executive Officers

The section below provides information regarding the Company’s executive officers as of February 14, 2020:

David R. Lukes, age 50, has served as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since February 2018, as a Director of the Company since April 2018, and as President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of SITE Centers since March 2017. Prior to joining SITE Centers, Mr. Lukes served as Chief Executive Officer of Equity One, Inc. (“Equity One”), an owner, developer and operator of shopping centers, as well as a member of Equity One’s Board of Directors from June 2014 until March 2017. Mr. Lukes also served as Equity One’s Executive Vice President from May 2014 to June 2014. Prior to joining Equity One, Mr. Lukes served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Sears Holding Corporation affiliate Seritage Realty Trust, a real estate company, from 2012 through April 2014. In addition, Mr. Lukes served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Olshan Properties, a privately-owned real estate firm that specializes in the development, acquisition and management of commercial real estate, from 2010 through 2012. From 2002 to 2010, Mr. Lukes served in various senior management positions at Kimco Realty Corporation, including serving as its Chief Operating Officer from 2008 to 2010. Mr. Lukes also serves as a Director of Citycon Oyj, an owner and operator of shopping centers located in the Nordic region, the shares of which are traded on the Helsinki Stock Exchange.  Mr. Lukes holds a Bachelor of Environmental Design from Miami University, a Master of Architecture from the University of Pennsylvania and a Master of Science in real estate development from Columbia University.

Christa A. Vesy, age 49, has served as Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer and Treasurer of the Company since November 2019, as Executive Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company from February 2018 to November 2019 and as Executive Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of SITE Centers, since March 2012. From July 2016 to March 2017, Ms. Vesy also served as Interim Chief Financial Officer of SITE Centers. In these roles, Ms. Vesy oversees the property and corporate accounting and financial reporting functions for SITE Centers.  Previously Ms. Vesy served as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of SITE Centers from November 2006. Prior to joining SITE Centers, Ms. Vesy worked for The Lubrizol Corporation, where she served as manager of external financial reporting and then as controller for the lubricant additives business segment. Prior to joining Lubrizol, from 1993 to September 2004, Ms. Vesy held various positions with the Assurance and Business Advisory Services group of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, a registered public accounting firm, including

6

Senior Manager from 1999 to September 2004. Ms. Vesy graduated with a Bachelor of Science in business administration from Miami University. Ms. Vesy is a certified public accountant (CPA) and member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA).

Michael A. Makinen, age 55, has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company since February 2018 and as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of SITE Centers since March 2017. Prior to joining SITE Centers, he served as Chief Operating Officer of Equity One beginning in July 2014. Prior to Equity One, Mr. Makinen served as Chief Operating Officer of Olshan Properties, a privately owned real estate firm specializing in commercial real estate, from 2010 to June 2014, as Vice President of Real Estate of United Retail Group from 2008 to 2010, as Vice President of Real Estate of Linens ‘n Things from 2004 to 2008 and as Executive Vice President of Thompson Associate, Inc., a real estate consulting firm, from 1990 to 2004. Mr. Makinen holds a Bachelor of Science from Michigan State University and a Master of Arts in geography from Indiana University.

The Company’s Manager

The Company is externally managed and advised by the Manager pursuant to the Management Agreements. The Company does not have any employees. Instead, pursuant to the terms of the External Management Agreement, the Manager provides the Company with its management team, including a chief executive officer, along with appropriate support personnel, in order to provide the management services to be provided by the Manager to the Company. Accordingly, each of the Company’s executive officers is an executive of SITE Centers.

SITE Centers, however, is not obligated to dedicate any of its executives or other personnel exclusively to the Company. In addition, neither SITE Centers nor its executives or other personnel, including its executive officers supplied to the Company, are obligated to dedicate any specific portion of its or their time to the Company. The External Management Agreement requires only that members of the Company’s management team devote such time as is necessary and appropriate, commensurate with the level of the Company’s activity. Nevertheless, the Company believes it benefits from the personnel, relationships and experience of SITE Centers’ executive team.

The Management Agreements were negotiated between related parties, and although the Company believes the terms are reasonable and approximate terms of an arm’s-length transaction, their terms, including fees and other amounts payable, may not be as favorable to the Company as if they had been negotiated at arm’s length with an unaffiliated third party. However, the Manager is at all times subject to the supervision and oversight of the Board of Directors and has only such functions, responsibilities and authority as are specified in the Management Agreements.

For more information, see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to the Company’s Relationship with SITE Centers and the Manager” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Executive Summary—Manager” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The following are certain risk factors that could affect the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. The risks highlighted below are not the only ones that the Company faces. Investors should carefully consider each of the following risks and all of the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Some of these risks relate principally to the Company’s relationship with SITE Centers, while others relate principally to the Company’s business and the industry in which it operates or to the securities markets generally and ownership of the Company’s common shares. If any of the following risks actually occur, the Company’s business, financial condition or results of operations could be negatively affected.

Risks Related to the Company’s Business, Properties and Strategies

The Company May Have Difficulty Selling Its Real Estate Investments at Attractive Prices or at All, and Its Ability to Distribute All or a Portion of the Net Proceeds from Any Such Sales to Its Shareholders Will Be Limited by the Terms of the Mortgage Financing; Furthermore, Due to the Dividend Preference of the Company’s Series A Preferred Shares, Distributions of Such Proceeds to Holders of the Company’s Common Shares Are Unlikely to Occur Until After Aggregate Dividends Have Been Paid on the Series A Preferred Shares in an Amount Equal to the Preference Amount.

A key component of the Company’s business strategy is the sale of its properties and using the proceeds thereof to pay operating expenses, repay indebtedness and make distributions to shareholders. The Company’s mortgage financing contains significant restrictions on the Company’s ability to distribute sales proceeds to shareholders. As a result, the Company anticipates that the majority of distributions to shareholders will not occur until after the mortgage loan or any refinancing thereof has been repaid. In addition, subject to the Company’s ability to distribute an amount equal to the minimum amount required to be distributed in order for the Company to maintain its status as a REIT and to avoid any Company-level U.S. federal income taxes imposed under the Code (the “Required REIT Distribution”), the terms of the Company’s series A preferred shares prohibit distributions to holders of the

7

Company’s common shares until the aggregate dividends paid on the series A preferred shares equal $190 million, which amount may be increased by up to an additional $10 million depending on the level of asset sale proceeds (the “preference amount”). Due to the dividend preference of the series A preferred shares, distributions to holders of common shares in excess of the Required REIT Distribution, if any, are not anticipated to occur until after aggregate dividends have been paid on the series A preferred shares in an amount equal to the preference amount. The Company cannot predict when or if it will declare dividends to the holders of series A preferred shares and when or if such dividends, if paid, will equal the preference amount. It is possible that the Company may never pay dividends on the series A preferred shares equaling the preference amount. If such circumstances were to occur, the Company would not be able to pay any dividends to its common shareholders in excess of the Required REIT Distribution.

Furthermore, real estate investments are relatively illiquid and, as a result, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to sell its properties on favorable terms or at all. Moreover, real estate sales prices are constantly changing and fluctuate with changes in interest rates, supply and demand dynamics, occupancy percentages, lease rates, the availability of suitable buyers and financing, the perceived quality and dependability of income flows from tenants and a number of other factors, both local and national. To date, all of the properties sold by the Company have been located in the continental U.S,. and a significant number of its remaining properties are located in Puerto Rico.  Sales of the Company’s properties in Puerto Rico are subject to additional challenges and uncertainties, including, that there have been very few sales of comparable assets in Puerto Rico in recent years, the number of potential buyers for Puerto Rico assets is likely more limited than for continental U.S. assets, the availability of financing for Puerto Rico properties is less certain and economic and political conditions in Puerto Rico may differ materially from those in the continental U.S.  Accordingly, the Company may not be able to sell its properties in Puerto Rico at prices as attractive as those it has achieved for the properties sold in the continental U.S., or at all.  Subject to certain exceptions, the terms of the mortgage financing also prohibit sales of the Company’s continental U.S. properties unless prices equal or exceed the release price designated for a specific property. To the extent the Company does not receive offers for its properties that exceed applicable release prices, the Company may be unable to sell assets unless it is able to refinance or amend the terms of the mortgage financing. Prices and capitalization rates obtained for continental U.S. properties previously sold by the Company may not be representative of prices and capitalization rates obtained in connection with the disposition of the Company’s remaining continental U.S. assets, and future sale prices may differ materially from the Company’s book values and from appraised values previously obtained for those assets.  When the Company sells any of its assets, it may recognize a loss on such sale.

A significant number of the Company’s remaining continental U.S. properties are larger in terms of net operating income and GLA than the continental U.S. properties that have previously been sold by the Company.  The Company expects that the market for these larger properties may be less liquid and more fragmented than the market for many of the properties it has already sold.  Accordingly, it is possible that many of the Company’s remaining continental U.S. properties will be sold at cap rates higher than what the Company achieved for the properties it has sold to date.

To the extent the Company provides any estimates with respect to the value of the Company’s assets or the timing and amount of distributions it will make, such estimates are based on multiple assumptions, one or more of which may prove incorrect, and the actual prices realized from the sale of the Company’s assets and the timing and amount of actual distributions may vary materially from the Company’s estimates. The Company cannot assure shareholders of the actual amount they will receive in distributions from the Company’s disposition strategy or when they will be paid. Additionally, the Board of Directors has discretion as to the timing of distributions of net sales proceeds. For more information see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity, Capital Resources and Financing Activities” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Company’s ability to sell its properties may also be limited by its need to avoid the 100% prohibited transactions tax that is imposed on gain recognized by a REIT from the sale of property characterized as dealer property, unless the disposition qualifies for a safe harbor under the Code. In order to ensure that a property disposition qualifies for the safe harbor, the Company may be required to hold such property for a minimum period of time and comply with certain other requirements in the Code. The Company owns certain of its properties in its TRS in order to mitigate the application of the prohibited transactions tax.  Gain from the disposition of properties owned indirectly through a TRS is not subject to the 100% prohibited transactions tax, but such gain would be subject to tax at the TRS level (the current U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to corporations is 21%). If the Company is not able to sell its properties at the prices it expects and in a cost-efficient manner, its profitability and its ability to meet debt and other financial obligations and make distributions to shareholders could be materially adversely affected.

The Company’s Real Estate Assets May Be Subject to Impairment Charges.

On a periodic basis, the Company assesses whether there are any indicators that the value of its real estate assets may be impaired. A property’s value is impaired only if the estimate of the aggregate future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) to be generated by the property are less than the carrying value of the property. In the Company’s estimate of cash flows, it considers factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, the effects of demand, competition and other factors. As the Company evaluates the potential sale of an asset, the undiscounted future cash flow considerations include the most likely course of action at the balance sheet date based on current plans, intended holding periods and available market information. The Company is required to make subjective assessments as to whether there are impairments in the value of its real estate assets. These assessments have a direct impact on the Company’s earnings because recording an impairment charge results in an immediate

8

negative adjustment to earnings. There can be no assurance that the Company will not take significant impairment charges in the future, especially in light of the Company’s strategy to sell properties. Any future impairment could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations in the period in which the charge is taken.

The Company’s Board of Directors and Management May Change the Company’s Strategy Without Shareholder Approval.

The Company’s Board of Directors and management may change the Company’s strategy with respect to capitalization, investment, distributions, operations and/or disposition of properties. The Board of Directors and management may establish new strategies as deemed appropriate, and the Company may become a long-term real estate holder and begin to make acquisitions in the United States and/or Puerto Rico, particularly if it is unable to sell its remaining properties at reasonably attractive prices. Although the Board of Directors and management have no present intention to revise or amend the Company’s strategy and policies, they may do so at any time without a vote by the shareholders. The results of decisions made by the Board of Directors and management could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or results of operations, including its ability to distribute cash to shareholders or qualify as a REIT.

The Company May Adopt a Plan of Liquidation, Which May Have Adverse Tax and Other Consequences.

Subject to ratification by shareholders, the Company’s Board of Directors may elect to adopt a formal plan of liquidation in the future to sell all or substantially all of the assets of the Company and its subsidiaries and to liquidate and dissolve the Company. The REIT provisions of the Code generally require that the Company distribute at least 90% of its REIT taxable income each year (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gain) as a dividend to its shareholders. Liquidating distributions made pursuant to any plan of liquidation are expected to qualify for the dividends paid deduction, provided that they are made within 24 months of the adoption of such plan. In the event a plan of liquidation is adopted, conditions may arise that might prevent the Company from being able to liquidate within such 24-month period. For instance, it may not be possible to sell the Company’s assets at acceptable prices during such period. In such event, rather than retain its assets and risk losing its status as a REIT, the Company could elect, for tax purposes, to transfer its remaining assets and liabilities to a liquidating trust or, subject to the approval of its shareholders, convert to a limited liability company in order to meet the 24-month requirement.

Any shareholders who have not sold their common shares prior to such a transfer or conversion would receive beneficial interests in the liquidating trust or membership interests in the limited liability company equivalent to their ownership interests in the Company, as represented by the Company’s common shares that they held prior to the transfer or conversion.  Beneficial interests in the liquidating trust and membership interests in the limited liability company would generally be non-transferable except by will, intestate succession or operation of law.  Because of the illiquid nature of these interests, there could be no assurance as to how long any holder thereof may be required to hold them.

Furthermore, such a transfer or conversion would be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a distribution of the Company’s remaining assets and liabilities to its shareholders, immediately followed by a contribution of the assets and liabilities to the liquidating trust or limited liability company. As a result, shareholders would recognize gain (or loss) in the tax year of such transfer or conversion equal to the difference between (x) the shareholder’s share of the cash and the fair market value of any assets received by the liquidating trust or limited liability company, less any liabilities assumed by the liquidating trust or limited liability company and (y) the shareholder’s tax basis in his or her common shares (reduced by the amount of all prior liquidating distributions paid to the shareholder during the liquidation period), prior to the sale of such assets and the distribution of the net cash proceeds, if any. Furthermore, for purposes of computing gain (or loss), the fair market value of any remaining assets (net of liabilities) may not necessarily correspond with the Company’s share price. Such transfer or conversion also may have adverse tax consequences for tax-exempt and non-U.S. shareholders, including with respect to the ongoing activity of the liquidating trust or limited liability company.

In addition, it is possible that the fair market value of the assets received by the liquidating trust or limited liability company, as estimated for purposes of determining the extent of a shareholder’s gain at the time interests in the liquidating trust or limited liability company are received by the shareholders, will exceed the cash and fair market value of property ultimately received by the liquidating trust or limited liability company on a sale of the assets. In this case, the shareholder would recognize a loss in a taxable year subsequent to the taxable year in which the gain was recognized. The ability of shareholders to claim this loss may be limited.

The Company May Establish a Reserve Fund with Proceeds of Its Final Asset Sales in Order to Satisfy Claims.  

The Company will likely seek to file articles of dissolution with the Secretary of State of the State of Ohio promptly after the sale of all of the Company’s remaining assets or at such time as it transfers its remaining assets, subject to its liabilities, into a liquidating entity. Pursuant to Ohio law, the Company would continue to exist for a period of five years following the filing of the articles of dissolution for the purpose of paying, satisfying and discharging any debts or obligations, collecting and distributing its assets, and doing all other acts required to liquidate and wind up its business and affairs. Under Ohio law, if the Company makes distributions to its shareholders without making adequate provisions for payment of creditors’ claims, the Company’s shareholders could be liable to creditors to the extent of any payments due to creditors (up to the aggregate amount previously received by the shareholder from the Company). Therefore, the Company may establish a reserve fund with a portion of the proceeds from its final asset sales in order to satisfy and discharge any unknown or contingent claims, debts or obligations which might arise during the five-

9

year period subsequent to the filing of the articles of dissolution.  As a result, it is likely that the Company would not distribute all proceeds from sales of its final assets until months or years following the date of such sales.  

E-commerce May Continue to Have an Adverse Impact on the Company’s Tenants and Business.

E-commerce is broadly embraced by the public and growth in the e-commerce share of overall consumer sales is likely to continue in the future.  Competition from internet retailers has resulted and could continue to result in a downturn or distress in the business of some of the Company’s tenants and could affect the way other current and future tenants lease space. For example, the migration toward e-commerce has led many omni-channel retailers to prune the number and size of their traditional “brick and mortar” locations to increasingly rely on e-commerce and alternative distribution channels. The Company cannot predict with certainty how continued growth in e-commerce will impact the demand for space at its properties or how much revenue will be generated at traditional store locations in the future. If the Company is unable to anticipate and respond promptly to trends in retailer and consumer behavior, its occupancy levels and operating results could be materially and adversely affected.

The Economic Performance and Value of the Company’s Shopping Centers Depend on Many Factors, Each of Which Could Have an Adverse Impact on the Company’s Cash Flows and Operating Results.

The economic performance and value of the Company’s real estate holdings can be affected by many factors, including the following:

Because the Company’s properties consist of retail shopping centers, the Company’s performance is linked to general economic conditions in the retail market, including conditions that affect consumers’ purchasing behaviors and disposable income. The market for retail space has been and may continue to be adversely affected by the adverse financial condition of some large retailing companies, the ongoing consolidation in the retail sector, increases in consumer internet purchases, the excess amount of retail space in a number of markets and weakness in the national, regional and local economies. The Company’s performance is affected by its tenants’ results of operations, which are impacted by consumer preferences and macroeconomic factors that affect consumers’ ability to purchase goods and services. If the price of the goods and services offered by its tenants materially increases, including as a result of increases in taxes or tariffs resulting from, among other things, potential changes in the Code, the operating results and the financial condition of the Company’s tenants and demand for retail space could be adversely affected. To the extent that any of these conditions occur, they are likely to affect market rents for retail space. In addition, the Company may face challenges in the management and maintenance of its properties or incur increased operating costs, such as real estate taxes, insurance and utilities, that may make its properties unattractive to tenants. In addition, the Company’s properties compete with numerous shopping venues, including regional malls, outlet centers, other shopping centers and e-commerce, in attracting and retaining retailers. As of December 31, 2019, leases at the Company’s properties were scheduled to expire on a total of approximately 8% of leased GLA during 2020. For those leases that renew, rental rates upon renewal may be lower than current rates. For those leases that do not renew, the Company may not be able to promptly re-lease the space on favorable terms or with reasonable capital investments. Such events may adversely affect the Company’s financial condition and operating results, its ability to satisfy debt obligations and to make distributions to shareholders and its ability to sell properties on attractive terms or at all.

The Company Relies on Major Tenants, Making It Vulnerable to Changes in the Business and Financial Condition of, or Demand for Its Space by, Such Tenants.

As of December 31, 2019, the annualized base rental revenues of the Company’s tenants that were equal to or exceed 3.0% of the Company’s aggregate annualized shopping center base rental revenues, were as follows:

10

The retail shopping sector has been affected by economic conditions, including increases in consumer internet purchases, as well as the competitive nature of the retail business and the competition for market share where stronger retailers have out-positioned some of the weaker retailers.  These shifts have forced some market share away from weaker retailers and required them, in some cases, to declare bankruptcy and/or close stores.  In some cases, major tenants may declare bankruptcy or might take advantage of early termination of leases in connection with a plan to close stores. Bankruptcies, store closures and reduced expansion plans by conventional department stores and national chains in recent years have resulted in a smaller overall number of tenants requiring large store formats.  

As information becomes available regarding the status of the Company’s leases with tenants in financial distress or as the future plans for their spaces change, the Company may be required to write off and/or accelerate depreciation and amortization expense associated with a significant portion of the tenant-related deferred charges in future periods.  The Company’s income and ability to meet its financial obligations could also be adversely affected in the event of the bankruptcy, insolvency or significant downturn in the business of one of these tenants or any of the Company’s other major tenants.  In addition, the Company’s results could be adversely affected if any of these tenants do not renew their leases as they expire on terms favorable to the Company or at all.

The Company’s Dependence on Rental Income May Adversely Affect Its Ability to Meet Its Debt Obligations and Make Distributions to Shareholders.

Substantially all of the Company’s income is derived from rental income from real property.  As a result, the Company’s performance depends on its ability to collect rent from tenants.  The Company’s income and funds available for repayment of indebtedness and distribution to shareholders would be negatively affected if a significant number of its tenants, or any of its major tenants, were to do the following:

Any of these actions could result in the termination of tenants’ leases and the loss of rental income attributable to the terminated leases.  Lease terminations by an anchor tenant or a failure by that anchor tenant to occupy the premises may also permit other tenants in the same shopping centers to terminate their leases or reduce the amount of rent they pay pursuant to the terms of their leases.  In addition, the Company cannot be certain that any tenant whose lease expires will renew that lease or that it will be able to re-lease space on economically advantageous terms.  The loss of rental revenues from a number of the Company’s major tenants and its inability to replace such tenants may adversely affect the Company’s profitability, its ability to meet debt and other financial obligations and make distributions to shareholders and its ability to sell properties on attractive terms or at all.

The Company’s Cash Flows and Operating Results Could Be Adversely Affected by Required Payments of Debt or Related Interest and Other Risks of Its Debt Financing.

As a result of the mortgage loan, the Company is generally subject to the risks associated with debt financing.  These risks include the following:

If properties are mortgaged to secure payment of indebtedness, as is the case with the mortgage loan, and the Company cannot or does not make the mortgage payments, it may have to surrender the properties to the lender with a consequent loss of any prospective income and equity value from such properties, which may also adversely affect the Company’s credit ratings.  Any of

11

these risks can place strains on the Company’s cash flows, reduce its ability to make distributions to shareholders and adversely affect its results of operations.

Liquidity Constraints Could Impact the Company’s Ability to Pursue Its Strategy and Make Distributions to Its Shareholders.

The Company may have liquidity restraints due to a number of factors, including:

The Company may require additional capital for other capital needs including capital expenditures, working capital and other expenses related to its properties. There is no assurance that the Company will have sufficient capital for those purposes. If it does not have sufficient liquidity, there can be no assurance that the Company would be able to access the capital markets, and any failure to obtain financing to meet its capital needs, on favorable terms or at all, could reduce, delay or terminate planned distributions to its shareholders.

The Company’s Financial Condition Could Be Adversely Affected by Restrictive Covenants.

The instruments governing the Company’s debt, including the mortgage financing, contain operating covenants, as well as important limitations on the Company’s ability to incur additional indebtedness, sell one or more of its assets, make distributions to shareholders and access operating cash from properties. These instruments also contain customary default provisions, including the failure to pay principal and interest issued thereunder in a timely manner, the failure to comply with certain covenants and the failure of the Company or its subsidiaries to pay when due certain indebtedness beyond applicable grace and cure periods. These covenants also limit the Company’s ability to obtain additional funds needed to address cash shortfalls, improve properties or pursue opportunities or transactions that would provide substantial return to its shareholders. In addition, a breach of these covenants could cause a default or accelerate some or all of any other indebtedness the Company may incur, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition. For more information see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity, Capital Resources and Financing Activities” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Company Has Variable-Rate Debt and Interest Rate Risk Subject to a Cap.

The Company has indebtedness with interest rates that vary depending upon the market index. In particular, the Company’s mortgage financing bears interest, at December 31, 2019, at a variable rate equal to the one-month LIBOR rate plus 2.68% per annum, subject to an interest rate cap of 4.5% on the one-month LIBOR rate. The mortgage financing is composed of several tranches of debt with interest rates varying by seniority, and the weighted-average interest rate spread applicable to the mortgage financing will increase over time as the servicer applies prepayments (including prepayments made with net proceeds from the Company’s asset sales) to more senior tranches of the loan. As of December 31, 2019, the interest rate was 4.4%. The Company may incur additional variable-rate debt in the future to the extent permitted by the terms of the mortgage financing or any refinancing thereof. Increases in interest rates would increase the Company’s interest expense, which would negatively affect net earnings and cash available for payment of its debt obligations and distributions to its shareholders.

The Company May Be Adversely Affected by the Potential Discontinuation of LIBOR.

In July 2017, the Financial Conduct Authority (the authority that regulates LIBOR) announced it intends to stop compelling banks to submit rates for the calculation of LIBOR after 2021. The Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”) has proposed that the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) serve as the alternative to LIBOR for use in derivatives and other financial contracts currently indexed to LIBOR.  ARRC has proposed a paced market transition plan to SOFR from LIBOR.  As of December 31, 2019, the Company had $674.3 million of indebtedness that was indexed to LIBOR.

In the event that LIBOR is discontinued, the interest rate for the Company’s debt that is indexed to LIBOR will be based on replacement rates (which may include SOFR) or alternate base rates as specified in the applicable documentation governing such indebtedness or as otherwise agreed upon.  The replacement rate or alternate base rate could be higher or more volatile than LIBOR prior to its discontinuance.  In addition, the Company expects that amendments will be made to its interest rate cap agreements that will result in the LIBOR-based cap rate reverting, upon the occurrence of such events, to the same rate that would be expected to be used as the replacement rate or alternate base rate under the related debt agreements.  The full impact of the expected transition away

12

from LIBOR and the potential discontinuation of LIBOR after 2021 is not known, but these changes could adversely affect the Company’s cash flow, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company Is Subject to Risks Relating to the Puerto Rican Economy and Government.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company owned 12 assets in Puerto Rico, aggregating 4.4 million square feet of Company-owned GLA. These assets represented 45% of both the Company’s total consolidated revenue and the Company’s consolidated property revenue less property expenses (i.e., property net operating income) for the year ended December 31, 2019.  Additionally, these assets accounted for 39% of Company-owned GLA at December 31, 2019.

For more than a decade, the Puerto Rico economy has experienced a sustained downturn, and the territorial government of Puerto Rico has operated at substantial spending deficits.  These economic conditions, which have been exacerbated by severe weather events, natural disasters and their aftermath, have adversely affected the territorial government’s cash flows and have resulted in defaults on various municipal and other bonds issued by the territorial government of Puerto Rico and certain utility companies.  

U.S. Congress approved the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act of 2016 (PROMESA) to provide a consensual restructuring framework for the territorial government of Puerto Rico and its creditors. PROMESA, among other things, established a seven-member federally appointed oversight board (the “Oversight Board”) with broad powers over the finances of the government of Puerto Rico and its instrumentalities. In 2016, the President of the U.S. appointed seven voting members to the Oversight Board through the process established in PROMESA, which authorized the President to select the members from several lists required to be submitted by congressional leaders. In February 2019, however, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (the “First Circuit”) declared such appointments unconstitutional on the grounds that they did not comply with the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which requires that principal federal officers be appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate. In June 2019, the Supreme Court of the U.S. (the “Supreme Court”) granted certiorari to consider various challenges to the First Circuit’s ruling, and the oral arguments were held in October. The Supreme Court’s decision is expected sometime in 2020.

Moreover, although the government of Puerto Rico and the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (the “PREPA”) have obtained preliminary creditor approval for the restructuring of certain of their outstanding debt obligations, court approval must still be obtained, and significant other government indebtedness and pension obligations must still be addressed. In the case of PREPA’s restructuring, a restructuring support agreement (the “RSA”) was entered into setting forth with the creditors of the public utility the principal terms of a proposed restructuring. The RSA must still also be approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. In the event the RSA is not approved or the government of Puerto Rico and its public corporations and other instrumentalities are unable to complete the restructuring of their obligations or obtain forbearance on related debt service payments, they may be unable to provide various services (including utilities) relied upon in the operation of businesses in Puerto Rico.

Furthermore, unreliability and significantly higher cost of utilities and other government services, the inability to recover from recent and future severe weather events and natural disasters (including as a result of the delay or failure to receive recovery funds allocated by U.S. Congress), recent political instability and a continued economic downturn may result in continued or increased migration of residents of Puerto Rico to mainland United States and elsewhere, which could continue to decrease the territory’s tax base, thereby exacerbating the government’s cash flow issues and further decreasing the number of consumers in Puerto Rico. In addition, the Supreme Court’s decision in the constitutional challenges to the appointments made under PROMESA could affect the validity of the Oversight Board’s settlement agreements with creditors and cause further uncertainty with respect to Puerto Rico’s restructuring plans. These risks could further challenge the profitability of tenants at the Company’s Puerto Rico properties and adversely impact the Company’s cash flows and ability to lease or sell its Puerto Rico properties.

Geographic Concentration of the Company’s Properties Makes It Vulnerable to Natural Disasters, Extreme Weather Conditions and Climate Change. An Uninsured Loss or a Loss That Exceeds the Limits of the Company’s Insurance Policies Could Subject the Company to a Loss of Capital and Revenue.

A significant number of the Company’s properties are located in areas that are susceptible to tropical storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, wildfires, sea-level rise and other natural disasters. In particular, properties located in Puerto Rico comprised 45% of the Company’s consolidated revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019. Extreme weather events and natural disasters in recent years, including Hurricane Maria, which made landfall in Puerto Rico in September 2017 and recurring earthquake activity in early 2020, have adversely impacted the insurance marketplace, and the potential increase in the frequency and intensity of natural disasters, extreme weather-related events and climate change in the future may further limit the types of coverage and the coverage limits the Company is able to obtain on commercially reasonable terms.  These natural disasters and extreme weather conditions may also disrupt the business of the Company’s tenants, which may affect the ability of some tenants to pay rent and may reduce the willingness of tenants to remain in or move to areas affected by these conditions, including Puerto Rico.  The process of repairing and restoring properties impacted by these events may also hinder or delay the Company’s ability to sell these properties even if the Company is adequately insured with respect to the damage.

13

The Company maintains (i) all-risk property insurance with limits of $150 million per occurrence and in the aggregate, for earthquake and flood, for properties in the continental U.S. and $200 million per occurrence and in the aggregate, for earthquake and flood, for properties in Puerto Rico and (ii) general liability insurance with limits of $100 million, per occurrence and in the aggregate, for properties in the continental United States and Puerto Rico, in each case subject to various conditions, exclusions, deductibles and sub-limits for certain perils such as flood and earthquake. Coverage for a named windstorm for the Company’s continental U. S. properties is subject to a deductible of 2% to 5% of the total insured value of each property and for the Company’s Puerto Rico properties is subject to a deductible of 1% of the total insured value of each property. The Company also carries insurance for acts of terrorism up to $100 million per occurrence relating to property damage in the continental United States and $128 million per occurrence relating to property damage in Puerto Rico. Should a loss occur that is uninsured or is in an amount exceeding the applicable policy limit, or in the event of a loss that is subject to a substantial deductible under an insurance policy, the Company could lose all or part of its capital invested in, and anticipated revenue from, one or more of its properties, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operating results and financial condition, as well as its ability to make distributions to shareholders.

The Company’s mortgage financing also contains customary covenants requiring it to maintain insurance coverage. If the insurance market continues to tighten, the Company may not be able to satisfy these requirements at commercially reasonable costs. If lenders insist on greater coverage than the Company or potential purchasers of its properties are able to obtain on commercially reasonable terms, such requirements could materially and adversely affect the Company’s ability to refinance or sell its properties.

The Company’s Real Estate Investments May Contain Environmental Risks That Could Adversely Affect Its Results of Operations.

Conditions at the Company’s properties may subject the Company to liabilities, including environmental liabilities. The Company’s operating expenses could be higher than anticipated due to the cost of complying with existing or future environmental laws and regulations. In addition, under various federal, state, territorial and local laws, ordinances and regulations, the Company may be considered an owner or operator of real property or to have arranged for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances. As a result, the Company may become liable for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous substances released on or in its properties. The Company may also be liable for other potential costs that could relate to hazardous or toxic substances (including governmental fines and injuries to persons and property). The Company may incur such liability whether or not it knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. Such liability could be of substantial magnitude and divert management’s attention from other aspects of the Company’s business and, as a result, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operating results and financial condition, as well as its ability to make distributions to shareholders. Environmental conditions at the Company’s properties may also limit the number of potential buyers for a property and decrease the price at which a property can be sold (if it can be sold at all).

Compliance with Certain Laws and Governmental Rules and Regulations May Require the Company to Make Unplanned Expenditures That Adversely Affect the Company’s Cash Flows.

The Company is required to operate its properties in compliance with certain laws and governmental rules and regulations, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, fire and safety regulations, building codes and other land use regulations, as currently in effect or as they may be enacted or adopted and become applicable to the properties, from time to time. The Company may be required to make substantial capital expenditures to make upgrades at its properties or otherwise comply with those requirements, and these expenditures could have a material adverse effect on its ability to meet its financial obligations and make distributions to shareholders.

The Company Has Significant Shareholders Who May Exert Influence on the Company as a Result of Their Considerable Beneficial Ownership of the Company’s Common Shares, and Their Interests May Differ from the Interests of Other Shareholders.

Mr. Alexander Otto, who designated Mr. Henrie Koetter to serve as a member of the Board of Directors, is in a position to exert significant influence over the Company because of his considerable beneficial ownership of the Company’s common shares. As of February 14, 2020, the reported ownership of Mr. Otto was approximately 17% of the Company’s common shares, and therefore Mr. Otto may exert influence with respect to matters that are brought to a vote of the Board of Directors and/or the holders of the Company’s common shares. Among others, these matters include the election of directors, corporate finance transactions and joint venture activity, merger, acquisition and disposition activity and amendments to the Company’s Articles of Incorporation and Code of Regulations. In the context of major corporate events, the interests of the Company’s significant shareholders may differ from the interests of other shareholders. For example, if a significant shareholder does not support a merger, tender offer, sale of assets or other business combination because the shareholder judges it to be inconsistent with the shareholder’s investment strategy, the Company may be unable to enter into or consummate a transaction that would enable other shareholders to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market prices for common shares. Furthermore, if the Company’s significant shareholders sell substantial amounts of the Company’s common shares in the public market to enhance the shareholders’ liquidity positions, fund alternative investments or for other reasons, the trading price of the Company’s common shares could decline significantly, and other shareholders may be unable to

14

sell their common shares at favorable prices. The Company cannot predict or control how the Company’s significant shareholders may use the influence they will have as a result of their common share holdings.

A Disruption, Failure, or Breach of the Company’s Networks or Systems, Including as a Result of Cyber-Attacks, Could Harm Its Business.

The Company relies extensively on computer systems to manage its business. While the Manager maintains some of its own critical information technology systems, it also depends on third parties to provide important information technology services relating to several of the Company’s key business functions, such as electronic communications and certain finance functions. These systems are subject to damage or interruption from power outages, facility damage, computer or telecommunications failures, computer viruses, security breaches, vandalism, natural disasters, catastrophic events, human error and potential cyber threats, including malicious codes, worms, phishing attacks, ransomware and other sophisticated cyber-attacks. Although the Company believes that the Manager and such third parties employ a number of measures to prevent, detect and mitigate cyber threats, including password protection, firewalls, backup servers, threat monitoring and periodic penetration testing, the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access change frequently, and there is no guarantee that such efforts will be successful.  Should they occur, these threats could compromise the confidential information of the Company’s tenants and third-party vendors, disrupt the Company’s business operations and the availability and integrity of data in the Company’s systems and result in litigation, violation of applicable privacy and other laws, investigations, actions, fines or penalties. In the event of damage or disruption to the Company’s business due to these occurrences, the Company may not be able to successfully and quickly recover all of its critical business functions, assets and data.

Violent Crime, Including Terrorism and Mass Shooting, or Civilian Unrest May Affect the Markets in Which the Company Operates Its Business and Its Profitability.

Certain of the Company’s properties are located in or near major metropolitan areas or other areas that have experienced, and remain susceptible to, violent crime, including terrorist attacks and mass shootings. Any kind of violent criminal acts, including terrorist acts against public institutions or buildings or modes of public transportation (including airlines, trains or buses), could alter shopping habits or deter customers from visiting the Company’s shopping centers, which would have a negative effect on the Company’s business, the operations of its tenants and the value of its properties.

The Company May Be Subject to Litigation That Could Adversely Affect Its Results of Operations.

The Company may be a defendant from time to time in lawsuits and regulatory proceedings relating to its business. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation and regulatory proceedings, the Company cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of any such litigation or proceedings. An unfavorable outcome could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition or results of operations. Any such litigation could also lead to increased volatility of the trading price of the Company’s common shares.

The Company Has a Limited Operating History, and It May Not Be Able to Operate Its Business Successfully or Generate Sufficient Cash Flow to Meet Its Debt Service Obligations or Make or Sustain Distributions to Its Shareholders.

The Company was organized in late 2017 and has a limited operating history.  The Company cannot assure investors that it will be able to operate its business successfully or continue to implement its operating and disposition strategy. As a result, ownership of the Company’s common shares may entail more risk than an investment in the common shares of a real estate company with a substantial operating history. If the Company is unable to operate its business successfully, it would not be able to generate sufficient cash flow to meet its debt service obligations or make or sustain distributions to its shareholders, and investors could lose all or a portion of the value of their ownership in its common shares.

The Company’s Historical Combined Financial Information Is Not Necessarily Indicative of Its Future Financial Condition, Results of Operations or Cash Flows, nor Does It Reflect What the Company’s Financial Condition, Results of Operations or Cash Flows Would Have Been as an Independent Public Company During the Periods Presented.

The historical combined financial information for periods prior to July 1, 2018, included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K does not reflect what the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows would have been as an independent public company during such periods and is not necessarily indicative of the Company’s future financial condition, future results of operations or future cash flows.  This is primarily a result of the following factors:

15

Please refer to “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and corresponding notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Risks Related to the Company’s Relationship with SITE Centers and the Manager

The Company Is Dependent on the Manager, SITE Centers and Its Key Personnel Who Provide Services to the Company, and the Company May Not Find a Suitable Replacement for the Manager if the Management Agreements Are Terminated, or for Key Personnel if They Leave SITE Centers or Otherwise Become Unavailable to the Company.

The Company has no separate management and is reliant on the Manager. The Manager has significant discretion as to the implementation of the Company’s operating policies and strategy, although the Manager is subject to supervision by the Company’s Board of Directors. All of the Company’s executive officers are executives of SITE Centers. Accordingly, the Company believes that its success will depend to a significant extent upon the efforts, experience, diligence, skill and continued service of the officers and key personnel of SITE Centers. The departure of any of the officers or key personnel of SITE Centers could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s performance.

The Company offers no assurance that the Manager will remain the Company’s manager or that the Company will continue to have access to SITE Centers’ officers and key personnel. SITE Centers is not obligated to dedicate any specific personnel exclusively to the Company, nor is SITE Centers obligated to dedicate any specific portion of time to the Company’s business, and none of SITE Centers’ employees are contractually dedicated to the Company under the Management Agreements with the Manager. The officers and employees of SITE Centers have significant responsibilities associated with SITE Centers and, as a result, these individuals may not always be willing or able to devote sufficient time to the management of the Company’s business.

The Management Agreements extend only until June 30, 2020, with automatic six-month renewals thereafter subject to the right of the Company or the Manager to terminate the Management Agreements upon delivery of written notice at least 60 days in advance of any renewal date. If the Management Agreements are terminated, the Company may incur expenses and disruptions in transitioning to a replacement manager, and if no suitable replacement manager is found to manage the Company and its properties, the Company likely would not be able to execute its business plan.

The Company May Have Conflicts of Interest with SITE Centers and the Manager.

The Company is subject to conflicts of interest arising out of its relationships with SITE Centers and the Manager. Specifically, all of the Company’s executive officers are executives of SITE Centers. SITE Centers and the Company’s executive officers may have conflicts between their duties to the Company and their duties to, and interests in, SITE Centers. Conflicts with the Company’s business and interests are most likely to arise from any amendment of the Management Agreements, involvement in activities related to the allocation of SITE Centers’ management’s time and services between the Company and SITE Centers, the terms and timing of sales of Company properties and the lease of vacant space or renewal of existing leases at the Company’s properties, which may be located near and compete with properties owned or managed by affiliates of SITE Centers.

The Company will pay the Manager substantial fees regardless of the performance of the Company’s properties. The Manager’s entitlement to a management fee, which is not based upon performance metrics or goals, might reduce its incentive to devote its time and effort to seeking strategies that maximize total returns to the Company’s shareholders. The Manager may also be motivated to take or recommend certain actions with respect to dispositions, leasing and financing activities that could increase the potential that it will earn additional fees, but which may not be consistent with actions desired by the Company’s shareholders. This, in turn, could hurt the Company’s ability to make distributions to its shareholders, the value of the Company’s assets and the market price of the Company’s common shares.

Furthermore, as a holder of the Company’s series A preferred shares, which are entitled to a dividend preference over the Company’s common shares and restrict the ability of the Company to consummate certain transactions, the interests of SITE Centers, as well as the Manager, may not always align with those of the holders of the Company’s common shares. For instance, SITE Centers and the Manager may pursue certain allowed transactions that they expect to generate proceeds facilitating the prompt payment of distributions on the series A preferred shares but that do not maximize value of the Company’s assets. This, in turn, could hurt the Company’s ability to make distributions to the holders of its common shares, as well as the market price of the Company’s common shares.

16

The Management Agreements with the Manager Were Not Negotiated on an Arm’s-Length Basis and May Not Be as Favorable to the Company as if They Had Been Negotiated with an Unaffiliated Third Party and May Be Difficult to Terminate.

The Company’s executive officers and one of its five current directors is a current executive of SITE Centers. The Management Agreements, as well as several other agreements relating to the separation from SITE Centers, were negotiated between related parties, and, although the Company believes the terms are reasonable and approximate terms of an arm’s-length transaction, their terms, including fees and other amounts payable, may not be as favorable to the Company as if they had been negotiated at arm’s length with an unaffiliated third party.

The Property Management Agreements may be terminated on June 30, 2020, or if extended, at the end of any subsequent six-month term, by the Manager or by the Company, upon the provision of notice 60 days in advance.

The External Management Agreement may be terminated on June 30, 2020, or, if extended, at the end of any subsequent six-month term by the Manager or by a majority of the independent directors that, with respect to the relevant action to be taken under the External Management Agreement, are “disinterested directors” (as such term is used in section 1701.60 of the Ohio Revised Code (the “Ohio Code”)) on the Board of Directors, upon the provision of notice 60 days in advance.

The Property Management Agreements will be terminated if the External Management Agreement is terminated, or, with regard to each asset, if the asset is sold or a controlling interest is transferred. In addition to the expiry dates outlined above, the External Management Agreement:

Pursuant to the Management Agreements, the Manager will not assume any responsibility other than to render the services called for thereunder and will not be responsible for any action of the Board of Directors in following or declining to follow its advice or recommendations. The Manager maintains a contractual as opposed to a fiduciary relationship with the Company. Under the terms of the External Management Agreement, the Company will indemnify the Manager and its affiliates, as well as their respective officers (and persons serving as officers of the Company at the request of SITE Centers or the Company’s Board of Directors), directors, equityholders, members, partners and employees, for all liability, claims, damages and losses in the performance of their duties under the External Management Agreement, and related expenses, except to the extent arising from any act or omission on their part that is determined to constitute gross negligence or willful misconduct. Under the terms of the Property Management Agreements, the Company will indemnify the Manager for all liabilities, claims, obligations, expenses, losses, damages, judgments or other injuries that SITE Centers suffers in connection with (a) the Company’s material breach of the Property Management Agreement, (b) actions taken by the Manager at the Company’s direction, (c) certain contracts assumed by the Company in the event of termination of the Property Management Agreement and (d) the performance of the Manager to the extent in compliance with the Property Management Agreement, except, among other things, in the event that such request for indemnification is caused by the Manager’s gross negligence, fraud or willful misconduct.

The Company Is Subject to Regulatory and Reporting Requirements That Have Increased Legal, Accounting and Financial Compliance Costs.

Prior to the Company’s separation from SITE Centers, the Company relied on SITE Centers’ corporate infrastructure and financial reporting and compliance programs.  Following the separation, the Company has been subject to the reporting requirements under the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”) and the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”). The requirements of these rules and regulations increased, and will likely continue to increase, the Company’s legal, accounting and financial compliance costs and make some activities more difficult, time-consuming and costly.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that the Company maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. In reliance on SITE Centers, the Company has developed and refined its disclosure

17

controls and other procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that it files with the SEC is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and that information required to be disclosed in reports under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to its principal executive and financial officers.

The Company’s current controls and any new controls that it develops may become inadequate because of changes in conditions in its business. Further, weaknesses in the Company’s disclosure controls or its internal control over financial reporting may be discovered in the future. Any failure in developing and maintaining effective controls, or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement, could harm the Company’s operating results or cause it to fail to meet its reporting obligations and may result in a restatement of its financial statements for prior periods. Any failure to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting also could adversely affect the results of management evaluations and independent registered public accounting firm audits of its internal control over financial reporting that the Company is required to include in its periodic reports that it files with the SEC. Ineffective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting could also cause investors to lose confidence in the Company’s reported financial and other information, which would likely have a negative effect on the trading price of its common shares. Pursuant to the terms of the Management Agreements, the Company will rely on the Manager to provide certain services integral to its internal control. In addition, if the Company is unable to continue to meet these requirements, it may not be able to remain listed on the NYSE.

The Company is required to provide an annual management report on the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting commencing with this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  However, the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm is not required to audit the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting until after it is no longer an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”). At such time, the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm may issue a report that is adverse in the event it is not satisfied with the level at which the Company’s internal control over financial reporting is documented, designed or operating.

Any failure to maintain effective disclosure controls and internal control over financial reporting could have a material and adverse effect on the Company’s business and operating results and cause a decline in the price of its common shares.

Risks Related to the Company’s Common Shares

If an Active Trading Market for the Company’s Common Shares Is Not Sustained, Ability to Sell Shares When Desired and the Prices Obtained Will Be Adversely Affected.

The Company’s common shares are currently listed on the NYSE under the trading symbol “RVI.” However, there can be no assurance that the Company’s common shares will continue to be listed on the NYSE or that an active trading market for the Company’s common shares will be maintained, especially as the Company continues to execute on its strategy to sell assets, including potentially adopting a plan of liquidation, and make distributions to shareholders, which could negatively impact the price of the Company’s common shares and market capitalization. As the Company sells assets, the price of its common shares and market capitalization could fall below the NYSE’s minimum requirements, and the Company’s common shares could be delisted.  Additionally, if the Company adopts a plan of liquidation, the NYSE has discretionary authority to delist its common shares.  Accordingly, no assurance can be given as to the ability of the Company’s shareholders to sell their common shares or the price that shareholders may obtain for their common shares.

Some of the factors that could negatively affect the market price of the Company’s common shares include:

18

Market factors unrelated to the Company’s performance could also negatively impact the market price of its common shares. One of the factors that investors may consider in deciding whether to buy or sell the Company’s common shares is its distribution rate as a percentage of its share price relative to market interest rates. If market interest rates increase, prospective investors may demand a higher distribution rate or seek alternative investments paying higher dividends or interest. As a result, interest rate fluctuations and conditions in the capital markets can affect the market value of the Company’s common shares. For instance, if interest rates rise, it is likely that the market price of its common shares will decrease as market rates on interest-bearing securities increase.

The Company Has Not Established a Minimum Distribution Payment Level, and It Cannot Assure Investors of Its Ability to Make Distributions in the Future.

The Company anticipates making distributions to holders of its common shares to satisfy the requirements to qualify as a REIT and generally not be subject to U.S. federal income and excise tax (other than with respect to operations conducted through the Company’s TRS). U.S. federal income tax law generally requires that a REIT distribute annually at least 90% of its REIT taxable income, without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains, and that it pay tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that it annually distributes less than 100% of its REIT taxable income. The Company generally intends to make distributions to holders of common shares with respect to each taxable year in an amount at least equal to its REIT taxable income for such taxable year. The Company also generally intends to distribute at least 90% of its Puerto Rico net taxable income to holders of its common shares (subject to a 10% withholding tax) pursuant to the terms of its agreement with the Puerto Rico Department of Treasury in order to be exempt from Puerto Rico income taxes and to maintain its REIT status in Puerto Rico.

Although the Company expects to declare and pay distributions on or around the end of each calendar year, the Board of Directors will evaluate its dividend policy regularly. To the extent cash available for distributions is less than the Company’s REIT taxable income, or if amortization requirements commence with respect to the mortgage loan or if the Company determines it is advisable for financial or other reasons, the Company has and may in the future pay a portion of its dividends in the form of common shares, and any such distribution of common shares may be taxable as a dividend to shareholders. The Company may also distribute debt or other securities in the future, which also may be taxable as a dividend to shareholders.  

Any distributions the Company makes to its shareholders will be at the discretion of the Board of Directors and will depend upon, among other things, the Company’s actual and anticipated results of operations and liquidity, which will be affected by various factors, including the income from its properties, its operating expenses (including management fees and other obligations owing to the Manager), any other expenditures and the terms of the mortgage financing and the limitations set forth in the mortgage loan agreements. Distributions will also be impacted by the pace and success of the Company’s property disposition strategy. As a result of the terms of the mortgage financing, however, the Company anticipates that the majority of distributions to shareholders will not occur until after the mortgage loan or any refinancing thereof has been repaid. Furthermore, subject to the requirement that the

19

Company distribute the Required REIT Distribution to the holders of the Company’s common shares, the series A preferred shares will be entitled to a dividend preference for all dividends declared on the Company’s capital stock up to the preference amount. Due to the dividend preference of the series A preferred shares, distributions to holders of common shares are not anticipated to occur until after aggregate dividends have been paid on the series A preferred shares in an amount equal to the preference amount. The Company cannot predict when or if it will declare dividends to the holders of series A preferred shares and when or if such dividends, if paid, will equal the preference amount. If the Company is unable to pay aggregate dividends on the series A preferred shares in an amount equal to the preference amount, it would not be able to pay any dividends to its common shareholders other than required REIT distributions.

As a result, no assurance can be given that the Company will be able to make distributions to its shareholders at any time in the future or the level or timing of any distributions the Company does make.

Shares Eligible for Future Sale May Have Adverse Effects on the Company’s Share Price.

Although the Company does not currently intend to undertake any future sales of its common shares or preferred shares, the effect of any such sale on the market price of its common shares cannot be predicted. Sales of substantial amounts of common shares or preferred shares, or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect the prevailing market price for the Company’s common shares. The Company is not required to offer any such shares to existing shareholders on a preemptive basis. Therefore, it may not be possible for existing shareholders to participate in such future issuances, which may dilute the existing shareholders’ interests in the Company.  

Offerings of Debt or Equity Securities, Which Would Rank Senior to the Company’s Common Shares, May Adversely Affect the Market Price for the Company’s Common Shares.

Although the Company does not have any current intention to do so, if the Company decides in the future to issue debt or preferred equity securities, other than the series A preferred shares, ranking senior to its common shares, it is likely that they will be governed by an indenture or other instrument containing covenants restricting the Company’s operating flexibility. Additionally, any convertible or exchangeable securities that the Company issues in the future may have rights, preferences and privileges more favorable than those of its common shares and may result in dilution to owners of its common shares. The Company and, indirectly, its shareholders will bear the cost of issuing and servicing such securities. Because the Company’s decision to issue debt or equity securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond its control, the Company cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of its future offerings. Thus, holders of the Company’s common shares will bear the risk of future offerings reducing the market price of common shares and diluting the value of their shareholdings in the Company.

In addition, the Company’s governing documents authorize it to issue, without the approval of the common shareholders, one or more classes or series of preferred shares (in addition to the series A preferred shares) having such designation, voting powers, preferences, rights and other terms, including preferences over the common shares respecting dividends and distributions, as the Board of Directors generally may determine. The terms of one or more classes or series of preferred shares could dilute the voting power or reduce the value of the Company’s common shares. For example, the Company could grant the holders of preferred shares the right to elect some number of the Company’s directors in all events or on the occurrence of specified events, or the right to veto specified transactions. Similarly, the repurchase or redemption rights or liquidation preferences the Company could assign to holders of preferred shares could affect the residual value or market price of the common shares.

The Company Is an “Emerging Growth Company,” and It Cannot Be Certain if the Reduced Disclosure Requirements Applicable to Emerging Growth Companies Make Its Securities Less Attractive to Investors.

The Company is an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act. For so long as the Company remains an emerging growth company, the Company is not required to comply with, among other things, the auditor attestation requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Emerging growth companies are also exempt from the “say on pay” provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“the Dodd-Frank Act”) and are permitted to omit the detailed compensation discussion and analysis and other compensation-related disclosures from proxy statements and reports filed under the Exchange Act.  Investors may find the Company’s common shares less attractive because the Company relies on these provisions. If investors find the Company’s common shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for the Company’s shares, and the Company’s share price may be more volatile.

In addition, Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards. However, the Company has chosen to “opt out” of such extended transition period, and, as a result, the Company will comply with new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates adoption of such standards and required for non-emerging growth companies. The Company’s decision to opt out of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards is irrevocable.  

20

Changes in Accounting Standards Issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") or Other Standard-Setting Bodies May Adversely Affect the Company’s Business.

The Company’s financial statements are subject to the application of U.S. GAAP, which is periodically revised and/or expanded. From time to time, the Company is required to adopt new or revised accounting standards issued by recognized authoritative bodies, including the FASB and the Securities and Exchange Commission. It is possible that accounting standards the Company is required to adopt may require changes to the current accounting treatment that it applies to its consolidated financial statements and may require it to make significant changes to its systems. Changes in accounting standards could result in a material adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to the Company’s Organization and Structure

Provisions in the Articles of Incorporation and Code of Regulations Could Have the Effect of Delaying, Deferring or Preventing a Change in Control, Even if That Change May Be Considered Beneficial by Some of the Company’s Shareholders, Which Could Reduce the Market Price of the Company’s Common Shares.

The Articles of Incorporation and Code of Regulations contain provisions that could have the effect of rendering more difficult, delaying or preventing an acquisition deemed undesirable by the Company’s Board of Directors. Among other things, the Articles of Incorporation and Code of Regulations include provisions:

These provisions, alone or together, could delay or prevent hostile takeovers and changes in control of the Company or changes in the Company’s management.

The Company believes these provisions protect its shareholders from coercive or otherwise unfair takeover tactics and are not intended to make the Company immune from takeovers. However, these provisions apply even if the offer may be considered beneficial by some shareholders and could delay, defer or prevent an acquisition that the Board of Directors determines is not in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders, which under certain circumstances could reduce the market price of its common shares.

The Company’s Authorized but Unissued Common and Preferred Shares May Prevent a Change in the Company’s Control.

The Articles of Incorporation authorize the Company to issue additional authorized but unissued common or preferred shares. In addition, the Board of Directors may, without shareholder approval, amend the Articles of Incorporation to increase the aggregate number of its shares of beneficial interest, or the number of its shares of beneficial interest of any class or series that the Company has authority to issue, and classify or reclassify any unissued common or preferred shares and set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. As a result, the Board of Directors may establish a series of common or preferred shares that could delay or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for the Company’s common shares or otherwise be in the best interest of the Company’s shareholders.

Ownership Limitations May Restrict Changes in Control of the Company for Which Its Shareholders Might Receive a Premium for Their Shares.

In order for the Company to qualify as a REIT for each taxable year, no more than 50% in value of its outstanding shares of beneficial interest may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals during the last half of any calendar year. “Individuals” for this purpose include natural persons, private foundations, some employee benefit plans and trusts, and some charitable trusts. To assist the Company in maintaining its qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Articles of Incorporation contain certain restrictions on ownership of the Company’s common shares. These ownership limitations could have the effect of discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of the Company’s common shares might receive a premium for their shares over the then-prevailing market price or which holders might believe to be otherwise in their best interests.

21

The REIT Rules Relating to Prohibited Transactions Could Affect the Company’s Disposition of Assets and Adversely Affect Its Profitability.

The Company intends to conduct its activities to avoid the 100% tax on gains from prohibited transactions, including by structuring dispositions of properties to qualify for the safe harbor to avoid application of such 100% tax. Among other requirements, the safe harbor limits sale transactions undertaken by a REIT or certain subsidiaries to seven in any calendar year, which requirements do not apply to sale transactions undertaken by a TRS.  The avoidance of this tax could reduce the Company’s liquidity and cause it to undertake fewer sales of properties than it would otherwise undertake. In addition, the Company may have to sell numerous properties to a single or a few purchasers, which could cause such dispositions to be less profitable than would be the case if it sold properties on a property-by-property basis. There can be no assurances that property dispositions will qualify for the safe harbor and not be subject to the 100% tax on gains from prohibited transactions. The safe harbor also requires that the Company hold the property for not less than two years.

The Company holds a number of properties through a TRS. Gains from the sale of property by a TRS will not be subject to the 100% tax on gains from prohibited transactions, but such gains will be subject to tax at the TRS level at corporate tax rates. The current U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to corporations is 21%.

Substantially All of the Company’s Assets Are Owned by Subsidiaries, and the Creditors of These Subsidiaries Are Entitled to Amounts Payable to Them by the Subsidiaries Before the Subsidiaries May Pay Any Dividends or other Distributions to the Company.

Substantially all of the Company’s properties and assets are held through wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Company depends on cash distributions from its subsidiaries for most of its cash flow. The creditors of each of the Company’s subsidiaries, including the lenders on the Company’s mortgage financing, are entitled to payment of that subsidiary’s obligations to them when due and payable before that subsidiary may make distributions or dividends to the Company. Thus, the Company’s ability to make any distributions to its shareholders depends on the Company’s subsidiaries’ ability to first satisfy their obligations to their creditors and the Company’s ability to satisfy its obligations, if any, to its creditors.

In addition, the Company’s participation in any distribution of the assets of any of its subsidiaries upon the liquidation, reorganization or insolvency of the subsidiary is only after the claims of the creditors, including trade creditors, mortgage lenders and preferred security holders, if any, of the applicable direct or indirect subsidiaries, are satisfied.

Risks Related to the Company’s Taxation as a REIT

If the Company Fails to Qualify as a REIT in Any Taxable Year, It Will Be Subject to U.S. Federal Income Tax as a Regular Corporation and Could Have Significant Tax Liability, Which May Have a Significant Adverse Consequence to the Value of the Company’s Common Shares.

The Company intends to operate in a manner that allows it to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes.  However, REIT qualification requires that the Company satisfy numerous requirements (some on an annual or quarterly basis) established under highly technical and complex provisions of the Code, for which there are a limited number of judicial or administrative interpretations.  The Company’s status as a REIT requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances that are not entirely within its control.  Accordingly, the Company’s ability to qualify and remain qualified as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes is not certain.  Even a technical or inadvertent violation of the REIT requirements could jeopardize the Company’s REIT qualification.  Furthermore, Congress or the IRS might change the tax laws or regulations and the courts could issue new rulings, in each case potentially having a retroactive effect that could make it more difficult or impossible for the Company to continue to qualify as a REIT.  If the Company fails to qualify as a REIT in any tax year, the following would result:

Even if the Company maintains its qualification as a REIT, it may face other tax liabilities that reduce its cash flow.  The Company’s TRS is subject to taxation, and any changes in the laws affecting the Company’s TRS may increase the Company’s tax expenses.  The Company may also be subject to certain federal, state and local taxes on its income (including on any gain from a

22

“prohibited transaction”) and property either directly or at the level of its subsidiaries.  Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for debt service obligations and distribution to the Company’s shareholders.

If Certain Subsidiaries Fail to Qualify as Disregarded Entities for U.S. Federal Income Tax Purposes, the Company May Not Qualify as a REIT.

One or more of the Company’s subsidiaries may be treated as a disregarded entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes and, therefore, will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on its income. Instead, the Company will be required to take such disregarded entity’s income into account when the Company calculates its taxable income. The Company cannot assure shareholders that the IRS will not challenge the status of any subsidiary limited liability company in which it owns an interest as a disregarded entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes, or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. If the IRS were successful in treating any subsidiary limited liability company as an entity taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Company could fail to meet the gross income tests and certain of the asset tests applicable to REITs and, accordingly, the Company would likely not qualify as a REIT. Also, the failure of any subsidiary limited liability company to qualify as a disregarded entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes could cause it to become subject to federal and state corporate income tax, which would reduce significantly the amount of cash available for debt service and for distribution.

Compliance with REIT Requirements May Negatively Affect the Company’s Operating Decisions.

To maintain its status as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Company must meet certain requirements on an ongoing basis, including requirements regarding its sources of income, the nature and diversification of its assets, the amounts the Company distributes to its shareholders and the ownership of its shares.  The Company may also be required to make distributions to its shareholders when it does not have funds readily available for distribution or at times when the Company’s funds are otherwise needed to fund capital expenditures or debt service obligations.

As a REIT, the Company must distribute at least 90% of its annual net taxable income (excluding net capital gains) to its shareholders.  To the extent that the Company satisfies this distribution requirement, but distributes less than 100% of its net taxable income, the Company will be subject to U.S. federal corporate income tax on its undistributed taxable income.  In addition, the Company will be subject to a 4% non-deductible excise tax if the actual amount paid to its shareholders in a calendar year is less than the minimum amount specified under U.S. federal tax laws.  From time to time, the Company may generate taxable income greater than its income for financial reporting purposes, or its net taxable income may be greater than its cash flow available for distribution to its shareholders.  If the Company does not have other funds available in these situations, it could be required to borrow funds, sell a portion of its properties at unfavorable prices, distribute common shares in a taxable distribution or find other sources of funds in order to meet the REIT distribution requirements and avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax.

In addition, the REIT provisions of the Code impose a 100% tax on income from “prohibited transactions.”  Prohibited transactions generally include sales of assets, other than foreclosure property, that constitute inventory or other property held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business.  This 100% tax could affect the Company’s decisions to sell property if it believes such sales could be treated as a prohibited transaction.  However, the Company would not be subject to this tax if it were to sell assets through its TRS, although the Company’s TRS would generally be subject to tax on gains from the sale of property.  The Company will also be subject to a 100% tax on certain amounts if the economic arrangements between the Company and its TRS are not comparable to similar arrangements among unrelated parties.

Proposed and potential future proposed reforms of the Code, if enacted, could adversely affect existing REITs.  Such proposals could result in REITs having fewer tax advantages and could adversely affect REIT shareholders.  It is impossible for the Company to predict the nature of or extent of any new tax legislation on the real estate industry, in general, and REITs, in particular.  In addition, some proposals under consideration may adversely affect the Company’s tenants’ operating results, financial condition and/or future business planning, which could adversely affect the Company and, consequently, its shareholders.

The Company May Be Forced to Borrow Funds to Maintain Its REIT Status, and the Unavailability of Such Capital on Favorable Terms at the Desired Times, or at All, May Cause the Company to Curtail Its Investment Activities and/or to Dispose of Assets at Inopportune Times, Which Could Materially and Adversely Affect the Company.

To qualify as a REIT, the Company generally must distribute to shareholders at least 90% of its REIT taxable income each year, determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding any net capital gains, and the Company will be subject to regular corporate income taxes on its undistributed taxable income to the extent that the Company distributes less than 100% of its REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and including any net capital gains, each year. In addition, the Company will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which distributions paid by the Company in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of the Company’s ordinary income, 95% of its capital gain net income and 100% of its undistributed income from prior years. The Company could have a potential distribution shortfall as a result of, among other things, differences in timing between the actual receipt of cash and recognition of income for U.S. federal income tax purposes or the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. In order to maintain REIT status and avoid the payment of income and excise taxes, the Company may need to borrow funds to meet the

23

REIT distribution requirements. The Company may not be able to borrow funds on favorable terms or at all, and the Company’s ability to borrow may be restricted by the terms of instruments governing the Company’s existing indebtedness. The Company’s access to third-party sources of capital depends on a number of factors, including the market’s perception of the Company’s growth potential, current debt levels, the market price of common shares and current and potential future earnings. The Company cannot assure shareholders that it will have access to such capital on favorable terms at the desired times, or at all, which may cause the Company to curtail its investment activities and/or to dispose of assets at inopportune times, and could materially and adversely affect the Company. The Company may make taxable in-kind distributions of common shares, which may cause shareholders to be required to pay income taxes with respect to such distributions in excess of any cash received, or the Company may be required to withhold taxes with respect to such distributions in excess of any cash shareholders receive.

Dividends Paid by REITs Generally Do Not Qualify for Reduced Tax Rates.

In general, the maximum U.S. federal income tax rate for dividends paid to individual U.S. shareholders is 20%.  Due to its REIT status, the Company’s distributions to individual shareholders generally are not eligible for the reduced rates. However, U.S. shareholders that are individuals, trusts and estates generally may deduct up to 20% of the ordinary dividends (e.g., REIT dividends that are not designated as capital gain dividends or qualified dividend income) received from a REIT for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026. Although this deduction reduces the effective tax rate applicable to certain dividends paid by REITs (generally to 29.6%, assuming the shareholder is subject to the 37% maximum rate), such tax rate is still higher than the tax rate applicable to corporate dividends that constitute qualified dividend income. Accordingly, investors who are individuals, trusts and estates may perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could materially and adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including the per share trading price of the Company’s common shares.

Legislative or Other Actions Affecting REITs Could Have a Negative Effect on the Company.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the Department of the Treasury. Changes to the tax laws, with or without retroactive application, could materially and adversely affect the Company or its shareholders. The Company cannot predict how changes in the tax laws might affect shareholders or the Company. New legislation, Treasury regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect the Company’s ability to qualify as a REIT, or the U.S. federal income tax consequences of such qualification, or the U.S. federal income tax consequences of an investment in the Company. In addition, the law relating to the tax treatment of other entities, or an investment in other entities, could change, making an investment in such other entities more attractive relative to an investment in a REIT.

For instance, enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the “TCJA”) significantly changed the U.S. federal income taxation of U.S. businesses and their owners, including REITs and their shareholders.  Changes made by the TCJA that affected the Company include, among others:

Many of the TCJA changes that are applicable to the Company were effective in the Company’s 2018 taxable year, without any transition periods or grandfathering for existing transactions.  While some of the changes made by the TCJA may adversely affect the Company in one or more reporting periods and prospectively, other changes may be beneficial on a going-forward basis.  Furthermore, potential amendments and technical corrections, as well as interpretations and implementation of regulations by the Treasury and IRS, may have or may in the future occur or be enacted, and, in each case, they could lessen or increase the impact of the TCJA.  In addition, states and localities, which often use federal taxable income as a starting point for computing state and local tax liabilities, continue to react to the TCJA, which reactions may exacerbate its negative, or diminish its positive, effects on the Company.

None.

24

At December 31, 2019, the Company owned 28 assets, composed of 16 continental U.S. assets and 12 assets in Puerto Rico. These properties consist of retail shopping centers composed of 11.4 million square feet of GLA and are located in 11 states and Puerto Rico.  At December 31, 2019, the average annualized base rent of the Company’s assets was $15.72 per square foot.  The Company’s average annualized base rent per occupied square foot does not consider tenant expense reimbursements.  The Company generally does not enter into significant tenant concessions on a lease-by-lease basis.  The Company’s properties were 87.3% occupied as of December 31, 2019.

Information as to the Company’s 10 largest tenants based on total annualized rental revenues and Company-owned GLA at December 31, 2019, is set forth in Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” under the caption “Retail Environment and Company Fundamentals” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  

Tenant Lease Expirations and Renewals

The following table shows the impact of tenant lease expirations through 2029 for all of RVI’s properties, assuming that none of the tenants exercise any of their renewal options as of December 31, 2019:

The following table shows the impact of tenant lease expirations through 2029 for all of RVI’s Puerto Rico properties, assuming that none of the tenants exercise any of their renewal options as of December 31, 2019:

The rental payments under certain of these leases will remain constant until the expiration of their base terms, regardless of inflationary increases.  There can be no assurance that any of these leases will be renewed or that any replacement tenants will be obtained if not renewed.

25

Retail Value Inc.

Property List at December 31, 2019

26

Retail Value Inc.

Property List at December 31, 2019

27

The Company and its subsidiaries are subject to various legal proceedings, which, taken together, are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company.  The Company is also subject to a variety of legal actions for personal injury or property damage arising in the ordinary course of its business, most of which are covered by insurance.  While the resolution of all matters cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes that the final outcome of such legal proceedings and claims will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s liquidity, financial position or results of operations.

Not Applicable.

28

PART II

Holders, Dividends and Market Information

The Company’s common shares are listed on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “RVI.”  As of February 14, 2020, there were 2,564 record holders and approximately 12,300 beneficial owners of the Company’s common shares.

The Company anticipates making distributions to holders of its common shares to satisfy the requirements to qualify as a REIT and generally not be subject to U.S. federal income and excise tax (other than with respect to operations through the Company’s TRS).  U.S. federal income tax law generally requires that a REIT distribute annually at least 90% of its REIT taxable income, without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains, and that it pay tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that it annually distributes less than 100% of its REIT taxable income.  The Company generally intends to make distributions to holders of common shares with respect to each taxable year in an amount at least equal to its REIT taxable income for such taxable year.  

ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

29

Performance Graph

The graph below presents the Company's cumulative total shareholder returns relative to the performance of the Russell 2000 Index and FTSE NAREIT Equity REITs Total Return Index.  The graph assumes $100 invested at the closing price of the Company's common stock on the New York Stock Exchange and each index on July 2, 2018 (the first day of RVI trading), and assumes the reinvestment of all dividends.  The stock price performance shown on this graph may not be indicative of future price performance.

Cumulative Total Shareholder Return Index

30

The following table sets forth selected combined and consolidated financial information and other data of the Company.  The following selected combined and consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with the Company’s combined and consolidated financial statements and related notes and Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”  The following selected financial data is not intended to replace the Company’s historical combined and consolidated financial statements. As a result of the spin-off from SITE Centers Corp., the selected financial data for periods prior to July 1, 2018, was carved-out from the financial information of SITE Centers at their historical carrying amounts. See Note 2, “Basis of Presentation,” to the Company’s combined and consolidated financial statements included herein.  

Comparative Summary of Selected Financial Data

(In thousands, except per share data)

31

Retail Value Inc. (“RVI” or the “Company”) (NYSE: RVI) is an Ohio company formed in December 2017 that, as of December 31, 2019, owned and operated a portfolio of 28 assets, composed of 16 continental U.S. assets and 12 assets in Puerto Rico. These properties consisted of retail shopping centers composed of 11.4 million square feet of Company-owned gross leasable area (“GLA”) and were located in 11 states and Puerto Rico. The Company’s continental U.S. assets comprised 55% and the properties in Puerto Rico comprised 45% of its total consolidated revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019.  The Company’s centers have a diverse tenant base that includes national retailers such as Walmart/Sam’s Club, Bed, Bath & Beyond, PetSmart, the TJX Companies (T.J. Maxx, Marshalls and HomeGoods), Kohl’s, Best Buy and Gap.  At December 31, 2019, the aggregate occupancy of the Company’s shopping center portfolio was 87.3%, and the average annualized base rent per occupied square foot was $15.72.  Prior to the Company’s separation on July 1, 2018, the Company was a wholly-owned subsidiary of SITE Centers Corp. (“SITE Centers” or the “Parent Company”).

Unless otherwise expressly stated or the context otherwise requires, in the case of information as of dates or for periods prior to the Company’s separation from SITE Centers, references to the “Company” and the “RVI Predecessor” refer to the combined and consolidated entities of SITE Centers that owned the assets comprising the Company’s portfolio as of July 1, 2018, assuming that such entities owned only the assets comprising the Company’s portfolio as of July 1, 2018.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Company expects to focus on realizing value in its portfolio through operations and sales of its assets.  The Company primarily intends to use net asset sale proceeds first to repay mortgage debt, second to make distributions on account of the RVI Preferred Shares, up to the preference amount, and third to make distributions to holders of the Company’s common shares.  

In March 2019, the Company entered into a mortgage loan in the aggregate principal amount of $900 million in order to refinance and prepay all amounts outstanding under its February 2018 mortgage loan, which had an original principal balance of $1.35 billion.  The Company incurred costs of $20.2 million in connection with the financing, which included a $1.8 million debt financing fee paid to SITE Centers.  

On July 1, 2018, in order to consummate the Company’s separation from SITE Centers, the Company and SITE Centers entered into a separation and distribution agreement (the “Separation and Distribution Agreement”), pursuant to which, among other things, SITE Centers agreed to transfer properties and certain related assets, liabilities and obligations to RVI and to distribute 100% of the outstanding common shares of RVI to holders of record of SITE Centers’ common shares as of the close of business on June 26, 2018, the record date.  On July 1, 2018, the separation date, holders of SITE Centers’ common shares received one common share of RVI for every ten shares of SITE Centers’ common stock held on the record date.  In connection with the separation, SITE Centers retained 1,000 shares of RVI’s series A preferred stock (the “RVI Preferred Shares”) having an aggregate dividend preference equal to $190 million, which amount may increase by up to an additional $10 million depending on the amount of aggregate gross proceeds generated by RVI asset sales.

32

From its formation in December 2017 through December 31, 2019, the Company sold the following assets (in thousands):

Manager

In connection with the Company’s separation from SITE Centers, on July 1, 2018, the Company entered into an external management agreement (the “External Management Agreement”) which, together with various property management agreements, governs the fees, terms and conditions pursuant to which SITE Centers serves as the Company’s manager.  The Company does not have any employees.  In general, either the Company or SITE Centers may terminate these management agreements on June 30, 2020, or at the end of any six-month renewal period thereafter.  

Pursuant to the External Management Agreement, the Company pays SITE Centers and certain of its subsidiaries a monthly asset management fee in an aggregate amount of 0.5% per annum of the gross asset value of the Company’s properties (calculated in accordance with the terms of the External Management Agreement).  The External Management Agreement also provides for the reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by SITE Centers in connection with the services it provides to the Company along with the payment of transaction-based fees to SITE Centers in the event of any debt financings or change of control transactions.

Pursuant to the property management agreements, the Company pays SITE Centers and certain of its subsidiaries a monthly property management fee in an aggregate amount of 3.5% and 5.5% of the gross revenue (as calculated in accordance with the terms of the property management agreements) of the Company’s continental U.S. properties and the Puerto Rico properties, respectively, on a monthly basis.  The property management agreements also provide for the payment to SITE Centers of certain leasing commissions and a disposition fee of 1% of the gross sale price of each asset sold by the Company.

33

Company Activity

The following is a summary of the Company’s operational statistics:

Retail Environment and Company Fundamentals

Though leasing prospects are heavily dependent on local conditions, in general the Company continues to see demand from a broad range of tenants for its continental U.S. space, as many tenants continue to adapt to an omni-channel retail environment. Value-oriented tenants continue to take market share from conventional and national chain department stores.  Some conventional department stores and national chains have announced bankruptcies, store closures and/or reduced expansion plans in recent years leading to a smaller overall number of tenants requiring large store formats.  New demand for space at the Company’s Puerto Rico properties has been somewhat limited especially among big box and national tenants.  The 2019 occupancy rate reflects the impact of asset dispositions and a combination of anchor and store tenant lease expirations and tenant bankruptcies.

The following table lists the Company’s 10 largest tenants based on total annualized rental revenues as of December 31, 2019:

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The combined and consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of the Company and all subsidiaries where the Company has financial or operating control. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions in certain circumstances that affect amounts reported in the accompanying combined and consolidated financial statements and related notes. In preparing these financial statements, management has used available information, including the Company’s and SITE Centers’ history, industry standards and the current economic environment, among other factors, in forming its estimates and judgments of certain amounts included in the Company’s combined and consolidated financial statements, giving due consideration to materiality. It is possible that the ultimate outcome as anticipated by management in formulating its estimates inherent in these financial statements might not materialize.

34

Application of the critical accounting policies described below involves the exercise of judgment and the use of assumptions as to future uncertainties. Accordingly, actual results could differ from these estimates. In addition, other companies may use different estimates that may affect the comparability of the Company’s results of operations to those companies in similar businesses.

Revenue Recognition and Accounts Receivable

The Company has adopted Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-02—Leases, as amended (“Topic 842”) as of January 1, 2019, using the modified retrospective approach by applying the transition provisions at the beginning of the period of adoption.  

Rental Income includes contractual lease payments that generally include the following:

Payments received from the Company’s insurance company related to its claims for business interruption losses incurred as a result of hurricane losses are recorded as Business Interruption Income. 

The Company makes estimates of the collectability of its accounts receivable related to base rents, including straight-line rentals, expense reimbursements and other revenue or income.  Upon adoption of Topic 842, rental income for the periods beginning on or after January 1, 2019, has been reduced for amounts the Company believes are not probable of being collected.  The Company analyzes accounts receivable, tenant credit worthiness and current economic trends when evaluating the probability of collection.  In addition, with respect to tenants in bankruptcy, the Company makes estimates of the expected recovery of pre-petition and post-petition claims in assessing the probability of collection of the related receivable.  The time to resolve these claims may exceed one year.  These estimates have a direct impact on the Company’s earnings because once the amount is not considered probable of being collected, earnings are reduced by a corresponding amount until the receivable is collected.

Combination and Consolidation

All significant inter-company balances and transactions have been eliminated in combination and consolidation.

Real Estate and Long-Lived Assets

Properties are depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. The Company is required to make subjective assessments as to the useful lives of its properties to determine the amount of depreciation to reflect on an annual basis with respect to those properties. These assessments have a direct impact on the Company’s net income. If the Company were to extend the expected useful life of a particular asset, it would be depreciated over more years and result in less depreciation expense and higher annual net income.

On a periodic basis, management assesses whether there are any indicators that the value of real estate assets, including construction in progress, and intangibles may be impaired. A property’s value is impaired only if management’s estimate of the aggregate future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) to be generated by the property are less than the carrying value of the property. The determination of undiscounted cash flows requires significant estimates by management. In management’s estimate of cash flows, it considers factors such as expected future operating income (loss), trends and prospects, the effects of demand, competition and other factors. If the Company is evaluating the potential sale of an asset, the undiscounted future cash flows analysis is probability-weighted based upon management’s best estimate of the likelihood of the alternative courses of action. Subsequent changes in estimated undiscounted cash flows arising from changes in anticipated actions could affect the determination of whether an impairment exists and whether the effects could have a material impact on the Company’s net income. To the extent an impairment has occurred, the loss will be measured as the excess of the carrying amount of the property over the fair value of the property.  The Company is required to make subjective assessments as to whether there are impairments in the value of its real estate properties. These assessments have a direct impact on the Company’s net income because recording an impairment charge results in an immediate negative adjustment to net income. If the Company’s estimates of the projected future cash flows, anticipated holding periods or market conditions change, its evaluation of the impairment charges may be different, and such differences could be material

35

to the Company’s combined and consolidated financial statements. Plans to hold properties over longer periods decrease the likelihood of recording impairment losses.

The Company generally considers assets to be held for sale when the transaction has been approved by the appropriate level of management and there are no known significant contingencies relating to the sale such that the sale of the property within one year is considered probable. This generally occurs when a sales contract is executed with no contingencies and the prospective buyer has significant funds at risk to ensure performance.

Measurement of Fair Value—Real Estate

The Company is required to assess the value of its real estate assets. The fair value of real estate investments used in the Company’s impairment calculations is estimated based on the price that would be received from the sale of an asset in an orderly transaction between marketplace participants at the measurement date. Assets without a public market are valued based on assumptions made and valuation techniques used by the Company. The availability of observable transaction data and inputs can make it more difficult and/or subjective to determine the fair value of such assets. As a result, amounts ultimately realized by the Company from assets sold may differ from the fair values presented, and the differences could be material.

The valuation of impaired real estate assets is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques including the income capitalization approach or discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each asset considering prevailing market capitalization rates, analysis of recent comparable sales transactions, actual sales negotiations, bona fide purchase offers received from third parties and/or consideration of the amount that currently would be required to replace the asset, as adjusted for obsolescence. In general, the Company considers multiple valuation techniques when measuring fair value of an investment. However, in certain circumstances, a single valuation technique may be appropriate.

For operational real estate assets, the significant assumptions include the capitalization rate used in the income capitalization valuation, as well as the projected property net operating income and expected hold period. For the Puerto Rico properties that were significantly impacted by Hurricane Maria, the significant assumptions include the discount rate, the timing for the construction completion and project stabilization and the exit capitalization rate. Valuation of real estate assets is calculated based on market conditions and assumptions made by management at the measurement date, which may differ materially from actual results if market conditions or the underlying assumptions change.

Deferred Tax Assets and Tax Liabilities

The Company accounts for income taxes related to its taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”) under the asset and liability method, which requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements.  The Company records net deferred tax assets to the extent it believes it is more likely than not that these assets will be realized.  In making such determinations, the Company considers all available positive and negative evidence, including forecasts of future taxable income, the reversal of other existing temporary differences, available net operating loss carryforwards, tax planning strategies and recent results of operations.  Several of these considerations require assumptions and significant judgment about the forecasts of future taxable income that are consistent with the plans and estimates that the Company is utilizing to manage its business.  Based on this assessment, management must evaluate the need for, and amount of, valuation allowances against the Company’s deferred tax assets.  The Company would record a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets if and when it has determined that an uncertainty exists regarding their realization, which would increase the provision for income taxes.  To the extent facts and circumstances change in the future, adjustments to the valuation allowances may be required.  In the event the Company were to determine that it would be able to realize the deferred income tax assets in the future in excess of their net recorded amount, the Company would adjust the valuation allowance, which would reduce the provision for income taxes.  The Company makes certain estimates in the determination of the use of valuation reserves recorded for deferred tax assets.  These estimates could have a direct impact on the Company’s earnings, as a difference in the tax provision would impact the Company’s earnings.

The Company has made estimates in assessing the impact of the uncertainty of income taxes.  Accounting standards prescribe a recognition threshold and measurement attribute criteria for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.  The standards also provide guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition.  These estimates have a direct impact on the Company’s net income because higher tax expense will result in reduced earnings.

General and Administrative Expenses

Prior to the separation from SITE Centers, general and administrative expenses included an allocation of indirect costs and expenses incurred by SITE Centers related to the Company’s business, primarily consisting of compensation and other general and administrative costs that have been allocated using the relative percentage of property revenue of the Company and SITE Centers management’s knowledge of the Company’s business. The amounts allocated are not necessarily indicative of the actual amount of

36

indirect expenses that would have been recorded had the Company been a separate independent entity. The amount of general and administrative expenses allocated to the Company has a direct impact on its net income or loss.

COMPARISON OF 2019 AND 2018 RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Where used, references to “Comparable Portfolio Properties” reflect shopping center properties owned as of December 31, 2019.  The discussion of the Company’s 2019 performance compared to 2018 appears below in “Comparison of 2019 and 2018 Results of Operations.”  The discussion of the Company’s 2018 performance compared to 2017 performance is set forth in Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Comparison of 2018, 2017 and 2016 Results of Operations,” of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.

Revenues from Operations (in thousands)