Form 10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2011
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
COMMISSION FILE NUMBER: 001-31817
CEDAR SHOPPING CENTERS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Maryland
|
|
42-1241468 |
|
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
44 South Bayles Avenue, Port Washington, New York 11050-3765
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
(516) 767-6492
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
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 þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock, as of
the latest practicable date: At July 29, 2011, there were 68,009,319 shares of Common Stock, $0.06
par value, outstanding.
CEDAR SHOPPING CENTERS, INC.
INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8-39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40-56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this Form 10-Q constitute forward-looking statements within
the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934. Such forward-looking statements include, without limitation, statements containing the
words anticipates, believes, expects, intends, future, and words of similar import which
express the Companys beliefs, expectations or intentions regarding future performance or future
events or trends. While forward-looking statements reflect good faith beliefs, expectations or
intentions, they are not guarantees of future performance and involve known and unknown risks,
uncertainties and other factors, which may cause actual results, performance or achievements to
differ materially from anticipated future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied
by such forward-looking statements as a result of factors outside of the Companys control. Certain
factors that might cause such differences include, but are not limited to, the following: real
estate investment considerations, such as the effect of economic and other conditions in general
and in the Companys market areas in particular; the financial viability of the Companys tenants
(including an inability to pay rent, filing for bankruptcy protection, closing stores and/or
vacating the premises); the continuing availability of acquisition, development and redevelopment
opportunities, on favorable terms; the availability of equity and debt capital (including the
availability of construction financing) in the public and private markets; the availability of
suitable joint venture partners and potential purchasers of the Companys properties if offered for
sale; the ability of the Companys joint venture partner to fund its share of future property
acquisitions; changes in interest rates; the fact that returns from acquisition, development and
redevelopment activities may not be at expected levels or at expected times; risks inherent in
ongoing development and redevelopment projects including, but not limited to, cost overruns
resulting from weather delays, changes in the nature and scope of development and redevelopment
efforts, changes in governmental regulations relating thereto, and market factors involved in the
pricing of material and labor; the need to renew leases or re-let space upon the expiration or
termination of current leases and incur applicable required replacement costs; and the financial
flexibility of ourselves and our joint venture partners to repay or refinance debt obligations when
due and to fund tenant improvements and capital expenditures.
3
CEDAR SHOPPING CENTERS, INC.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30 |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land |
|
$ |
337,810,000 |
|
|
$ |
325,138,000 |
|
Buildings and improvements |
|
|
1,296,924,000 |
|
|
|
1,246,979,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,634,734,000 |
|
|
|
1,572,117,000 |
|
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(207,895,000 |
) |
|
|
(188,233,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate, net |
|
|
1,426,839,000 |
|
|
|
1,383,884,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for sale/conveyance |
|
|
51,175,000 |
|
|
|
88,348,000 |
|
Investment in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
46,060,000 |
|
|
|
52,466,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
13,426,000 |
|
|
|
14,166,000 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
14,340,000 |
|
|
|
12,493,000 |
|
Receivables: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rents and other tenant receivables, net |
|
|
8,914,000 |
|
|
|
7,048,000 |
|
Straight-line rents |
|
|
16,546,000 |
|
|
|
15,669,000 |
|
Loans and other receivables ($8.0 million and $2.6 million, respectively) and
joint venture settlements |
|
|
10,968,000 |
|
|
|
8,599,000 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
8,925,000 |
|
|
|
9,676,000 |
|
Deferred charges, net |
|
|
25,900,000 |
|
|
|
28,086,000 |
|
Assets relating to real estate held for sale/conveyance |
|
|
2,322,000 |
|
|
|
2,052,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,625,415,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,622,487,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage loans payable |
|
$ |
684,118,000 |
|
|
$ |
659,203,000 |
|
Mortgage loans payable real estate held for sale/conveyance |
|
|
42,951,000 |
|
|
|
48,313,000 |
|
Secured revolving credit facilities |
|
|
167,097,000 |
|
|
|
132,597,000 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
|
30,446,000 |
|
|
|
29,026,000 |
|
Unamortized intangible lease liabilities |
|
|
44,092,000 |
|
|
|
46,453,000 |
|
Liabilities relating to real estate held for sale/conveyance |
|
|
1,416,000 |
|
|
|
1,371,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
970,120,000 |
|
|
|
916,963,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in Operating Partnership |
|
|
5,325,000 |
|
|
|
7,053,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. shareholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock ($.01 par value, $25.00 per share
liquidation value, 12,500,000 shares authorized, 6,400,000 shares
issued and outstanding) |
|
|
158,575,000 |
|
|
|
158,575,000 |
|
Common stock ($.06 par value, 150,000,000 shares authorized
68,002,000 and 66,520,000 shares, respectively, issued and
outstanding) |
|
|
4,080,000 |
|
|
|
3,991,000 |
|
Treasury stock (1,336,000 and 1,120,000 shares, respectively, at cost) |
|
|
(10,856,000 |
) |
|
|
(10,367,000 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
718,015,000 |
|
|
|
712,548,000 |
|
Cumulative distributions in excess of net income |
|
|
(283,400,000 |
) |
|
|
(231,275,000 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(2,997,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,406,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. shareholders equity |
|
|
583,417,000 |
|
|
|
630,066,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interests in consolidated joint ventures |
|
|
60,299,000 |
|
|
|
62,050,000 |
|
Limited partners interest in Operating Partnership |
|
|
6,254,000 |
|
|
|
6,355,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noncontrolling interests |
|
|
66,553,000 |
|
|
|
68,405,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity |
|
|
649,970,000 |
|
|
|
698,471,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity |
|
$ |
1,625,415,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,622,487,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
4
CEDAR SHOPPING CENTERS, INC.
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rents |
|
$ |
30,730,000 |
|
|
$ |
30,988,000 |
|
|
$ |
61,495,000 |
|
|
$ |
63,240,000 |
|
Expense recoveries |
|
|
6,776,000 |
|
|
|
6,718,000 |
|
|
|
16,232,000 |
|
|
|
16,150,000 |
|
Other |
|
|
793,000 |
|
|
|
283,000 |
|
|
|
1,499,000 |
|
|
|
382,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
38,299,000 |
|
|
|
37,989,000 |
|
|
|
79,226,000 |
|
|
|
79,772,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating, maintenance and management |
|
|
7,035,000 |
|
|
|
6,840,000 |
|
|
|
17,620,000 |
|
|
|
16,315,000 |
|
Real estate and other property-related taxes |
|
|
4,849,000 |
|
|
|
4,844,000 |
|
|
|
9,811,000 |
|
|
|
9,736,000 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
2,691,000 |
|
|
|
2,106,000 |
|
|
|
5,216,000 |
|
|
|
4,317,000 |
|
Management transition charges |
|
|
6,350,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,530,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Impairments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
562,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,117,000 |
|
Acquisition transaction costs and terminated projects |
|
|
73,000 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
1,242,000 |
|
|
|
1,322,000 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
10,917,000 |
|
|
|
11,222,000 |
|
|
|
21,250,000 |
|
|
|
21,370,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
31,915,000 |
|
|
|
25,576,000 |
|
|
|
61,669,000 |
|
|
|
55,177,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
6,384,000 |
|
|
|
12,413,000 |
|
|
|
17,557,000 |
|
|
|
24,595,000 |
|
Non-operating income and expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, including amortization of
deferred financing costs |
|
|
(11,773,000 |
) |
|
|
(12,292,000 |
) |
|
|
(23,863,000 |
) |
|
|
(25,574,000 |
) |
Interest income |
|
|
106,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
184,000 |
|
|
|
19,000 |
|
Unconsolidated joint ventures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in income |
|
|
34,000 |
|
|
|
479,000 |
|
|
|
825,000 |
|
|
|
835,000 |
|
Write-off of investment |
|
|
(7,961,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,961,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of land parcel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-operating income and expense |
|
|
(19,594,000 |
) |
|
|
(11,808,000 |
) |
|
|
(30,787,000 |
) |
|
|
(24,720,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before discontinued operations |
|
|
(13,210,000 |
) |
|
|
605,000 |
|
|
|
(13,230,000 |
) |
|
|
(125,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
265,000 |
|
|
|
(157,000 |
) |
|
|
1,478,000 |
|
|
|
(514,000 |
) |
Impairment charges |
|
|
(12,258,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,990,000 |
) |
|
|
(22,544,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,238,000 |
) |
Gain on sales |
|
|
474,000 |
|
|
|
(5,000 |
) |
|
|
474,000 |
|
|
|
170,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total discontinued operations |
|
|
(11,519,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,152,000 |
) |
|
|
(20,592,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,582,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
(24,729,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,547,000 |
) |
|
|
(33,822,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,707,000 |
) |
Less, net loss (income) attributable to noncontrolling interests: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interests in consolidated joint ventures |
|
|
22,000 |
|
|
|
87,000 |
|
|
|
47,000 |
|
|
|
(388,000 |
) |
Limited partners interest in Operating Partnership |
|
|
579,000 |
|
|
|
178,000 |
|
|
|
839,000 |
|
|
|
292,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net loss (income) attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
601,000 |
|
|
|
265,000 |
|
|
|
886,000 |
|
|
|
(96,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. |
|
|
(24,128,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,282,000 |
) |
|
|
(32,936,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,803,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred distribution requirements |
|
|
(3,540,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,969,000 |
) |
|
|
(7,041,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,938,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to common shareholders |
|
$ |
(27,668,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,251,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(39,977,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,741,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per common share attributable to common shareholders (basic
and diluted): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.29 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.07 |
) |
Discontinued operations |
|
|
(0.17 |
) |
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.41 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.07 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts attributable to Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
common shareholders, net of limited partners interest: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(16,380,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,190,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(19,797,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,263,000 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
(11,753,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,056,000 |
) |
|
|
(20,645,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,643,000 |
) |
Gain on sales of discontinued operations |
|
|
465,000 |
|
|
|
(5,000 |
) |
|
|
465,000 |
|
|
|
165,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(27,668,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,251,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(39,977,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,741,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding |
|
|
68,099,000 |
|
|
|
64,434,000 |
|
|
|
67,664,000 |
|
|
|
61,581,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
5
CEDAR SHOPPING CENTERS, INC.
Consolidated Statements of Equity
Six months ended June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. Shareholders |
|
|
|
Preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$25.00 |
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Additional |
|
|
distributions |
|
|
other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.06 |
|
|
stock, |
|
|
paid-in |
|
|
in excess of |
|
|
comprehensive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
value |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Par value |
|
|
at cost |
|
|
capital |
|
|
net income |
|
|
(loss) income |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2010 |
|
|
6,400,000 |
|
|
$ |
158,575,000 |
|
|
|
66,520,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,991,000 |
|
|
$ |
(10,367,000 |
) |
|
$ |
712,548,000 |
|
|
$ |
(231,275,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,406,000 |
) |
|
$ |
630,066,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32,936,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32,936,000 |
) |
Unrealized gain on change in
fair value
of cash flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
409,000 |
|
|
|
409,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(32,527,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation
activity, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
759,000 |
|
|
|
46,000 |
|
|
|
(489,000 |
) |
|
|
471,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,000 |
|
Net proceeds from sale of
common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,000 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
223,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
225,000 |
|
Net proceeds from dividend
reinvestment and
direct stock purchase plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
684,000 |
|
|
|
41,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,034,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,075,000 |
|
Preferred distribution
requirements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,041,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,041,000 |
) |
Distributions to common
shareholders/
noncontrolling interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,148,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,148,000 |
) |
Contribution from minority
interest partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reallocation adjustment of
limited
partners interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
739,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
739,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, June 30, 2011 |
|
|
6,400,000 |
|
|
$ |
158,575,000 |
|
|
|
68,002,000 |
|
|
$ |
4,080,000 |
|
|
$ |
(10,856,000 |
) |
|
$ |
718,015,000 |
|
|
$ |
(283,400,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,997,000 |
) |
|
$ |
583,417,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling Interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority |
|
|
partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interests in |
|
|
interest in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
consolidated |
|
|
Operating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
joint ventures |
|
|
Partnership |
|
|
Total |
|
|
equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
62,050,000 |
|
|
$ |
6,355,000 |
|
|
$ |
68,405,000 |
|
|
$ |
698,471,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
(47,000 |
) |
|
|
(452,000 |
) |
|
|
(499,000 |
) |
|
|
(33,435,000 |
) |
Unrealized gain on change in fair value
of cash flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
411,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(47,000 |
) |
|
|
(450,000 |
) |
|
|
(497,000 |
) |
|
|
(33,024,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation activity, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,000 |
|
Net proceeds from sale of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
225,000 |
|
Net proceeds from dividend reinvestment and
direct stock purchase plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,075,000 |
|
Preferred distribution requirements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,041,000 |
) |
Distributions to common shareholders/
noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(1,973,000 |
) |
|
|
(139,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,112,000 |
) |
|
|
(14,260,000 |
) |
Contribution from minority interest partners |
|
|
269,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
269,000 |
|
|
|
269,000 |
|
Reallocation adjustment of limited
partners interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
488,000 |
|
|
|
488,000 |
|
|
|
1,227,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, June 30, 2011 |
|
$ |
60,299,000 |
|
|
$ |
6,254,000 |
|
|
$ |
66,553,000 |
|
|
$ |
649,970,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
6
CEDAR SHOPPING CENTERS, INC.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Cash flow from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(33,822,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,707,000 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in income of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(825,000 |
) |
|
|
(835,000 |
) |
Distributions from unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
557,000 |
|
|
|
548,000 |
|
Write-off of investment in unconsolidated joint venture |
|
|
7,961,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Impairments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,117,000 |
|
Acquisition transaction costs and terminated projects |
|
|
1,242,000 |
|
|
|
1,273,000 |
|
Impairments discontinued operations |
|
|
22,544,000 |
|
|
|
3,238,000 |
|
Gain on sales of real estate |
|
|
(502,000 |
) |
|
|
(170,000 |
) |
Straight-line rents |
|
|
(998,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,424,000 |
) |
Provision for doubtful accounts |
|
|
1,765,000 |
|
|
|
1,518,000 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
21,466,000 |
|
|
|
23,753,000 |
|
Amortization of intangible lease liabilities |
|
|
(2,995,000 |
) |
|
|
(5,427,000 |
) |
Amortization (including accelerated write-off) and market price adjustments
relating to stock-based compensation |
|
|
3,128,000 |
|
|
|
1,236,000 |
|
Amortization (including accelerated write-off of deferred financing costs) |
|
|
2,143,000 |
|
|
|
2,493,000 |
|
Increases/decreases in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rents and other receivables, net |
|
|
(4,405,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,875,000 |
) |
Joint venture settlements |
|
|
126,000 |
|
|
|
(2,426,000 |
) |
Prepaid expenses and other |
|
|
(383,000 |
) |
|
|
1,340,000 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
(3,436,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,894,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
13,566,000 |
|
|
|
16,758,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flow from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenditures for real estate and improvements |
|
|
(63,158,000 |
) |
|
|
(15,512,000 |
) |
Net proceeds from sales of real estate |
|
|
11,577,000 |
|
|
|
2,056,000 |
|
Net proceeds from transfers to unconsolidated Cedar/RioCan joint venture, less
cash at dates of transfer |
|
|
2,894,000 |
|
|
|
31,513,000 |
|
Investments in and advances to unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(4,183,000 |
) |
|
|
(4,302,000 |
) |
Distributions of capital from unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
2,996,000 |
|
|
|
1,559,000 |
|
Increase in loans and other receivables |
|
|
(4,729,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Construction escrows and other |
|
|
(1,825,000 |
) |
|
|
1,156,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities |
|
|
(56,428,000 |
) |
|
|
16,470,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flow from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net advances/(repayments) from/(to) revolving credit facilities |
|
|
34,500,000 |
|
|
|
(89,844,000 |
) |
Proceeds from mortgage financings |
|
|
29,291,000 |
|
|
|
16,242,000 |
|
Mortgage repayments |
|
|
(4,762,000 |
) |
|
|
(16,457,000 |
) |
Payments of debt financing costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(998,000 |
) |
Termination payment related to interest rate swaps |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,476,000 |
) |
Noncontrolling interests: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution from consolidated joint venture minority interests |
|
|
269,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to consolidated joint venture minority interests |
|
|
(1,973,000 |
) |
|
|
(660,000 |
) |
Redemptions of Operating Partnership Units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(485,000 |
) |
Distributions to limited partners |
|
|
(255,000 |
) |
|
|
(353,000 |
) |
Net proceeds from the sales of common stock |
|
|
4,299,000 |
|
|
|
65,913,000 |
|
Exercise of warrant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000,000 |
|
Preferred stock distributions |
|
|
(7,099,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,938,000 |
) |
Distributions to common shareholders |
|
|
(12,148,000 |
) |
|
|
(10,542,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
42,122,000 |
|
|
|
(36,598,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(740,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,370,000 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
14,166,000 |
|
|
|
17,164,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
13,426,000 |
|
|
$ |
13,794,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
7
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Note 1. Organization and Basis of Preparation
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. (the Company) was organized in 1984 and elected to be taxed as
a real estate investment trust (REIT) in 1986. The Company focuses primarily on ownership,
operation, development and redevelopment of supermarket-anchored shopping centers predominantly in
mid-Atlantic and Northeast coastal states. At June 30, 2011, the Company owned and managed 131
operating properties, including 22 properties in the unconsolidated Cedar/RioCan joint venture,
and 17 properties held for sale/conveyance.
Cedar Shopping Centers Partnership, L.P. (the Operating Partnership) is the entity through
which the Company conducts substantially all of its business and owns (either directly or through
subsidiaries) substantially all of its assets. At June 30, 2011 the Company owned a 98.0% economic
interest in, and was the sole general partner of, the Operating Partnership. The limited partners
interest in the Operating Partnership (2.0% at June 30, 2011) is represented by Operating
Partnership Units (OP Units). The carrying amount of such interest is adjusted at the end of each
reporting period to an amount equal to the limited partners ownership percentage of the Operating
Partnerships net equity. Allocations of amounts between the Company and its limited partners
include the impact of the equity award shares discussed in Note 2 Stock- Based Compensation.
The approximately 1.4 million OP Units outstanding at June 30, 2011 are economically equivalent to
the Companys common stock and are convertible into the Companys common stock at the option of the
respective holders on a one-to-one basis.
As used herein, the Company refers to Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. and its subsidiaries on a
consolidated basis, including the Operating Partnership or, where the context so requires, Cedar
Shopping Centers, Inc. only.
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts and operations of the Company, the
Operating Partnership, its subsidiaries, and certain joint venture partnerships in which it
participates. The Company consolidates all variable interest entities (VIEs) for which it is the
primary beneficiary. Generally, a VIE is an entity with one or more of the following
characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to
finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support, (b) as a group, the
holders of the equity investment at risk (i) lack the power to make decisions about the entitys
activities that significantly impacts the entitys performance through voting or similar rights,
(ii) have no obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) have no right to
receive the expected residual returns of the entity, or (c) the equity investors have voting rights
that are not proportional to their economic interests, and substantially all of the entitys
activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately
few voting rights. The Company follows the accounting guidance for determining whether an entity is
a VIE,
which requires the performance of a qualitative rather than a quantitative analysis to
determine the primary beneficiary of a VIE. The guidance requires an entity to consolidate a VIE if
it has (i) the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the entitys economic
performance, and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits
from the VIE that could be significant to the VIE. Significant judgments related to these
determinations include estimates about the current and future fair values and performance of real
estate held by these VIEs and general market conditions.
8
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
With respect to its 12 consolidated operating joint ventures, the Company has general
partnership interests of 20% in nine properties, 40% in two properties and 50% in one property. As
(i) such entities are not VIEs, and (ii) the Company is the sole general partner and exercises
substantial operating control over these entities, the Company has determined that such entities
should be consolidated for financial statement purposes. Current accounting guidance provides a
framework for determining whether a general partner controls, and should consolidate, a limited
partnership or similar entity in which it owns a minority interest.
The Companys three 60%-owned joint ventures originally formed as development projects in
Limerick, Pottsgrove and Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, are consolidated as they are deemed to be VIEs
and the Company is the primary beneficiary in each case. At June 30, 2011, these VIEs owned real
estate with a carrying value of $138.3 million. The assets of the consolidated VIEs can be used to
settle obligations other than those of the consolidated VIEs. At that date, one of the VIEs had a
property-specific mortgage loan payable aggregating $63.8 million, and the real estate owned by the
other two VIEs partially collateralized the secured revolving development property credit facility
(the development property credit facility) to the extent of $28.1 million. Such obligations are
guaranteed by, and are recourse to, the Company. For such development projects, the Company reviews
the applicable budgets and provides supervisory support.
On February 15, 2011, Homburg Invest Inc. (HII), one of the Companys joint venture
partners, exercised its buy/sell option pursuant to the terms of the joint venture agreements for
each of the nine properties owned by the venture. The offered values for the properties, in the
aggregate, amounted to approximately $55.0 million over existing property-specific financing of
approximately $101.6 million and $102.3 million at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010,
respectively. The Company has elected to purchase HIIs 80% interest in one of the nine properties,
Meadows Marketplace, located in Hershey, Pennsylvania. The offered purchase price for the 80%
interest is approximately $5.3 million, and the outstanding balance of the mortgage loan payable on
the property was approximately $10.1 million and $10.2 million at June 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010, respectively. The Company also determined not to meet HIIs buy/sell offers for each of the
remaining eight properties. Accordingly, at closing, the Company will receive proceeds of
approximately $9.7 million from HII for its 20% interest in these properties. The outstanding
balances of the mortgage loans payable on the eight properties was approximately $91.5 million and
$92.1 million at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively. The Companys property
management agreements for the eight properties will terminate upon the closing of the sale. In
addition to normal closing conditions, these
transactions are subject to the obtaining of approvals of the lenders holding mortgages on the
properties, which create significant uncertainties. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that any
of these transactions will be consummated.
9
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
With respect to its unconsolidated joint ventures, the Company has a 20% interest in a joint
venture with RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust of Toronto, Canada, a publicly-traded Canadian
real estate investment trust (RioCan) formed initially for the acquisition of seven shopping
center properties owned by the Company; all seven properties had been transferred to the joint
venture by May 2010 and, as of June 30, 2011, the joint venture owned 22 properties. The accounting
treatment presentation on the accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2010 is to reflect the results of the properties operations through the
respective dates of transfer in current operations and, prospectively following their transfer to
the joint venture, as equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated joint ventures. Accordingly, the
accompanying statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 includes
revenues of $0.7 million and $4.4 million, respectively, applicable to the periods prior to the
dates of transfer to the RioCan joint venture. Although the Company provides management and other
services, RioCan has significant management participation rights. The Company has determined that
this joint venture is not a VIE and, accordingly, the Company accounts for its investment in this
joint venture under the equity method.
The Company had an approximate 85% limited partners interest in an unconsolidated joint
venture (increased from approximately 76% in the second quarter of 2011 for a payment of $745,000)
which owned a single-tenant property in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Company had determined that
this joint venture was not a VIE. In addition, the Company had no control over the entity, did not
provide any management or other services to the entity, and had no substantial participating or
kick out rights. The Company had accounted for its investment in this joint venture under the
equity method. The tenant vacated the premises in April 2011 at which time the joint venture had a
CMBS non-recourse first mortgage loan secured by the property in the amount of $14.7 million due
for payment in May 2011. In May and June 2011, the Company reviewed its investment alternatives and
determined that it would not be prudent to proceed with the development, sale or lease of both the
joint venture property and an adjacent property 100% owned by the Company (the adjacent property
had been leased to the same tenant which also vacated the premises in April 2011). In addition, it
was determined that it would also not be prudent to advance the funds necessary to pay off the
joint ventures mortgage. Such determination was based on the uncertainty in obtaining favorable
revisions to zoning, difficult existing deed restrictions, the uncertainty in achieving required
economic returns given the extensive additional capital investments required, and uncertain current
market conditions for sale or lease. As a result, in exchange for a payment by the Company of
$838,000, the Company (a) obtained appropriate releases, and (b) assigned its limited partnership
interest to other partners of the joint venture. Accordingly, as of June 30, 2011, the Company
wrote off its investment in the joint venture ($8.0 million), and recorded an impairment charge,
included in discontinued operations, related to the value of the 100%-owned adjacent property ($9.1
million, as more fully discussed in Note 3 Discontinued Operations).
10
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
At June 30, 2011, the Company had deposits of $0.8 million on four land parcels (which is its
maximum exposure) to be purchased for future development. Although each of the entities holding the
deposits is considered a VIE, the Company has not consolidated any of them as the Company is not
the primary beneficiary in each case.
Note 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the
instructions to Form 10-Q and include all of the information and disclosures required by U.S.
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) for interim reporting. Accordingly, they do not
include all of the disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In the opinion
of management, all adjustments necessary for fair presentation (including normal recurring
accruals) have been included. The consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-Q should be
read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes contained
in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
The consolidated financial statements reflect certain reclassifications of prior period
amounts to conform to the 2011 presentation, principally to reflect the sale and/or treatment as
held for sale/conveyance of certain operating properties and the treatment thereof as
discontinued operations. The reclassifications had no impact on previously-reported net income
(loss) attributable to common shareholders or earnings per share.
Real Estate Investments
Real estate investments are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation. The provision for
depreciation is calculated using the straight-line method based upon the estimated useful lives of
the respective assets of between 3 and 40 years. Depreciation expense amounted to $10.1 million and
$10.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $19.7 million
and $20.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Expenditures for
betterments that substantially extend the useful lives of the assets are capitalized. Expenditures
for maintenance, repairs, and betterments that do not substantially prolong the normal useful life
of an asset are charged to operations as incurred.
Upon the sale (or treatment as held for sale/conveyance) or other disposition of assets, the
cost and related accumulated depreciation and amortization are removed from the accounts and the
resulting gain or impairment loss, if any, is reflected as discontinued operations. In addition,
prior periods financial statements would be reclassified to reflect the sold properties
operations as discontinued.
11
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Real estate investments include costs of development and redevelopment activities, and
construction in progress. Capitalized costs, including interest and other carrying costs during the
construction and/or renovation periods, are included in the cost of the related asset and charged
to operations through depreciation over the assets estimated useful life. Interest and financing
costs capitalized amounted to $0.8 million and $0.7 million for the three months ended June
30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $1.1 million and $1.6 million for the six months ended June
30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. A variety of costs are incurred in the acquisition, development
and leasing of a property, such as pre-construction costs essential to the development of the
property, development costs, construction costs, interest costs, real estate taxes, salaries and
related costs, and other costs incurred during the period of development. After a determination is
made to capitalize a cost, it is allocated to the specific component of a project that is
benefited. The Company ceases capitalization on the portions substantially completed and occupied,
or held available for occupancy, and capitalizes only those costs associated with the portions
under development. The Company considers a construction project to be substantially completed and
held available for occupancy upon the completion of tenant improvements, but not later than one
year from cessation of major construction activity.
Management reviews each real estate investment for impairment whenever events or circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of a real estate investment may not be recoverable. The review of
recoverability is based on an estimate of the future cash flows that are expected to result from
the real estate investments use and eventual disposition. These cash flows consider factors such
as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of leasing
demand, competition and other factors. If an impairment event exists due to the projected inability
to recover the carrying value of a real estate investment, an impairment loss is recorded to the
extent that the carrying value exceeds estimated fair value. Real estate investments held for
sale/conveyance are carried at the lower of their respective carrying amounts or estimated fair
values, less costs to sell. Depreciation and amortization are suspended during the periods held for
sale/conveyance.
During the three months ended March 31, 2010, the Company wrote-off approximately $1.3 million
of costs incurred in prior years for a potential development project in Williamsport, Pennsylvania
that the Company determined would not go forward.
Conditional asset retirement obligation
A conditional asset retirement obligation is a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement
activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement is conditional on a future event that may
or may not be within the control of the Company. The Company would record a liability for a
conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value of the obligation can be reasonably
estimated. Environmental studies conducted at the time of acquisition with respect to all of the
Companys properties did not reveal any material environmental liabilities, and the Company is
unaware of any subsequent environmental matters that would have created a material liability. The
Company believes that its properties are currently in material compliance with applicable
environmental, as well as non-environmental, statutory and regulatory requirements. There were no
conditional asset retirement obligation liabilities recorded by the Company during the three and
six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
12
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Fair Value Measurements
The fair value measurement accounting guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy that
prioritizes observable and unobservable inputs used to measure fair value into three levels:
|
|
|
Level 1 Inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted prices (unadjusted) for
identical assets or liabilities in active markets. |
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Inputs to the valuation methodology include quoted prices for similar
assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset
or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the
financial instrument. |
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to
the fair value measurement. |
The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs and the lowest priority
to Level 3 inputs. In determining fair value, the Company utilizes valuation techniques that
maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs to the extent
possible while also considering counterparty credit risk in the assessment of fair value. Financial
liabilities measured at fair value in the consolidated financial statements consist of interest
rate swaps. The fair values of interest rate swaps are determined using widely accepted valuation
techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis, on the expected cash flows of each derivative.
The analysis reflects the contractual terms of the swaps, including the period to maturity, and
uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate curves (significant other observable
inputs). The fair value calculation also includes an amount for risk of non-performance using
significant unobservable inputs such as estimates of current credit spreads to evaluate the
likelihood of default. The Company has concluded, as of June 30, 2011, that the fair value
associated with the significant unobservable inputs relating to the Companys risk of
non-performance was insignificant to the overall fair value of the interest rate swap agreements
and, as a result, the Company has determined that the relevant inputs for purposes of calculating
the fair value of the interest rate swap agreements, in their entirety, were based upon
significant other observable inputs. Nonfinancial assets and liabilities measured at fair value
in the consolidated financial statements consists of real estate held for sale/conveyance-
discontinued operations.
13
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The following tables show the hierarchy for those assets measured at fair value on a
non-recurring basis as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets Measured at Fair Value on a |
|
|
|
Non Recurring Basis |
|
|
|
June 30, 2011 |
|
Asset Description |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for sale |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,316,000 |
|
|
$ |
45,859,000 |
|
|
$ |
51,175,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets Measured at Fair Value on a |
|
|
|
Non Recurring Basis |
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
Asset Description |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for sale |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
22,773,000 |
|
|
$ |
47,186,000 |
|
|
$ |
69,959,000 |
(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Excludes net book value of $18.4 million relating to properties subsequently treated as
held for sale during the six months ended June 30, 2011 and recorded at fair value as of
that date. |
The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, rents and other
receivables, certain other assets, accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate fair value.
The fair value of the Companys investments ($3.6 million and $0 at June 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010, respectively) and liabilities related to deferred compensation plans ($3.7 million and $0 at
June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively) were determined to be a Level 1 within the
valuation hierarchy, and were based on independent values provided by financial institutions. The
valuation of the liability for the Companys interest rate swaps ($1.4 million and $1.6 million at
June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively), which is measured on a recurring basis, was
determined to be a Level 2 within the valuation hierarchy, and was based on independent values
provided by financial institutions. The valuation of the assets for the Companys real estate held
for sale/conveyance discontinued operations, which is measured on a nonrecurring basis, have
been determined to be (i) a Level 2 within the valuation hierarchy, based on the respective
contracts of sale or (ii) Level 3 within the valuation hierarchy, where applicable, based on
estimated sales prices determined by discounted cash flow analyses if no contract amounts were as
yet being negotiated. The discounted cash flow analyses included all estimated cash inflows and
outflows over a specific holding period and where applicable, any estimated debt premiums. These
cash flows were comprised of unobservable inputs which included contractual rental revenues and
forecasted rental revenues and expenses based upon market conditions and expectations for growth.
Capitalization rates and discount rates utilized in these analyses were based upon observable rates
that the Company believed to be within a reasonable range of current market rates for the
respective properties.
14
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The fair value of the Companys fixed rate mortgage loans was estimated using available market
information and discounted cash flows analyses based on borrowing rates the Company believes it
could obtain with similar terms and maturities. As of June 30, 2011 and December
31, 2010, the aggregate fair values of the Companys fixed rate mortgage loans were
approximately $620.4 million and $579.4 million, respectively; the carrying values of such loans
were $599.4 million and $575.6 million, respectively, at those dates.
Intangible Lease Asset/Liability
The Company allocates the fair value of real estate acquired to land, buildings and
improvements. In addition, the fair value of in-place leases is allocated to intangible lease
assets and liabilities.
The fair value of the tangible assets of an acquired property is determined by valuing the
property as if it were vacant, which value is then allocated to land, buildings and improvements
based on managements determination of the relative fair values of these assets. In valuing an
acquired propertys intangibles, factors considered by management include an estimate of carrying
costs during the expected lease-up periods, such as real estate taxes, insurance, other operating
expenses, and estimates of lost rental revenue during the expected lease-up periods based on its
evaluation of current market demand. Management also estimates costs to execute similar leases,
including leasing commissions, tenant improvements, legal and other related costs.
The values of acquired above-market and below-market leases are recorded based on the present
values (using discount rates which reflect the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the
differences between the contractual amounts to be received and managements estimate of market
lease rates, measured over the terms of the respective leases that management deemed appropriate at
the time of the acquisitions. Such valuations include a consideration of the non-cancellable terms
of the respective leases as well as any applicable renewal period(s). The fair values associated
with below-market rental renewal options are determined based on the Companys experience and the
relevant facts and circumstances that existed at the time of the acquisitions. The values of
above-market leases are amortized to rental income over the terms of the respective non-cancelable
lease periods. The portion of the values of below-market leases associated with the original
non-cancelable lease terms are amortized to rental income over the terms of the respective
non-cancelable lease periods. The portion of the values of the leases associated with below-market
renewal options that are likely of exercise are amortized to rental income over the respective
renewal periods. The value of other intangible assets (including leasing commissions, tenant
improvements, etc.) is amortized to expense over the applicable terms of the respective leases. If
a lease were to be terminated prior to its stated expiration or not renewed, all unamortized
amounts relating to that lease would be recognized in operations at that time.
15
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
With respect to the Companys acquisitions, the fair values of in-place leases and other
intangibles have been allocated to the intangible asset and liability accounts. Such allocations
are preliminary and are based on information and estimates available as of the respective dates of
acquisition. As final information becomes available and is refined, appropriate adjustments are
made to the purchase price allocations, which are finalized within twelve months of the
respective dates of acquisition.
Unamortized intangible lease liabilities that relate to below-market leases amounted to $44.1
million and $46.5 million at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively. Unamortized
intangible lease assets that relate to above-market leases amounted to $0.9 million and $0 at June
30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
As a result of recording the intangible lease assets and liabilities, (i) revenues were
increased by $1.5 million and $2.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010,
respectively, and $2.9 million and $4.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010,
respectively, relating to the amortization of intangible lease liabilities, and (ii) depreciation
and amortization expense was increased correspondingly by $2.4 million and $2.5 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $4.4 million and $4.9 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents consist of cash in banks and short-term investments with original
maturities of less than ninety days, and include cash at consolidated joint ventures of $9.6
million and $6.7 million at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
Restricted Cash
The terms of several of the Companys mortgage loans payable require the Company to deposit
certain replacement and other reserves with its lenders. Such restricted cash is generally
available only for property-level requirements for which the reserves have been established, and is
not available to fund other property-level or Company-level obligations.
Rents and Other Receivables
Management has determined that all of the Companys leases with its various tenants are
operating leases. Rental income with scheduled rent increases is recognized using the straight-line
method over the respective non-cancelable terms of the leases. The aggregate excess of rental
revenue recognized on a straight-line basis over the contractual base rents is included in
straight-line rents on the consolidated balance sheet. Leases also generally contain provisions
under which the tenants reimburse the Company for a portion of property operating expenses and real
estate taxes incurred, generally attributable to their respective allocable portions of GLA. Such
income is recognized in the periods earned. In addition, a limited number of operating leases
contain contingent rent provisions under which tenants are required to pay, as additional rent, a
percentage of their sales in excess of a specified amount. The Company defers recognition of
contingent rental income until those specified sales targets are met. Other contingent fees are
recognized when earned.
16
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The Company must make estimates as to the collectability of its accounts receivable related to
base rent, straight-line rent, percentage rent, expense reimbursements and other revenues. When
management analyzes accounts receivable and evaluates the adequacy of the allowance for doubtful
accounts, it considers such things as historical bad debts, tenant creditworthiness, current
economic trends, current developments relevant to a tenants business specifically and to its
business category generally, and changes in tenants payment patterns. The allowance for doubtful
accounts was $6.1 million and $5.4 million at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
The provision for doubtful accounts (included in operating, maintenance and management expenses)
was $0.7 million and $0.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively,
and $1.6 million and $1.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Concentration of Credit Risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk
consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents in excess of insured amounts and tenant receivables.
The Company places its cash and cash equivalents with high quality financial institutions.
Management performs ongoing credit evaluations of its tenants and requires certain tenants to
provide security deposits and/or suitable guarantees.
Other Assets
Other assets at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Investments and cumulative mark-to-market adjustments
related to stock-based compensation |
|
$ |
3,607,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,101,000 |
|
Prepaid expenses |
|
|
2,678,000 |
|
|
|
5,258,000 |
|
Intangible lease assets (i) |
|
|
877,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Property deposits |
|
|
751,000 |
|
|
|
1,792,000 |
|
Leasehold improvements and other |
|
|
1,012,000 |
|
|
|
525,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,925,000 |
|
|
$ |
9,676,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(i) |
|
Represents unamortized balances relating to above-market leases resulting from
purchase accounting allocations. |
17
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Deferred Charges, Net
Deferred charges at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are net of accumulated amortization
and are comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Lease origination costs (i) |
|
$ |
16,632,000 |
|
|
$ |
16,101,000 |
|
Financing costs (ii) |
|
|
8,309,000 |
|
|
|
10,434,000 |
|
Other |
|
|
959,000 |
|
|
|
1,551,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
25,900,000 |
|
|
$ |
28,086,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(i) |
|
Includes unamortized balances of intangible lease assets ($7.6 million and $7.7 million,
respectively) resulting from purchase accounting allocations. |
|
(ii) |
|
Represents costs incurred in connection with the Companys credit facilities and other
long-term debt. |
Deferred charges are amortized over the terms of the related agreements. Amortization
expense related to deferred charges (including amortization of deferred financing costs included in
non-operating income and expense) amounted to $2.0 million and $2.2 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $3.9 million and $4.3 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Income Taxes
The Company has elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the Code). A REIT will generally not be subject to federal income taxation on that
portion of its income that qualifies as REIT taxable income, to the extent that it distributes at
least 90% of such REIT taxable income to its shareholders and complies with certain other
requirements. As of June 30, 2011, the Company was in compliance with all REIT requirements.
The Company follows a two-step approach for evaluating uncertain tax positions. Recognition
(step one) occurs when an enterprise concludes that a tax position, based solely on its technical
merits, is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon examination. Measurement (step two) determines
the amount of benefit that more-likely-than-not will be realized upon settlement. Derecognition of
a tax position that was previously recognized would occur when a company subsequently determines
that a tax position no longer meets the more-likely-than-not threshold of being sustained. The use
of a valuation allowance as a substitute for derecognition of tax positions is prohibited. The
Company has not identified any uncertain tax positions which would require an accrual.
18
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Derivative Financial Instruments
The Company occasionally utilizes derivative financial instruments, principally interest rate
swaps, to manage its exposure to fluctuations in interest rates. The Company has established
policies and procedures for risk assessment, and the approval, reporting and monitoring of
derivative financial instruments. Derivative financial instruments must be effective in reducing
the Companys interest rate risk exposure in order to qualify for hedge accounting. When the terms
of an underlying transaction are modified, or when the underlying hedged item ceases to exist, all
changes in the fair value of the instrument are marked-to-market with changes in value included in
net income for each period until the derivative financial instrument matures or is settled. Any
derivative financial instrument used for risk management that does not meet the hedging criteria is
marked-to-market with the changes in value included in net income. The Company has not entered
into, and does not plan to enter into, derivative financial instruments for trading or speculative
purposes. Additionally, the Company has a policy of entering into derivative contracts only with
major financial institutions. On January 20, 2010, the Company paid approximately $5.5 million to
terminate interest rate swaps applicable to the financing for its development joint venture project
in Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.
As of June 30, 2011, the Company believes it has no significant risk associated with
non-performance of the financial institutions which are the counterparties to its derivative
contracts. Additionally, based on the rates in effect as of June 30, 2011, if a counterparty were
to default, the Company would receive a net interest benefit. At June 30, 2011, the Company had
approximately $19.9 million of mortgage loans payable subject to interest rate swaps. Such interest
rate swaps converted LIBOR-based variable rates to fixed annual rates of 5.4% and 6.5% per annum.
At that date, the Company had accrued liabilities of $1.4 million (included in accounts payable and
accrued expenses on the consolidated balance sheet) relating to the fair value of interest rate
swaps applicable to existing mortgage loans payable. Charges and/or credits relating to the changes
in fair values of such interest rate swaps are made to accumulated other comprehensive (loss)
income, noncontrolling interests (minority interests in consolidated joint ventures and limited
partners interest), or operations (included in interest expense), as appropriate.
19
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The following is a summary of the derivative financial instruments held by the Company at June
30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional values |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Fair value |
|
Designation/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
Expiration |
|
|
sheet |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
Cash flow |
|
Derivative |
|
|
Count |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
Count |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
dates |
|
|
location |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualifying |
|
rate swaps |
|
|
2 |
|
|
$ |
19,896,000 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
$ |
20,094,000 |
|
|
|
2011 2020 |
|
|
accrued expenses |
|
|
$ |
1,441,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,642,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following presents the effect of the Companys derivative financial instruments on
the consolidated statements of operations and the consolidated statements of equity for the three
and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain (loss) recognized in other |
|
|
Amount of gain (loss) recognized in other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comprehensive (loss) income (effective portion) |
|
|
comprehensive (loss) income (effective portion) |
|
Designation/ |
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
Cash flow |
|
Derivative |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualifying |
|
swaps |
|
$ |
115,000 |
|
|
$ |
(94,000 |
) |
|
$ |
411,000 |
|
|
$ |
(1,093,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was no ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2011 and 2010.
Limited Partners Interest In Operating Partnership (Mezz OP Units)
The Company follows the accounting guidance related to noncontrolling interests in
consolidated financial statements, which clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary
(minority interests or certain limited partners interest, in the case of the Company), subject to
the classification and measurement of redeemable securities, is an ownership interest in a
consolidated entity which should be reported as equity in the parent companys consolidated
financial statements. The guidance requires a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances
of equity attributable to noncontrolling interests and disclosure, on the face of the consolidated
income statement, of those amounts of consolidated net income attributable to the noncontrolling
interests. The Company classifies the balances related to minority interests in consolidated
joint ventures and limited partners interest in the Operating Partnership into the consolidated
equity accounts, as appropriate (certain non-controlling interests of the Company are classified in
the mezzanine section of the balance sheet (the Mezz OP Units) as such Mezz OP Units do not meet
the requirements for equity classification, as certain of the holders of OP Units have registration
rights that provide such holders with the right to demand registration under the federal securities
laws of the common stock of the Company issuable upon conversion of such OP Units). The Company
adjusts the carrying value of the Mezz OP Units each period to equal the greater of its historical
carrying value or its redemption value. Through June 30, 2011, there have been no cumulative net
adjustments recorded to the carrying amounts of the Mezz OP Units.
20
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The following is an analysis of the activity relating to the Mezz OP units:
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
7,053,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
(387,000 |
) |
Unrealized gain on change in fair value
of cash flow hedges |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(385,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions |
|
|
(116,000 |
) |
Reallocation adjustment of limited partners interest |
|
|
(1,227,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, June 30, 2011 |
|
$ |
5,325,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/ Dividends Per Share
Basic earnings per share (EPS) is computed by dividing net (loss) attributable to the
Companys common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the
period, including (a) restricted shares and shares held by Rabbi Trusts, as these are participating
securities, and (b) shares attributable to the equity award discussed in Stock-Based Compensation
below.
Fully-diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other
contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into shares of common stock. The
calculations of additional shares were anti-dilutive for the three and six months ended June 30,
2011, respectively. The calculations of additional shares were 52,000 and 39,000 for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively, and related to the warrants issued to RioCan prior to
their exercise; however, such amounts were anti-dilutive as the Company reported net losses for
those periods. Accordingly, fully-diluted EPS are the same as basic EPS for all periods presented.
Dividends to common shareholders declared were $6,097,000 ($0.09 per share) and $5,845,000
($0.09 per share) for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $12,148,000
($0.18 per share) and $5,845,000 ($0.09 per share) for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010,
respectively.
21
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Management Transition Charges
In June 2011, the Companys Chairman of the Board, CEO and President retired, and the
employment of the Companys Chief Financial Officer ended. Pursuant to their respective employment
and/or separation agreements, (a) they are to receive an aggregate of approximately $3.7 million in
cash severance payments (including the cost of related payroll taxes and benefits), and (b) all of
their unvested restricted share grants became vested and all related unamortized deferred
compensation was written off (an aggregate of approximately $2.0 million see Stock-Based
Compensation below). Together with approximately $0.8 million of other costs, primarily
professional fees and expenses related to the hiring of a new President/CEO and Chief Financial
Officer (including $0.2 million recorded during the three months ended March 31, 2011), the Company
recorded an aggregate of approximately $6.5 million as management transition charges during the
six months ended June 30, 2011.
Stock-Based Compensation
The Companys 2004 Stock Incentive Plan (the Incentive Plan) establishes the procedures for
the granting of incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, performance
units and performance shares. The maximum number of shares of the Companys common stock that may
be issued pursuant to the Incentive Plan is 4,850,000 (including a 2,100,000 share increase
approved by shareholders on June 15, 2011), and the maximum number of shares that may be granted to
a participant in any calendar year may not exceed 250,000. All grants issued pursuant to the
Incentive Plan are restricted stock grants which generally vest (i) at the end of designated time
periods for time-based grants, or (ii) upon the completion of a designated period of performance
for performance-based grants and satisfaction of performance
criteria. Time-based grants are
valued according to the market price for the Companys common stock at the date of grant. The value
of all grants is being expensed on a straight-line basis over the respective vesting periods
(irrespective of achievement of the performance grants) adjusted, as applicable, for fluctuations
in the market value of the Companys common stock and forfeiture assumptions. Those grants of
restricted shares that are transferred to Rabbi Trusts are classified as treasury stock on the
Companys consolidated balance sheet. For performance-based grants, the Company generally engages
an independent appraisal company to determine the value of the shares at the date of grant, taking
into account the underlying contingency risks associated with the performance criteria.
In January 2009, the Company issued 218,000 shares of common stock as performance-based
grants, based on the total annual return on an investment in the Companys common stock (TSR)
over the three-year period ending December 31, 2011, with 75% to vest if such TSR is equal to, or
greater than an average of 6% TSR per year on the Companys common stock, and 25% to vest based on
a comparison of TSR for such three years to the Companys peer group. The independent appraisal
determined the values of the performance-based shares to be $5.44 and $6.48 per share,
respectively, compared to a market price at the date of grant of $7.02 per share. After the
accelerated vesting in June 2011 of certain of these shares, as discussed below, 82,000 shares
remain of the 2009 performance-based award.
22
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
In January 2010, the Company issued 227,000 shares of common stock as performance-based
grants. As modified in September 2010, one-half of these amounts will vest upon the satisfaction of
the following conditions: (a) if the TSR on the Companys common stock is at least an average of 6%
per year for the three years ending December 31, 2012, and (b) if there is a positive comparison of
TSR on the Companys common stock to the median of the TSR for the Companys peer group for the
three years ending December 31, 2012. The independent appraisal determined the values of the
category (a) and (b) performance-based shares to be $4.56 per share and $6.00 per share,
respectively, compared to a market price at the date of grant of $6.70 per share. After the
accelerated vesting in June 2011 of certain of these shares, as discussed below, 84,000 shares
remain of the 2010 performance-based award.
In January 2011, the Company issued 275,000 shares of common stock as performance-based
grants. One-half of these amounts will vest upon the satisfaction of the following conditions: (a)
if the TSR on the Companys common stock is at least an average of 8% per year for the three years
ending December 31, 2013, and (b) if there is a positive comparison of TSR on the Companys common
stock to the median of the TSR for the Companys peer group for the three years ending December 31,
2013. The independent appraisal determined the values of the category (a) and (b) performance-based
shares to be $4.40 per share and $5.91 per share, respectively, compared to a market price at the
date of grant of $6.54 per share. After the accelerated vesting in June 2011 of certain of these
shares, as discussed below, 123,000 shares remain of the 2011 performance-based award.
In connection with the retirement of the Companys Chairman of the Board, CEO and President,
and the end of the employment of the Companys Chief Financial Officer (see Management Transition
Charges above), all of their outstanding restricted share grants, consisting of time-based grants
(284,000 shares) and performance-based grants (422,000 shares) became vested (an aggregate of
706,000 shares), and were expensed in full at the then market value of the shares (an aggregate of
approximately $2.0 million).
23
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The Companys new President and CEO is to receive restricted share grants totaling 2.5 million
shares, one-half of which are to be time-based, vesting upon the seventh anniversary of the date of
grant (vesting on June 15, 2018), and the other half to be performance-based, to be earned if the
TSR on the Companys common stock is at least an average of 6.5% per year for the seven years
ending June 15, 2018. The independent appraiser has initially estimated the value of the
performance-based award to be $4.39 per share compared to a market price at the date of
grant of $4.98 per share. As a result of existing limitations within the Incentive Plan, only
250,000 shares have been issued, 1,750,000 shares are being accounted for as an equity award, and
500,000 shares are being accounted for as a liability award. The values of the equity and
liability awards are being expensed on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. Consistent
with such awards to other recipients, dividends will be paid on all the shares, including the
equity and liability award shares, with the dividends paid on the equity award shares treated as
distributions to common shareholders and included in the statement of equity, and the dividends
paid on the liability award shares treated as compensation and included in the statement of
operations. In addition, with respect to the liability award, adjustments to reflect changes in the
fair value of the award will also be charged to operations. It is the Companys intention to seek a
modification of the terms of the Incentive Plan (or to adopt a new stock incentive plan) so as to
permit the grant of the entire 2.5 million shares. Until such changes are effectuated, the Company
will issue 250,000 shares each calendar year, thereby reducing the liability established for the
equity award. If, by June 15, 2018, the entire 2.5 million shares have not been issued, the parties
have agreed to satisfy any remaining Company obligations on a mutually-agreeable economic basis.
The Companys new Chief Financial Officer received a time-based restricted share grant
totaling 137,000 shares, vesting 25% annually on each of the next four anniversary dates of June 7,
2011.
24
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
In addition to the above, there were other time-based restricted shares issued, which amounted
to 0 shares and 4,000 shares for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and
299,000 shares and 278,000 shares for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The following table sets forth certain stock-based compensation information for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Restricted share grants (a) |
|
|
387,000 |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
961,000 |
|
|
|
505,000 |
|
Average per-share value |
|
$ |
4.96 |
|
|
$ |
6.52 |
|
|
$ |
5.40 |
|
|
$ |
6.55 |
|
Grant date values of restricted stock awards: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted share grants |
|
$ |
1,921,000 |
|
|
$ |
30,000 |
|
|
$ |
5,192,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,308,000 |
|
Equity award |
|
$ |
8,198,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,198,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Liability award |
|
$ |
2,342,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,342,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charged to operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expense relating to stock-based compensation |
|
$ |
2,816,000 |
|
|
$ |
884,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,796,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,590,000 |
|
Adjustments to reflect changes in market price of
Companys common stock |
|
|
(518,000 |
) |
|
|
(884,000 |
) |
|
|
(668,000 |
) |
|
|
(375,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total charged to operations (b) |
|
$ |
2,298,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,128,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,215,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested shares (a): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested, beginning of period |
|
|
1,548,000 |
|
|
|
1,368,000 |
|
|
|
1,280,000 |
|
|
|
980,000 |
|
Grants |
|
|
387,000 |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
961,000 |
|
|
|
505,000 |
|
Vested during period |
|
|
(726,000 |
) |
|
|
(28,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,017,000 |
) |
|
|
(141,000 |
) |
Forfeitures/cancellations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested, end of period |
|
|
1,209,000 |
|
|
|
1,344,000 |
|
|
|
1,209,000 |
|
|
|
1,344,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average value of non-vested shares (based on
valuation at date of grant) |
|
$ |
5.36 |
|
|
$ |
6.33 |
|
|
$ |
5.36 |
|
|
$ |
6.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average value of shares forfeited |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5.66 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value of shares vested during the
period (based on valuation at date of grant) (c) |
|
$ |
4,017,000 |
|
|
$ |
397,000 |
|
|
$ |
6,611,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,189,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Does not include the equity and liability award shares. |
|
(b) |
|
The 2011 amounts include $1,980,000 applicable to the accelerated vestings. |
|
(c) |
|
The 2011 amounts include $3,775,000 applicable to the accelerated vestings. |
At June 30, 2011, 2.3 million shares remained available for grants pursuant to the
Incentive Plan (including the 2.1 million shares approved by shareholders), and $14.7 million
remains to be expensed over various periods ending in June 2018.
During 2001, pursuant to the 1998 Stock Option Plan (the Option Plan), the Company granted
to the then directors options to purchase an aggregate of approximately 13,000 shares of common
stock at $10.50 per share, the market value of the Companys common stock on the date of the grant.
The options were fully exercisable and expired on July 11, 2011. The Option Plan has expired and is
no longer in effect.
25
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
In connection with an acquisition of a shopping center in 2002, the Operating Partnership
issued warrants to purchase approximately 83,000 OP Units to a then minority interest partner in
the property. Such warrants have an exercise price of $13.50 per unit, subject to certain
anti-dilution adjustments, are fully vested, and expire on May 31, 2012.
Supplemental consolidated statements of cash flows information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid |
|
$ |
24,160,000 |
|
|
$ |
25,714,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumption of mortgage loans payable upon disposition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,740,000 |
) |
Conversion of OP Units into common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,000 |
|
Purchase accounting allocations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible lease assets |
|
|
(5,764,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,901,000 |
) |
Intangible lease liabilities |
|
|
753,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued interest rate swap liabilities |
|
|
(202,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,307,000 |
) |
Accrued real estate improvements and construction escrows |
|
|
1,241,000 |
|
|
|
357,000 |
|
Capitalization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
400,000 |
|
|
|
495,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deconsolidation of properties transferred to joint venture: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
139,745,000 |
|
Mortgage loans payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(94,058,000 |
) |
Other assets/liabilities, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,574,000 |
) |
Investment in and advances to unconsolidated joint venture |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,423,000 |
|
Settlement receivable from unconsolidated joint venture |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,824,000 |
|
Recently-Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair
Value Measurement: Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements
in U.S GAAP and IFRS. This update defines fair value, clarifies a framework to measure fair value,
and requires specific disclosures of fair value measurements.
The guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after January 1,
2012 and is required to be applied retrospectively. The Company does not expect adoption of this
guidance to have a material impact on its financial condition or results of operations.
In June 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-05, Presentation of
Comprehensive Income. This standard eliminates the current requirement to report other
comprehensive income and its components in the statement of equity and instead requires the
components of other comprehensive income to be presented either in a single continuous statement of
comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. The guidance is effective for
interim and annual reporting periods beginning after January 1, 2012 and is required to be applied
retrospectively. Other than presentation in the financial statements, the adoption of this guidance
will have no effect on the Companys financial position or results of operations.
26
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Note 3. Real Estate/Discontinued Operations/Investment in Cedar/RioCan Joint Venture
At June 30, 2011 a substantial portion of the Companys real estate was pledged as collateral
for mortgage loans payable and the revolving credit facilities. The following are the significant
real estate transactions that occurred during the six months ended June 30, 2011.
Wholly-owned properties
On January 14, 2011, the Company acquired Colonial Commons, a shopping center located in Lower
Paxton Township, Pennsylvania. The purchase price for the property was approximately $49.1 million.
At closing, the Company entered into a first mortgage in the amount of $28.1 million, which bears
interest at 5.55% per annum.
On February 14, 2011, the Company completed the sale of a development land parcel, located
near Ephrata, Pennsylvania for approximately $1.9 million, which approximated the propertys
carrying value at December 31, 2010.
On April 29, 2011, the Company acquired, for future development (and which is substantially
pre-leased), a vacant land parcel in Kutztown (Township of Maxatawny), Pennsylvania for a purchase
price of approximately $1.6 million.
Discontinued operations
During the period from January 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011, the Company sold or treated as
held for sale and/or conveyance, 26 of its properties, including (1) a 100%-owned single-tenant
property in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and (2) a number of drug store/convenience centers. The
carrying values of the assets and liabilities of these properties, principally the net book values
of the real estate and the related mortgage loans payable to be assumed by the buyers (or conveyed
to the mortgagee), have been reclassified as held for sale/conveyance on the Companys
consolidated balance sheets at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010. In
addition, the properties results of operations have been classified as discontinued
operations for all periods presented. In connection therewith, the Company recorded net impairment
charges of $12.3 million and $3.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010,
respectively, and $22.5 million and $3.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010,
respectively (such impairment charges aggregated $39.5 million for the entire year ended December
31 2010).
27
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Such charges were based on a comparison of the carrying values of the properties with either
(1) the actual sales price less costs to sell for the properties sold or contract amounts for
properties in the process of being sold, (2) estimated sales prices based on discounted cash flow
analyses if no contract amounts were as yet being negotiated, as discussed in more detail in Note 2
Fair Value Measurements, or (3) an as is appraisal with respect to the single-tenant
property in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to be conveyed to the mortgagee. Prior to the Companys plan
to dispose of assets reclassified to held for sale/conveyance, the Company performed
recoverability analyses based on the estimated cash flows that were expected to result from the
real estate investments use and eventual disposal.
The impairment charge recorded in the three months ended June 30, 2011 relates primarily to
the 100%-owned single-tenant property in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Similar to the adjacent joint
venture property discussed in Note 1 Organization and Basis of Preparation, the tenant vacated
the premises in April 2011 at which time the Companys wholly-owned subsidiary had a CMBS
non-recourse first mortgage loan secured by the property in the amount of $12.9 million maturing in
March 2012 (guaranteed by the Company to the extent of $250,000). In May and June 2011, the Company
reviewed its investment alternatives and determined that it would not be prudent to proceed with
the development, sale or lease of the properties. In addition, it was determined that to advance
the funds to repay the mortgages would also not be prudent. Such determination was based on the
uncertainty in obtaining favorable revisions to zoning, difficult existing deed restrictions,
uncertainty in achieving required economic returns given the extensive additional capital
investments required, and uncertain current market conditions for sale or lease. No payments have
been made on the 100%-owned property mortgage since May 2011, although the Company has been
accruing interest expense and will pay real estate taxes and other property-maintenance expenses as
they become due. The carrying value of the property, which is classified as held for
sale/conveyance was $4.6 million at June 30, 2011, after giving effect to a $9.1 million
impairment charge. It is the Companys intention to convey the property to the mortgagee by a
deed-in-lieu of foreclosure process, whereby the Companys subsidiary would be released from all
obligations, including any unpaid principal (other than the aforementioned $250,000 Company
guaranty) and interest. At the time of such conveyance, the Company would recognize a gain
(anticipated to approximate $8.3 million) based on the excess of the carrying amount of the
liabilities (mortgage principal and accrued interest and real estate taxes) over the carrying
amount of the property at June 30, 2011.
28
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
As previously disclosed, the Companys properties in Ohio, principally drugstore-anchored
centers, were disproportionately impacted, relative to the Companys other properties, by
continuing unemployment and adverse economic conditions attributable in large part to the
decline in automobile production and sales which, in turn, resulted in factory closings and/or
downsizing. This resulted in disproportionately larger vacancies at those properties. As a result
of the challenges in maintaining viable tenancies in those areas, the Company developed a strategy
to dispose of these and several other properties. Impairment charges related to these properties
recorded in the six months ended June 30, 2011 included approximately $2.0 million for two
additional properties reclassified to held for sale/conveyance during the three months ended
March 31, 2011 and additional charges of approximately $7.9 million and $2.6 million for the three
month periods ended March 31 and June 30, 2011, respectively, principally representing adjustments
to the net realizable values of certain of the properties treated as held for sale/conveyance as
of December 31, 2010. The additional charges were based principally on changes in the structure of
previously-negotiated transactions. In March 2011, the Company terminated a contract to swap three
properties for certain land parcels in Ohio and instead entered into a new agreement to sell the
properties for cash and assumption of existing debt, and, subsequent to June 30, 2011, the Company
was unable to obtain the required lender consents for the sale of 14 additional held for
sale/conveyance properties, discussed below (the buyers in both cases being members of the group
from which the Company originally acquired the drug store/convenience centers).
On April 27, 2011, the Company made a two-year $4.1 million loan to the developers of a site
located in Columbus, Ohio (the developers are certain other members of the group from which the
Company acquired the drug store/convenience centers). The loan was made in consideration of the
borrowers facilitating (but not being parties to) the contract for the sale of the 14 properties.
The loan (which may be increased, under certain conditions, by an additional $300,000) bears
interest at 6.25% per annum and is collateralized by a first mortgage on the development parcel,
which has an appraised value in excess of $8 million.
On April 29, 2011, the Company entered into a contract for the sale of the 14 properties,
subject to lenders approvals, with a closing anticipated during the latter part of 2011. The $33.2
million net aggregate sales price for the properties, after reflecting estimated closing costs and
expenses, includes approximately $25.3 million of mortgage loans payable to be assumed, and
approximates the properties carrying values as of March 31, 2011. As a result of being unable to
obtain lender consents, the Company is in the process of renegotiating the transaction, may not
sell all 14 properties at this time, and, accordingly, has revalued the properties on an
individual, and not portfolio, basis.
In addition to the three and 14-property transactions noted above, the Company, on March 30,
2011, completed the sale of two of the held for sale/conveyance properties for approximately $3.8
million, which approximated their adjusted carrying values. In addition, on April 15, 2011, the
Company completed the sale of another held for sale/conveyance property for approximately $10.8
million, which approximated $0.5 million in excess of its adjusted carrying value.
29
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The following table summarizes information relating to the Companys properties which were
sold or treated as held for sale and/or conveyance, as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage loans payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property carrying value |
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
Int. |
|
|
Financial statement carrying value |
|
Property Description |
|
State |
|
|
Jun. 30, 2011 |
|
|
Dec. 31, 2010 |
|
|
date |
|
|
rate |
|
|
Jun. 30, 2011 |
|
|
Dec. 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrolton Discount Drug Mart Plaza (a) |
|
OH |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Centerville Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
2,382,000 |
|
|
|
2,481,000 |
|
|
May 2015 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
2,716,000 |
|
|
|
2,743,000 |
|
Clyde Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
2,196,000 |
|
|
|
2,287,000 |
|
|
May 2015 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
1,884,000 |
|
|
|
1,903,000 |
|
Columbia Mall |
|
PA |
|
|
10,175,000 |
|
|
|
10,774,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enon Discount Drug Mart Plaza (b) |
|
OH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,598,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Family Dollar at Zanesville (a) |
|
OH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fairfield Plaza (b) |
|
CT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,150,000 |
|
|
July 2015 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,009,000 |
|
FirstMerit Bank at Akron |
|
OH |
|
|
693,000 |
|
|
|
760,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FirstMerit Bank at Cuyahoga Falls |
|
OH |
|
|
546,000 |
|
|
|
569,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gahanna Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
5,316,000 |
|
|
|
7,103,000 |
|
|
Nov 2016 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
% |
|
|
4,886,000 |
|
|
|
4,924,000 |
|
Grove City Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
1,893,000 |
|
|
|
2,911,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hilliard Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
1,472,000 |
|
|
|
2,627,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hills & Dales Discount Drug Mart Plaza (b) |
|
OH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,263,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lodi Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
2,346,000 |
|
|
|
2,550,000 |
|
|
May 2015 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
2,295,000 |
|
|
|
2,319,000 |
|
Long Reach Village (a) |
|
MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mason Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
4,319,000 |
|
|
|
4,499,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McCormick Place |
|
OH |
|
|
1,796,000 |
|
|
|
3,942,000 |
|
|
Aug 2017 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
% |
|
|
2,568,000 |
|
|
|
2,587,000 |
|
Ontario Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
2,315,000 |
|
|
|
2,534,000 |
|
|
May 2015 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
2,120,000 |
|
|
|
2,141,000 |
|
Pickerington Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
3,391,000 |
|
|
|
3,532,000 |
|
|
Jul 2015 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
4,031,000 |
|
|
|
4,072,000 |
|
Polaris Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
4,453,000 |
|
|
|
4,640,000 |
|
|
May 2015 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
4,327,000 |
|
|
|
4,369,000 |
|
Pondside Plaza (a) |
|
NY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Powell Discount Drug Mart Plaza (a) |
|
OH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roosevelt II |
|
PA |
|
|
4,600,000 |
|
|
|
13,687,000 |
|
|
Mar 2012 |
|
|
6.5 |
% |
|
|
12,865,000 |
|
|
|
12,940,000 |
|
Shelby Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
1,848,000 |
|
|
|
1,925,000 |
|
|
May 2015 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
2,120,000 |
|
|
|
2,141,000 |
|
Westlake Discount Drug Mart Plaza |
|
OH |
|
|
1,434,000 |
|
|
|
1,667,000 |
|
|
Dec 2016 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
3,139,000 |
|
|
|
3,165,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,175,000 |
|
|
|
86,499,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,951,000 |
|
|
|
48,313,000 |
|
Development Land Parcel (b) |
|
PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,849,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
51,175,000 |
|
|
$ |
88,348,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
42,951,000 |
|
|
$ |
48,313,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Property sold during 2010. |
|
(b) |
|
Property sold during 2011. |
30
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The following is a summary of the components of loss from discontinued operations for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rents |
|
$ |
1,735,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,364,000 |
|
|
$ |
4,418,000 |
|
|
$ |
5,046,000 |
|
Expense recoveries |
|
|
540,000 |
|
|
|
672,000 |
|
|
|
1,302,000 |
|
|
|
1,386,000 |
|
Other |
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
|
18,000 |
|
|
|
311,000 |
|
|
|
46,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
2,281,000 |
|
|
|
3,054,000 |
|
|
|
6,031,000 |
|
|
|
6,478,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating, maintenance and management |
|
|
781,000 |
|
|
|
960,000 |
|
|
|
1,804,000 |
|
|
|
2,318,000 |
|
Real estate and other property-related taxes |
|
|
546,000 |
|
|
|
535,000 |
|
|
|
1,145,000 |
|
|
|
1,115,000 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
162,000 |
|
|
|
1,155,000 |
|
|
|
384,000 |
|
|
|
2,387,000 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
527,000 |
|
|
|
561,000 |
|
|
|
1,220,000 |
|
|
|
1,172,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,016,000 |
|
|
|
3,211,000 |
|
|
|
4,553,000 |
|
|
|
6,992,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations before
impairment charges |
|
|
265,000 |
|
|
|
(157,000 |
) |
|
|
1,478,000 |
|
|
|
(514,000 |
) |
Impairment charges |
|
|
(12,258,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,990,000 |
) |
|
|
(22,544,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,238,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
(11,993,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,147,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(21,066,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,752,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on sales of discontinued operations |
|
$ |
474,000 |
|
|
$ |
(5,000 |
) |
|
$ |
474,000 |
|
|
$ |
170,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RioCan Joint Venture
The Company and RioCan have entered into an 80% (RioCan) and 20% (Cedar) joint venture (i)
initially for the purchase of seven supermarket-anchored properties previously owned by the
Company, and (ii) then to acquire additional primarily supermarket-anchored properties in the
Companys primary market areas, in the same joint venture format. The transfers of the initial
seven properties, which commenced in December 2009, were completed in May 2010. At June 30, 2011,
the Company was owed approximately $3.0 million ($0.7 million related to contingent consideration)
relating to post-closing adjustments applicable to properties transferred to or acquired by the
joint venture.
On April 15, 2011, the joint venture acquired Northwoods Crossing shopping center, located
near Boston, Massachusetts. The purchase price was approximately $23.4 million, including the
assumption of a $14.4 million first mortgage maturing in 2016 and bearing interest at 6.4% per
annum.
31
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The Company earned fees from the joint venture of approximately $0.7 million and $0.2 million
for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $1.2 million and $0.3 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, representing accounting fees,
management fees, acquisition fees and financing fees. Such fees are included in other revenues in
the accompanying statements of operations. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2010,
the Company recorded an impairment charge of approximately $0.6 million and $2.1 million,
respectively, related principally to the remaining completion work at the Blue Mountain Commons
property transferred to the joint venture in December 2009. In connection with the joint venture
transactions, the Company paid fees to its investment advisor of approximately $0.2 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2010, which are included in transaction costs in the accompanying
statement of operations.
32
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The following are the 22 properties owned by the Cedar/RioCan joint venture as of June 30,
2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of |
|
|
Transfer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
transfer |
|
|
or |
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or |
|
|
purchase |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
Int. |
|
Property Description |
|
State |
|
|
acquisition |
|
|
price |
|
|
Payable (b) |
|
|
rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blue Mountain Commons |
|
PA |
|
|
12/10/2009 |
(a) |
|
$ |
32,150,000 |
|
|
$ |
17,500,000 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
Columbus Crossing |
|
PA |
|
|
2/23/2010 |
(a) |
|
|
24,538,000 |
|
|
|
16,880,000 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
% |
Creekview Plaza |
|
PA |
|
|
9/29/2010 |
|
|
|
26,240,000 |
|
|
|
14,432,000 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
Cross Keys Place |
|
NJ |
|
|
10/13/2010 |
|
|
|
26,336,000 |
|
|
|
14,600,000 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
% |
Exeter Commons |
|
PA |
|
|
8/3/2010 |
|
|
|
53,000,000 |
|
|
|
30,000,000 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
% |
Franklin Village Plaza |
|
MA |
|
|
2/4/2010 |
(a) |
|
|
54,656,000 |
|
|
|
43,500,000 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
Gettysburg Marketplace |
|
PA |
|
|
10/21/2010 |
|
|
|
19,850,000 |
|
|
|
10,918,000 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
Loyal Plaza |
|
PA |
|
|
5/26/2010 |
(a) |
|
|
26,950,000 |
|
|
|
12,615,000 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
% |
Marlboro Crossroads |
|
MD |
|
|
10/21/2010 |
|
|
|
12,500,000 |
|
|
|
6,875,000 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
% |
Monroe Marketplace |
|
PA |
|
|
9/29/2010 |
|
|
|
41,990,000 |
|
|
|
23,095,000 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
Montville Commons |
|
CT |
|
|
9/29/2010 |
|
|
|
18,900,000 |
|
|
|
10,500,000 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
% |
New River Valley |
|
VA |
|
|
9/29/2010 |
|
|
|
27,970,000 |
|
|
|
15,163,000 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
Northland Center |
|
PA |
|
|
10/21/2010 |
|
|
|
10,248,000 |
|
|
|
6,298,000 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
Northwoods Crossing |
|
MA |
|
|
4/15/2011 |
|
|
|
23,448,000 |
|
|
|
14,429,000 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
% |
Pitney Road Plaza |
|
PA |
|
|
9/29/2010 |
|
|
|
11,060,000 |
|
|
|
6,083,000 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
Shaws Plaza |
|
MA |
|
|
4/27/2010 |
(a) |
|
|
20,363,000 |
|
|
|
14,200,000 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
% |
Stop & Shop Plaza |
|
CT |
|
|
4/27/2010 |
(a) |
|
|
8,974,000 |
|
|
|
7,000,000 |
|
|
|
6.2 |
% |
Sunset Crossing |
|
PA |
|
|
12/10/2009 |
(a) |
|
|
9,850,000 |
|
|
|
4,500,000 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
Sunrise Plaza |
|
NJ |
|
|
9/29/2010 |
|
|
|
26,460,000 |
|
|
|
13,728,000 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
Town Square Plaza |
|
PA |
|
|
1/26/2010 |
|
|
|
18,854,000 |
|
|
|
11,000,000 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
Towne Crossings |
|
VA |
|
|
10/21/2010 |
|
|
|
19,000,000 |
|
|
|
10,450,000 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
York Marketplace |
|
PA |
|
|
10/21/2010 |
|
|
|
29,200,000 |
|
|
|
16,060,000 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
542,537,000 |
|
|
$ |
319,826,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Initial seven properties previously owned by the Company that were transferred to the Cedar/RioCan joint venture. |
|
(b) |
|
Mortgage loans payable represent either (i) the outstanding balance at the date of transfer, excluding any mortgage discount or (ii) the loan amount on the dates of borrowing and/or assumption. |
33
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The following summarizes certain financial information related to the Companys
investment in the Cedar/RioCan unconsolidated joint venture at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010,
respectively, and for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011 |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate, net (a) |
|
$ |
538,948,000 |
|
|
$ |
524,447,000 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
11,535,000 |
|
|
|
5,934,000 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
5,802,000 |
|
|
|
4,464,000 |
|
Rent and other receivables |
|
|
3,369,000 |
|
|
|
2,074,000 |
|
Straight-line rent |
|
|
1,876,000 |
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
Deferred charges, net |
|
|
4,425,000 |
|
|
|
13,269,000 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
13,351,000 |
|
|
|
8,514,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
579,306,000 |
|
|
$ |
559,702,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and partners capital: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage loans payable (a) |
|
$ |
319,295,000 |
|
|
$ |
293,400,000 |
|
Due to the Company |
|
|
3,016,000 |
|
|
|
6,036,000 |
|
Unamortized lease liability |
|
|
23,155,000 |
|
|
|
24,573,000 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
5,316,000 |
|
|
|
7,738,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock |
|
|
97,000 |
|
|
|
97,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners capital: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RioCan |
|
|
182,367,000 |
|
|
|
181,239,000 |
|
The Company |
|
|
46,060,000 |
|
|
|
46,619,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total partners capital |
|
|
228,427,000 |
|
|
|
227,858,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and partners capital |
|
$ |
579,306,000 |
|
|
$ |
559,702,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The joint ventures property-specific mortgage loans payable are collateralized by
all of the joint ventures real estate, and bear interest at rates ranging from 4.8% to
7.2% per annum |
34
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
15,296,000 |
|
|
$ |
5,161,000 |
|
|
$ |
31,289,000 |
|
|
$ |
8,246,000 |
|
Property operating and other expenses |
|
|
1,307,000 |
|
|
|
761,000 |
|
|
|
3,966,000 |
|
|
|
1,220,000 |
|
Management fees to the Company |
|
|
483,000 |
|
|
|
176,000 |
|
|
|
950,000 |
|
|
|
275,000 |
|
Real estate taxes |
|
|
1,819,000 |
|
|
|
517,000 |
|
|
|
3,551,000 |
|
|
|
818,000 |
|
Acquisition transaction costs |
|
|
790,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
858,000 |
|
|
|
594,000 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
61,000 |
|
|
|
51,000 |
|
|
|
132,000 |
|
|
|
102,000 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
5,177,000 |
|
|
|
1,283,000 |
|
|
|
10,140,000 |
|
|
|
1,795,000 |
|
Interest and other non-operating expenses, net |
|
|
4,684,000 |
|
|
|
1,353,000 |
|
|
|
9,079,000 |
|
|
|
1,831,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
975,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,020,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,613,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,611,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RioCan |
|
|
780,000 |
|
|
|
827,000 |
|
|
|
2,090,000 |
|
|
|
1,322,000 |
|
The Company |
|
|
195,000 |
|
|
|
193,000 |
|
|
|
523,000 |
|
|
|
289,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
975,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,020,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,613,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,611,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured Revolving Credit Facility. On November 15, 2010, the joint venture closed a secured
revolving credit facility with TD Bank, National Association as administrative agent and Royal Bank
of Canada as syndication agent, with total commitments aggregating $50.0 million. The principal
terms of the facility include (i) an availability based primarily on appraisals with a 50% advance
rate, (ii) an interest rate based on (a) LIBOR plus 300 basis points (bps) with a 100 bps floor,
or (b) the prime rate, as defined, plus 200 bps, (iii) an unused portion fee of 50 bps, and (iv) a
leverage ratio limited to 65%. The facility will expire on November 15, 2012, subject to a
one-year extension option. As the joint venture has not pledged any properties as collateral under
the facility, there were no amounts outstanding and no amounts available for borrowing at June 30,
2011. The facility may be used to fund acquisitions, capital expenditures, mortgage repayments,
partnership distributions, working capital and other general partnership purposes. The facility is
subject to customary financial covenants, including limits on leverage, and other financial
statement ratios. As of June 30, 2011, the joint venture was in compliance with the financial
covenants as required by the terms of the facility.
35
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
Note 4. Mortgage Loans Payable and Secured Revolving Credit Facilities
Secured debt is comprised of the following at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011 |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rates |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
Description |
|
outstanding |
|
|
average |
|
|
Range |
|
|
outstanding |
|
|
average |
|
|
Range |
|
Fixed-rate mortgages (a) |
|
$ |
599,350,000 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
% |
|
|
5.0% 7.6% |
|
|
$ |
575,635,000 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
% |
|
|
5.0% 7.6% |
|
Variable-rate mortgages |
|
|
84,768,000 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
3.5% and 5.9% |
|
|
|
83,568,000 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
2.5% and 5.9% |
|
Total property-specific mortgages |
|
|
684,118,000 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
659,203,000 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Stabilized property credit facility |
|
|
64,035,000 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,535,000 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Development property credit facility |
|
|
103,062,000 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
103,062,000 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
851,215,000 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
791,800,000 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate mortgages related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for sale discontinued
operations (a) |
|
$ |
42,951,000 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
% |
|
|
5.0% 6.5% |
|
|
$ |
48,313,000 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
5.0% 6.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Restated to reflect the reclassifications of properties treated
as discontinued operations. |
Included in variable-rate mortgages is a $70.7 million construction facility, as
amended, with Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company (as agent) and several other banks, pursuant
to which the Company has pledged its joint venture development property in Pottsgrove, Pennsylvania
as collateral for borrowings thereunder. The facility is guaranteed by the Company and will expire
on September 26, 2011, subject to a one-year extension option. Borrowings under the facility bear
interest at the Companys option at either LIBOR plus a spread of 325 bps, or the agent banks
prime rate. Borrowings outstanding under the facility aggregated $63.8 million at June 30, 2011,
and such borrowings bore interest at an average rate of 3.5% per annum. As of June 30, 2011, the
Company was in compliance with the financial covenants as required by the terms of the construction
facility.
Stabilized Property Revolving Credit Facility
The Company has a $185 million stabilized property revolving credit facility with Bank of
America, N.A. as administrative agent, together with three other lead lenders and other
participating banks (the stabilized property credit facility). The facility is expandable to $400
million, subject principally to acceptable collateral and the availability of additional lender
commitments, and will expire on January 31, 2012, subject to a one-year extension option. The
principal terms of the facility include (i) an availability based primarily on appraisals, with a
67.5% advance rate, (ii) an interest rate based on LIBOR plus 350 bps, with a 200 bps LIBOR floor,
(iii) a leverage ratio limited to 67.5%, and (iv) an unused portion fee of 50 bps.
Borrowings outstanding under the facility aggregated $64.0 million at June 30, 2011. Such
borrowings bore interest at an average rate of 5.5% per annum, and the Company had pledged 29 of
its shopping center properties as collateral for such borrowings, including five properties which
are being treated as real estate held for sale/conveyance.
36
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The stabilized property credit facility has been, and will be, used to fund acquisitions,
certain development and redevelopment activities, capital expenditures, mortgage repayments,
dividend distributions, working capital and other general corporate purposes. The facility is
subject to customary financial covenants, including limits on leverage and distributions (limited
to 95% of funds from operations, as defined), and other financial statement ratios. Based on
covenant measurements and collateral in place as of June 30, 2011, the Company was permitted
to draw up to approximately $140.8 million ($138.0 million if the collateral properties being
treated as held for sale/conveyance were removed), of which approximately $76.8 million remained
available as of that date. As of June 30, 2011, the Company was in compliance with the financial
covenants as required by the terms of the stabilized property credit facility.
Development Property Revolving Credit Facility
The Company has a $150 million development property credit facility with KeyBank, National
Association (as agent) and several other banks, pursuant to which the Company has pledged certain
of its development projects and redevelopment properties as collateral for borrowings thereunder.
The facility, as amended, is expandable to $250 million, subject principally to acceptable
collateral and the availability of additional lender commitments. In June 2011, the Company
exercised its one-year extension option and the loan is now due on June 13, 2012. Borrowings under
the facility bear interest at the Companys option at either LIBOR or the agent banks prime rate,
plus a spread of 225 bps or 75 bps, respectively. Advances under the facility are calculated at the
least of 70% of aggregate project costs, 70% of as stabilized appraised values, or costs incurred
in excess of a 30% equity requirement on the part of the Company. The facility also requires an
unused portion fee of 15 bps. This facility has been, and will be, used to fund in part the
Companys and certain consolidated joint ventures development activities. In order to draw funds
under this construction facility, the Company must meet certain pre-leasing and other conditions.
Borrowings outstanding under the facility aggregated $103.1 million at June 30, 2011, and such
borrowings bore interest at a rate of 2.5% per annum. As of June 30, 2011, the Company was in
compliance with the as financial covenants required by the terms of the development property credit
facility.
Note 5. Common Stock
The Company has a Standby Equity Purchase Agreement (the SEPA Agreement) with an investment
company for sales of its shares of common stock aggregating up to $45 million over a commitment
period ending in September 2011. Under the terms of the SEPA Agreement, the Company may sell, from
time to time, shares of its common stock at a discount to market of 1.75%. The amount of these
daily sales is generally limited to the lesser of 20% of the average daily trading volume or $1.0
million. In connection with these sales transactions, the Company agreed to pay an investment
advisor a 0.75% placement agent fee. In addition, the Company may require the investment company to
advance from time to time up to $5.0 million; provided, however, that the Company may only request
these larger advances approximately once a month. With respect to such advances, the common stock
sales are at a discount to market of 2.75% and the placement agent fee is 1.25%. As the Company has
a conditional obligation to issue a variable number of shares of its common stock, advances are
initially recorded as a liability, and as shares are sold on a daily basis and the advance is
settled, such liability is reflected in equity. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, there
were no shares sold pursuant to the SEPA Agreement.
37
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
The Company has a Dividend Reinvestment and Direct Stock Purchase Plan (DRIP) covering up to
5.0 million shares of its common stock. The DRIP offers a convenient method for shareholders to
invest cash dividends and/or make optional cash payments to purchase shares of the Companys common
stock at 98% of their market value. On March 17, 2011, an amendment to the DRIP became effective to
have all stock purchased at 100% of their market value which was approved by the Board of Directors
of the Company. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, the Company issued approximately 684,000
shares of its common stock at an average price of $6.03 per share and realized proceeds after
expenses of approximately $4.1 million.
In connection with a litigation settlement in the Companys favor, the Company received a cash
payment of $225,000. In addition, in May 2011, the defendants acquired 39,000 shares of the
Companys common stock at an average price of $5.78 per share from which the Company realized net
proceeds of an additional $225,000.
During 2001, pursuant to the 1998 Stock Option Plan (the Option Plan), the Company granted
to the then directors options to purchase an aggregate of approximately 13,000 shares of common
stock at $10.50 per share, the market value of the Companys common stock on the date of the grant.
The options were fully exercisable and expired on July 11, 2011. In connection with the adoption of
the Incentive Plan, the Company agreed that it would not grant any more options under the Option
Plan.
In connection with an acquisition of a shopping center in 2002, the Operating Partnership
issued warrants to purchase approximately 83,000 OP Units to a then minority interest partner in
the property. Such warrants have an exercise price of $13.50 per unit, subject to certain
anti-dilution adjustments, are fully vested, and will expire on May 31, 2012.
Note 6. Subsequent Events
In determining subsequent events, management reviewed all activity from July 1, 2011 through
the date of filing this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
38
Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
June 30, 2011
(unaudited)
On July 28, 2011, the Companys Board of Directors declared a dividend of $0.09 per share with
respect to its common stock as well as an equal distribution per unit on its outstanding OP Units.
At the same time, the Board declared a dividend of $0.5546875 per share with respect to the
Companys 8-7/8% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. The distributions are payable on
August 22, 2011 to shareholders of record on August 12, 2011.
On July 6, 2011, the Company refinanced a property that had collateralized the development
property revolving credit facility. The new fixed-rate mortgage, aggregating $16.5 million, bears
interest at 5.2% per annum, with the principal payable on a 25-year amortization schedule, and the
balance due in July 2021. The proceeds reduced the balances under the development property
revolving credit facility and the stabilized property revolving credit facility by $10.8 million
and $5.7 million, respectively.
On August 1, 2011, the Company refinanced a fixed-rate mortgage collateralized by a property
owned by the Cedar/RioCan joint venture. The existing $43.3 million mortgage bore interest at 4.8%
per annum, with the balance due in November 2011. The new fixed-rate mortgage, aggregating $44.0
million, bears interest at 4.1% per annum, with principal and interest payments on a 30-year
amortization schedule, and the balance due in August 2016.
39
|
|
|
Item 2. |
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Companys consolidated
financial statements and related notes thereto included elsewhere in this report.
Executive Summary
The Company is a fully-integrated real estate investment trust which focuses primarily on
ownership, operation, development and redevelopment of supermarket-anchored shopping centers
predominantly in mid-Atlantic and Northeast coastal states. At June 30, 2011, the Company owned and
managed (both wholly-owned and in joint venture) a portfolio of 131
operating properties totaling approximately 16.0 million square feet of GLA, including 71
wholly-owned properties comprising approximately 7.8 million square feet, 12 properties owned in
joint venture (consolidated) comprising approximately 1.4 million square feet, 22 properties in a
managed joint venture (unconsolidated) comprising approximately 3.7 million square feet, five
redevelopment properties comprising approximately 1.3 million square feet., four ground-up
development properties comprising approximately 0.7 million square feet, and 17 properties held
for sale/conveyance comprising approximately 1.1 million square feet. Excluding the ground-up
development properties and the properties held for sale/conveyance, the 110 property portfolio
was approximately 92.0% leased at June 30, 2011. The Company also owned approximately 185 acres of
land parcels, a significant portion of which is under development.
The Company, organized as a Maryland corporation, has established an umbrella partnership
structure through the contribution of substantially all of its assets to the Operating Partnership,
organized as a limited partnership under the laws of Delaware. The Company conducts substantially
all of its business through the Operating Partnership. At June 30, 2011, the Company owned 98.0% of
the Operating Partnership and is its sole general partner. The approximately 1.4 million OP Units
are economically equivalent to the Companys common stock and are convertible into the Companys
common stock at the option of the holders on a one-to-one basis.
Summary of Critical Accounting Policies
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires the
Company to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities,
revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing
basis, management evaluates its estimates, including those related to revenue recognition and the
allowance for doubtful accounts receivable, real estate investments and purchase accounting
allocations related thereto, asset impairment, and derivatives used to hedge interest-rate risks.
Managements estimates are based both on information that is currently available and on various
other assumptions management believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results
could differ from those estimates and those estimates could be different under varying assumptions
or conditions.
40
The Company has identified the following critical accounting policies, the application of
which requires significant judgments and estimates:
Revenue Recognition
Rental income with scheduled rent increases is recognized using the straight-line method over
the respective terms of the leases. The aggregate excess of rental revenue recognized on a
straight-line basis over base rents under applicable lease provisions is included in straight-line
rents receivable on the consolidated balance sheet. Leases also generally contain provisions under
which the tenants reimburse the Company for a portion of property operating expenses and real
estate taxes incurred; such income is recognized in the periods earned. In addition, certain
operating leases contain contingent rent provisions under which tenants are required to pay a
percentage of their sales in excess of a specified amount as additional rent. The Company defers
recognition of contingent rental income until those specified targets are met. Other contingent
fees are recognized when earned.
The Company must make estimates as to the collectability of its accounts receivable related to
base rent, straight-line rent, expense reimbursements and other revenues. Management analyzes
accounts receivable by considering tenant creditworthiness, current economic conditions, and
changes in tenants payment patterns when evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for doubtful
accounts receivable. These estimates have a direct impact on net income, because a higher bad debt
allowance would result in lower net income, whereas a lower bad debt allowance would result in
higher net income.
Real Estate Investments
Real estate investments are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation. The provision for
depreciation is calculated using the straight-line method based on estimated useful lives.
Expenditures for maintenance, repairs and betterments that do not materially prolong the normal
useful life of an asset are charged to operations as incurred. Expenditures for betterments that
substantially extend the useful lives of real estate assets are capitalized. Real estate
investments include costs of development and redevelopment activities, and construction in
progress. Capitalized costs, including interest and other carrying costs during the construction
and/or renovation periods, are included in the cost of the related asset and charged to operations
through depreciation over the assets estimated useful life. The Company is required to make
subjective estimates as to the useful lives of its real estate assets for purposes of determining
the amount of depreciation to reflect on an annual basis. These assessments have a direct impact on
net income. A shorter estimate of the useful life of an asset would have the effect of increasing
depreciation expense and lowering net income, whereas a longer estimate of the useful life of an
asset would have the effect of reducing depreciation expense and increasing net income.
41
A variety of costs are incurred in the acquisition, development and leasing of a property,
such as pre-construction costs essential to the development of the property, development costs,
construction costs, interest costs, real estate taxes, salaries and related costs, and other costs
incurred during the period of development. After a determination is made to capitalize a cost, it
is allocated to the specific component of a project that is benefited. The Company ceases
capitalization on the portions substantially completed and occupied, or held available for
occupancy, and capitalizes only those costs associated with the portions under construction. The
Company considers a construction project as substantially completed and held available for
occupancy upon the completion of tenant improvements, but not later than one year from cessation of
major development activity. Determination of when a development project is substantially complete
and capitalization must cease involves a degree of judgment. The effect of a longer capitalization
period would be to increase capitalized costs and would result in higher net income, whereas the
effect of a shorter capitalization period would be to reduce capitalized costs and would result in
lower net income.
The Company allocates the fair value of real estate acquired to land, buildings and
improvements. In addition, the fair value of in-place leases is allocated to intangible lease
assets and liabilities.
The fair value of the tangible assets of an acquired property is determined by valuing the
property as if it were vacant, which value is then allocated to land, buildings and improvements
based on managements determination of the relative fair values of such assets. In valuing an
acquired propertys intangibles, factors considered by management include an estimate of carrying
costs during the expected lease-up periods, such as real estate taxes, insurance, other operating
expenses, and estimates of lost rental revenue during the expected lease-up periods based on its
evaluation of current market demand. Management also estimates costs to execute similar leases,
including leasing commissions, tenant improvements, legal and other related costs.
The values of acquired above-market and below-market leases are recorded based on the present
values (using discount rates which reflect the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the
differences between the contractual amounts to be received and managements estimate of market
lease rates, measured over the terms of the respective leases that management deemed appropriate at
the time of the acquisitions. Such valuations include a consideration of the non-cancellable terms
of the respective leases as well as any applicable renewal period(s). The fair values associated
with below-market rental renewal options are determined based on the Companys experience and the
relevant facts and circumstances that existed at the time of the acquisitions. The values of
above-market leases are amortized to rental income over the terms of the respective non-cancelable
lease periods. The portion of the values of below-market leases associated with the original
non-cancelable lease terms are amortized to rental income over the terms of the respective
non-cancelable lease periods. The portion of the values of the leases associated with below-market
renewal options that are likely of exercise are amortized to rental income over the respective
renewal periods. The value of other intangible assets (including leasing commissions, tenant
improvements, etc.) is amortized to expense over the applicable terms of the respective leases. If
a lease were to be terminated prior to its stated expiration or not renewed, all unamortized
amounts relating to that lease would be recognized in operations at that time.
42
Management is required to make subjective assessments in connection with its valuation of real
estate acquisitions. These assessments have a direct impact on net income, because (i) above-market
and below-market lease intangibles are amortized to rental income, and (ii) the value of other
intangibles is amortized to expense. Accordingly, higher allocations to below-market lease
liability and other intangibles would result in higher rental income and amortization expense;
whereas lower allocations to below-market lease liability and other intangibles would result in
lower rental income and amortization expense.
Management reviews each real estate investment for impairment whenever events or circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of a real estate investment may not be recoverable.
The review of recoverability is based on an estimate of the future cash flows that are expected to
result from the real estate investments use and eventual disposition. These estimates of cash
flows consider factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as
the effects of leasing demand, competition and other factors. If an impairment event exists due to
the projected inability to recover the carrying value of a real estate investment, an impairment
loss is recorded to the extent that the carrying value exceeds estimated fair value. A real estate
investment held for sale/conveyance is carried at the lower of its carrying amount or estimated
fair value, less the cost of a potential sale. Depreciation and amortization are suspended during
the period the property is held for sale/conveyance. Management 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 net income, because an impairment loss is recognized in the
period that the assessment is made.
Stock-Based Compensation
The Companys 2004 Stock Incentive Plan (the Incentive Plan) establishes the procedures for
the granting of incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, performance
units and performance shares. The maximum number of shares of the Companys common stock that may
be issued pursuant to the Incentive Plan is 4,850,000 (including a 2,100,000 share increase
approved by shareholders on June 15, 2011), and the maximum number of shares that may be granted to
a participant in any calendar year is 250,000. All grants issued pursuant to the Incentive Plan are
restricted stock grants which generally vest (i) at the end of designated time periods for
time-based grants, or (ii) upon the completion of a designated period of performance for
performance-based grants. Time-based grants are valued according to the market price for the
Companys common stock at the date of grant. For performance-based grants, the Company engages an
independent appraisal company to determine the value of the shares at the date of grant, taking
into account the underlying contingency risks associated with the performance criteria. These value
estimates have a direct impact on net income, because higher valuations would result in lower net
income, whereas lower valuations would result in higher net income. The value of such grants is
being expensed on a straight-line basis over the respective vesting periods, as adjusted for
fluctuations in the market value of the Companys common stock.
43
Results of Operations
Differences in results of operations between 2011 and 2010 were primarily the result of the
impact of the Cedar/RioCan joint venture transactions, the Companys property
acquisition/disposition program, continuing development/redevelopment activities, and the
management transition charges. During the period January 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011, the Company
acquired one shopping center aggregating approximately 475,000 square feet of GLA, wrote off its
investment in an unconsolidated joint venture ($8.0 million), and recorded an impairment charge
related to the value of a 100%-owned adjacent property ($9.1 million), as the Company determined
that these development projects would not go forward. In addition, the Company sold or treated as
held for sale 25 other properties (including a number of drug
store/convenience centers) aggregating approximately 1,322,000 square feet of GLA for an
aggregate estimated sales price of approximately $79.5 million. The Company transferred five
properties to the Cedar/RioCan joint venture, aggregating approximately 971,000 square feet of GLA.
In connection with such transfers, the Company realized approximately $34.0 million in net
proceeds.
Net (loss) attributable to common shareholders was $(27.7) million and $(4.3) million for the
three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $(40.0) million and $(7.7) million for
the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
44
Comparison of the three months ended June 30, 2011 to 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
held in |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
(decrease) |
|
|
change |
|
|
Other |
|
|
both periods |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
$ |
38,299,000 |
|
|
$ |
37,989,000 |
|
|
$ |
310,000 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
$ |
553,000 |
|
|
$ |
(243,000 |
) |
Property operating expenses |
|
|
11,884,000 |
|
|
|
11,684,000 |
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
129,000 |
|
|
|
71,000 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
10,917,000 |
|
|
|
11,222,000 |
|
|
|
(305,000 |
) |
|
|
-3 |
% |
|
|
543,000 |
|
|
|
(848,000 |
) |
General and administrative |
|
|
2,691,000 |
|
|
|
2,106,000 |
|
|
|
585,000 |
|
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Management transition charges |
|
|
6,350,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,350,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Impairments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
562,000 |
|
|
|
(562,000 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Acquisition transaction costs and
terminated projects |
|
|
73,000 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
71,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Non-operating income and
expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense and financing cost
amortization |
|
|
11,773,000 |
|
|
|
12,292,000 |
|
|
|
(519,000 |
) |
|
|
-4 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Unconsolidated joint ventures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in income |
|
|
34,000 |
|
|
|
479,000 |
|
|
|
(445,000 |
) |
|
|
-93 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Write off of investment |
|
|
7,961,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,961,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Other |
|
|
106,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
101,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
265,000 |
|
|
|
(157,000 |
) |
|
|
422,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Impairment charges |
|
|
12,258,000 |
|
|
|
2,990,000 |
|
|
|
9,268,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Gain (loss) on sales |
|
|
474,000 |
|
|
|
(5,000 |
) |
|
|
479,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Properties held in both periods. The Company held 87 properties throughout the three months
ended June 30, 2011 and 2010.
Total revenues decreased primarily as a result of (i) a decrease in non-cash amortization of
intangible lease liabilities primarily as a result of the completion of scheduled amortization at
certain properties ($0.5 million, which was also the principal reason for the decrease in
depreciation and amortization expense), (ii) a decrease in non-cash straight-line rents primarily
as a result of early lease terminations ($0.1 million) and (iii) a decrease in percentage rent and
tenant recoveries ($0.1 million), partially offset by (iv) an increase is base rents attributable
to continued leasing at ground up developments and redevelopment properties ($0.4 million) and (v)
an increase in other income ($0.1 million).
Property operating expenses increased primarily as a result of (i) an increase in bad debt
expense ($0.1 million), and (ii) an increase in real estate tax expense and other operating
expenses ($0.1 million), partially off-set by (iii) a decrease in repairs and maintenance expenses
($0.1 million).
45
General and administrative expenses increased primarily as a result of (i) an increase in
legal, accounting and other professional fees ($0.3 million) and (ii) an increase in net
mark-to-market adjustments related to stock-based compensation ($0.2 million).
Management transition charges relate principally to the retirement of the Companys Chairman
of the Board, CEO and President, and the end of the employment of the Companys Chief Financial
Officer, and include (a) an aggregate of approximately $3.7 million in cash severance payments
(including the cost of related payroll taxes and benefits), (b) the accelerated amortization of
deferred compensation costs related to the vesting of restricted share grants (an aggregate of
approximately $2.0 million), and (c) approximately $0.6 million of other costs, primarily
professional fees and expenses related to the hiring of a new President/CEO and Chief Financial
Officer.
Impairments for the 2010 relate principally to the properties initially transferred to the
Cedar/RioCan joint venture.
Interest expense and financing cost amortization decreased primarily as a result of (i) lower
interest expense principally related to the reduction in the outstanding balance of the stabilized
property credit facility from the net proceeds of the preferred stock offering completed in August
2010 ($0.5 million), (ii) an increase in capitalized interest and amortization expense ($0.1
million), and (iii) a decrease in amortization of deferred financing costs, principally related to
the accelerated write-off of deferred financing costs in September 2010 ($0.3 million), offset by
(iv) an increase in mortgage interest expense related to additional property specific mortgage
loans payable ($0.3 million).
Equity in income of unconsolidated joint ventures decreased primarily as a result of the
tenant vacating the premises at a property in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as more fully discussed
elsewhere in this report.
Write off of joint venture investment relates to the Companys decision not to go forward with
the development of two adjacent properties in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as more fully discussed
elsewhere in this report.
Discontinued operations for 2011 and 2010 include the results of operations, impairment
charges and gain on sales for 26 of the Companys properties (including a number of drug
store/convenience centers) which it sold or treated as held for sale/conveyance, as more fully
discussed elsewhere in this report.
46
The Other column includes principally (a) the results of properties acquired after January
1, 2010, (b) the results of properties transferred to the Cedar/RioCan joint venture through the
respective dates of transfer, (c) acquisition, financing and property management fees earned by the
Company, (d) results of ground-up developments recently placed into service and on-going activities
related to re-development properties, and (e) unallocated property and
construction management compensation and benefits (including stock-based compensation),
summarized as follows:
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar/RioCan joint venture properties |
|
$ |
(663,000 |
) |
Fees earned by the Company and other |
|
|
41,000 |
|
Property acquisitions |
|
|
1,292,000 |
|
Development and redevelopment properties |
|
|
(117,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
553,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar/RioCan joint venture properties |
|
$ |
(105,000 |
) |
Unallocated compensation and benefits |
|
|
790,000 |
|
Property acquisitions |
|
|
369,000 |
|
Development and redevelopment properties |
|
|
(925,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
129,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense:
|
|
|
|
|
Property acquisitions |
|
$ |
830,000 |
|
Development and redevelopment properties |
|
|
(287,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
543,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
47
Comparison of the six months ended June 30, 2011 to 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
held in |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
increase |
|
|
change |
|
|
Other |
|
|
both years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
$ |
79,226,000 |
|
|
$ |
79,772,000 |
|
|
$ |
(546,000 |
) |
|
|
-1 |
% |
|
$ |
(378,000 |
) |
|
|
(168,000 |
) |
Property operating expenses |
|
|
27,431,000 |
|
|
|
26,051,000 |
|
|
|
1,380,000 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
329,000 |
|
|
|
1,051,000 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
21,250,000 |
|
|
|
21,370,000 |
|
|
|
(120,000 |
) |
|
|
-1 |
% |
|
|
639,000 |
|
|
|
(759,000 |
) |
General and administrative |
|
|
5,216,000 |
|
|
|
4,317,000 |
|
|
|
899,000 |
|
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Management transition charges |
|
|
6,530,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,530,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Impairments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,117,000 |
|
|
|
(2,117,000 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Acquisition transaction costs and
terminated projects, net |
|
|
1,242,000 |
|
|
|
1,322,000 |
|
|
|
(80,000 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Non-operating income and
expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense and financing cost
amortization |
|
|
23,863,000 |
|
|
|
25,574,000 |
|
|
|
(1,711,000 |
) |
|
|
-7 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Unconsolidated joint ventures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in income |
|
|
825,000 |
|
|
|
835,000 |
|
|
|
(10,000 |
) |
|
|
-1 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Write off of investment |
|
|
7,961,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,961,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Other |
|
|
212,000 |
|
|
|
19,000 |
|
|
|
193,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations |
|
|
1,478,000 |
|
|
|
(514,000 |
) |
|
|
1,992,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Impairment charges |
|
|
22,544,000 |
|
|
|
3,238,000 |
|
|
|
19,306,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Gain on sales |
|
|
474,000 |
|
|
|
170,000 |
|
|
|
304,000 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Properties held in both periods. The Company held 87 properties throughout the six months
ended June 30, 2011 and 2010.
Total revenues decreased primarily as a result of (i) a decrease in non-cash amortization of
intangible lease liabilities primarily as a result of the completion of scheduled amortization at
certain properties ($1.3 million, which was also the principal reason for the decrease in
depreciation and amortization expense), (ii) a decrease in non-cash straight-line rents primarily
as a result of early lease terminations ($0.4 million), (iii) a decrease in percentage rent ($0.1
million), partially offset by (iv) an increase in base rents attributable to continued leasing at
ground-up developments and redevelopment properties ($1.2 million), (v) an increase in tenant
recovery income ($0.2 million), and (vi) an increase in other income ($0.2 million).
Property operating expenses increased primarily as a result of (i) an increase in bad debt
expense ($0.5 million), (ii) an increase in snow removal costs ($0.4 million), (iii) an increase in
real estate tax expense ($0.1 million), and (iv) an increase in non-billable expenses ($0.1
million).
48
General and administrative expenses increased primarily as a result of (i) a smaller
litigation settlement received in 2011 as compared to a litigation settlement received in 2010
($0.5 million) and (ii) an increase in legal, accounting and other professional fees ($0.3 million.
Management transition charges relate principally to the retirement of the Companys Chairman
of the Board, CEO and President, and the end of the employment of the Companys Chief Financial
Officer, and include (a) an aggregate of approximately $3.7 million in cash
severance payments (including the cost of related payroll taxes and benefits), (b) the
accelerated amortization of deferred compensation costs related to the vesting of restricted share
grants (an aggregate of approximately $2.0 million), and (c) approximately $0.8 million of other
costs, primarily professional fees and expenses related to the hiring of a new President/CEO and
Chief Financial Officer.
Impairments for 2010 relate principally to the remaining completion work at the Blue Mountain
Commons property transferred to the Cedar/RioCan joint venture in December 2009 and to the five
properties transferred to the Cedar/RioCan joint venture during the first and second quarters of
2010.
Interest expense and financing cost amortization decreased primarily a result of (i) lower
interest expense principally related to the reduction in the outstanding balance of the stabilized
property credit facility from the net proceeds of the preferred stock offering completed in August
2010 ($1.7 million), (ii) a decrease in amortization of deferred financing costs, principally
related to the accelerated write-off of deferred financing costs in September 2010 ($0.6 million),
partially offset by (iii) a decrease in capitalized interest and amortization ($0.5 million), and
(iv) an increase in mortgage interest expense related to additional property specific mortgage
loans payable ($0.2 million).
Equity in income of unconsolidated joint ventures decreased primarily as a result of the
tenant vacating the premises at a property in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as more fully discussed
elsewhere in this report, offset by operating results from an increased number of properties owned
by the Cedar/RioCan joint venture.
Write off of joint venture investment relates to the Companys decision not to go forward with
the development of two adjacent properties in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as more fully discussed
elsewhere in this report.
Discontinued operations for 2011 and 2010 include the results of operations, impairment
charges and gain on sales for 26 of the Companys properties (including a number of drug
store/convenience centers) which it sold or treated as held for sale/conveyance, as more fully
discussed elsewhere in this report.
49
The Other column includes principally (a) the results of properties acquired after January
1, 2010, (b) the results of properties transferred to the Cedar/RioCan joint venture through the
respective dates of transfer, (c) acquisition, financing and property management fees earned by the
Company, (d) results of ground-up developments recently placed into service and on-going activities
related to re-development properties, and (e) unallocated property and construction management
compensation and benefits (including stock-based compensation), summarized as follows:
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar/RioCan joint venture properties |
|
$ |
(3,272,000 |
) |
Fees earned by the Company and other |
|
$ |
574,000 |
|
Property acquisitions |
|
|
2,639,000 |
|
Development and redevelopment properties |
|
|
(319,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(378,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar/RioCan joint venture properties |
|
$ |
(809,000 |
) |
Unallocated compensation and benefits |
|
|
643,000 |
|
Property acquisitions |
|
|
665,000 |
|
Development and redevelopment properties |
|
|
(170,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
329,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense:
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar/RioCan joint venture properties |
|
$ |
(1,000 |
) |
Property acquisitions |
|
|
1,076,000 |
|
Development and redevelopment properties |
|
|
(436,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
639,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidity and Capital Resources
The Company funds operating expenses and other short-term liquidity requirements, including
debt service, tenant improvements, leasing commissions, preferred and common dividend
distributions, if made, and distributions to minority interest partners, primarily from operations
and distributions from the Cedar/RioCan joint venture. The Company has also used its stabilized
property credit facility for these purposes. The Company expects to fund long-term liquidity
requirements for property acquisitions, development and/or redevelopment costs, capital
improvements, joint venture contributions, and maturing debt initially with its credit facilities
and construction financing, and ultimately through a combination of issuing and/or assuming
additional mortgage debt, the sale of equity securities, the issuance of additional OP Units,
distributions from the Cedar/RioCan joint venture, and the sale of properties or interests
therein (including joint venture arrangements). Although there has been an improvement in
general credit availability during the latter part of 2010 and continuing into 2011, for this and
other reasons, there can be no assurance that the Company will have the availability of mortgage
financing on completed development projects, additional construction financing, net proceeds from
the contribution of properties to joint ventures, or proceeds from the refinancing of existing
debt.
50
The Company has a $185 million stabilized property credit facility with Bank of America, N.A.
as administrative agent, together with three other lead lenders and other participating banks. The
facility is expandable to $400 million, subject principally to acceptable collateral and the
availability of additional lender commitments and will expire on January 31, 2012, subject to a
one-year extension option. The principal terms of the facility include (i) an availability based
primarily on appraisals, with a 67.5% advance rate, (ii) an interest rate based on LIBOR plus 350
bps, with a 200 bps LIBOR floor, (iii) a leverage ratio limited to 67.5%, and (iv) an unused
portion fee of 50 bps. Borrowings outstanding under the facility aggregated $64.0 million at June
30, 2011; such borrowings bore interest at a rate of 5.5% per annum. The Company had pledged 29 of
its shopping center properties as collateral for such borrowings, including five properties which
are being treated as held for sale/conveyance.
The stabilized property credit facility has been, and will be, used to fund acquisitions,
certain development and redevelopment activities, capital expenditures, mortgage repayments,
dividend distributions, working capital and other general corporate purposes. The facility is
subject to customary financial covenants, including limits on leverage and distributions (limited
to 95% of funds from operations, as defined), and other financial statement ratios. Based on
covenant measurements and collateral in place as of June 30, 2011, the Company was permitted to
draw up to approximately $140.8 million ($138.0 million if the collateral properties being treated
as held for sale/conveyance were removed), of which approximately $76.8 million remained
available as of that date. As of June 30, 2011, the Company was in compliance with the financial
covenants as required by the terms of the stabilized property credit facility.
The Company has a $150 million development property credit facility with KeyBank, National
Association (as agent) and several other banks, pursuant to which the Company has pledged certain
of its development projects and redevelopment properties as collateral for borrowings thereunder.
The facility, as amended, is expandable to $250 million, subject to certain conditions, including
acceptable collateral, and the availability of additional lender commitments. In June 2011, the
Company exercised its one-year extension option and the loan is now due on June 13, 2012.
Borrowings under the facility bear interest at the Companys option at either LIBOR or the agent
banks prime rate, plus a spread of 225 bps or 75 bps, respectively. Advances under the facility
are calculated at the least of 70% of aggregate project costs, 70% of as stabilized appraised
values, or costs incurred in excess of a 30% equity requirement on the part of the Company. The
facility also requires an unused portion fee of 15 bps. This facility has been and will be used to
fund in part the Companys and certain joint ventures development activities. In order to draw
funds under this construction facility, the Company must meet certain pre-leasing and other
conditions. Borrowings outstanding under the facility aggregated $103.1
million at June 30, 2011, and such borrowings bore interest at a rate of 2.5% per annum. As of
June 30, 2011, the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants as required by the terms
of the development property credit facility.
51
The Company has a $70.7 million construction facility, as amended, with Manufacturers and
Traders Trust Company (as agent) and several other banks, pursuant to which the Company pledged its
joint venture development project in Pottsgrove, Pennsylvania as collateral for borrowings to be
made thereunder. The facility is guaranteed by the Company and will expire in September 2011,
subject to a one-year extension option. Borrowings under the facility bear interest at the
Companys option at either LIBOR plus a spread of 325 bps, or the agent banks prime rate.
Borrowings outstanding under the facility aggregated $63.8 million at June 30, 2011, and such
borrowings bore interest at an average rate of 3.5% per annum. As of June 30, 2011, the Company was
in compliance with the financial covenants as required by the terms of the construction facility.
Other property-specific mortgage loans payable at June 30, 2011 consisted of fixed-rate notes
totaling $599.4 million, with a weighted average interest rate of 5.8%, and a variable-rate note of
$21.0 million, with a present interest rate of 5.9%, which is payable in September 2011. For the
remainder of 2011, the Company has approximately $4.5 million of scheduled debt principal
amortization payments and no additional balloon payments.
Total mortgage loans payable and secured revolving credit facilities have an overall weighted
average interest rate of 5.2% and mature at various dates through 2029. The terms of several of the
Companys mortgage loans payable require the Company to deposit certain replacement and other
reserves with its lenders. Such restricted cash is generally available only for property-level
requirements for which the reserves have been established, and is not available to fund other
property-level or Company-level obligations.
The Company has a Dividend Reinvestment and Direct Stock Purchase Plan (DRIP) covering up to
5.0 million shares of its common stock. The DRIP offers a convenient method for shareholders to
invest cash dividends and/or make optional cash payments to purchase shares of the Companys common
stock at 98% of their market value. On March 17, 2011, an amendment to the DRIP became effective to
have all stock purchased at 100% of their market value which was approved by the Board of Directors
of the Company. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, the Company issued approximately 684,000
shares of its common stock at an average price of $6.03 per share and realized proceeds after
expenses of approximately $4.1 million.
52
The Company has a Standby Equity Purchase Agreement (the SEPA Agreement) with an investment
company for sales of its shares of common stock aggregating up to $45 million over a commitment
period ending in September 2011. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, there were no shares
sold pursuant to the SEPA Agreement.
The Company expects to have sufficient liquidity to effectively manage its business. Such
liquidity sources include, amongst others (i) cash on hand, (ii) operating cash flows, (iii)
availability under its secured revolving credit facilities, (iv) property-specific financings,
(v) sales of properties, (vi) proceeds from contributions of properties to joint ventures, and/or
(vi) issuances of additional shares of common or preferred stock.
Net Cash Flows
Operating Activities
Net cash flows provided by operating activities amounted to $13.6 million and $16.8 million
during the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The comparative changes in
operating cash flows during the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, were
primarily the result of the cash elements of the management transition charges, the impact of the
Cedar/RioCan joint venture transactions, the Companys property acquisition/disposition program,
and continuing development/redevelopment activities.
Investing Activities
Net cash flows used in investing activities were $56.4 million for the six months ended June
30, 2011 and net cash flows provided by investing activities were $16.5 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2010; such cash flows were primarily the result of the Companys
acquisition/disposition activities. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, the Company (i)
acquired one shopping center and incurred expenditures for property improvements (an aggregate of
$63.2 million), (ii) made loans and other advances ($4.7 million), and (iii) investments in and
advances to unconsolidated joint ventures ($4.2 million), offset by the receipt of net proceeds
from (iv) the sales of properties treated as discontinued operations and other real estate ($11.6
million), (v) additional settlement payments related to the original transfers of properties to the
Cedar/RioCan joint venture ($2.9 million), and (vi) distributions of capital from unconsolidated
joint ventures ($3.0 million). During the six months ended June 30, 2010, the Company realized
proceeds from (i) the transfers of five properties to the RioCan joint venture ($31.5 million net
of a settlement receivable of $2.4 million), (ii) the sales of properties treated as discontinued
operations ($2.1 million), and (iii) distributions of capital from an unconsolidated joint venture
($1.6 million), offset by (iv) expenditures for property improvements ($15.5 million), and (iv)
investments in an unconsolidated joint venture ($4.3 million).
53
Financing Activities
Net cash flows provided by financing activities were $42.1 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2011 and net cash flows used in financing activities were $36.6 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2010. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, the Company had net proceeds from
(i) net advances from its revolving credit facilities ($34.5 million), (ii) mortgage financings
($29.3 million), (iii) sales of common stock ($4.3 million), and (iv) a contribution from
consolidated joint venture minority interest ($.03 million), offset by (v) preferred and common
stock dividend distributions ($19.2 million), (vi) repayment of mortgage
obligations ($4.8 million), and (vii) distributions paid to noncontrolling interests (minority
interests and limited partners $2.3 million). During the six months ended June 30, 2010, the
Company had (i) net repayments to its revolving credit facilities ($89.8 million), (ii) repayment
of mortgage obligations ($16.5 million, including $11.0 million of mortgage balloon payments),
(iii) preferred and common stock distributions ($14.4 million), (iv) a termination payment relating
to interest rate swaps ($5.5 million), (v) payment of debt financing costs ($1.0 million), (vi)
redemptions of OP Units ($0.5 million), (vii) distributions paid to noncontrolling interests
(limited partners $0.3 million), and offset by net proceeds from (viii) sales of common stock
($65.9 million), (ix) mortgage financings ($16.2 million), and (x) the exercise of the RioCan
warrant of $10.0 million.
Funds From Operations
Funds (Used In) From Operations (FFO) is a widely-recognized non-GAAP financial measure for
REITs that the Company believes, when considered with financial statements determined in accordance
with GAAP, is useful to investors in understanding financial performance and providing a relevant
basis for comparison among REITs. In addition, FFO is useful to investors as it captures features
particular to real estate performance by recognizing that real estate generally appreciates over
time or maintains residual value to a much greater extent than do other depreciable assets.
Investors should review FFO, along with GAAP net income, when trying to understand an equity REITs
operating performance. The Company presents FFO because the Company considers it an important
supplemental measure of its operating performance and believes that it is frequently used by
securities analysts, investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of REITs. Among other
things, the Company uses FFO or an adjusted FFO-based measure (i) as a criterion to determine
performance-based bonuses for members of senior management, (ii) in performance comparisons with
other shopping center REITs, and (iii) to measure compliance with certain financial covenants under
the terms of the Loan Agreements relating to the Companys credit facilities.
54
The Company computes FFO in accordance with the White Paper on FFO published by the National
Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT), which defines FFO as net income applicable
to common shareholders (determined in accordance with GAAP), excluding gains or losses from debt
restructurings and sales of properties, plus real estate-related depreciation and amortization, and
after adjustments for partnerships and joint ventures (which are computed to reflect FFO on the
same basis).
55
FFO does not represent cash generated from operating activities and should not be considered
as an alternative to net income applicable to common shareholders or to cash flow from operating
activities. FFO is not indicative of cash available to fund ongoing cash needs, including the
ability to make cash distributions. Although FFO is a measure used for comparability in assessing
the performance of REITs, as the NAREIT White Paper only provides guidelines for computing FFO, the
computation of FFO may vary from one company to another. The following table sets forth the
Companys calculations of FFO for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to common shareholders |
|
$ |
(27,668,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,251,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(39,977,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,741,000 |
) |
Add (deduct): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate depreciation and amortization |
|
|
10,903,000 |
|
|
|
12,327,000 |
|
|
|
21,313,000 |
|
|
|
23,655,000 |
|
Noncontrolling interests: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest |
|
|
(579,000 |
) |
|
|
(178,000 |
) |
|
|
(839,000 |
) |
|
|
(292,000 |
) |
Minority interests in consolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(22,000 |
) |
|
|
(87,000 |
) |
|
|
(47,000 |
) |
|
|
388,000 |
|
Minority interests share of FFO applicable to
consolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(1,237,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,686,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,573,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,377,000 |
) |
Equity in income of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(34,000 |
) |
|
|
(479,000 |
) |
|
|
(825,000 |
) |
|
|
(835,000 |
) |
FFO from unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
1,182,000 |
|
|
|
834,000 |
|
|
|
3,064,000 |
|
|
|
1,420,000 |
|
Gain on sale of land parcel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Gain on sales of discontinued operations |
|
|
(474,000 |
) |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
(474,000 |
) |
|
|
(170,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds (Used in) From Operations |
|
$ |
(17,929,000 |
) |
|
$ |
6,485,000 |
|
|
$ |
(20,386,000 |
) |
|
$ |
13,048,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FFO per common share (assuming conversion of OP Units) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares (basic): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in determination of basic earnings per share |
|
|
68,099,000 |
|
|
|
64,434,000 |
|
|
|
67,664,000 |
|
|
|
61,581,000 |
|
Additional shares assuming conversion of OP Units |
|
|
1,415,000 |
|
|
|
1,945,000 |
|
|
|
1,415,000 |
|
|
|
1,965,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in determination of basic FFO per share |
|
|
69,514,000 |
|
|
|
66,379,000 |
|
|
|
69,079,000 |
|
|
|
63,546,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares (dilutive): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in determination of diluted earnings per share |
|
|
68,099,000 |
|
|
|
64,486,000 |
|
|
|
67,664,000 |
|
|
|
61,620,000 |
|
Additional shares assuming conversion of OP Units |
|
|
1,415,000 |
|
|
|
1,945,000 |
|
|
|
1,415,000 |
|
|
|
1,965,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in determination of diluted FFO per share |
|
|
69,514,000 |
|
|
|
66,431,000 |
|
|
|
69,079,000 |
|
|
|
63,585,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inflation
Low to moderate levels of inflation during the past several years have favorably impacted the
Companys operations by stabilizing operating expenses. However, the Companys properties have
tenants whose leases include expense reimbursements and other provisions to minimize the effect of
inflation. At the same time, low inflation has had the indirect effect of reducing the Companys
ability to increase tenant rents upon the signing of new leases and/or lease renewals.
56
|
|
|
Item 3. |
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
One of the principal market risks facing the Company is interest rate risk on its credit
facilities. The Company may, when advantageous, hedge its interest rate risk by using derivative
financial instruments. The Company is not subject to foreign currency risk.
The Company is exposed to interest rate changes primarily through (i) the variable-rate credit
facilities used to maintain liquidity, fund capital expenditures, development/redevelopment
activities, and expand its real estate investment portfolio, (ii) property-specific variable-rate
construction financing, and (iii) other property-specific variable-rate mortgages. The Companys
objectives with respect to interest rate risk are to limit the impact of interest rate changes on
operations and cash flows, and to lower its overall borrowing costs. To achieve these objectives,
the Company may borrow at fixed rates and may enter into derivative financial instruments such as
interest rate swaps, caps, etc., in order to mitigate its interest rate risk on a related
variable-rate financial instrument. The Company does not enter into derivative or interest rate
transactions for speculative purposes. Additionally, the Company has a policy of entering into
derivative contracts only with major financial institutions. At June 30, 2011, the Company had
approximately $19.9 million of mortgage loans payable subject to interest rate swaps which
converted LIBOR-based variable rates to fixed annual rates ranging from 5.4% and 6.5% per annum. At
that date, the Company had accrued liabilities of $1.4 million (included in accounts payable and
accrued expenses on the consolidated balance sheet) relating to the fair value of interest rate
swaps applicable to these mortgage loans payable.
At June 30, 2011, long-term debt consisted of fixed-rate mortgage loans payable and
variable-rate debt (principally the Companys variable-rate credit facilities). The average
interest rate on the $599.4 million of fixed-rate indebtedness outstanding was 5.8%, with
maturities at various dates through 2029. The average interest rate on the $251.9 million of
variable-rate debt (including $167.1 million in advances under the Companys revolving credit
facilities) was 3.8%. The stabilized property credit facility matures in January 2012, subject to a
one-year extension option. The development property credit facility matures on June 13, 2012. With
respect to $187.9 million of variable-rate debt outstanding at June 30, 2011, if interest rates
either increase or decrease by 1%, the Companys interest cost would increase or decrease
respectively by approximately $1.9 million per annum. With respect to the remaining $64.0 million
of variable-rate debt outstanding at June 30, 2011, represented by the Companys stabilized
property credit facility, interest is based on LIBOR with a 200 bps LIBOR floor. Accordingly, if
interest rates either increase or decrease by 1%, the Companys interest cost applicable on this
line would increase by approximately $0.6 million per annum only if LIBOR was in excess of 2.0% per
annum (as of June 30, 2011, LIBOR was 0.19%).
57
|
|
|
Item 4. |
|
Controls and Procedures |
The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls designed to
ensure that information required to be disclosed in its filings under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 is reported within the time periods specified in the rules and regulations of the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In this regard, the Company has formed a Disclosure
Committee currently comprised of several of the Companys executive officers as well as certain
other employees with knowledge of information that may be considered in the SEC reporting process.
The Committee has responsibility for the development and assessment of the financial and
non-financial information to be included in the reports filed with the SEC, and assists the
Companys Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer in connection with their
certifications contained in the Companys SEC filings. The Committee meets regularly and reports to
the Audit Committee on a quarterly or more frequent basis. The Companys principal executive and
financial officers have evaluated its disclosure controls and procedures as of June 30, 2011, and
have determined that such disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
During the six months ended June 30, 2011, there have been no changes in the internal controls
over financial reporting or in other factors that have materially affected, or are reasonably
likely to materially affect, these internal controls over financial reporting.
58
Part II Other Information
|
|
|
Exhibit 10.1
|
|
Employment Agreement between Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
and Philip R. Mays, dated as of May 24, 2011 |
Exhibit 10.2
|
|
Employment Agreement between Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc.
and Bruce J. Schanzer, dated as of May 31, 2011 |
Exhibit 10.3
|
|
Letter Agreement between Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. and
Lawrence E. Kreider, Jr., dated as of June 1, 2011 |
Exhibit 10.4
|
|
Letter Agreement between Cedar Shopping Centers, Inc. and
Leo S. Ullman, dated as of June 9, 2011 |
Exhibit 31
|
|
Section 302 Certifications |
Exhibit 32
|
|
Section 906 Certifications |
Exhibit 101.INS
|
|
XBRL Instance Document |
Exhibit 101.SCH
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document |
Exhibit 101.CAL
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document |
Exhibit 101.DEF
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document |
Exhibit 101.LAB
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document |
Exhibit 101.PRE
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto
duly authorized.
CEDAR SHOPPING CENTERS, INC.
|
|
|
By: /s/ BRUCE J. SCHANZER
|
|
By: /s/ PHILIP R. MAYS |
|
|
|
Bruce J. Schanzer
|
|
Philip R. Mays |
President and Chief
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
Executive Officer
|
|
(Principal financial officer) |
(Principal executive officer) |
|
|
August 4, 2011
59