e10vk
UNITED
STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006
Commission file number: 1-32261
BIOMED REALTY TRUST,
INC.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Maryland
|
|
20-1142292
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification
No.)
|
incorporation or
organization)
|
|
|
17140 Bernardo Center Drive,
Suite 222
|
|
92128
|
San Diego,
California
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
(Address of Principal Executive
Offices)
|
|
|
(858) 485-9840
(Registrants telephone
number, including area code)
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
7.375% Series A Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock, $0.01 Par Value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act of
1933. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has
filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or
15(d) of the Exchange Act 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 if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of the registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated
filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large
accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act (check one):
Large accelerated filer
þ Accelerated
filer
o Non-accelerated
filer o
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
The aggregate market value of the 56,759,149 shares of
common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was
$1,699,368,921 based upon the last reported sale price of
$29.94 per share on the New York Stock Exchange on
June 30, 2006, the last business day of its most recently
completed second quarter.
The number of outstanding shares of the registrants common
stock, par value $0.01 per share, as of February 28,
2007 was 65,455,198.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrants Proxy Statement with respect
to its May 16, 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be
filed not later than 120 days after the end of the
registrants fiscal year are incorporated by reference into
Part III hereof.
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC.
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
PART I
Forward-Looking
Statements
We make statements in this report that are forward-looking
statements within the meaning of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (set forth in Section 27A of
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). In particular,
statements pertaining to our capital resources, portfolio
performance and results of operations contain forward-looking
statements. Likewise, our statements regarding anticipated
growth in our funds from operations and anticipated market
conditions, demographics and results of operations are
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve
numerous risks and uncertainties, and you should not rely on
them as predictions of future events. Forward-looking statements
depend on assumptions, data or methods which may be incorrect or
imprecise, and we may not be able to realize them. We do not
guarantee that the transactions and events described will happen
as described (or that they will happen at all). You can identify
forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking
terminology such as believes, expects,
may, will, should,
seeks, approximately,
intends, plans, estimates or
anticipates or the negative of these words and
phrases or similar words or phrases. You can also identify
forward-looking statements by discussions of strategy, plans or
intentions. The following factors, among others, could cause
actual results and future events to differ materially from those
set forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements:
|
|
|
|
|
adverse economic or real estate developments in the life science
industry or in our target markets,
|
|
|
|
general economic conditions,
|
|
|
|
our ability to compete effectively,
|
|
|
|
defaults on or non-renewal of leases by tenants,
|
|
|
|
increased interest rates and operating costs,
|
|
|
|
our failure to obtain necessary outside financing,
|
|
|
|
our ability to successfully complete real estate acquisitions,
developments and dispositions,
|
|
|
|
risks and uncertainties affecting property development and
construction,
|
|
|
|
our failure to successfully operate acquired properties and
operations,
|
|
|
|
our failure to maintain our status as a real estate investment
trust, or REIT,
|
|
|
|
government approvals, actions and initiatives, including the
need for compliance with environmental requirements,
|
|
|
|
financial market fluctuations, and
|
|
|
|
changes in real estate and zoning laws and increases in real
property tax rates.
|
While forward-looking statements reflect our good faith beliefs,
they are not guarantees of future performance. We disclaim any
obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements,
whether as a result of new information, future events or
otherwise. For a further discussion of these and other factors
that could impact our future results, performance or
transactions, see the section below entitled Item 1A.
Risk Factors.
General
As used herein, the terms we, us,
our or the company refer to BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation and any of our
subsidiaries, including BioMed Realty, L.P., a Maryland limited
partnership (our Operating Partnership), and 201
Industrial Road, L.P., our predecessor. We are a REIT focused on
acquiring, developing, owning, leasing and managing laboratory
and office space for the life science industry. Our tenants
primarily include biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies,
scientific research institutions, government
2
agencies and other entities involved in the life science
industry. Our properties are generally located in markets with
well established reputations as centers for scientific research,
including Boston, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle,
Maryland, Pennsylvania and New York/New Jersey.
We were formed on April 30, 2004 and commenced operations
on August 11, 2004, after completing our initial public
offering. As of December 31, 2006, we owned or had
interests in 56 properties, consisting of 92 buildings with
approximately 7.9 million rentable square feet of
laboratory and office space. Our operating portfolio was
approximately 96.3% leased to 107 tenants, not including
1.3 million square feet, or 84.7% of the unleased square
footage in our operating and non-operating portfolio, that was
available for redevelopment. In addition, we have properties
with approximately 1.2 million rentable square feet under
construction and undeveloped land that we estimate can support
up to an additional 1.1 million rentable square feet of
laboratory and office space.
Our senior management team has significant experience in the
real estate industry, principally focusing on properties
designed for life science tenants. We operate as a fully
integrated, self-administered and self-managed REIT, providing
management, leasing, development and administrative services to
our properties. As of February 28, 2007, we had 87
employees.
Our principal offices are located at 17140 Bernardo Center
Drive, Suite 222, San Diego, California 92128. Our
telephone number at that location is
(858) 485-9840.
Our website is located at www.biomedrealty.com. We make
available through our website our annual report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K
and amendments to such reports filed or furnished pursuant to
Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as
reasonably practicable after we electronically file such
material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange
Commission. You can also access on our website our Code of
Business Conduct and Ethics, Corporate Governance Guidelines,
Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter, and
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter.
2006
Highlights
On May 24, 2006, we completed the acquisition of Shady
Grove Road, Human Genome Sciences, Inc.s
635,058 square foot headquarters office and laboratory
facility, and Belward Campus Drive, its 289,912 square foot
large-scale manufacturing facility, as well as undeveloped land
that we estimate can support the development of up to
approximately 500,000 rentable square feet of laboratory
and office space, located in Rockville, Maryland for
approximately $427.1 million, excluding closing costs. The
properties are fully leased to Human Genome Sciences pursuant to
20-year
triple-net
leases.
On June 7, 2006, we completed a follow-on common stock
offering of 10,436,250 shares at $28.65 per share,
resulting in net proceeds of $286.5 million.
On June 28, 2006, we amended and restated our unsecured
revolving credit facility, doubling the size of the facility
from $250 million to $500 million. In addition to
increasing the size of the facility, the amendment extended the
term to June 27, 2009, provided greater flexibility with
respect to covenants, and reduced the borrowing rate. We may
extend the maturity date of the revolving credit facility to
June 27, 2010 and may increase the amount of the facility
to $700 million upon satisfying certain conditions.
On July 11, 2006, we completed the acquisition of the
Pacific Research Center located at 7777 Gateway Boulevard,
Newark, California. The property, consisting of ten two- and
three-story office buildings totaling 1,432,324 square
feet, as well as undeveloped land that we estimate can support
the development of up to approximately 400,000 rentable
square feet of space, was acquired for approximately
$214.0 million, excluding closing costs.
On August 21, 2006, we completed a follow-on common stock
offering of 7,992,500 shares at $28.75 per share,
resulting in net proceeds of $220.3 million.
On August 23, 2006, we closed a $147.0 million
fixed-rate, mortgage loan with KeyBank National Association, or
KeyBank, which is secured by our Shady Grove Road property. The
loan bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.97% per annum and
matures on September 1, 2016.
3
On September 25, 2006, our operating partnership issued
$175.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.50%
Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2026, resulting in net proceeds of
$169.4 million.
On November 17, 2006, we completed the acquisition of the
Center for Life
Science | Boston. The
702,940 square foot life science research building is
located in the Longwood Medical Area in Boston, Massachusetts
and is currently under construction. The total purchase price
was approximately $472.7 million, excluding closing costs.
We expect to invest in excess of an additional $200 million
in the Center for Life
Science | Boston to
complete the project.
We funded the purchase price for the Center for Life
Science | Boston
acquisition using borrowings under a new $550 million
secured acquisition and construction loan with KeyBank (under
which we initially borrowed approximately $266 million) and
borrowings under our $500 million unsecured revolving
credit facility. The secured acquisition and construction loan
was amended and restated and syndicated on December 21,
2006. As of December 31, 2006, this loan bore interest at a
weighted-average rate of 6.575% per annum. The loan matures
on November 16, 2009, subject to a one-year extension at
our option upon satisfying certain conditions.
On December 21, 2006, we signed a new,
15-year
lease with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for approximately
194,000 square feet of to be built office and laboratory
space at our Landmark at Eastview property. Under the lease,
Regeneron will relocate a majority of its existing operations at
the Landmark at Eastview property to buildings to be constructed
by us on the Landmark campus. Following Regenerons
relocation, which is expected to occur in March 2009, we intend
to redevelop and offer for lease the space Regeneron currently
occupies at the Landmark at Eastview property (excluding
27,021 square feet of space that Regeneron will continue to
lease).
In addition to the acquisitions described above, during 2006, we
acquired twelve properties, totaling approximately
743,000 rentable square feet of laboratory and office space
that was 78.6% leased at acquisition, for an aggregate of
approximately $195.9 million (excluding closing costs). In
total, during 2006, we acquired 16 properties, consisting of
3.1 million rentable square feet of laboratory and office
space, as well as approximately 797,000 rentable square
feet under construction and undeveloped land that we estimate
can support up to an additional 900,000 rentable square
feet of laboratory and office space, for an aggregate of
approximately $1.3 billion (excluding closing costs).
During 2006, we declared aggregate dividends on our common stock
and distributions on our operating partnership units of
$1.16 per common share and unit, representing four full
quarterly dividends of $0.29 per common share and unit.
Subsequent
Events
On January 18, 2007, we completed an offering of
9,200,000 shares of 7.375% Series A Cumulative
Redeemable Preferred Stock at $25.00 per share, resulting
in net proceeds of $222.6 million, the majority of which
were utilized to repay a portion of the outstanding indebtedness
on our unsecured line of credit.
On January 26, 2007, we signed new, long-term leases with
Illumina, Inc. for approximately 195,000 square feet of
office and laboratory space at our Towne Centre Drive property.
Under the new leases, Illumina will expand into a new
84,000 square foot building to be constructed at the
property. Once completed and occupied, Illumina will lease the
new building for a 15-year term. In addition, Illumina extended
its lease for the 109,270 square feet it currently occupies
at Towne Centre Drive by nine years to 2023 to correspond with
the new
15-year
lease on the building to be constructed.
On January 29, 2007, we entered into definitive purchase
and sale agreements with affiliates of Lyme Timber Company to
acquire a portfolio of real estate assets located in Cambridge,
Massachusetts; Houston, Texas; and New Haven, Connecticut. The
acquisition includes approximately 600,000 square feet of
life science space recently completed or under construction at
Lymes Rogers Street project and land that can support
approximately 266,000 square feet of life science
laboratory and office space at Kendall Square in Cambridge,
Massachusetts. The total purchase price for the portfolio is
approximately $510 million, excluding closing costs. The
acquisition is expected to close in the second quarter of 2007
and is subject to customary due diligence and closing conditions.
4
Growth
Strategy
Our success and future growth potential is based upon the unique
real estate opportunities within the life science industry. Our
growth strategy is designed to meet the sizable demand and
specialized requirements of life science tenants by leveraging
the knowledge and expertise of a management team focused on
serving this fast growing industry.
Our external growth strategy includes:
|
|
|
|
|
an ability to capitalize on managements extensive
acquisition expertise and extensive industry relationships among
life science tenants, property owners and real estate brokers,
|
|
|
|
a focus on acquiring properties leased to high quality life
science tenants at attractive yields and acquiring properties
with potential upside through
lease-up,
redevelopment or additional development,
|
|
|
|
the selective development of life science space in target market
locations, and
|
|
|
|
an emphasis on the location of potential acquisitions in
relation to academic and research institutions to support
long-term value.
|
Our internal growth strategy includes:
|
|
|
|
|
access to cost-effective capital, enabling us to finance tenant
improvements and lease available space to high quality,
long-term tenants,
|
|
|
|
predictable and consistent earnings growth through annual
contractual rental rate increases,
|
|
|
|
close monitoring of our existing tenants to address
opportunities to renew, extend or modify existing leases and
identify additional expansion opportunities,
|
|
|
|
redevelopment opportunities to convert existing office and
warehouse space into laboratory space,
|
|
|
|
the ability to leverage tenant-financed improvements to
encourage tenant renewals or to substantially increase rental
rates at the end of a lease, and
|
|
|
|
pre-leasing and construction of new laboratory and office space
on land held for development.
|
Target
Markets
Our target markets Boston, San Diego,
San Francisco, Seattle, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New
York/New Jersey and research parks near or adjacent to
universities have emerged as the primary hubs for
research, development and production in the life science
industry. Each of these markets benefits from the presence of
mature life science companies, which provide scale and stability
to the market, as well as academic and university environments
and government entities to contribute innovation, research,
personnel and capital to the private sector. In addition, the
clustered research environments within these target markets
typically provide a high quality of life for the research
professionals and a fertile ground for new life science ideas
and ventures.
Positive
Life Science Industry Trends
We expect continued growth in the life science industry due to
several factors:
|
|
|
|
|
the aging of the U.S. population resulting from the
transition of baby boomers to senior citizens, which has
increased the demand for new drugs and health care treatment
alternatives,
|
|
|
|
the existing high level of, and continuing increase in, research
and development expenditures, as represented by a recent
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)
survey indicating that research and development spending by its
members climbed to a record $43.0 billion in 2006 from
$39.9 billion in the prior year, and when combined with
non-member companies, totaled a record $55.2 billion in
2006, and
|
|
|
|
escalating health care costs, which drive the demand for better
drugs, less expensive treatments and more services in an attempt
to manage such costs.
|
5
We are uniquely positioned to benefit from these favorable
dynamics through the demand for space for research, development
and production by our life science industry tenants.
Experienced
Management
We have created and continue to develop a premier life science
real estate-oriented management team, dedicated to maximizing
current and long-term returns and growth for our stockholders.
Our executive officers have acquired, developed, owned, leased
and managed in excess of $3.0 billion in life science real
estate. Through this experience, our management team has
established extensive industry relationships among life science
tenants, property owners and real estate brokers. In addition,
our experienced independent board members provide management
with a broad range of knowledge in real estate, the sciences,
life science company operations, and large public company
finance and management.
Regulation
General
Our properties are subject to various laws, ordinances and
regulations, including regulations relating to common areas. We
believe that we have the necessary permits and approvals to
operate each of our properties.
Americans
with Disabilities Act
Our properties must comply with Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, or ADA, to the extent that such
properties are public accommodations as defined by
the ADA. The ADA may require removal of structural barriers to
access by persons with disabilities in certain public areas of
our properties where such removal is readily achievable. We
believe that our properties are in substantial compliance with
the ADA and that we will not be required to make substantial
capital expenditures to address the requirements of the ADA. The
tenants are generally responsible for any additional amounts
required to conform their construction projects to the ADA.
However, noncompliance with the ADA could result in imposition
of fines or an award of damages to private litigants. The
obligation to make readily achievable accommodations is an
ongoing one, and we will continue to assess our properties and
to make alterations as appropriate in this respect.
Environmental
Matters
Under various federal, state and local environmental laws and
regulations, a current or previous owner, operator or tenant of
real estate may be required to investigate and remove hazardous
or toxic substances or petroleum product releases or threats of
releases at such property, and may be held liable for property
damage and for investigation,
clean-up and
monitoring costs incurred in connection with the actual or
threatened contamination. Such laws typically impose
clean-up
responsibility and liability without regard to fault, or whether
the owner, operator or tenant knew of or caused the presence of
the contamination. The liability under such laws may be joint
and several for the full amount of the investigation,
clean-up and
monitoring costs incurred or to be incurred or actions to be
undertaken, although a party held jointly and severally liable
may obtain contributions from the other identified, solvent,
responsible parties of their fair share toward these costs.
These costs may be substantial, and can exceed the value of the
property. The presence of contamination, or the failure to
properly remediate contamination, on a property may adversely
affect the ability of the owner, operator or tenant to sell or
rent that property or to borrow using such property as
collateral, and may adversely impact our investment in that
property.
Federal regulations and certain state laws and regulations
require building owners and those exercising control over a
buildings management to identify and warn, via signs,
labels or other notices, of potential hazards posed by the
presence of asbestos-containing materials, or ACMs, and
potential ACMs in their building. The regulations also set forth
employee training, record-keeping and due diligence requirements
pertaining to ACMs and potential ACMs. Significant fines can be
assessed for violating these regulations. Building owners and
those exercising control over a buildings management may
be subject to an increased risk of personal injury lawsuits by
workers and others exposed to ACMs and potential ACMs as a
result of these regulations. The regulations may affect the
value of a building containing ACMs and potential ACMs in which
we have invested. Federal, state and local laws and regulations
also govern the removal, encapsulation, disturbance, handling
and/or
disposal of ACMs and potential
6
ACMs when such materials are in poor condition or in the event
of construction, remodeling, renovation or demolition of a
building. Such laws may impose liability for improper handling
or a release to the environment of ACMs and potential ACMs and
may provide for fines to, and for third parties to seek recovery
from, owners or operators of real properties for personal injury
or improper work exposure associated with ACMs and potential
ACMs. See Risk Factors Risks Related to the
Real Estate Industry We could incur significant
costs related to governmental regulation and private litigation
over environmental matters involving asbestos-containing
materials, which could adversely affect our operations, the
value of our properties, and our ability to make distributions
to our stockholders under Item 1A. below.
Federal, state and local laws and regulations also require
removing or upgrading certain underground storage tanks and
regulate the discharge of storm water, wastewater and any water
pollutants; the emission of air pollutants; the generation,
management and disposal of hazardous or toxic chemicals,
substances or wastes; and workplace health and safety. Life
science industry tenants, including certain of our tenants,
engage in various research and development activities involving
the controlled use of hazardous materials, chemicals, biological
and radioactive compounds. Although we believe that the
tenants activities involving such materials comply in all
material respects with applicable laws and regulations, the risk
of contamination or injury from these materials cannot be
completely eliminated. In the event of such contamination or
injury, we could be held liable for any damages that result, and
any such liability could exceed our resources and our
environmental remediation insurance coverage. Licensing
requirements governing use of radioactive materials by tenants
may also restrict the use of or ability to transfer space in
buildings we own. See Risk Factors Risks
Related to the Real Estate Industry We could incur
significant costs related to government regulation and private
litigation over environmental matters involving the presence,
discharge or threat of discharge of hazardous or toxic
substances, which could adversely affect our operations, the
value of our properties, and our ability to make distributions
to our stockholders under Item 1A. below.
In addition, our leases generally provide that (1) the
tenant is responsible for all environmental liabilities relating
to the tenants operations, (2) we are indemnified for
such liabilities and (3) the tenant must comply with all
environmental laws and regulations. Such a contractual
arrangement, however, does not eliminate our statutory liability
or preclude claims against us by governmental authorities or
persons who are not parties to such an arrangement.
Noncompliance with environmental or health and safety
requirements may also result in the need to cease or alter
operations at a property, which could affect the financial
health of a tenant and its ability to make lease payments. In
addition, if there is a violation of such a requirement in
connection with a tenants operations, it is possible that
we, as the owner of the property, could be held accountable by
governmental authorities for such violation and could be
required to correct the violation and pay related fines. In
certain situations, we have indemnified tenants for conditions
preceding their lease term, or that do not result from their
operations.
Prior to closing any property acquisition, we obtain
environmental assessments in a manner we believe prudent in
order to attempt to identify potential environmental concerns at
such properties. These assessments are carried out in accordance
with an appropriate level of due diligence and generally include
a physical site inspection, a review of relevant federal, state
and local environmental and health agency database records, one
or more interviews with appropriate site-related personnel,
review of the propertys chain of title and review of
historic aerial photographs and other information on past uses
of the property. We may also conduct limited subsurface
investigations and test for substances of concern where the
results of the first phase of the environmental assessments or
other information indicate possible contamination or where our
consultants recommend such procedures.
While we may purchase our properties on an as is
basis, all of our purchase contracts contain an environmental
contingency clause, which permits us to reject a property
because of any environmental hazard at such property. We receive
environmental reports on all prospective properties.
We believe that our properties comply in all material respects
with all federal and state regulations regarding hazardous or
toxic substances and other environmental matters.
7
Insurance
We carry comprehensive general liability, fire and extended
coverage, terrorism and loss of rental income insurance covering
all of our properties under a blanket portfolio policy, with the
exception of property insurance on our McKellar Court, Science
Center Drive, Belward Campus Drive and Shady Grove Road
locations, which is carried directly by the tenants in
accordance with the terms of their respective leases, and
builders risk policies for any projects under construction. In
addition, we carry workers compensation coverage for
injury to our employees. We believe the policy specifications
and insured limits are adequate given the relative risk of loss,
cost of the coverage and standard industry practice. We also
carry environmental remediation insurance for some of our
properties. This insurance, subject to certain exclusions and
deductibles, covers the cost to remediate environmental damage
caused by unintentional future spills or the historic presence
of previously undiscovered hazardous substances, as well as
third-party bodily injury and property damage claims related to
the release of hazardous substances. We intend to carry similar
insurance with respect to future acquisitions as appropriate. A
substantial portion of our properties are located in areas
subject to earthquake loss, such as San Diego and
San Francisco, California and Seattle, Washington. Although
we presently carry earthquake insurance on our properties, the
amount of earthquake insurance coverage we carry may not be
sufficient to fully cover losses from earthquakes. In addition,
we may discontinue earthquake, terrorism or other insurance, or
may elect not to procure such insurance, on some or all of our
properties in the future if the cost of the premiums for any of
these policies exceeds, in our judgment, the value of the
coverage discounted for the risk of loss. See Risk
Factors Risks Related to the Real Estate
Industry Uninsured and underinsured losses could
adversely affect our operating results and our ability to make
distributions to our stockholders under Item 1A.
below.
Competition
We are one of only two publicly traded entities focusing
primarily on the acquisition, management, expansion and
selective development of properties designed for life science
tenants (the other such entity being Alexandria Real Estate
Equities, Inc.). However, various entities, including other
REITs, such as health care REITs and suburban office property
REITs, pension funds, insurance companies, investment funds and
companies, partnerships, and developers invest in properties
occupied by life science tenants and therefore compete for
investment opportunities with us. Because properties designed
for life science tenants typically contain improvements that are
specific to tenants operating in the life science industry, we
believe that we will be able to maximize returns on investments
as a result of:
|
|
|
|
|
our expertise in understanding the real estate needs of life
science industry tenants,
|
|
|
|
our ability to identify, acquire and develop properties with
generic laboratory infrastructure that appeal to a wide range of
life science industry tenants, and
|
|
|
|
our expertise in identifying and evaluating life science
industry tenants.
|
However, some of our competitors have greater financial
resources than we do and may be able to accept more risks,
including risks with respect to the creditworthiness of a tenant
or the geographic proximity of its investments. In the future,
competition from these entities may reduce the number of
suitable investment opportunities offered to us or increase the
bargaining power of property owners seeking to sell. Further, as
a result of their greater resources, those entities may have
more flexibility than we do in their ability to offer rental
concessions to attract tenants. These concessions could put
pressure on our ability to maintain or raise rents and could
adversely affect our ability to attract or retain tenants.
Additionally, our ability to compete depends upon, among other
factors, trends of the national and local economies, investment
alternatives, financial condition and operating results of
current and prospective tenants, availability and cost of
capital, construction and renovation costs, taxes, governmental
regulations, legislation and population trends.
Foreign
Operations
We do not engage in any foreign operations or derive any revenue
from foreign sources.
8
For purposes of this section, the term stockholders
means the holders of shares of our common stock and our
preferred stock.
Risks
Related to Our Properties, Our Business and Our Growth
Strategy
Because we lease our properties to a limited number of
tenants, and to the extent we depend on a limited number of
tenants in the future, the inability of any single tenant to
make its lease payments could adversely affect our business and
our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
As of December 31, 2006, we had 107 tenants in 56
properties. Two of our tenants, Human Genome Sciences and Vertex
Pharmaceuticals, represented 17.4% and 15.7%, respectively, of
our annualized base rent for the year ended December 31,
2006, and 11.8% and 7.7%, respectively, of our total leased
rentable square footage. While we evaluate the creditworthiness
of our tenants by reviewing available financial and other
pertinent information, there can be no assurance that any tenant
will be able to make timely rental payments or avoid defaulting
under its lease. If a tenant defaults, we may experience delays
in enforcing our rights as landlord and may incur substantial
costs in protecting our investment. Because we depend on rental
payments from a limited number of tenants, the inability of any
single tenant to make its lease payments could adversely affect
us and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Tenants in the life science industry face high levels of
regulation, expense and uncertainty that may adversely affect
their ability to pay us rent and consequently adversely affect
our business.
Life science entities comprise the vast majority of our tenant
base. Because of our dependence on a single industry, adverse
conditions affecting that industry will more adversely affect
our business, and thus our ability to make distributions to our
stockholders, than if our business strategy included a more
diverse tenant base. Life science industry tenants, particularly
those involved in developing and marketing drugs and drug
delivery technologies, fail from time to time as a result of
various factors. Many of these factors are particular to the
life science industry. For example:
|
|
|
|
|
Our tenants require significant outlays of funds for the
research and development and clinical testing of their products
and technologies. If private investors, the government or other
sources of funding are unavailable to support such development,
a tenants business may fail.
|
|
|
|
The research and development, clinical testing, manufacture and
marketing of some of our tenants products require federal,
state and foreign regulatory approvals. The approval process is
typically long, expensive and uncertain. Even if our tenants
have sufficient funds to seek approvals, one or all of their
products may fail to obtain the required regulatory approvals on
a timely basis or at all. Furthermore, our tenants may only have
a small number of products under development. If one product
fails to receive the required approvals at any stage of
development, it could significantly adversely affect our
tenants entire business and its ability to pay rent.
|
|
|
|
Our tenants with marketable products may be adversely affected
by health care reform efforts and the reimbursement policies of
government or private health care payors.
|
|
|
|
Our tenants may be unable to adequately protect their
intellectual property under patent, copyright or trade secret
laws. Failure to do so could jeopardize their ability to profit
from their efforts and to protect their products from
competition.
|
|
|
|
Collaborative relationships with other life science entities may
be crucial to the development, manufacturing, distribution or
marketing of our tenants products. If these other entities
fail to fulfill their obligations under these collaborative
arrangements, our tenants businesses will suffer.
|
We cannot assure you that our tenants in the life science
industry will be successful in their businesses. If our
tenants businesses are adversely affected, they may have
difficulty paying us rent.
9
Because particular upgrades are required for life science
tenants, improvements to our properties involve greater
expenditures than traditional office space, which costs may not
be covered by the rents our tenants pay.
The improvements generally required for our properties
infrastructure are more costly than for other property types.
Typical infrastructural improvements include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
reinforced concrete floors,
|
|
|
|
upgraded roof structures for greater load capacity,
|
|
|
|
increased
floor-to-ceiling
clear heights,
|
|
|
|
heavy-duty HVAC systems,
|
|
|
|
enhanced environmental control technology,
|
|
|
|
significantly upgraded electrical, gas and plumbing
infrastructure, and
|
|
|
|
laboratory benchwork.
|
Our tenants generally pay higher rent on our properties than
tenants in traditional office space. However, we cannot assure
you that our tenants will continue to do so in the future or
that the rents paid will cover the additional costs of upgrading
the properties.
Because of the unique and specific improvements required for
our life science tenants, we may be required to incur
substantial renovation costs to make our properties suitable for
other life science tenants or other office tenants, which could
adversely affect our operating performance.
We acquire or develop properties that include laboratory space
and other features that we believe are generally desirable for
life science industry tenants. However, different life science
industry tenants may require different features in their
properties, depending on each tenants particular focus
within the life science industry. If a current tenant is unable
to pay rent and vacates a property, we may incur substantial
expenditures to modify the property before we are able to
re-lease the space to another life science industry tenant. This
could hurt our operating performance and the value of your
investment. Also, if the property needs to be renovated to
accommodate multiple tenants, we may incur substantial
expenditures before we are able to re-lease the space.
Additionally, our properties may not be suitable for lease to
traditional office tenants without significant expenditures or
renovations. Accordingly, any downturn in the life science
industry may have a substantial negative impact on our
properties values.
The geographic concentration of our properties in Boston,
Maryland and California makes our business particularly
vulnerable to adverse conditions affecting these markets.
Twelve of our 56 properties are located in the Boston area. As
of December 31, 2006, these properties represented 26.7% of
our annualized base rent and 16.7% of our total rentable square
footage. Four of our 56 properties are located in Maryland.
As of December 31, 2006, these properties represented 23.0%
of our annualized base rent and 14.0% of our total rentable
square footage. In addition, 22 of our 56 properties are located
in California, with twelve in San Diego and ten in
San Francisco. As of December 31, 2006, these
properties represented 24.5% of our annualized base rent and
40.7% of our total rentable square footage. Because of this
concentration in three geographic regions, we are particularly
vulnerable to adverse conditions affecting Boston, Maryland and
California, including general economic conditions, increased
competition, a downturn in the local life science industry, real
estate conditions, terrorist attacks, earthquakes (with respect
to California) and other natural disasters occurring in these
regions. In addition, we cannot assure you that these markets
will continue to grow or remain favorable to the life science
industry. The performance of the life science industry and the
economy in general in these geographic markets may affect
occupancy, market rental rates and expenses, and thus may affect
our performance and the value of our properties. We are also
subject to greater risk of loss from earthquakes because of our
properties concentration in California. The close
proximity of our ten properties in San Francisco to a fault
line makes them more vulnerable to earthquakes than properties
in many other parts of the country.
10
Our tax indemnification and debt maintenance obligations
require us to make payments if we sell certain properties or
repay certain debt, which could limit our operating
flexibility.
In our formation transactions, certain of our executive
officers, Alan D. Gold, Gary A. Kreitzer, John F.
Wilson, II and Matthew G. McDevitt, and certain other
individuals contributed six properties to our operating
partnership. If we were to dispose of these contributed assets
in a taxable transaction, Messrs. Gold, Kreitzer, Wilson
and McDevitt and the other contributors of those assets would
suffer adverse tax consequences. In connection with these
contribution transactions, we agreed to indemnify those
contributors against such adverse tax consequences for a period
of ten years. This indemnification will help those contributors
to preserve their tax positions after their contributions. The
tax indemnification provisions were not negotiated in an
arms length transaction but were determined by our
management team. We have also agreed to use reasonable best
efforts consistent with our fiduciary duties to maintain at
least $8.0 million of debt, some of which must be property
specific, that the contributors can guarantee in order to defer
any taxable gain they may incur if our operating partnership
repays existing debt. These tax indemnification and debt
maintenance obligations may affect the way in which we conduct
our business. During the indemnification period, these
obligations may impact the timing and circumstances under which
we sell the contributed properties or interests in entities
holding the properties. For example, these tax indemnification
payments could effectively reduce or eliminate any gain we might
otherwise realize upon the sale or other disposition of the
related properties. Accordingly, even if market conditions might
otherwise dictate that it would be desirable to dispose of these
properties, the existence of the tax indemnification obligations
could result in a decision to retain the properties in our
portfolio to avoid having to pay the tax indemnity payments. The
existence of the debt maintenance obligations could require us
to maintain debt at a higher level than we might otherwise
choose. Higher debt levels could adversely affect our ability to
make distributions to our stockholders.
While we may seek to enter into tax-efficient joint ventures
with third-party investors, we currently have no intention of
disposing of these properties or interests in entities holding
the properties in transactions that would trigger our tax
indemnification obligations. The involuntary condemnation of one
or more of these properties during the indemnification period
could, however, trigger the tax indemnification obligations
described above. The tax indemnity would equal the amount of the
federal and state income tax liability the contributor would
incur with respect to the gain allocated to the contributor. The
calculation of the indemnity payment would not be reduced due to
the time value of money or the time remaining within the
indemnification period. The terms of the contribution agreements
also require us to gross up the tax indemnity payment for the
amount of income taxes due as a result of the tax indemnity
payment. Messrs. Gold, Kreitzer, Wilson and McDevitt are
potential recipients of these indemnification payments. Because
of these potential payments their personal interests may diverge
from those of our stockholders.
Our expansion strategy may not yield the returns expected,
may result in disruptions to our business, may strain our
management resources and may adversely affect our operations.
We own properties principally in Boston, San Diego,
San Francisco, Seattle, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New
York/New Jersey, each of which is currently a leading market in
the United States for the life science industry. We cannot
assure you that these markets will remain favorable to the life
science industry, that these markets will continue to grow or
that we will be successful expanding in these markets.
In addition to the 13 properties we acquired in connection with
our initial public offering in August 2004, we have acquired an
additional 43 properties, and we expect to continue to expand.
This anticipated growth will require substantial attention from
our existing management team, which may divert managements
attention from our current properties. Implementing our growth
plan will also require that we expand our management and staff
with qualified and experienced personnel and that we implement
administrative, accounting and operational systems sufficient to
integrate new properties into our portfolio. We also must manage
future property acquisitions without incurring unanticipated
costs or disrupting the operations at our existing properties.
Managing new properties requires a focus on leasing and
retaining tenants. If we fail to successfully integrate future
acquisitions into our portfolio, or if newly acquired properties
fail to perform as we expect, our results of operations,
financial condition and ability to pay distributions could
suffer.
11
We may be unable to acquire, develop or operate new
properties successfully, which could harm our financial
condition and ability to pay distributions to our
stockholders.
We continue to evaluate the market for available properties and
may acquire office, laboratory and other properties when
opportunities exist. We also may develop or substantially
renovate office and other properties. Acquisition, development
and renovation activities are subject to significant risks,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
changing market conditions, including competition from others,
may diminish our opportunities for acquiring a desired property
on favorable terms or at all. Even if we enter into agreements
for the acquisition of properties, these agreements are subject
to customary conditions to closing, including completion of due
diligence investigations to our satisfaction,
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to obtain financing on favorable terms (or at
all),
|
|
|
|
we may spend more time or money than we budget to improve or
renovate acquired properties or to develop new properties,
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to quickly and efficiently integrate new
properties, particularly if we acquire portfolios of properties,
into our existing operations,
|
|
|
|
we may fail to obtain the financial results expected from the
properties we acquire or develop, making them unprofitable,
|
|
|
|
market and economic conditions may result in higher than
expected vacancy rates and lower than expected rental rates,
|
|
|
|
we may fail to retain tenants that have pre-leased our
properties under development if we do not complete the
construction of these properties in a timely manner or to the
tenants specifications,
|
|
|
|
if we develop properties, we may encounter delays or refusals in
obtaining all necessary zoning, land use, building, occupancy
and other required governmental permits and authorizations,
|
|
|
|
we are less familiar with the development of properties in
markets outside of California,
|
|
|
|
acquired and developed properties may have defects we do not
discover through our inspection processes, including latent
defects that may not reveal themselves until many years after we
put a property in service, and
|
|
|
|
we may acquire land, properties or entities owning properties,
which are subject to liabilities and for which, in the case of
unknown liabilities, we may have limited or no recourse.
|
In November 2006, we acquired the Center for Life
Science | Boston, a
702,940 square foot life science research building under
development. We expect to invest in excess of an additional
$200 million to complete the project. In addition, we have
commenced approximately 360,000 square feet of development
at our Landmark at Eastview property in New York, and
approximately 94,000 square feet of development at our
Fairview Avenue property in Seattle, Washington. As a result of
these projects, we may face increased risk with respect to our
development activities.
The realization of any of the above risks could significantly
and adversely affect our financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow, per share trading price of our
securities, ability to satisfy our debt service obligations and
ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.
Our success depends on key personnel with extensive
experience dealing with the real estate needs of life science
tenants, and the loss of these key personnel could threaten our
ability to operate our business successfully.
Our future success depends, to a significant extent, on the
continued services of our management team. In particular, we
depend on the efforts of Mr. Gold, our Chairman, President
and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Kreitzer, our Executive
Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, Mr. Wilson,
our Executive Vice President Operations,
Mr. McDevitt, our Regional Executive Vice President, and
Kent Griffin, our Chief Financial Officer. Among the reasons
that Messrs. Gold, Kreitzer, Wilson, McDevitt and Griffin
are important to our success are that
12
they have extensive real estate and finance experience, and
strong reputations within the life science industry. Our
management team has developed informal relationships through
past business dealings with numerous members of the scientific
community, life science investors, current and prospective life
science industry tenants, and real estate brokers. We expect
that their reputations will continue to attract business and
investment opportunities before the active marketing of
properties and will assist us in negotiations with lenders,
existing and potential tenants, and industry personnel. If we
lost their services, our relationships with such lenders,
existing and prospective tenants, and industry personnel could
suffer. We have entered into employment agreements with each of
Messrs. Gold, Kreitzer, Wilson, McDevitt and Griffin, but
we cannot guarantee that they will not terminate their
employment prior to the end of the term.
The bankruptcy of a tenant may adversely affect the income
produced by and the value of our properties.
The bankruptcy or insolvency of a tenant may adversely affect
the income produced by our properties. If any tenant becomes a
debtor in a case under the Bankruptcy Code, we cannot evict the
tenant solely because of the bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court
also might authorize the tenant to reject and terminate its
lease with us, which would generally result in any unpaid,
pre-bankruptcy rent being treated as an unsecured claim. In
addition, our claim against the tenant for unpaid, future rent
would be subject to a statutory cap equal to the greater of
(1) one year of rent or (2) 15% of the remaining rent
on the lease (not to exceed three years of rent). This cap might
be substantially less than the remaining rent actually owed
under the lease. Additionally, a Bankruptcy Court may require us
to turn over to the estate all or a portion of any deposits,
amounts in escrow, or prepaid rents. Our claim for unpaid,
pre-bankruptcy rent, our lease termination damages and claims
relating to damages for which we hold deposits or other amounts
that we were forced to repay would likely not be paid in full.
Compliance with changing regulation of corporate governance
and public disclosure may result in additional expenses and may
have a negative impact on our business.
Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate
governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and new rules and regulations of the Securities and
Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE,
are creating uncertainty for companies such as ours. These new
or changed laws, regulations and standards are subject to
varying interpretations in many cases due to their lack of
specificity, and as a result, their application in practice may
evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and
governing bodies, which could result in continuing uncertainty
regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by
ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. Our
efforts to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards
have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in,
increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of
management time and attention from revenue-generating activities
to compliance activities. In particular, our efforts to comply
with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the
related regulations regarding our required assessment of our
internal control over financial reporting and our independent
registered public accountants audit of that assessment has
required the commitment of significant financial and managerial
resources. We expect these efforts to require the continued
commitment of significant resources. Further, our board members,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer could face
an increased risk of personal liability in connection with the
performance of their duties. As a result, we may have difficulty
attracting and retaining qualified board members and executive
officers, which could harm our business. If our efforts to
comply with new or changed laws, regulations and standards
differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing
bodies due to ambiguities related to practice, our reputation
may be harmed.
Future acts of terrorism or war or the risk of war may have a
negative impact on our business.
The continued threat of terrorism and the potential for military
action and heightened security measures in response to this
threat may cause significant disruption to commerce. There can
be no assurance that the armed hostilities will not escalate or
that these terrorist attacks, or the United States
responses to them, will not lead to further acts of terrorism
and civil disturbances, which may further contribute to economic
instability. Any armed conflict, civil unrest or additional
terrorist activities, and the attendant political instability
and societal disruption, may adversely affect our results of
operations, financial condition and future growth.
13
Risks
Related to the Real Estate Industry
Significant competition may decrease or prevent increases in
our properties occupancy and rental rates and may reduce
our investment opportunities.
We are one of only two publicly traded entities focusing
primarily on the acquisition, management, expansion and
selective development of properties designed for life science
tenants. However, various entities, including other REITs, such
as health care REITs and suburban office property REITs, pension
funds, insurance companies, investment funds and companies,
partnerships, and developers invest in properties containing
life science tenants and therefore compete for investment
opportunities with us. Many of these entities have substantially
greater financial resources than we do and may be able to accept
more risk than we can prudently manage, including risks with
respect to the creditworthiness of a tenant or the geographic
location of its investments. In the future, competition from
these entities may reduce the number of suitable investment
opportunities offered to us or increase the bargaining power of
property owners seeking to sell. Further, as a result of their
greater resources, those entities may have more flexibility than
we do in their ability to offer rental concessions to attract
tenants. This could put pressure on our ability to maintain or
raise rents and could adversely affect our ability to attract or
retain tenants. As a result, our financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow, per share trading price of our common
stock or preferred stock, ability to satisfy our debt service
obligations and ability to pay distributions to our stockholders
may be adversely affected.
Uninsured and underinsured losses could adversely affect our
operating results and our ability to make distributions to our
stockholders.
We carry comprehensive general liability, fire and extended
coverage, terrorism and loss of rental income insurance covering
all of our properties under a blanket portfolio policy, with the
exception of property insurance on our McKellar Court, Science
Center Drive, Belward Campus Drive and Shady Grove Road
locations, which is carried directly by the tenants in
accordance with the terms of their respective leases, and
builders risk policies for any projects under construction. In
addition, we carry workers compensation coverage for
injury to our employees. We believe the policy specifications
and insured limits are adequate given the relative risk of loss,
cost of the coverage and standard industry practice. We also
carry environmental remediation insurance for some of our
properties. This insurance, subject to certain exclusions and
deductibles, covers the cost to remediate environmental damage
caused by unintentional future spills or the historic presence
of previously undiscovered hazardous substances, as well as
third-party bodily injury and property damage claims related to
the release of hazardous substances. We intend to carry similar
insurance with respect to future acquisitions as appropriate. A
substantial portion of our properties are located in areas
subject to earthquake loss, such as San Diego and
San Francisco, California and Seattle, Washington. Although
we presently carry earthquake insurance on our properties, the
amount of earthquake insurance coverage we carry may not be
sufficient to fully cover losses from earthquakes. In addition,
we may discontinue earthquake, terrorism or other insurance, or
may elect not to procure such insurance, on some or all of our
properties in the future if the cost of the premiums for any of
these policies exceeds, in our judgment, the value of the
coverage discounted for the risk of loss.
If we experience a loss that is uninsured or that exceeds policy
limits, we could lose the capital invested in the damaged
properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from
those properties. In addition, if the damaged properties are
subject to recourse indebtedness, we would continue to be liable
for the indebtedness, even if these properties were irreparably
damaged.
Our performance and value are subject to risks associated
with the ownership and operation of real estate assets and with
factors affecting the real estate industry.
Our ability to make expected distributions to our stockholders
depends on our ability to generate revenues in excess of
expenses, our scheduled principal payments on debt and our
capital expenditure requirements. Events and conditions that are
beyond our control may decrease our cash available for
distribution and the value of our properties. These events
include:
|
|
|
|
|
local oversupply, increased competition or reduced demand for
life science office and laboratory space,
|
|
|
|
inability to collect rent from tenants,
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
vacancies or our inability to rent space on favorable terms,
|
|
|
|
increased operating costs, including insurance premiums,
utilities and real estate taxes,
|
|
|
|
the ongoing need for capital improvements, particularly in older
structures,
|
|
|
|
costs of complying with changes in governmental regulations,
including tax laws,
|
|
|
|
the relative illiquidity of real estate investments,
|
|
|
|
changing submarket demographics, and
|
|
|
|
civil unrest, acts of war and natural disasters, including
earthquakes, floods and fires, which may result in uninsured and
underinsured losses.
|
In addition, we could experience a general decline in rents or
an increased incidence of defaults under existing leases if any
of the following occur:
|
|
|
|
|
periods of economic slowdown or recession,
|
|
|
|
rising interest rates,
|
|
|
|
declining demand for real estate, or
|
|
|
|
the public perception that any of these events may occur.
|
Any of these events could adversely affect our financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share trading
price of our common stock or preferred stock, ability to satisfy
our debt service obligations and ability to pay distributions to
our stockholders.
Illiquidity of real estate investments may make it difficult
for us to sell properties in response to market conditions and
could harm our financial condition and ability to make
distributions.
Equity real estate investments are relatively illiquid and
therefore will tend to limit our ability to vary our portfolio
promptly in response to changing economic or other conditions.
To the extent the properties are not subject to
triple-net
leases, some significant expenditures such as real estate taxes
and maintenance costs are generally not reduced when
circumstances cause a reduction in income from the investment.
Should these events occur, our income and funds available for
distribution could be adversely affected. Furthermore, our
Landmark at Eastview property is subject to a ground lease until
certain property subdivisions are completed, at which time the
ground lease will terminate and we will obtain fee simple title
to the property. If those subdivisions are not completed, the
property will remain subject to the ground lease, which could
make it more difficult to sell the property. In addition, our
Colorow Drive property is subject to a ground lease, which could
make it more difficult to sell the property. If any of the
parking leases or licenses associated with our Cambridge
portfolio were to expire, or if we were unable to assign these
leases to a buyer, it would be more difficult for us to sell
these properties and would adversely affect our ability to
retain current tenants or attract new tenants at these
properties. In addition, REIT requirements may subject us to a
100% tax on gain recognized from the sale of property if the
property is considered to be held primarily for sale to
customers in the ordinary course of our business. To prevent
these taxes, we may comply with safe harbor rules relating to
the number of properties sold in a year, how long we owned the
properties, their tax bases and the cost of improvements made to
those properties. However, we can provide no assurance that we
will be able to successfully comply with these safe harbors. If
compliance is possible, the safe harbor rules may restrict our
ability to sell assets in the future and achieve liquidity that
may be necessary to fund distributions.
We may be unable to renew leases, lease vacant space or
re-lease space as leases expire, which could adversely affect
our business and our ability to pay distributions to our
stockholders.
If we cannot renew leases, we may be unable to re-lease our
properties at rates equal to or above the current rate. Even if
we can renew leases, tenants may be able to negotiate lower
rates as a result of market conditions. Market conditions may
also hinder our ability to lease vacant space in newly developed
properties. In addition, we may enter into or acquire leases for
properties that are specially suited to the needs of a
particular tenant. Such properties may require renovations,
tenant improvements or other concessions in order to lease them
to other tenants if the initial leases terminate. Any of these
factors could adversely impact our financial condition, results
of
15
operations, cash flow, per share trading price of our common
stock or preferred stock, our ability to satisfy our debt
service obligations and our ability to pay distributions to our
stockholders.
We could incur significant costs related to government
regulation and private litigation over environmental matters
involving the presence, discharge or threat of discharge of
hazardous or toxic substances, which could adversely affect our
operations, the value of our properties, and our ability to make
distributions to our stockholders.
Our properties may be subject to environmental liabilities.
Under various federal, state and local laws, a current or
previous owner, operator or tenant of real estate can face
liability for environmental contamination created by the
presence, discharge or threat of discharge of hazardous or toxic
substances. Liabilities can include the cost to investigate,
clean up and monitor the actual or threatened contamination and
damages caused by the contamination (or threatened
contamination). Environmental laws typically impose such
liability regardless of:
|
|
|
|
|
our knowledge of the contamination,
|
|
|
|
the timing of the contamination,
|
|
|
|
the cause of the contamination, or
|
|
|
|
the party responsible for the contamination.
|
The liability under such laws may be strict, joint and several,
meaning that we may be liable regardless of whether we knew of,
or were responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and
the government entity or private party may seek recovery of the
entire amount from us even if there are other responsible
parties. Liabilities associated with environmental conditions
may be significant and can sometimes exceed the value of the
affected property. The presence of hazardous substances on a
property may adversely affect our ability to sell or rent that
property or to borrow using that property as collateral.
Some of our properties have had contamination in the past that
required cleanup. In most cases, we believe the contamination
has been effectively remediated, and that any remaining
contamination either does not require remediation or that the
costs associated with such remediation will not be material to
us. However, we cannot guarantee that such contamination does
not continue to pose a threat to the environment or that we will
not have continued liability in connection with such prior
contamination. Our Kendall Square A and Kendall Square D
properties are located on the site of a former manufactured gas
plant. Various remedial actions were performed on these
properties, including soil stabilization to control the spread
of oil and hazardous materials in the soil. Another of our
properties, Elliott Avenue, has known soil contamination beneath
a portion of the building located on the property. Based on
environmental consultant reports, management does not believe
any remediation would be required unless major structural
changes were made to the building that resulted in the soil
becoming exposed. We do not expect these matters to materially
adversely affect such properties value or the cash flows
related to such properties, but we can provide no assurances to
that effect.
Environmental laws also:
|
|
|
|
|
may require the removal or upgrade of underground storage tanks,
|
|
|
|
regulate storm water, wastewater and water pollutant discharge,
|
|
|
|
regulate air pollutant emissions,
|
|
|
|
regulate hazardous materials generation, management and
disposal, and
|
|
|
|
regulate workplace health and safety.
|
Life science industry tenants, our primary tenant industry
focus, frequently use hazardous materials, chemicals, heavy
metals, and biological and radioactive compounds. Our
tenants controlled use of these materials subjects us and
our tenants to laws that govern using, manufacturing, storing,
handling and disposing of such materials and certain byproducts
of those materials. We are unaware of any of our existing
tenants violating applicable laws and regulations, but we and
our tenants cannot completely eliminate the risk of
contamination or injury from these materials. If our properties
become contaminated, or if a party is injured, we could be held
liable
16
for any damages that result. Such liability could exceed our
resources and any environmental remediation insurance coverage
we have, which could adversely affect our operations, the value
of our properties, and our ability to make distributions to our
stockholders. Licensing requirements governing use of
radioactive materials by tenants may also restrict the use of or
ability to transfer space in buildings we own.
We could incur significant costs related to governmental
regulation and private litigation over environmental matters
involving asbestos-containing materials, which could adversely
affect our operations, the value of our properties, and our
ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Environmental laws also govern the presence, maintenance and
removal of asbestos-containing materials, or ACMs, and may
impose fines and penalties if we fail to comply with these
requirements. Failure to comply with these laws, or even the
presence of ACMs, may expose us to third-party liability. Some
of our properties contain ACMs, and we could be liable for such
fines or penalties, as described above in Item 1.
Business Regulation Environmental
Matters.
Our properties may contain or develop harmful mold, which
could lead to liability for adverse health effects and costs of
remediating the problem, which could adversely affect the value
of the affected property and our ability to make distributions
to our stockholders.
When excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building
materials, mold growth may occur, particularly if the moisture
problem remains undiscovered or is not addressed over a period
of time. Some molds may produce airborne toxins or irritants.
Concern about indoor exposure to mold has been increasing
because exposure to mold may cause a variety of adverse health
effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions. As
a result, the presence of significant mold at any of our
properties could require us to undertake a costly remediation
program to contain or remove the mold from the affected
property. In addition, the presence of significant mold could
expose us to liability to our tenants, their or our employees,
and others if property damage or health concerns arise.
Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and
similar laws may require us to make significant unanticipated
expenditures.
All of our properties are required to comply with the ADA. The
ADA requires that all public accommodations must meet federal
requirements related to access and use by disabled persons.
Although we believe that our properties substantially comply
with present requirements of the ADA, we have not conducted an
audit of all of such properties to determine compliance. If one
or more properties is not in compliance with the ADA, then we
would be required to bring the offending properties into
compliance. Compliance with the ADA could require removing
access barriers. Non-compliance could result in imposition of
fines by the U.S. government or an award of damages to
private litigants, or both. Additional federal, state and local
laws also may require us to modify properties or could restrict
our ability to renovate properties. Complying with the ADA or
other legislation could be very expensive. If we incur
substantial costs to comply with such laws, our financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share trading
price of our common stock or preferred stock, our ability to
satisfy our debt service obligations and our ability to pay
distributions to our stockholders could be adversely affected.
We may incur significant unexpected costs to comply with
fire, safety and other regulations, which could adversely impact
our financial condition, results of operations, and ability to
make distributions.
Our properties are subject to various federal, state and local
regulatory requirements, such as state and local fire and safety
requirements, building codes and land use regulations. Failure
to comply with these requirements could subject us to
governmental fines or private litigant damage awards. We believe
that our properties are currently in material compliance with
all applicable regulatory requirements. However, we do not know
whether existing requirements will change or whether future
requirements will require us to make significant unanticipated
expenditures that will adversely impact our financial condition,
results of operations, cash flow, the per share trading price of
our common stock or preferred stock, our ability to satisfy our
debt service obligations and our ability to pay distributions to
our stockholders.
17
Risks
Related to Our Organizational Structure
Conflicts of interest could result in our management acting
other than in our stockholders best interests.
We may choose not to enforce, or to enforce less
vigorously, our rights under contribution agreements because of
conflicts of interest with certain of our
officers. Messrs. Gold, Kreitzer, Wilson
and McDevitt, some of their spouses and parents, and other
individuals and entities not affiliated with us or our
management, had ownership interests in the properties
contributed to our operating partnership in our formation
transactions. Under the agreements relating to the contribution
of those interests, we are entitled to indemnification and
damages in the event of breaches of representations or
warranties made by Messrs. Gold, Kreitzer, Wilson and
McDevitt and other contributors. None of these contribution
agreements were negotiated on an arms-length basis. We may
choose not to enforce, or to enforce less vigorously, our rights
under these contribution agreements because of our desire to
maintain our ongoing relationships with the individuals involved.
Our charter and Maryland law contain provisions that may
delay, defer or prevent a change of control transaction and may
prevent stockholders from receiving a premium for their
shares.
Our charter and the articles supplementary with respect to
our preferred stock contain 9.8% ownership limits that may
delay, defer or prevent a change of control
transaction. Our charter, with certain
exceptions, authorizes our directors to take such actions as are
necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT.
Unless exempted by our board of directors, no person may own
more than 9.8% of the value of our outstanding shares of capital
stock or more than 9.8% in value or number (whichever is more
restrictive) of the outstanding shares of our common stock or
series A preferred stock. The board may not grant such an
exemption to any proposed transferee whose ownership of in
excess of 9.8% of the value of our outstanding shares would
result in the termination of our status as a REIT. These
restrictions on transferability and ownership will not apply if
our board of directors determines that it is no longer in our
best interests to attempt to qualify as a REIT. The ownership
limit may delay or impede a transaction or a change of control
that might involve a premium price for our common stock or
otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.
We could authorize and issue stock without stockholder
approval that may delay, defer or prevent a change of control
transaction. Our charter authorizes us to
issue additional authorized but unissued shares of our common
stock or preferred stock. In addition, our board of directors
may classify or reclassify any unissued shares of our common
stock or preferred stock and may set the preferences, rights and
other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. The board
may also, without stockholder approval, amend our charter to
increase the authorized number of shares of our common stock or
our preferred stock that we may issue. The board of directors
could establish a series of common stock or preferred stock that
could, depending on the terms of such series, delay, defer or
prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve
a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best
interests of our stockholders.
Certain provisions of Maryland law could inhibit changes
in control that may delay, defer or prevent a change of control
transaction. Certain provisions of the
Maryland General Corporation Law, or the MGCL, may have the
effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to
acquire us or of impeding a change of control. In some cases,
such an acquisition or change of control could provide our
stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the
then-prevailing market price of their shares. These MGCL
provisions include:
|
|
|
|
|
business combination provisions that, subject to
limitations, prohibit certain business combinations between us
and an interested stockholder for certain periods.
An interested stockholder is generally any person
who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of our
shares or an affiliate or associate of ours who, at any time
within the two-year period prior to the date in question, was
the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of our
then outstanding voting stock. A person is not an interested
stockholder under the statute if the board of directors approved
in advance the transaction by which he otherwise would have
become an interested stockholder. The business combinations are
prohibited for five
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
years after the most recent date on which the stockholder
becomes an interested stockholder. After that period, the MGCL
imposes special voting requirements on such
combinations, and
|
|
|
|
|
|
control share provisions that provide that
control shares of our company acquired in a
control share acquisition have no voting rights
unless holders of two-thirds of our voting stock (excluding
interested shares) consent. Control shares are
shares that, when aggregated with other shares controlled by the
stockholder, entitle the stockholder to exercise one of three
increasing ranges of voting power in electing directors. A
control share acquisition is the direct or indirect
acquisition of ownership or control of control
shares.
|
In the case of the business combination provisions of the MGCL,
we opted out by resolution of our board of directors with
respect to any business combination between us and any person
provided such business combination is first approved by our
board of directors (including a majority of directors who are
not affiliates or associates of such person). In the case of the
control share provisions of the MGCL, we opted out pursuant to a
provision in our bylaws. However, our board of directors may by
resolution elect to opt in to the business combination
provisions of the MGCL. Further, we may opt in to the control
share provisions of the MGCL in the future by amending our
bylaws, which our board of directors can do without stockholder
approval.
The partnership agreement of our operating partnership, Maryland
law, and our charter and bylaws also contain other provisions
that may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change of
control that might involve a premium price for our common stock
or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.
Our board of directors may amend our investing and financing
policies without stockholder approval, and, accordingly, our
stockholders would have limited control over changes in our
policies that could increase the risk we default under our debt
obligations or that could harm our business, results of
operations and share price.
Our board of directors has adopted a policy of limiting our
indebtedness to approximately 60% of our total market
capitalization. Total market capitalization is defined as the
sum of the market value of our outstanding common stock (which
may decrease, thereby increasing our
debt-to-total
capitalization ratio), plus the aggregate value of operating
partnership units we do not own, plus the liquidation preference
of outstanding preferred stock, plus the book value of our total
consolidated indebtedness. However, our organizational documents
do not limit the amount or percentage of debt that we may incur,
nor do they limit the types of properties we may acquire or
develop. Our board of directors may alter or eliminate our
current policy on borrowing or investing at any time without
stockholder approval. Changes in our strategy or in our
investment or leverage policies could expose us to greater
credit risk and interest rate risk and could also result in a
more leveraged balance sheet. These factors could result in an
increase in our debt service and could adversely affect our cash
flow and our ability to make expected distributions to our
stockholders. Higher leverage also increases the risk we would
default on our debt.
We may invest in properties with other entities, and our lack
of sole decision-making authority or reliance on a
co-venturers financial condition could make these joint
venture investments risky.
We have in the past and may continue in the future to co-invest
with third parties through partnerships, joint ventures or other
entities. We may acquire non-controlling interests or share
responsibility for managing the affairs of a property,
partnership, joint venture or other entity. In such events, we
would not be in a position to exercise sole decision-making
authority regarding the property or entity. Investments in
entities may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not
present were a third party not involved. These risks include the
possibility that partners or co-venturers:
|
|
|
|
|
might become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required
capital contributions,
|
|
|
|
may have economic or other business interests or goals that are
inconsistent with our business interests or goals, and
|
|
|
|
may be in a position to take actions contrary to our policies or
objectives.
|
Such investments may also have the potential risk of impasses on
decisions, such as a sale, because neither we nor the partner or
co-venturer would have full control over the partnership or
joint venture. Disputes between us and
19
partners or co-venturers may result in litigation or arbitration
that would increase our expenses and prevent our officers
and/or
directors from focusing their time and effort on our business.
In addition, we may in certain circumstances be liable for the
actions of our third-party partners or co-venturers if:
|
|
|
|
|
we structure a joint venture or conduct business in a manner
that is deemed to be a general partnership with a third party,
in which case we could be liable for the acts of that third
party,
|
|
|
|
third-party managers incur debt or other liabilities on behalf
of a joint venture which the joint venture is unable to pay, and
the joint venture agreement provides for capital calls, in which
case we could be liable to make contributions as set forth in
any such joint venture agreement, or
|
|
|
|
we agree to cross-default provisions or to cross-collateralize
our properties with the properties in a joint venture, in which
case we could face liability if there is a default relating to
those properties in the joint venture or the obligations
relating to those properties.
|
Risks
Related to Our Capital Structure
Debt obligations expose us to increased risk of property
losses and may have adverse consequences on our business
operations and our ability to make distributions.
We have used and will continue to use debt to finance property
acquisitions. Our use of debt may have adverse consequences,
including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Required payments of principal and interest may be greater than
our cash flow from operations.
|
|
|
|
We may be forced to dispose of one or more of our properties,
possibly on disadvantageous terms, to make payments on our debt.
|
|
|
|
If we default on our debt obligations, the lenders or mortgagees
may foreclose on our properties that secure those loans.
Further, if we default under a mortgage loan, we will
automatically be in default on any other loan that has
cross-default provisions, and we may lose the properties
securing all of these loans.
|
|
|
|
A foreclosure on one of our properties will be treated as a sale
of the property for a purchase price equal to the outstanding
balance of the secured debt. If the outstanding balance of the
secured debt exceeds our tax basis in the property, we would
recognize taxable income on foreclosure without realizing any
accompanying cash proceeds to pay the tax (or to make
distributions based on REIT taxable income).
|
|
|
|
We may not be able to refinance or extend our existing debt. If
we cannot repay, refinance or extend our debt at maturity, in
addition to our failure to repay our debt, we may be unable to
make distributions to our stockholders at expected levels or at
all.
|
|
|
|
Even if we are able to refinance or extend our existing debt,
the terms of any refinancing or extension may not be as
favorable as the terms of our existing debt. If the refinancing
involves a higher interest rate, it could adversely affect our
cash flow and ability to make distributions to stockholders.
|
As of December 31, 2006, we had outstanding mortgage
indebtedness of $390.4 million, excluding
$13.5 million of debt premium; approximately
$250 million of borrowings under our secured term loan
facility, secured by 15 of our properties; $2.2 million of
mortgage indebtedness associated with our unconsolidated
partnership; $175 million of outstanding aggregate
principal amount of 4.50% Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2026;
$228.2 million in outstanding borrowings under our
$500 million unsecured revolving credit facility; and
$286.4 million in outstanding borrowings under our
$550 million acquisition and construction loan, secured by
our Center for Life
Science | Boston
property. We expect to incur additional debt in connection with
future acquisitions and development. Our organizational
documents do not limit the amount or percentage of debt that we
may incur.
Our credit facilities include restrictive covenants relating
to our operations, which could limit our ability to respond to
changing market conditions and our ability to make distributions
to our stockholders.
Our credit facilities impose restrictions on us that affect our
distribution and operating policies and our ability to incur
additional debt. For example, we are subject to a maximum
leverage ratio of 60% during the terms of the loans, which could
reduce our ability to incur additional debt and consequently
reduce our ability to make
20
distributions to our stockholders. Our credit facilities also
contain limitations on our ability to make distributions to our
stockholders in excess of those required to maintain our REIT
status. Specifically, our credit facilities limit distributions
to 95% of funds from operations, but not less than the minimum
necessary to enable us to meet our REIT income distribution
requirements. In addition, our credit facilities contain
covenants that, among other things, limit our ability to further
mortgage our properties or reduce insurance coverage, and that
require us to maintain specified levels of net worth. These or
other limitations may adversely affect our flexibility and our
ability to achieve our operating plans.
We have and may continue to engage in hedging transactions,
which can limit our gains and increase exposure to losses.
We have and may continue to enter into hedging transactions to
protect us from the effects of interest rate fluctuations on
floating rate debt. Our hedging transactions may include
entering into interest rate swap agreements or interest rate cap
or floor agreements, or other interest rate exchange contracts.
Hedging activities may not have the desired beneficial impact on
our results of operations or financial condition. No hedging
activity can completely insulate us from the risks associated
with changes in interest rates. Moreover, interest rate hedging
could fail to protect us or adversely affect us because, among
other things:
|
|
|
|
|
Available interest rate hedging may not correspond directly with
the interest rate risk for which we seek protection.
|
|
|
|
The duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the
related liability.
|
|
|
|
The party owing money in the hedging transaction may default on
its obligation to pay.
|
|
|
|
The credit quality of the party owing money on the hedge may be
downgraded to such an extent that it impairs our ability to sell
or assign our side of the hedging transaction.
|
|
|
|
The value of derivatives used for hedging may be adjusted from
time to time in accordance with accounting rules to reflect
changes in fair value. Downward adjustments, or
mark-to-market
losses, would reduce our stockholders equity.
|
Hedging involves risk and typically involves costs, including
transaction costs, that may reduce our overall returns on our
investments. These costs increase as the period covered by the
hedging increases and during periods of rising and volatile
interest rates. These costs will also limit the amount of cash
available for distribution to stockholders. We generally intend
to hedge as much of the interest rate risk as management
determines is in our best interests given the cost of such
hedging transactions. The REIT qualification rules may limit our
ability to enter into hedging transactions by requiring us to
limit our income from hedges. If we are unable to hedge
effectively because of the REIT rules, we will face greater
interest rate exposure than may be commercially prudent. In
connection with our $250 million secured term loan, we
entered into an interest rate swap agreement, which has the
effect of fixing the interest rate on the secured term loan at
6.4%. In addition, in connection with entering into the
acquisition and construction loan secured by our Center for Life
Science | Boston
property, we entered into four forward starting interest rate
swap agreements, which have the effect of fixing the interest
rate on the long-term debt we expect to enter into upon
completing construction of the project in 2008. Other than these
interest rate swaps, we have not entered into any hedging
transactions.
Increases in interest rates could increase the amount of our
debt payments and adversely affect our ability to pay
distributions to our stockholders.
Interest we pay could reduce cash available for distributions.
Additionally, if we incur variable rate debt, including
borrowings under our $550 million secured construction
loan, our $250 million senior secured term loan facility
and our $500 million senior unsecured credit facility, to
the extent not adequately hedged, increases in interest rates
would increase our interest costs. These increased interest
costs would reduce our cash flows and our ability to make
distributions to our stockholders. In addition, if we need to
repay existing debt during a period of rising interest rates, we
could be required to liquidate one or more of our investments in
properties at times that may not permit realization of the
maximum return on such investments.
21
If we fail to obtain external sources of capital, which is
outside of our control, we may be unable to make distributions
to our stockholders, maintain our REIT qualification, or fund
growth.
In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we are
required to distribute annually at least 90% of our net taxable
income, excluding any net capital gain. In addition, we will be
subject to income tax at regular corporate rates to the extent
that we distribute less than 100% of our net taxable income,
including any net capital gains. Because of these distribution
requirements, we may not be able to fund future capital needs,
including any necessary acquisition financing, from operating
cash flow. Consequently, we rely on third-party sources to fund
our capital needs. We may not be able to obtain financings on
favorable terms or at all. Our access to third-party sources of
capital depends, in part, on:
|
|
|
|
|
general market conditions,
|
|
|
|
the markets perception of our growth potential,
|
|
|
|
with respect to acquisition financing, the markets
perception of the value of the properties to be acquired,
|
|
|
|
our current debt levels,
|
|
|
|
our current and expected future earnings,
|
|
|
|
our cash flow and cash distributions, and
|
|
|
|
the market price per share of our common stock or preferred
stock.
|
Additionally, if the ground lease underlying our Landmark at
Eastview property remains in place, it could be more difficult
to borrow using that property as collateral. Our inability to
obtain capital from third-party sources will adversely affect
our business and limit our growth. Without sufficient capital,
we may not be able to acquire or develop properties when
strategic opportunities exist, satisfy our debt service
obligations or make the cash distributions to our stockholders
necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT.
Risks
Related to Our REIT Status
Our failure to qualify as a REIT under the Code would result
in significant adverse tax consequences to us and would
adversely affect our business and the value of our stock.
We believe that we have operated and intend to continue
operating in a manner intended to allow us to qualify as a REIT
for federal income tax purposes under the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended, or the Code. Qualification as a REIT
involves the application of highly technical and complex Code
provisions for which there are only limited judicial and
administrative interpretations. The fact that we hold
substantially all of our assets through a partnership further
complicates the application of the REIT requirements. Even a
seemingly minor technical or inadvertent mistake could
jeopardize our REIT status. Our REIT status depends upon various
factual matters and circumstances that may not be entirely
within our control. For example, in order to qualify as a REIT,
at least 95% of our gross income in any year must be derived
from qualifying sources, and we must satisfy a number of
requirements regarding the composition of our assets. Also, we
must make distributions to stockholders aggregating annually at
least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding capital gains.
In addition, new legislation, regulations, administrative
interpretations or court decisions, each of which could have
retroactive effect, may make it more difficult or impossible for
us to qualify as a REIT, or could reduce the desirability of an
investment in a REIT relative to other investments. We have not
requested and do not plan to request a ruling from the IRS that
we qualify as a REIT, and the statements in this report are not
binding on the IRS or any court. Accordingly, we cannot be
certain that we have qualified or will continue to qualify as a
REIT.
If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any tax year, we will face
serious adverse tax consequences that would substantially reduce
the funds available for distribution to our stockholders for
each of the years involved because:
|
|
|
|
|
we would not be allowed to deduct distributions to stockholders
in computing our taxable income and would be subject to federal
income tax at regular corporate rates,
|
|
|
|
we could also be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax
and possibly increased state and local taxes, and
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
unless we are entitled to relief under applicable statutory
provisions, we could not elect to be taxed as a REIT for four
taxable years following the year in which we were disqualified.
|
In addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we will not be
required to make distributions to stockholders, and all
distributions to stockholders will be subject to tax as ordinary
corporate distributions. As a result of all these factors, our
failure to qualify as a REIT could impair our ability to expand
our business and raise capital and would adversely affect the
value of our common stock or preferred stock.
To maintain our REIT status, we may be forced to borrow funds
during unfavorable market conditions to make distributions to
our stockholders.
To qualify as a REIT, we must distribute to our stockholders
certain amounts each year based on our income as described
above. At times, we may not have sufficient funds to satisfy
these distribution requirements and may need to borrow funds to
maintain our REIT status and avoid the payment of income and
excise taxes. These borrowing needs could result from:
|
|
|
|
|
differences in timing between the actual receipt of cash and
inclusion of income for federal income tax purposes,
|
|
|
|
the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures,
|
|
|
|
the creation of reserves, or
|
|
|
|
required debt or amortization payments.
|
We may need to borrow funds at times when the then-prevailing
market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings. These
borrowings could increase our costs or reduce our equity and
adversely affect the value of our common stock or preferred
stock.
To maintain our REIT status, we may be forced to forego
otherwise attractive opportunities.
To qualify as a REIT, we must satisfy tests concerning, among
other things, the sources of our income, the nature and
diversification of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our
stockholders and the ownership of our stock. We may be required
to make distributions to stockholders at times when it would be
more advantageous to reinvest cash in our business or when we do
not have funds readily available for distribution. Thus,
compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to
operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.
Risks
Related to the Ownership of Our Stock
The market price and trading volume of our common stock may
be volatile.
The market price of our common stock may be volatile. In
addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate
and cause significant price variations to occur. We cannot
assure you that the market price of our common stock will not
fluctuate or decline significantly in the future.
Some of the factors that could negatively affect our share price
or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our
common stock include:
|
|
|
|
|
actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly operating
results or dividends,
|
|
|
|
changes in our funds from operations or earnings estimates,
|
|
|
|
publication of research reports about us or the real estate
industry,
|
|
|
|
increases in market interest rates that lead purchasers of our
shares to demand a higher yield,
|
|
|
|
changes in market valuations of similar companies,
|
|
|
|
adverse market reaction to any additional debt we incur or
acquisitions we make in the future,
|
|
|
|
additions or departures of key management personnel,
|
|
|
|
actions by institutional stockholders,
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
speculation in the press or investment community,
|
|
|
|
the realization of any of the other risk factors presented in
this report, and
|
|
|
|
general market and economic conditions.
|
An increase in market interest rates may have an adverse
effect on the market price of our securities.
Changes in market interest rates have historically affected the
trading prices of equity securities issued by REITs. One of the
factors that will influence the price of our common stock and
preferred stock will be the dividend yield on such stock (as a
percentage of the price of the stock) relative to market
interest rates. An increase in market interest rates, which are
currently at low levels relative to historical rates, may lead
prospective purchasers of our common stock or series A
preferred stock to expect a higher dividend yield. Further,
higher interest rates would likely increase our borrowing costs
and potentially decrease funds available for distribution. Thus,
higher market interest rates could harm our financial condition
and results of operations and could cause the market price of
our common stock and series A preferred stock to fall.
Broad market fluctuations could negatively impact the market
price of our common stock or preferred stock.
The stock market has experienced extreme price and volume
fluctuations that have affected the market price of many
companies in industries similar or related to ours and that have
been unrelated to these companies operating performance.
These broad market fluctuations could reduce the market price of
our common stock or preferred stock. Furthermore, our operating
results and prospects may be below the expectations of public
market analysts and investors or may be lower than those of
companies with comparable market capitalizations. Either of
these factors could lead to a material decline in the market
price of our common stock or preferred stock.
Our distributions to stockholders may decline at any time.
We may not continue our current level of distributions to
stockholders. Our board of directors will determine future
distributions based on a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
cash available for distribution,
|
|
|
|
operating results,
|
|
|
|
our financial condition, especially in relation to our
anticipated future capital needs,
|
|
|
|
then current expansion plans,
|
|
|
|
the distribution requirements for REITs under the Code, and
|
|
|
|
other factors our board deems relevant.
|
The number of shares of our common stock available for future
sale could adversely affect the market price of our common
stock.
We cannot predict whether future issuances of shares of our
common stock or the availability of shares for resale in the
open market will decrease the market price per share of our
common stock. As of December 31, 2006, we had outstanding
65,425,598 shares of our common stock, as well as units in
our operating partnership and LTIP units, which may be exchanged
for 2,863,564 shares and 150,666 shares, respectively,
of our common stock. In addition, as of December 31, 2006,
we had reserved an additional 1,794,986 shares of common
stock for future issuance under our incentive award plan.
Furthermore, under the new rules adopted by the Securities and
Exchange Commission regarding registration and offering
procedures, if we meet the definition of a well-known
seasoned issuer under Rule 405 of the Securities Act,
we are permitted to file an automatic shelf registration
statement that will be immediately effective upon filing. On
September 15, 2006, we filed such an automatic shelf
registration statement, which may permit us, from time to time,
to offer and sell debt securities, common stock, preferred
stock, warrants and other securities to the extent necessary or
advisable to meet our liquidity needs.
24
Any of the following could have an adverse effect on the market
price of our common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
sales of substantial amounts of shares of our common stock in
the public market, or the perception that such sales might occur,
|
|
|
|
the exchange of units for common stock,
|
|
|
|
the exercise of any options granted to certain directors,
executive officers and other employees under our incentive award
plan,
|
|
|
|
issuances of preferred stock with liquidation or distribution
preferences, and
|
|
|
|
other issuances of our common stock.
|
Additionally, the existence of units, options and shares of our
common stock reserved for issuance upon exchange of units may
adversely affect the terms upon which we may be able to obtain
additional capital through the sale of equity securities. In
addition, future sales of shares of our common stock may be
dilutive to existing stockholders.
From time to time we also may issue shares of our common stock
or operating partnership units in connection with property,
portfolio or business acquisitions. We may grant additional
demand or piggyback registration rights in connection with these
issuances. Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, or
the perception that these sales could occur, may adversely
affect the prevailing market price of our common stock or may
adversely affect the terms upon which we may be able to obtain
additional capital through the sale of equity securities.
Item 1B. Unresolved
Staff Comments
None.
Existing
Portfolio
At December 31, 2006, our portfolio consisted of 56
properties, which included 92 buildings with an aggregate of
approximately 7.9 million rentable square feet of
laboratory and office space. We also own five undeveloped land
parcels, adjacent to five of our existing properties that we
estimate can support up to 1.1 million rentable square feet
of laboratory and office space. In addition, we currently have
three land parcels under construction representing approximately
1.2 million rentable square feet of laboratory and office
space.
The following summarizes our existing portfolio at
December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Rentable
|
|
|
Rentable
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
per Leased
|
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
Square Foot
|
|
Market
|
|
Properties
|
|
|
Feet
|
|
|
Feet
|
|
|
Leased(1)
|
|
|
Current(2)
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boston(3)
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
1,297,786
|
|
|
|
16.7
|
%
|
|
|
98.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
49,304
|
|
|
|
26.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
38.44
|
|
San Francisco
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
2,460,417
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
%
|
|
|
96.0
|
%
|
|
|
25,180
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
%
|
|
|
19.92
|
|
San Diego(4)
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
755,034
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
%
|
|
|
83.3
|
%
|
|
|
20,008
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
%
|
|
|
31.82
|
|
New York/New Jersey
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
873,369
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
%
|
|
|
95.0
|
%
|
|
|
14,838
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
%
|
|
|
19.94
|
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
778,251
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
%
|
|
|
99.0
|
%
|
|
|
14,846
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
%
|
|
|
21.20
|
|
Seattle
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
253,329
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
8,485
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
%
|
|
|
37.93
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1,093,787
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
42,285
|
|
|
|
23.0
|
%
|
|
|
38.66
|
|
University Related
Other
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
343,157
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
9,116
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
%
|
|
|
26.56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Weighted Average
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
7,855,130
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
96.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
184,062
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
29.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Percentage of leasable square footage in operating portfolio
currently subject to an existing lease. |
|
(2) |
|
In this and other tables, annualized current base rent is the
monthly contractual rent under existing leases at
December 31, 2006, multiplied by 12 months. Includes
contractual amounts to be received pursuant to master lease
agreements with the sellers on certain properties, which are not
included in rental income for U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles, or GAAP. |
|
(3) |
|
Excludes parking revenue of approximately $1.1 million for
47 Erie Street parking structure. |
|
(4) |
|
Includes the McKellar Court property, consisting of
72,863 square feet. We own the general partnership interest
in the unconsolidated limited partnership that owns the McKellar
Court property, which entitles us to 75% of the gains upon a
sale of the property and 21% of the operating cash flows. |
The following table sets forth information related to the
properties we owned, or had an ownership interest in, at
December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Leased
|
|
|
Boston
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Albany Street
|
|
|
75,003
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Center for Life
Science |
Boston(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Street
|
|
|
47,912
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Coolidge Avenue
|
|
|
37,400
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
21 Erie Street
|
|
|
49,247
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
40 Erie Street
|
|
|
100,854
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Fresh Pond Research Park
|
|
|
90,702
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Kendall Square A
|
|
|
302,919
|
|
|
|
96.7
|
%
|
Kendall Square D
|
|
|
349,325
|
|
|
|
98.5
|
%
|
Sidney Street
|
|
|
191,904
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Vassar Street
|
|
|
52,520
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
47 Erie Street Parking Structure
|
|
|
447 Stalls
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
San Francisco
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ardentech Court
|
|
|
55,588
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Ardenwood Venture(2)
|
|
|
72,500
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Bayshore Boulevard
|
|
|
183,344
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Bridgeview Technology Park I
|
|
|
212,673
|
|
|
|
64.1
|
%
|
Bridgeview Technology Park II
|
|
|
50,400
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Dumbarton Circle
|
|
|
44,000
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Eccles Avenue
|
|
|
152,145
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Industrial Road
|
|
|
169,490
|
|
|
|
88.1
|
%
|
Kaiser Drive
|
|
|
87,953
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
Pacific Research Center(3)
|
|
|
1,432,324
|
|
|
|
29.3
|
%
|
San Diego
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balboa Avenue
|
|
|
35,344
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Bernardo Center Drive
|
|
|
61,286
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Faraday Avenue
|
|
|
28,704
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
John Hopkins Court
|
|
|
69,946
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
McKellar Court(4)
|
|
|
72,863
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Nancy Ridge Drive
|
|
|
42,138
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Road to the Cure
|
|
|
64,800
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Leased
|
|
|
San Diego Science Center
|
|
|
105,364
|
|
|
|
46.6
|
%
|
Science Center Drive
|
|
|
53,740
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Sorrento Valley Boulevard
|
|
|
54,924
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Towne Centre Drive(5)
|
|
|
115,870
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Waples Street(6)
|
|
|
50,055
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
New York/New Jersey
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graphics Drive(3)
|
|
|
72,300
|
|
|
|
44.3
|
%
|
Landmark at Eastview(7)
|
|
|
751,648
|
|
|
|
94.8
|
%
|
One Research Way(8)
|
|
|
49,421
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eisenhower Road
|
|
|
27,750
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
George Patterson Boulevard
|
|
|
71,500
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
King of Prussia(9)
|
|
|
427,109
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Phoenixville Pike
|
|
|
104,400
|
|
|
|
58.8
|
%
|
Spring Mill Drive
|
|
|
76,378
|
|
|
|
90.7
|
%
|
900 Uniqema Boulevard(10)
|
|
|
11,293
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
1000 Uniqema Boulevard(10)
|
|
|
59,821
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Seattle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elliott Avenue
|
|
|
134,989
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Fairview Avenue(11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monte Villa Parkway
|
|
|
51,000
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
217th Place(3)
|
|
|
67,340
|
|
|
|
56.0
|
%
|
Maryland
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beckley Street
|
|
|
77,225
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Belward Campus Drive
|
|
|
289,912
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Shady Grove Road
|
|
|
635,058
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Tributary Street
|
|
|
91,592
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
University Related
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colorow Drive(12)
|
|
|
93,650
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Lucent Drive(13)
|
|
|
21,500
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Trade Centre Avenue(14)
|
|
|
78,023
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Walnut Street(15)
|
|
|
149,984
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Weighted
Average
|
|
|
7,855,130
|
|
|
|
80.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The entire property was under development at December 31,
2006. |
|
(2) |
|
We own an 87.5% membership interest in the limited liability
company that owns this property. |
|
(3) |
|
A portion of the property was undergoing redevelopment at
December 31, 2006. |
|
(4) |
|
We own the general partnership interest in the limited
partnership that owns the McKellar Court property, which
entitles us to 75% of the gains upon a sale of the property and
21% of the operating cash flows. |
|
(5) |
|
A previously undeveloped portion of the property was undergoing
development at December 31, 2006. |
27
|
|
|
(6) |
|
We own 70% of the limited liability company that owns the Waples
Street property, which entitles us to 90% of the cash flow from
operations up to a 9.5% cumulative annual return, and then 75%
of such distributions thereafter. |
|
(7) |
|
We own a leasehold interest in the property through a
99-year
ground lease, which will convert into a fee simple interest upon
the completion of certain property subdivisions. A previously
undevelopment portion of the property was undergoing development
at December 31, 2006. |
|
(8) |
|
The entire property was undergoing redevelopment at
December 31, 2006. |
|
(9) |
|
We own an 88.5% limited partnership interest and a 0.5% general
partnership interest in the limited partnership that owns this
property. |
|
|
|
(10) |
|
Located in New Castle, Delaware. |
|
(11) |
|
We own an 70% membership interest in the limited liability
company that owns this property, which is currently under
development at December 31, 2006. |
|
(12) |
|
Located in Salt Lake City, Utah. We own a leasehold interest in
the property through a ground lease that expires in December
2043, subject to our option to renew the ground lease for one
additional ten-year period. |
|
(13) |
|
Located in Lebanon, New Hampshire. |
|
(14) |
|
Located in Longmont, Colorado. |
|
(15) |
|
Located in Boulder, Colorado. |
Tenant
Information
As of December 31, 2006, our properties were leased to 107
tenants, and 91% of our annualized base rent was derived from
tenants that were public companies or government agencies or
their subsidiaries. The following table presents information
regarding our ten largest tenants based on percentage of our
annualized base rent as of December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
per Leased
|
|
|
Base Rent -
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Leased
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
Square Foot
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Expiration
|
Tenant
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Total Portfolio
|
|
|
Date(s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Human Genome Sciences, Inc.
|
|
|
924,970
|
|
|
$
|
39,500
|
|
|
$
|
42.70
|
|
|
|
21.5
|
%
|
|
May 2026
|
Vertex Pharmaceuticals
|
|
|
604,702
|
|
|
|
23,765
|
|
|
|
39.30
|
|
|
|
12.9
|
%
|
|
April 2018(1)
|
Genzyme Corporation
|
|
|
343,000
|
|
|
|
15,440
|
|
|
|
45.01
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
%
|
|
July 2018
|
Centocor, Inc. (Johnson &
Johnson)
|
|
|
331,398
|
|
|
|
8,047
|
|
|
|
24.28
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
%
|
|
March 2010
|
Array BioPharma, Inc.
|
|
|
228,007
|
|
|
|
6,668
|
|
|
|
29.24
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
|
August 2016(2)
|
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
|
|
|
420,253
|
|
|
|
5,446
|
|
|
|
12.96
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
|
January 2008
|
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.
|
|
|
227,932
|
|
|
|
4,206
|
|
|
|
18.45
|
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
|
Multiple(3)
|
Illumina, Inc.
|
|
|
115,870
|
|
|
|
4,057
|
|
|
|
35.01
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
%
|
|
August 2014
|
Nektar Therapeutics
|
|
|
79,917
|
|
|
|
3,888
|
|
|
|
48.65
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
%
|
|
October 2016
|
InterMune, Inc.
|
|
|
71,308
|
|
|
|
3,750
|
|
|
|
52.59
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
April 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Weighted
Average(4)
|
|
|
3,347,357
|
|
|
$
|
114,767
|
|
|
$
|
34.29
|
|
|
|
62.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
41,532 square feet expires March 2009, 191,904 square
feet expires August 2010, 59,322 square feet expires
December 2010, 290,716 square feet expires April 2018, and
21,228 square feet expires May 2012. |
|
(2) |
|
149,984 square feet expires July 2016 and
78,023 square feet expires August 2016. |
|
(3) |
|
200,911 square feet expires March 2009, which will be
replaced with a 15-year 194,000 square foot lease at the
new buildings to be constructed at the Landmark at Eastview
property, and 27,021 square feet expires March 2024. |
28
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Without regard to any lease terminations
and/or
renewal options. |
Lease
Distribution
Our leases are typically structured for terms of five to
15 years, with extension options, and include a fixed
rental rate with scheduled annual escalations. The leases are
generally
triple-net.
Triple-net
leases are those in which tenants pay not only base rent, but
also some or all real estate taxes and operating expenses of the
leased property. Tenants typically reimburse us for the full
direct cost, without regard to a base year or expense stop, for
use of lighting, heating and air conditioning, and certain
capital improvements necessary to maintain the property in its
original condition. We are generally responsible for structural
repairs.
Lease
Expirations
The following table presents a summary schedule of available
space at December 31, 2006 and lease expirations over the
next ten calendar years for leases in place at December 31,
2006. Additionally, we have space that is currently under a
master lease arrangement at our King of Prussia property, which
expires in 2008. The master lease at our Bayshore Boulevard
property expired in February 2006. This table assumes that none
of the tenants exercise renewal options or early termination
rights, if any, at or prior to the scheduled expirations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Total Rentable
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
|
Feet of
|
|
|
Square Feet of
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
per Leased
|
|
|
|
Expiring
|
|
|
Expiring
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
Base Rent
|
|
|
Square Foot
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration
|
|
Leases
|
|
|
Leases
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
2007(1)
|
|
|
576,046
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
14,664
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
25.46
|
|
2008
|
|
|
712,733
|
|
|
|
11.3
|
%
|
|
|
12,774
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
%
|
|
|
17.92
|
|
2009
|
|
|
622,199
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
%
|
|
|
13,080
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
%
|
|
|
21.02
|
|
2010
|
|
|
777,056
|
|
|
|
12.4
|
%
|
|
|
19,723
|
|
|
|
10.7
|
%
|
|
|
25.38
|
|
2011
|
|
|
216,657
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
|
|
7,205
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
|
|
33.26
|
|
2012
|
|
|
238,435
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
|
|
6,391
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
%
|
|
|
26.81
|
|
2013
|
|
|
228,336
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
|
|
3,626
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
15.88
|
|
2014
|
|
|
238,252
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
|
|
7,125
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
|
|
29.91
|
|
2015
|
|
|
148,666
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
%
|
|
|
3,760
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
25.29
|
|
2016
|
|
|
393,954
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
%
|
|
|
12,765
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
%
|
|
|
32.40
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
2,128,314
|
|
|
|
33.9
|
%
|
|
|
82,949
|
|
|
|
45.1
|
%
|
|
|
38.97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Weighted Average
|
|
|
6,280,648
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
184,062
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
29.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes current month to month leases. |
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
We are not currently a party to any legal proceedings nor, to
our knowledge, is any legal proceeding threatened against us
that would have a material adverse effect on our financial
position, results of operations or liquidity.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
None.
29
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Our common stock has been listed on the New York Stock Exchange
under the symbol BMR since August 6, 2004. On
February 26, 2007, the reported closing sale price per
share for our common stock on the NYSE was $29.70 and there were
approximately 75 holders of record. The following table
sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high, low and last
sale prices in dollars on the NYSE for our common stock and the
distributions we declared per share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Dividend
|
|
Period
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Last
|
|
|
per Share
|
|
|
First Quarter 2005
|
|
$
|
22.40
|
|
|
$
|
19.40
|
|
|
$
|
20.60
|
|
|
$
|
0.27
|
|
Second Quarter 2005
|
|
$
|
24.47
|
|
|
$
|
19.39
|
|
|
$
|
23.85
|
|
|
$
|
0.27
|
|
Third Quarter 2005
|
|
$
|
25.60
|
|
|
$
|
22.30
|
|
|
$
|
24.80
|
|
|
$
|
0.27
|
|
Fourth Quarter 2005
|
|
$
|
26.06
|
|
|
$
|
22.25
|
|
|
$
|
24.40
|
|
|
$
|
0.27
|
|
First Quarter 2006
|
|
$
|
29.86
|
|
|
$
|
23.75
|
|
|
$
|
29.64
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
Second Quarter 2006
|
|
$
|
29.94
|
|
|
$
|
25.95
|
|
|
$
|
29.94
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
Third Quarter 2006
|
|
$
|
31.99
|
|
|
$
|
28.28
|
|
|
$
|
30.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
Fourth Quarter 2006
|
|
$
|
32.41
|
|
|
$
|
27.71
|
|
|
$
|
28.60
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
We intend to continue to declare quarterly distributions on our
common stock. The actual amount and timing of distributions,
however, will be at the discretion of our board of directors and
will depend upon our financial condition in addition to the
requirements of the Code, and no assurance can be given as to
the amounts or timing of future distributions. In addition, our
credit facilities limit our ability to pay distributions to our
common stockholders. The limitation is based on 95% of funds
from operations, but not less than the minimum necessary to
enable us to meet our REIT income distribution requirements. We
do not anticipate that our ability to pay distributions will be
impaired by the terms of our credit facilities. However, there
can be no assurances in that regard.
Subject to the distribution requirements applicable to REITs
under the Code, we intend, to the extent practicable, to invest
substantially all of the proceeds from sales and refinancings of
our assets in real estate-related assets and other assets. We
may, however, under certain circumstances, make a distribution
of capital or of assets. Such distributions, if any, will be
made at the discretion of our board of directors. Distributions
will be made in cash to extent that cash is available for
distribution.
Information about our equity compensation plans is incorporated
by reference in Item 12 of Part III of this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data (not covered by Report of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm)
|
The following sets forth selected consolidated financial and
operating information for BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and for 201
Industrial Road, L.P., our predecessor. We have not presented
historical information for BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. prior to
August 11, 2004, the date on which we consummated our
initial public offering, because during the period from our
formation until our initial public offering, we did not have
material corporate activity. The following data should be read
in conjunction with our financial statements and notes thereto
and Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations included in
Item 7 of this report.
30
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND BIOMED REALTY TRUST PREDECESSOR
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.
|
|
|
Predecessor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 11,
|
|
|
January 1,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 through
|
|
|
2004 through
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
August 17,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
Statements of Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental
|
|
$
|
166,732
|
|
|
$
|
92,650
|
|
|
$
|
19,432
|
|
|
$
|
3,339
|
|
|
$
|
6,275
|
|
|
$
|
5,869
|
|
Tenant recoveries
|
|
|
54,590
|
|
|
|
42,232
|
|
|
|
9,222
|
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
744
|
|
|
|
718
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
221,410
|
|
|
|
138,856
|
|
|
|
28,654
|
|
|
|
3,714
|
|
|
|
7,019
|
|
|
|
6,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental operations
|
|
|
61,585
|
|
|
|
46,373
|
|
|
|
11,619
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
830
|
|
|
|
821
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
65,610
|
|
|
|
39,378
|
|
|
|
7,853
|
|
|
|
600
|
|
|
|
955
|
|
|
|
955
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
18,085
|
|
|
|
13,278
|
|
|
|
3,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
145,280
|
|
|
|
99,029
|
|
|
|
22,602
|
|
|
|
953
|
|
|
|
1,785
|
|
|
|
1,776
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
76,130
|
|
|
|
39,827
|
|
|
|
6,052
|
|
|
|
2,761
|
|
|
|
5,234
|
|
|
|
4,811
|
|
Equity in net income (loss) of
unconsolidated partnership
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(40,672
|
)
|
|
|
(23,226
|
)
|
|
|
(1,180
|
)
|
|
|
(1,760
|
)
|
|
|
(2,901
|
)
|
|
|
(3,154
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interests
|
|
|
36,643
|
|
|
|
18,053
|
|
|
|
5,051
|
|
|
|
1,001
|
|
|
|
2,334
|
|
|
|
1,660
|
|
Minority interest in consolidated
partnerships
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
267
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interests in operating
partnership
|
|
|
(1,747
|
)
|
|
|
(1,274
|
)
|
|
|
(414
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
|
$
|
4,782
|
|
|
$
|
1,001
|
|
|
$
|
2,334
|
|
|
$
|
1,660
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares
outstanding basic
|
|
|
55,928,595
|
|
|
|
38,913,103
|
|
|
|
30,965,178
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares
outstanding diluted
|
|
|
59,018,004
|
|
|
|
42,091,195
|
|
|
|
33,767,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends declared per common
share
|
|
$
|
1.16
|
|
|
$
|
1.08
|
|
|
$
|
0.4197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data (at period
end):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments in real estate, net
|
|
$
|
2,457,538
|
|
|
$
|
1,129,371
|
|
|
$
|
468,530
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
47,025
|
|
|
$
|
47,853
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
2,692,642
|
|
|
|
1,337,310
|
|
|
|
581,723
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,056
|
|
|
|
50,732
|
|
Mortgage notes payable, net
|
|
|
403,836
|
|
|
|
246,233
|
|
|
|
102,236
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,208
|
|
|
|
37,743
|
|
Secured construction loan
|
|
|
286,355
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured term loan
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchangeable senior notes
|
|
|
175,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured line of credit
|
|
|
228,165
|
|
|
|
17,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
1,458,610
|
|
|
|
586,162
|
|
|
|
137,639
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,597
|
|
|
|
38,560
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
19,319
|
|
|
|
20,673
|
|
|
|
22,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity and
partners capital
|
|
|
1,214,713
|
|
|
|
730,475
|
|
|
|
421,817
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,459
|
|
|
|
12,169
|
|
Total liabilities and equity
|
|
|
2,692,642
|
|
|
|
1,337,310
|
|
|
|
581,723
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,056
|
|
|
|
50,732
|
|
Other Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from/(used in):(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
101,535
|
|
|
|
54,762
|
|
|
|
14,497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,416
|
|
|
|
1,762
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(1,339,463
|
)
|
|
|
(601,805
|
)
|
|
|
(457,218
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
(159
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
1,243,280
|
|
|
|
539,486
|
|
|
|
470,433
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,666
|
)
|
|
|
(1,210
|
)
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Cash flow information for 2004 is combined for BioMed Realty
Trust and the Predecessor. |
31
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with
the financial statements and notes thereto appearing elsewhere
in this report. We make statements in this section that are
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal
securities laws. For a complete discussion of forward-looking
statements, see the section above entitled Item 1.
Business Forward-Looking Statements. Certain
risk factors may cause our actual results, performance or
achievements to differ materially from those expressed or
implied by the following discussion. For a discussion of such
risk factors, see the section above entitled Item 1A.
Risk Factors.
Overview
As used herein, the terms we, us,
our or the Company refer to BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation, and any of our
subsidiaries, including BioMed Realty, L.P., a Maryland limited
partnership (our Operating Partnership), and 201
Industrial Road, L.P. (Industrial Road or our
Predecessor). We operate as a fully integrated,
self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust
(REIT) focused on acquiring, developing, owning,
leasing and managing laboratory and office space for the life
science industry. Our tenants primarily include biotechnology
and pharmaceutical companies, scientific research institutions,
government agencies and other entities involved in the life
science industry. Our properties are generally located in
markets with well established reputations as centers for
scientific research, including Boston, San Diego,
San Francisco, Seattle, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New
York/New Jersey.
We were formed on April 30, 2004 and completed our initial
public offering on August 11, 2004. From inception through
August 11, 2004, neither the Company nor our Operating
Partnership had any operations. Industrial Road was the largest
of the properties contributed in our initial public offering and
therefore has been identified as the accounting acquirer
pursuant to paragraph 17 of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 141,
Business Combinations (SFAS 141). As
such, the historical financial statements presented herein for
Industrial Road were prepared on a stand-alone basis up to and
including the acquisition date, August 17, 2004. Upon
completion of our initial public offering, the interest in the
Predecessor acquired from affiliates was recorded at historic
cost. The acquisitions of the unaffiliated interests in the
Predecessor and the interests in all of the other properties
have been accounted for as a purchase in accordance with
SFAS 141.
On May 24, 2006, we completed the acquisition of Shady
Grove Road, Human Genome Sciences, Inc.s
635,058 square foot headquarters office and laboratory
facility, and Belward Campus Drive, its 289,912 square foot
large-scale manufacturing facility, as well as undeveloped land
that we estimate can support the development of up to
approximately 500,000 rentable square feet of laboratory
and office space, located in Rockville, Maryland for
approximately $427.1 million, excluding closing costs. The
properties are fully leased to Human Genome Sciences pursuant to
20-year
triple-net
leases.
On June 7, 2006, we completed a follow-on common stock
offering of 10,436,250 shares at $28.65 per share,
resulting in net proceeds of $286.5 million.
On June 28, 2006, we amended and restated our unsecured
revolving credit facility, doubling the size of the facility
from $250 million to $500 million. In addition to
increasing the size of the facility, the amendment extended the
term to June 27, 2009, provided greater flexibility with
respect to covenants, and reduced the borrowing rate. We may
extend the maturity date of the revolving credit facility to
June 27, 2010 and may increase the amount of the facility
to $700 million upon satisfying certain conditions.
On July 11, 2006, we completed the acquisition of the
Pacific Research Center located at 7777 Gateway Boulevard,
Newark, California. The property, consisting of ten two and
three-story office buildings totaling 1,432,324 square
feet, as well as undeveloped land that we estimate can support
the development of up to approximately 400,000 rentable
square feet of space, was acquired for approximately
$214.0 million, excluding closing costs.
On August 21, 2006, we completed a follow-on common stock
offering of 7,992,500 shares at $28.75 per share,
resulting in net proceeds of $220.3 million.
32
On August 23, 2006, we closed a $147.0 million
fixed-rate, mortgage loan with KeyBank National Association,
which is secured by our Shady Grove Road property in Rockville,
Maryland. The loan bears interest at a fixed rate of
5.97% per annum and matures on September 1, 2016.
On September 22, 2006, the lead underwriter of our initial
public offering exercised a warrant to purchase 270,000 common
shares at $15.00 per share, resulting in net proceeds of
$4.1 million.
On September 25, 2006, our Operating Partnership issued
$175.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.50%
Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2026, resulting in net proceeds of
$169.4 million.
On November 17, 2006, we completed the acquisition of the
Center for Life
Science | Boston
located in Boston, Massachusetts. The property consists of one
eighteen-story office building currently under construction that
will total 702,940 square feet of retail, office and
laboratory space when completed. The property was 80.1%
pre-leased to four tenants upon acquisition, with an average
lease term of 14.55 years. The total purchase price of
approximately $472.7 million, excluding closing costs, was
financed through borrowings under our unsecured line of credit
and a $550 million secured construction loan with KeyBank
and other lenders. We expect to invest in excess of an
additional $200 million in the Center for Life
Science | Boston to
complete the project.
On December 21, 2006, we signed a new, 15-year lease with
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for approximately
194,000 square feet of to be built office and laboratory
space at our Landmark at Eastview property. Under the lease,
Regeneron will relocate a majority of its existing operations at
the Landmark at Eastview property to buildings to be constructed
by us on the Landmark campus. Following Regenerons
relocation, which is expected to occur in March 2009, we intend
to redevelop and offer for lease the space Regeneron currently
occupies at the Landmark at Eastview property (excluding
27,021 square feet of space that Regeneron will continue
to lease).
In addition to the acquisition of the properties in Rockville,
Maryland, Newark, California, and Boston, Massachusetts, during
2006, we acquired twelve properties totaling approximately
743,000 rentable square feet of laboratory and office space
that was 78.6% leased at acquisition for an aggregate of
approximately $195.9 million (excluding closing costs).
From our initial public offering through December 31, 2006,
we have declared aggregate dividends on our common stock and
distributions on our operating partnership units of
$2.6597 per common share and unit, representing four full
quarterly dividends of $0.29, five full quarterly dividends of
$0.27, and a partial third quarter 2004 dividend of
$0.1497 per common share and unit.
As of December 31, 2006, we owned or had interests in 56
properties, located principally in Boston, San Diego,
San Francisco, Seattle, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New
York/New Jersey, consisting of 92 buildings with approximately
7.9 million rentable square feet of laboratory and office
space, which was approximately 96.3% leased to 107 tenants
(excluding space currently available for redevelopment). Of the
approximately 1.6 million square feet of unleased space,
1.3 million square feet, or 84.7% of our unleased square
footage, was available for redevelopment. In addition, we have
properties with approximately 1.2 million rentable square
feet under construction and undeveloped land that we estimate
can support up to an additional 1.1 million rentable square
feet of laboratory and office space.
Factors
Which May Influence Future Operations
Our corporate strategy is to continue to focus on acquiring,
developing, owning, leasing and managing laboratory and office
space for the life science industry. As of December 31,
2006, excluding space available for redevelopment, our property
portfolio was 96.3% leased to 107 tenants. Leases representing
approximately 9.2% of our rentable square footage expires during
2007 and approximately 11.3% of our rentable square footage
expires during 2008. Our leasing strategy for 2007 focuses on
leasing currently vacant space and negotiating renewals for
leases scheduled to expire during the year, and identifying new
tenants or existing tenants seeking additional space to occupy
the spaces for which we are unable to negotiate such renewals.
Additionally, we will seek to lease space that is currently
under a master lease arrangement at our King of Prussia
property, which expires in 2008. The master lease at our
Bayshore Boulevard property expired in February 2006. The
property was subsequently leased
33
to two tenants with an average lease term of approximately six
years. We also intend to proceed with other new developments,
when real estate market conditions permit.
In November 2006, we acquired the Center for Life
Science | Boston, a
702,940 square foot life science research building under
development. We expect to invest in excess of an additional
$200 million to complete the project. In addition, we have
commenced approximately 360,000 square feet of development
at our Landmark at Eastview property in New York, and
approximately 94,000 square feet of development at our
Fairview Avenue property in Seattle, Washington.
The success of our leasing and development strategy will be
dependent upon the general economic conditions and more
specifically real estate market conditions and life science
industry trends in the United States and in our target markets
of Boston, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle,
Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York/New Jersey and research parks
near or adjacent to universities.
We believe that, on a portfolio basis, rental rates on leases
expiring in 2007 and 2008 are at or below market rental rates
that are currently being achieved in our markets. However, we
cannot give any assurance that leases will be renewed or that
available space will be released at rental rates equal to or
above the current contractual rental rates or at all.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP
requires management to use judgment in the application of
accounting policies, including making estimates and assumptions.
We base our estimates on historical experience and on various
other assumptions believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances. These judgments affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the
reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting
periods. If our judgment or interpretation of the facts and
circumstances relating to various transactions had been
different, it is possible that different accounting policies
would have been applied resulting in a different presentation of
our financial statements. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our
estimates and assumptions. In the event estimates or assumptions
prove to be different from actual results, adjustments are made
in subsequent periods to reflect more current information. Below
is a discussion of accounting policies that we consider critical
in that they address the most material parts of our financial
statements, require complex judgment in their application or
require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain.
REIT
Compliance
We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Code.
Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly
technical and complex provisions of the Code to our operations
and financial results and the determination of various factual
matters and circumstances not entirely within our control. We
believe that our current organization and method of operation
comply with the rules and regulations promulgated under the Code
to enable us to qualify, and continue to qualify, as a REIT.
However, it is possible that we have been organized or have
operated in a manner that would not allow us to qualify as a
REIT, or that our future operations could cause us to fail to
qualify.
If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, then we
will be required to pay federal income tax (including any
applicable alternative minimum tax) and, in most of the states,
state income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate tax
rates. Even as a REIT, we may be subject to certain state and
local taxes. If we lose our REIT status, then our net earnings
available for investment or distribution to stockholders would
be significantly reduced for each of the years involved, and we
would no longer be required to make distributions to our
stockholders.
34
Investments
in Real Estate
Investments in real estate are carried at depreciated cost.
Depreciation and amortization are recorded on a straight-line
basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:
|
|
|
Buildings and improvements
|
|
40 years
|
Ground lease
|
|
Term of the related lease
|
Tenant improvements
|
|
Shorter of the useful lives or the
terms of the related leases
|
Furniture, fixtures, and equipment
|
|
3 to 5 years
|
Acquired in-place leases
|
|
Non-cancelable term of the related
lease
|
Acquired management agreements
|
|
Non-cancelable term of the related
agreement
|
Purchase accounting was applied, on a pro-rata basis where
appropriate, to the assets and liabilities of real estate
entities in which we acquired an interest or a partial interest.
The fair value of tangible assets of an acquired property (which
includes land, buildings, and improvements) is determined by
valuing the property as if it were vacant, and the
as-if-vacant value is then allocated to land,
buildings and improvements based on managements
determination of the relative fair value of these assets. We
determine the as-if-vacant fair value using methods similar to
those used by independent appraisers. Factors considered by us
in performing these analyses include an estimate of the carrying
costs during the expected
lease-up
periods, current market conditions and costs to execute similar
leases. In estimating carrying costs, we include real estate
taxes, insurance and other operating expenses and estimates of
lost rental revenue during the expected
lease-up
periods based on current market demand.
In allocating fair value to the identified intangible assets and
liabilities of an acquired property, above-market and
below-market in-place leases are recorded based on the present
value (using a discount rate which reflects the risks associated
with the leases acquired) of the difference between (a) the
contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases
and (b) our estimate of the fair market lease rates for the
corresponding in-place leases at acquisition, measured over a
period equal to the remaining non-cancelable term of the leases.
The capitalized above-market lease values are amortized as a
reduction of rental income over the remaining non-cancelable
terms of the respective leases. The capitalized below-market
lease values are amortized as an increase to rental income over
the remaining non-cancelable terms of the respective leases and
any fixed rate renewal periods. If a tenant vacates its space
prior to the contractual termination of the lease and no rental
payments are being made on the lease, any unamortized balance of
the related intangible will be written off.
The aggregate value of other acquired intangible assets,
consisting of acquired in-place leases and acquired management
agreements, are recorded based on a variety of components
including, but not necessarily limited to: (a) the value
associated with avoiding the cost of originating the acquired
in-place leases (i.e. the market cost to execute a lease,
including leasing commissions and legal fees, if any);
(b) the value associated with lost revenue related to
tenant reimbursable operating costs estimated to be incurred
during the assumed
lease-up
period (i.e. real estate taxes, insurance and other operating
expenses); (c) the value associated with lost rental
revenue from existing leases during the assumed
lease-up
period; and (d) the value associated with avoided tenant
improvement costs or other inducements to secure a tenant lease.
The fair value assigned to the acquired management agreements
are recorded at the present value (using a discount rate which
reflects the risks associated with the management agreements
acquired) of the acquired management agreements with certain
tenants of the acquired properties. The values of in-place
leases and management agreements are amortized to expense over
the remaining non-cancelable period of the respective leases or
agreements. If a lease were to be terminated prior to its stated
expiration, all unamortized amounts related to that lease would
be written off.
A variety of costs are incurred in the acquisition, development,
construction, improvements and leasing of properties. After
determination is made to capitalize a cost, it is allocated to
the specific component of a project that is benefited.
Determination of when a development project is substantially
complete and capitalization must cease involves a degree of
judgment. Our capitalization policy on development properties is
guided by SFAS No. 34, Capitalization of Interest
Cost and SFAS No. 67, Accounting for Costs and
the Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate
Properties. The costs of land and buildings under
development include specifically identifiable costs. The
capitalized costs include pre-construction costs essential to
the development of the property, development costs,
35
construction costs, interest costs, real estate taxes, salaries
and related costs, and other costs incurred during the period of
development. We consider a construction project as substantially
completed and held available for occupancy upon the completion
of tenant improvements, but no later than one year from
cessation of major construction activity. We cease
capitalization on the portion substantially completed and
occupied or held available for occupancy, and capitalize only
those costs associated with the portion under construction.
Capitalized costs associated with unsuccessful acquisitions are
charged to expense when an acquisition is abandoned.
Repair and maintenance costs are charged to expense as incurred
and significant replacements and betterments are capitalized.
Repairs and maintenance costs include all costs that do not
extend the useful life of an asset or increase its operating
efficiency. Significant replacement and betterments represent
costs that extend an assets useful life or increase its
operating efficiency.
We compute depreciation and amortization on our properties using
the straight-line method based on estimated useful asset lives.
These assessments have a direct impact on our net income because
if we were to shorten the expected useful lives of our
investments in real estate, we would depreciate such investments
over fewer years, resulting in more depreciation expense and
lower net income on an annual basis.
When circumstances such as adverse market conditions indicate a
possible impairment of the value of a property, we review the
recoverability of the propertys carrying value. The review
of recoverability is based on an estimate of the future
undiscounted cash flows (excluding interest charges) 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
impairment exists due to the inability to recover the carrying
value of a real estate investment, an impairment loss is
recorded to the extent that the carrying value exceeds the
estimated fair value of the property. We are required to make
subjective assessments as to whether there are impairments in
the values of our investments in real estate. These assessments
have a direct impact on our net income because recording an
impairment loss results in an immediate negative adjustment to
net income. The evaluation of anticipated cash flows is highly
subjective and is based in part on assumptions regarding future
occupancy, rental rates and capital requirements that could
differ materially from actual results in future periods. Since
cash flows on properties considered to be long-lived assets to
be held and used are considered on an undiscounted basis to
determine whether an asset has been impaired, our established
strategy of holding properties over the long term directly
decreases the likelihood of recording an impairment loss. If our
strategy changes or market conditions otherwise dictate an
earlier sale date, an impairment loss may be recognized to
reduce the property to the lower of the carrying amount or fair
value less costs to sell, and such loss could be material. If we
determine that impairment has occurred, the affected assets must
be reduced to their fair value. As of and through
December 31, 2006, no assets have been identified as
impaired and no such impairment losses have been recognized.
Revenue
Recognition
We commence revenue recognition on our leases based on a number
of factors. In most cases, revenue recognition under a lease
begins when the lessee takes possession of or controls the
physical use of the leased asset. Generally, this occurs on the
lease commencement date. In determining what constitutes the
leased asset, we evaluate whether we or the lessee is the owner,
for accounting purposes, of the tenant improvements. If we are
the owner, for accounting purposes, of the tenant improvements,
then the leased asset is the finished space and revenue
recognition begins when the lessee takes possession of the
finished space, typically when the improvements are
substantially complete. If we conclude we are not the owner, for
accounting purposes, of the tenant improvements (the lessee is
the owner), then the leased asset is the unimproved space and
any tenant improvement allowances funded under the lease are
treated as lease incentives which reduces revenue recognized
over the term of the lease. In these circumstances, we begin
revenue recognition when the lessee takes possession of the
unimproved space for the lessee to construct improvements. The
determination of who is the owner, for accounting purposes, of
the tenant improvements determines the nature of the leased
asset and when revenue recognition under a lease begins. We
consider a number of different factors to evaluate whether we or
the lessee is the owner of the tenant improvements for
accounting purposes. These factors include:
|
|
|
|
|
whether the lease stipulates how and on what a tenant
improvement allowance may be spent;
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
whether the tenant or landlord retain legal title to the
improvements;
|
|
|
|
the uniqueness of the improvements;
|
|
|
|
the expected economic life of the tenant improvements relative
to the length of the lease;
|
|
|
|
the responsible party for construction cost overruns; and
|
|
|
|
who constructs or directs the construction of the improvements.
|
The determination of who owns the tenant improvements, for
accounting purposes, is subject to significant judgment. In
making that determination we consider all of the above factors.
However, no one factor is determinative in reaching a conclusion.
All leases are classified as operating leases and minimum rents
are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the
related lease. The excess of rents recognized over amounts
contractually due pursuant to the underlying leases is included
in accrued straight-line rents on the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets and contractually due but unpaid rents are
included in accounts receivable.
Substantially all rental operations expenses, consisting of real
estate taxes, insurance and common area maintenance costs are
recoverable from tenants under the terms of our lease
agreements, but are dependent on several factors, including
occupancy and lease terms. Tenant recovery revenue is recognized
in the period the expenses are incurred. The reimbursements are
recognized and presented in accordance with Emerging Issues Tax
Force Issue
No. 99-19,
Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal versus Net as an Agent
(EITF 99-19).
EITF 99-19
requires that these reimbursements be recorded gross, as the
Company is generally the primary obligor with respect to
purchasing goods and services from third-party suppliers, has
discretion in selecting the supplier and bears the credit risk.
Lease termination fees are recognized when the related leases
are canceled and we have no continuing obligation to provide
services to such former tenants. A gain on early termination of
a lease of $3.5 million is included in other income in the
2005 consolidated statement of income and was due to the early
termination of a portion of the Nektar lease at our Industrial
Road property. Accordingly, the related deferred lease
commissions and remaining other related intangible assets have
been fully amortized. We will recognize a gain in 2007 of
approximately $4.8 million related to the early termination
of the Novartis lease at our 201 Elliott property. The funds
were received prior to December 31, 2006, and have been
recorded as a deferred gain within other liabilities on the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The corresponding gain
is deferred until 2007 as it did not meet revenue recognition
criteria in 2006 due to the execution of the termination
agreement on January 1, 2007. However, certain intangible
assets related to the Novartis lease have been fully amortized
as of December 31, 2006.
We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated
losses resulting from the inability of tenants to make required
rent and tenant recovery payments or defaults. We may also
maintain an allowance for accrued straight-line rents and
amounts due from lease terminations based on our assessment of
the collectibility of the balance.
Payments received under master lease agreements entered into
with the sellers of the Bayshore (ended February 2006) and
King of Prussia properties to lease space that was not producing
rent at the time of the acquisition are recorded as a reduction
to buildings and improvements rather than as rental income in
accordance with EITF
85-27,
Recognition of Receipts from
Made-Up
Rental Shortfalls.
Investments
in Partnerships
Investments in partnerships are consolidated if a controlling
interest is held using the guidance provided in Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation
No. 46 (revised December 2003), Consolidation of
Variable Interest Entities (FIN 46(R)), an
interpretation of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51,
Consolidated Financial Statements, EITF Issue
No. 04-5,
Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General
Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar
Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights
(EITF 04-5),
and Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 18, The
Equity Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock
(APB 18).
37
FIN 46(R) provides guidance on the identification of
entities for which control is achieved through means other than
voting rights (variable interest entities or
VIEs) and the determination of which business
enterprise should consolidate the VIE (the primary
beneficiary). Generally, FIN 46(R) applies when
either (1) the equity investors (if any) lack one or more
of the essential characteristics of a controlling financial
interest, (2) the equity investment at risk is insufficient
to finance that entitys activities without additional
subordinated financial support or (3) the equity investors
have voting rights that are not proportionate to their economic
interests and the activities of the entity involve or are
conducted on behalf of an investor with a disproportionately
small voting interest.
EITF
04-5 states
that the general partner in a limited partnership is presumed to
control that limited partnership. The presumption may be
overcome if the limited partners have either (1) the
substantive ability to dissolve the limited partnership or
otherwise remove the general partner without cause or
(2) substantive participating rights, which provide the
limited partners with the ability to effectively participate in
significant decisions that would be expected to be made in the
ordinary course of the limited partnerships business and
thereby preclude the general partner from exercising unilateral
control over the partnership. If the criteria in
EITF 04-5
are met, the consolidation of existing limited liability
companies and partnerships accounted for under the equity method
may be required.
Except for investments consolidated in accordance with
FIN 46 or
EITF 04-5,
we account for investments in entities in which we exercise
significant influence over, but do not control, under the equity
method of accounting. These investments are recorded initially
at cost and subsequently adjusted for equity in earnings and
cash contributions and distributions. Under the equity method of
accounting, our net equity in the investment is reflected in the
consolidated balance sheets and our share of net income or loss
is included in our consolidated statements of income.
On a periodic basis, management assesses whether there are any
indicators that the carrying value of our investments in
partnerships may be impaired. An investment is impaired only if
managements estimate of the fair value of the investment
is less than the carrying value of the investment. To the extent
impairment has occurred, the loss shall be measured as the
excess of the carrying amount of the investment over the fair
value of the investment. Management does not believe that the
carrying values of any of our investments in partnerships are
impaired as of December 31, 2006.
Results
of Operations
The following is a comparison, for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005 and for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004, of the consolidated operating
results of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc., the operating results of
201 Industrial Road, L.P., our predecessor, and the combined
operating results of Bernardo Center Drive, Science Center Drive
and Balboa Avenue. We refer to Bernardo Center Drive, Science
Center Drive and Balboa Avenue as the Combined Contribution
Properties. As part of our formation transactions, our
predecessor was contributed to us in exchange for
1,461,451 units in our Operating Partnership, and the
Combined Contribution Properties, which were under common
management with our predecessor, were contributed to us in
exchange for 1,153,708 units in our Operating Partnership.
Our predecessor is considered for accounting purposes to be our
acquirer. As such, the historical financial statements presented
herein for our predecessor were prepared on a stand-alone basis.
The financial statements of the Combined Contribution Properties
are presented herein on an historical combined basis. Management
does not consider the financial condition and operating results
of our predecessor on a stand-alone basis to be indicative of
the historical operating results of our company taken as a
whole. Therefore, the following discussion relates to the
combined historical financial condition and operating results of
our predecessor and the Combined Contribution Properties, over
which our management has provided continuous common management
throughout the applicable reporting periods. Subsequent to the
dates they were contributed to us, the financial information for
each of our predecessor and the Combined Contribution Properties
is included in the financial information for BioMed Realty
Trust, which commenced operations on August 11, 2004.
Management believes this presentation provides a more meaningful
discussion of the financial condition and operating results of
BioMed Realty Trust, our predecessor and the Combined
Contribution Properties. In order to present these results on a
meaningful combined basis, the
38
historical combined financial information for all periods
presented includes combining entries to reflect the
partners capital of our predecessor which was not owned by
management.
The following tables set forth the basis for presenting the
historical financial information (in thousands).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental
|
|
$
|
166,732
|
|
|
$
|
92,650
|
|
|
$
|
74,082
|
|
Tenant recoveries
|
|
|
54,590
|
|
|
|
42,232
|
|
|
|
12,358
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
(3,886
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
221,410
|
|
|
|
138,856
|
|
|
|
82,554
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental operations
|
|
|
61,585
|
|
|
|
46,373
|
|
|
|
15,212
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
65,610
|
|
|
|
39,378
|
|
|
|
26,232
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
18,085
|
|
|
|
13,278
|
|
|
|
4,807
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
145,280
|
|
|
|
99,029
|
|
|
|
46,251
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
76,130
|
|
|
|
39,827
|
|
|
|
36,303
|
|
Equity in net income/(loss) of
unconsolidated partnership
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
|
|
(231
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(40,672
|
)
|
|
|
(23,226
|
)
|
|
|
(17,446
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interests
|
|
|
36,643
|
|
|
|
18,053
|
|
|
|
18,590
|
|
Minority interests
|
|
|
(1,610
|
)
|
|
|
(1,007
|
)
|
|
|
(603
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
|
$
|
17,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.
|
|
|
Predecessor
|
|
|
Properties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Combined
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 11,
|
|
|
January 1,
|
|
|
January 1,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
2004 through
|
|
|
2004 through
|
|
|
2004 through
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
August 17,
|
|
|
the Date of
|
|
|
Combining
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Contribution
|
|
|
Entries
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental
|
|
$
|
92,650
|
|
|
$
|
19,432
|
|
|
$
|
3,339
|
|
|
$
|
2,831
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
25,602
|
|
|
$
|
67,048
|
|
Tenant recoveries
|
|
|
42,232
|
|
|
|
9,222
|
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,076
|
|
|
|
32,156
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
138,856
|
|
|
|
28,654
|
|
|
|
3,714
|
|
|
|
3,310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,678
|
|
|
|
103,178
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental operations
|
|
|
46,373
|
|
|
|
11,619
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,325
|
|
|
|
34,048
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
39,378
|
|
|
|
7,853
|
|
|
|
600
|
|
|
|
543
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,996
|
|
|
|
30,382
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
13,278
|
|
|
|
3,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,227
|
|
|
|
10,051
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
99,029
|
|
|
|
22,602
|
|
|
|
953
|
|
|
|
993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,548
|
|
|
|
74,481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
39,827
|
|
|
|
6,052
|
|
|
|
2,761
|
|
|
|
2,317
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,130
|
|
|
|
28,697
|
|
Equity in net income/(loss) of
unconsolidated partnership
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
130
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
1,133
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(23,226
|
)
|
|
|
(1,180
|
)
|
|
|
(1,760
|
)
|
|
|
(1,594
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,534
|
)
|
|
|
(18,692
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interests
|
|
|
18,053
|
|
|
|
5,051
|
|
|
|
1,001
|
|
|
|
733
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,785
|
|
|
|
11,268
|
|
Minority interests
|
|
|
(1,007
|
)
|
|
|
(269
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(223
|
)
|
|
|
(582
|
)
|
|
|
(1,074
|
)
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
|
$
|
4,782
|
|
|
$
|
1,001
|
|
|
$
|
510
|
|
|
$
|
(582
|
)
|
|
$
|
5,711
|
|
|
$
|
11,335
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparison
of the Year Ended December 31, 2006 to the Year Ended
December 31, 2005
Rental Revenues. Rental revenues increased
$74.1 million to $166.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to $92.7 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005. The increase was primarily
due to the inclusion of rental revenues for the properties
acquired during the year ended December 31, 2006. Rental
revenues for the additional properties acquired during 2005 and
2006 is net of amortization recorded for acquired above market
leases and below market leases, both related to purchase
accounting entries recorded upon acquisition of the interests in
these properties. In addition, same property rental revenues
increased approximately $398,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to the same period in 2005
primarily due to additional leasing activity.
Tenant Recoveries. Revenues from tenant
reimbursements increased $12.4 million to
$54.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2006
compared to $42.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. The increase was primarily due to the
inclusion of tenant reimbursements for the properties acquired
during the year ended December 31, 2006. In addition, same
property tenant recoveries decreased approximately
$2.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2006
compared to the same period in 2005. The decrease corresponds to
a similar decrease in the rental operations expenses (tenant
recoveries decreased to 84.2% of total expenses in 2006 compared
to 86.4% in 2005) and is primarily the result of lower
utility expenses at certain properties.
Other Income. Other income for the year ended
December 31, 2005 is comprised primarily of a gain
resulting from the early termination of a lease to Nektar
Therapeutics at our Industrial Road property of
$3.5 million.
40
Rental Operations Expenses. Rental operations
expenses increased $15.2 million to $61.6 million for
the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to
$46.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2005.
The increase was primarily due to the inclusion of rental
operations expenses for the properties acquired during the year
ended December 31, 2006. These expenses include insurance,
property taxes and other operating expenses, most of which were
recovered from the tenants. In addition, same property rental
operations expenses decreased approximately $1.9 million
for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to the same
period in 2005 primarily due to lower utility expenses at
certain properties.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense. Depreciation and amortization expense
increased $26.2 million to $65.6 million for the year
ended December 31, 2006 compared to $39.4 million for
the year ended December 31, 2005. The increase was
primarily due to the inclusion of depreciation and amortization
expense for the properties acquired during the year ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005. In addition, same property
depreciation and amortization expense increased approximately
$1.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2006
compared to the same period in 2005, primarily as the result of
the accelerated amortization of the net remaining balance of
intangible assets totaling $947,000 due to the early termination
of a lease and increased amortization for tenant improvements
placed in service during 2005 or 2006.
General and Administrative Expenses. General
and administrative expenses increased $4.8 million to
$18.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2006
compared to $13.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. The increase was primarily due to an
increase in employees resulting in increased personnel and
infrastructure costs. The year ended December 31, 2005
included a $619,000 increase to general and administrative
expense resulting from a correction of the expensing of
restricted stock grants awarded to our executive officers and
other employees at the time of our initial public offering in
August 2004 that occurred in the periods prior to the year ended
December 31, 2005. We do not believe that the correction to
this expensing of restricted stock grants is material to the
first and second quarters of 2005 or to our 2004 consolidated
financial statements.
Interest Income. Interest income decreased
$200,000 to $1.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from $1.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. This is primarily due to a decrease in
the funds available for investment throughout the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005.
Interest Expense. Interest expense increased
$17.4 million to $40.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to $23.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005. The increase in interest is a
result of more overall debt outstanding during 2006, partially
offset by a reduction of interest expense in 2006 due to the
accretion of debt premium of $2.1 million and the
capitalization of interest costs related to redevelopment and
development projects of $7.6 million in the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to $1.8 million of
accretion of debt premium and $700,000 of capitalization of
interest costs related to redevelopment and development in the
year ended December 31, 2005. In addition, same property
interest expense decreased approximately $198,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2006 compared to the same period in
2005, primarily as the result of the increase in the
capitalization of interest costs on certain properties
undergoing redevelopment activities in 2006.
Minority Interests. Minority interests
increased $600,000 to $1.6 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006, compared to $1.0 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005. The 2006 minority interest
allocation includes the allocation to the holders of our
operating partnership units and the limited partner of our
consolidated partnership in Ardenwood Venture, offset by an
allocation of loss to the limited partners of our consolidated
partnership in King of Prussia for the year ended
December 31, 2006. The 2005 minority interest amount
includes the allocation to the holders of our operating
partnership units, offset by an allocation of loss to the
limited partners of our consolidated partnership in King of
Prussia for the year ended December 31, 2005.
Comparison
of the Year Ended December 31, 2005 to the Year Ended
December 31, 2004
Our results of operations for the years ended December 31,
2005 and 2004 include the accounts of our predecessor through
the date of its contribution to us. Our predecessor is the
largest of the properties contributed in our initial public
offering and therefore has been identified as the accounting
acquirer pursuant to paragraph 17 of
SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations. As such, the historical financial
statements presented herein for our predecessor were prepared on
a stand-alone basis. The financial information for the Combined
Contribution Properties also is included through the date of
contribution for each property. Subsequent to the dates they
were
41
contributed to us, the financial information for each of our
predecessor and the Combined Contribution Properties is included
in the financial information for BioMed Realty Trust, which
commenced operations on August 11, 2004.
Rental Revenues. Rental revenues increased
$67.1 million to $92.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $25.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily
due to the inclusion of rental revenues for the properties
acquired in connection with our initial public offering as well
as additional property acquisitions subsequent to our initial
public offering. Rental revenues for the additional properties
acquired during 2004 and 2005 is net of amortization recorded
for acquired above market leases and acquired lease obligations
related to below market leases, both related to purchase
accounting entries recorded upon acquisition of the interests in
these properties.
Tenant Recoveries. Revenues from tenant
reimbursements increased $32.1 million to
$42.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005
compared to $10.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily due to the
inclusion of tenant reimbursements for the properties acquired
in connection with our initial public offering, an increase in
same property tenant recoveries to 85.5% of total expenses in
2005 compared to 78.0% in 2004, as well as additional property
acquisitions subsequent to our initial public offering.
Other Income. Other income for the year ended
December 31, 2005 is comprised primarily of a gain on early
termination of the Nektar Therapeutics lease at our Industrial
Road property of $3.5 million.
Rental Operations Expenses. Rental operations
expenses increased $34.1 million to $46.4 million for
the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to
$12.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2004.
The increase was primarily due to the inclusion of rental
operations expenses for the properties acquired in connection
with our initial public offering as well as additional property
acquisitions subsequent to our initial public offering. These
expenses include insurance, property taxes and other operating
expenses, most of which were recovered from the tenants.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense. Depreciation and amortization expense
increased $30.4 million to $39.4 million for the year
ended December 31, 2005 compared to $9.0 million for
the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was
primarily due to the inclusion of depreciation and amortization
expense for the properties acquired in connection with our
initial public offering as well as additional property
acquisitions subsequent to our initial public offering.
General and Administrative Expenses. General
and administrative expenses increased $10.1 million to
$13.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2005
compared to $3.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily due to the
hiring of personnel after our initial public offering, the
addition of expenses relating to operating as a public company,
the compensation expense related to restricted stock awards
during the year ended December 31, 2005, and higher
consulting and professional fees associated with corporate
governance and Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 implementation.
The year ended December 31, 2005 included a $619,000
increase to general and administrative expense resulting from a
correction of the expensing of restricted stock grants awarded
to our executive officers and other employees at the time of our
initial public offering in August 2004 that occurred in the
periods prior to the year ended December 31, 2005. We do
not believe that the correction to this expensing of restricted
stock grants is material to the first and second quarters of
2005 or to our 2004 consolidated financial statements.
Interest Income. Interest income increased
$1.1 million to $1.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 from $200,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2004. This is primarily due to interest earned
on funds held by us following the consummation of our initial
public offering and our follow-on offering in June 2005.
Interest Expense. Interest expense increased
$18.7 million to $23.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $4.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. The increase in interest is a
result of more overall debt outstanding during 2005 and the
write off of $2.0 million of loan fees related to the early
repayment and termination of our unsecured credit facility and
our $100.0 million unsecured term loan facility, partially
offset by a reduction of interest expense in 2005 due to the
accretion of debt premium of $1.8 million.
Minority Interests. Minority interests
decreased $100,000 to $1.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005, compared to $1.1 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. The minority interest
allocation for 2005 and
42
2004 are not comparable due to the initial public offering. The
2004 minority interest allocation includes the allocation to the
holders of our operating partnership units, offset by a loss
allocation to the limited partner of our consolidated
partnership, King of Prussia, for the period from
August 11, 2004 through December 31, 2004, and the
percentage allocation to non-controlling interests of the
Combined Contribution Properties and for our predecessor for the
period January 1, 2004 through date of contribution of the
properties. The 2005 minority interest allocation includes the
allocation to the holders of our operating partnership units,
offset by a loss allocation to the limited partners of our
consolidated partnership, King of Prussia, for the year ended
December 31, 2005.
Cash
Flows
The following summary discussion of our cash flows is based on
the consolidated statements of cash flows in Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data and is not
meant to be an all inclusive discussion of the changes in our
cash flows for the periods presented below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioMed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realty Trust,
|
|
|
|
BioMed
|
|
|
BioMed
|
|
|
Inc. and
|
|
|
|
Realty Trust,
|
|
|
Realty Trust,
|
|
|
Predecessor
|
|
|
|
Inc. 2006
|
|
|
Inc. 2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating
activities
|
|
$
|
101,535
|
|
|
$
|
54,762
|
|
|
$
|
14,497
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
|
(1,339,463
|
)
|
|
|
(601,805
|
)
|
|
|
(457,218
|
)
|
Net cash provided by financing
activities
|
|
|
1,243,280
|
|
|
|
539,486
|
|
|
|
470,433
|
|
Ending cash and cash equivalents
balance
|
|
|
25,664
|
|
|
|
20,312
|
|
|
|
27,869
|
|
Our statements of cash flows and those of our predecessor have
been combined for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Comparison
of the Year Ended December 31, 2006 to the Year Ended
December 31, 2005
Net cash provided by operating activities increased
$46.8 million to $101.5 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to $54.8 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005. The increase was primarily
due to the increase in operating income before depreciation and
amortization, non-cash compensation expense related to the
vesting of restricted common stock, add back of the revenue
reduction related to the amortization of above market lease
intangible assets, and changes in other operating assets and
liabilities.
Net cash used in investing activities increased
$737.7 million to $1.3 billion for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to $601.8 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005. The increase was primarily
due to amounts paid to acquire interests in real estate
properties and non-real estate assets, partially offset by a
decrease in the receipt of master lease payments.
Net cash provided by financing activities increased
$703.8 million to $1.2 billion for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to $539.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005. The increase was primarily
due to an increase in the proceeds from common stock offerings,
line of credit borrowings, exchangeable notes offering,
construction line draws, and the issuance of mortgage notes
payable, offset by principal payments on mortgage loans,
payments on the line of credit, payment of loan costs, and
payments of dividends and distributions.
Comparison
of the Year Ended December 31, 2005 to the Year Ended
December 31, 2004
Net cash provided by operating activities increased
$40.3 million to $54.8 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $14.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily
due to the increase in operating income before depreciation and
amortization, non-cash compensation expense related to the
vesting of restricted common stock, non-cash write off of
intangible assets due to loan repayment, and changes in other
operating assets and liabilities.
Net cash used in investing activities increased
$144.6 million to $601.8 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $457.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily
due to
43
amounts paid to acquire interests in real estate properties
partially offset by a decrease in funds received from prior
owners for security deposits and funds held in escrow for
acquisitions.
Net cash provided by financing activities increased
$69.1 million to $539.5 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $470.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily
due to secured term loan proceeds offset by principal payments
on mortgage loans, payments of dividends and distributions, and
lower proceeds from common stock offerings.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Our short-term liquidity requirements consist primarily of funds
to pay for operating expenses and other expenditures directly
associated with our properties, including:
|
|
|
|
|
interest expense and scheduled principal payments on outstanding
mortgage indebtedness and exchangeable senior notes,
|
|
|
|
general and administrative expenses,
|
|
|
|
future distributions expected to be paid to our stockholders
(including holders of preferred stock), and
|
|
|
|
capital expenditures, tenant improvements and leasing
commissions.
|
We expect to satisfy our short-term liquidity requirements
through our existing working capital and cash provided by our
operations. Our rental revenue, provided by our
triple-net
leases, and minimal unreimbursed operating expenses generally
provide cash inflows to meet our debt service obligations, pay
general and administrative expenses, and fund regular
distributions.
Our long-term liquidity requirements consist primarily of funds
to pay for scheduled debt maturities, construction obligations,
renovations, expansions, capital commitments, and other
non-recurring capital expenditures that need to be made
periodically and the costs associated with acquisitions of
properties that we pursue. We expect to satisfy our long-term
liquidity requirements through our existing working capital,
cash provided by operations, long-term secured and unsecured
indebtedness, the issuance of additional equity or debt
securities and the use of net proceeds from the disposition of
non-strategic assets. We also expect to use funds available
under our unsecured revolving credit facility and our secured
construction loan to finance acquisition and development
activities and capital expenditures on development projects on
an interim basis.
Under the new rules adopted by the Securities and Exchange
Commission regarding registration and offering procedures, if we
meet the definition of a well-known seasoned issuer
under Rule 405 of the Securities Act, we are permitted to
file an automatic shelf registration statement that will be
immediately effective upon filing. On September 15, 2006,
we filed such an automatic shelf registration statement, which
may permit us, from time to time, to offer and sell debt
securities, common stock, preferred stock, warrants and other
securities to the extent necessary or advisable to meet our
liquidity needs.
Our total market capitalization at December 31, 2006 was
approximately $3.3 billion based on the market closing
price of our common stock at December 31, 2006 of
$28.60 per share (assuming the conversion of 2,863,564
operating partnership units and 150,666 LTIP units into common
stock) and our debt outstanding was approximately
$1.3 billion (exclusive of accounts payable and accrued
expenses). As a result, our debt to total market capitalization
ratio was approximately 40.7% at December 31, 2006. Our
board of directors adopted a policy of limiting our indebtedness
to approximately 60% of our total market capitalization.
However, our board of directors may from time to time modify our
debt policy in light of current economic or market conditions
including, but not limited to, the relative costs of debt and
equity capital, market conditions for debt and equity securities
and fluctuations in the market price of our common stock.
Accordingly, we may increase or decrease our debt to market
capitalization ratio beyond the limit described above.
On May 24, 2006, we entered into a secured bridge loan with
KeyBank and other lenders, under which we borrowed
$150.0 million. The bridge loan had an extended term of six
months and bore interest at a floating rate equal to, at our
option, either (1) LIBOR plus 140 basis points or
(2) the higher of (a) the prime rate then in effect
and (b) the federal funds rate then in effect plus a spread
of 50 basis points. This bridge loan was fully repaid and
44
terminated on August 23, 2006 with funds provided by the
new fixed-rate mortgage loan from KeyBank, secured by our Shady
Grove Road property.
On June 28, 2006, we entered into an amended and restated
unsecured revolving credit facility and a first amendment to our
$250.0 million secured term loan facility with KeyBank and
other lenders. The amendment and restatement of the unsecured
revolving credit facility increased our available borrowings
from $250.0 million to $500.0 million and extended the
maturity date of the facility to June 27, 2009. The
unsecured revolving credit facility bears interest at a floating
rate equal to, at our option, either (1) reserve adjusted
LIBOR plus a spread which ranges from 110 to 160 basis
points, depending on our leverage, or (2) the higher of
(a) the prime rate then in effect plus a spread which
ranges from 0 to 25 basis points, or (b) the federal
funds rate then in effect plus a spread which ranges from 50 to
75 basis points, in each case, depending on our leverage. We may
increase the amount of the unsecured revolving credit facility
to $700.0 million subject to certain conditions. In
addition, we, at our sole discretion, may extend the maturity
date of the unsecured revolving credit facility to June 27,
2010 after satisfying certain conditions and paying an extension
fee based on the then current facility commitment. We have
deferred the incremental loan costs associated with the amended
unsecured revolving credit facility of approximately
$1.9 million, which will be amortized to expense with the
unamortized loan costs from the original debt facility over the
remaining term. On November 3, 2006, we entered into a
first amendment to the amended and restated unsecured revolving
credit facility and a second amendment to the secured term loan
facility. The amendments update the list of permitted
investments for each agreement to include investments in our
Center for Life
Science | Boston
property with no additional changes to the interest rates or
maturity dates for each facility. The $250.0 million
secured term loan, which is secured by our interests in 15 of
our properties, continues to have a maturity date of
May 30, 2010 and bears interest at a floating rate equal
to, at our option, either (1) reserve adjusted LIBOR plus
225 basis points or (2) the higher of (a) the
prime rate then in effect plus 50 basis points and
(b) the federal funds rate then in effect plus
100 basis points. The secured term loan is also secured by
our interest in any distributions from these properties, a
pledge of the equity interests in a subsidiary owning one of
these properties, and a pledge of the equity interests in a
subsidiary owning an interest in another of these properties. We
entered into an interest rate swap agreement in connection with
the initial closing of these credit facilities, which has the
effect of fixing the interest rate on the secured term loan at
6.4%. At December 31, 2006, we had outstanding borrowings
of $228.2 million on its unsecured revolving credit
facility and $250.0 million in outstanding borrowings on
its secured term loan.
The terms of the amended credit agreements for the unsecured
revolving credit facility and secured term loan include certain
restrictions and covenants, which limit, among other things, the
payment of dividends, and the incurrence of additional
indebtedness and liens. The terms also require compliance with
financial ratios relating to the minimum amounts of net worth,
fixed charge coverage, unsecured debt service coverage, interest
coverage, the maximum amount of secured, variable-rate and
recourse indebtedness, leverage ratio, and certain investment
limitations. The dividend restriction referred to above provides
that, except to enable us to continue to qualify as a REIT for
federal income tax purposes, we will not make distributions with
respect to common stock or other equity interests in an
aggregate amount for the preceding four fiscal quarters in
excess of 95% of funds from operations, as defined, for such
period, subject to other adjustments. Management believes that
we were in compliance with the covenants as of December 31,
2006.
On September 25, 2006, our Operating Partnership issued
$175.0 million aggregate principal amount of its 4.50%
Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2026 (the Notes). The
Notes are general senior unsecured obligations of the Operating
Partnership and rank equally in right of payment with all other
senior unsecured indebtedness of the Operating Partnership.
Interest at a rate of 4.50% per annum is payable on
April 1 and October 1 of each year, beginning on
April 1, 2007, until the stated maturity date of
October 1, 2026. The terms of the Notes are governed by an
indenture, dated September 25, 2006, among the Operating
Partnership, as issuer, we, as guarantor, and U.S. Bank
National Association, as trustee. The Notes contain an exchange
settlement feature, which provides that the Notes may, on or
after September 1, 2026 or under certain other
circumstances, be exchangeable for cash (up to the principal
amount of the Notes) and, with respect to excess exchange value,
into, at our option, cash, shares of our common stock or a
combination of cash and shares of common stock at the then
applicable exchange rate. The initial exchange rate is
26.4634 shares per $1,000 principal amount of Notes,
representing an exchange price of approximately $37.79 per
share. If certain designated events occur on or prior to
October 6, 2011 and a holder elects to exchange Notes in
connection with any such transaction, we will increase the
exchange rate by a number of
45
additional shares of common stock based on the date the
transaction becomes effective and the price paid per share of
common stock in the transaction, as set forth in the indenture
governing the Notes. The exchange rate may also be adjusted
under certain other circumstances, including the payment of cash
dividends in excess of the current regular quarterly cash
dividend of $0.29 per share of common stock. The Operating
Partnership may redeem the Notes, in whole or in part, at any
time to preserve our status as a REIT or at any time on or after
October 6, 2011 for cash at 100% of the principal amount
plus accrued and unpaid interest. The holders of the Notes have
the right to require the Operating Partnership to repurchase the
Notes, in whole or in part, for cash on each of October 1,
2011, October 1, 2016 and October 1, 2021, or upon the
occurrence of a designated event, in each case for a repurchase
price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes plus
accrued and unpaid interest. We used the net proceeds received
from the issuance of the Notes to repay the outstanding balance
on our unsecured revolving credit facility and for working
capital purposes.
On November 17, 2006, we obtained a $550.0 million
floating-rate, acquisition and construction loan from KeyBank,
which is secured by our Center for Life
Science | Boston
property. The loan bears interest at a floating rate equal to,
at our option, either (1) LIBOR plus 125 basis points
or (2) the higher of (a) the prime rate then in effect
or (b) the federal funds rate then in effect plus
50 basis points. The construction loan matures on
November 16, 2009, but we may extend the maturity date to
November 16, 2010 after satisfying certain conditions and
paying an additional fee. The construction loan requires
interest only monthly payments until the maturity date. We
utilized a portion of the borrowing capacity on the construction
loan, along with borrowings on our unsecured revolving credit
facility, to acquire the Center for Life
Science | Boston
property and to fund construction activities. On
December 21, 2006, we entered into an amended and restated
secured acquisition and construction loan, which modified the
original loan by, among other things, (1) creating four
tranches of notes, tranches A, B-1, B-2, and C,
(2) syndicating the loan among certain other lenders, and
(3) revising certain restrictions and covenants set forth
in the loan. The amended loan bears interest at a blended rate
equal to, at our option, either (a) LIBOR plus
approximately 122.5 basis points or (b) the higher of
(i) the prime rate then in effect or (ii) the federal
funds rate then in effect plus 50 basis points. The amended
loan continues to have a maturity date of November 16, 2009
and we may still, at our sole discretion, extend the maturity
date for an additional year after satisfying certain conditions
and payment of an extension fee. The amended loan includes
certain revised restrictions and covenants, which limit, among
other things, the incurrence of additional indebtedness and
liens. The amended loan also requires compliance with financial
covenants relating to minimum amounts of net worth, fixed charge
coverage, and leverage ratio. At December 31, 2006, we had
outstanding borrowings on the secured acquisition and
construction loan of $286.4 million.
46
A summary of our outstanding consolidated mortgage notes payable
as of December 31, 2006 is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective
|
|
|
Principal Balance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stated Fixed
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Maturity Date
|
|
Ardentech Court
|
|
|
7.25
|
%
|
|
|
5.06
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,658
|
|
|
$
|
4,746
|
|
|
July 1, 2012
|
Bayshore Boulevard
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
15,730
|
|
|
|
16,107
|
|
|
January 1, 2010
|
Bridgeview Technology Park I
|
|
|
8.07
|
%
|
|
|
5.04
|
%
|
|
|
11,625
|
|
|
|
11,732
|
|
|
January 1, 2011
|
Eisenhower Road
|
|
|
5.80
|
%
|
|
|
4.63
|
%
|
|
|
2,164
|
|
|
|
2,211
|
|
|
May 5, 2008
|
Elliott Avenue
|
|
|
7.38
|
%
|
|
|
4.63
|
%
|
|
|
16,020
|
|
|
|
16,526
|
|
|
November 24, 2007
|
40 Erie Street
|
|
|
7.34
|
%
|
|
|
4.90
|
%
|
|
|
18,676
|
|
|
|
19,575
|
|
|
August 1, 2008
|
Kendall Square D
|
|
|
6.38
|
%
|
|
|
5.45
|
%
|
|
|
70,963
|
|
|
|
72,395
|
|
|
December 1, 2018
|
Lucent Drive
|
|
|
5.50
|
%
|
|
|
5.50
|
%
|
|
|
5,733
|
|
|
|
5,899
|
|
|
January 21, 2015
|
Monte Villa Parkway
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
9,576
|
|
|
|
9,805
|
|
|
January 1, 2010
|
Nancy Ridge Drive
|
|
|
7.15
|
%
|
|
|
5.38
|
%
|
|
|
6,872
|
|
|
|
6,952
|
|
|
September 1, 2012
|
Road to the Cure
|
|
|
6.70
|
%
|
|
|
5.78
|
%
|
|
|
15,657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 31, 2014
|
Science Center Drive
|
|
|
7.65
|
%
|
|
|
5.04
|
%
|
|
|
11,444
|
|
|
|
11,577
|
|
|
July 1, 2011
|
Shady Grove Road
|
|
|
5.97
|
%
|
|
|
5.97
|
%
|
|
|
147,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 1, 2016
|
Sidney Street
|
|
|
7.23
|
%
|
|
|
5.11
|
%
|
|
|
30,732
|
|
|
|
31,426
|
|
|
June 1, 2012
|
Towne Centre Drive
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
21,872
|
|
|
|
22,396
|
|
|
January 1, 2010
|
900 Uniqema Boulevard
|
|
|
8.61
|
%
|
|
|
5.61
|
%
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 1, 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
390,370
|
|
|
|
231,347
|
|
|
|
Unamortized premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,466
|
|
|
|
14,886
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
403,836
|
|
|
$
|
246,233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums were recorded upon assumption of the notes at the time
of the related acquisition to account for above-market interest
rates. Amortization of these premiums is recorded as a reduction
to interest expense over the remaining term of the respective
note.
As of December 31, 2006, principal payments due for our
consolidated indebtedness (mortgage notes payable excluding debt
premium of $13.5 million, secured term loan, secured
construction loan, the Notes and unsecured line of credit) were
as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
21,557
|
|
2008
|
|
|
24,453
|
|
2009
|
|
|
519,545
|
|
2010
|
|
|
297,445
|
|
2011
|
|
|
26,219
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
440,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,329,890
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As noted above, we have entered into a derivative contract known
as an interest rate swap in order to hedge the risk of increase
in interest rates on our $250.0 million secured term loan.
In addition, in connection with entering into the acquisition
and construction loan secured by our Center for Life
Science | Boston
property, we entered into four forward starting swap agreements,
which have the effect of fixing the interest rate on the
long-term debt that we expect to enter into upon completing the
construction of the project in 2008. We record all derivatives
on the balance sheet at fair value. The accounting for changes
in the fair value of derivatives depends on the intended use of
the derivative and the resulting designation. Derivatives used
to hedge the exposure to changes in the fair value of an asset,
liability, or firm commitment attributable to a particular risk,
such as interest rate risk, are
47
considered fair value hedges. Derivatives used to hedge the
exposure to variability in expected future cash flows, or other
types of forecasted transactions, are considered cash flow
hedges.
For derivatives designated as fair value hedges, changes in the
fair value of the derivative and the hedged item related to the
hedged risk are recognized in earnings. For derivatives
designated as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of changes
in the fair value of the derivative is initially reported in
other comprehensive income (outside of earnings) and
subsequently reclassified to earnings when the hedged
transaction affects earnings, and the ineffective portion of
changes in the fair value of the derivative is recognized
directly in earnings. We assess the effectiveness of each
hedging relationship by comparing the changes in fair value or
cash flows of the derivative hedging instrument with the changes
in fair value or cash flows of the designated hedged item or
transaction. For derivatives not designated as hedges, changes
in fair value are recognized in earnings.
Our objective in using derivatives is to add stability to
interest expense and to manage our exposure to interest rate
movements or other identified risks. To accomplish this
objective, we primarily use interest rate swaps as part of our
cash flow hedging strategy. Interest rate swaps designated as
cash flow hedges involve the receipt of variable-rate amounts in
exchange for fixed-rate payments over the life of the agreements
without exchange of the underlying principal amount. During
2006, such derivatives were used to hedge the variable cash
flows associated with existing variable-rate debt and forecasted
issuances of debt. We formally documented the hedging
relationships and account for our interest rate swap agreements
as cash flow hedges.
As of December 31, 2006, our four forward starting swaps to
hedge a forecasted debt issuance had a total notional value of
$450 million. These four swaps have the effect of
obligating us to pay a weighted-average fixed rate of 5.2% and
receive the difference between the fixed rate and the
three-month LIBOR rate (if the fixed rate is lower than the
three-month LIBOR rate) and will become effective
December 30, 2008 and expire on December 30, 2018. No
initial net investment was made to enter into these agreements.
As of December 31, 2006, we also had an interest rate swap
hedging existing floating-rate debt with a notional amount of
$250.0 million, whereby we pay a fixed rate of 6.4% and
receive the difference between the fixed rate and the one-month
LIBOR rate plus 225 basis points. This agreement expires on
June 1, 2010, and no initial investment was made to enter
into this agreement. At December 31, 2006, our interest
rate swap agreements had a total fair value of
$8.4 million, which is included in other assets on the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The change in net
unrealized gains of $2.5 million in 2006 for derivatives
designated as cash flow hedges is separately disclosed in the
statement of changes in stockholders equity and
comprehensive income.
At December 31, 2006, an immaterial amount of hedge
ineffectiveness on cash flow hedges due to mismatches in
maturity dates of the interest rate swap and debt was recognized
in other income/expense during 2006. Amounts reported in
accumulated other comprehensive income related to derivatives
will be reclassified to interest expense as interest payments
are made on our hedged debt. The change in net unrealized gains
on cash flow hedges reflects a reclassification of
$2.3 million of net unrealized gains/losses from
accumulated other comprehensive income as a reduction to
interest expense during 2006. During 2007, we estimate that an
additional $2.5 million will be reclassified as a reduction
to interest expense.
As of December 31, 2006, no derivatives were designated as
fair value hedges or hedges of net investments in foreign
operations. Additionally, we do not use derivatives for trading
or speculative purposes and currently do not have any
derivatives that are not designated as hedges.
48
The following table provides information with respect to our
contractual obligations at December 31, 2006, including the
maturities and scheduled principal repayments, but excluding
related debt premiums. We were not subject to any material
capital lease obligations or unconditional purchase obligations
as of December 31, 2006.
Contractual
Obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligation
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008-2009
|
|
|
2010-2011
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable(1)
|
|
$
|
21,557
|
|
|
$
|
29,478
|
|
|
$
|
73,664
|
|
|
$
|
265,671
|
|
|
$
|
390,370
|
|
Secured term loan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
Secured acquisition and
construction loan(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
286,355
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
286,355
|
|
Exchangeable senior notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
175,000
|
|
|
|
175,000
|
|
Unsecured line of credit(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
228,165
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
228,165
|
|
Share of mortgage debt of
unconsolidated partnership
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
2,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,230
|
|
Interest payments on debt
obligations(4)
|
|
|
82,081
|
|
|
|
149,170
|
|
|
|
59,194
|
|
|
|
184,959
|
|
|
|
475,404
|
|
Ground lease obligation(5)
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
401
|
|
|
|
428
|
|
|
|
11,544
|
|
|
|
12,558
|
|
Construction projects
|
|
|
123,169
|
|
|
|
9,344
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
132,513
|
|
Tenant obligations(6)
|
|
|
100,250
|
|
|
|
22,271
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,521
|
|
Lease commissions
|
|
|
824
|
|
|
|
3,998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,822
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
328,093
|
|
|
$
|
729,243
|
|
|
$
|
385,428
|
|
|
$
|
637,174
|
|
|
$
|
2,079,938
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Balance excludes $13.5 million of unamortized debt premium. |
|
(2) |
|
The construction loan matures on November 16, 2009, but we
may extend the maturity date to November 16, 2010 after
satisfying certain conditions and paying an additional fee. |
|
(3) |
|
At our sole discretion, we may extend the maturity date of the
unsecured revolving credit facility to June 27, 2010 after
satisfying certain conditions and paying an extension fee based
on the then current facility commitment. |
|
(4) |
|
Interest payments are based on the interest in effect on
December 31, 2006 including the effect of the interest rate
swap on the secured term loan. |
|
(5) |
|
We have a ground lease obligation on the Colorow Drive property
expiring December 2043. |
|
(6) |
|
Committed tenant-related obligations based on executed leases as
of December 31, 2006. |
Funds
from Operations
We present funds from operations, or FFO, because we consider it
an important supplemental measure of our operating performance
and believe it is frequently used by securities analysts,
investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of
REITs, many of which present FFO when reporting their results.
FFO is intended to exclude GAAP historical cost depreciation and
amortization of real estate and related assets, which assumes
that the value of real estate assets diminishes ratably over
time. Historically, however, real estate values have risen or
fallen with market conditions. Because FFO excludes depreciation
and amortization unique to real estate, gains and losses from
property dispositions and extraordinary items, it provides a
performance measure that, when compared year over year, reflects
the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental
rates, operating costs, development activities and interest
costs, providing perspective not immediately apparent from net
income. We compute FFO in accordance with standards established
by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real
Estate Investment Trusts, or NAREIT, in its March 1995 White
Paper (as amended in November 1999 and April 2002). As defined
by NAREIT, FFO represents net income (computed in accordance
with GAAP), excluding gains (or losses) from sales of property,
plus real estate related depreciation and amortization
(excluding amortization of loan origination costs) and after
adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
Our computation may differ from the methodology for calculating
FFO utilized by other equity REITs and, accordingly, may not be
49
comparable to such other REITs. Further, FFO does not represent
amounts available for managements discretionary use
because of needed capital replacement or expansion, debt service
obligations, or other commitments and uncertainties. FFO should
not be considered as an alternative to net income (loss)
(computed in accordance with GAAP) as an indicator of our
financial performance or to cash flow from operating activities
(computed in accordance with GAAP) as an indicator of our
liquidity, nor is it indicative of funds available to fund our
cash needs, including our ability to pay dividends or make
distributions.
The following table provides the calculation of our FFO and a
reconciliation to net income for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005 (in thousands, except per share
amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interests in operating
partnership
|
|
|
1,747
|
|
|
|
1,274
|
|
Depreciation and
amortization real estate assets
|
|
|
65,690
|
|
|
|
39,428
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations
|
|
$
|
102,470
|
|
|
$
|
57,748
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations per
share diluted
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
$
|
1.37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares
outstanding diluted
|
|
|
59,018,004
|
|
|
|
42,091,195
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off
Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2006, we had an investment in McKellar
Court, L.P., which owns a single tenant occupied property
located in San Diego. McKellar Court is a variable interest
entity (VIE) as defined in FIN 46; however, we
are not the primary beneficiary. The limited partner is also the
only tenant in the property and will bear a disproportionate
amount of any losses. We, as the general partner, will receive
21% of the operating cash flows and 75% of the gains upon sale
of the property. We account for our general partner interest
using the equity method. Significant accounting policies used by
the unconsolidated partnership that owns this property are
similar to those used by us. At December 31, 2006, our
share of the debt related to this investment was equal to
approximately $2.2 million. The debt has a maturity date of
January 1, 2010 and bears interest at 8.56%. The assets and
liabilities of McKellar Court were $16.7 million and
$10.9 million, respectively, at December 31, 2006, and
were $17.1 million and $11.0 million, respectively, at
December 31, 2005. Our equity in net income (loss) of
McKellar Court was $83,000, $119,000, and ($11,000) for the
years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively.
We have determined that we are the primary beneficiary in other
VIEs, which we consolidate and which are further described in
Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements.
Cash
Distribution Policy
We elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Code commencing with
our taxable year ended December 31, 2004. To qualify as a
REIT, we must meet a number of organizational and operational
requirements, including the requirement that we distribute
currently at least 90% of our ordinary taxable income to our
stockholders. It is our intention to comply with these
requirements and maintain our REIT status. As a REIT, we
generally will not be subject to corporate federal, state or
local income taxes on taxable income we distribute currently (in
accordance with the Code and applicable regulations) to our
stockholders. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable
year, we will be subject to federal, state and local income
taxes at regular corporate rates and may not be able to qualify
as a REIT for subsequent tax years. Even if we qualify for
federal taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain state
and local taxes on our income and to federal income and excise
taxes on our undistributed taxable income, i.e., taxable
income not distributed in the amounts and in the time frames
prescribed by the Code and applicable regulations thereunder.
From our initial public offering through December 31, 2006,
we have declared aggregate dividends on our common stock and
distributions on our operating partnership units of
$2.6597 per common share and unit,
50
representing four full quarterly dividends of $0.29, five full
quarterly dividends of $0.27, and a partial third quarter 2004
dividend of $0.1497 per common share and unit.
Inflation
Some of our leases contain provisions designed to mitigate the
adverse impact of inflation. These provisions generally increase
rental rates during the terms of the leases either at fixed
rates or indexed escalations (based on the Consumer Price Index
or other measures). We may be adversely impacted by inflation on
the leases that do not contain indexed escalation provisions. In
addition, most of our leases require the tenant to pay an
allocable share of operating expenses, including common area
maintenance costs, real estate taxes and insurance. This may
reduce our exposure to increases in costs and operating expenses
resulting from inflation, assuming our properties remain leased
and tenants fulfill their obligations to reimburse us for such
expenses.
Our revolving loan agreement and our secured construction loan
bear interest at variable rates, which will be influenced by
changes in short-term interest rates, and will be sensitive to
inflation.
Item 7A. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Our future income, cash flows and fair values relevant to
financial instruments depend upon prevailing market interest
rates. Market risk is the exposure to loss resulting from
changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates,
commodity prices and equity prices. The primary market risk to
which we believe we are exposed is interest rate risk. Many
factors, including governmental monetary and tax policies,
domestic and international economic and political considerations
and other factors that are beyond our control contribute to
interest rate risk.
At December 31, 2006, our debt consisted of 17 fixed-rate
notes (including the Notes) with a carrying value of
$578.8 million (including $13.5 million of debt
premium) and a weighted-average interest rate of 5.73%, our
revolving unsecured credit facility with an outstanding balance
of $228.2 million at a weighted average interest rate of
6.55%, our secured term loan with an outstanding balance of
$250.0 million, and our secured construction loan with an
outstanding balance of $286.4 million at a weighted average
interest rate of 6.58%. We have entered into an interest rate
swap agreement, which has the effect of fixing the interest rate
on the secured term loan at 6.4%. To determine fair value, the
fixed-rate debt is discounted at a rate based on an estimate of
current lending rates, assuming the debt is outstanding through
maturity and considering the notes collateral. At
December 31, 2006, the aggregate fair value of our fixed
rate debt was estimated to be $540.8 million compared to
the carrying value of $578.8 million. We do not believe
that the interest rate risk represented by our fixed rate debt
was material as of December 31, 2006 in relation to total
assets of $2.7 billion and equity market capitalization of
$2.0 billion of our common stock and operating units. As of
December 31, 2006, the fair value of our proportionate
share of debt in the unconsolidated partnership approximated its
carrying value.
Based on our revolving credit facility and construction loan
balances at December 31, 2006, a 1% change in interest
rates would change our interest costs by $5.1 million per
year. This amount was determined by considering the impact of
hypothetical interest rates on our financial instruments. This
analysis does not consider the effect of any change in overall
economic activity that could occur in that environment. Further,
in the event of a change of the magnitude discussed above, we
may take actions to further mitigate our exposure to the change.
However, due to the uncertainty of the specific actions that
would be taken and their possible effects, this analysis assume
no changes in our financial structure.
In order to modify and manage the interest rate characteristics
of our outstanding debt and to limit the effects of interest
rate risks on our operations, we may utilize a variety of
financial instruments, including interest rate swaps, caps and
treasury locks in order to mitigate our interest rate risk on a
related financial instrument. The use of these types of
instruments to hedge our exposure to changes in interest rates
carries additional risks, including counterparty credit risk,
the enforceability of hedging contracts and the risk that
unanticipated and significant changes in interest rates will
cause a significant loss of basis in the contract. To limit
counterparty credit risk we will seek to enter into such
agreements with major financial institutions with high credit
ratings. There can be no assurance that we will be able to
adequately protect against the foregoing risks and will
ultimately realize an economic benefit that exceeds the related
amounts incurred in connection with engaging in such hedging
activities. We do not enter into such contracts for speculative
or trading purposes.
51
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
INDEX TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
52
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, the related consolidated
statements of income, stockholders equity, and
comprehensive income of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and
subsidiaries for each of the years in the two-year period ended
December 31, 2006 and for the period from August 11,
2004 (commencement of operations) through December 31,
2004, and the related statements of income and owners
equity of Inhale 201 Industrial Road, L.P., as defined in
note 1, for the period from January 1, 2004 through
August 17, 2004, the related consolidated statements of
cash flows of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries for the
years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related
consolidated and combined statement of cash flows of BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries and Inhale 201 Industrial
Road, L.P. for the year ended December 31, 2004. In
connection with our audits of the consolidated and combined
financial statements, we have also audited the accompanying
financial statement schedule III of BioMed Realty Trust,
Inc. and subsidiaries. These consolidated and combined financial
statements and financial statement schedule are the
responsibility of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.s management.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
consolidated and combined financial statements and financial
statement schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated and combined financial
statements referred to above present fairly, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial position of BioMed Realty
Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and
2005, the consolidated results of operations of BioMed Realty
Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries for each of the years in the
two-year period ended December 31, 2006 and for the period
from August 11, 2004 through December 31, 2004, and
the results of operations of Inhale 201 Industrial Road, L.P.
for the period from January 1, 2004 through August 17,
2004, the consolidated cash flows of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.
and subsidiaries for the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005, and the consolidated and combined cash flows of BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries and Inhale 201 Industrial
Road, L.P. for the year ended December 31, 2004, in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles. Also in our opinion, the related financial statement
schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated
and combined financial statements taken as a whole, presents
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth
therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.s internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006,
based on criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report
dated February 28, 2007 expressed an unqualified opinion on
managements assessment of, and the effective operation of,
internal control over financial reporting.
KPMG LLP
San Diego, California
February 28, 2007
53
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of
Directors
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.:
We have audited managements assessment, included in the
accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting, that BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and
subsidiaries maintained effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (COSO). BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.s
management is responsible for maintaining effective internal
control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on managements
assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the
Companys internal control over financial reporting based
on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, evaluating
managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, managements assessment that BioMed Realty
Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries maintained effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006,
is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on criteria
established in Internal Control Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO). Also, in our opinion, BioMed Realty
Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2006, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(COSO).
54
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the related
consolidated statements of income, stockholders equity,
and comprehensive income of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and
subsidiaries for each of the years in the two-year period ended
December 31, 2006 and for the period from August 11,
2004 (commencement of operations) through December 31,
2004, and the related statements of income and owners
equity of Inhale 201 Industrial Road, L.P., as defined in
note 1, for the period from January 1, 2004 through
August 17, 2004, the related consolidated statement of cash
flows of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries for the
years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related
consolidated and combined statements of cash flows of BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries and Inhale 201 Industrial
Road, L.P. for the year ended December 31, 2004, and our
report dated February 28, 2007 expressed an unqualified
opinion on those consolidated and combined financial statements
and the accompanying financial statement schedule III.
KPMG LLP
San Diego, California
February 28, 2007
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Investments in real estate, net
|
|
$
|
2,457,538
|
|
|
$
|
1,129,371
|
|
Investment in unconsolidated
partnership
|
|
|
2,436
|
|
|
|
2,483
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
25,664
|
|
|
|
20,312
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
6,426
|
|
|
|
5,487
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
5,985
|
|
|
|
9,873
|
|
Accrued straight-line rents, net
|
|
|
20,446
|
|
|
|
8,731
|
|
Acquired above market leases, net
|
|
|
7,551
|
|
|
|
8,817
|
|
Deferred leasing costs, net
|
|
|
129,322
|
|
|
|
136,640
|
|
Deferred loan costs, net
|
|
|
17,608
|
|
|
|
4,855
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
3,627
|
|
|
|
2,164
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
16,039
|
|
|
|
8,577
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
2,692,642
|
|
|
$
|
1,337,310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Mortgage notes payable, net
|
|
$
|
403,836
|
|
|
$
|
246,233
|
|
Secured construction loan
|
|
|
286,355
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured term loan
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
Exchangeable senior notes
|
|
|
175,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured line of credit
|
|
|
228,165
|
|
|
|
17,000
|
|
Security deposits
|
|
|
7,704
|
|
|
|
6,905
|
|
Dividends and distributions payable
|
|
|
19,847
|
|
|
|
13,365
|
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses
and other liabilities
|
|
|
62,602
|
|
|
|
23,012
|
|
Acquired below market leases, net
|
|
|
25,101
|
|
|
|
29,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
1,458,610
|
|
|
|
586,162
|
|
Minority interests
|
|
|
19,319
|
|
|
|
20,673
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $.01 par
value, 15,000,000 shares authorized, none issued or
outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $.01 par value,
100,000,000 shares authorized, 65,425,598 and
46,634,432 shares issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively
|
|
|
654
|
|
|
|
466
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
1,272,243
|
|
|
|
757,591
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
income
|
|
|
8,417
|
|
|
|
5,922
|
|
Dividends in excess of earnings
|
|
|
(66,601
|
)
|
|
|
(33,504
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,214,713
|
|
|
|
730,475
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
2,692,642
|
|
|
$
|
1,337,310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INHALE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD,
|
|
|
|
BIOMED REALTY TRUST, INC.
|
|
|
L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 11, 2004
|
|
|
January 1, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
through
|
|
|
through
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
August 17,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental
|
|
$
|
166,732
|
|
|
$
|
92,650
|
|
|
$
|
19,432
|
|
|
$
|
3,339
|
|
Tenant recoveries
|
|
|
54,590
|
|
|
|
42,232
|
|
|
|
9,222
|
|
|
|
375
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
221,410
|
|
|
|
138,856
|
|
|
|
28,654
|
|
|
|
3,714
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental operations
|
|
|
41,001
|
|
|
|
34,505
|
|
|
|
9,236
|
|
|
|
131
|
|
Real estate taxes
|
|
|
20,584
|
|
|
|
11,868
|
|
|
|
2,383
|
|
|
|
222
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
65,610
|
|
|
|
39,378
|
|
|
|
7,853
|
|
|
|
600
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
18,085
|
|
|
|
13,278
|
|
|
|
3,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
145,280
|
|
|
|
99,029
|
|
|
|
22,602
|
|
|
|
953
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
76,130
|
|
|
|
39,827
|
|
|
|
6,052
|
|
|
|
2,761
|
|
Equity in net income (loss) of
unconsolidated partnership
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(40,672
|
)
|
|
|
(23,226
|
)
|
|
|
(1,180
|
)
|
|
|
(1,760
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interests
|
|
|
36,643
|
|
|
|
18,053
|
|
|
|
5,051
|
|
|
|
1,001
|
|
Minority interest in consolidated
partnerships
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
267
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interests in operating
partnership
|
|
|
(1,747
|
)
|
|
|
(1,274
|
)
|
|
|
(414
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
|
$
|
4,782
|
|
|
$
|
1,001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per shares
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares
outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
55,928,595
|
|
|
|
38,913,103
|
|
|
|
30,965,178
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
59,018,004
|
|
|
|
42,091,195
|
|
|
|
33,767,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Dividends in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Excess of
|
|
|
Owners
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
The Predecessor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
12,459
|
|
|
$
|
12,459
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,215
|
)
|
|
|
(1,215
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,001
|
|
|
|
1,001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at August 11,
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,245
|
|
|
|
12,245
|
|
The Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buyout of owners equity of
Predecessor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,245
|
)
|
|
|
(12,245
|
)
|
Net proceeds from sale of common
stock
|
|
|
31,050,000
|
|
|
|
311
|
|
|
|
429,024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
429,335
|
|
Issuance of unvested restricted
common stock
|
|
|
336,333
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting of share-based awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
872
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
872
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,172
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,172
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2004
|
|
|
31,386,333
|
|
|
|
314
|
|
|
|
429,893
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,390
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
421,817
|
|
Net proceeds from sale of common
stock
|
|
|
15,122,500
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
|
|
323,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
324,020
|
|
Net issuances of unvested
restricted common stock
|
|
|
125,599
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting of share-based awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,830
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,830
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(42,160
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(42,160
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,046
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,046
|
|
Unrealized gain on cash flow hedge
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,922
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,922
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2005
|
|
|
46,634,432
|
|
|
|
466
|
|
|
|
757,591
|
|
|
|
5,922
|
|
|
|
(33,504
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
730,475
|
|
Net proceeds from sale of common
stock
|
|
|
18,428,750
|
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
506,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
506,771
|
|
Net proceeds from exercise of
warrant
|
|
|
270,000
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
4,047
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,050
|
|
Net issuances of unvested
restricted common stock
|
|
|
92,416
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting of share-based awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,019
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(68,130
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(68,130
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,033
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,033
|
|
Unrealized gain on cash flow hedge
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,495
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,495
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
65,425,598
|
|
|
$
|
654
|
|
|
$
|
1,272,243
|
|
|
$
|
8,417
|
|
|
$
|
(66,601
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,214,713
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
58
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC.
(In
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at August 11,
2004
|
|
$
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
4,782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2004
|
|
$
|
4,782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
Unrealized gain on cash flow hedge
|
|
|
5,922
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2005
|
|
$
|
22,968
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
Unrealized gain on cash flow hedges
|
|
|
2,495
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2006
|
|
$
|
37,528
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trust, Inc. and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inhale
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty
|
|
|
201 Industrial Road,
|
|
|
|
Trust, Inc.
|
|
|
L.P. (Predecessor)
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(revised See note 2)
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
|
$
|
5,783
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income
to net cash provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
65,610
|
|
|
|
39,378
|
|
|
|
8,453
|
|
Minority interests in consolidated
partnerships
|
|
|
(137
|
)
|
|
|
(267
|
)
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
Minority interests in operating
partnership
|
|
|
1,747
|
|
|
|
1,274
|
|
|
|
414
|
|
Bad debt expense
|
|
|
193
|
|
|
|
257
|
|
|
|
158
|
|
Revenue reduction attributable to
acquired above market leases
|
|
|
2,471
|
|
|
|
1,524
|
|
|
|
538
|
|
Revenue recognized related to
acquired below market leases
|
|
|
(4,811
|
)
|
|
|
(3,332
|
)
|
|
|
(251
|
)
|
Compensation expense related to
restricted common stock
|
|
|
4,019
|
|
|
|
3,830
|
|
|
|
872
|
|
Amortization of deferred loan costs
|
|
|
1,925
|
|
|
|
1,002
|
|
|
|
216
|
|
Write off of deferred loan costs
due to repayment and extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,002
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of debt premium on
mortgage notes payable
|
|
|
(2,148
|
)
|
|
|
(1,761
|
)
|
|
|
(307
|
)
|
(Income)/loss from unconsolidated
partnership
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
(119
|
)
|
|
|
11
|
|
Distributions received from
unconsolidated partnership
|
|
|
130
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
Changes in operating assets and
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
(939
|
)
|
|
|
(3,017
|
)
|
|
|
(2,470
|
)
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
3,695
|
|
|
|
(8,293
|
)
|
|
|
(1,987
|
)
|
Accrued straight-line rents
|
|
|
(11,715
|
)
|
|
|
(5,425
|
)
|
|
|
(887
|
)
|
Deferred leasing costs
|
|
|
(3,070
|
)
|
|
|
(1,196
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
(1,463
|
)
|
|
|
(633
|
)
|
|
|
(1,531
|
)
|
Other assets
|
|
|
(2,157
|
)
|
|
|
820
|
|
|
|
(201
|
)
|
Due to affiliates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
53
|
|
Security deposits
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
1,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses
and other liabilities
|
|
|
13,156
|
|
|
|
10,619
|
|
|
|
5,751
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating
activities
|
|
|
101,535
|
|
|
|
54,762
|
|
|
|
14,497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of interests in and
additions to investments in real estate and related intangible
assets
|
|
|
(1,340,204
|
)
|
|
|
(604,462
|
)
|
|
|
(458,165
|
)
|
Minority interest investment in
consolidated partnerships
|
|
|
449
|
|
|
|
594
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receipts of master lease payments
|
|
|
726
|
|
|
|
2,025
|
|
|
|
1,327
|
|
Security deposits received from
prior owners of real estate
|
|
|
720
|
|
|
|
1,074
|
|
|
|
4,831
|
|
Redemption of operating partnership
units for cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(173
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Funds held in escrow for
acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(200
|
)
|
|
|
(1,700
|
)
|
Additions to non-real estate assets
|
|
|
(1,154
|
)
|
|
|
(663
|
)
|
|
|
(511
|
)
|
Repayment of related party payables
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
|
(1,339,463
|
)
|
|
|
(601,805
|
)
|
|
|
(457,218
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trust, Inc. and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inhale
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty
|
|
|
201 Industrial Road,
|
|
|
|
Trust, Inc.
|
|
|
L.P. (Predecessor)
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(revised See note 2)
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from common stock offering
|
|
|
528,783
|
|
|
|
340,257
|
|
|
|
465,753
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock
warrant
|
|
|
4,050
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of offering costs
|
|
|
(21,989
|
)
|
|
|
(16,678
|
)
|
|
|
(36,415
|
)
|
Payment of deferred loan costs
|
|
|
(14,675
|
)
|
|
|
(6,192
|
)
|
|
|
(1,701
|
)
|
Line of credit proceeds
|
|
|
620,476
|
|
|
|
244,175
|
|
|
|
33,900
|
|
Line of credit repayments
|
|
|
(409,311
|
)
|
|
|
(227,175
|
)
|
|
|
(33,900
|
)
|
Secured term loan proceeds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured term loan proceeds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured term loan payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(100,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Secured bridge loan proceeds
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured bridge loan payments
|
|
|
(150,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchangeable senior notes proceeds
|
|
|
175,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loan proceeds
|
|
|
286,355
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes proceeds
|
|
|
147,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,300
|
|
Principal payments on mortgage
notes payable
|
|
|
(5,401
|
)
|
|
|
(3,759
|
)
|
|
|
(234
|
)
|
Tenant improvement loan
|
|
|
(2,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tenant improvement loan repayments
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to operating
partnership unit holders
|
|
|
(3,312
|
)
|
|
|
(3,098
|
)
|
|
|
(357
|
)
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
(61,749
|
)
|
|
|
(38,044
|
)
|
|
|
(4,698
|
)
|
Distributions to owners of
Predecessor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,215
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing
activities
|
|
|
1,243,280
|
|
|
|
539,486
|
|
|
|
470,433
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and
cash equivalents
|
|
|
5,352
|
|
|
|
(7,557
|
)
|
|
|
27,712
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at
beginning of year
|
|
|
20,312
|
|
|
|
27,869
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of
year
|
|
$
|
25,664
|
|
|
$
|
20,312
|
|
|
$
|
27,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash
flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest (net of
amounts capitalized of $7,614, $708 and $0, respectively)
|
|
$
|
33,965
|
|
|
$
|
20,291
|
|
|
$
|
3,040
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash
investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrual for dividends declared
|
|
|
18,973
|
|
|
|
12,591
|
|
|
|
8,474
|
|
Accrual for distributions declared
for operating partnership unit and LTIP unit holders
|
|
|
874
|
|
|
|
773
|
|
|
|
775
|
|
Mortgage loans assumed (includes
premium of $1,037, $11,312, and $5,642, respectively)
|
|
|
18,460
|
|
|
|
149,517
|
|
|
|
53,477
|
|
Accrued additions to real estate
and related intangible assets
|
|
|
29,680
|
|
|
|
4,812
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
Historic cost basis of assets
transferred from Predecessor (including $2,189 of accrued
straight-line rents as of August 17, 2004)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,569
|
|
Operating partnership units issued
for interests in certain contributed properties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,810
|
|
Investment in unconsolidated
partnership acquired by issuing operating partnership units
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,508
|
|
Distributions in excess of equity
balance to owners of Predecessor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,131
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
61
|
|
1.
|
Organization
and Description of Business
|
As used herein, the terms we, us,
our or the Company refer to BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation, and any of our
subsidiaries, including BioMed Realty, L.P., a Maryland limited
partnership (our Operating Partnership), and 201
Industrial Road, L.P. (Industrial Road or our
Predecessor). We operate as a fully integrated,
self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust
(REIT) focused on acquiring, developing, owning,
leasing and managing laboratory and office space for the life
science industry. The Companys tenants primarily include
biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, scientific research
institutions, government agencies and other entities involved in
the life science industry. The Companys properties are
generally located in markets with well established reputations
as centers for scientific research, including Boston,
San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, Maryland,
Pennsylvania and New York/New Jersey.
The Company was incorporated in Maryland on April 30, 2004.
On August 11, 2004, the Company commenced operations after
completing its initial public offering (the
Offering) of 27,000,000 shares of its common
stock, par value $.01 per share. The Offering price was
$15.00 per share resulting in gross proceeds of
$405.0 million. On August 16, 2004, in connection with
the exercise of the underwriters over-allotment option,
the Company issued an additional 4,050,000 shares of common
stock and received gross proceeds of $60.8 million. The
aggregate proceeds to the Company, net of underwriting discounts
and commissions and Offering costs, were approximately
$429.3 million. The Company issued a stock warrant in
connection with the Offering to the lead underwriter for the
right to purchase 270,000 common shares at $15.00 per
share, which equals the estimated fair value at the date of
grant. The warrant became exercisable six months after the
Offering date and was exercised in full on September 22,
2006. The proceeds were utilized to repay a portion of the
outstanding indebtedness on the Companys unsecured line of
credit and for general corporate and working capital purposes.
From inception through August 11, 2004, neither the Company
nor its Operating Partnership had any operations. Simultaneously
with the Offering, the Company obtained a $100.0 million
revolving unsecured credit facility (Note 5), which was
used to finance acquisitions and for other corporate purposes
prior to being replaced on May 31, 2005 with a
$250.0 million revolving unsecured credit facility with
KeyBank National Association and other lenders (Note 5).
As of December 31, 2006, the Company owned or had interests
in 56 properties, located principally in Boston, San Diego,
San Francisco, Seattle, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New
York/New Jersey, consisting of 92 buildings with approximately
7.9 million rentable square feet of laboratory and office
space, which was approximately 96.3% leased to 107 tenants
(excluding space currently available for redevelopment). Of the
approximately 1.6 million square feet of unleased space,
1.3 million square feet, or 84.7% of our unleased square
footage, was available for redevelopment. In addition, we have
properties with approximately 1.2 million rentable square
feet under construction and undeveloped land that we estimate
can support up to an additional 1.1 million rentable square
feet of laboratory and office space.
Industrial Road was the largest of the properties contributed in
the Offering and therefore was identified as the accounting
acquirer pursuant to paragraph 17 of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 141,
Business Combinations (SFAS 141). As
such, the historical financial statements presented herein for
Industrial Road were prepared on a stand-alone basis up to and
including the acquisition date, August 17, 2004. Upon
completion of the Offering, the interest in the Predecessor
acquired from affiliates was recorded at historic cost. The
acquisitions of the unaffiliated interests in the Predecessor
and the interests in all of the other properties have been
accounted for as a purchase in accordance with SFAS 141.
|
|
2.
|
Basis of
Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies
|
Principles
of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
the Company, its wholly owned subsidiaries, partnerships and
limited liability companies it controls, and variable interest
entities for which the Company has
62
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
determined itself to be the primary beneficiary. All material
intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. The
Company consolidates entities the Company controls and records a
minority interest for the portions not owned by the Company.
Control is determined, where applicable, by the sufficiency of
equity invested and the rights of the equity holders, and by the
ownership of a majority of the voting interests, with
consideration given to the existence of approval or veto rights
granted to the minority shareholder. If the minority shareholder
holds substantive participation rights, it overcomes the
presumption of control by the majority voting interest holder.
In contrast, if the minority shareholder simply holds protective
rights (such as consent rights over certain actions), it does
not overcome the presumption of control by the majority voting
interest holder.
Investments
in Partnerships
The Company evaluates its investments in limited liability
companies and partnerships under Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 46 (revised
December 2003), Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities (FIN 46) an interpretation of
Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51 Consolidated
Financial Statements (ARB 51). FIN 46
provides guidance on the identification of entities for which
control is achieved through means other than voting rights
(variable interest entities or VIEs) and
the determination of which business enterprise should
consolidate the VIE (the primary beneficiary).
Generally, FIN 46 applies when either (1) the equity
investors (if any) lack one or more of the essential
characteristics of a controlling financial interest,
(2) the equity investment at risk is insufficient to
finance that entitys activities without additional
subordinated financial support or (3) the equity investors
have voting rights that are not proportionate to their economic
interests and the activities of the entity involve or are
conducted on behalf of an investor with a disproportionately
small voting interest.
If FIN 46 does not apply, the Company considers EITF Issue
No. 04-5,
Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General
Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar
Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights
(EITF
04-5),
which provides guidance in determining whether a general partner
controls a limited partnership. EITF
04-5 states
that the general partner in a limited partnership is presumed to
control that limited partnership. The presumption may be
overcome if the limited partners have either (1) the
substantive ability to dissolve the limited partnership or
otherwise remove the general partner without cause or
(2) substantive participating rights, which provide the
limited partners with the ability to effectively participate in
significant decisions that would be expected to be made in the
ordinary course of the limited partnerships business and
thereby preclude the general partner from exercising unilateral
control over the partnership. If the criteria in EITF
04-5 are
met, the consolidation of limited liability companies and
partnerships may be required.
Except for investments that are consolidated in accordance with
FIN 46 or EITF
04-5, the
Company accounts for investments in entities in which it
exercises significant influence over, but does not control,
under the equity method of accounting. These investments are
recorded initially at cost and subsequently adjusted for equity
in earnings and cash contributions and distributions. Under the
equity method of accounting, the Companys net equity in
the investment is reflected in the consolidated balance sheets
and its share of net income or loss is included in the
Companys consolidated statements of income.
On a periodic basis, management assesses whether there are any
indicators that the value of the Companys investments in
partnerships may be impaired. An investment is impaired only if
managements estimate of the value of the investment is
less than the carrying value of the investment. To the extent
impairment has occurred, the loss shall be measured as the
excess of the carrying value of the investment over the fair
value of the investment. Management does not believe that the
value of any of the Companys investments in partnerships
are impaired as of December 31, 2006.
63
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Investments
in Real Estate
Investments in real estate are carried at depreciated cost.
Depreciation and amortization are recorded on a straight-line
basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:
|
|
|
Buildings and improvements
|
|
40 years
|
Ground lease
|
|
Term of the related lease
|
Tenant improvements
|
|
Shorter of the useful lives or the
terms of the related leases
|
Furniture, fixtures, and equipment
(other assets)
|
|
3 to 5 years
|
Acquired in-place leases
|
|
Non-cancelable term of the related
lease
|
Acquired management agreements
|
|
Non-cancelable term of the related
agreement
|
Investments in real estate, net consists of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Land
|
|
$
|
270,286
|
|
|
$
|
146,340
|
|
Ground lease
|
|
|
14,210
|
|
|
|
14,210
|
|
Land under development
|
|
|
85,362
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
Buildings and improvements
|
|
|
1,598,384
|
|
|
|
962,482
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
|
497,971
|
|
|
|
8,582
|
|
Tenant improvements
|
|
|
51,904
|
|
|
|
19,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,518,117
|
|
|
|
1,151,275
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(60,579
|
)
|
|
|
(21,904
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,457,538
|
|
|
$
|
1,129,371
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase accounting was applied, on a pro-rata basis where
appropriate, to the assets and liabilities of real estate
properties in which the Company acquired an interest or a
partial interest. The fair value of tangible assets of an
acquired property (which includes land, buildings, and
improvements) is determined by valuing the property as if it
were vacant, and the as-if-vacant value is then
allocated to land, buildings and improvements based on
managements determination of the relative fair value of
these assets. The Company determines the as-if-vacant fair value
using methods similar to those used by independent appraisers.
Factors considered by the Company in performing these analyses
include an estimate of the carrying costs during the expected
lease-up
periods, current market conditions and costs to execute similar
leases. In estimating carrying costs, the Company includes real
estate taxes, insurance and other operating expenses and
estimates of lost rental revenue during the expected
lease-up
periods based on current market demand.
In allocating fair value to the identified intangible assets and
liabilities of an acquired property, above-market and
below-market in-place leases are recorded based on the estimated
net present value (using a discount rate which reflects the
risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference
between (a) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to
the in-place leases and (b) the Companys estimate of
the fair market lease rates for the corresponding in-place
leases at acquisition, measured over a period equal to the
remaining non-cancelable term of the leases. The capitalized
above-market lease values are amortized as a reduction of rental
income over the remaining non-cancelable terms of the respective
leases. The capitalized below-market lease values are amortized
as an increase to rental income over the remaining
non-cancelable terms of the respective leases and any fixed rate
renewal periods. If a tenant vacates its space prior to the
contractual termination of the lease and no rental payments are
being made on the lease, any unamortized balance of the related
intangible will be written off.
64
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The balance of acquired above market leases was comprised as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Acquired above market leases
|
|
$
|
12,084
|
|
|
$
|
10,879
|
|
Accumulated amortization
|
|
|
(4,533
|
)
|
|
|
(2,062
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,551
|
|
|
$
|
8,817
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The balance of acquired below market leases was comprised as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Acquired below market leases
|
|
$
|
33,495
|
|
|
$
|
33,230
|
|
Accumulated amortization
|
|
|
(8,394
|
)
|
|
|
(3,583
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
25,101
|
|
|
$
|
29,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The table below presents the estimated amortization during the
next five years related to the acquired above and below market
leases for properties owned at December 31, 2006 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Amortization of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquired above market leases
|
|
$
|
(2,430
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,383
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,250
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,190
|
)
|
|
$
|
(548
|
)
|
|
$
|
(750
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7,551
|
)
|
Acquired below market leases
|
|
|
5,062
|
|
|
|
4,991
|
|
|
|
4,937
|
|
|
|
3,826
|
|
|
|
1,329
|
|
|
|
4,956
|
|
|
|
25,101
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net rental revenues
increase
|
|
$
|
2,632
|
|
|
$
|
3,608
|
|
|
$
|
3,687
|
|
|
$
|
2,636
|
|
|
$
|
781
|
|
|
$
|
4,206
|
|
|
$
|
17,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The aggregate value of other acquired intangible assets
consisting of acquired in-place leases and acquired management
agreements (see deferred leasing costs below) are recorded based
on a variety of components including, but not necessarily
limited to: (a) the value associated with avoiding the cost
of originating the acquired in-place leases (i.e. the market
cost to execute a lease, including leasing commissions and legal
fees, if any); (b) the value associated with lost revenue
related to tenant reimbursable operating costs estimated to be
incurred during the assumed
lease-up
period (i.e. real estate taxes, insurance and other operating
expenses); (c) the value associated with lost rental
revenue from existing leases during the assumed
lease-up
period; and (d) the value associated with avoided tenant
improvement costs or other inducements to secure a tenant lease.
The fair value assigned to the acquired management agreements
are recorded at the present value (using a discount rate which
reflects the risks associated with the management agreements
acquired) of the acquired management agreements with certain
tenants of the acquired properties. The values of in-place
leases and management agreements are amortized to expense over
the remaining non-cancelable period of the respective leases or
agreements. If a lease were to be terminated prior to its stated
expiration, all unamortized amounts related to that lease would
be written off.
A variety of costs are incurred in the acquisition, development,
construction, improvements and leasing of properties. After
determination is made to capitalize a cost, it is allocated to
the specific component of a project that is benefited.
Determination of when a development project is substantially
complete and capitalization must cease involves a degree of
judgment. The Companys capitalization policy on
development properties is guided by SFAS No. 34,
Capitalization of Interest Cost and
SFAS No. 67, Accounting for Costs and the Initial
Rental Operations of Real Estate Properties. The
costs of land and buildings under development include
specifically identifiable costs. The capitalized costs include
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 direct
costs incurred during the period of development. The Company
considers a construction project as substantially complete and
held available for occupancy upon the completion of tenant
improvements, but no later than one year
65
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
from cessation of major construction activity. The Company
ceases capitalization on the portion substantially completed and
occupied or held available for occupancy, and capitalizes only
those costs associated with the portion under construction.
Interest costs capitalized for the years ended December 31,
2006, 2005, and 2004 were $7.6 million, $708,000, and $0,
respectively. Capitalized costs associated with unsuccessful
acquisitions are charged to expense when an acquisition is no
longer considered probable.
Repair and maintenance costs are charged to expense as incurred
and significant replacements and betterments are capitalized.
Repairs and maintenance costs include all costs that do not
extend the useful life of an asset or increase its operating
efficiency. Significant replacement and betterments represent
costs that extend an assets useful life or increase its
operating efficiency.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets and Long-Lived Assets to be
Disposed
The Company reviews long-lived assets and certain identifiable
intangibles for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may
not be recoverable. The review of recoverability is based on an
estimate of the future undiscounted cash flows (excluding
interest charges) expected to result from the long-lived
assets 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 impairment exists due to the
inability to recover the carrying value of a long-lived asset,
an impairment loss is recorded to the extent that the carrying
value exceeds the estimated fair value of the property. The
Company is required to make subjective assessments as to whether
there are impairments in the values of our investments in
long-lived assets. These assessments have a direct impact on the
Companys net income because recording an impairment loss
results in an immediate negative adjustment to net income. The
evaluation of anticipated cash flows is highly subjective and is
based in part on assumptions regarding future occupancy, rental
rates and capital requirements that could differ materially from
actual results in future periods. Since cash flows on properties
considered to be long-lived assets to be held and used are
considered on an undiscounted basis to determine whether an
asset has been impaired, the Companys established strategy
of holding properties over the long term directly decreases the
likelihood of recording an impairment loss. If the
Companys strategy changes or market conditions otherwise
dictate an earlier sale date, an impairment loss may be
recognized to reduce the property to the lower of the carrying
amount or fair value less costs to sell, and such loss could be
material. If the Company determines that impairment has
occurred, the affected assets must be reduced to their fair
value. As of and through December 31, 2006, no assets have
been identified as impaired and no such impairment losses have
been recognized.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents consist of highly liquid investments
with original maturities of three months or less. We maintain
our cash at insured financial institutions. The combined account
balances at each institution periodically exceed FDIC insurance
coverage, and, as a result, there is a concentration of credit
risk related to amounts in excess of FDIC limits. The Company
believes that the risk is not significant.
Restricted
Cash
Restricted cash primarily consists of cash deposits for real
estate taxes, insurance and capital expenditures as required by
certain mortgage notes payable.
Statements
of Cash Flows
The statements of cash flows of the Company and the Predecessor
have been combined for the year ended December 31, 2004 to
make them comparable to the same periods in 2005 and 2006 for
the Company.
66
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Certain revisions have been made to the consolidated statements
of cash flows for the twelve months ended December 31, 2005
to remove the non-cash effect of changes in certain balance
sheet items, which are reflected in the supplemental disclosure
of cash flow information in the current year presentation. These
revisions are immaterial to the prior period presented and
resulted in an increase in cash flows from operating activities
of approximately $272,000, an increase in cash flows from
investing activities of approximately $202,000, and a decrease
in cash flows from financing activities of approximately
$474,000.
Deferred
Leasing Costs
Leasing commissions and other direct costs associated with
obtaining new or renewal leases are recorded at cost and
amortized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the
respective leases, with remaining terms ranging from one month
to fifteen years as of December 31, 2006. Deferred leasing
costs also include the net carrying value of acquired in-place
leases and acquired management agreements, which are discussed
above in investments in real estate.
The balance of deferred leasing costs at December 31, 2006
was comprised as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Acquired in-place leases
|
|
$
|
162,935
|
|
|
$
|
(47,066
|
)
|
|
$
|
115,869
|
|
Acquired management agreements
|
|
|
12,601
|
|
|
|
(4,574
|
)
|
|
|
8,027
|
|
Deferred leasing and other direct
costs
|
|
|
6,122
|
|
|
|
(696
|
)
|
|
|
5,426
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
181,658
|
|
|
$
|
(52,336
|
)
|
|
$
|
129,322
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The balance of deferred leasing costs at December 31, 2005
was comprised as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Acquired in-place leases
|
|
$
|
149,312
|
|
|
$
|
(22,577
|
)
|
|
$
|
126,735
|
|
Acquired management agreements
|
|
|
10,717
|
|
|
|
(2,505
|
)
|
|
|
8,212
|
|
Deferred leasing and other direct
costs
|
|
|
2,026
|
|
|
|
(333
|
)
|
|
|
1,693
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
162,055
|
|
|
$
|
(25,415
|
)
|
|
$
|
136,640
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The estimated future amortization expense for deferred leasing
costs for the years ending December 31 were as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
24,339
|
|
2008
|
|
|
21,764
|
|
2009
|
|
|
19,461
|
|
2010
|
|
|
12,291
|
|
2011
|
|
|
9,068
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
42,399
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
129,322
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
Loan Costs
External costs associated with obtaining long-term financing are
capitalized and amortized to interest expense over the terms of
the related loans using the effective-interest method.
Unamortized financing costs are charged to expense upon the
early repayment or significant modification of the financing.
Fully amortized deferred loan costs
67
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
are removed from the books upon maturity of the debt. The
balance is net of $5.5 million and $3.2 million of
accumulated amortization at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Loan costs of $2.0 million were fully
amortized during the year ended December 31, 2005 due to
the full repayment and termination of the credit facility and
unsecured term loan facility (Note 5).
Revenue
Recognition
The Company commences revenue recognition on its leases based on
a number of factors. In most cases, revenue recognition under a
lease begins when the lessee takes possession of or controls the
physical use of the leased asset. Generally, this occurs on the
lease commencement date. In determining what constitutes the
leased asset, the Company evaluates whether the Company or the
lessee is the owner, for accounting purposes, of the tenant
improvements. If the Company is the owner, for accounting
purposes, of the tenant improvements, then the leased asset is
the finished space and revenue recognition begins when the
lessee takes possession of the finished space, typically when
the improvements are substantially complete. If the Company
concludes that it is not the owner, for accounting purposes, of
the tenant improvements (the lessee is the owner), then the
leased asset is the unimproved space and any tenant improvement
allowances funded under the lease are treated as lease
incentives which reduce revenue recognized over the term of the
lease. In these circumstances, the Company begins revenue
recognition when the lessee takes possession of the unimproved
space for the lessee to construct improvements. The
determination of who is the owner, for accounting purposes, of
the tenant improvements determines the nature of the leased
asset and when revenue recognition under a lease begins. The
Company considers a number of different factors to evaluate
whether it or the lessee is the owner of the tenant improvements
for accounting purposes. These factors include:
|
|
|
|
|
whether the lease stipulates how and on what a tenant
improvement allowance may be spent;
|
|
|
|
whether the tenant or landlord retain legal title to the
improvements;
|
|
|
|
the uniqueness of the improvements;
|
|
|
|
the expected economic life of the tenant improvements relative
to the length of the lease;
|
|
|
|
the responsible party for construction cost overruns; and
|
|
|
|
who constructs or directs the construction of the improvements.
|
The determination of who owns the tenant improvements, for
accounting purposes, is subject to significant judgment. In
making that determination , the Company considers all of the
above factors. However, no one factor is determinative in
reaching a conclusion.
All leases are classified as operating leases and minimum rents
are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the
related lease. The impact of the straight-line rent adjustment
increased revenue for the Company by $11.7 million,
$5.6 million, and $1.1 million for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, and for the period from
August 11, 2004 through December 31, 2004,
respectively. The impact of the straight-line rent adjustment
decreased revenue for the Predecessor by $238,000 for the period
from January 1, 2004 through August 17, 2004.
Additionally, the impact of the amortization of acquired above
market leases and acquired below market leases increased rental
revenues by $2.3 million, $1.8 million for the years
ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and
decreased rental revenues by $287,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2004. The amortization in 2005 includes a
$100,000 decrease to revenue due to the write off of an above
market lease that was terminated at our Industrial Road
property. The excess of rents recognized over amounts
contractually due pursuant to the underlying leases are included
in accrued straight-line rents on the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets and contractually due but unpaid rents are
included in accounts receivable.
68
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Substantially all rental operations expenses, consisting of real
estate taxes, insurance and common area maintenance costs are
recoverable from tenants under the terms of lease agreements,
but are dependent on several factors, including occupancy and
lease terms. Revenue is recognized in the period the expenses
are incurred. The reimbursements are recognized and presented in
accordance with
EITF 99-19,
Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal versus Net as an Agent
(EITF 99-19).
EITF 99-19
requires that these reimbursements be recorded gross, as the
Company is generally the primary obligor with respect to
purchasing goods and services from third-party suppliers, has
discretion in selecting the supplier and bears the credit risk.
Lease termination fees are recognized when the related leases
are canceled, collectability is assured, and we have no
continuing obligation to provide space to former tenants. A gain
on early termination of lease of $3.6 million for the year
ended December 31, 2005 is included in other income on the
consolidated statements of income and was primarily due to the
early termination of a portion of the Nektar Therapeutics lease
at our Industrial Road property. Accordingly, the related lease
commissions and other related intangible assets have been fully
amortized. The Company will recognize a gain in 2007 of
approximately $4.8 million related to the early termination
of the Novartis lease at its 201 Elliott property. The funds
were received prior to December 31, 2006, and have been
recorded as a deferred gain within other liabilities on the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The corresponding gain
is deferred until 2007 as it did not meet revenue recognition
criteria in 2006 due to the execution of the termination
agreement on January 1, 2007. However, certain intangible
assets related to the Novartis lease, totaling $947,000, have
been fully amortized as of December 31, 2006.
Payments received under master lease agreements entered into
with the sellers of the Bayshore and King of Prussia properties
to lease space that was not producing rent at the time of the
acquisition are recorded as a reduction to buildings and
improvements rather than as rental income in accordance with
EITF 85-27,
Recognition of Receipts from
Made-Up
Rental Shortfalls. Receipts under these master
lease agreements totaled $726,000, $2.0 million, and
$1.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2006,
2005, and 2004, respectively. The master lease at Bayshore
expired in February 2006. The master lease at King of Prussia
will expire in June 2008 or sooner under the terms of the
agreement if the vacant space is leased by a new tenant.
Allowance
for Doubtful Accounts
The Company maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts for
estimated losses resulting from the inability of tenants to make
required rent and tenant recovery payments or defaults. We may
also maintain an allowance for accrued straight-line rents and
amounts due from lease terminations. The computation of this
allowance is based on the tenants payment history and
current credit status. Bad debt expense included in rental
operations expenses was $193,000, $257,000, and $158,000 for the
years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004,
respectively. The Companys allowance for doubtful accounts
was $1.2 million and $611,000 as of December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively. Included in the allowance for doubtful
accounts was $532,000 and $196,000 related to master lease
payments not expected to be collected for the years ending
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Share-Based
Payments
On January 1, 2006, the Company adopted
SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment
(SFAS 123(R)). SFAS 123(R) requires
that all share-based payments to employees be recognized in the
income statement based on their fair value. The fair-value is
recorded based on the market value of the common stock on the
grant date and is amortized to general and administrative
expense over the respective vesting periods. Prior to the
adoption of SFAS 123(R), the Company followed
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation (SFAS 123), as amended by
SFAS No. 148. SFAS 123 required that compensation
expense be recorded for the fair-value of restricted stock
granted by the Company to employees and non-employee directors.
The treatment of restricted stock grants under SFAS 123(R)
does not materially differ from the treatment under
SFAS 123. The Company currently has no stock options
outstanding.
69
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company adopted SFAS 123(R) using a modified
prospective application as permitted under SFAS 123(R).
Accordingly, prior period amounts have not been restated. Under
this application, the Company is required to record compensation
expense for all awards granted after the date of adoption and
for the unvested portion of previously granted awards that
remain outstanding as of the beginning of the fiscal year of
adoption. The impact of adopting SFAS 123(R) on all
previously granted restricted stock awards approximates the
impact of using SFAS 123, therefore no change in the amount
recognized for these awards in the current period is necessary.
Equity
Offering Costs
Underwriting commissions and offering costs are reflected as a
reduction of proceeds.
Income
Taxes
The Company has elected to be taxed as a REIT under
Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended, commencing with our taxable year ended
December 31, 2004. The Company believes it has qualified
and continues to qualify as a REIT. A REIT is generally not
subject to federal income tax on that portion of its taxable
income that is distributed to its stockholders. Accordingly, no
provision has been made for federal income taxes in the
accompanying consolidated financial statements. REITs are
subject to a number of organizational and operational
requirements. If the Company fails to qualify as a REIT in any
taxable year, the Company will be subject to federal income tax
(including any applicable alternative minimum tax) and, in most
of the states, state income tax on its taxable income at regular
corporate tax rates. The Company is subject to certain state and
local taxes.
The Company has formed a taxable REIT subsidiary (a
TRS). In general, a TRS may perform non-customary
services for tenants, hold assets that we cannot hold directly
and, except for the operation or management of health care
facilities or lodging facilities or the providing of any person,
under a franchise, license or otherwise, rights to any brand
name under which any lodging facility or health care facility is
operated, may engage in any real estate or non-real estate
related business. A TRS is subject to corporate federal income
taxes on its taxable income at regular corporate tax rates. For
the periods presented in the accompanying consolidated
statements of income there is no tax provision for the TRS as
the TRS had no substantial operations during 2006, 2005 or 2004.
The Predecessor was a partnership. Under applicable federal and
state income tax rules, the allocated share of net income/loss
from partnerships is reportable in the income tax returns of the
partners and members. Accordingly, no income tax provision is
included in the accompanying consolidated financial statements
for the period from January 1, 2004 through August 17,
2004.
Dividends
and Distributions
Earnings and profits, which determine the taxability of
dividends and distributions to stockholders, will differ from
income reported for financial reporting purposes due to the
difference for federal income tax purposes in the treatment of
revenue recognition, compensation expense, and in the estimated
useful lives of real estate assets used to compute depreciation.
70
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The income tax treatment for distributions reportable for the
years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 were as
follows (unaudited):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Ordinary income
|
|
$
|
1.06
|
|
|
|
99.07
|
%
|
|
$
|
1.01
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
Return of capital
|
|
|
.01
|
|
|
|
.93
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1.07
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
1.01
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managements
Estimates
Management has made a number of estimates and assumptions
relating to the reporting of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the consolidated financial statements and the reporting of
revenue and expenses during the reporting period to prepare
these consolidated financial statements in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The Company
bases its estimates on historical experience and on various
other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making
judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities
and reported amounts of revenue and expenses that are not
readily apparent from other sources. Actual results could differ
from those estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
Management considers those estimates and assumptions that are
most important to the portrayal of the Companys financial
condition and results of operations, in that they require
managements most subjective judgments, to form the basis
for the accounting policies used by the Company. These estimates
and assumptions of items such as market rents, time required to
lease vacant spaces, lease terms for incoming tenants and credit
worthiness of tenants in determining the as-if-vacant value,
in-place lease value and above and below market rents value are
utilized in allocating purchase price to tangible and identified
intangible assets upon acquisition of a property. These
accounting policies also include managements estimates of
useful lives in calculating depreciation expense on its
properties and the ultimate recoverability (or impairment) of
each property. If the useful lives of buildings and improvements
are different from 40 years, it could result in changes to
the future results of operations of the Company. Future adverse
changes in market conditions or poor operating results of our
properties could result in losses or an inability to recover the
carrying value of the properties that may not be reflected in
the properties current carrying value, thereby possibly
requiring an impairment charge in the future.
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to
the current year presentation.
In connection with our Offering, the Company acquired interests
in six properties through our Operating Partnership that were
previously owned by limited partnerships and a limited liability
company in which certain officers of the Company or entities
affiliated with them owned interests, and private investors and
tenants who are not affiliated with them owned interests.
Persons and entities owning the interests in four of the limited
partnerships and the limited liability company, certain
officers, some of their spouses and parents, and other
individuals and entities not affiliated with us or our
management, contributed to the Company all of their interests in
these entities. In exchange for these interests, the Company
issued an aggregate of 2,870,564 limited partnership units in
its operating partnership and made cash payments in the
aggregate amount of $20.5 million. Certain officers of the
Company (including some of their spouses) received an aggregate
of 2,673,172 limited partnership units having a
71
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
value of $40.1 million based on the initial public offering
price of the Companys common stock of $15.00 per
share.
Minority interests on the consolidated balance sheets relate
primarily to the limited partnership units in the Operating
Partnership (Units) that are not owned by the
Company, which at December 31, 2006 and 2005 amounted to
4.42% and 5.83%, respectively, of Units outstanding. In
conjunction with the formation of the Company, certain persons
and entities contributing interests in properties to the
Operating Partnership received Units. Limited partners who were
issued Units in the formation transactions have the right, to
require the Operating Partnership to redeem part or all of their
Units. The Company may elect to acquire those Units in exchange
for shares of the Companys common stock on a
one-for-one
basis, subject to adjustment in the event of stock splits, stock
dividends, issuance of stock rights, specified extraordinary
distributions and similar events, or pay cash based upon the
fair market value of an equivalent number of shares of the
Companys common stock at the time of redemption. In
December 2005, a non-managing partner of the operating
partnership tendered 7,000 limited partnership units in exchange
for $173,320, or $24.76 per share. Minority interests also
include the 11% interest of a limited partner in the limited
partnership that owns the King of Prussia property, the 30%
interest of a member in the limited liability company that owns
the Waples property, the 30% interest of a member in the limited
liability company formed to acquire the Fairview property, and
the 12.5% interest of a member in the limited liability company
that owns the Ardenwood Venture property, which are consolidated
entities of the Company.
|
|
4.
|
Mortgage
Notes Payable
|
A summary of the Companys outstanding consolidated
mortgage notes payable as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 is
as follows (principal balance in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective
|
|
|
Principal Balance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stated Fixed
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Maturity Date
|
|
Ardentech Court
|
|
|
7.25
|
%
|
|
|
5.06
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,658
|
|
|
$
|
4,746
|
|
|
July 1, 2012
|
Bayshore Boulevard
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
15,730
|
|
|
|
16,107
|
|
|
January 1, 2010
|
Bridgeview Technology Park I
|
|
|
8.07
|
%
|
|
|
5.04
|
%
|
|
|
11,625
|
|
|
|
11,732
|
|
|
January 1, 2011
|
Eisenhower Road
|
|
|
5.80
|
%
|
|
|
4.63
|
%
|
|
|
2,164
|
|
|
|
2,211
|
|
|
May 5, 2008
|
Elliott Avenue
|
|
|
7.38
|
%
|
|
|
4.63
|
%
|
|
|
16,020
|
|
|
|
16,526
|
|
|
November 24, 2007
|
40 Erie Street
|
|
|
7.34
|
%
|
|
|
4.90
|
%
|
|
|
18,676
|
|
|
|
19,575
|
|
|
August 1, 2008
|
Kendall Square D
|
|
|
6.38
|
%
|
|
|
5.45
|
%
|
|
|
70,963
|
|
|
|
72,395
|
|
|
December 1, 2018
|
Lucent Drive
|
|
|
5.50
|
%
|
|
|
5.50
|
%
|
|
|
5,733
|
|
|
|
5,899
|
|
|
January 21, 2015
|
Monte Villa Parkway
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
9,576
|
|
|
|
9,805
|
|
|
January 1, 2010
|
Nancy Ridge Drive
|
|
|
7.15
|
%
|
|
|
5.38
|
%
|
|
|
6,872
|
|
|
|
6,952
|
|
|
September 1, 2012
|
Road to the Cure
|
|
|
6.70
|
%
|
|
|
5.78
|
%
|
|
|
15,657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 31, 2014
|
Science Center Drive
|
|
|
7.65
|
%
|
|
|
5.04
|
%
|
|
|
11,444
|
|
|
|
11,577
|
|
|
July 1, 2011
|
Shady Grove Road
|
|
|
5.97
|
%
|
|
|
5.97
|
%
|
|
|
147,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 1, 2016
|
Sidney Street
|
|
|
7.23
|
%
|
|
|
5.11
|
%
|
|
|
30,732
|
|
|
|
31,426
|
|
|
June 1, 2012
|
Towne Centre Drive
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
21,872
|
|
|
|
22,396
|
|
|
January 1, 2010
|
900 Uniqema Boulevard
|
|
|
8.61
|
%
|
|
|
5.61
|
%
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 1, 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
390,370
|
|
|
|
231,347
|
|
|
|
Unamortized premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,466
|
|
|
|
14,886
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
403,836
|
|
|
$
|
246,233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The net carrying value of properties (investments in real
estate) secured by our mortgage notes payable was
$705.7 million and $460.5 million at December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively.
Premiums were recorded upon assumption of the mortgage notes
payable at the time of acquisition to account for above-market
interest rates. Amortization of these premiums is recorded as a
reduction to interest expense over the remaining term of the
respective note using a method that approximates the
effective-interest method.
|
|
5.
|
Credit
Facilities, Exchangeable Notes, and Other Debt
Instruments
|
On August 11, 2004, the Company entered into a
$100.0 million unsecured revolving loan agreement, which
bore interest at LIBOR plus 1.20%, or higher depending on the
leverage ratio of the Company, or a reference rate, and was
scheduled to expire on August 11, 2007. This credit
facility was fully repaid and terminated on May 31, 2005
with funds drawn on the Companys new credit facilities
discussed below. Accordingly, the related unamortized loan costs
of $901,000 were expensed in the three months ended
June 30, 2005.
On May 31, 2005, the Company entered into three credit
facilities with KeyBank and other lenders under which the
Company initially borrowed $485.0 million of a total of
$600.0 million available under these facilities. The credit
facilities included an unsecured revolving credit facility of
$250.0 million, under which the Company initially borrowed
$135.0 million, an unsecured term loan of
$100.0 million and a secured term loan of
$250.0 million. The Company borrowed the full amounts under
the $100.0 million unsecured term loan and
$250.0 million secured term loan. The unsecured revolving
credit facility had a maturity date of May 30, 2008, but
was amended on June 28, 2006 to extend the maturity date
and increase the amount of the credit facility, as discussed
below. The secured term loan was also amended on June 28,
2006 to revise certain restrictions and covenants consistent
with the amendment and restatement of the unsecured revolving
credit facility, as discussed below. The $100.0 million
unsecured term loan facility was fully repaid with the proceeds
from the Companys follow-on common stock offering in June
2005 and terminated on June 27, 2005. Accordingly, related
unamortized loan costs of $1.1 million were expensed in the
three months ended June 30, 2005.
On May 24, 2006, the Company entered into a secured bridge
loan with KeyBank and other lenders, under which the Company
borrowed $150.0 million. The bridge loan had an extended
term of six months and bore interest at a floating rate equal
to, at the Companys option, either (1) LIBOR plus
140 basis points or (2) the higher of (a) the
prime rate then in effect and (b) the federal funds rate
then in effect plus a spread of 50 basis points. This
bridge loan was fully repaid and terminated on August 23,
2006 with funds provided by the new fixed-rate mortgage loan
from KeyBank, secured by the Companys Shady Grove Road
property.
On June 28, 2006, the Company entered into an amended and
restated unsecured revolving credit facility and a first
amendment to its $250.0 million secured term loan facility
with KeyBank, and other lenders. The amendment and restatement
of the unsecured revolving credit facility increased the
companys available borrowings from $250.0 million to
$500.0 million and extended the maturity date of the
facility to June 27, 2009. The unsecured revolving credit
facility bears interest at a floating rate equal to, at the
Companys option, either (1) reserve adjusted LIBOR
plus a spread which ranges from 110 to 160 basis points,
depending on the Companys leverage, or (2) the higher
of (a) the prime rate then in effect plus a spread which
ranges from 0 to 25 basis points, or (b) the federal
funds rate then in effect plus a spread which ranges from 50 to
75 basis points, in each case, depending on the
Companys leverage. The Company may increase the amount of
the unsecured revolving credit facility to $700.0 million
subject to certain conditions. In addition, the Company, at its
sole discretion, may extend the maturity date of the unsecured
revolving credit facility to June 27, 2010 after satisfying
certain conditions and paying an extension fee based on the then
current facility commitment. The Company has deferred the
incremental loan costs associated with the amended unsecured
revolving credit facility of approximately $1.9 million,
which will be amortized to expense with the unamortized loan
costs from the original debt facility over the remaining term.
On November 3, 2006, the Company entered into a first
amendment to the amended and restated unsecured revolving credit
facility and a second amendment to the secured term loan
facility. The amendments update the list
73
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
of permitted investments for each agreement to include
investments in the Companys Center for Life Science |
Boston property with no additional changes to the interest rates
or maturity dates for each facility. The $250.0 million
secured term loan, which is secured by the Companys
interests in 15 of its properties, continues to have a maturity
date of May 30, 2010 and bears interest at a floating rate
equal to, at the Companys option, either (1) reserve
adjusted LIBOR plus 225 basis points or (2) the higher of
(a) the prime rate then in effect plus 50 basis points and
(b) the federal funds rate then in effect plus
100 basis points. The secured term loan is also secured by
the Companys interest in any distributions from these
properties, a pledge of the equity interests in a subsidiary
owning one of these properties, and a pledge of the equity
interests in a subsidiary owning an interest in another of these
properties. The Company entered into an interest rate swap
agreement in connection with the initial closing of these credit
facilities, which has the effect of fixing the interest rate on
the secured term loan at 6.4%. At December 31, 2006, the
Company had outstanding borrowings of $228.2 million on its
unsecured revolving credit facility and $250.0 million in
outstanding borrowings on its secured term loan.
The terms of the amended credit agreements for the unsecured
revolving credit facility and secured term loan include certain
restrictions and covenants, which limit, among other things, the
payment of dividends, and the incurrence of additional
indebtedness and liens. The terms also require compliance with
financial ratios relating to the minimum amounts of net worth,
fixed charge coverage, unsecured debt service coverage, interest
coverage, the maximum amount of secured, variable-rate and
recourse indebtedness, leverage ratio, and certain investment
limitations. The dividend restriction referred to above provides
that, except to enable the Company to continue to qualify as a
REIT for federal income tax purposes, the Company will not make
distributions with respect to common stock or other equity
interests in an aggregate amount for the preceding four fiscal
quarters in excess of 95% of funds from operations, as defined,
for such period, subject to other adjustments. Management
believes that it was in compliance with the covenants as of
December 31, 2006.
On September 25, 2006, the Operating Partnership issued
$175.0 million aggregate principal amount of its 4.50%
Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2026 (the Notes). The
Notes are general senior unsecured obligations of the Operating
Partnership and rank equally in right of payment with all other
senior unsecured indebtedness of the Operating Partnership.
Interest at a rate of 4.50% per annum is payable on
April 1 and October 1 of each year, beginning on
April 1, 2007, until the stated maturity date of
October 1, 2026. The terms of the Notes are governed by an
indenture, dated September 25, 2006, among the Operating
Partnership, as issuer, the Company, as guarantor, and
U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee. The Notes
contain an exchange settlement feature, which provides that the
Notes may, on or after September 1, 2026 or under certain
other circumstances, be exchangeable for cash (up to the
principal amount of the Notes) and, with respect to excess
exchange value, into, at the Companys option, cash, shares
of the Companys common stock or a combination of cash and
shares of common stock at the then applicable exchange rate. The
initial exchange rate is 26.4634 shares per $1,000
principal amount of Notes, representing an exchange price of
approximately $37.79 per share. If certain designated
events occur on or prior to October 6, 2011 and a holder
elects to exchange Notes in connection with any such
transaction, the Company will increase the exchange rate by a
number of additional shares of common stock based on the date
the transaction becomes effective and the price paid per share
of common stock in the transaction, as set forth in the
indenture governing the Notes. The exchange rate may also be
adjusted under certain other circumstances, including the
payment of cash dividends in excess of the current regular
quarterly cash dividend of $0.29 per share of common stock.
The Operating Partnership may redeem the Notes, in whole or in
part, at any time to preserve the Companys status as a
REIT or at any time on or after October 6, 2011 for cash at
100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest.
The holders of the Notes have the right to require the Operating
Partnership to repurchase the Notes, in whole or in part, for
cash on each of October 1, 2011, October 1, 2016 and
October 1, 2021, or upon the occurrence of a designated
event, in each case for a repurchase price equal to 100% of the
principal amount of the Notes plus accrued and unpaid interest.
The Company used the net proceeds received from the issuance of
the Notes to repay the outstanding balance on the Companys
unsecured revolving credit facility and for working capital
purposes.
74
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
On November 17, 2006, the Company obtained a
$550.0 million floating-rate, acquisition and construction
loan from KeyBank, which is secured by the Companys Center
for Life Science | Boston property. The loan bears interest
at a floating rate equal to, at the Companys option,
either (1) LIBOR plus 125 basis points or (2) the
higher of (a) the prime rate then in effect or (b) the
federal funds rate then in effect plus 50 basis points. The
construction loan matures on November 16, 2009, but the
Company may extend the maturity date to November 16, 2010
after satisfying certain conditions and paying an additional
fee. The construction loan requires interest only monthly
payments until the maturity date. The Company utilized a portion
of the borrowing capacity on the construction loan, along with
borrowings on its unsecured revolving credit facility, to
acquire the Center for Life Science | Boston property and
to fund construction activities. On December 21, 2006, the
Company entered into an amended and restated secured acquisition
and construction loan, which modified the original loan by,
among other things, (1) creating four tranches of notes,
tranches A, B-1, B-2, and C, (2) syndicating the loan among
certain other lenders, and (3) revising certain
restrictions and covenants set forth in the loan. The amended
loan bears interest at a blended rate equal to, at the
Companys option, either (a) LIBOR plus approximately
122.5 basis points or (b) the higher of (i) the
prime rate then in effect or (ii) the federal funds rate
then in effect plus 50 basis points. The amended loan continues
to have a maturity date of November 16, 2009 and the
Company may still, at its sole discretion, extend the maturity
date for an additional year after satisfying certain conditions
and payment of an extension fee. The amended loan includes
certain revised restrictions and covenants, which limit, among
other things, the incurrence of additional indebtedness and
liens. The amended loan also requires compliance with financial
covenants relating to minimum amounts of net worth, fixed charge
coverage, and leverage ratio. At December 31, 2006, the
Company had outstanding borrowings on the secured acquisition
and construction loan of $286.4 million.
As of December 31, 2006, principal payments due for our
consolidated indebtedness (mortgage notes payable excluding debt
premium of $13.5 million, secured term loan, secured
construction loan, the Notes, and unsecured line of credit) were
as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
21,557
|
|
2008
|
|
|
24,453
|
|
2009
|
|
|
519,545
|
|
2010
|
|
|
297,445
|
|
2011
|
|
|
26,219
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
440,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,329,890
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share (EPS) is calculated based on the
weighted average number of shares of our common stock
outstanding during the period. The effect of the outstanding
Units, vesting of unvested restricted stock that has been
granted, and the exercise of a stock warrant issued in
connection with the Offering, using the treasury method, were
dilutive and included in the calculation of diluted
weighted-average shares for the years ended December 31,
2006 and 2005 and for the period from August 11, 2004
through December 31, 2004. Shares potentially issueable
pursuant to the exchange settlement feature of the Notes (See
Note 5) were antidilutive as of December 31, 2006
and were therefore not included in the calculation of diluted
weighted-average shares for the year ended December 31,
2006. No shares were considered antidilutive for the year ended
December 31, 2005 and for the period from August 11,
2004 through December 31, 2004.
75
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table sets forth information related to the
computations of basic and diluted EPS in accordance with
SFAS No. 128, Earnings per Share (in thousands,
except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period August 11,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 through
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Net income attributable to common
shares
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
17,046
|
|
|
$
|
4,782
|
|
Minority interests in operating
partnership
|
|
|
1,747
|
|
|
|
1,274
|
|
|
|
414
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted net income attributable
to common shares
|
|
$
|
36,780
|
|
|
$
|
18,320
|
|
|
$
|
5,196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares
outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
55,928,595
|
|
|
|
38,913,103
|
|
|
|
30,965,178
|
|
Incremental shares from assumed
conversion/exercise:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock warrant
|
|
|
94,155
|
|
|
|
92,488
|
|
|
|
51,681
|
|
Vesting of restricted stock
|
|
|
131,690
|
|
|
|
215,078
|
|
|
|
90,173
|
|
Operating partnership units
|
|
|
2,863,564
|
|
|
|
2,870,526
|
|
|
|
2,660,543
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
59,018,004
|
|
|
|
42,091,195
|
|
|
|
33,767,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share
basic
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share
diluted
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
|
SFAS No. 107, Disclosure about Fair Value of
Financial Instruments, requires the Company to disclose fair
value information about all financial instruments, whether or
not recognized in the balance sheets, for which it is
practicable to estimate fair value. The Companys
disclosures of estimated fair value of financial instruments at
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, were determined
using available market information and appropriate valuation
methods. Considerable judgment is necessary to interpret market
data and develop estimated fair value. The use of different
market assumptions or estimation methods may have a material
effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
The carrying amounts for cash and cash equivalents, restricted
cash, accounts receivable, security deposits, accounts payable,
accrued expenses and other liabilities approximate fair value
due to the short-term nature of these instruments.
The Company calculates the fair value of its mortgage notes
payable and other fixed rate debt based on a currently available
market rate assuming the loans are outstanding through maturity
and considering the collateral. In determining the current
market rate for fixed rate debt, a market spread is added to the
quoted yields on federal government treasury securities with
similar terms to debt.
The fair value of variable rate debt approximates book value
because the interest rate is based on LIBOR plus a spread, which
approximates a market interest rate. In accordance with
SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Investment
and Hedging Activities, the carrying value of interest rate
swaps, as well as the underlying hedged liability, if
applicable, are reflected at their fair value. The Company
relies on quotations from a third party to determine these fair
values.
76
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
At December 31, 2006, the aggregate fair value of the
Companys mortgage notes payable, unsecured line of credit,
secured construction loan, Notes, and secured term loan was
estimated to be $1.31 billion compared to the carrying
value of $1.34 billion. At December 31, 2005, the
aggregate fair value of the Companys mortgage notes
payable, unsecured line of credit and secured term loan was
estimated to be $507.5 million compared to the carrying
value of $513.2 million. As of December 31, 2006 and
2005, the fair value of debt in the unconsolidated partnership
approximated its carrying value.
The Company has adopted the BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and BioMed
Realty, L.P. 2004 Incentive Award Plan (the Plan).
The Plan provides for the grant to directors, employees and
consultants of the Company and the Operating Partnership (and
their respective subsidiaries) of stock options, restricted
stock, long-term incentive plan units (LTIP units),
stock appreciation rights, dividend equivalents, and other
incentive awards. The Company has reserved 2,500,000 shares
of common stock for issuance pursuant to the Plan, subject to
adjustments as set forth in the Plan. Compensation cost for
these incentive awards is measured based on the fair value of
the award on the grant date and is recognized as expense over
the respective vesting period, which for restricted stock awards
and LTIP units is generally two to four years. Fully vested
incentive awards may be settled for either cash or stock
depending on the Companys election and the type of award
granted. Through December 31, 2006, the Company has only
awarded restricted stock grants and LTIP units. The restricted
stock grants may only be settled for stock whereas the LTIP
units may be redeemed for either cash or stock, at the
Companys election.
In December 2006, the Company amended the Plan and the limited
partnership agreement of its Operating Partnership to allow for
the issuance of LTIP units to directors, officers and other
employees. LTIP units represent a profits interest in the
Operating Partnership for services rendered or to be rendered by
the LTIP unitholder in their capacity as a partner, or in
anticipation of becoming a partner, in the Operating
Partnership. Initially, LTIP units do not have full parity with
common units of the Operating Partnership with respect to
liquidating distributions although they receive the same
quarterly per unit distributions as common units and may vote
the LTIP units from the date of issuance. The LTIP units are
subject to vesting requirements, which lapse over a specified
period of time (normally three or four years from the date of
issuance). In addition, the LTIP units are generally subject to
a two-year
lock-up
period during which time the LTIP unit may not be redeemed or
sold by the LTIP unitholder. Upon the occurrence of specified
events, LTIP units may over time achieve full parity with common
units of the Operating Partnership for all purposes. Upon
achieving full parity (the Equalization Date) and in
connection with the vesting and any related
lock-up
period, LTIP units may be redeemed for an equal number of the
Companys stock or cash, at the Companys election.
In connection with the amendments to the Plan noted above, the
Company granted to certain officers the right to cancel
previously issued unvested restricted stock grants and to
receive in return an equal number of LTIP units, which would
retain the same vesting schedule. As a result, 144,500 LTIP
units were granted pursuant to the cancellation of the
corresponding unvested restricted stock awards.
During 2006, the Company granted 243,232 shares of unvested
restricted stock and LTIP units with an aggregate value of
$6.7 million. During 2005, the Company granted
129,674 shares of unvested restricted stock with an
aggregate value of $2.9 million. During 2004, the Company
granted 336,333 shares of unvested restricted stock with an
aggregate value of $5.1 million. For the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, a total of 163,194 and
117,440 shares of restricted stock vested, with fair values
of $4.0 million and $2.6 million, respectively.
Participants are entitled to cash dividends and may vote such
awarded shares, but the sale or transfer of such shares is
limited during the restricted period. For the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005, and for the period from
August 11, 2004 through December 31, 2004,
$4.0 million, $3.8 million, and $872,000,
respectively, of stock-based compensation expense was recognized
in general and administrative expense. As of December 31,
2006, total
77
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
compensation expense related to unvested awards of
$6.0 million will be recognized in the future over a
weighted average period of 2.2 years.
The year ended December 31, 2005 included a $619,000
increase to general and administrative expense resulting from a
correction to the expensing of restricted stock grants awarded
to the Companys executive officers and other employees at
the time of the Offering in August 2004. Of this amount,
$823,000 relates to the period from August 11, 2004 through
December 31, 2004, which was partially offset by a decrease
of $204,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. The
Company does not believe that the correction to this expensing
of restricted stock grants is material to the first and second
quarters of 2005 or to our 2004 consolidated financial
statements.
A summary of the Companys unvested restricted stock and
LTIP units as of December 31, 2006 is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Unvested Restricted
|
|
|
Average Grant-
|
|
|
|
Shares/LTIP units
|
|
|
Date Fair Value
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.00
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
336,333
|
|
|
|
15.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
336,333
|
|
|
|
15.03
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
129,674
|
|
|
|
22.31
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(117,440
|
)
|
|
|
15.02
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(4,075
|
)
|
|
|
20.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
344,492
|
|
|
|
17.70
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
243,232
|
|
|
|
27.75
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(163,194
|
)
|
|
|
16.82
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
26.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
424,380
|
|
|
$
|
23.79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.
|
Investments
in Partnerships
|
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include an
investment in an unconsolidated entity in which the Company does
not own a controlling interest. As of December 31, 2006 and
2005, the Company had an investment in McKellar Court, L.P.
(McKellar Court). The acquisition of the investment
in McKellar Court closed on September 30, 2004. McKellar
Court is a variable interest entity as defined in FIN 46;
however, the Company is not the primary beneficiary. The limited
partner is the only tenant in the property and is to bear a
disproportionate amount of any expected losses. The Company, as
the general partner, is to receive 21% of the operating cash
flows and 75% of the gains upon sale of the property. The
Company accounts for its general partner interest using the
equity method. Significant accounting policies used by the
unconsolidated partnership that owns this property are similar
to those used by the Company. The assets and liabilities of
McKellar Court were $16.7 million and $10.9 million,
respectively at December 31, 2006, and were
$17.1 million and $11.0 million, respectively, at
December 31, 2005. The Companys share of
unconsolidated mortgage debt was $2.2 million and
$2.3 million at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. The Companys equity in net income (loss) of
McKellar Court was $83,000, $119,000 and ($11,000) for the years
ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively.
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include
investments in four variable interest entities in which the
Company is considered to be the primary beneficiary under
FIN 46. As of December 31, 2006, the Company had an
89% interest in the entity that owns the King of Prussia
property, a 70% interest in the entity that owns the Waples
property, a 70% interest in the entity that owns the Fairview
property, and an 87.5% interest in the entity that owns the
Ardenwood Venture property. These entities are consolidated in
the accompanying consolidated
78
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
financial statements. Equity interests in these partnerships not
owned by the Company are classified as minority interest on the
consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2006.
|
|
10.
|
Derivative
and Other Financial Instruments
|
The Company records all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair
value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of
derivatives depends on the intended use of the derivative and
the resulting designation. Derivatives used to hedge the
exposure to changes in the fair value of an asset, liability, or
firm commitment attributable to a particular risk, such as
interest rate risk, are considered fair value hedges.
Derivatives used to hedge the exposure to variability in
expected future cash flows, or other types of forecasted
transactions, are considered cash flow hedges.
For derivatives designated as fair value hedges, changes in the
fair value of the derivative and the hedged item related to the
hedged risk are recognized in earnings. For derivatives
designated as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of changes
in the fair value of the derivative is initially reported in
other comprehensive income (outside of earnings) and
subsequently reclassified to earnings when the hedged
transaction affects earnings, and the ineffective portion of
changes in the fair value of the derivative is recognized
directly in earnings. The Company assesses the effectiveness of
each hedging relationship by comparing the changes in fair value
or cash flows of the derivative hedging instrument with the
changes in fair value or cash flows of the designated hedged
item or transaction. For derivatives not designated as hedges,
changes in fair value are recognized in earnings.
The Companys objective in using derivatives is to add
stability to interest expense and to manage its exposure to
interest rate movements or other identified risks. To accomplish
this objective, the Company primarily uses interest rate swaps
as part of its cash flow hedging strategy. Interest rate swaps
designated as cash flow hedges involve the receipt of
variable-rate amounts in exchange for fixed-rate payments over
the life of the agreements without exchange of the underlying
principal amount. During 2006, such derivatives were used to
hedge the variable cash flows associated with existing
variable-rate debt and future variability in the interest
related cash flows from forecasted issuances of debt. The
Company formally documented the hedging relationships and
accounts for its interest rate swap agreements as cash flow
hedges.
As of December 31, 2006, the Company had four forward
starting swaps hedging a forecasted debt issuance, with a total
notional value of $450 million. These four swaps have the
effect of obligating the Company to pay a weighted-average fixed
rate of 5.2% and receive the difference between the fixed rate
and the three-month LIBOR rate (if the fixed rate is lower than
the three-month LIBOR rate) and will become effective
December 30, 2008 and expire on December 30, 2018. No
initial net investment was made to enter into these agreements.
As of December 31, 2006, the Company also had an interest
rate swap hedging existing floating-rate debt with a notional
amount of $250.0 million, whereby the Company pays a fixed
rate of 6.4% and receives the difference between the fixed rate
and the one-month LIBOR rate plus 225 basis points. This
agreement expires on June 1, 2010, and no initial
investment was made to enter into this agreement. At
December 31, 2006, the Companys interest rate swap
agreements had a total fair value of $8.4 million, which is
included in other assets on the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets. The change in net unrealized gains of
$2.5 million and $5.9 million in 2006 and 2005,
respectively, for derivatives designated as cash flow hedges is
separately disclosed in the statement of changes in
stockholders equity and comprehensive income.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, an immaterial amount
of hedge ineffectiveness on cash flow hedges due to mismatches
in maturity dates of the swap and debt was recognized in other
income/expense. Amounts reported in accumulated other
comprehensive income related to derivatives will be reclassified
to interest expense as interest payments are made on the
Companys hedged debt. The change in net unrealized gains
on cash flow hedges reflects a reclassification of
$2.3 million of net unrealized gains/losses from
accumulated other comprehensive income as a reduction to
interest expense during 2006. During 2007, the Company estimates
that an additional $2.5 million will be reclassified as a
reduction to interest expense.
79
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of December 31, 2006, no derivatives were designated as
fair value hedges or hedges of net investments in foreign
operations. Additionally, the Company does not use derivatives
for trading or speculative purposes and currently does not have
any derivatives that are not designated as hedges.
The limited partner in the King of Prussia limited partnership
has a put option that would require the Company to purchase the
limited partners interest in the property beginning
August 21, 2007 through November 11, 2007 for
$1.8 million less any distributions paid to the limited
partner. If the put option is not exercised, then the Company
has a call option beginning in May 11, 2008 through
August 11, 2008 to purchase the limited partners
interest for $1.9 million less any distributions paid to
the limited partner. If the Company does not exercise the
option, then the limited partnership will continue in existence
under the terms of the partnership agreement. The net fair value
of the put and call options was $384,000 and $317,000 at
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and is recorded
as a net accrued liability included in accounts payable and
accrued expenses on the consolidated balance sheets. In
addition, the Company has recorded net change in fair value of
the put and call options of $67,000, $31,000, and $20,000 for
the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 and for the
period from August 11, 2004 through December 31, 2004,
respectively, which is recorded as a charge to income on the
consolidated statements of income.
The other member in the Waples limited liability company has a
put option that would require the Company to purchase the
members interest in the property. The Company has a call
option to purchase the limited partners interest after
January 25, 2007, subject to certain conditions. If neither
option is exercised, then the limited partnership will continue
in existence under the terms of the partnership agreement. The
agreement provides that the put and call option prices will be
based on the fair value of the project at the time of exercise.
The Company believes the fair value of the project is equal to,
or in excess of, the carrying value of the project as of
December 31, 2006. In addition, if the other member
exercises the put option, the Company believes that it has
adequate resources to settle the option.
The other member in the Fairview limited liability company has a
put option that would require the Company to purchase the
members interest in the property at any time after the
first anniversary and before the fifth anniversary of the
project completion date. The Company has a call option to
purchase the other members interest at any time after the
first anniversary and before the fifth anniversary of the
project completion date. If neither option is exercised, then
the limited liability company will continue in existence under
the terms of the limited liability company agreement. The
agreement provides that the put and call option prices will be
based on an intrinsic value of the project at the time of
exercise. At December 31, 2006, the net fair value of the
put option was approximately equal to the other members
equity investment. In addition, if the other member exercises
the put option, the Company believes that it has adequate
resources to settle the option.
The Company has the right to purchase the other members
interest or sell its own interest (collectively, the
Buy-Sell Option) in the Ardenwood limited liability
company at any time after the later of (1) the second
anniversary of the date that the related property is at least
ninety percent leased with remaining lease terms of at least
five years and (2) the date that a term loan is obtained
pursuant to the agreement. If the Buy-Sell Option is exercised
by the Company, the other member has the right to determine
whether to acquire the our membership interest or to sell its
own membership interest to the Company. The agreement provides
that the Buy-Sell option price will be based on the fair value
of the assets at the time of exercise. In addition, if the other
member exercises the put option, the Company believes that it
has adequate resources to settle the option.
The Company had previously disclosed reporting segment
information for the following geographic areas: Boston,
San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, New York/New
Jersey, Pennsylvania and Maryland based on internal reporting
provided to the Chief Operating Decision Maker
(CODM) as defined in SFAS No. 131,
Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information (SFAS 131). SFAS 131
requires an enterprise to disclose financial information about
its reportable operating segments, which are those for which
financial
80
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
information is available and is regularly evaluated by the CODM
in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing
performance. SFAS 131 requires an enterprise to disclose
segment revenues, profit or loss, assets and the basis of
measurement and reconciliations of those totals to the
corresponding consolidated information provided in the
Companys Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated
Statements of Income. The Company had historically aggregated
its individual properties into larger geographic segments per
the guidance in SFAS 131 based on the availability of
discrete financial information and similarities in economic
characteristics, the homogenous nature of the products, and the
types of customers served.
Beginning in the quarter ended June 30, 2006, the Company
changed its methods of internal reporting to the CODM due to an
organizational restructuring. The CODM now reviews operational
data for the one operating segment that qualifies for
aggregation reporting under the provisions of SFAS 131 when
making decisions regarding resource allocation, capital
transactions and the measurement of operating performance. The
Companys properties share the following similar economic
and operating characteristics: (i) they have similar
forecasted returns (measured by cap rate at acquisition),
(ii) they are occupied almost exclusively by life science
tenants that are public companies, government agencies or their
subsidiaries, (iii) they are located near areas of high
life science concentrations with similar demographics and site
characteristics, (iv) the majority of properties are
designed specifically for life science tenants that require
infrastructure improvements not generally found in standard
office properties, and (v) the associated leases are
primarily
triple-net
leases, generally with a fixed rental rate and scheduled annual
escalations, that provide for a recovery of close to 100% of
operating expenses. Consequently, financial information by
geographic operating segment, as previously provided and
reported in the Companys quarterly and annual filings, is
no longer required under SFAS 131. Upon such a change in
the internal reporting structure of an entity, SFAS 131
requires that the corresponding segment information provided in
prior periods be changed to reflect the new reporting segments.
Accordingly, segment information for prior periods is no longer
required.
Total future minimum lease receipts under noncancelable
operating tenant leases in effect at December 31, 2006 were
as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
172,478
|
|
2008
|
|
|
181,191
|
|
2009
|
|
|
193,374
|
|
2010
|
|
|
177,081
|
|
2011
|
|
|
164,897
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
1,598,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,487,151
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
Ground
Leases
The Company has a leasehold interest in the Landmark at Eastview
property through a
99-year
ground lease. Following the sellers completion of certain
property subdivisions, the ground lease will terminate and a fee
simple interest in the property will be transferred to the
Company for no additional consideration. Under the terms of the
ground lease, the Company has established an escrow deposit to
be used by the seller to complete certain improvements required
in connection with completing the property subdivisions. This
deposit is included in other assets on the consolidated balance
sheets and had a remaining balance of $381,000 and $788,000 as
of December 31, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
81
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company has a ground lease obligation on the Colorow Drive
property expiring December 2043. The minimum commitment under
this lease as of December 31, 2006 was as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
2008
|
|
|
187
|
|
2009
|
|
|
214
|
|
2010
|
|
|
214
|
|
2011
|
|
|
214
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
11,544
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
12,558
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Concentration
of Credit Risk
Life science entities comprise the vast majority of the
Companys tenant base. Because of the dependence on a
single industry, adverse conditions affecting that industry will
more adversely affect our business. Two of the Companys
tenants, Human Genome Sciences, Inc. and Vertex Pharmaceuticals,
comprised 17.4% and 15.7%, or $29.0 million and
$26.1 million, respectively, of rental revenues for the
year ended December 31, 2006. These tenants are located in
the Companys Maryland and Boston markets, respectively.
Two of the Companys tenants, Vertex Pharmaceuticals and
Genzyme Corporation, comprised 15.8% and 10.5%, or
$14.7 million and $9.7 million, respectively, of
rental revenues for the year ended December 31, 2005. These
tenants are located in the Companys Boston market. Two of
the Companys tenants, Centocor, Inc. (a Johnson &
Johnson subsidiary) and Nektar Therapeutics, comprised 13.0% and
11.5%, or $2.5 million and $2.2 million, respectively,
of rental revenues for the period from August 11, 2004 to
December 31, 2004. These tenants are located in the
Companys Pennsylvania and San Francisco markets. The
inability of these tenants to make lease payments could
materially adversely affect the Companys business.
The Company generally does not require collateral or other
security from our tenants, other than security deposits or
letters of credit in select cases.
Capital
Commitments
As of December 31, 2006, the Company had approximately
$259.9 million outstanding in capital commitments related
to construction, development, tenant improvements, renovation
costs, leasing commissions, and general property-related capital
expenditures, with approximately $224.2 million expected to
be paid in 2007 and the remaining amount, approximately
$35.6 million, expected to be paid in 2008 and 2009.
Insurance
The Company carries insurance coverage on its properties with
policy specifications and insured limits that it believes are
adequate given the relative risk of loss, cost of the coverage
and standard industry practice. However, certain types of losses
(such as from earthquakes and floods) may be either uninsurable
or not economically insurable. Further, certain of the
properties are located in areas that are subject to earthquake
activity and floods. Should a property sustain damage as a
result of an earthquake or flood, the Company may incur losses
due to insurance deductibles, co-payments on insured losses or
uninsured losses. Should an uninsured loss occur, the Company
could lose some or all of its capital investment, cash flow and
anticipated profits related to one or more properties.
82
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Environmental
Matters
The Company follows a policy of monitoring its properties for
the presence of hazardous or toxic substances. The Company is
not aware of any environmental liability with respect to the
properties that would have a material adverse effect on the
Companys business, assets or results of operations. There
can be no assurance that such a material environmental liability
does not exist. The existence of any such material environmental
liability could have an adverse effect on the Companys
results of operations and cash flow. The Company carries
environmental remediation insurance for some of its properties.
This insurance, subject to certain exclusions and deductibles,
covers the cost to remediate environmental damage caused by
future spills or the historic presence of previously
undiscovered hazardous substances, as well as third-party bodily
injury and property damage claims related to the release of
hazardous substances.
Repurchase
Agreements
A lease at the King of Prussia Road property contains a
provision whereby the tenant, Centocor, Inc.
(Centocor), holds a right to purchase the property
(the Purchase Option) from the Company. The Purchase
Option is exercisable at any time until April 1, 2008 with
the purchase price determined based on a cap rate of 9.0%
(giving effect to certain rental escalation assumptions for the
period after April 1, 2006 for specific space at the
property as specified in the third amendment to the lease)
applied to net rents (1) payable by Centocor,
(2) payable by third party tenants elsewhere on the
property and (3) for unleased space, equal to net rent
payable by Centocor for similar space.
The acquisition of the Belward Campus Drive
(Belward) and Shady Grove Road (Shady
Grove) properties include provisions whereby the seller
could repurchase the properties from the Company (individually,
the Repurchase Option) under specific terms in the
future. The Belward Repurchase Option is exercisable at any time
during the first three years after the acquisition date, subject
to a twelve-month notice provision, at a to be determined
repurchase price that would result in a 15% internal rate of
return for the Company (taking into consideration all rents paid
to the Company). The Shady Grove Repurchase Option is a one-time
option at approximately the tenth anniversary of the acquisition
date, subject to a twelve-month notice provision, at a
repurchase price of approximately $300.0 million in cash.
As the Repurchase Options may be executed only by the seller and
will exceed the acquisition prices paid by the Company, no gain
will be recorded by the Company unless the Repurchase Options
are exercised.
Other
Agreements
In connection with the acquisition of the Center for Life
Science | Boston property on November 17, 2006, the
Company assumed an agreement (the Turnkey Garage
Agreement) between the seller and Beth Israel Deaconess
Medical Center (BIDMC) for the construction of a
below-grade parking facility and the sale of a portion of the
total anticipated parking spaces to BIDMC for a fixed purchase
price of $28.8 million, subject to adjustment for actual
costs incurred on the construction pursuant to specific
provisions of the Turnkey Garage Agreement. Pursuant to the
execution of the Turnkey Garage Agreement, BIDMC issued an
irrevocable letter of credit for the full purchase price of
$28.8 million upon which the holder, upon substantial
completion of the garage facility, would be permitted to draw.
Tax
Indemnification Agreements and Minimum Debt
Requirements
As a result of the contribution of properties to the Operating
Partnership, the Company has indemnified the contributors of the
properties against adverse tax consequences if it directly or
indirectly sells, exchanges or otherwise disposes of the
properties in a taxable transaction before the tenth anniversary
of the completion of the Offering. The Company also has agreed
to use its reasonable best efforts to maintain at least
$8.0 million of debt, some of which must be property
specific, for a period of ten years following the date of the
Offering to enable certain
83
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
contributors to guarantee the debt in order to defer potential
taxable gain they may incur if the Operating Partnership repays
the existing debt.
Legal
Proceedings
The Company is not currently a party to any legal proceedings
nor, to its knowledge, is any legal proceeding threatened
against it that would have a material adverse effect on its
financial position, results of operations or liquidity.
|
|
14.
|
Property
Acquisitions
|
The Company acquired the following properties during the year
ended December 31, 2006 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Above
|
|
|
Deferred Leasing Costs
|
|
|
Below
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
|
|
|
Investment in
|
|
|
Market
|
|
|
In-Place
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
Market
|
|
|
Note
|
|
|
Note
|
|
|
Total Cash
|
|
Property
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Real Estate
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Fee
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Assumed
|
|
|
Premium
|
|
|
Consideration
|
|
|
Ardenwood Venture
|
|
|
6/14/2006
|
|
|
$
|
14,153
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
313
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
(74
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
14,402
|
|
Belward Campus Drive
|
|
|
5/24/2006
|
|
|
|
200,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,974
|
|
Center for Life Science |
Boston
|
|
|
11/17/2006
|
|
|
|
467,417
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,155
|
|
|
|
1,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
472,942
|
|
Charles Street
|
|
|
4/7/2006
|
|
|
|
12,033
|
|
|
|
327
|
|
|
|
1,043
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(178
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,225
|
|
Fairview Avenue
|
|
|
1/12/2006
|
|
|
|
2,703
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,703
|
|
John Hopkins Court
|
|
|
8/16/2006
|
|
|
|
23,086
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,086
|
|
One Research Way
|
|
|
5/31/2006
|
|
|
|
8,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,267
|
|
Pacific Research Center
|
|
|
7/11/2006
|
|
|
|
214,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
214,900
|
|
Road to the Cure
|
|
|
12/14/2006
|
|
|
|
23,559
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,657
|
)
|
|
|
(801
|
)
|
|
|
7,762
|
|
Shady Grove Road
|
|
|
5/24/2006
|
|
|
|
226,149
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226,149
|
|
Sorrento Valley Boulevard
|
|
|
12/7/2006
|
|
|
|
19,174
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
1,055
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,339
|
|
Spring Mill Drive
|
|
|
7/20/2006
|
|
|
|
9,022
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
704
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,814
|
|
Trade Centre Avenue
|
|
|
8/9/2006
|
|
|
|
18,679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,947
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,718
|
|
900 Uniqema Boulevard
|
|
|
1/13/2006
|
|
|
|
4,096
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,766
|
)
|
|
|
(236
|
)
|
|
|
3,104
|
|
Walnut Street
|
|
|
7/7/2006
|
|
|
|
41,268
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,634
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,082
|
|
217th Place
|
|
|
11/21/2006
|
|
|
|
10,654
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,654
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,296,134
|
|
|
$
|
1,204
|
|
|
$
|
13,623
|
|
|
$
|
1,884
|
|
|
$
|
(264
|
)
|
|
$
|
(17,423
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,037
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,294,121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average intangible
amortization life (in months)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
In connection with the acquisition of the Trade Centre Avenue
and Walnut Street properties, the Company extended funds
totaling $300,000 and $1.7 million, respectively, in the
form of tenant allowances to the tenants to cover the reasonable
costs of constructing tenant improvements to the premises. The
tenant allowances were fully paid to the tenants through escrow
at closing and will be repaid monthly over the term of their
respective leases, with interest calculated at the rate of
10.5% per annum. As a result of the prepayment of the funds
and the Companys limited approval rights regarding the use
of those funds, the Company determined that the tenant
allowances should be reflected as the extension of a note
receivable, which is included in other assets in the
accompanying balance sheets as of December 31, 2006.
Monthly repayments in 2006 totaling $151,000 were recorded as a
reduction of the outstanding principal balance and the receipt
of interest income.
84
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company acquired the following properties during the year
ended December 31, 2005 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Above
|
|
|
Deferred Leasing Costs
|
|
|
Below
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
|
|
|
Investment in
|
|
|
Market
|
|
|
In-Place
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
Market
|
|
|
Note
|
|
|
Note
|
|
|
Total Cash
|
|
Property
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Real Estate
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Fee
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Assumed
|
|
|
Premium
|
|
|
Consideration
|
|
|
Albany Street
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
$
|
33,235
|
|
|
$
|
620
|
|
|
$
|
4,232
|
|
|
$
|
363
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
38,450
|
|
Bridgeview Technology Park II
|
|
|
3/16/2005
|
|
|
|
14,588
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,166
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
(778
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,218
|
|
Colorow Drive
|
|
|
12/22/2005
|
|
|
|
19,369
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,369
|
|
Coolidge Avenue
|
|
|
4/5/2005
|
|
|
|
9,862
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
977
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,839
|
|
Dumbarton Circle
|
|
|
5/27/2005
|
|
|
|
7,819
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,012
|
|
|
|
127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,958
|
|
Eccles Avenue
|
|
|
12/1/2005
|
|
|
|
21,856
|
|
|
|
1,826
|
|
|
|
2,235
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,032
|
|
21 Erie Street
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
|
21,738
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,301
|
|
|
|
264
|
|
|
|
(1,170
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,133
|
|
40 Erie Street
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
|
41,371
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,441
|
|
|
|
289
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,192
|
)
|
|
|
(1,338
|
)
|
|
|
25,571
|
|
Faraday Avenue
|
|
|
9/19/2005
|
|
|
|
8,560
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,560
|
|
Fresh Pond Research Park
|
|
|
4/5/2005
|
|
|
|
21,822
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,617
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,637
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,802
|
|
George Patterson Boulevard
|
|
|
10/28/2005
|
|
|
|
13,001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,976
|
|
|
|
211
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,188
|
|
Graphics Drive
|
|
|
3/17/2005
|
|
|
|
7,377
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,787
|
|
Kaiser Drive
|
|
|
8/25/2005
|
|
|
|
9,523
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,523
|
|
Kendall Square D
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
|
169,880
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,072
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73,189
|
)
|
|
|
(5,520
|
)
|
|
|
119,243
|
|
Lucent Drive
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
|
6,153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
995
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,014
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,134
|
|
Nancy Ridge Drive
|
|
|
4/21/2005
|
|
|
|
12,407
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,158
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,001
|
)
|
|
|
(768
|
)
|
|
|
5,891
|
|
Phoenixville Pike
|
|
|
4/5/2005
|
|
|
|
12,083
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,121
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,247
|
|
Sidney Street
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
|
58,068
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,031
|
|
|
|
644
|
|
|
|
(14,032
|
)
|
|
|
(31,809
|
)
|
|
|
(3,686
|
)
|
|
|
19,216
|
|
1000 Uniqema Boulevard
|
|
|
9/30/2005
|
|
|
|
14,568
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,303
|
|
Vassar Street
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
|
15,881
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,434
|
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
(621
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,857
|
|
Waples Street
|
|
|
3/1/2005
|
|
|
|
5,377
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,377
|
|
West Kendall Square A
|
|
|
5/31/2005
|
|
|
|
126,104
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,746
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,850
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
650,642
|
|
|
$
|
2,446
|
|
|
$
|
91,649
|
|
|
$
|
2,566
|
|
|
$
|
(19,238
|
)
|
|
$
|
(138,205
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,312
|
)
|
|
$
|
578,548
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average intangible
amortization life (in months)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.
|
Newly
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
|
In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an Interpretation
of FASB Statement No. 109 (FIN 48).
FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income
taxes recognized in a companys financial statements and
prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for
the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.
FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2006. The adoption of FIN 48 is not
expected to have a significant impact on the Companys
consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements (SFAS 157).
SFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting
principles, and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. SFAS 157 applies under other accounting
pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements,
but does not require new fair value measurements. SFAS 157
is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The
adoption of SFAS 157 is not expected to have a significant
impact on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
85
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In September 2006, the SEC staff issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior
Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current
Year Financial Statements (SAB 108). The
intent of SAB 108 is to reduce diversity in practice for
the method companies use to quantify financial statement
misstatements, including the effect of prior year uncorrected
errors. SAB 108 establishes an approach that requires
quantification of financial statement errors using both an
income statement and a cumulative balance sheet approach.
SAB 108 is effective for fiscal years ending after
November 15, 2006. The adoption of SAB 108 did not
have a significant impact on the Companys consolidated
financial statements.
On January 18, 2007, the Company completed the issuance of
9,200,000 shares, including the exercise of an
over-allotment of 1,200,000 shares, of 7.375% Series A
Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock at $25.00 per share,
resulting in net proceeds of approximately $222.6 million,
the majority of which were utilized to repay a portion of the
outstanding indebtedness on the Companys unsecured line of
credit.
On January 26, 2007, the Company signed new, long-term
leases with Illumina, Inc. for approximately 195,000 square
feet of office and laboratory space at the Companys Towne
Centre Drive property. Under the new leases, Illumina will
expand into a new 84,000 square foot building to be
constructed at the property. Once completed and occupied,
Illumina will lease the new building for a 15-year term. In
addition, Illumina extended its lease for the
109,270 square feet it currently occupies at Towne Center
Drive by nine years to 2023 to correspond with the new
15-year
lease on the building to be constructed.
On January 29, 2007, the Company entered into definitive
purchase and sale agreements with affiliates of Lyme Timber
Company to acquire a portfolio of real estate assets located in
Cambridge, Massachusetts; Houston, Texas; and New Haven,
Connecticut. The acquisition includes approximately
600,000 square feet of life science space recently
completed or under construction at Lymes Rogers Street
project and land that can support approximately
266,000 square feet of life science laboratory and office
space at Kendall Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The total
purchase price for the portfolio is approximately
$510 million, excluding closing costs. The acquisition is
expected to close in the second quarter of 2007 and is subject
to customary due diligence and closing conditions.
On January 31, 2007, the Company granted 269,500 LTIP units
and 32,500 shares of restricted stock with an aggregate
value of approximately $9.0 million that vests over a
period of four years to officers pursuant to the Plan.
|
|
17.
|
Quarterly
Financial Information (unaudited)
|
The tables below reflect the Companys and the
Predecessors selected quarterly information for the years
ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004 (in thousands,
except per share data).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
63,648
|
|
|
$
|
64,510
|
|
|
$
|
49,459
|
|
|
$
|
43,793
|
|
Income before minority interests
|
|
$
|
13,122
|
|
|
$
|
11,311
|
|
|
$
|
7,514
|
|
|
$
|
4,696
|
|
Minority interests
|
|
$
|
(533
|
)
|
|
$
|
(499
|
)
|
|
$
|
(356
|
)
|
|
$
|
(222
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
12,589
|
|
|
$
|
10,812
|
|
|
$
|
7,158
|
|
|
$
|
4,474
|
|
Net income per share
basic(1)
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
$
|
0.14
|
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
Net income per share
diluted(1)
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
$
|
0.14
|
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
86
BIOMED
REALTY TRUST, INC. AND
INHALE 201 INDUSTRIAL ROAD, L.P. (PREDECESSOR)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
44,492
|
|
|
$
|
41,330
|
|
|
$
|
28,529
|
|
|
$
|
24,505
|
|
Income before minority interests
|
|
$
|
4,804
|
|
|
$
|
5,479
|
|
|
$
|
1,505
|
|
|
$
|
6,265
|
|
Minority interests
|
|
$
|
(235
|
)
|
|
$
|
(278
|
)
|
|
$
|
(65
|
)
|
|
$
|
(429
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
4,569
|
|
|
$
|
5,201
|
|
|
$
|
1,440
|
|
|
$
|
5,836
|
|
Net income per share
basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
|
$
|
0.11
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
(1) |
The sum of quarterly financial data may vary from the annual
data due to rounding.
|
87
SCHEDULE III
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
As of December 31, 2006
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross amount carried at December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost
|
|
Costs
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
Capitalized
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ground
|
|
and
|
|
Subsequent
|
|
|
|
Ground
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Property
|
|
Renovated
|
|
Encumbrances
|
|
Land
|
|
Lease
|
|
Improvements
|
|
to Acquisition
|
|
Land
|
|
Lease
|
|
Improvements
|
|
Total
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
(3)
|
|
|
|
Albany Street
|
|
1922/1998
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,942
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
31,293
|
|
|
$
|
48
|
|
|
$
|
1,942
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
31,341
|
|
|
$
|
33,283
|
|
|
$
|
(1,242
|
)
|
|
$
|
32,041
|
|
Ardentech Court
|
|
1997/2001
|
|
|
4,658
|
|
|
|
2,742
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,379
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
2,742
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,408
|
|
|
|
8,150
|
|
|
|
(286
|
)
|
|
|
7,864
|
|
Ardenwood Venture
|
|
1985
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,603
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,603
|
|
|
|
14,153
|
|
|
|
(206
|
)
|
|
|
13,947
|
|
Balboa Avenue
|
|
1968/2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,316
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,493
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
1,316
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,627
|
|
|
|
10,943
|
|
|
|
(588
|
)
|
|
|
10,355
|
|
Bayshore Boulevard
|
|
2000
|
|
|
15,730
|
|
|
|
3,667
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,593
|
|
|
|
7,124
|
|
|
|
3,667
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,717
|
|
|
|
33,384
|
|
|
|
(1,558
|
)
|
|
|
31,826
|
|
Beckley Street
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,480
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,590
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,480
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,590
|
|
|
|
19,070
|
|
|
|
(897
|
)
|
|
|
18,173
|
|
Bernardo Center Drive
|
|
1974/1992
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,714
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,718
|
|
|
|
16,298
|
|
|
|
(815
|
)
|
|
|
15,483
|
|
Belward Campus Drive
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196,814
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196,814
|
|
|
|
200,974
|
|
|
|
(3,092
|
)
|
|
|
197,882
|
|
Center for Life Science |
Boston(4)
|
|
|
|
|
286,355
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
407,417
|
|
|
|
42,764
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
450,181
|
|
|
|
510,181
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
510,181
|
|
Bridgeview Technology Park I
|
|
1977/2002
|
|
|
11,625
|
|
|
|
1,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,716
|
|
|
|
2,535
|
|
|
|
1,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,251
|
|
|
|
18,566
|
|
|
|
(997
|
)
|
|
|
17,569
|
|
Bridgeview Technology Park II
|
|
1977/2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,522
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,066
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,522
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,066
|
|
|
|
14,588
|
|
|
|
(585
|
)
|
|
|
14,003
|
|
Charles Street
|
|
1986
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,033
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,033
|
|
|
|
12,033
|
|
|
|
(165
|
)
|
|
|
11,868
|
|
Colorow Drive
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,369
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,378
|
|
|
|
19,378
|
|
|
|
(548
|
)
|
|
|
18,830
|
|
Coolidge Avenue
|
|
1962/1999
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,760
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,760
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,102
|
|
|
|
9,862
|
|
|
|
(303
|
)
|
|
|
9,559
|
|
Dumbarton Circle
|
|
1990
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,723
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,096
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,723
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,096
|
|
|
|
7,819
|
|
|
|
(636
|
)
|
|
|
7,183
|
|
Eccles Avenue
|
|
1965/1995
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,257
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
599
|
|
|
|
273
|
|
|
|
21,257
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
872
|
|
|
|
22,129
|
|
|
|
(316
|
)
|
|
|
21,813
|
|
Eisenhower Road
|
|
1973/2000
|
|
|
2,164
|
|
|
|
416
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,614
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
416
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,672
|
|
|
|
3,088
|
|
|
|
(122
|
)
|
|
|
2,966
|
|
Elliott Avenue
|
|
1925/2004
|
|
|
16,020
|
|
|
|
10,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,911
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
10,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,999
|
|
|
|
49,123
|
|
|
|
(2,310
|
)
|
|
|
46,813
|
|
21 Erie Street
|
|
1925/2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,372
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
3,366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,414
|
|
|
|
21,780
|
|
|
|
(730
|
)
|
|
|
21,050
|
|
40 Erie Street
|
|
1996
|
|
|
18,676
|
|
|
|
7,593
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,778
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
7,593
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,886
|
|
|
|
41,479
|
|
|
|
(1,342
|
)
|
|
|
40,137
|
|
Fairview Avenue(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,703
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
694
|
|
|
|
1,603
|
|
|
|
2,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,265
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
Faraday Avenue
|
|
1986
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,190
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
1,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,201
|
|
|
|
8,571
|
|
|
|
(228
|
)
|
|
|
8,343
|
|
Fresh Pond Research Park
|
|
1948/2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,322
|
|
|
|
221
|
|
|
|
3,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,543
|
|
|
|
22,043
|
|
|
|
(798
|
)
|
|
|
21,245
|
|
George Patterson Boulevard
|
|
1996/2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,426
|
|
|
|
(147
|
)
|
|
|
1,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,279
|
|
|
|
12,854
|
|
|
|
(320
|
)
|
|
|
12,534
|
|
Graphics Drive
|
|
1992/2001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,577
|
|
|
|
1,539
|
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,116
|
|
|
|
8,916
|
|
|
|
(331
|
)
|
|
|
8,585
|
|
Industrial Road
|
|
2001/2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,718
|
|
|
|
14,064
|
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,782
|
|
|
|
67,782
|
|
|
|
(4,609
|
)
|
|
|
63,173
|
|
John Hopkins Court
|
|
1991
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,560
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,526
|
|
|
|
837
|
|
|
|
3,560
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,363
|
|
|
|
23,923
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,923
|
|
Kaiser Drive
|
|
1990
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,093
|
|
|
|
966
|
|
|
|
3,430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,059
|
|
|
|
10,489
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,489
|
|
Kendall Square D
|
|
2002
|
|
|
70,963
|
|
|
|
3,572
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
166,308
|
|
|
|
474
|
|
|
|
3,572
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
166,782
|
|
|
|
170,354
|
|
|
|
(6,622
|
)
|
|
|
163,732
|
|
King of Prussia Road
|
|
1954/2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66,675
|
|
|
|
239
|
|
|
|
12,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66,914
|
|
|
|
79,727
|
|
|
|
(4,014
|
)
|
|
|
75,713
|
|
Landmark at Eastview
|
|
1958/1999
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,210
|
|
|
|
61,996
|
|
|
|
11,243
|
|
|
|
223
|
|
|
|
14,210
|
|
|
|
73,016
|
|
|
|
87,449
|
|
|
|
(4,811
|
)
|
|
|
82,638
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross amount carried at December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost
|
|
Costs
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
Capitalized
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ground
|
|
and
|
|
Subsequent
|
|
|
|
Ground
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Property
|
|
Renovated
|
|
Encumbrances
|
|
Land
|
|
Lease
|
|
Improvements
|
|
to Acquisition
|
|
Land
|
|
Lease
|
|
Improvements
|
|
Total
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
(3)
|
|
|
|
Lucent Drive
|
|
2004
|
|
|
5,733
|
|
|
|
265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,888
|
|
|
|
6,153
|
|
|
|
(233
|
)
|
|
|
5,920
|
|
Monte Villa Parkway
|
|
1996/2002
|
|
|
9,576
|
|
|
|
1,020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,711
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,711
|
|
|
|
11,731
|
|
|
|
(636
|
)
|
|
|
11,095
|
|
Nancy Ridge Drive
|
|
1983/2001
|
|
|
6,872
|
|
|
|
2,344
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,063
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
2,344
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,095
|
|
|
|
12,439
|
|
|
|
(473
|
)
|
|
|
11,966
|
|
One Research Way
|
|
1980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,454
|
|
|
|
533
|
|
|
|
1,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,987
|
|
|
|
8,800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,800
|
|
Pacific Research Center
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,883
|
|
|
|
5,311
|
|
|
|
74,017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
146,194
|
|
|
|
220,211
|
|
|
|
(2,770
|
)
|
|
|
217,441
|
|
Phoenixville Pike
|
|
1989
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,879
|
|
|
|
2,708
|
|
|
|
1,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,587
|
|
|
|
14,791
|
|
|
|
(549
|
)
|
|
|
14,242
|
|
Road to the Cure
|
|
1977
|
|
|
15,657
|
|
|
|
4,430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,129
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
4,430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,136
|
|
|
|
23,566
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
23,525
|
|
San Diego Science Center
|
|
1973/2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,871
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,875
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
3,871
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,915
|
|
|
|
25,786
|
|
|
|
(1,211
|
)
|
|
|
24,575
|
|
Science Center Drive
|
|
1995
|
|
|
11,444
|
|
|
|
2,630
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,365
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
2,630
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,440
|
|
|
|
19,070
|
|
|
|
(939
|
)
|
|
|
18,131
|
|
Shady Grove Road
|
|
2003
|
|
|
147,000
|
|
|
|
28,601
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197,548
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
28,603
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197,548
|
|
|
|
226,151
|
|
|
|
(3,153
|
)
|
|
|
222,998
|
|
Sidney Street
|
|
2000
|
|
|
30,732
|
|
|
|
7,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,488
|
|
|
|
58,068
|
|
|
|
(2,003
|
)
|
|
|
56,065
|
|
Sorrento Valley Boulevard
|
|
1982
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,140
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,034
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,140
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,034
|
|
|
|
19,174
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
19,133
|
|
Spring Mill Drive
|
|
1988
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,074
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,948
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,074
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,948
|
|
|
|
9,022
|
|
|
|
(136
|
)
|
|
|
8,886
|
|
Trade Centre Avenue
|
|
1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,275
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,275
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,404
|
|
|
|
18,679
|
|
|
|
(197
|
)
|
|
|
18,482
|
|
Towne Centre Drive
|
|
2001
|
|
|
21,872
|
|
|
|
10,720
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,504
|
|
|
|
727
|
|
|
|
10,720
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,231
|
|
|
|
42,951
|
|
|
|
(1,871
|
)
|
|
|
41,080
|
|
Tributary Street
|
|
1983/1998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,060
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,597
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,060
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,597
|
|
|
|
12,657
|
|
|
|
(541
|
)
|
|
|
12,116
|
|
900 Uniqema Boulevard
|
|
2000
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,692
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,692
|
|
|
|
4,096
|
|
|
|
(98
|
)
|
|
|
3,998
|
|
1000 Uniqema Boulevard
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,218
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
1,350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,229
|
|
|
|
14,579
|
|
|
|
(413
|
)
|
|
|
14,166
|
|
Vassar Street
|
|
1950/1998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,040
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,040
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,841
|
|
|
|
15,881
|
|
|
|
(548
|
)
|
|
|
15,333
|
|
Waples Street
|
|
1983/2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,470
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,907
|
|
|
|
7,374
|
|
|
|
2,470
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,281
|
|
|
|
12,751
|
|
|
|
(923
|
)
|
|
|
11,828
|
|
Walnut Street
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,068
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,068
|
|
|
|
41,268
|
|
|
|
(535
|
)
|
|
|
40,733
|
|
West Kendall Square A
|
|
2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,922
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
121,182
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,922
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
121,182
|
|
|
|
126,104
|
|
|
|
(4,797
|
)
|
|
|
121,307
|
|
217th Place
|
|
1987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,125
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,529
|
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
7,125
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,675
|
|
|
|
10,800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
$
|
676,725
|
|
|
$
|
355,391
|
|
|
$
|
14,210
|
|
|
$
|
2,047,284
|
|
|
$
|
101,232
|
|
|
$
|
355,648
|
|
|
$
|
14,210
|
|
|
$
|
2,148,259
|
|
|
$
|
2,518,117
|
|
|
$
|
(60,579
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,457,538
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes secured construction loan secured by the Center for
Life Science | Boston
property, but excludes unamortized debt premium of $13,466. |
|
(2) |
|
The aggregate gross cost of the Companys rental property
for federal income tax purposes approximated $2.5 billion
as of December 31, 2006 (unaudited). |
|
(3) |
|
Depreciation of the ground lease and building and improvements
are recorded on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful
lives ranging from the life of the lease to 40 years. |
|
(4) |
|
The entire property was under development as of
December 31, 2006. |
89
The following table reconciles the historical cost and related
accumulated depreciation as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Predecessor(5)
|
|
|
|
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.(5)
|
|
|
August 11,
|
|
|
January 1,
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
thru
|
|
|
thru
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
August 17,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Investment in real
estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period/year
|
|
$
|
1,151,275
|
|
|
$
|
471,799
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
49,588
|
|
Property acquisitions
|
|
|
1,296,134
|
|
|
|
650,642
|
|
|
|
471,467
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improvements
|
|
|
70,708
|
|
|
|
28,834
|
|
|
|
332
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period/year
|
|
$
|
2,518,117
|
|
|
$
|
1,151,275
|
|
|
$
|
471,799
|
|
|
$
|
49,588
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
Depreciation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period/year
|
|
$
|
(21,904
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3,269
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(2,563
|
)
|
Depreciation expense
|
|
|
(38,675
|
)
|
|
|
(18,635
|
)
|
|
|
(3,269
|
)
|
|
|
(586
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period/year
|
|
$
|
(60,579
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21,904
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3,269
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3,149
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5) |
|
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. commenced operations on
August 11, 2004 after completion of our Offering.
Industrial Road is the largest of the properties acquired in the
Offering and therefore has been identified as the accounting
acquirer, or Predecessor, pursuant to paragraph 17 of
SFAS 141. As such, the information presented herein for our
Predecessor were prepared on a stand-alone basis up to and
including the acquisition date, August 17, 2004. Upon
completion of the Offering, the interest in the Predecessor
acquired from affiliates was recorded at historic cost. The
acquisitions of the unaffiliated interests in the Predecessor
and the interests in all of the other properties have been
accounted for as a purchase in accordance with SFAS 141. |
See accompanying report of independent registered public
accounting firm.
90
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed
to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our
Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the SECs
rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow
for timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing
and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures,
management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no
matter how well designed and operated, can provide only
reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control
objectives, and management is required to apply its judgment in
evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls
and procedures. Also, we have an investment in an unconsolidated
entity. As we manage this entity, our disclosure controls and
procedures with respect to such entity are essentially
consistent with those we maintain with respect to our
consolidated entities. As required by
Rule 13a-15(b)
under the Exchange Act, we carried out an evaluation, under the
supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our
disclosure controls and procedures. Based on the foregoing, our
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded
that, as of the end of the period covered by this report, our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective and were
operating at a reasonable assurance level.
Managements
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Internal control over financial reporting refers to the process
designed by, or under the supervision of, our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, and effected by our board
of directors, management and other personnel, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial
reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles, and includes those policies and
procedures that: (1) pertain to the maintenance of records
that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company;
(2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the
company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Internal control over financial reporting cannot provide
absolute assurance of achieving financial reporting objectives
because of its inherent limitations. Internal control over
financial reporting is a process that involves human diligence
and compliance and is subject to lapses in judgment and
breakdowns resulting from human failures. Internal control over
financial reporting also can be circumvented by collusion or
improper management override. Because of such limitations, there
is a risk that material misstatements may not be prevented or
detected on a timely basis by internal control over financial
reporting. However, these inherent limitations are known
features of the financial reporting process. Therefore, it is
possible to design into the process safeguards to reduce, though
not eliminate, this risk.
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting for the
company, as such term is defined in
Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Exchange Act. Under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation
of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting. Management has used the framework set forth in the
report entitled Internal Control Integrated
Framework published by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission to
evaluate the effectiveness of the companys internal
control over financial reporting. Based on its evaluation,
management has concluded that the companys internal
control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2006, the end of the companys most
recent fiscal year. KPMG LLP, our independent registered public
accounting firm, has issued an
91
attestation report on managements assessment of the
companys internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2006, which is included herein.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There has been no change in our internal control over financial
reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2006 that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None.
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
As required by Section 303A.12(a) of the NYSE Listed
Company Manual, our Chief Executive Officer made his annual
certification to the NYSE on June 16, 2006 stating that he
was not aware of any violation by our company of the corporate
governance listing standards of the NYSE. In addition, we have
filed, as exhibits to this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
the certifications of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer required under Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to be filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission regarding the quality of our public
disclosure.
The information concerning our directors, executive officers and
corporate governance required by Item 10 will be included
in the Proxy Statement to be filed relating to our 2007 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
Pursuant to instruction G(3) to
Form 10-K,
information concerning audit committee financial expert
disclosure set forth under the heading Information
Regarding the Board Committees of the
Board Audit Committee will be included in the
Proxy Statement to be filed relating to our 2007 Annual Meeting
of Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
Pursuant to instruction G(3) to
Form 10-K,
information concerning compliance with Section 16(a) of the
Exchange Act concerning our directors and executive officers set
forth under the heading entitled General
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance will be included in the Proxy Statement to be
filed relating to our 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is
incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information concerning our executive compensation required
by Item 11 will be included in the Proxy Statement to be
filed relating to our 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is
incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The information concerning the security ownership of certain
beneficial owners and management and related stockholder matters
required by Item 12 will be included in the Proxy Statement
to be filed relating to our 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders
and is incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
The information concerning certain relationships and related
transactions and director independence required by Item 13
will be included in the Proxy Statement to be filed relating to
our 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated
herein by reference.
92
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
The information concerning our principal accountant fees and
services required by Item 14 will be included in the Proxy
Statement to be filed relating to our 2007 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(b) Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Articles of Amendment and
Restatement of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.(1)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.(1)
|
|
3
|
.3
|
|
Articles Supplementary
Classifying BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.s 7.375%
Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock.(2)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Form of Certificate for Common
Stock of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.(3)
|
|
4
|
.2
|
|
Form of Certificate for 7.375%
Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc.(2)
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
Indenture, dated
September 25, 2006, among BioMed Realty, L.P., BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc. and U.S. Bank National Association, as
trustee, including the form of 4.50% Exchangeable Senior Notes
due 2026.(4)
|
|
10
|
.1
|
|
Fourth Amended and Restated
Agreement of Limited Partnership of BioMed Realty, L.P. dated as
of January 18, 2007.(5)
|
|
10
|
.2
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement
dated as of August 13, 2004 among BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.
and the persons named therein.(1)
|
|
10
|
.3
|
|
2004 Incentive Award Plan, as
amended.(6)
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Award
Agreement under the 2004 Incentive Award Plan.(7)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Form of Long Term Incentive Plan
Unit Award Agreement.(6)
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement
between BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and each of its directors and
officers.(3)
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
Employment Agreement between
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and Alan D. Gold dated as of
August 6, 2004.(1)
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
Employment Agreement between
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and Gary A. Kreitzer dated as of
August 6, 2004.(1)
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
First Amendment to Employment
Agreement between BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and Gary A. Kreitzer
dated as of September 15, 2006.(8)
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Employment Agreement between
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and John F. Wilson, II dated as
of August 6, 2004.(1)
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
First Amendment to Employment
Agreement between BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and John F.
Wilson, II dated as of March 27, 2006.(9)
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Employment Agreement between
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and Matthew G. McDevitt dated as of
August 6, 2004.(1)
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
First Amendment to Employment
Agreement between BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and Matthew G.
McDevitt dated as of February 27, 2006.(10)
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Employment Agreement between
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. and R. Kent Griffin dated as of
March 27, 2006.(9)
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
Contribution Agreement between
Alan D. Gold and BioMed Realty, L.P. dated as of May 4,
2004.(3)
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Contribution Agreement between
Gary A. Kreitzer and BioMed Realty, L.P. dated as of May 4,
2004.(3)
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
Contribution Agreement between
John F. Wilson, II and BioMed Realty, L.P. dated as of
May 4, 2004.(3)
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
Contribution Agreement between
Matthew G. McDevitt and BioMed Realty, L.P. dated as of
May 4, 2004.(3)
|
93
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
Form of Contribution Agreement
between the additional contributors and BioMed Realty, L.P.
dated as of May 4, 2004.(3)
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
Stock Purchase Warrant issued to
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. dated as of
August 11, 2004.(10)
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
BioMed Realty 401(k) Retirement
Savings Plan.(7)
|
|
10
|
.22
|
|
First Amendment to the BioMed
Realty 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan.(7)
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
Second Amendment to the BioMed
Realty 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan.(7)
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
Good Faith Amendment to the BioMed
Realty 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan.(10)
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
Third Amendment to the BioMed
Realty 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan.(10)
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
Amendment to the BioMed Realty
401(k) Retirement Savings Plan.(5)
|
|
10
|
.27
|
|
Agreement for Purchase of Real
Estate, dated as of April 15, 2005, between BioMed Realty,
L.P. and The Lyme Timber Company.(11)
|
|
10
|
.28
|
|
Secured Term Loan Agreement, dated
as of May 31, 2005, by and among BioMed Realty, L.P.,
KeyBank National Association, as Administrative Agent, and
certain lenders party thereto.(12)
|
|
10
|
.29
|
|
Form of Secured Term Loan Note.(12)
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
First Amendment to Secured Term
Loan Agreement, dated as of June 28, 2006, by and among
BioMed Realty, L.P., KeyBank National Association, as
Administrative Agent, and certain lenders party thereto.(13)
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
Second Amendment to Secured Term
Loan Agreement, dated as of November 3, 2006, by and among
BioMed Realty, L.P., KeyBank National Association, as
Administrative Agent, and certain lenders party thereto.(14)
|
|
10
|
.32
|
|
Unsecured Credit Agreement, dated
as of May 31, 2005, by and among BioMed Realty, L.P.,
KeyBank National Association, as Administrative Agent, and
certain lenders party thereto.(12)
|
|
10
|
.33
|
|
Form of Line Note under Unsecured
Credit Agreement.(12)
|
|
10
|
.34
|
|
Form of Term Note under Unsecured
Credit Agreement.(12)
|
|
10
|
.35
|
|
First Amended and Restated
Unsecured Credit Agreement, dated as of June 28, 2006, by
and among BioMed Realty, L.P., KeyBank National Association, as
Administrative Agent, and certain lenders party thereto.(13)
|
|
10
|
.36
|
|
First Amendment to First Amended
and Restated Unsecured Credit Agreement, dated as of
November 3, 2006, by and among BioMed Realty, L.P., KeyBank
National Association, as Administrative Agent, and certain
lenders party thereto.(14)
|
|
10
|
.37
|
|
Assumption, Consent and Loan
Modification Agreement, dated as of May 31, 2005, by and
among KS Parcel D, LLC, The Lyme Timber Company, BioMed Realty
Trust, Inc., BMR 500 Kendall Street LLC and The
Variable Annuity Life Insurance Company.(12)
|
|
10
|
.38
|
|
Promissory Note, dated as of
November 21, 2003, to The Variable Annuity Life Insurance
Company.(12)
|
|
10
|
.39
|
|
Mortgage, Security Agreement,
Fixture Filing, Financing Statement and Assignment of Leases and
Rents, dated as of November 21, 2003, in favor of The
Variable Annuity Life Insurance Company.(12)
|
|
10
|
.40
|
|
Lease, dated as of
January 18, 2001, by and between Kendall Square, LLC and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.41
|
|
First Amendment to Lease, dated as
of May 9, 2002, by and between Kendall Square, LLC and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.42
|
|
Second Amendment to Lease, dated
as of September 16, 2003, by and between KS Parcel A, LLC,
as successor to Kendall Square, LLC, and Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.43
|
|
Third Amendment to Lease, dated as
of December 22, 2003, by and between KS Parcel A, LLC, as
successor to Kendall Square, LLC, and Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.44
|
|
Fourth Amendment to Lease, dated
as of September 30, 2004, by and between KS Parcel A, LLC,
as successor to Kendall Square, LLC, and Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.45
|
|
Fifth Amendment to Lease, dated as
of April 15, 2005, by and between KS Parcel A, LLC, as
successor to Kendall Square, LLC, and Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Incorporated.(12)
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.46
|
|
Sixth Amendment to Lease, dated as
of September 23, 2005, by and between BMR-675 West
Kendall Street LLC, as successor to Kendall Square, LLC, and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(15)
|
|
10
|
.47
|
|
Seventh Amendment to Lease, dated
as of January 23, 2006, by and between BMR-675 West
Kendall Street LLC, as successor to Kendall Square, LLC, and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(10)
|
|
10
|
.48
|
|
Lease, dated as of
September 17, 1999, by and between Trustees of
Fort Washington Realty Trust and Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.49
|
|
Lease, dated March 3, 1995,
by and between Fort Washington Limited Partnership and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.50
|
|
First Amendment to Lease, dated as
of December 1996, by and between David E. Clem and David M.
Roby, as Trustees of Fort Washington Realty Trust, and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.51
|
|
Second Amendment to Lease, dated
as of June 13, 1997, by and between David E. Clem and David
M. Roby, as Trustees of Fort Washington Realty Trust, and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.52
|
|
Third Amendment to Lease, dated as
of October 1, 1998, by and between David E. Clem and David
M. Roby, as Trustees of Fort Washington Realty Trust, and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.53
|
|
Fourth Amendment to Lease, dated
as of February 22, 2000, by and between David E. Clem and
David M. Roby, as Trustees of Fort Washington Realty Trust,
and Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.54
|
|
Fifth Amendment to Lease, dated as
of May 1, 1999, by and between David E. Clem and David M.
Roby, as Trustees of Fort Washington Realty Trust, and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.55
|
|
Sixth Amendment to Lease, dated as
of April 6, 2005, by and between David E. Clem and David M.
Roby, as Trustees of Fort Washington Realty Trust, and
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.(12)
|
|
10
|
.56
|
|
Lease, dated November 14,
2006, between BMR-21 Erie Street LLC and Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Incorporated.(16)
|
|
10
|
.57
|
|
Agreement of Purchase and Sale,
dated as of May 2, 2006, between Human Genome Sciences,
Inc. and BioMed Realty, L.P.(17)
|
|
10
|
.58
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated as of
May 24, 2006, between BMR-Belward Campus Drive LSM LLC and
Human Genome Sciences, Inc. (18)
|
|
10
|
.59
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated as of
May 24, 2006, between BMR-Shady Grove Road HQ LLC and Human
Genome Sciences, Inc. (18)
|
|
10
|
.60
|
|
Secured Bridge Loan Agreement,
dated as of May 24, 2006, by and among BioMed Realty, L.P.,
KeyBank National Association, as Administrative Agent, and
certain lenders party thereto.(18)
|
|
10
|
.61
|
|
Form of Note under Secured Bridge
Loan Agreement.(18)
|
|
10
|
.62
|
|
First Amendment to Secured Bridge
Loan Agreement, dated as of July 5, 2006, by and among
BioMed Realty, L.P. and KeyBank National Association,
individually and as Administrative Agent.(19)
|
|
10
|
.63
|
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated
as of June 7, 2006, between Sun Microsystems, Inc. and
BioMed Realty, L.P.(20)
|
|
10
|
.64
|
|
First Amendment to Purchase and
Sale Agreement, dated as of June 22, 2006, between Sun
Microsystems, Inc. and BioMed Realty, L.P.(20)
|
|
10
|
.65
|
|
Second Amendment to Purchase and
Sale Agreement, dated as of June 23, 2006, between Sun
Microsystems, Inc. and BioMed Realty, L.P.(20)
|
|
10
|
.66
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement,
dated September 25, 2006, among BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.,
BioMed Realty, L.P., Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC and
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated.(4)
|
|
10
|
.67
|
|
Promissory Note, dated
August 23, 2006, by BMR-Shady Grove B LLC in favor of
KeyBank National Association.(21)
|
|
10
|
.68
|
|
Indemnity Deed of Trust,
Assignment of Leases and Rents, Security Agreement, and Fixture
Filing, dated August 23, 2006, by BMR-Shady Grove Road HQ
LLC in favor of KeyBank National Association.(21)
|
|
10
|
.69
|
|
Real Estate Purchase and Sale
Agreement, dated as of October 20, 2006, among BioMed
Realty, L.P., CLSB I, LLC and CLSB II, LLC.(22)
|
|
10
|
.70
|
|
First Amendment to Real Estate
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated as of November 2, 2006,
among BioMed Realty, L.P., CLSB I, LLC and CLSB II,
LLC.(14)
|
95
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.71
|
|
Secured Acquisition and
Construction Loan Agreement, dated as of November 17, 2006,
among BMR-Blackfan Circle LLC, KeyBank National Association, as
Administrative Agent, and certain other lenders party
thereto.(16)
|
|
10
|
.72
|
|
Promissory Note, dated
November 17, 2006, by BMR-Blackfan Circle LLC in favor of
KeyBank National Association.(16)
|
|
10
|
.73
|
|
Amended and Restated Secured
Acquisition and Construction Loan Agreement, dated as of
December 21, 2006, among BMR-Blackfan Circle LLC, KeyBank
National Association, as Administrative Agent, and certain other
lenders party thereto.(23)
|
|
10
|
.74
|
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated
as of January 29, 2007, among Rogers Street, LLC,
Lyme/Houston Development I, LP, Kendall Square LLC and
BioMed Realty, L.P.(5)
|
|
10
|
.75
|
|
First Amendment to Real Estate
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated as of February 16, 2007,
among Rogers Street, LLC, Lyme/Houston Development I, LP,
Kendall Square LLC and BioMed Realty, L.P.(5)
|
|
10
|
.76
|
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated
as of January 29, 2007, among
SP-K
Development, LLC,
SP-B1
Development, LLC, SP-A Development, LLC, SP-B2 Development, LLC,
SP-D Development, LLC,
SP-E
Development, LLC,
SP-J
Development, LLC, 110 Munson Street, LLC, SP-C Development, LLC,
Lyme Properties LLC and BioMed Realty, L.P.(5)
|
|
10
|
.77
|
|
First Amendment to Real Estate
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated as of February 16, 2007,
among SP-K
Development, LLC, SP-B1 Development, LLC,
SP-A
Development, LLC, SP-B2 Development, LLC, SP-D Development, LLC,
SP-E Development, LLC, SP-J Development, LLC, 110 Munson Street,
LLC, SP-C Development, LLC, Lyme Properties LLC and BioMed
Realty, L.P.(5)
|
|
10
|
.78
|
|
Director Compensation Policy.(24)
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
List of Subsidiaries of BioMed
Realty Trust, Inc.(5)
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of KPMG LLP.(5)
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.(5)
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.(5)
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certifications of Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.(5)
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 20, 2004. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Registration Statement on
Form 8-A
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
January 17, 2007. |
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Registration Statement of
Form S-11,
as amended (File
No. 333-115204),
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 5,
2004. |
|
(4) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust,
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 26, 2006. |
|
(5) |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
(6) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
January 5, 2007. |
|
(7) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
January 14, 2005. |
|
(8) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust,
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 15, 2006. |
|
(9) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
March 15, 2006. |
96
|
|
|
(10) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
March 15, 2006. |
|
(11) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
April 19, 2005. |
|
(12) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
June 3, 2005. |
|
(13) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
July 3, 2006. |
|
(14) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 8, 2006. |
|
(15) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 29, 2005. |
|
(16) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust,
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 20, 2006. |
|
(17) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 5,
2006. |
|
(18) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 26, 2006. |
|
(19) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
August 8, 2006. |
|
(20) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
July 17, 2006. |
|
(21) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust,
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
August 28, 2006. |
|
(22) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust,
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
October 24, 2006. |
|
(23) |
|
Incorporated herein by reference to BioMed Realty Trust,
Inc.s Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
December 28, 2006. |
|
(24) |
|
Incorporated by reference to BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.s
Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 6, 2007. |
97
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.
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc.
Alan D. Gold
Chairman of the Board, President and
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
Kent Griffin
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Karen A. Sztraicher
Vice President Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
Dated: February 28, 2007
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ BARBARA
R. CAMBON
Barbara
R. Cambon
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ EDWARD
A. DENNIS
Edward
A. Dennis
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ GARY
A. KREITZER
Gary
A. Kreitzer
|
|
Executive Vice President, General
Counsel, Secretary and Director
|
|
February 28, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ MARK
J. RIEDY
Mark
J. Riedy
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ THEODORE
D. ROTH
Theodore
D. Roth
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ M.
FAYE WILSON
M.
Faye Wilson
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007
|
98