显示标签为“industry”的博文。显示所有博文
显示标签为“industry”的博文。显示所有博文

2012年2月28日星期二

EU, Indonesia negotiate partnership

Jakarta (The Jakarta Post/ANN) – Indonesia and the European Union (EU) began negotiations on Monday on a comprehensive economic partnership agreement (CEPA) that seeks to eliminate over 95 per cent of import tariffs on goods and improve bilateral investment.
The chief operating officer of the EU’s external action service, David O’Sullivan, said the Indonesia-European Union CEPA would be very important for the economic growth of both regions amidst the global economic turmoil.
“We already are a major trading and investment partner of Indonesia. In fact, we have huge complementarity. We believe it is very beneficial in terms of trade and investment to have an agreement with Indonesia. It is a win-win solution for both sides,¿ O’Sullivan said.
The EU has a combined non oil and gas trade value of US$32 billion in 2011 with Indonesia, an all time high, and a trade surplus of $8 billion for Indonesia.
In terms of investments, businesses from the EU invested up to $2.2 billion in 2011, making it the second-largest source of foreign investment into Indonesia. EU companies also employ over 500,000 employees in Indonesia.
“It is time to start the negotiation. From our perspective, trade negotiation typically takes a couple of years but this negotiation could go relatively quickly,¿ O’Sullivan said.
Based on policy recommendations from a joint study team, the CEPA would cover improvements in market access, capacity building and facilitation of trade and investment. On trade, the agreement would implement gradual tariff reduction within a period of nine years, eliminating 95 per cent of tariffs and possibly even the remaining 5 per cent.
The capacity-building program would include a permanent forum for business-to-business and business-to-government technical dialogue and joint financing for programs. CEPA would also cover standard protocols for joint cooperation in infrastructure development under the so-called private-partnership framework.
House of Representatives’ trade commission chairman Airlangga Hartarto said that the multitude of issues being discussed meant the agreement could potentially provide many beneficial opportunities for both regions.
“This is not a Free Trade Area (FTA) agreement but will be more comprehensive. The issues being discussed include trading, investment and capacity-building. These issues make this agreement different from the FTA, which only aims at eliminating levies,¿ Airlangga said.
Indonesian Employers’ Association (Apindo) chairman Sofjan Wanandi said that he expected EU investment to provide benefits to small- and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs), a sector on which Indonesia relied heavily for growth.
“I believe this [agreement] will benefit both sides and we must also involve SMEs in our future investment plans. We are going to promote this agreement throughout the essential business regions in the country,¿ Sofjan said.
“Now that the negotiation is underway, we need to promote this agreement to the public so that they can give us their input. This [negotiation] will take time and therefore Indonesia must play the main role in ensuring the discussions go in line with our interests,¿ he added.
Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin) deputy chairman for international trade Emirsyah Satar said that establishing a comprehensive partnership with the EU was important because there was still a lot of untapped potential.
“We rank only at number 23 in the world in imports to the EU. On the other hand, the EU is the fourth-largest exporter into Indonesia. So, there is still a lot of room for business growth,¿ Emirsyah said.
COPYRIGHT: ASIA NEWS NETWORK
Read Yahoo! News on your mobile. Click here!

2012年2月22日星期三

Kenya's Housing Finance 2011 pretax profit, loans up

NAIROBI (Reuters) – Kenya’s second-largest mortgage lender Housing Finance posted a 74 percent jump in 2011 profit, as its loan book grew by a third despite high interest rates, it said on Wednesday, adding it planned to raise long-term financing abroad.
Housing Finance said its pretax profit rose to 975.8 million shillings, while its loan book grew by 31 percent to 24.2 billion shillings and earnings per share climbed 26 percent to 2.70 shillings.
“We are optimistic that we can maintain the growth curve in the current financial year on the back of long term financing which will shield the company from current market fluctuation in the money market,” Frank Ireri, the managing director of the lender, told an investor briefing.
He said the firm’s net interest income rose to 1.9 billion shillings from 1.4 billion shillings.
Concerned with the huge fluctuations in short-term funding instruments, Housing Finance said in October it was considering floating a 25-year housing bond targeting pension funds and real estate investment trusts.
Ireri said the company was now seeking to raise funds abroad as opposed to the bond, because of the high domestic rates.
“We cannot come in with a bond right now because guys will ask for very high interest rates. We are borrowing an offshore debt,” Ireri said.
The mortgage lender raised 7 billion shillings through a seven-year bond issue in October 2010. The bond had a fixed rate set at 8.5 percent and a variable rate pegged at 3 percent above the 182-day Treasury bill rate.
High interest rates and double digit inflation in Kenya are hurting the real estate industry, as developers and buyers struggle to meet financing requirements, property pricing index firm HassConsult said in January.
Shilling depreciation for most of 2011 also slowed the flow of real estate developments and hurt the industry as construction material costs rose.
“There is a lot of imported content in construction and with the exchange rate going crazy and interest rates raising last year some developers slowed down,” said Ireri.
“The impact may still be there this year, but in 2013 we may find that there is a housing shortage … and there will be high demand again.”
http://tourism9.com    http://vkins.com

2012年2月20日星期一

Budget must provide 'clarity'

http://tourism9.com/    http://vkins.com/
PravinGordhan1 Independent Newspapers
Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan. Photo: Neil Baynes
In the Budget speech on February 22, the SA Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Sacci) will be “seeking clarity” on a number of issues, its CEO Neren Rau says.
These issues include the planned financing model of the various infrastructure investment programs and the specific borrowing strategy to avoid crowding out of the private sector, as well as the progress already made on provincial interventions by the National Treasury and the expected timelines for continued assistance to these provincial governments towards restoration of a conducive business environment and fiscal sustainability.
Sacci also wants information on the strategy to achieve a tax neutral outcome for the South African business community given the possible additional taxes such as the carbon tax and local business tax as well as progress on finding a suitable funding model for the National Health Insurance (NHI) scheme.
Other issues on which clarity is required concern tangible and immediate measures to cut regulatory bottlenecks and red tape for business generally, and SMEs in particular, in order to reduce the cost of doing business in SA.
Information on progress on the integration of development finance institutions (DFIs) and general business support, promotion initiatives and plans to ease the access to finance for SMEs is also required, according to Sacci.
Clarity for foreign and domestic investors on economic stability specifically relating to concerns on nationalisation is needed and Sacci hopes that the Budget statement “will reflect a business-friendly fiscal policy that reduces the many hindrances to achieving economic growth and job creation by the private sector in SA.” – I-Net Bridge

2012年2月17日星期五

SRS Sponsors New Whitepaper: “Energy Efficiency Retrofit Financing Options for the Commercial Real Estate Industry”

TRUMBULL, Conn.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–
Sustainable Real Estate Solutions, Inc. (SRS), the industry leader in on-demand building energy assessment and proprietary benchmarking software, today announced it is sponsoring a new whitepaper: Energy Efficiency Retrofit Financing Options for the Commercial Real Estate Industry. Published by Building Energy Performance Assessment News (BEPAnews), this new report is the seventh in its Critical Issues Series and is available at no cost.
The paper discusses innovative, “market ready” financing mechanisms that are supported by new tools that significantly reduce the financial underwriting risk. It also describes how these solutions solve the underwriting issues that have delayed large scale market adoption of commercial property energy efficiency investment. (download paper)
“SRS is proud to sponsor this research paper that provides commercial building stakeholders with the insight needed to accelerate energy efficiency retrofits and unlock the full-potential to monetize energy savings opportunities, noted Brian McCarter, SRS CEO. He added, “these new best practices have overcome most if not all the technical and financial underwriting obstacles thereby allowing building owners to obtain attractive financing for energy efficiency projects. Furthermore, these recent developments will enable energy retrofit financing to become a mainstream financial asset class with a high degree of standardization, predictability and scale.”
About Sustainable Real Estate Solutions, Inc. (SRS)
SRS, an industry leader in on-demand building energy assessment and proprietary benchmarking software, delivers Sustainable Real Estate Manager® an Internet-based software-as-a-service (SaaS) workflow platform enabling building stakeholders to assess, benchmark and optimize the energy and sustainability performance of their properties. Its Peer Building Benchmarking™ database contains over 120,000 buildings nationwide encompassing 15 property types comprising 3.3 billion square feet, over $7.8 billion in annual energy costs and $635 million in annual water/sewer costs and has reinvented commercial real estate’s energy efficiency benchmarking best practice. For more information, visit www.SRMnetwork.com.
http://tourism9.cm/    http://vkins.com/

2012年2月14日星期二

Nuclear Energy Quarterly Deals Analysis – M&A and Investment Trends, Q4 2011

NEW YORK, Feb. 14, 2012 /PRNewswire/ — Reportlinker.com announces that a new market research report is available in its catalogue:
Nuclear Energy Quarterly Deals Analysis – M&A and Investment Trends, Q4 2011
http://www.reportlinker.com/p0369454/Nuclear-Energy-Quarterly-Deals-Analysis—MA-and-Investment-Trends-Q4-2011.html#utm_source=prnewswire&utm_medium=pr&utm_campaign=Nuclear_energy
Nuclear Energy Quarterly Deals Analysis – M&A and Investment Trends, Q4 2011
SummaryGlobalData’s “Nuclear Energy Quarterly Deals Analysis – M&A and Investment Trends, Q4 2011″ report is an essential source of data and trend analysis on Mergers and Acquisitions (M&As) and financings in the nuclear energy market. The report provides detailed information on M&As, equity and debt offerings, private equity and venture capital (PE/VC) and partnership transactions recorded in the nuclear energy industry in Q4 2011. The report provides detailed comparative data on the number of deals and their value in the last five quarters, categorized by deal types, segments and geographies. The report also provides information on the top advisory firms in the nuclear energy industry.
Data presented in this report is derived from GlobalData’s proprietary in-house Nuclear Energy eTrack deals database and primary and secondary research.
Scope
- Analyze market trends for the nuclear energy market in the global arena- Review of deal trends in uranium mining & processing, equipment and services, and power generation markets- Analysis of M&A, Equity/Debt Offerings, Private Equity, Venture Financing and Partnerships in the nuclear energy industry-
Summary
of nuclear energy deals globally in the last five quarters- Information on top deals happened in the nuclear energy industry- Geographies covered include – North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, South & Central America, and Middle East & Africa- League Tables of financial advisors in M&A and equity/debt offerings. This includes key advisors such as Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, and Goldman Sachs
Reasons to buy
- Enhance your decision making capability in a more rapid and time sensitive manner- Find out the major deal performing segments for investments in your industry- Evaluate type of companies divesting / acquiring and ways to raise capital in the market- Do deals with an understanding of how competitors are financed, and the mergers and partnerships that have shaped the nuclear energy market- Identify major private equity/venture capital firms that are providing finance in the nuclear energy market- Identify growth segments and opportunities in each region within the industry- Look for key financial advisors where you are planning to raise capital from the market or for acquisitions within the industry- Identify top deals makers in the nuclear energy market1 Table of contents1 Table of contents 21.1 List of Tables 31.2 List of Figures 42 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Deals Summary 52.1 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Deals Analysis, Q4 2011 52.2 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Number of Deals by Type, Q4 2011 72.3 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Deals, Q4 2011 83 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Deal Makers, Q4 2011 94 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Deals Summary, by Type 104.1 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Mergers and Acquisitions, Q4 2011 104.1.1 Top M&As in Q4 2011 114.2 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Asset Transactions, Q4 2011 124.2.1 Top Asset Transactions in Q4 2011 134.3 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Equity Offerings, Q4 2011 144.3.1 Top Equity Offerings in Q4 2011 154.4 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Debt Offerings, Q4 2011 164.4.1 Top Debt Offerings in Q4 2011 174.5 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Partnerships, Q4 2011 184.5.1 Partnership Deals in Q4 2011 195 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Deals Summary, by Sector 205.1 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Uranium Mining and Processing Deals, Q4 2011 205.1.1 Uranium Mining and Processing – Deals of the Quarter 215.2 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Power Generation Deals, Q4 2011 225.2.1 Power Generation – Deals of the Quarter 235.3 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Equipment and Services Deals, Q4 2011 245.3.1 Equipment and Services – Deals of the Quarter 256 Nuclear Energy Industry, Deal Summary, by Geography 266.1 Nuclear Energy Industry, North America Deals, Q4 2011 266.1.1 North America – Deals of the Quarter 276.2 Nuclear Energy Industry, Europe Deals, Q4 2011 286.2.1 Europe – Deals of the Quarter 296.3 Nuclear Energy Industry, Asia-Pacific Deals, Q4 2011 306.3.1 Asia-Pacific – Deals of the Quarter 316.4 Nuclear Energy Industry, Rest of the World Deals, Q4 2011 326.4.1 Rest of the World – Deals of the Quarter 337 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Advisors 347.1 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, M&A, Q1 2011-Q4 2011 347.2 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, Equity Offerings, Q1 2011-Q4 2011 357.3 Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, Debt Offerings, Q1 2011-Q4 2011 368 Further Information 378.1 Methodology 378.2 About GlobalData 378.3 Contact Us 388.4 Disclosure information 388.5 Disclaimer 38
List of Tables
Table 1: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 6Table 2: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Deals by Type, Number and %, Q4 2011 7Table 3: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Deals, Q4 2011 8Table 4: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Deal Makers, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2011 9Table 5: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Mergers and Acquisitions, Deal Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 10Table 6: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top M&As, Q4 2011 11Table 7: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Asset Transactions, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 12Table 8: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Asset Transactions, Q4 2011 13Table 9: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Equity Offerings, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 14Table 10: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Equity Offerings, Q4 2011 15Table 11: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Debt Offerings, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 16Table 12: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Debt Offerings, Q4 2011 17Table 13: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Partnerships, Deals Summary, Number of Deals, Q4 2010-Q4 2011 18Table 14: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Uranium Mining and Processing Segment, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 21Table 15: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Power Generation Segment, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 22Table 16: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Equipment and Services Segment, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 24Table 17: Nuclear Energy Industry, North America, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 27Table 18: Nuclear Energy Industry, Europe, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 28Table 19: Nuclear Energy Industry, Asia-Pacific, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 30Table 20: Nuclear Energy Industry, Rest of the World, Deals Summary, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 32Table 21: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, Mergers and Acquisitions, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q1 2010-Q4 2011 34Table 22: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, Equity Offerings, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q1 2011-Q4 2011 35Table 23: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global Top Financial Advisors, Debt Offerings, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q1 2011-Q4 2011 36
List of Figures
Figure 1: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 5Figure 2: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Number of Deals by Type (%), Q4 2011 7Figure 3: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Mergers and Acquisitions, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 10Figure 4: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Asset Transactions, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 12Figure 5: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Equity Offerings, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 14Figure 6: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Debt Offerings, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 16Figure 7: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Partnerships, Number of Deals, Q4 2010-Q4 2011 18Figure 8: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Uranium Mining and Processing Segment, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 20Figure 9: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Power Generation Segment, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 22Figure 10: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Equipment and Services Segment, Number of Deals and Deal Values (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 24Figure 11: Nuclear Energy Industry, North America, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 26Figure 12: Nuclear Energy Industry, Europe, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 28Figure 13: Nuclear Energy Industry, Asia-Pacific, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 30Figure 14: Nuclear Energy Industry, Rest of the World, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q4 2010-Q4 2011 32Figure 15: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, Mergers and Acquisitions, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q1 2011-Q4 2011 34Figure 16: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, Equity Offerings, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q1 2011-Q4 2011 35Figure 17: Nuclear Energy Industry, Global, Top Financial Advisors, Debt Offerings, Number of Deals and Deal Value (US$m), Q1 2011-Q4 2011 36
To order this report:Nuclear energy Industry: Nuclear Energy Quarterly Deals Analysis – M&A and Investment Trends, Q4 2011
More
Market Research Report
Check our
Industry Analysis and Insights
CONTACT
Nicolas Bombourg
Reportlinker
Email: nbo@reportlinker.com
US: (805)652-2626
Intl: +1 805-652-2626

http://tourism9.com/    http://vkins.com/

2012年2月13日星期一

DealBook: Private Equity Industry Attracts S.E.C. Scrutiny

In recent years, the private equity industry has escaped much of the regulatory scrutiny that has been directed toward hedge funds and Wall Street banks. But that appears to be changing.
The Securities and Exchange Commission has begun a broad examination of the private equity industry, seeking information about the business practices of some of the country’s most powerful financial firms.
The S.E.C.’s enforcement unit sent a letter late last year to several private equity funds as part of what it called an “informal inquiry” into the industry, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. It is not clear which firms received the letter.
While the S.E.C. emphasized that the request should not be construed as an indication that it suspected any wrongdoing, its goal in gathering information was to investigate possible violations of securities laws, these people said.
One focus of the inquiry is how private equity firms value their investments and report performance. Unlike the valuing of publicly traded stocks, valuing private equity investments — largely in private companies that are not listed on an exchange — can be a thorny and subjective process.
The S.E.C.’s concern, say people familiar with the government inquiry, is that some private equity funds might overstate the value of their portfolios to attract investors for future funds.
“Private equity firms work hard, with auditors and company managements, to provide accurate valuations of their largely illiquid holdings to their investors,” said Steve Judge, the chief executive of the Private Equity Growth Capital Council, the industry’s trade group.
The S.E.C. inquiry, which was reported earlier by The Wall Street Journal, adds to the increased scrutiny of the private equity industry in Washington and expands the agency’s interest in how financial institutions value their holdings.
While private equity billionaires like Henry R. Kravis and Stephen A. Schwarzman have long made headlines for their audacious deals, the industry has historically received minimal attention from federal lawmakers, in part because private equity clients — typically pension funds and the investment arms of foreign governments — are considered to be more sophisticated than average investors.
The inquiry also comes at a time when private equity has been thrust onto the national stage as a central issue in the presidential election. Mitt Romney, a leading contender for the Republican nomination, earned his fortune running Bain Capital, one of the world’s largest private equity firms.
The industry drew heightened interest during last decade’s buyout boom. Backed by billions of dollars in loans from flush banks, the firms acquired major American companies, including the radio giant Clear Channel Communications, the hospital chain H.C.A. and the automaker Chrysler.
Washington began to pay attention. The favorable tax treatment that private equity executives receive on a large portion of their compensation came under attack. The Justice Department began investigating whether the world’s largest private equity firms colluded to drive down the prices of acquisitions that they teamed up on.
Under the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, most private equity firms must register with the S.E.C. by the end of March. The commission already oversees many firms. The Blackstone Group and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, for example, are publicly traded companies that provide the commission with detailed financial information.
While the largest private equity shops receive the most publicity, the industry is vast, with several thousand firms and more than $1 trillion in assets under management.
Critics of the industry argue that private equity’s core investment strategy — taking on large amounts of debt to buy companies — too often results in bankruptcies and job losses.
Private equity officials counter that their acquisitions drive economic growth by making companies more competitive. They also boast of delivering superior investment returns to clients, including public pension funds.
The S.E.C inquiry appears less focused on big-picture questions like private equity’s effect on jobs or the companies that it buys. Instead, the commission wants to deepen its understanding of more arcane issues like firms’ fee structures and how they value investments.
Handling the inquiry is the S.E.C.’s enforcement division, which drew criticism for its ineffectiveness as a regulator in the period leading up to the financial crisis. The agency has recently taken a more aggressive public stance, vowing to root out misconduct on Wall Street.
Speaking at a private equity conference last month, Robert B. Kaplan, co-chief of the S.E.C. enforcement division’s newly formed asset management unit, said he thought the private equity industry lacked sufficient oversight and deserved more scrutiny.
One area of focus is portfolio valuation. Private equity managers use varying, complex methodologies to value their holdings, which are often private companies bought using debt. Because there are no easily ascertainable market prices for private companies, subjective judgments play a significant role in their valuation.
While the industry has in recent years provided managers with a framework for valuing their private holdings, even its largest, most sophisticated players acknowledge the complexities involved.
The Carlyle Group, for instance, which has filed for an initial public offering, lists valuation as a “risk factor” in its registration statement with the S.E.C.
“Valuation methodologies for certain assets in our funds can involve subjective judgments,” Carlyle said, “and the fair value of assets established pursuant to such methodologies may be incorrect, which could result in the misstatement of fund performance.”
Private equity funds argue that they are rigorous in their valuation process. Many firms use independent financial advisory firms that specialize in portfolio valuation, like Duff & Phelps.
They also contend that interim valuations are less important to investors in private equity funds than investors in other vehicles like hedge funds. That is because private equity funds earn profits only when they sell a holding. By contrast, hedge fund managers are paid on their gains at the end of each year.
“Because private equity investments are not traded on stock exchanges, investors and company management can focus on creating value over the long term and not on the monthly or quarterly pressures of the public markets,” said Mr. Judge, the chief of the industry trade group.
The valuation of assets has become a main focus of law enforcement authorities, not only at private equity firms but also at hedge funds and Wall Street banks.
Earlier this month, federal prosecutors charged three former Credit Suisse executives with inflating the value of their mortgage-bond holdings to secure higher bonus payouts.
The S.E.C. recently filed several actions against hedge funds as part of an initiative to combat fraudulent valuations and phony returns. The effort — called the “aberrational performance inquiry” — uses what the S.E.C. calls proprietary risk analytics to evaluate hedge fund performance.
In announcing the initiative, the S.E.C. emphasized that it was interested in assessing returns across Wall Street.
“We are applying analytics across the investment adviser space — beyond performance and beyond hedge funds,” the agency said.

http://tourism9.cm/    http://vkins.com/

2012年2月10日星期五

Pension Funds Get Queasy over Private Equity

By Cristina Alesci and Devin Banerjee
Mitt Romney’s campaign for the Republican Presidential nomination may be creating funding headaches for his former colleagues in the private equity industry. Romney’s opponents have characterized Bain Capital—the firm he helped found in 1984 and left in 1999—and other buyout managers as corporate looters who enrich themselves at the expense of ordinary workers. The issue is likely to remain in the news should Romney win his party’s nomination and face President Obama in the general election.
With public scrutiny focused on private equity funds, pension funds are more reluctant to invest and may ask for more details on job creation and push for lower fees, according to officials and trustees at public pensions. “Pension funds have boards. They don’t want to be giving money to an industry that has a taint,” says Tony James, president of Blackstone Group, the world’s largest private equity firm. “Similarly, boards of directors don’t want to sell their company to organizations they don’t view as respectable. So it could be very damaging for the industry.”
The debate comes as the industry is competing for a shrinking pool of investor dollars. Fundraising has fallen off sharply since the onset of the global financial crisis, staying below $100 million each quarter, according to London-based researcher Preqin. In the second quarter of 2007, at the peak of the leveraged buyout boom, private equity firms raised almost $214 billion. In the fourth quarter of 2011, they raised $52.4 billion.
Public and private pension funds in the U.S. provide 42 percent of the capital for all private equity investments, according to the Private Equity Growth Capital Council in Washington. Public employee pension funds, which must answer to ordinary workers, are sensitive to protracted debates about managers’ compensation and whether buyouts create value and jobs, says one official who asked not to be named because he wasn’t authorized to speak on the topic. “The political attacks against Romney and Bain will definitely come up when firms pitch us their new funds,” says William R. Atwood, executive director of the Illinois State Board of Investment, which oversees $10.4 billion in pension funds. “You’d be crazy not to bring it up.” The Illinois pension board had $621.3 million, or 6 percent of its assets, in private equity as of Dec. 31, according to its website.
Bad publicity has hurt private equity firms in the past. Last year, Blackstone lost out on a deal to manage hedge fund investments for New York City’s public pension funds after the company’s chief strategist suggested retiree benefits were too generous.
Bain tends to be less reliant on pension funds than its rivals. When Romney set out to raise Bain’s first fund in 1984, he steered clear of pension funds, pursuing high-net-worth individuals who contributed about $37 million, according to a person who worked with Romney at the time. Kohlberg Kravis Roberts’s co-founders, by contrast, received early capital from Oregon’s and Washington’s pensions, with the latter contributing $12 million to KKR’s first fund in 1982.
The success of Bain’s first fund, which generated a 61 percent average annual return, according to marketing documents from 2004 obtained by Bloomberg, allowed Bain to charge a premium for its investment services. Bain collects 30 percent of the profit on its investments, the highest in the industry. Pensions historically have been less willing to pay the higher performance fees. In a recent fund, Bain relied on pensions for about 9 percent of client assets. Alex Stanton, a spokesman for Bain, declined to comment.
One Bain executive expects the storm to blow over. “Our limited partners have been with us for 28 years, many of them,” Bain Managing Director Stephen Pagliuca said in an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Jan. 27. “We just keep our heads down and try to build value.” Pagliuca also said that pensions will come to rely more on private equity to meet their growing obligations to workers because traditional assets like stocks and bonds won’t return enough. Still, with Romney’s candidacy keeping the spotlight on the industry, Atwood of the Illinois State Board of Investment says there’s bound to be an impact. “We all know that private equity managers make a lot of money, and we know how they do their business,” he says. “But when it’s on the front page, it causes us to think twice when making investment decisions. Private equity is more lucrative when it’s kept quiet.”
The bottom line: Pension funds, which provide 42 percent of the private equity industry’s capital, may pull back amid criticism of Romney and Bain.
Alesci is a reporter for Bloomberg News in New York. Banerjee is a reporter for Bloomberg News in New York.
http://tourism9.com/    http://vkins.com/

2012年2月7日星期二

Private-Equity Lobbying Helped Protect Romney’s Tax Benefits

February 07, 2012, 7:18 AM EST
By Steven Sloan
Feb. 7 (Bloomberg) — The largest U.S. private-equity funds and venture capital firms have relied on a five-year, multimillion-dollar lobbying campaign to protect the carried interest tax break that helped drive presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s 2010 effective tax rate below 14 percent.
With the issue gaining attention in this year’s U.S. presidential election campaign, the investment industry is again girding to defend its preferential tax treatment. Blackstone Group LP alone spent $5 million in 2011 lobbying Congress on issues including the tax treatment of carried interest.
“If anything preserves the status quo, it will be the very heavy lobbying campaign,” said Edward Kleinbard, a law professor at the University of Southern California. “There’s no other reason for the subsidy to survive.”
Opponents of the tax rate for carried interest see this as an opportunity to press for change. Romney released his 2010 tax returns on Jan. 24, revealing he paid an effective tax rate of 13.9 percent on income of $21.6 million.
Romney, a former Republican governor of Massachusetts and co-founder of Bain Capital LLC, has come to personify the debate over whether the carried interest paid to private-equity managers should be taxed at the capital gains rate of 15 percent while ordinary income is taxed at rates as high as 35 percent.
Tax Fairness Debate
Democrats view the carried interest issue as an element of the tax fairness theme that President Barack Obama is highlighting in his re-election campaign. Representative Sander Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, plans to introduce a bill as soon as this week that would tax carried interest at the same rate as regular income, according to spokesman Josh Drobnyk. The bill probably won’t advance in the Republican-controlled chamber this year.
Carried interest is the profits-based compensation that private-equity managers, real estate investors and members of oil and gas partnerships often receive. They get a portion of their clients’ earnings as investment income if the underlying earnings are treated that way. Levin and Obama call carried interest compensation for work, which they say should be viewed like wages for tax purposes.
Private-equity firms invested more than $148 billion in 1,234 U.S.-based companies in 2010, according to the Private Equity Growth Capital Council. The industry says it employs more than 8 million people.
Washington Lobbyists
Companies opposed to changing the tax treatment of carried interest have hired veteran Washington lobbyists to make their case. Wayne Berman of Ogilvy Government Relations is Blackstone’s top lobbyist on the issue. He was an assistant commerce secretary during George H.W. Bush’s administration. Other Ogilvy lobbyists working for Blackstone include Drew Maloney, who was a staffer for former House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican, and Moses Mercado, the former House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt’s deputy chief of staff.
Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. hired former Representative Vic Fazio, a California Democrat, to work with Congress on “tax issues affecting private-equity firms and their portfolio companies,” according to lobbying records. The New York-based private-equity company spent $150,000 in the fourth quarter on lobbyists from Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld to work on issues that included tax policy.
Bain spent $80,000 during the fourth quarter to hire lobbyists from Public Strategies Washington Inc. to “monitor tax reform developments,” lobbying records show. Joseph O’Neill and Paul Snyder are lobbying for Romney’s former company.
O’Neill was chief of staff to former Senate Finance Committee Chairman Lloyd Bentsen and helped run the late Texas Democrat’s 1988 vice presidential bid. Snyder was a legislative assistant to former House Speaker Tip O’Neill, the late Massachusetts Democrat.
Budget Deficit
Raising taxes on carried interest compensation wouldn’t do much to narrow the U.S. budget deficit. In its fiscal 2012 budget request, the Obama administration said the proposal to tax carried interest as ordinary income would generate $14.8 billion over 10 years. In December, the deficit stood at almost $1.3 trillion.
The issue has divided Congress along mostly partisan lines. The last time the Senate considered a bill that would have increased taxes on carried interest — in June 2010 — every Republican voted against it, preventing the bill from advancing. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska was the only Democrat to oppose the legislation.
Few Defections
The same bill was passed in the House that year with 15 lawmakers in each party voting against their leaders.
As the debate over carried-interest taxation advanced in Congress, the Private Equity Growth Capital Council was formed in February 2007 so the industry could make its case more directly to lawmakers.
The group, whose members include the Carlyle Group LP, based in Washington, and New York-based Blackstone spent about $2.5 million that year lobbying Congress on issues that included measures to tax carried interest at the same rate as ordinary income. It spent $2.2 million on lobbying in 2011.
“We believe that tax policy should incentivize the kind of entrepreneurial risk-taking that private-equity firms take every day,” said Ken Spain, a spokesman for the Private Equity Growth Capital Council, a trade group based in Washington. “We remain vigilant in respect to this issue. Private equity as an asset class is going to be a topic of discussion throughout 2012.”
Spain is a former communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee.
Comprehensive Overhaul
While the issue will be a central one in the presidential campaign and on Capitol Hill, the taxation of carried interest probably won’t change until Congress considers a comprehensive tax-code overhaul. That would be difficult to enact before 2013.
One potential challenge for private equity is something that otherwise would be seen as a favorable development for the industry: a Romney administration. Ending the preferential treatment of capital gains if Romney wins the presidency could dissolve notions that he is a captive to his former industry, said Martin Sullivan, a contributing editor at Tax Analysts, a nonprofit organization in Falls Church, Virginia.
“It will be much easier to repeal if Mitt Romney becomes president than if Mr. Obama remains president,” he said.
Still, Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom told reporters last month that the Republican presidential candidate thinks carried interest should be taxed at the same rate as a capital gain. The candidate has proposed eliminating the tax on capital gains for those with adjusted gross incomes of less than $200,000 a year.
‘Convoluted’ Code
Private-equity executives also rely on fairness arguments to make their case. In a Jan. 27 appearance on Bloomberg Television, Steve Pagliuca, the managing partner of Bain Capital, said the tax code is “convoluted” and “almost unintelligible.”
“We’ve got to have a fair tax code,” he said. “We don’t wake up every day saying ‘Well, what’s the tax code?’ We wake up trying to build great businesses and we pay all of the taxes that are necessary.”
Mark Heesen, president of the National Venture Capital Association, an industry trade group based in Arlington, Virginia, said his industry often reminds lawmakers of its differences from other investors such as private-equity firms. Venture capital firms typically invest in early-stage companies and don’t use as much leverage as private-equity investors do.
Creating Something
“We are able to demonstrate our belief that quintessential capital gains are all about creating something out of nothing,” he said. “That’s what venture capital does.”
Heesen said his message to Congress is that it’s important to maintain the link between carried interest and capital gains, even if the capital gains tax rate increases. Unless Congress acts, such gains will be taxed at 20 percent in 2013. High earners will face an additional 3.8 percent tax on capital gains and other unearned income as part of the 2010 health-care law.
On the other side of the issue is the AFL-CIO, which has lobbied in favor of changing how carried interest is taxed, and is prepared to do so again. Damon Silvers, the policy director for the labor organization in Washington, called the treatment of carried interest a “tax subsidy for leveraged buyouts.”
“We are going to be pressing the carried interest issue at whatever opportunity we get,” he said. “Mitt Romney’s tax returns are the world’s greatest educational tool about the impact of the carried-interest loophole.”
The AFL-CIO spent $1.1 million in 2007 to lobby Congress on issues that included a Senate bill to raise taxes on carried interest.
Lobbying on the carried-interest debate is only part of the reason the tax break has survived, said David Donnelly, the national campaigns director at the Public Campaign Action Fund, a Washington nonprofit group that tracks political contributions. Investors who are paid in carried interest are often the well-heeled donors that members of both parties turn to for campaign contributions, he said.
“I don’t think it’s simply the lobbying,” Donnelly said. “The people who are interested in this particular provision are high net-worth individuals. That’s a constituency that Congress always cares about when they have to raise money to fund their campaigns.”
–With assistance from Richard Rubin in Washington and Cristina Alesci in New York. Editors: Jodi Schneider, Robin Meszoly
To contact the reporter on this story: Steven Sloan in Washington at ssloan7@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jodi Schneider at jschneider50@bloomberg.net


http://tourism9.com/    http://vkins.com/

2012年2月3日星期五

Simon Property Group Reports Fourth Quarter Results, Announces Increase In Quarterly Dividend and Provides 2012 Guidance

INDIANAPOLIS, Feb. 3, 2012 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Simon Property Group, Inc. (the “Company” or “Simon”) (NYSE: SPG – News) today reported results for the quarter and year ended December 31, 2011.
Results for the Quarter
  • Net income attributable to common stockholders was $362.9 million, or $1.24 per diluted share, as compared to $217.9 million, or $0.74 per diluted share, in the prior year period. The increase on a per share basis was 67.6%.

  • Funds from Operations (“FFO”) was $678.9 million, or $1.91 per diluted share, as compared to $638.7 million, or $1.80 per diluted share, in the prior year period. The increase on a per share basis was 6.1%.
Results for the Year
  • Net income attributable to common stockholders was $1.021 billion, or $3.48 per diluted share, as compared to $610.4 million, or $2.10 per diluted share, in the prior year. The increase on a per share basis was 65.7%.

  • FFO was $2.439 billion, or $6.89 per diluted share, as compared to $1.770 billion, or $5.03 per diluted share, in the prior year. The increase on a per share basis was 37.0%.  2010 FFO as adjusted for debt extinguishment charges was $2.121 billion or $6.03 per diluted share. The increase on an as adjusted per share basis was 14.3%.
“Our portfolio of high quality assets continues to demonstrate strength as our regional malls and Premium Outlets generated comparable property net operating income growth of 4.5% in the quarter,” said David Simon, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. “Occupancy in the portfolio was 30 basis points higher than one year ago and our tenants reported a robust increase in sales of 10.7%. Financing activities during the quarter enhanced our industry leading balance sheet and the ramping up of development and redevelopment activities positions us to continue to deliver strong results for our stockholders. Given our results in 2011 and our current view of 2012, we are also pleased to announce an increase in our quarterly dividend to $0.95 per share from $0.90.”
U.S. Operational Statistics(1)


As ofAs of%

December 31, 2011December 31, 2010Increase
Occupancy(2)94.8%94.5%+ 30 basis points
Total Sales per Sq. Ft. (3)$536$48410.7%
Average Rent per Sq. Ft. (2)$39.42$37.774.4%
(1)  Combined information for U.S. regional malls and U.S. Premium Outlets, including the Prime portfolio. Prior period amounts have been restated to include Prime. Does not include information for properties owned by SPG-FCM (the Mills portfolio).
(2)  Represents mall stores in regional malls and all owned gross leasable area in Premium Outlets.
(3)  Rolling 12 month sales per square foot for mall stores less than 10,000 square feet in regional malls and all owned gross leasable area in Premium Outlets.
Dividends
Today the Company announced that the Board of Directors declared a quarterly common stock dividend of $0.95 per share, an increase of 5.6% from the previous quarter. This dividend is payable on February 29, 2012 to stockholders of record on February 15, 2012.
The Company also declared the quarterly dividend on its 8 3/8% Series J Cumulative Redeemable Preferred (NYSE: SPGPrJ) Stock of $1.046875 per share, payable on March 30, 2012 to stockholders of record on March 16, 2012.
Acquisitions and Dispositions
During the fourth quarter and subsequent to year-end, the Company completed several property transactions:
  • Exchanged its 50% ownership interests in six malls and one community center with the Macerich Company for their 50% ownership interests in five malls and one community center. No cash was exchanged other than customary net working capital adjustments. As a result of the transaction, Simon owns 100% of Empire Mall, Lindale Mall, Mesa Mall, Rushmore Mall, Southern Hills Mall and Empire East, and the Macerich Company owns 100% of Eastland Mall, Lake Square Mall, Northpark Mall, South Ridge Mall, Southpark Mall, Valley Mall and Eastland Convenience Center.

  • Disposed of its interests in three properties:  Gwinnett Place, Factory Merchants Branson and Crystal River Mall.

  • Acquired an additional 25% ownership interest in Del Amo Fashion Center, increasing its ownership interest to 50%.

  • Sold its 49% interest in Gallerie Commerciali Italia (“GCI”) in the first quarter of 2012. As a result of this transaction, the Company no longer owns an interest in any assets in Italy.
A net gain was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2011 as a result of the Macerich Company transaction and three U.S. property dispositions.
Capital Markets
On October 5th, the Company announced that it entered into a new unsecured revolving credit facility that increased the Company’s borrowing capacity to $4.0 billion. This facility, which can be increased to $5.0 billion during its term, will initially mature on October 30, 2015, and can be extended for an additional year to October 30, 2016 at the Company’s sole option. The base interest rate on the Company’s new facility is LIBOR plus 100 basis points.
On November 10th, the Company announced the sale of $1.2 billion of senior unsecured notes in an underwritten public offering by its majority-owned partnership subsidiary, Simon Property Group, L.P. The offering consisted of $500.0 million of 2.800% notes due 2017 and $700.0 million of 4.125% notes due 2021. Net proceeds from the offering were used to partially repay the outstanding U.S. dollar balance of the senior unsecured credit facility and for general business purposes.
Development Activity
In the U.S.
The Company has two new development projects under construction:
  • Merrimack Premium Outlets in Merrimack, New Hampshire – a 409,000 square foot upscale outlet center located one hour north of metropolitan Boston and scheduled to open on June 14, 2012. Over 100 designer and brand outlet stores will be represented at the center. The Company owns 100% of this project.
  • Tanger Outlets – Texas City – a 350,000 square foot upscale outlet center located in Texas City, Texas. The center is located approximately 30 miles south of Houston and 20 miles north of Galveston and is scheduled to open in October of 2012. The Company owns a 50% interest in this project.
Renovation and expansion projects are underway at 23 centers in addition to the restoration of Opry Mills in Nashville, Tennessee. Opry Mills has been closed since it was damaged by a historic flood in May of 2010.  The center is scheduled to reopen on March 29, 2012.
In 2011, the Company opened 38 new anchors and big box tenants, aggregating 1.7 million square feet of activity. Approximately 30 anchors and big boxes are currently scheduled to open in 2012 and 2013.
International
On December 8th, the Company completed the 90,000 square foot expansion of Ami Premium Outlets in Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan. The expansion was 100% leased at opening. The Company owns a 40% interest in this project.
The grand opening of Johor Premium Outlets, the Company’s first Premium Outlet Center® in Southeast Asia, was held on December 11th. The center encompasses 190,000 square feet of gross leasable area featuring 80 stores and is strategically located in Johor, Malaysia. Johor Premium Outlets is close to Senai Airport and less than an hour’s drive from the city center of Singapore and about three hours from Kuala Lumpur. The center was 100% leased at opening. The Company owns the property in a 50/50 partnership with Genting Berhad.
Today marks the groundbreaking for Busan Premium Outlets, a 240,000 square foot upscale outlet center that will serve southeastern Korea, including the cities of Busan, Ulsan and Daegu, as well as local and overseas visitors. The Company owns a 50% interest in this project, which will be its third Premium Outlet Center in Korea.
2012 Guidance
The Company estimates that FFO will be within a range of $7.20 to $7.30 per diluted share for the year ending December 31, 2012, and diluted net income will be within a range of $3.28 to $3.38 per share.
The following table provides the reconciliation of the range of estimated diluted net income available to common stockholders per share to estimated diluted FFO per share.
For the year ending December 31, 2012

LowHigh

EndEnd



Estimated diluted net income available to common stockholders per share$3.28$3.38



Gain on sale of interest in GCI(0.08)(0.08)



Depreciation and amortization including the Company’s share of joint ventures4.004.00



Estimated diluted FFO per share$7.20$7.30
The 2012 guidance reflects management’s view of current and future market conditions, including assumptions with respect to rental rates, occupancy levels, capital spend on new and redevelopment activities, and the earnings impact of the events referenced in this release and previously disclosed. The guidance also reflects management’s view of future capital market conditions, which is generally consistent with the current forward rates for LIBOR and U.S. Treasury bonds. The estimates do not include possible future gains or losses or the impact on operating results from other possible future property acquisitions or dispositions, possible capital markets activity or possible future impairment charges. The guidance takes into account the impact of all transactions that have already occurred, including the initial FFO dilution from the sale of the Company’s 49% interest in GCI. EPS estimates may be subject to fluctuations as a result of several factors, including changes in the recognition of depreciation and amortization expense and any gains or losses associated with disposition activity. By definition, FFO does not include real estate-related depreciation and amortization or gains or losses resulting from the sale of, or impairment charges relating to, previously depreciated operating properties. This guidance is a forward-looking statement and is subject to the risks and other factors described elsewhere in this release.
Conference Call
The Company will provide an online simulcast of its quarterly conference call at www.simon.com (Investors tab), www.earnings.com, and www.streetevents.com. To listen to the live call, please go to any of these websites at least fifteen minutes prior to the call to register, download and install any necessary audio software. The call will begin at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time (New York time) today, February 3, 2012. An online replay will be available for approximately 90 days at www.simon.com, www.earnings.com, and www.streetevents.com. A fully searchable podcast of the conference call will also be available at www.REITcafe.com.
Supplemental Materials and Website
The Company has prepared a supplemental information package which is available at www.simon.com in the Investors section, Financial Information tab. It has also been furnished to the SEC as part of a current report on Form 8-K. If you wish to receive a copy via mail or email, please call 800-461-3439.
We routinely post important information for investors on our website, www.simon.com, in the “Investors” section. We intend to use this website as a means of disclosing material, non-public information and for complying with our disclosure obligations under Regulation FD. Accordingly, investors should monitor the Investor Relations section of our website, in addition to following our press releases, SEC filings, public conference calls, presentations and webcasts. The information contained on, or that may be accessed through, our website is not incorporated by reference into, and is not a part of, this document.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
This press release includes FFO, FFO as adjusted and comparable property net operating income growth, which are adjusted from financial performance measures defined by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”). Reconciliations of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures are included within this press release or the Company’s supplemental information package.  FFO and comparable property net operating income growth are financial performance measures widely used in the REIT industry.
Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements made in this press release may be deemed “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Although the Company believes the expectations reflected in any forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, the Company can give no assurance that our expectations will be attained, and it is possible that actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these forward-looking statements due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors. Such factors include, but are not limited to: the Company’s ability to meet debt service requirements, the availability and terms of financing, changes in the Company’s credit rating, changes in market rates of interest and foreign exchange rates for foreign currencies, changes in value of investments in foreign entities, the ability to hedge interest rate risk, risks associated with the acquisition, development, expansion, leasing and management of properties, general risks related to retail real estate, the liquidity of real estate investments, environmental liabilities, international, national, regional and local economic climates, changes in market rental rates, trends in the retail industry, relationships with anchor tenants, the inability to collect rent due to the bankruptcy or insolvency of tenants or otherwise, risks relating to joint venture properties, costs of common area maintenance, intensely competitive market environment in the retail industry, risks related to international activities, insurance costs and coverage, terrorist activities, changes in economic and market conditions and maintenance of our status as a real estate investment trust. The Company discusses these and other risks and uncertainties under the heading “Risk Factors” in its annual and quarterly periodic reports filed with the SEC.  The Company may update that discussion in its periodic reports, but otherwise the Company undertakes no duty or obligation to update or revise these forwardlooking statements, whether as a result of new information, future developments, or otherwise.
Simon Property Group
Simon Property Group, Inc. is an S&P 500 company and the largest real estate company in the U.S.  The Company currently owns or has an interest in 337 retail real estate properties comprising 245 million square feet in North America and Asia.  Simon Property Group is headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana and employs more than 5,000 people worldwide.  The Company’s common stock is publicly traded on the NYSE under the symbol SPG.  For further information, visit the Simon Property Group website at www.simon.com.
Simon Property Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Operations
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)




















For the Three Months
For the Twelve Months

Ended December 31,
Ended December 31,

2011
2010
2011
2010








REVENUE:






 Minimum rent$ 706,099
$ 672,606
$ 2,664,724
$ 2,429,519
 Overage rent65,068
56,668
140,842
110,621
 Tenant reimbursements315,916
298,146
1,177,269
1,083,780
 Management fees and other revenues35,009
34,310
128,010
121,207
 Other income49,245
57,988
195,587
212,503
   Total revenue1,171,337
1,119,718
4,306,432
3,957,630








EXPENSES:






 Property operating105,559
98,615
436,571
414,264
 Depreciation and amortization277,536
276,418
1,065,946
982,820
 Real estate taxes95,803
90,893
369,755
345,960
 Repairs and maintenance33,539
37,875
113,496
102,425
 Advertising and promotion34,383
34,641
107,002
97,194
 Provision for credit losses3,325
5,190
6,505
3,130
 Home and regional office costs37,583
36,615
128,618
109,314
 General and administrative14,705
5,358
46,319
21,267
 Transaction expenses-
6,418
-
68,972
 Other35,823
23,633
97,078
68,045
   Total operating expenses638,256
615,656
2,371,290
2,213,391
OPERATING INCOME533,081
504,062
1,935,142
1,744,239








Interest expense(246,507)
(252,405)
(983,526)
(1,027,091)
Loss on extinguishment of debt-
-
-
(350,688)
Income tax expense of taxable REIT subsidiaries(877)
(2,291)
(3,583)
(1,734)
Income from unconsolidated entities31,677
25,192
81,238
75,921
Impairment charge from investments in unconsolidated entities-
(8,169)
-
(8,169)
Gain upon acquisition of controlling interests, and on sale or disposal






of assets and interests in unconsolidated entities, net124,557
687
216,629
321,036
CONSOLIDATED NET INCOME441,931
267,076
1,245,900
753,514








Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests78,167
48,318
221,101
136,476
Preferred dividends834
835
3,337
6,614








NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS$ 362,930
$ 217,923
$ 1,021,462
$ 610,424
















BASIC EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE:






   Net income attributable to common stockholders$ 1.24
$ 0.74
$ 3.48
$ 2.10








DILUTED EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE:






   Net income attributable to common stockholders$ 1.24
$ 0.74
$ 3.48
$ 2.10
Simon Property Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Dollars in thousands, except share amounts)












December 31,
December 31,

2011
2010
ASSETS:


   Investment properties at cost$ 29,657,046
$ 27,508,735
       Less – accumulated depreciation8,388,130
7,711,304

21,268,916
19,797,431
   Cash and cash equivalents798,650
796,718
   Tenant receivables and accrued revenue, net486,731
426,736
   Investment in unconsolidated entities, at equity1,378,084
1,390,105
   Deferred costs and other assets1,633,544
1,795,439
   Notes receivable from related party651,000
651,000
       Total assets$ 26,216,925
$ 24,857,429




LIABILITIES:


   Mortgages and other indebtedness$ 18,446,440
$ 17,473,760
   Accounts payable, accrued expenses, intangibles, and deferred revenues1,091,712
993,738
   Cash distributions and losses in partnerships and joint ventures, at equity695,569
485,855
   Other liabilities and accrued dividends170,971
184,855
       Total liabilities20,404,692
19,138,208




Commitments and contingencies


Limited partners’ preferred interest in the Operating Partnership and noncontrolling


   redeemable interests in properties267,945
85,469




EQUITY:


Stockholders’ equity


   Capital stock (850,000,000 total shares authorized, $ 0.0001 par value, 238,000,000


       shares of excess common stock, 100,000,000 authorized shares of preferred stock):


       Series J 8 3/8% cumulative redeemable preferred stock, 1,000,000 shares authorized,


           796,948 issued and outstanding with a liquidation value of $ 39,84745,047
45,375
       Common stock, $ 0.0001 par value, 511,990,000 shares authorized, 297,725,698 and


           296,957,360 issued and outstanding, respectively30
30
       Class B common stock, $ 0.0001 par value, 10,000 shares authorized, 8,000


           issued and outstanding-
-
   Capital in excess of par value8,103,133
8,059,852
   Accumulated deficit(3,251,740)
(3,114,571)
   Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income(94,263)
6,530
   Common stock held in treasury at cost, 3,877,448 and 4,003,451 shares, respectively(152,541)
(166,436)
       Total stockholder’s equity4,649,666
4,830,780
Noncontrolling interests894,622
802,972
       Total equity5,544,288
5,633,752
       Total liabilities and equity$ 26,216,925
$ 24,857,429
Simon Property Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Unaudited Joint Venture Statements of Operations
(Dollars in thousands)


















For the Three Months
For the Twelve Months

Ended December 31,
Ended December 31,

2011
2010
2011
2010








Revenue:






 Minimum rent$ 482,040
$ 462,853
$ 1,844,774
$ 1,810,581
 Overage rent59,083
50,052
161,993
143,018
 Tenant reimbursements221,315
229,498
862,211
870,555
 Other income48,813
44,283
175,430
214,728
   Total revenue811,251
786,686
3,044,408
3,038,882








Operating Expenses:






 Property operating157,020
148,462
602,989
595,733
 Depreciation and amortization186,851
190,918
737,865
752,014
 Real estate taxes52,616
56,356
220,955
230,326
 Repairs and maintenance21,907
25,508
76,258
92,490
 Advertising and promotion15,605
16,120
57,703
55,952
 Provision for credit losses2,227
2,993
8,648
3,934
 Other62,417
54,877
227,703
209,635
   Total operating expenses498,643
495,234
1,932,121
1,940,084








Operating Income312,608
291,452
1,112,287
1,098,798








Interest expense(206,961)
(201,605)
(813,433)
(812,886)
(Loss) Income from unconsolidated entities(857)
528
(4,644)
(840)
Impairment charge from investments in unconsolidated entities-
(16,671)
-
(16,671)








Income from Continuing Operations$ 104,790
$ 73,704
$ 294,210
$ 268,401








Income from discontinued joint venture interests6,210
20,583
48,154
63,108
Gain (loss) on sale or disposal of assets and interests in






unconsolidated entities, net332,078
(85)
347,640
39,676








Net Income$ 443,078
$ 94,202
$ 690,004
$ 371,185








Third-Party Investors’ Share of Net Income$ 232,643
$ 64,568
$ 384,384
$ 234,799








Our Share of Net Income$ 210,435
$ 29,634
$ 305,620
$ 136,386
Amortization of Excess Investment (A)(12,730)
(12,653)
(50,562)
(48,329)
Our Share of (Gain) Loss on Sale or Disposal of Assets and Interests






 in Unconsolidated Entities, net(166,028)
42
(173,820)
(20,305)
Our Share of Impairment Charge from Investments in






 Unconsolidated Entities-
8,169
-
8,169
Income from Unconsolidated Entities$ 31,677
$ 25,192
$ 81,238
$ 75,921
Simon Property Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Unaudited Joint Venture Balance Sheets
(Dollars in thousands)












December 31,
December 31,

2011
2010
Assets:


Investment properties, at cost$ 20,481,657
$ 21,236,594
Less – accumulated depreciation5,264,565
5,126,116

15,217,092
16,110,478
Cash and cash equivalents806,895
802,025
Tenant receivables and accrued revenue, net359,208
353,719
Investment in unconsolidated entities, at equity133,576
158,116
Deferred costs and other assets526,101
525,024
       Total assets$ 17,042,872
$ 17,949,362




Liabilities and Partners’ (Deficit) Equity:


Mortgages and other indebtedness$ 15,582,321
$ 15,937,404
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, intangibles, and deferred revenue775,733
748,245
Other liabilities981,711
961,284
       Total liabilities17,339,765
17,646,933
Preferred units67,450
67,450
Partners’ (deficit) equity(364,343)
234,979
       Total liabilities and partners’ equity$ 17,042,872
$ 17,949,362




Our Share of:


Partners’ (deficit) equity$ (32,000)
$ 146,578
Add: Excess Investment (A)714,515
757,672
Our net Investment in Joint Ventures$ 682,515
$ 904,250
Simon Property Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Footnotes to Unaudited Financial Statements


Notes:  




(A)Excess investment represents the unamortized difference between the Company’s investment and equity in the underlying net assets of the partnerships and joint ventures.  The Company generally amortizes excess investment over the life of the related properties, typically no greater than 40 years, and the amortization is included in income from unconsolidated entities.
Simon Property Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Unaudited Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures (1)
(Amounts in thousands, except per share amounts)









Reconciliation of Consolidated Net Income to FFO and FFO as Adjusted







For the Three Months Ended
For the Twelve Months Ended


December 31,
December 31,


2011
2010
2011
2010









Consolidated Net Income (2)(3)(4)(5)$       441,931
$ 267,076
$ 1,245,900
$    753,514
Adjustments to Consolidated Net Income to Arrive at FFO:







Depreciation and amortization from consolidated







    properties270,081
272,713
1,047,571
968,695

Simon’s share of depreciation and amortization from







    unconsolidated entities98,009
98,048
384,367
388,565

Impairment charges of depreciable real estate-
8,169
-
8,169

Gain upon acquisition of controlling interests, and on sale or disposal







    of assets and interests in unconsolidated entities, net(124,557)
(687)
(216,629)
(321,036)

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest holders in







    properties(2,679)
(3,298)
(8,559)
(10,640)

Noncontrolling interests portion of depreciation and amortization(2,553)
(1,959)
(8,633)
(7,847)

Preferred distributions and dividends(1,313)
(1,313)
(5,252)
(8,929)
FFO of the Operating Partnership$       678,919
$ 638,749
$ 2,438,765
$ 1,770,491

Loss on extinguishment of debt-
-
-
350,688
FFO as adjusted of the Operating Partnership$       678,919
$ 638,749
$ 2,438,765
$ 2,121,179









Diluted net income per share to diluted FFO per share and diluted






   FFO as adjusted per share reconciliation:






Diluted net income per share$             1.24
$       0.74
$          3.48
$          2.10

Depreciation and amortization from consolidated properties







    and Simon’s share of depreciation and amortization from







    unconsolidated entities, net of noncontrolling interests portion of







    depreciation and amortization1.02
1.04
4.02
3.86

Impairment charges of depreciable real estate-
0.02
-
0.02

Gain upon acquisition of controlling interests, and on sale or disposal







    of assets and interests in unconsolidated entities, net(0.35)
-
(0.61)
(0.92)

Impact of additional dilutive securities for FFO per share-
-
-
(0.03)
Diluted FFO per share$             1.91
$       1.80
$          6.89
$          5.03

Loss on debt extinguishment-
-
-
1.00
Diluted FFO as adjusted per share$             1.91
$       1.80
$          6.89
$          6.03









Details for per share calculations:















FFO of the Operating Partnership$       678,919
$ 638,749
$ 2,438,765
$ 1,770,491









Adjustments for dilution calculation:






Impact of preferred stock and preferred unit conversions and






   option exercises (6)-
-
-
3,676
Diluted FFO of the Operating Partnership678,919
638,749
2,438,765
1,774,167
Diluted FFO allocable to unitholders(116,424)
(108,892)
(416,833)
(296,670)
Diluted FFO allocable to common stockholders$       562,495
$ 529,857
$ 2,021,932
$ 1,477,497









Basic weighted average shares outstanding293,822
292,931
293,504
291,076
Adjustments for dilution calculation:






  Effect of stock options11
230
69
274
  Impact of Series I preferred unit conversion-
-
-
238
  Impact of Series I preferred stock conversion-
-
-
1,749









Diluted weighted average shares outstanding293,833
293,161
293,573
293,337
Weighted average limited partnership units outstanding60,816
60,248
60,522
58,900
Diluted weighted average shares and units outstanding354,649
353,409
354,095
352,237









Basic FFO per Share$             1.91
$       1.81
$          6.89
$          5.06
   Percent Change5.5%


36.2%

Diluted FFO per Share$             1.91
$       1.80
$          6.89
$          5.03
   Percent Change6.1%


37.0%

Diluted FFO as adjusted per share$             1.91
$       1.80
$          6.89
$          6.03
   Percent Change6.1%


14.3%









Simon Property Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Footnotes to Unaudited Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures


Notes:  


(1)This report contains measures of financial or operating performance that are not specifically defined by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”), including funds from operations (“FFO”), FFO as adjusted, FFO per share and FFO as adjusted per share.  FFO is a performance measure that is standard in the REIT business.  We believe FFO provides investors with additional information concerning our operating performance and a basis to compare our performance with those of other REITs.  We also use these measures internally to monitor the operating performance of our portfolio.  As adjusted measures exclude the effect of certain debt-related charges.  We believe these measures provide investors with a basis to compare our current operating performance with previous periods in which we did not have those charges. Our computation of these non-GAAP measures may not be the same as similar measures reported by other REITs.



The Company determines FFO based upon the definition set forth by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). The Company determines FFO to be our share of consolidated net income computed in accordance with GAAP, excluding real estate related depreciation and amortization, excluding gains and losses from extraordinary items, excluding gains and losses from the sales of, or any impairment charges related to, previously depreciated operating properties, plus the allocable portion of FFO of unconsolidated joint ventures based upon economic ownership interest, and all determined on a consistent basis in accordance with GAAP.



The Company has adopted NAREIT’s clarification of the definition of FFO that requires it to include the effects of nonrecurring items not classified as extraordinary, cumulative effect of accounting changes, or a gain or loss resulting from the sale of, or any impairment charges relating to, previously depreciated operating properties. We include in FFO gains and losses realized from the sale of land, outlot buildings, marketable and non-marketable securities, and investment holdings of non-retail real estate. However, you should understand that FFO does not represent cash flow from operations as defined by GAAP, should not be considered as an alternative to net income determined in accordance with GAAP as a measure of operating performance, and is not an alternative to cash flows as a measure of liquidity.


(2)Includes the Company’s share of gains on land sales of $1.7 million and $2.4 million for the three months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $6.2 million and $11.8 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.


(3)Includes the Company’s share of straight-line adjustments to minimum rent of $11.0 million and $8.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $37.2 million and $32.1 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.


(4)Includes the Company’s share of the amortization of fair market value of leases from acquisitions of $5.2 million and $5.1 million for the three months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $22.9 million and $19.9 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.


(5)Includes the Company’s share of debt premium amortization of $3.0 million and $3.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $10.0 million and $12.7 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.


(6)Includes dividends and distributions on Series I preferred stock and Series I preferred units. All outstanding shares of Series I preferred stock and Series I preferred units were redeemed on April 16, 2010.
http://tourism9.com    http://vkins.com/