General Growth Properties, Inc. 10-K 2013
Documents found in this filing:
COMMISSION FILE NUMBER 1-34948
GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES, INC.
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
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. YES ý NO o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. YES o NO ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES ý NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). YES ý 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 registrant's 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. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of "accelerated filer", "large accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). YES o NO ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant, the registrant's predecessor or its subsidiaries have filed all reports required to be filed by section 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. YES ý NO o
On June 30, 2012, the last business day of the most recently completed second quarter of the registrant, the aggregate market value of the shares of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $10.5 billion based upon the closing price of the common stock on such date.
As of February 25, 2013, there were 939,357,189 shares of the registrant's common stock outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the proxy statement for the annual stockholders meeting to be held on May 10, 2013 are incorporated by reference into Part III.
GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements of General Growth Properties, Inc. ("GGP" or the "Company") and related notes, as included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (this "Annual Report"). The terms "we," "us" and "our" may also be used to refer to GGP and its subsidiaries (or, in certain contexts, the Predecessor (as defined below) and its subsidiaries). GGP, a Delaware corporation, was organized in July 2010 and is a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust, referred to as a "REIT". GGP is the successor registrant, by merger on November 9, 2010 (the "Effective Date") to GGP, Inc. (the "Predecessor"). The Predecessor had filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code ("Chapter 11") and emerged from bankruptcy, pursuant to a plan of reorganization (the "Plan") on the Effective Date as described below.
Our Company and Strategy
Our primary business is to be an owner and operator of best-in-class malls that provide an outstanding environment and experience for our communities, retailers, employees, consumers and shareholders. The majority of our properties are located in the United States; however, we also own interests in regional malls in Brazil.
We own entirely or with joint venture partners 144 regional malls (126 domestic and 18 in Brazil) comprising approximately 135 million square feet. The U.S. regional mall portfolio generated tenant sales of $545 per square foot during 2012; including 70 Class A malls generating average tenant sales of $635 per square foot and contributing approximately 68% of our share of Company net operating income (as defined in Item 6). The quality of our portfolio is further summarized in the table below.
Our company's internal growth is focused on three major areas:
Since December 31, 2011, not only has our occupancy risen, but more importantly the level of long-term, or "permanent" occupancy, has increased from 87.5% as of December 31, 2011 to 89.6% as of December 31, 2012. During this same period, we have seen an expansion of the spread, or variance, between the rent paid on expiring leases and the rent commencing under new leases, on a suite-to-suite basis. On a suite-to-suite basis, the leases commencing occupancy in 2012 exhibited initial rents that were 10.2% higher than the final rents paid on expiring leases. We identified $1.6 billion of redevelopment projects within our portfolio, over 80% of which is being invested into Class A malls. We anticipate generating stabilized returns in the high single to low double digits on these projects as
they commence operations. The internal growth drivers within our existing portfolio are strongly complemented by the industry's expected lack of new supply of mall space over the next five years and the anticipated resilient demand for space from retailers, both domestic and international.
We believe our long-term strategy can provide our shareholders with a competitive risk-adjusted total return comprised of dividends and share price appreciation.
Our operational strategies include the following:
During 2012, we completed transactions achieving operational goals that promote our long-term strategy as summarized below (figures shown represent our proportionate share):
We operate in a single reportable segment, which includes the ownership, operation, management and selective re-development of our Consolidated Properties and Unconsolidated Properties, which are primarily regional malls. As of December 31, 2012, our segment was comprised of 126 regional malls in the United States and 18 malls in Brazil, eight strip centers totaling 1.6 million square feet, primarily in the Western region of the United States, as well as seven stand-alone office buildings totaling 0.9 million square feet, concentrated in Columbia, Maryland.
Each of our operating properties is deemed an individual operating segment for accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP") since each property's financial operations are discrete and managed independently. Further, the Company's portfolio is primarily located in the United States and, for 2012, no individual property comprised over 10% of total revenues.
For the year ended December 31, 2012, our largest tenant, Limited Brands, (based on common parent ownership) accounted for approximately 3% of rents. Four tenants, in aggregate, Limited Brands, The Gap, Foot Locker, and Abercrombie & Fitch, comprised approximately 10% of rents for 2012.
We compete for tenants and visitors to our malls with other malls in close proximity, regardless of owner. In order to maintain and increase our mall's competitive position within its marketplace we do the following:
We believe the high-quality of our regional malls enables us to compete effectively for retailers and consumers.
Under various Federal, state and local laws and regulations, an owner of real estate may be liable for the costs of remediation of certain hazardous or toxic substances on such real estate. These laws may impose liability without regard to whether the owner knew of the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. The costs of remediation may be substantial and may adversely affect the owner's ability to sell or borrow against such real estate as collateral. In connection with the ownership and operation of our properties, we, or the relevant joint venture through which the property is owned, may be liable for such costs.
Substantially all of our properties have been subject to a Phase I environmental site assessment, which is intended to evaluate the environmental condition of the subject property and its surroundings. Phase I environmental assessments typically include a historical review, a public records review, a site visit and interviews, but do not include sampling or subsurface investigations.
To date, the Phase I environmental site assessments have not revealed any environmental conditions that would have a material adverse effect on our overall business, financial condition or results of operations. However, it is possible that these assessments do not reveal all potential environmental liabilities or that conditions have changed since the assessment was prepared (typically, at the time the property was purchased or developed).
See Risk Factors regarding additional discussion of environmental matters.
The following is a discussion of our investment policies, financing policies, conflict of interest policies and policies with respect to certain other activities. One or more of these policies may be amended or rescinded from time to time without a stockholder vote.
Our primary business is to own and operate best-in-class malls that provide an outstanding environment and experience for our communities, retailers, employees, consumers and shareholders. The majority of our properties are located in the United States; however, we may also own interests in regional malls and property management activities outside the United States such as in Brazil. The Company elected to be treated as a REIT commencing with the taxable year beginning July 1, 2010, its date of incorporation. REIT limitations restrict us from making an investment that would cause our real estate assets to be less than 75% of our total assets. In addition, at least 75% of our gross income must be derived directly or indirectly from investments relating to real property or mortgages on real property, including "rents from real property," dividends from other REITs and, in certain circumstances, interest from certain types of temporary investments. At least 95% of our income must be derived from such real property investments, and from dividends, interest and gains from the sale or dispositions of stock or securities or from other combinations of the foregoing.
Subject to REIT limitations, we may invest in the securities of other issuers in connection with acquisitions of indirect interests in real estate. Such an investment would normally be in the form of a general or limited partnership or membership interests in special purpose partnerships and limited liability companies that own one or more properties. We may, in the future, acquire all or substantially all of the securities or assets of other REITs, management companies or similar entities where such investments would be consistent with our investment policies.
We do not have a policy limiting the number or amount of mortgages that may be placed on any particular property. We generally seek to finance individual properties on a secured basis. However, mortgage financing instruments usually limit additional indebtedness on those properties. Typically, we invest in or form separate legal entities to assist us in obtaining permanent financing at attractive terms. Permanent financing may be structured as a mortgage loan on a single property, or on a group of properties, and generally requires us to provide a mortgage interest on the property in favor of an institutional third party or as a securitized financing. For securitized financings, we create separate legal entities to own the properties. These legal entities are structured so that they would not necessarily be consolidated in the event we became subject to a bankruptcy proceeding or liquidation. We decide upon the structure of the financing based upon the best terms available to us and whether the proposed financing is consistent with our other business objectives. For accounting purposes, we include
the outstanding securitized debt of legal entities owning consolidated properties as part of our consolidated indebtedness.
We are party to a revolving credit facility and publically traded bonds that require us to satisfy certain affirmative and negative covenants and to meet financial ratios and tests, which may include ratios and tests based on leverage, interest coverage and net worth.
If our Board of Directors determines to seek additional capital, we may raise that capital through additional public equity or preferred equity offerings, public debt offerings, debt financing, retention of cash flows, by creating joint ventures with existing ownership interests in properties or a combination of these methods. Our ability to retain cash flows is limited by the requirement for REITs to pay tax on or distribute 100% of their capital gains income and distribute at least 90% of their taxable income. Our desire is to avoid entity level U.S. Federal income tax by distributing 100% of our capital gains and ordinary taxable income.
If our Board of Directors determines to raise additional equity capital, it may, without stockholder approval, issue additional shares of common stock or other capital stock. The Board of Directors may issue a number of shares up to the amount of our authorized capital in any manner and on such terms and for such consideration as it deems appropriate. Such securities may be senior to the outstanding classes of common stock. Such securities also may include additional classes of preferred stock, which may be convertible into common stock. The Plan Sponsors (as defined in Note 2) have preemptive rights to purchase our common stock as necessary to allow them to maintain their respective proportional ownership interest in GGP on a fully diluted basis. Any such offering could dilute a stockholder's investment in us.
We implemented our dividend reinvestment plan in which primarily all stockholders are entitled to participate. However, we may determine to pay dividends in a combination of cash and shares of common stock.
Conflict of Interest Policies
We maintain policies and have entered into agreements designed to reduce or eliminate potential conflicts of interest. We have adopted governance principles governing our affairs and the Board of Directors, as well as written charters for each of the standing committees of the Board of Directors. In addition, we have a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which applies to all of our officers, directors, and employees. At least a majority of the members of our Board of Directors must qualify as independent under the listing standards for NYSE companies. Any transaction between us and any director, officer or 5% stockholder must be approved pursuant to our Related Party Transaction Policy, including such transactions with Brookfield Investor, our largest stockholder. Refer to Note 10 for further discussion.
Policies With Respect To Certain Other Activities
We intend to make investments which are consistent with our qualification as a REIT, unless the Board of Directors determines that it is no longer in our best interests to qualify as a REIT. We have authority to offer shares of our common stock or other securities in exchange for property. We also have authority to repurchase or otherwise reacquire our shares or any other securities. We may issue shares of our common stock, or cash at our option, to holders of units of limited partnership interest in the Operating Partnership in future periods upon exercise of such holders' rights under the Operating Partnership agreement. Our policy prohibits us from making any loans to our directors or executive officers for any purpose. We may make loans to the joint ventures in which we participate.
Bankruptcy and Reorganization
In April 2009, the Predecessor and certain of its domestic subsidiaries (the "Debtors") filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code in the bankruptcy court of the Southern District of New York (the "Bankruptcy Court"). On October 21, 2010, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming the Plan. Pursuant to the Plan, prepetition creditor claims were satisfied in full and equity holders received newly issued common stock in GGP and in Howard Hughes Corporation ("HHC"). After that distribution, HHC became a publicly-held company, majority-owned by the Predecessor's previous stockholders. GGP has no remaining interest in HHC as of the Effective Date.
The Plan was based on the agreements (collectively, as amended and restated, the "Investment Agreements") with REP Investments LLC, an affiliate of Brookfield Asset Management Inc. (the "Brookfield Investor") an affiliate of Fairholme Funds Inc. ("Fairholme"), and an affiliate of Pershing Square Capital Management, L.P. ("Pershing Square") and collectively ("the Plan Sponsors"). The Plan Sponsors also entered into an agreement with affiliates of the Blackstone Group ("Blackstone"). Pursuant to the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Plan Sponsors and Blackstone were issued 120 million warrants (the "Warrants") to purchase common stock of GGP. Refer to Note 10 for further discussion of the Warrants.
As of January 25, 2013, we had approximately 1,670 employees.
We have comprehensive liability, property and rental loss insurance with respect to our portfolio of properties. Our management believes that such insurance provides adequate coverage.
Qualification as a REIT and Taxability of Distributions
The Predecessor qualified as a real estate investment trust pursuant to the requirements contained in Sections 856-860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). For 2010, 2011 and 2012, the Company met their distribution requirements to its common stockholders as provided for in Section 857 of the Code wherein a dividend declared in October, November or December but paid in January of the following year will be considered a prior year dividend for all purposes of the Code (Note 9). The Company elected to be taxed as a REIT commencing with the taxable year beginning July 2010, its date of incorporation and the Company intends to maintain REIT status, and therefore our operations will not be subject to Federal tax on real estate investment trust taxable income. A schedule detailing the taxability of dividends for 2012, 2011 and 2010 has been presented in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Securities and Exchange Commission Investigation
By letter dated January 9, 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") notified the Company that it had completed its investigation into possible violations of proscriptions on insider trading under the Federal securities laws by certain former officers and directors and that the SEC does not intend to recommend any enforcement action.
Our Internet website address is www.ggp.com. Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Interactive Data Files, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports are available and may be accessed free of charge through the Investment section of our Internet website under the Shareholder Info subsection, as soon as reasonably practicable after those
documents are filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Our Internet website and included or linked information on the website are not intended to be incorporated into this Annual Report. Additionally, the public may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC's Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20549, and may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, which can be accessed at http://www.sec.gov.
Regional and local economic conditions may adversely affect our business
Our real property investments are influenced by the regional and local economy, which may be negatively impacted by increased unemployment, increased federal income and payroll taxes, increased state and local taxes, industry slowdowns, lack of availability of consumer credit, increased levels of consumer debt, poor housing market conditions, adverse weather conditions, natural disasters, plant closings, and other factors. Similarly, local real estate conditions, such as an oversupply of, or a reduction in demand for, retail space or retail goods, and the supply and creditworthiness of current and prospective tenants may affect the ability of our properties to generate significant revenue.
Economic conditions, especially in the retail sector, may have an adverse effect on our revenues and available cash
Unemployment, increased federal income and payroll taxes, increased state and local taxes, weak income growth, tight credit and the need to pay down existing obligations may negatively impact consumer spending. Given these economic conditions, we believe there is a risk that the sales at stores operating in our malls may be adversely affected. This may hinder our ability to implement our strategies and may have an unfavorable effect on our operations and our ability to attract new tenants.
We may be unable to lease or re-lease space in our properties on favorable terms or at all
Our results of operations depend on our ability to continue to strategically lease space in our properties, including re-leasing space in properties where leases are expiring, optimizing our tenant mix or leasing properties on more economically favorable terms. Because approximately eight to nine percent of our total leases expire annually, we are continually focused on our ability to lease properties and collect rents from tenants. Similarly, we are pursuing a strategy of replacing expiring short-term leases with long-term leases. If the sales at certain stores operating in our regional malls do not improve sufficiently, tenants might be unable to pay their existing minimum rents or expense recovery charges, since these rents and charges would represent a higher percentage of their sales. If our tenants' sales do not improve, new tenants would be less likely to be willing to pay minimum rents as high as they would otherwise pay. Because substantially all of our income is derived from rentals of real property, our income and available cash would be adversely affected if a significant number of tenants are unable to meet their obligations.
The bankruptcy or store closures of national tenants, which are tenants with chains of stores in many of our properties, may adversely affect our revenues
Our leases generally contain provisions designed to ensure the creditworthiness of the tenant. However, companies in the retail industry, including some of our tenants, have declared bankruptcy or voluntarily closed certain of their stores. We may be unable to re-lease such space or to re-lease it on comparable or more favorable terms. As a result, the bankruptcy or closure of a national tenant may adversely affect our revenues.
Certain co-tenancy provisions in our lease agreements may result in reduced rent payments, which may adversely affect our operations and occupancy
Certain of our lease agreements include a co-tenancy provision which allows the tenant to pay a reduced rent amount and, in certain instances, terminate the lease, if we fail to maintain certain occupancy levels. Therefore, if occupancy or tenancy falls below certain thresholds, rents we are entitled to receive from our retail tenants could be reduced and may limit our ability to attract new tenants.
It may be difficult to sell real estate quickly, and transfer restrictions apply to some of our properties
Equity real estate investments are relatively illiquid, which may limit our ability to strategically change our portfolio promptly in response to changes in economic or other conditions. In addition, significant expenditures associated with each equity investment, such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes and maintenance costs, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a reduction in income from the investment. If income from a property declines while the related expenses do not decline, our income and cash available to us would be adversely affected. If it becomes necessary or desirable for us to dispose of one or more of our mortgaged properties, we might not be able to obtain a release of the lien on the mortgaged property without payment of the associated debt. The foreclosure of a mortgage on a property or inability to sell a property could adversely affect the level of cash available to us.
Our business is dependent on perceptions by retailers and shoppers of the convenience and attractiveness of our retail properties, and our inability to maintain a positive perception may adversely affect our revenues
We are dependent on perceptions by retailers or shoppers of the safety, convenience and attractiveness of our retail properties. If retailers and shoppers perceive competing retail properties and other retailing options such as the internet to be more convenient or of a higher quality, our revenues may be adversely affected.
We redevelop and expand properties, and this activity is subject to risks due to various economic factors that are beyond our control
Capital investment to expand or redevelop our properties will be an ongoing part of our strategy going forward. In connection with such projects, we will be subject to various risks, including the following:
If redevelopment, expansion or reinvestment projects are unsuccessful, our investments in those projects may not be fully recoverable from future operations or sales.
We are in a competitive business
There are numerous shopping facilities that compete with our properties in attracting retailers to lease space. In addition, retailers at our properties face continued competition from retailers at other regional malls, outlet malls and other discount shopping centers, discount shopping clubs, catalog companies, and through internet sales and telemarketing. Competition of these types could adversely affect our revenues and cash flows.
We compete with other major real estate investors with significant capital for attractive investment opportunities. These competitors include REITs, investment banking firms and private institutional investors.
Our ability to realize our strategies and capitalize on our competitive strengths are dependent on our ability to effectively operate a large portfolio of high quality malls, maintain good relationships with our tenants and consumers, and remain well-capitalized, and our failure to do any of the foregoing could affect our ability to compete effectively in the markets in which we operate.
Some of our properties are subject to potential natural or other disasters
A number of our properties are located in areas which are subject to natural or other disasters, including hurricanes and earthquakes. Furthermore, many of our properties are located in coastal regions, and would therefore be affected by any future increases in sea levels. For example, certain of our properties are located in California or in other areas with higher risk of earthquakes.
Possible terrorist activity or other acts of violence could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations
Future terrorist attacks in the United States or other acts of violence may result in declining economic activity, which could harm the demand for goods and services offered by our tenants and the value of our properties and might adversely affect the value of an investment in our securities. Such a resulting decrease in retail demand could make it difficult for us to renew or re-lease our properties at lease rates equal to or above historical rates. Terrorist activities or violence also could directly affect the value of our properties through damage, destruction or loss, and the availability of insurance for such acts, or of insurance generally, might be lower or cost more, which could increase our operating expenses and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. To the extent that our tenants are affected by future attacks, their businesses similarly could be adversely affected, including their ability to continue to meet obligations under their existing leases. These acts might erode business and consumer confidence and spending and might result in increased volatility in national and international financial markets and economies. Any one of these events might decrease demand for real estate, decrease or delay the occupancy of our new or redeveloped properties, and limit our access to capital or increase our cost of raising capital.
We may incur costs to comply with environmental laws
Under various Federal, state or local laws, ordinances and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of real estate may be required to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances released at a property, and may be held liable to third parties for bodily injury or property damage (investigation and/or clean-up costs) incurred by the parties in connection with the contamination. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of the release of the hazardous or toxic substances. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination may adversely affect the owner's ability to sell, lease or borrow with respect to the real estate. Other Federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations require abatement or removal of asbestos-containing materials in the event of demolition or certain renovations or remodeling, the cost of which may be substantial for certain redevelopments, and also govern emissions of and exposure to asbestos fibers in the air. Federal and state laws also regulate the operation and removal of
underground storage tanks. In connection with the ownership, operation and management of certain properties, we could be held liable for the costs of remedial action with respect to these regulated substances or tanks or related claims.
Our properties have been subjected to varying degrees of environmental assessment at various times. However, the identification of new areas of contamination, a change in the extent or known scope of contamination or changes in cleanup requirements could result in significant costs to us.
Some potential losses are not insured
We carry comprehensive liability, fire, flood, earthquake, terrorism, extended coverage and rental loss and environmental insurance on all of our properties. We believe the policy specifications and insured limits of these policies are adequate and appropriate. There are, however, some types of losses, including lease and other contract claims, and certain environmental conditions not discovered within the applicable policy period, which generally are not insured. If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occurs, we could lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the property. If this happens, we might nevertheless remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the property.
Inflation may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations
Should inflation increase in the future, this may have an impact on our consumers' disposable income. This may place temporary pressure on retailer sales and margins as their costs rise and we may be unable to pass the costs along to the consumer, which in turn may affect our ability to collect rents or renew spaces at higher overall rents. In addition, inflation may also impact our overall costs of operation. Many but not all of our leases have fixed amounts for recoveries and if our costs rise we may not be able to pass these costs on to our tenants. However, over the long term, substantially all of our tenant leases contain provisions designed to partially mitigate the negative impact of inflation as discussed in Item 7 below, which discussion is incorporated by reference here.
Inflation also poses a risk to us due to the possibility of future increases in interest rates. Such increases would adversely impact us due to our outstanding variable-rate debt as well as result in higher interest rates on new fixed-rate debt. In certain cases, we have previously limited our exposure to interest rate fluctuations related to a portion of our variable-rate debt by the use of interest rate cap and swap agreements. Such agreements, subject to current market conditions, allow us to replace variable-rate debt with fixed-rate debt in order to achieve our desired ratio of variable-rate to fixed rate date. However, in an increasing interest rate environment the fixed rates we can obtain with such replacement fixed-rate cap and swap agreements or the fixed-rate on new debt will also continue to increase.
We are a holding company with no operations of our own and will depend on our subsidiaries for cash
Our operations are conducted almost entirely through our subsidiaries. Our ability to make dividends or distributions in connection with being a REIT is highly dependent on the earnings of and the receipt of funds from our subsidiaries through dividends or distributions, and our ability to generate cash to meet our debt service obligations is further limited by our subsidiaries' ability to make such dividends, distributions or intercompany loans. Our subsidiaries' ability to pay any dividends or distributions to us are limited by their obligations to satisfy their own obligations to their creditors and preferred stockholders before making any dividends or distributions to us. In addition, Delaware law imposes requirements that may restrict our ability to pay dividends to holders of our common stock.
We share control of some of our properties with other investors and may have conflicts of interest with those investors
For the Unconsolidated Properties, we are required to make decisions with the other investors who have interests in the relevant property or properties. For example, the approval of certain of the other investors is required with respect to operating budgets and refinancing, encumbering, expanding or selling any of these properties, to make distributions, as well as to bankruptcy decisions related to the Unconsolidated Properties and related joint ventures. Also, the assets of Unconsolidated Properties may be used as collateral to secure loans of our joint venture partners, and the indemnity we may be entitled to from our joint venture partners could be worth less than the value of those assets. We might not have the same interests as the other investors in relation to these transactions. Accordingly, we might not be able to favorably resolve any of these issues, or we might have to provide financial or other inducements to the other investors to obtain a favorable resolution.
In addition, various restrictive provisions and rights apply to sales or transfers of interests in our jointly owned properties. As such, we might be required to make decisions about buying or selling interests in a property or properties at a time that is not desirable.
Bankruptcy of our joint venture partners could impose delays and costs on us with respect to the jointly owned retail properties
The bankruptcy of one of the other investors in any of our jointly owned shopping malls could materially and adversely affect the relevant property or properties. Pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code, we would be precluded from taking some actions affecting the estate of the other investor without prior court approval which would, in most cases, entail prior notice to other parties and a hearing. At a minimum, the requirement to obtain court approval may delay the actions we would or might want to take. If the relevant joint venture through which we have invested in a property has incurred recourse obligations, the discharge in bankruptcy of one of the other investors might result in our ultimate liability for a greater portion of those obligations than would otherwise be required.
We are impacted by tax-related obligations to some of our partners
We own certain properties through partnerships which have arrangements in place that protect the deferred tax situation of our existing third party limited partners. Violation of these arrangements could impose costs on us. As a result, we may be restricted with respect to decisions such as financing, encumbering, expanding or selling these properties.
Several of our joint venture partners are tax-exempt. As such, they are taxable to the extent of their share of unrelated business taxable income generated from these jointly owned properties. As the manager of these joint ventures, we have obligations to avoid the creation of unrelated business taxable income at these properties. As a result, we may be restricted with respect to decisions related to the financing of and revenue generation from these properties.
We may not be able to maintain our status as a REIT
We have elected to be treated as a REIT in connection with the filing of our tax return for 2010, retroactive to July 1, 2010. It is possible that we may not meet the conditions for continued qualification as a REIT. In addition, once an entity is qualified as a REIT, the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") generally requires that such entity distribute at least 90% of its ordinary taxable income to shareholders and pay tax on or distribute 100% of its capital gains. To avoid current entity level U.S. Federal income taxes, we expect to distribute 100% of our capital gains and ordinary income to shareholders annually. For 2010 we made 90% of this distribution in common stock and 10% in cash. For 2011, we made this distribution in the form of quarterly $.10 per share cash payments and the
special dividend of the common stock of RPI. There can be no assurances as to the allocation between cash and common stock of our future dividends.
If, with respect to any taxable year, we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we would not be allowed to deduct distributions to shareholders in computing our taxable income and Federal income tax. If any of our REIT subsidiaries fail to qualify as a REIT, such failure could result in our loss of REIT status. If we lose our REIT status, corporate level income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, would apply to our taxable income at regular corporate rates. As a result, the amount available for distribution to holders of equity securities that would otherwise receive dividends would be reduced for the year or years involved, and we would no longer be required to make distributions. In addition, unless we were entitled to relief under the relevant statutory provisions, we would be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for four subsequent taxable years.
GGP believes that it is a domestically controlled qualified investment entity as defined by the Code. However, because its shares are publicly traded, no assurance can be given that the Company is or will continue to be a domestically controlled qualified investment entity.
An ownership limit, certain anti-takeover defenses and applicable law may hinder any attempt to acquire us
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain the following limitations.
The ownership limit. Generally, for us to qualify as a REIT under the Code for a taxable year, not more than 50% in value of the outstanding shares of our capital stock may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer "individuals" at any time during the last half of such taxable year. Our charter provides that no one individual may own more than 9.9% of the outstanding shares of capital stock unless our board of directors provides a waiver from the ownership restrictions, which the Investment Agreements contemplate subject to the applicable Plan Sponsor making certain representations and covenants. Brookfield Investor currently owns approximately 38% of the outstanding shares of capital stock, excluding the effect of shares issuable upon exercise of the Warrants (refer to Item 7 and Note 10). The Code defines "individuals" for purposes of the requirement described above to include some types of entities. However, our certificate of incorporation also permits us to exempt a person from the ownership limit described therein upon the satisfaction of certain conditions which are described in our certificate of incorporation.
Selected provisions of our charter documents. Our charter authorizes the board of directors:
Selected provisions of our bylaws. Our amended and restated bylaws contain the following limitations:
Selected provisions of Delaware law. We are a Delaware corporation, and Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law applies to us. In general, Section 203 prevents an "interested stockholder" (as defined below), from engaging in a "business combination" (as defined in the statute) with us for three years following the date that person becomes an interested stockholder unless one or more of the following occurs:
The statute defines "interested stockholder" as any person that is the owner of 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock or is an affiliate or associate of us and was the owner of 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock at any time within the three-year period immediately before the date of determination.
Each item discussed above may delay, deter or prevent a change in control of our company, even if a proposed transaction is at a premium over the then current market price for our common stock. Further, these provisions may apply in instances where some stockholders consider a transaction beneficial to them. As a result, our stock price may be negatively affected by these provisions.
There is a risk of investor influence over our company that may be adverse to our best interests and those of our other shareholders
Brookfield Investor and Pershing Square still own, in the aggregate, a significant portion of the shares of our common stock (excluding shares issuable upon the exercise of Warrants) as of December 31, 2012. The effect of the exercise of the Warrants by Brookfield Investor or the election to receive future dividends in the form of common stock, would further increase their ownership.
As a result of transactions occurring on December 31, 2012 and January 28, 2013 (refer to Item 7 and Note 10 for discussion), the Brookfield Investor is now the sole third party owner of the Warrants, representing 73.9 million Warrants or approximately 83 million common stock equivalents. As of January 3, 2013, the Brookfield Investor's potential ownership of the Company, including the effect of shares issuable upon exercise of the Warrants, is 43.1%, which is stated in their Form 13D filed on the same date. A sensitivity analysis of Brookfield Investor's potential ownership is presented in Item 7.
After these transactions, Brookfield Investor has the option with 57,500,000 Warrants to either full share settle (i.e. deliver cash for the exercise price of the Warrants in the amount of approximately $618 million in exchange for approximately 65,000,000 shares of common stock) or net share settle (i.e. receive shares in common stock equivalent to the intrinsic value of the warrant at the time of exercise). The remaining 16,400,000 Warrants held by Brookfield Investor must be net share settled. Due to the Warrants, Brookfield Investor's potential ownership amount will change due to payments of dividends and changes in our stock price.
Although the Plan Sponsors have entered into standstill agreements to limit their influence, the concentration of ownership of our outstanding equity in the Plan Sponsors may make some transactions more difficult or impossible without the support of the Plan Sponsors, or more likely with the support of the Plan Sponsors. The interests of any of the Plan Sponsors, any other substantial stockholder or any of their respective affiliates could conflict with or differ from our interests or the interests of the holders of our common stock. For example, the concentration of ownership held by the Plan Sponsors could delay, defer or prevent a change of control of our company or impede a merger, takeover or other business combination that may otherwise be favorable for us and the other stockholders. A Plan Sponsor, substantial stockholder or affiliate thereof may also pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. We cannot assure you that the standstill agreements can fully protect against these risks.
As long as the Plan Sponsors and any other substantial stockholder own, directly or indirectly, a substantial portion of our outstanding shares, subject to the terms of the standstill agreements and were they to act in a coordinated manner, they would be able to exert significant influence over us, including:
Some of our directors are involved in other businesses including, without limitation, real estate activities and public and/or private investments and, therefore, may have competing or conflicting interests with us and our board of directors has adopted resolutions renouncing any interest or expectation in any such business opportunities. In addition, our relationship agreement with Brookfield Asset Management Inc. contains significant exclusions from Brookfield's obligation to present opportunities to us
Certain of our directors have and may in the future have interests in other real estate business activities, and may have control or influence over these activities or may serve as investment advisors, directors or officers. These interests and activities, and any duties to third parties arising from such interests and activities, could divert the attention of such directors from our operations. Additionally, certain of our directors are engaged in investment and other activities in which they may learn of real estate and other related opportunities in their non-director capacities. Our board of directors has adopted resolutions applicable to our directors that expressly provide, as permitted by Section 122(17) of the DGCL, that our non-employee directors are not obligated to limit their interests or activities in their non-director capacities or to notify us of any opportunities that may arise in connection therewith, even if the opportunities are complementary to or in competition with our businesses. Accordingly, we have, and investors in our common stock should have, no expectation that we will be able to learn of or participate in such opportunities. Additionally, the relationship agreement with Brookfield Asset
Management, Inc. contains significant exclusions from Brookfield Asset Management Inc.'s obligations to present opportunities to us.
Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and operating flexibility
As of December 31, 2012, we have $19.2 billion aggregate principal amount of indebtedness outstanding at our pro rata share, net of noncontrolling interest, which includes $3.1 billion of our share of unconsolidated debt. Our indebtedness may have important consequences to us and the value of our common stock, including:
Our debt contains restrictions and covenants which may limit our ability to enter into or obtain funding for certain transactions or operate our business
The terms of certain of our debt will require us to satisfy certain customary affirmative and negative covenants and to meet financial ratios and tests, including ratios and tests based on leverage, interest coverage and net worth, or to satisfy similar tests as a precondition to incurring additional debt. We entered into a $1.0 billion revolving credit facility in April 2012 containing such covenants and restrictions. In addition, certain of our indebtedness that was reinstated in connection with the Plan contains restrictions. The covenants and other restrictions under our debt agreements affect, among other things, our ability to:
Further, our ability to incur debt under the indentures governing the unsecured corporate bonds issued by TRCLLC which are expected to remain outstanding through November 2015 (with maturities from 2013), is determined by the calculation of several covenant tests, including ratios of secured debt to gross assets and total debt to gross assets. We expect that TRCLLC and its subsidiaries may need to refinance project-level debt prior to 2015, and our ability to refinance such debt may be limited by
these ratios and any potential non-compliance with the covenants may result in TRCLLC seeking other sources of capital, including investments from us, or may result in a default on the reinstated unsecured corporate bonds. Our current plan with respect to the 2013 maturities in to pay down the amount with available capital.
In addition, our refinanced debt contains certain terms which include restrictive operational and financial covenants, restrictions on the distribution of cash flows from properties serving as collateral for the debt and, in certain instances, higher interest rates. These fees and cash flow restrictions may affect our ability to fund our on-going operations from our operating cash flows and we may be limited in our operating and financial flexibility and, thus, may be limited in our ability to respond to changes in our business or competitive activities.
We may not be able to refinance, extend or repay our Consolidated debt or our portion of indebtedness of our Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates
As of December 31, 2012, our proportionate share of total debt, including the $206.2 million of Junior Subordinated Notes, aggregated $19.2 billion consisting of our consolidated debt, net of noncontrolling interest, of $16.1 billion combined with our share of the debt of our Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates of $3.1 billion. Of our proportionate share of total debt, $1.6 billion is recourse to the Company due to guarantees or other security provisions for the benefit of the note holder. There can be no assurance that we, or the joint venture, will be able to refinance or restructure this debt on acceptable terms or otherwise, or that operations of the properties or contributions by us and/or our partners will be sufficient to repay such loans. If we or the joint venture cannot service this debt, we or the joint venture may have to deed property back to the applicable lenders.
We may not be able to raise capital through financing activities
Substantially all of our assets are encumbered by property-level indebtedness; therefore, we may be limited in our ability to raise additional capital through property level or other financings. In addition, our ability to raise additional capital could be limited to refinancing existing secured mortgages before their maturity date which may result in yield maintenance or other prepayment penalties to the extent that the mortgage is not open for prepayment at par.
We may not be able to raise capital through the sale of properties, including the strategic sale of non-core assets at prices we believe are appropriate
We desire to opportunistically sell non-core assets, such as stand-alone office buildings, community shopping centers and certain regional malls. Our ability to sell our properties to raise capital may be limited. The retail economic climate negatively affects the value of our properties and therefore reduces our ability to sell these properties on acceptable terms. Our ability to sell our properties could be affected by the availability of credit, which could increase the cost and difficulty for potential purchasers to acquire financing, as well as by the illiquid nature of real estate. For example, as part of our strategy to further de-lever our balance sheet in order to build liquidity and optimize our portfolio, we plan to reposition certain of our underperforming properties. If we cannot reposition these properties on terms that are acceptable to us, we may not be able to de-lever and realize our strategy of building liquidity and optimizing our portfolio. See "Business Risks" for a further discussion of the effects of the retail economic climate on our properties, as well as the illiquid nature of our investments in our properties.
Risks Related to the Distribution of HHC
We have indemnified HHC for certain tax liabilities
Pursuant to the Investment Agreements, we have indemnified HHC from and against 93.75% of any and all losses, claims, damages, liabilities and reasonable expenses to which HHC and its subsidiaries become subject, in each case solely to the extent directly attributable to certain taxes related to sales in the Predecessor's Master Planned Communities segment prior to March 31, 2010, in an amount up to $303.8 million as reflected in our consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. Under certain circumstances, the Company has also agreed to be responsible for interest or penalties attributable to such taxes in excess of $303.8 million.
Refer to Item 7.
Our investments in real estate as of December 31, 2012 consisted of our interests in regional malls, strip centers and stand-alone office properties. We generally own the land underlying the properties; however, at certain of our properties, all or part of the underlying land is owned by a third party that leases the land to us pursuant to a long-term ground lease. The leases generally contain various purchase options. We manage all of our U.S. regional malls. However, our stand-alone offices and certain strip centers are managed by a third party property management company. Information regarding encumbrances on our properties is included in here and Schedule III of this Annual Report.
Mall and freestanding GLA includes in-line mall shop and outparcel retail locations (locations that are not attached to the primary complex of buildings that comprise a regional mall) and excludes anchors.
Anchors have traditionally been a major component of a regional mall and play an important role in maintaining customer traffic and making the centers in our retail portfolio desirable locations for mall store tenants. Anchors are frequently department stores whose merchandise appeals to a broad range of shoppers. Anchors generally either own their stores, the land under them and adjacent parking areas, or enter into long-term leases at rates that are generally lower than the rents charged to mall store tenants. We also typically enter into long-term reciprocal agreements with anchors that provide for, among other things, mall and anchor operating covenants and anchor expense participation. The regional malls in our retail portfolio receive a smaller percentage of their operating income from anchors than from stores (other than anchors) that are typically specialty retailers who lease space in the structure including, or attached to, the primary complex of buildings that comprise a shopping center.
The following sets forth certain information regarding our properties including regional malls, stand-alone offices, strip centers and other retail as of December 31, 2012:
On January 29, 2010, our Brazilian joint venture, Aliansce Shopping Centers S.A. ("Aliansce"), commenced trading on the Brazilian Stock Exchange, or BM&FBovespa, as a result of an initial public offering of Aliansce's common shares in Brazil (the "Aliansce IPO"). Our ownership interest in Aliansce was approximately 31% at December 31, 2010 as a result of the stock sold in the Aliansce IPO. Our percentage ownership interest in Aliansce has increased as a result of various transactions since the Aliansce IPO. As of December 31, 2012, we held a 40% non-controlling ownership interest in Aliansce consisting of approximately 63,600,000 shares of the public real estate operating company. In addition, we hold a 35% non-controlling ownership percentage in a large regional mall, Shopping Leblon, in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) which is managed by Aliansce. The ownership interests in Aliansce and Shopping Leblon are accounted for under the equity method.
The following table sets forth certain information regarding the mortgages and other indebtedness encumbering our properties and also our unsecured corporate debt.
Below is a reconciliation of our proportionate share of mortgages, notes and loans payable (from above) to our consolidated mortgages, notes and loans payable per our Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2012.
Lease Expiration Schedule
The following table indicates various lease expiration information related to our U.S. regional malls, strip centers and office buildings owned as of December 31, 2012. The table excludes expirations and rental revenue from temporary tenants and tenants that pay percent-in-lieu rent. See "Note 3Summary of Significant Accounting Policies" to the consolidated financial statements for our accounting policies for revenue recognition from our tenant leases and "Note 11Rentals Under Operating Leases" to the consolidated financial statements for the future minimum rentals of our operating leases for the consolidated properties.
Other than certain cases as described below and in Note 18, neither the Company nor any of the Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates is currently involved in any material pending legal proceedings nor, to our knowledge, is any material legal proceeding currently threatened against the Company or any of the Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates.
In October 2004, certain limited partners (the "Urban Plaintiffs") of Urban Shopping Centers, L.P. ("Urban") filed a lawsuit against Urban's general partner, Head Acquisition, L.P. ("Head"), as well as TRCLP, Simon Property Group, Inc., Westfield America, Inc., and various of their affiliates, including Head's general partners (collectively, the "Urban Defendants"), in Circuit Court in Cook County, Illinois. The Predecessor, GGPLP and other affiliates were later included as Urban Defendants. The
lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the Urban Defendants breached the Urban partnership agreement, unjustly enriched themselves through misappropriation of partnership opportunities, failed to grow the partnership, breached their fiduciary duties, and tortiously interfered with several contractual relationships. The plaintiffs seek relief in the form of unspecified monetary damages and equitable relief requiring, among other things, the Urban Defendants, including the Predecessor and its affiliates, to engage in certain future transactions through the Urban Partnership. The case is currently in the final stages of discovery. John Schreiber, one of our directors, serves on the board of directors of, and is an investor in, an entity that is a principal investor in the Urban Plaintiffs, and is himself an investor in the Urban Plaintiffs and, therefore, has a financial interest in the outcome of the litigation that may be adverse to us. While we do not believe that this litigation will have a material effect on us, we are disclosing its existence due to Mr. Schreiber's interest in the case.
Pursuant to the Plan, the Company cured and reinstated that certain note (the "Homart Note") in the original principal amount of $254.0 million between GGP Limited Partnership and The Comptroller of the State of New York as Trustee of the Common Retirement Fund ("CRF") by payment in cash of accrued interest at the contractual non-default rate. CRF, however, contended that the Company's bankruptcy caused the Company to default under the Homart Note and, therefore, post-petition interest accrued under the Homart Note at the contractual default rate was due for the period June 1, 2009 until November 9, 2010. On June 16, 2011, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the "Bankruptcy Court") ruled in favor of CRF, and, on June 22, 2011, the Company elected to satisfy the Homart Note in full by paying CRF the outstanding default interest and principal amount on the Homart Note totaling $246.0 million. As a result of the ruling, the Company incurred and paid $11.7 million of default interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. However, the Company has appealed the Bankruptcy Court's order and has reserved its right to recover the payment of default interest.
Pursuant to the Plan, the Company agreed to pay to the holders of claims (the "2006 Lenders") under a revolving and term loan facility (the "2006 Credit Facility") the principal amount of their claims outstanding of approximately $2.6 billion plus post-petition interest at the contractual non-default rate. However, the 2006 Lenders asserted that they were entitled to receive interest at the contractual default rate. In July 2011, the Bankruptcy Court ruled in favor of the 2006 Lenders. As a result of the ruling, the Company has accrued $96.1 million as of December 31, 2012 and $91.5 million as of December 31, 2011. In August 2011, the Company appealed the Bankruptcy Court ruling; a decision is expected in 2013. We will continue to evaluate the appropriateness of our accrual during the appeal process.
Tax Indemnification Liability
Pursuant to the Investment Agreements, the Successor has indemnified HHC from and against 93.75% of any and all losses, claims, damages, liabilities and reasonable expenses to which HHC and its subsidiaries become subject, in each case solely to the extent directly attributable to MPC Taxes (as defined in the Investment Agreements) in an amount up to $303.8 million. Under certain circumstances, we agreed to be responsible for interest or penalties attributable to such MPC Taxes in excess of the $303.8 million. As a result of this indemnity, The Howard Hughes Company, LLC and Howard Hughes Properties, Inc. filed petitions in the United States Tax Court on May 6, 2011, contesting this liability and a trial was held in early November 2012. We have accrued $303.8 million as of December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011 related to the tax indemnification liability. In addition, we have accrued $21.6 million of interest related to the tax indemnification liability in accounts payable and accrued expenses on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011. The aggregate liability of $325.4 million represents management's best estimate of our liability as
of December 31, 2012, which will be periodically evaluated in the aggregate. We do not expect to make any significant payments on the tax indemnification liability within the next 12 months.
The following table summarizes the quarterly high and low sales prices on the NYSE for 2012 and 2011.
The following table summarizes distributions per share of our common stock.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities and Repurchase of Shares
See Note 14 for information regarding shares of our common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2012 and Note 12 for information regarding redemptions of the common units of GGP Limited Partnership held by limited partners (the "Common Units") for common stock.
The following line graph sets forth the cumulative total returns on a $100 investment in each of our Common Stock, S&P 500 and the FTSE National Association of REITEquity REITs for the period of November 10, 2010 (the first trading day following the Effective Date) through December 31, 2012.
The following table sets forth selected financial data which is derived from, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements and the related Notes and Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contained in this Annual Report. As the Investment Agreements and consummation of the Plan on November 9, 2010 (Note 2) triggered the application of acquisition accounting on the Effective Date, the results presented in the following table for the year ended December 31, 2010 have been presented separately for the Predecessor and Successor companies.
Basis of Presentation
The Company emerged from Chapter 11 on November 9, 2010, which we refer to as the Effective Date. The structure of the Plan Sponsors' investments triggered the application of the acquisition method of accounting. The acquisition method of accounting was applied at the Effective Date and, therefore, the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010; the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 and for the period from November 10, 2010 to December 31, 2010, and the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and the Consolidated Statements of Equity for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, and for the period from November 10, 2010 to December 31, 2010 reflect the revaluation of the Predecessor's assets and liabilities to fair value as of the Effective Date. Certain elements of our financial statements were significantly changed by these adjustments, such as depreciation which is calculated on revalued property and equipment and amortization of above and below market leases and other intangibles which is also calculated on revalued assets and liabilities. The results for the Successor and Predecessor are based on different bases of accounting. Due to the increased depreciation in operating expenses and the net decrease of revenues due to the amortization of above and below market leases and straight-line rent, certain line items of the Predecessor's and Successor's statements of operations are not directly comparable.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
The Company presents NOI and FFO as they are financial measures widely used in the REIT industry. Refer to Item 7 for definitions and reconciliations.
All references to numbered Notes are to specific footnotes to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report and whose descriptions are incorporated into the applicable response by reference. The following discussion should be read in conjunction with such Consolidated Financial Statements and related Notes. Capitalized terms used, but not defined, in this Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations ("MD&A") have the same meanings as in such Notes.
Our primary business is to be an owner and operator of best-in-class malls that provide an outstanding environment and experience for our communities, retailers, employees, consumers and shareholders. The substantial majority of our properties are located in the United States; however, we also own interests in regional malls and property management activities through our Unconsolidated Real Estate Affiliates in Brazil. As of December 31, 2012, we are the owner, either entirely or with joint venture partners, of 144 regional malls (126 domestic and 18 in Brazil) comprising approximately 135 million square feet.
We provide management and other services to substantially all of our properties, including properties which we own through joint venture arrangements and which are unconsolidated for GAAP purposes. Our management operating philosophies and strategies are the same whether the properties are consolidated or unconsolidated.
Our operational strategies include the following: