Archive for June, 2010

GGP to File Reorganization Plan Next Week; Asks for Exclusivity Period Extension

Things have been quiet on the General Growth front since the hearing in early May during which the court approved the Brookfield backed recapitalization plan and then Simon Property Group withdrew from its pursuit.

Last night General Growth provided a brief status update.

General Growth Properties Announces It Expects to File a Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization on or around July 9, 2010

Files Motion for Extension of Exclusivity for Plan of Reorganization

CHICAGO–(BUSINESS WIRE)–General Growth Properties, Inc. (NYSE: GGP) today announced it expects to file its Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization and accompanying disclosure statement on or around July 9, 2010. Concurrent with this announcement, GGP has filed a motion with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York requesting an extension of its exclusive period in which to file the Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization through October 18, 2010, and its exclusive period to solicit acceptances of any Plan of Reorganization through December 16, 2010. The current exclusivity periods are scheduled to expire on July 15, 2010, and September 15, 2010, respectively.

While GGP expects to file its plan within the current exclusivity period, the requested extension is integral to GGP’s strategy to maximize value upon emergence. The extension would allow GGP to continue to explore all financing emergence options available to it and to complement or replace existing financing commitments on an exclusive basis.

June Retail Sales Look Weak As Consumers Retrench (Tuesday’s News & Notes)

June is just about other and it’s becoming increasingly clear that the consumer has run out of steam. After a nice run earlier in the year, retail sales have begun to soften in recent months and figures so far in June make it look like same-store sales might even decline for the month.
It seems pent-up demand can only fuel spending for so long. What we really need is jobs, jobs, jobs. And those aren’t materializing at anywhere near the rate necessary to make people feel comfortable enough to open their wallets. In addition, consumers–rightly–are deleveraging. And unsurprisingly, consumer confidence is crashing as well.
The Economist has an excellent report on debt in this week’s issue. Of particular interest is an item on the state of consumer debt.

In part, this is because consumers in many countries have become more frugal in response to the recession and the decline in house prices. In America houses turned into cash machines during the credit boom as people remortgaged to release equity and boost their spending. Mortgage equity withdrawal rose from less than $20 billion a quarter in 1997 to more than $140 billion in some quarters of 2005 and 2006. After 2007 it slowed abruptly and even went negative (homeowners paid down debt) in 2009. Consumers are also more cautious about borrowing in view of sluggish wage growth and rising unemployment in most of the developed world.

It’s been a while since we did a roundup of links. Here are some other key stories from recent days that are worth checking out.

Carried Interest Goes Down

It looks like the industry can breathe a sigh of relief as the fears about a rise in the rate of taxation of carried interest will not come to fruition.

It’s possible the push could be revived. But for now the industry won’t face what many thought would be a doomsday scenario.

Reid will probably fail again, since his own party’s Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) has joined the Republican opposition against this tax hike bill. Republicans will probably block any tax hike. Sen. Nelson specifically said he does not want the carried interest repeal on real estate partnerships, which are a big factor in every state, unlike like hedge funds, private equity and venture capital funds concentrated in New York, California, Illinois, Massachusetts and other larger states. (Sen. Nelson is winning back stripes after his infamous Cornhusker-kickback health care deal.)

Repealing carried interest is losing appeal as more and more leaders oppose its consequences, unintended or otherwise. It’s a growth killer in this weak economy and it’s un-American to tax small businesses with ordinary income after their lifetime of hard work to build up their business with risk capital. These entrepreneurs, including investment managers, deserve capital gains when appropriate. And remember, often times carried interest is ordinary income too.

iPhone 4 Mania in New York

The Street has a short video of one of the insane lines for the iPhone 4 in New York City. Incredible.

Meanwhile there’s a slideshow at showing lines from cities around the country.

Kelo–Five Years On

Five years ago, the Supreme Court in an extremely controversial decision ruled in the Kelo v. City of New London case that the law of eminent domain could apply in condemning private property for economic development.
The ruling generated a tsunami of backlash. The outpouring from our readers was immense–unlike anything else I can remember in my time with the magazine. In response, many states moved quickly to enact new laws to prevent the use of eminent domain for development in their own states.

The backlash to the ruling still rages today. It was exacerbated by the fact that the commercial project in question ended up being largely a flop. The houses were demolished to make way for a plant that Pfizer announced it was shutting down last year. So in the end, people lost their houses needlessly.

The Institute for Justice, a self-described libertarian, civil liberties, public interest law firm, has put together a nice video summarizing what happened with Kelo and what’s happened since to commemorate the five year anniversary of the ruling. You can watch it below.

CRE Prices Ticked Higher in April

The latest numbers from the Moodys/REAL Commercial Property Price Index (CPPI) show that prices continue to move sideways and that a bottom in pricing seems to have formed.
The CPPI shows a return of positive 1.7 percent in April for the all properties national database. The rise comes after a fall in the index in February and March. Ultimately, observers are projecting that prices may bounce along this level for some time. We shouldn’t expect to see any more sharp downturns in the index, but a recovery in prices is not in the cards yet either. Overall, values are down 16 percent over the last year and 41 percent from the peak in late 2007.
Calculated Risk provides a nice analysis of these numbers every month that compare the commercial index with the Case-Shiller composite 20 index of housing prices. Needless to say, the similarity is striking.
Click or larger image.
moodys april 2010
The quarterly index by property type has also been updated recently. On retail assets, the index dropped to 133 in the first quarter–down from its peak of 195 in the third quarter of 2007. Overall, the national retail index has dropped 32 percent from its peak.
Click for larger image.
retail index q1 2010

Chicago Anchor Report Reveals Interesting Insights

CB Richard Ellis’ Chicago office put out a new report, Retail Anchor Report- Spring 2010, that provides an illustrative look at the mindset of big-box tenants. The findings are just for Chicago, but I think they do give us a glimpse as to what anchor tenants are probably asking for everywhere else. Ultimately, such tenants are taking advantage of openings in the market to grab spaces at reduced rents. This jibes with what’s happened in New York City as well where chains that never had stores in or close to Manhattan now do. Those ranks include Costco, Target, JCPenney and Nordstrom. And, of course, Walmart is sniffing around as well.

The report looked at 48 transactions completed in the past year and found that “the combination of lower rents and a throng of new tenants looking to lock in historically low rates have led to a recent surge in retail anchor leasing.”

CB’s release on the report found that:

[A]verage asking rents have decreased by 19%, currently standing at $10.12 per square foot. More telling is the average rate for completed anchor transactions, which has ranged from 30% to 70% below the previous tenant’s rent. The average net rent of completed anchor leases was $6.52 per square foot overall and $5.67 per square foot for suburban Chicago properties.

Other findings in the report include:

• The total number of retail anchor spaces over 20,000 square feet on the market currently stands at 207, down from 227 last year but still significantly above the 102 reported in 2004 during the last anchor crisis.

• 85% of currently available anchor spaces have been on the market for over a year.

• 28 of the 36 Circuit City spaces that came on the market between late 2008 and early 2009 are still on the market today.

• Only 27 new anchor spaces came on the market in Chicagoland during the past year, as compared to 97 the prior year.

• Retailers new to the market included Savers, Gordmans, Ross Dress for Less, SuitHouse, Forman Mills, Garden Ridge, FAMSA, Shoppers World and Wonder!.

I’m checking to see if CBRE will allow share the report as a Scribd document. If they give the green light, I’ll add it below.

Barney’s Still Losing Money; Bright Outlook for REITs (Friday’s News & Notes)

The fact that the REITs are well-positioned to take advantage of this downturn has been talked about for a while, but now the rating agencies are starting to take note, according to a report from CoStar. For this and other stories about the world of retail and retail real estate, follow the links below.

  • The New York Post reports that in spite of an improvement in same-store sales, luxury department store Barneys is still posting losses as a result of its $500 million debt load.
  • Rating agencies are beginning to favor REITs, according to a CoStar story, because of their easy access to capital.
  • Another CoStar story reports that JP Morgan completed the sale of the second multi-borrower CMBS issue of the year. Retail properties accounted for almost 80 percent of the loan pool.
  • Limited Brands has agreed to sell its 25 percent stake in the Limited chain to private equity firm Sun Capital Partners.

Back from the Brink

This week furniture seller Pier 1 Imports posted its first profit in a number of years. The chain had been struggling even before the recession hit, and many industry experts thought it was a goner back in 2008. But Pier 1 seems to have persevered, and its case now offers both hope and an example to follow for retailers who are facing falling sales or other financial problems.
Rather than sit idly by and blame the recession for its poor performance, the management at Pier 1 took a close look at its operations and determined that there were indeed measures it could take that could help it stay afloat. The retailer cut back its staff. It reviwed its real estate portfolio and closed underperforming stores. It scaled down the amount of merchandise it carried and negotiated lower rents on remaining stores. All these measures were undoubtedly tough to implement, but they seem to have served Pier 1’s ultimate purpose–to stick around long enough to see consumer demand improve. Sometimes, that’s all a retailer needs to survive a downturn.

Senate’s Carried Interest Language Changes

The bill in front of the Senate keeps morphing. I’m not sure what this makes the effective tax rate, but the language does keep changing and is different from what ultimately passed the House. That means any changes will have to be ironed out in conference, which might provide the industry one last chance to alter the carried interest language even further.

Here’s what came out of the committee discussing the bill as was reported at The Hill:

The bill would prevent investment fund managers from paying taxes entirely at capital gains rates on investment management services income received as carried interest in an investment fund. To the extent that carried interest reflects a
return on invested capital, the bill would continue to tax carried interest at capital gain tax rates. However, to the extent that carried interest does not reflect a return on invested capital, this amendment would require investment fund managers to treat seventy-five percent (75%) of the remaining carried interest as ordinary income beginning on January 1, 2011. The amount that will be treated as ordinary income is reduced to fifty percent (50%) for carried interest that does not reflect a return on invested capital but which is attributable to the sale of assets which are held for 5 or more years. This amendment provides that the lower recharacterization percentage also applies to the gain or loss attributable to the underlying assets held for 5 or more years when a partnership interest is sold as well as to gain attributable to section 197 intangibles of a partnership whose principal activity is providing specific investment management services with respect to the assets of the partnership when the partnership interest has been held for 5 or more years. This amendment also provides that, on selling an interest in any publicly traded
partnership, a person who is not an investment service provider will be exempt from the rule that recharacterizes as ordinary income under Internal Revenue Code section 751(a) that portion of the gain or loss attributable to an investment services partnership interest. This proposal, as amended, is estimated to raise $13.905 billion over 10 years.

I’m not sure what that means, but the number quoted at the end is lower than the original revenue estimates of what the raise in carried interest taxes was supposed to achieve.

Here’s Bloomberg Business Week’s summation:

Baucus’s new proposal would create a multitiered tax rate affecting some venture capital fund managers that declines the longer the funds are managed. Fund executives who manage a fund for one to five years would pay ordinary tax rates on 75 percent of their profit share, known as carried interest, and capital gains rates on the other 25 percent. For investments of more than five years, the rate would be a blend of 50 percent ordinary tax rates and 50 percent capital gains.

It also would exempt shareholders of Blackstone Group LP and other publicly traded buyout firms from facing higher taxes if they sell shares at a profit.

And here is how Reuters described the alterations:

The new investment fund managers’s tax, called carried interest, would tax 75 percent of investment fund managers income at ordinary tax rates, with an exception for assets held at least 5 years, of which only 50 percent would be taxed at ordinary income rates, according to committee documents.

The new proposal also eases the tax’s impact on the sale of partnership shares.

The original Senate bill’s carried interest proposal would have taxed 65 percent of investment fund managers’ earnings at higher normal income tax rates. Currently investment fund managers enjoy a lower 15 percent capital gains tax rate on their earnings from managing investors’ money.

The new carried interest language brings the bill more in line with a bill passed by the House of Representatives, which called for 75 percent of earnings to be taxed at higher normal income tax rates.