10-Q: Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
Published on May 11, 2009
UNITED
STATES
|
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
|
Washington,
D.C. 20549
|
FORM
10-Q
|
[ X
] QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
|
THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For
the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009
|
OR
|
[ ]
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) of
|
THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For
the transition period
from to
|
Commission
File No. 1-11986
|
TANGER
FACTORY OUTLET CENTERS, INC.
|
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its
Charter)
|
NORTH
CAROLINA
|
56-1815473
|
(State
or other jurisdiction
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
|
of
incorporation or organization)
|
Identification
No.)
|
3200
Northline Avenue, Suite 360, Greensboro, North Carolina
27408
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
code)
|
(336)
292-3010
|
(Registrant's
telephone number, including area
code)
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes ý No ¨
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 ¨ No
¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated
filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act.
Large
accelerated filer ý
|
Accelerated
filer ¨
|
Non-accelerated
filer ¨
|
Smaller
reporting company ¨
|
Indicated
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No ý
31,905,081
Common Shares,
|
$.01
par value, outstanding as of May 1,
2009
|
1
TANGER
FACTORY OUTLET CENTERS, INC.
Index
Page
Number
|
||
Part
I. Financial Information
|
||
Item
1. Financial Statements (Unaudited)
|
||
Consolidated
Balance Sheets -
|
||
as
of March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008
|
3
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations -
|
||
for
the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008
|
4
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows -
|
||
for
the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008
|
5
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
6
|
|
Item
2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of
Financial
|
||
Condition
and Results of Operations
|
17
|
|
Item
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk
|
26
|
|
Item
4. Controls and Procedures
|
27
|
|
Part
II. Other Information
|
||
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
|
27
|
|
Item
1A. Risk Factors
|
27
|
|
Item
6. Exhibits
|
27
|
|
Signatures
|
27
|
2
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
Item 1. Financial
Statements
|
TANGER
FACTORY OUTLET CENTERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(In
thousands, except share and per share data)
(Unaudited)
March 31,
|
December 31,
|
||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||||||||
ASSETS:
|
(as
adjusted)
|
||||||||||||||||
Rental
property
|
|||||||||||||||||
Land
|
$
|
135,710
|
$
|
135,689
|
|||||||||||||
Buildings,
improvements and fixtures
|
1,348,211
|
1,260,243
|
|||||||||||||||
Construction
in progress
|
4,805
|
3,823
|
|||||||||||||||
1,488,726
|
1,399,755
|
||||||||||||||||
Accumulated
depreciation
|
(374,541
|
)
|
(359,301
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Rental
property, net
|
1,114,185
|
1,040,454
|
|||||||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
3,101
|
4,977
|
|||||||||||||||
Investments
in unconsolidated joint ventures
|
9,773
|
9,496
|
|||||||||||||||
Deferred
charges, net
|
48,294
|
37,750
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
assets
|
34,010
|
29,248
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
1,209,363
|
$
|
1,121,925
|
|||||||||||||
LIABILITIES
AND EQUITY
|
|||||||||||||||||
Liabilities
|
|||||||||||||||||
Debt
|
|||||||||||||||||
Senior,
unsecured notes (net of discount of $8,367 and
|
|||||||||||||||||
$9,137,
respectively)
|
$
|
391,133
|
$
|
390,363
|
|||||||||||||
Mortgage
payable (including a debt discount of $1,166 and $0,
respectively)
|
34,634
|
---
|
|||||||||||||||
Unsecured
term loan
|
235,000
|
235,000
|
|||||||||||||||
Unsecured
lines of credit
|
188,400
|
161,500
|
|||||||||||||||
849,167
|
786,863
|
||||||||||||||||
Construction
trade payables
|
9,070
|
11,968
|
|||||||||||||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
27,777
|
26,277
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
liabilities
|
33,868
|
30,914
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
liabilities
|
919,882
|
856,022
|
|||||||||||||||
Commitments
|
|||||||||||||||||
Equity
|
|||||||||||||||||
Tanger
Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. shareholders’ equity
|
|||||||||||||||||
Preferred
shares, 7.5% Class C, liquidation preference
|
|||||||||||||||||
$25
per share, 8,000,000 shares authorized, 3,000,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
shares
issued and outstanding at March 31, 2009 and
|
|||||||||||||||||
December
31, 2008
|
75,000
|
75,000
|
|||||||||||||||
Common
shares, $.01 par value, 150,000,000 shares
|
|||||||||||||||||
authorized,
31,888,401 and 31,667,501 shares issued
|
|||||||||||||||||
and
outstanding at March 31, 2009 and December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||
2008,
respectively
|
319
|
317
|
|||||||||||||||
Paid
in capital
|
372,762
|
371,190
|
|||||||||||||||
Distributions
in excess of net income
|
(184,349
|
)
|
(201,679
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
(8,533
|
)
|
(9,617
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Equity
attributable to shareholders of Tanger Factory Outlet Centers,
Inc.
|
255,199
|
235,211
|
|||||||||||||||
Equity
attributable to noncontrolling interest in Operating
Partnership
|
34,282
|
30,692
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
equity
|
289,481
|
265,903
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
liabilities and equity
|
$
|
1,209,363
|
$
|
1,121,925
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
3
TANGER
FACTORY OUTLET CENTERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In
thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||||||
March 31,
|
||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||
(as
adjusted)
|
||||||||||||
Revenues
|
||||||||||||
Base
rentals
|
$
|
42,927
|
$
|
37,232
|
||||||||
Percentage
rentals
|
1,308
|
1,178
|
||||||||||
Expense
reimbursements
|
19,219
|
17,478
|
||||||||||
Other
income
|
1,704
|
1,388
|
||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
65,158
|
57,276
|
||||||||||
Expenses
|
||||||||||||
Property
operating
|
21,748
|
19,219
|
||||||||||
General
and administrative
|
5,935
|
5,271
|
||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
20,397
|
15,583
|
||||||||||
Total
expenses
|
48,080
|
40,073
|
||||||||||
Operating
income
|
17,078
|
17,203
|
||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(11,210
|
)
|
(10,199
|
)
|
||||||||
Gain
on fair value measurement of previous interest held in acquired joint
venture
|
31,497
|
---
|
||||||||||
Income
before equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated joint
ventures
|
37,365
|
7,004
|
||||||||||
Equity
in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated joint ventures
|
(897
|
)
|
394
|
|||||||||
Net
income
|
36,468
|
7,398
|
||||||||||
Noncontrolling
interest in Operating Partnership
|
(5,698
|
)
|
(981
|
)
|
||||||||
Net
income attributable to shareholders of Tanger Factory Outlet Centers,
Inc.
|
$
|
30,770
|
$
|
6,417
|
||||||||
Basic
earnings per common share:
|
||||||||||||
Income
from continuing operations
|
$
|
.93
|
$
|
.16
|
||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
.93
|
$
|
.16
|
||||||||
Diluted
earnings per common share:
|
||||||||||||
Income
from continuing operations
|
$
|
.92
|
$
|
.16
|
||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
.92
|
$
|
.16
|
||||||||
Dividends
paid per common share
|
$
|
.38
|
$
|
.36
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
4
TANGER
FACTORY OUTLET CENTERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In
thousands)
(Unaudited)
Three Months
Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
March 31,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||||||
(as
adjusted)
|
|||||||||||||||
OPERATING
ACTIVITIES
|
|||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
36,468
|
$
|
7,398
|
|||||||||||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash
|
|||||||||||||||
provided
by operating activities:
|
|||||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
20,429
|
15,583
|
|||||||||||||
Amortization
of deferred financing costs
|
465
|
361
|
|||||||||||||
Equity
in (earnings) loss of unconsolidated joint ventures
|
897
|
(394
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Compensation
expense related to restricted shares
|
|||||||||||||||
and
options granted
|
1,297
|
1,224
|
|||||||||||||
Amortization
of debt premiums and discount, net
|
999
|
12
|
|||||||||||||
Gain
on fair value measurement of previous interest held in
acquired
|
|||||||||||||||
joint
venture
|
(31,497
|
)
|
---
|
||||||||||||
Distributions
of cumulative earnings from unconsolidated joint ventures
|
168
|
885
|
|||||||||||||
Amortization
of above/(below) market rent rate adjustment, net
|
77
|
105
|
|||||||||||||
Straight-line
base rent adjustment
|
(777
|
)
|
(789
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Increase (decrease) due to changes in:
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
assets
|
382
|
(3,310
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
1,622
|
(3,437
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
30,530
|
17,638
|
|||||||||||||
INVESTING
ACTIVITIES
|
|||||||||||||||
Additions
to rental property
|
(11,306
|
)
|
(24,897
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Acquisition
of remaining interests in unconsolidated joint venture, net of cash
acquired
|
(31,086
|
)
|
---
|
||||||||||||
Distributions
in excess of cumulative earnings from unconsolidated joint
ventures
|
42
|
---
|
|||||||||||||
Additions
to deferred lease costs
|
(1,473
|
)
|
(1,104
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(43,823
|
)
|
(26,001
|
)
|
|||||||||||
FINANCING
ACTIVITIES
|
|||||||||||||||
Cash
dividends paid
|
(13,440
|
)
|
(12,689
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Distributions
to noncontrolling interest in Operating Partnership
|
(2,302
|
)
|
(2,183
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Proceeds
from borrowings and issuance of debt
|
70,500
|
180,820
|
|||||||||||||
Repayments
of debt
|
(43,600
|
)
|
(158,795
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Proceeds
from tax increment financing
|
---
|
1,449
|
|||||||||||||
Additions
to deferred financing costs
|
---
|
(571
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Proceeds
from exercise of options
|
259
|
222
|
|||||||||||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
11,417
|
8,253
|
|||||||||||||
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
(1,876
|
)
|
(110
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
4,977
|
2,412
|
|||||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of period
|
$
|
3,101
|
$
|
2,302
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
5
TANGER
FACTORY OUTLET CENTERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1.
|
Business
|
Tanger
Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and subsidiaries is one of the largest owners and
operators of factory outlet centers in the United States. We are a
fully-integrated, self-administered and self-managed real estate investment
trust, or REIT, which focuses exclusively on developing, acquiring, owning,
operating and managing factory outlet shopping centers. As of March
31, 2009, we owned and operated 31 outlet centers, with a total gross leasable
area of approximately 9.2 million square feet. These factory outlet
centers were 94% occupied. Also, we operated and had partial
ownership interests in two outlet centers totaling approximately 950,000 square
feet.
Our
factory outlet centers and other assets are held by, and all of our operations
are conducted by, Tanger Properties Limited Partnership and
subsidiaries. Accordingly, the descriptions of our business,
employees and properties are also descriptions of the business, employees and
properties of the Operating Partnership. Unless the context indicates
otherwise, the term “Company” refers to Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and
subsidiaries and the term “Operating Partnership” refers to Tanger Properties
Limited Partnership and subsidiaries. The terms “we”, “our” and “us”
refer to the Company or the Company and the Operating Partnership together, as
the text requires.
We own
the majority of the units of partnership interest issued by the Operating
Partnership through our two wholly-owned subsidiaries, the Tanger GP Trust and
the Tanger LP Trust. The Tanger GP Trust controls the Operating
Partnership as its sole general partner. The Tanger LP Trust holds a
limited partnership interest. The Tanger family, through its
ownership of the Tanger Family Limited Partnership holds the remaining units as
a limited partner. Stanley K. Tanger, our Chairman of the Board, is
the sole general partner of the Tanger Family Limited Partnership.
2.
|
Basis
of Presentation
|
Our
unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and
should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and
notes thereto of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008. The December 31, 2008 balance sheet data was derived from
audited financial statements. Certain information and note
disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the Securities and Exchange
Commission’s ("SEC") rules and regulations, although management believes that
the disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not
misleading. Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to
conform to the current period presentation, including changes resulting from the
adoption of FSP APB 14-1, FAS 160, and FSP EITF 03-6-1 on
January 1, 2009, as discussed below.
The
accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements include our accounts,
our wholly-owned subsidiaries, as well as the Operating Partnership and its
subsidiaries and reflect, in the opinion of management, all adjustments
necessary for a fair presentation of the interim consolidated financial
statements. All such adjustments are of a normal and recurring
nature. Intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated
in consolidation.
Investments
in real estate joint ventures that represent non-controlling ownership interests
are accounted for using the equity method of accounting. These investments are
recorded initially at cost and subsequently adjusted for our equity in the
venture's net income (loss) and cash contributions and
distributions.
6
Adoption
of Recent Accounting Pronouncements
FSP
APB 14-1 “Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be Settled in
Cash Upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash Settlement)”
Effective
January 1, 2009, we retrospectively adopted Financial Accounting Standards
Board staff position FSP APB 14-1, “Accounting for Convertible Debt
Instruments That May Be Settled in Cash Upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash
Settlement)” (“FSP 14-1”). In August 2006 we issued $149.5 million of
Exchangeable Notes at an interest rate of 3.75 %, or the Exchangeable
Notes. These Exchangeable Notes are within the scope of
FSP 14-1, which requires bifurcation of the Exchangeable Notes into a debt
component that is initially recorded at fair value and an equity
component. The difference between the fair value of the debt
component and the initial proceeds from issuance of the instrument is recorded
as a component of equity. The liability component of the debt
instrument is accreted to par using the effective interest method over the
remaining life of the debt (the first redemption date in August
2011). The accretion is reported as a component of interest
expense. The equity component is not subsequently re-valued as long
as it continues to qualify for equity treatment. Upon implementation
of this accounting change we did the following:
·
|
We
concluded that the difference between the fair value of the debt component
at issuance and the initial proceeds received was approximately $15.0
million based on a market interest rate of 6.11%. Therefore, we
recorded an increase to equity of approximately $15.0
million. The corresponding debt discount of $15.0 million
recognized was as a reduction to the carrying value of the Exchangeable
Notes on the balance sheets.
|
The
Exchangeable Notes issued in 2006 have an outstanding principal amount of $149.5
million and are reflected on our consolidated balance sheets as
follows:
As
of
March
31,
2009
(1)
|
As
of
December
31,
2008
|
||
Equity
component carrying amount
|
$
15.0
|
$
15.0
|
|
Unamortized
debt discount
|
$
7.7
|
$
8.5
|
|
Net
debt carrying amount
|
$141.8
|
$141.0
|
·
|
We
also reclassified approximately $363,000 of unamortized financing costs to
shareholders’ equity as these costs were attributable to the issuance of
the conversion feature associated with the Exchangeable
Notes.
|
·
|
Distributions
in excess of net income as of December 31, 2008 includes a decrease of
approximately $5.1 million for the cumulative accretion of the debt
discount from August 2006 through December 31,
2008.
|
·
|
Interest
expense, net of additional capitalized amounts and reclassified loan cost
amortization, for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively, includes approximately $731,000 and $651,000 of additional
non-cash interest expense related to the accretion of the debt
discounts. Interest costs of $1.4 million were recognized for
each of the three month periods in 2009 and 2008 related to the
contractual interest coupon.
|
·
|
The
revised diluted earnings per common share for the quarter ended March 31,
2008 was reduced by $.02 per share from its originally recorded
amount.
|
7
FAS
160 “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements – an
amendment of ARB No. 51”
In
December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.
160 “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment
of ARB No. 51”, or FAS 160. We adopted the provisions of FAS 160
effective January 1, 2009 and adopted the recent revisions to EITF Topic D-98,
"Classification and Measurements of Redeemable Securities", which became
effective upon our adoption of FAS 160. This statement amends ARB 51
to establish accounting and reporting standards for the non-controlling interest
in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a
subsidiary. FAS 160 clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in
a subsidiary should be reported as equity in the consolidated balance sheet and
the noncontrolling interest's share of earnings is included in consolidated net
income. The calculation of earnings per share continues to be based on income
amounts attributable to the Company. FAS 160 requires retrospective
adoption of the presentation and disclosure requirements for existing
noncontrolling interests. All other requirements of FAS 160 shall be
applied prospectively. Upon adoption of FAS 160 we did the
following:
·
|
We
reclassified the noncontrolling interests of the Operating Partnership
from the mezzanine section of our balance sheets to equity but separate
from the equity attributable to the shareholders of the Company. This
reclassification totaled $34.3 million and $30.7 million as of March 31,
2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively.
|
·
|
We
display on the statements of operations net income at levels that include
the amounts attributable to both the Company and the noncontrolling
interest. We also display the amounts of net income
attributable to the Company and to the noncontrolling
interest. Previously, net income attributable to the
noncontrolling interest was reported as an expense or other deduction in
arriving at net income.
|
The
following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and the ending
carrying amounts of total equity, equity attributable to shareholder of Tanger
Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and equity attributable to the noncontrolling
interest in the Operating Partnership (in thousands, except share and per share
amounts):
Shareholders
of Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc.
|
||||||||||||
Preferred
shares
|
Common
shares
|
Paid
in
capital
|
Distributions
in
excess
of
earnings
|
Accumulated
other
comprehensive income (loss)
|
Total
shareholders’
equity
|
Noncontrolling
interest in Operating
Partnership
|
Total
Equity
|
|||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008 as
previously
reported
|
$75,000
|
$317
|
$358,891
|
$(196,535)
|
$(9,617)
|
$228,056
|
$ ---
|
$228,056
|
||||
Cumulative
effect from adoption of FSP
APB
14-1
|
12,299
|
(5,144)
|
7,155
|
1,371
|
8,526
|
|||||||
Reclassification
upon adoption of FAS 160
|
29,321
|
29,321
|
||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008 as
adjusted
|
$75,000
|
$317
|
$371,190
|
$(201,679)
|
$(9,617)
|
$235,211
|
$30,692
|
$265,903
|
||||
Comprehensive
Income:
|
||||||||||||
Net
Income
|
30,770
|
30,770
|
5,698
|
36,468
|
||||||||
Other
comprehensive
|
1,084
|
1,084
|
211
|
1,295
|
||||||||
Total
comprehensive income
|
31,854
|
5,909
|
37,763
|
|||||||||
Compensation
under incentive award plan
|
1,297
|
1,297
|
1,297
|
|||||||||
Issuance
of 13,400 common shares upon
|
||||||||||||
exercise
of options
|
260
|
260
|
260
|
|||||||||
Grant
of 207,500 restricted shares
|
2
|
(2)
|
||||||||||
Adjustment for
minority interest in
Operating
Partnership
|
17
|
17
|
(17)
|
|||||||||
Preferred
dividends ($0.47 per share)
|
(1,406)
|
(1,406)
|
(1,406)
|
|||||||||
Common
dividends ($0.38 per share)
|
(12,034)
|
(12,034)
|
(12,034)
|
|||||||||
Distributions
to noncontrolling interest
|
||||||||||||
in
Operating Partnership
|
(2,302)
|
(2,302)
|
||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2009
|
$75,000
|
$319
|
$372,762
|
$(184,349)
|
$(8,533)
|
$255,199
|
$34,282
|
$289,481
|
||||
8
On
January 1, 2009, we adopted FASB Staff Position EITF 03-6-1, “Determining
Whether Instruments Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are
Participating Securities” (“FSP 03-6-1”). FSP 03-6-1 addresses whether instruments granted in share-based
payment awards are participating securities prior to vesting, and therefore,
need to be included in the earnings allocation when computing earnings per share
under the two-class method as described in SFAS No. 128. In accordance with
FSP 03-6-1, unvested share-based
payment awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends or dividend
equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and shall be
included in the computation of earnings per share pursuant to the two-class
method. Upon adoption, all prior-period earnings per share data are
required to be adjusted retrospectively. The impact upon adoption was
a decrease of $.02 per share for the three months ended March 31,
2009. The impact on the three months ended March 31, 2008 was
immaterial.
Reclassifications
Certain
amounts in the December 31, 2008 consolidated balance sheet have been
reclassified to the caption “other liabilities” from the caption “Accounts
payable and accrued expenses” to conform to the presentation of the consolidated
balance sheet presented as of March 31, 2009. The caption other
liabilities includes the fair value of derivative instruments and the liability
related to the Washington County, Pennsylvania tax increment financing
obligation.
3.
|
Development
of Rental Properties
|
Expansions
at Existing Centers
During
the first quarter of 2009 we continued construction activities on a 23,000
square foot expansion at our Commerce II, Georgia outlet center. We
expect tenants to begin opening during the second quarter of 2009.
Commitments
to complete construction of our expansions and renovations, and other capital
expenditure requirements amounted to approximately $3.5 million at March 31,
2009. Commitments for construction represent only those costs
contractually required to be paid by us.
Interest
costs capitalized during the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 amounted
to $36,000 and $535,000, respectively.
Tax
Increment Financing
In
December 2006 the Redevelopment Authority of Washington County, Pennsylvania
issued tax increment financing bonds to finance a portion of the public
infrastructure improvements related to the construction of the Tanger outlet
center in Washington, PA. We received the net proceeds from the bond
issuance as reimbursement as we spent funds on qualifying assets as defined in
the bond agreement. Debt service of these bonds is funded by 80% of
the real property taxes assessed within the tax increment financing district and
any shortfalls in the debt service are funded by special assessments on the
Washington, PA property. We have recorded in other liabilities on our
consolidated balance sheet approximately $17.5 million as of March 31, 2009
which represents the funds that we have received and expect to receive from the
bonds. Associated with this liability is a discount of $6.1 million
representing the difference between the amount received and the total amount of
the bonds issued. The principal amount of bonds issued totaled $23.6
million, mature in July 2035 and bear interest at an effective rate of 8.10% and
a stated rate of 5.45%. For the three months ended March 31, 2009,
approximately $354,000 of interest expense related to this bond is included in
the consolidated statement of operations. Estimated principal reductions
over the next five years are expected to approximate $384,000.
Change
in Accounting Estimate
During
the first quarter of 2009, we obtained approval from Beaufort County, South
Carolina to implement a redevelopment plan at the Hilton Head I, SC outlet
center. Based on our current redevelopment timeline, we determined
that the estimated remaining useful life of the existing outlet center is
approximately three years. As a result of this change in useful
lives, additional depreciation and amortization of approximately $1.2 million
was recognized during the three months ended March 31, 2009. The
accelerated depreciation and amortization reduced income from continuing
operations and net income by approximately $.03 per share for the three months
ended March 31, 2009.
9
4.
|
Acquisition
of Rental Property
|
On
January 5, 2009, we purchased the remaining 50% interest in the joint venture
that owned the outlet center in Myrtle Beach, SC on Hwy 17 for a cash price of
$32.0 million, which was net of the assumption of the existing mortgage loan of
$35.8 million. The acquisition was funded by amounts available under
our unsecured lines of credit. We had owned a 50%
interest in the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture since its formation in 2001
and accounted for it under the equity method. The joint venture is
now 100% owned by us and has therefore been consolidated in 2009.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.
141 (revised 2007) “Business Combinations”, or FAS 141R. FAS 141R
replaces FAS 141 “Business Combinations” and requires that the acquisition
method of accounting (which FAS 141 called the purchase method) be used for all
business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after January 1,
2009, as well as for an acquirer to be identified for each business
combination. The
following table illustrates the fair value of the total consideration
transferred and the amounts of the identifiable assets acquired and liabilities
assumed at the acquisition date (in thousands):
Cash
|
$ 32,000
|
|
Debt
assumed
|
35,800
|
|
Fair
value of total consideration transferred
|
67,800
|
|
Fair
value of our equity interest in Myrtle Beach Hwy 17
|
||
held
before the acquisition
|
31,957
|
|
Total
|
$ 99,757
|
The
following table summarizes the allocation of the purchase price to the
identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of January 5, 2009, the
date of acquisition (in thousands) and the weighted average amortization period
by major intangible asset class (in years):
Value
|
Weighted
amortization
period
|
|||
Buildings,
improvements and fixtures
|
$
81,182
|
|||
Deferred
lease costs and other intangibles
|
||||
Below
market lease value
|
(2,358)
|
5.8
|
||
Below
market land lease value
|
4,807
|
56.0
|
||
Lease
in place value
|
7,998
|
4.4
|
||
Tenant
relationships
|
7,274
|
8.8
|
||
Present
value of lease & legal costs
|
1,145
|
4.9
|
||
Total
deferred lease costs and other intangibles
|
18,866
|
|||
Subtotal
|
100,048
|
|||
Debt
discount
|
1,467
|
|||
Fair
value of interest rate swap assumed
|
(1,715)
|
|||
Fair
value of identifiable assets and liabilities assumed, net
|
(43)
|
|||
Net
assets acquired
|
$ 99,757
|
There was
no contingent consideration associated with this acquisition. We
incurred approximately $28,000 in third-party acquisition related costs for the
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 acquisition which were expensed as incurred. As a
result of acquiring the remaining 50% interest in Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, our
previously held interest was remeasured at fair value, resulting in a gain of
approximately $31.5 million.
10
5.
|
Investments
in Unconsolidated Real Estate Joint
Ventures
|
Our
investments in unconsolidated joint ventures as of March 31, 2009 and December
31, 2008 aggregated $9.8 million and $9.5 million, respectively. We
have evaluated the accounting treatment for each of the joint ventures under the
guidance of FIN 46R and have concluded based on the current facts and
circumstances that the equity method of accounting should be used to account for
the individual joint ventures. At March 31, 2009, we were members of the
following unconsolidated real estate joint ventures:
Joint
Venture
|
Center
Location
|
Opening
Date
|
Ownership
%
|
Square
Feet
|
Carrying
Value
of
Investment
(in
millions)
|
Total
Joint
Venture
Debt
(in
millions)
|
Deer
Park
|
Deer
Park, Long Island, NY
|
2008
|
33.3%
|
684,952
|
$4.2
|
$262.9
|
Wisconsin
Dells
|
Wisconsin
Dells, Wisconsin
|
2006
|
50%
|
264,929
|
$5.5
|
$25.3
|
These
investments are recorded initially at cost and subsequently adjusted for our
equity in the venture’s net income (loss) and cash contributions and
distributions. The following management, leasing and marketing fees
were recognized from services provided to Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 (2008 period
only), Wisconsin Dells and Deer Park (in thousands):
Three months ended
|
||||
March 31,
|
||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||
Fee:
|
||||
Management
and leasing
|
$
471
|
$ 228
|
||
Marketing
|
39
|
34
|
||
Total
Fees
|
$
510
|
$ 262
|
Our
investments in real estate joint ventures are reduced by 50% of the profits
earned for leasing and development services provided to Wisconsin
Dells. Our investment in Deer Park is reduced by 33.3% of the profits
earned for leasing services provided to Deer Park. Our carrying value
of investments in unconsolidated joint ventures differs from our share of the
assets reported in the “Summary Balance Sheets – Unconsolidated Joint Ventures”
shown below due to adjustments to the book basis, including intercompany profits
on sales of services that are capitalized by the unconsolidated joint ventures.
The differences in basis are amortized over the various useful lives of the
related assets.
On a
periodic basis, we assess whether there are any indicators that the value of our
investments in unconsolidated joint ventures may be impaired. An
investment is impaired only if management’s estimate of the value of the
investment is less than the carrying value of the investments, and such decline
in value is deemed to be other than temporary. To the extent
impairment has occurred, the loss shall be measured as the excess of the
carrying amount of the investment over the value of the
investment. Our estimates of value for each joint venture investment
are based on a number of assumptions that are subject to economic and market
uncertainties including, among others, demand for space, competition for
tenants, changes in market rental rates and operating costs of the
property. As these factors are difficult to predict and are subject
to future events that may alter our assumptions, the values estimated by us in
our impairment analysis may not be realized. As of March 31, 2009, we
do not believe that any of our equity investments were impaired.
Wisconsin
Dells
In March
2005, we established the Wisconsin Dells joint venture to construct and operate
a Tanger Outlet center in Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin. The 264,900 square foot
center opened in August 2006. In February 2006, in conjunction with
the construction of the center, Wisconsin Dells entered into a three-year,
interest-only mortgage agreement with a one-year maturity extension
option. In February 2009, the one-year option became effective to
extend the maturity of the mortgage to February 24, 2010. As of March
31, 2009, the loan had a balance of $25.3 million with a floating interest rate
based on the one month LIBOR index plus 1.30%. The construction loan
incurred by this unconsolidated joint venture is collateralized by its property
as well as joint and several guarantees by us and designated guarantors of our
venture partner.
11
Condensed
combined summary financial information of joint ventures accounted for using the
equity method is as follows (in thousands):
Summary
Balance Sheets
–
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
|
As of
March 31,
2009
|
As of
December 31,
2008
|
||
Assets:
|
||||
Investment
properties at cost, net
|
$ 288,951
|
$ 323,546
|
||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
13,195
|
5,359
|
||
Deferred
charges, net
|
6,307
|
7,025
|
||
Other
assets
|
4,399
|
6,324
|
||
Total
assets
|
$
312,852
|
$ 342,254
|
||
Liabilities
and Owners’ Equity:
|
||||
Mortgages
payable
|
$ 288,169
|
$ 303,419
|
||
Construction
trade payables
|
3,356
|
13,641
|
||
Accounts
payable and other liabilities (1)
|
6,998
|
9,479
|
||
Total
liabilities
|
298,523
|
326,539
|
||
Owners’
equity (1)
|
14,329
|
15,715
|
||
Total
liabilities and owners’ equity
|
$312,852
|
$ 342,254
|
(1)
|
Includes
the fair value of interest rate protection agreements at Deer Park as of
March 31, 2009 and Deer Park and Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 as of December 31,
2008, in the amounts $2.1 and $5.6, respectively, recorded as an increase
in accounts payable and other liabilities and a reduction of owners’
equity in other comprehensive
income.
|
Three months ended
|
||||
Summary
Statement of Operations
|
March 31,
|
|||
–
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
|
2009
|
2008
|
||
Revenues
|
$ 8,524
|
$ 4,757
|
||
Expenses:
|
||||
Property
operating
|
4,247
|
1,802
|
||
General
and administrative
|
189
|
19
|
||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
3,174
|
1,345
|
||
Total
expenses
|
7,610
|
3,166
|
||
Operating
income
|
914
|
1,519
|
||
Interest
expense
|
3,731
|
840
|
||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
(2,817)
|
$ 751
|
||
Tanger
Factory Outlet Centers, Inc’s share of:
|
||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ (897)
|
$ 394
|
||
Depreciation
(real estate related)
|
$ 1,166
|
$ 652
|
||
12
6.
|
Other
Comprehensive Income
|
Total
comprehensive income is as follows (in thousands):
Three months ended
|
|||||||
March 31,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Net
income
|
$ 36,468
|
$ 7,398
|
|||||
Other
comprehensive income (loss):
|
|||||||
Reclassification
adjustment for amortization of gain on
|
|||||||
Settlement
of US treasury rate lock included in net income,
|
(72)
|
(68)
|
|||||
Change
in fair value of treasury rate locks
|
---
|
(9,006)
|
|||||
Change
in fair value of cash flow hedges
|
(70)
|
---
|
|||||
Change
in fair value of our portion of unconsolidated joint
ventures
|
|||||||
cash
flow hedges
|
1,437
|
(1,206)
|
|||||
Other
comprehensive income (loss)
|
1,295
|
(10,280)
|
|||||
Total
comprehensive income (loss)
|
37,763
|
(2,882)
|
|||||
Comprehensive
income (loss) attributable to the noncontrolling interest
|
(5,909)
|
661
|
|||||
Total
comprehensive income (loss) attributable to common
shareholders
|
$
31,854
|
$
(2,221)
|
7. Share-Based
Compensation
During
the first quarter of 2009, our Board of Directors approved the grant of 207,500
restricted common shares to the independent directors and our
officers. The restricted common shares granted to independent
directors vest ratably over a three year period. The restricted
common shares granted to officers vest ratably over a five year
period. The grant date fair value of the awards, or $28.19 per share,
was determined based upon the closing market price of our common shares on the
day prior to the grant date in accordance with the terms of the Company’s
Incentive Award Plan, or Plan. Compensation expense related to the
amortization of the deferred compensation amount is being recognized in
accordance with the vesting schedule of the restricted shares.
We
recorded share-based compensation expense in our statements of operations as
follows (in thousands):
Three months ended
|
||
March 31,
|
||
2009
|
2008
|
|
Restricted
shares
|
$1,244
|
$1,172
|
Options
|
53
|
52
|
Total
share-based compensation
|
$1,297
|
$1,224
|
As of
March 31, 2009, there was $17.5 million of total unrecognized compensation cost
related to unvested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the
Plan.
13
8. Earnings
Per Share
The
following table sets forth a reconciliation of the numerators and denominators
in computing earnings per share in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 128, Earnings Per Share (in thousands, except per share
amounts):
Three
months ended
|
|||||||||
March
31,
|
|||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
NUMERATOR:
|
|||||||||
Net
income available to the Company
|
$
|
30,770
|
$
|
6,417
|
|||||
Less
applicable preferred share dividends
|
(1,406
|
)
|
(1,406
|
)
|
|||||
Less
allocation of earnings to participating securities
|
(437
|
)
|
(139
|
)
|
|||||
Net
income available to common shareholders
|
$
|
28,927
|
$
|
4,872
|
|||||
DENOMINATOR:
|
|||||||||
Basic
weighted average common shares
|
31,269
|
30,979
|
|||||||
Effect
of exchangeable notes
|
---
|
92
|
|||||||
Effect
of outstanding options
|
81
|
169
|
|||||||
Diluted
weighted average common shares
|
31,350
|
31,240
|
|||||||
Basic
earnings per common share:
|
|||||||||
Income
from continuing operations
|
$
|
.93
|
$
|
.16
|
|||||
Net
income
|
$
|
.93
|
$
|
.16
|
|||||
Diluted
earnings per common share:
|
|||||||||
Income
from continuing operations
|
$
|
.92
|
$
|
.16
|
|||||
Net
income
|
$
|
.92
|
$
|
.16
|
Our
$149.5 million of Exchangeable Notes are included in the diluted earnings per
share computation, if the effect is dilutive, using the treasury stock
method. In applying the treasury stock method, the effect will be
dilutive if the average market price of our common shares for at least 20
trading days in the 30 consecutive trading days at the end of each quarter is
higher than the exchange rate of $36.04 per share.
The
computation of diluted earnings per share excludes options to purchase common
shares when the exercise price is greater than the average market price of the
common shares for the period. No options were excluded from the
computations for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The assumed conversion of the partnership units held by
the noncontrolling interest limited partner as of the beginning of the year,
which would result in the elimination of earnings allocated to the
noncontrolling interest in the Operating Partnership, would have no impact on
earnings per share since the allocation of earnings to a partnership unit, as if
converted, is equivalent to earnings allocated to a common share.
The
Company’s unvested restricted share awards contain non-forfeitable rights to
dividends or dividend equivalents. In accordance with FSP EITF 03-06-1
“Determining Whether Instruments Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are
Participating Securities”, the impact of the unvested restricted share awards on
earnings per share has been calculated using the two-class method whereby
earnings are allocated to the unvested restricted share awards based on
dividends declared and the unvested restricted shares' participation rights in
undistributed earnings.
14
9.
|
Derivatives
|
We are
exposed to various market risks, including changes in interest
rates. Market risk is the potential loss arising from adverse changes
in market rates and prices, such as interest rates. We may
periodically enter into certain interest rate protection and interest rate swap
agreements to effectively convert floating rate debt to a fixed rate
basis. We do not enter into derivatives or other financial
instruments for trading or speculative purposes.
In
accordance with our derivatives policy, all derivatives are assessed for
effectiveness at the time the contracts are entered into and are assessed for
effectiveness on an on-going basis at each quarter end. All of our
derivatives have been designated as cash flow hedges. Unrealized
gains and losses related to the effective portion of our derivatives are
recognized in other comprehensive income and gains or losses related to
ineffective portions are recognized in the income statement. At March
31, 2009, all of the derivatives which we originally entered into were
considered effective.
The table
below presents the fair value of the Company’s derivative financial instruments
as well as their classification on the Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2009 and
December 31, 2008 (in millions).
As
of
|
As
of
|
|||||||
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||
Liability
Derivatives
|
||||||||
Notional
amounts
|
Balance
sheet
location
|
Fair
value
|
Balance
sheet
location
|
Fair
value
|
||||
Derivatives
designated as hedging
|
||||||||
instruments
under Statement 133
|
||||||||
Interest
rate swap agreements
|
$235.0
|
Other
liabilities
|
$11.8
|
Other
liabilities
|
$11.7
|
|||
Derivatives
not designated as hedging
|
||||||||
Instruments
under Statement 133 (1)
|
||||||||
Interest
rate swap agreement
|
$35.0
|
Other
liabilities
|
$
1.4
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|||
Total
derivatives
|
$270.0
|
$13.2
|
$11.7
|
(1) The derivative
not designated as a hedging instrument was the interest rate swap agreement
assumed when we purchased the remaining 50% interest in the joint venture that
owned the outlet center in Myrtle Beach, SC on Hwy 17. We could not
qualify for hedge accounting for this assumed derivative which had a fair value
of $1.7 million upon acquisition and was recorded in other liabilities in the
balance sheet. Changes in fair value of this derivative will be
recorded through the statement of operations until its expiration in March
2010.
The
remaining net benefit from a derivative settled during 2005 in accumulated other
comprehensive income was an unamortized balance as of March 31, 2009 of $2.3
million which will amortize into the statement of operations through October
2015.
10. Fair
Value Measurements
In
September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued
Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”, or FAS 157. FAS 157
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. We adopted the
provisions of FAS 157 as of January 1, 2008 for financial
instruments. Although the adoption of FAS 157 did not materially
impact our financial condition, results of operations or cash flow, we are now
required to provide additional disclosures as part of our consolidated financial
statements.
In
February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position 157-2, “Effective Date
of FASB Statement No. 157”, which delayed the effective date of FAS 157 to
January 1, 2009 for us for all nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities,
except for items recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial
statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). Rental property
is considered a nonfinancial asset and the testing of it for impairment is
considered nonrecurring in nature. Effective January 1, 2009, the
definition of fair value in the context of an impairment evaluation became the
price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in
an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement
date.
15
FAS 157
established a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used
in measuring fair value. These tiers are defined as
follows:
Tier
|
Description
|
Level
1
|
Defined
as observable inputs such as quoted prices in active
markets
|
Level
2
|
Defined
as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either
directly or indirectly observable
|
Level
3
|
Defined
as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exists, therefore
requiring an entity to develop its own
assumptions
|
The
valuation of our financial instruments is determined using widely accepted
valuation techniques including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected
cash flows of each derivative. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of
the derivatives, including the period to maturity, and uses observable
market-based inputs, including interest rate curves. The valuation
also includes a discount for counterparty risk. We have determined
that our derivative valuations are classified in Level 2 of the fair value
hierarchy.
For
assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, quantitative
disclosure of the fair value for each major category of assets and liabilities
is presented below:
Fair
Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using (in
millions)
|
||||
Quoted
prices
|
||||
in
active markets
|
Significant
other
|
Significant
|
||
for
identical assets
|
observable
inputs
|
unobservable
inputs
|
||
Level
1
|
Level
2
|
Level
3
|
||
Liabilities:
|
||||
Derivative
financial instruments (1)
|
---
|
$(13.2)
|
---
|
|
(1)
Included in “Other liabilities” in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheet.
|
||||
11. Non-Cash
Investing Activities
Non-cash
financing activities that occurred during the 2009 period included the
assumption of mortgage debt in the amount of $35.8 million, including a discount
of $1.5 million related to the acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in the
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture as discussed in Note 4. In
addition, rental property increased by $32.0 million related to the fair market
valuation of our previously held interest in excess of carrying
amount.
We
purchase capital equipment and incur costs relating to construction of
facilities, including tenant finishing allowances. Expenditures
included in construction trade payables as of March 31, 2009 and 2008 amounted
to $9.1 million and $23.8 million, respectively.
12.
|
Subsequent
Events
|
In May
2009, Exchangeable Notes of the Operating Partnership in the principal amount of
$142.3 million were exchanged for Company common shares, representing
approximately 95.2% of the total outstanding prior to the exchange
offer. In the aggregate, the exchange offer resulted in the issuance
of approximately 4.9 million Company common shares and the payment of
approximately $1.2 million in cash for accrued and unpaid interest and in lieu
of fractional shares. Following settlement of the exchange offer,
approximately $7.2 million of Exchangeable Notes remained
outstanding.
13.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In
April 2009, the FASB issued FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures
about Fair Value of Financial Instruments (“FSP FAS 107-1”). FSP FAS 107-1
amends SFAS No. 107 to require disclosures about fair value of financial
instruments for interim reporting periods of publicly traded companies in
addition to the annual financial statements. FSP FAS 107-1 also amends APB
No. 28 to require those disclosures in summarized financial information at
interim reporting periods. FSP FAS 107-1 is effective for interim periods ending
after June 15, 2009. Prior period presentation is not required for
comparative purposes at initial adoption. We do not expect the adoption of FSP
FAS 107-1 on July 1, 2009 to have a material impact on our consolidated
financial position or results of operations.
16
Item
2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations
The
discussion of our results of operations reported in the unaudited, consolidated
statements of operations compares the three months ended March 31, 2009 with the
three months ended March 31, 2008. The following discussion should be
read in conjunction with the unaudited consolidated financial statements
appearing elsewhere in this report. Historical results and percentage
relationships set forth in the unaudited, consolidated statements of operations,
including trends which might appear, are not necessarily indicative of future
operations. Unless the context indicates otherwise, the term
“Company” refers to Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and subsidiaries and the
term “Operating Partnership” refers to Tanger Properties Limited Partnership and
subsidiaries. The terms “we”, “our” and “us” refer to the Company or
the Company and the Operating Partnership together, as the text
requires.
Cautionary
Statements
Certain
statements made below are forward-looking statements within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We intend for such
forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for
forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Reform Act of
1995 and included this statement for purposes of complying with these safe
harbor provisions. Forward-looking statements, which are based on certain
assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies and expectations, are
generally identifiable by use of the words “believe”, “expect”, “intend”,
“anticipate”, “estimate”, “project”, or similar expressions. You
should not rely on forward-looking statements since they involve known and
unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond
our control and which could materially affect our actual results, performance or
achievements. Factors which may cause actual results to differ
materially from current expectations include, but are not limited to, those set
forth under Item 1A – “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2008. There have been no material changes to
the risk factors listed there through March 31, 2009.
General
Overview
At March
31, 2009, our consolidated portfolio included 31 wholly-owned outlet centers in
21 states totaling 9.2 million square feet compared to 29 wholly-owned outlet
centers in 21 states totaling 8.4 million square feet at March 31,
2008. The changes in the number of centers and square feet are due to
the following events:
No.
of
Centers
|
Square
Feet
(000’s)
|
States
|
||||
As
of March 31, 2008
|
29
|
8,434
|
21
|
|||
New
development:
|
||||||
Washington,
Pennsylvania
|
1
|
371
|
---
|
|||
Acquisition:
|
||||||
Myrtle
Beach, South Carolina
|
1
|
402
|
---
|
|||
Center
expansions:
|
||||||
Barstow,
California
|
---
|
19
|
---
|
|||
Other
|
---
|
(8)
|
---
|
|||
As
of March 31, 2009
|
31
|
9,218
|
21
|
17
The
following table summarizes certain information for our existing outlet centers
in which we have an ownership interest as of March 31, 2009. Except
as noted, all properties are fee owned.
Location
|
Square
|
%
|
||
Wholly-Owned
Outlet Centers
|
Feet
|
Occupied
|
||
Riverhead,
New York (1)
|
729,315
|
97
|
||
Rehoboth
Beach, Delaware (1)
|
568,868
|
97
|
||
Foley,
Alabama
|
557,185
|
91
|
||
San
Marcos, Texas
|
442,006
|
97
|
||
Myrtle
Beach Hwy 501, South Carolina
|
426,417
|
86
|
||
Sevierville,
Tennessee (1)
|
419,038
|
98
|
||
Myrtle
Beach Hwy 17, South Carolina (1)
(2)
|
402,442
|
97
|
||
Hilton
Head, South Carolina
|
388,094
|
85
|
||
Washington,
Pennsylvania
|
370,525
|
82
|
||
Charleston,
South Carolina
|
352,315
|
91
|
||
Commerce
II, Georgia
|
347,025
|
93
|
||
Howell,
Michigan
|
324,631
|
94
|
||
Branson,
Missouri
|
302,992
|
98
|
||
Park
City, Utah
|
298,379
|
99
|
||
Locust
Grove, Georgia
|
293,868
|
95
|
||
Westbrook,
Connecticut
|
291,051
|
94
|
||
Gonzales,
Louisiana
|
282,403
|
99
|
||
Williamsburg,
Iowa
|
277,230
|
91
|
||
Lincoln
City, Oregon
|
270,280
|
94
|
||
Tuscola,
Illinois
|
256,514
|
78
|
||
Lancaster,
Pennsylvania
|
255,152
|
97
|
||
Tilton,
New Hampshire
|
245,563
|
96
|
||
Fort
Myers, Florida
|
198,950
|
95
|
||
Commerce
I, Georgia
|
185,750
|
58
|
||
Terrell,
Texas
|
177,800
|
94
|
||
Barstow,
California
|
171,300
|
100
|
||
West
Branch, Michigan
|
112,120
|
96
|
||
Blowing
Rock, North Carolina
|
104,235
|
100
|
||
Nags
Head, North Carolina
|
82,178
|
97
|
||
Kittery
I, Maine
|
59,694
|
100
|
||
Kittery
II, Maine
|
24,619
|
100
|
||
Totals
|
9,217,939
|
94
|
(3) | |
Unconsolidated
Joint Ventures
|
|||
Deer
Park, New York (33.3% owned) (4)
|
684,952
|
78
|
|
Wisconsin
Dells, Wisconsin (50% owned)
|
264,929
|
97
|
(1)
|
These
properties or a portion thereof are subject to a ground
lease.
|
(2)
|
Property
serves as collateral on a $35.8 million non-recourse mortgage with an
interest rate of LIBOR + 1.40%.
|
(3)
|
Excludes
the occupancy rate at our Washington, Pennsylvania outlet center which
opened during the third quarter of 2008 and has not yet
stabilized.
|
(4)
|
Includes
a 29,253 square foot warehouse adjacent to the property utilized to
support the operations of the retail
tenants.
|
18
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Comparison
of the three months ended March 31, 2009 to the three months ended March 31,
2008
Base
rentals increased $5.7 million, or 15%, in the 2009 period compared to the 2008
period. Approximately $3.8 million of the increase related to our new
outlet center in Washington, Pennsylvania which opened in August 2008 and our
acquisition in January 2009 of the remaining 50% interest in the joint venture
that held the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, South Carolina center. The Myrtle
Beach Hwy 17 outlet center is now wholly-owned and has been consolidated in our
2009 period results. Also, our base rental income increased $1.4
million due to increases in rental rates on lease renewals and incremental rents
from re-tenanting vacant space. During the 2009 period, we executed
213 leases totaling 1.0 million square feet at an average increase of
20.4%. This compares to our execution of 239 leases totaling 1.1
million square feet at an average increase of 24.1% during the 2008
period.
In
addition, the amount of termination fees recognized in the 2009 period was
approximately $400,000 higher when compared to the 2008 period due to several
tenants terminating leases early. Payments received from the early
termination of leases are recognized as revenue from the time the payment is
receivable until the tenant vacates the space.
Also,
included in base rentals is the amortization from the value of the above and
below market leases recorded as a result of our property acquisitions as either
an increase (in the case of below market leases) or a decrease (in the case of
above market leases) to rental income over the remaining term of the associated
lease. If a tenant vacates its space prior to the contractual
termination of the lease and no rental payments are being made on the lease, any
unamortized balance of the related above or below market lease value will be
written off and could materially impact our net income positively or
negatively. At March 31, 2009, the net liability representing the
amount of unrecognized below market lease values totaled approximately $3.0
million.
Percentage
rentals, which represent revenues based on a percentage of tenants' sales volume
above predetermined levels (the "breakpoint"), increased $130,000 or
11%. The entire increase is due the addition of the Washington, PA
and Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, SC centers to the wholly-owned
portfolio. Reported same-space sales per square foot for the rolling
twelve months ended March 31, 2009 were $338 per square
foot. Same-space sales is defined as the weighted average sales per
square foot reported in space open for the full duration of each comparison
period.
Expense
reimbursements, which represent the contractual recovery from tenants of certain
common area maintenance, insurance, property tax, promotional, advertising and
management expenses generally fluctuates consistently with the reimbursable
property operating expenses to which it relates. Expense
reimbursements, expressed as a percentage of property operating expenses, were
88% and 91% in the 2009 and 2008 periods, respectively. This decrease
is primarily a function of our lower average occupancy rates for the portfolio
during the 2009 period.
Other
income increased $316,000 or 23%, due to management and leasing fees earned from
services provided to the Deer Park joint venture which opened in October
2008. This increase in fees was offset by a decrease in fees from
service provided to the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture which became
wholly-owned in January 2009.
Property
operating expenses increased $2.5 million, or 13%, in the 2009 period as
compared to the 2008 period. The increase is due primarily to the
$2.2 million of incremental operating costs from our new Washington, PA outlet
center and the now wholly-owned Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, SC outlet center. In
addition in the first quarter of 2009, we incurred an increase of approximately
$400,000 in snow removal costs at several other properties within our portfolio
compared to the 2008 period.
General
and administrative expenses increased $664,000, or 13%, in the 2009 period as
compared to the 2008 period. The increase is due to a number of
factors including: higher expenses related to reserves for doubtful accounts and
bankruptcies; higher legal and professional fees and full quarter effect of the
restricted shares issued in late February 2008 and additional restricted shares
issued in late February 2009. As a percentage of total revenues,
general and administrative expenses were 9% for both the 2009 and 2008
periods.
19
Depreciation
and amortization increased $4.8 million, or 31%, in the 2009 period compared to
the 2008 period. During the first quarter of 2009, we determined that
the estimated useful life of the existing Hilton Head I, South Carolina center
approximated three years based on the approval received from Beaufort County,
South Carolina to implement a redevelopment plan at our Hilton Head I, SC outlet
center. As a result of this change in useful lives, additional
depreciation and amortization of approximately $1.2 million was recognized
during the three months ended March 31, 2009. The accelerated
depreciation and amortization reduced income from continuing operations and net
income by approximately $.03 per share for the three months ended March 31,
2009. The remainder of the increase is due the addition of the
Washington, PA and Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, SC centers to the wholly-owned
portfolio, representing $3.3 million of depreciation and amortization for the
2009 period.
Interest
expense increased $1.0 million, or 10%, in the 2009 period compared to the 2008
period. Since the 2008 period, we completed the construction of the
Washington, PA outlet center, acquired the remaining 50% interest in the Myrtle
Beach Hwy 17 joint venture and completed several major renovations at various
centers across our portfolio. These projects increased our debt
levels significantly during that time which has resulted in higher interest
expense. However, this increase in interest expense was partially
offset by lower interest rates that were achieved through the refinancing of
certain of our fixed rate debt and the overall decrease in rates on our existing
unsecured lines of credit. The average interest rate, including loan cost
amortization, on average debt outstanding for the three months ended March 31,
2009 and 2008 was 4.93% and 6.07%, respectively.
Equity in
earnings (losses) of unconsolidated joint ventures decreased $1.3 million in the
2009 period compared to the 2008 period. The decrease is due mainly
to our equity in the losses incurred by the Deer Park property, which opened
during October 2008, totaling $1.1 million due to depreciation charges and
leverage on the project. We expect results to improve during the
stabilization of the property in its first year of operation. In
addition, the 2009 period does not include any equity in earnings from the
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture as we acquired the remaining 50% interest in
January 2009.
On
January 5, 2009, we purchased the remaining 50% interest in the Myrtle Beach Hwy
17 joint venture for a cash price of $32.0 million which was net of the
assumption of the existing mortgage loan of $35.8 million. The
acquisition was funded by amounts available under our unsecured lines of
credit. We had
owned a 50% interest in the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture since its
formation in 2001 and accounted for it under the equity method. The
joint venture is now 100% owned by us and is consolidated in
2009. The acquisition was accounted for under the provisions of FAS
141R which was effective January 1, 2009. Under these provisions we
recorded a gain of $31.5 million which represented the difference between the
fair market value of our previously owned interest and its cost
basis.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Operating
Activities
Property
rental income represents our primary source of net cash provided by operating
activities. Rental and occupancy rates are the primary factors that
influence property rental income levels. Since the 2008 period, we
have added two outlet centers to our wholly-owned portfolio thus increasing our
cash provided by operations. In addition, our rental rates upon
renewal and re-tenanting have increased in each of the periods between the 2008
period and the 2009 period. These two factors have more than offset
the slight decrease in overall portfolio occupancy on a comparative basis
between the periods.
Investing
Activities
During
the 2009 period, we completed the acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in
the joint venture that held the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, South Carolina center at a
cash purchase price of $32.0 million. This increase in cash used in
investing activities was offset by a decrease in our additions to rental
property. Additions to rental property during 2008 period were
significantly higher than the 2009 period due to the expenditures related to our
Washington, PA outlet center which opened in August 2008 and two major
renovation projects which were on-going during most of that
period. There are no significant renovation projects planned during
2009.
20
Financing
Activities
As noted
in investing activities above, during the 2009 period we completed the
acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in the joint venture that held the
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, SC center funding the majority of the cash purchase price
with amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit
facilities. This increase in cash provided by financing activities
was offset by a decrease in additions to rental property as our development
pipeline has decreased when compared to the 2008 period. The 2008
period included significant expenditures to complete the construction of the
Washington, PA outlet center which eventually opened in August 2008 and the two
major renovation projects discussed above.
Current
Developments and Dispositions
We intend
to continue to grow our portfolio by developing, expanding or acquiring
additional outlet centers. In the section below, we describe the new
developments that are either currently planned, underway or recently
completed. However, you should note that any developments or
expansions that we, or a joint venture that we are involved in, have planned or
anticipated may not be started or completed as scheduled, or may not result in
accretive net income or funds from operations. In addition, we
regularly evaluate acquisition or disposition proposals and engage from time to
time in negotiations for acquisitions or dispositions of
properties. We may also enter into letters of intent for the purchase
or sale of properties. Any prospective acquisition or disposition
that is being evaluated or which is subject to a letter of intent may not be
consummated, or if consummated, may not result in an increase in net income or
funds from operations.
WHOLLY
OWNED CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS
Expansions
at Existing Centers
During
the first quarter of 2009 we continued construction activities on a 23,000
square foot expansion at our Commerce II, Georgia outlet center. We
expect tenants to begin opening during the second quarter of 2009.
Commitments
to complete construction of our expansions and renovations, and other capital
expenditure requirements amounted to approximately $3.5 million at March 31,
2009. Commitments for construction represent only those costs
contractually required to be paid by us.
Potential
Future Developments
We
currently have an option for a new development site located in Mebane, North
Carolina on the highly traveled Interstate 40/85 corridor, which sees over
83,000 cars daily. The site is located halfway between the Research
Triangle Park area of Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill, and the Triad area of
Greensboro, High Point and Winston-Salem. During the option period we
will be analyzing the viability of the site and determining whether to proceed
with the development of a center at this location.
We
currently have an option for a new development site located in Irving, Texas,
which would be our third in the state. The site is strategically located west of
Dallas at the North West quadrant of busy State Highway 114 and Loop 12 and will
be the first major project planned for the Texas Stadium Redevelopment
Area. It is also adjacent to the upcoming DART light rail line (and
station stop) connecting downtown Dallas to the Las Colinas Urban Center, the
Irving Convention Center and the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport.
At this
time, we are in the initial study period on these potential new
locations. As such, there can be no assurance that either of these
sites will ultimately be developed. These projects, if realized,
would be primarily funded by amounts available under our unsecured lines of
credit but could also be funded by other sources of capital such as
collateralized construction loans, public debt or equity offerings as necessary
or available.
21
Financing
Arrangements
At March
31, 2009, approximately 96% of our outstanding debt represented unsecured
borrowings and approximately 95% of the gross book value of our real estate
portfolio was unencumbered. We maintain unsecured, revolving lines of
credit that provided for unsecured borrowings of up to $325.0
million. Five of our six lines of credit, representing $300.0
million, have maturity dates of June 2011 or later. The remaining
line of credit, which provides for borrowings of up to $25.0 million, matures in
June 2009 and had no amounts outstanding as of March 31, 2009.
In May
2009, Exchangeable Notes of the Operating Partnership in the principal amount of
$142.3 million were exchanged for Company common shares, representing
approximately 95.2% of the total outstanding prior to the exchange
offer. In the aggregate, the exchange offer resulted in the issuance
of approximately 4.9 million Company common shares and the payment of
approximately $1.2 million in cash for accrued and unpaid interest and in lieu
of fractional shares. Following settlement of the exchange offer,
approximately $7.2 million of Exchangeable Notes remained
outstanding.
We intend
to retain the ability to raise additional capital, including public debt or
equity, to pursue attractive investment opportunities that may arise and to
otherwise act in a manner that we believe to be in our shareholders’ best
interests. We have no significant debt maturities until
2011. We are a well-known seasoned issuer with a shelf registration
that allows us to register unspecified amounts of different classes of
securities on Form S-3. We intend to update our shelf registration
during the second quarter of 2009. To generate capital to reinvest
into other attractive investment opportunities, we may also consider the use of
additional operational and developmental joint ventures, the sale or lease of
outparcels on our existing properties and the sale of certain properties that do
not meet our long-term investment criteria. Based on cash provided by
operations, existing credit facilities, ongoing negotiations with certain
financial institutions and our ability to sell debt or issue equity subject to
market conditions, we believe that we have access to the necessary financing to
fund the planned capital expenditures during 2009.
22
We
anticipate that adequate cash will be available to fund our operating and
administrative expenses, regular debt service obligations, and the payment of
dividends in accordance with Real Estate Investment Trust, or REIT, requirements
in both the short and long-term. Although we receive most of our
rental payments on a monthly basis, distributions to shareholders are made
quarterly and interest payments on the senior, unsecured notes are made
semi-annually. Amounts accumulated for such payments will be used in
the interim to reduce the outstanding borrowings under our existing lines of
credit or invested in short-term money market or other suitable
instruments.
We
believe our current balance sheet position is financially sound; however, due to
the current weakness in and unpredictability of the capital and credit markets,
we can give no assurance that affordable access to capital will exist between
now and 2011 when our next debt maturities occur. As a result, our
current primary focus is to strengthen our capital and liquidity position by
controlling and reducing construction and overhead costs, generating positive
cash flows from operations to cover our dividend and reducing outstanding
debt.
On April
9, 2009, our Board of Directors declared a $.3825 cash dividend per common share
payable on May 15, 2009 to each shareholder of record on April 30, 2009, and
caused a $.7650 per Operating Partnership unit cash distribution to be paid to
the Operating Partnership’s noncontrolling interest. The Board of
Directors also declared a $.46875 cash dividend per 7.5% Class C Cumulative
Preferred Share payable on May 15, 2009 to holders of record on April 30,
2009.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
The
following table details certain information as of March 31, 2009 about various
unconsolidated real estate joint ventures in which we have an ownership
interest:
Joint
Venture
|
Center
Location
|
Opening
Date
|
Ownership
%
|
Square
Feet
|
Carrying
Value
of
Investment
(in
millions)
|
Total
Joint
Venture
Debt
(in
millions)
|
Deer
Park
|
Deer
Park, Long Island, NY
|
2008
|
33.3%
|
684,952
|
$4.2
|
$262.9
|
Wisconsin
Dells
|
Wisconsin
Dells, Wisconsin
|
2006
|
50%
|
264,929
|
$5.5
|
$25.3
|
We may
issue guarantees for the debt of a joint venture in order for the joint venture
to obtain funding or to obtain funding at a lower cost than could be obtained
otherwise. We are party to a joint and several guarantee with respect
to the construction loan obtained by the Wisconsin Dells joint venture during
the first quarter of 2006, which currently has a balance of $25.3
million. We are also party to a joint and several guarantee with
respect to the loans obtained by the Deer Park joint venture which currently
have a balance of $262.9 million.
Each of
the above ventures contains provisions where a venture partner can trigger
certain provisions and force the other partners to either buy or sell their
investment in the joint venture. Should this occur, we may be
required to sell the property to the venture partner or incur a significant cash
outflow in order to maintain ownership of these outlet centers.
The
following table details our share of the debt maturities of the unconsolidated
joint ventures as of March 31, 2009 (in thousands):
Joint
Venture
|
Our
Portion of Joint Venture Debt
|
Maturity
Date
|
Interest
Rate
|
Deer
Park
|
$87,640
|
5/17/2011
|
Libor
+ 1.375-3.50%
|
Wisconsin
Dells
|
$12,625
|
2/24/2010
|
Libor
+ 1.30%
|
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Refer to
our 2008 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of our critical accounting
policies which include principles of consolidation, acquisition of real estate,
cost capitalization, impairment of long-lived assets and revenue
recognition. There have been no material changes to these policies in
2009.
23
Related
Party Transactions
As noted
above in “Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements”, we are 50% owners of the Wisconsin
Dells joint venture and a 33.3% owner in the Deer Park joint venture currently
and were a 50% owner of Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 during 2008. These joint
ventures pay us management, leasing, marketing and development fees, which we
believe approximate current market rates, for services provided to the joint
ventures. During the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively, we recognized the following fees (in thousands):
Three months ended
|
||||
March 31,
|
||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||
Fee:
|
||||
Management
and leasing
|
$
471
|
$ 228
|
||
Marketing
|
39
|
34
|
||
Total
Fees
|
$
510
|
$ 262
|
Tanger
Family Limited Partnership is a related party which holds a limited partnership
interest in, and is the noncontrolling interest in the Operating
Partnership. Stanley K. Tanger, the Company’s Chairman of the Board,
is the sole general partner of Tanger Family Limited Partnership. The
only material related party transaction with Tanger Family Limited Partnership
is the payment of quarterly distributions of earnings which were $2.3 million
and $2.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In
April 2009, the FASB issued FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures
about Fair Value of Financial Instruments (“FSP FAS 107-1”). FSP FAS 107-1
amends SFAS No. 107 to require disclosures about fair value of financial
instruments for interim reporting periods of publicly traded companies in
addition to the annual financial statements. FSP FAS 107-1 also amends APB
No. 28 to require those disclosures in summarized financial information at
interim reporting periods. FSP FAS 107-1 is effective for interim periods ending
after June 15, 2009. Prior period presentation is not required for
comparative purposes at initial adoption. We do not expect the adoption of FSP
FAS 107-1 on July 1, 2009 to have a material impact on our consolidated
financial position or results of operations.
Funds
From Operations
Funds
from Operations, or FFO, represents income before extraordinary items and gains
(losses) on sale or disposal of depreciable operating properties, plus
depreciation and amortization uniquely significant to real estate and after
adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
FFO is
intended to exclude historical cost depreciation of real estate as required by
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or GAAP, which assumes that the value
of real estate assets diminishes ratably over time. Historically,
however, real estate values have risen or fallen with market
conditions. Because FFO excludes depreciation and amortization unique
to real estate, gains and losses from property dispositions and extraordinary
items, it provides a performance measure that, when compared year over year,
reflects the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates,
operating costs, development activities and interest costs, providing
perspective not immediately apparent from net income.
We
present FFO because we consider it an important supplemental measure of our
operating performance and believe it is frequently used by securities analysts,
investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of REITs, many of which
present FFO when reporting their results. FFO is widely used by us
and others in our industry to evaluate and price potential acquisition
candidates. The National Association of Real Estate Investment
Trusts, Inc., of which we are a member, has encouraged its member companies to
report their FFO as a supplemental, industry-wide standard measure of REIT
operating performance. In addition, a percentage of bonus
compensation to certain members of management is based on our FFO
performance.
24
FFO has
significant limitations as an analytical tool, and you should not consider it in
isolation, or as a substitute for analysis of our results as reported under
GAAP. Some of these limitations are:
§
|
FFO
does not reflect our cash expenditures, or future requirements, for
capital expenditures or contractual
commitments;
|
§
|
FFO
does not reflect changes in, or cash requirements for, our working capital
needs;
|
§
|
Although
depreciation and amortization are non-cash charges, the assets being
depreciated and amortized will often have to be replaced in the future,
and FFO does not reflect any cash requirements for such
replacements;
|
§
|
FFO,
which includes discontinued operations, may not be indicative of our
ongoing operations; and
|
§
|
Other
companies in our industry may calculate FFO differently than we do,
limiting its usefulness as a comparative
measure.
|
Because
of these limitations, FFO should not be considered as a measure of discretionary
cash available to us to invest in the growth of our business or our dividend
paying capacity. We compensate for these limitations by relying
primarily on our GAAP results and using FFO only supplementally.
Below is
a reconciliation of net income to FFO for the three months ended March 31, 2009
and 2008 as well as other data for those respective periods (in
thousands):
Three
Months Ended
|
|||||||||
March 31,
|
|||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
FUNDS
FROM OPERATIONS
|
|||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
36,468
|
$
|
7,398
|
|||||
Adjusted
for:
|
|||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization uniquely significant to real estate –
wholly-owned
|
20,278
|
15,508
|
|||||||
Depreciation
and amortization uniquely significant to real estate
|
|||||||||
-unconsolidated
joint ventures
|
1,166
|
652
|
|||||||
Gain
on fair value measurement of previously held interest
|
|||||||||
in
acquired joint venture
|
(31,497
|
)
|
---
|
||||||
Funds
from operations (FFO)
|
26,415
|
23,558
|
|||||||
Preferred
share dividends
|
(1,406
|
)
|
(1,406
|
)
|
|||||
Allocation
to participating securities
|
(306
|
)
|
(246
|
)
|
|||||
Funds
from operations available to common shareholders
|
$
|
24,703
|
$
|
21,906
|
|||||
Weighted
average shares outstanding (1)
|
37,417
|
37,307
|
(1)
|
Includes
the dilutive effect of options, restricted share awards and Exchangeable
Notes and assumes the partnership units of the Operating Partnership held
by the non-controlling interest are converted to common shares of the
Company.
|
Economic
Conditions and Outlook
The
majority of our leases contain provisions designed to mitigate the impact of
inflation. Such provisions include clauses for the escalation of base rent and
clauses enabling us to receive percentage rentals based on tenants’ gross sales
(above predetermined levels, which we believe often are lower than traditional
retail industry standards) which generally increase as prices
rise. Most of the leases require the tenant to pay their share
of property operating expenses, including common area maintenance, real estate
taxes, insurance and advertising and promotion, thereby reducing exposure to
increases in costs and operating expenses resulting from inflation.
While we
believe factory outlet stores will continue to be a profitable and fundamental
distribution channel for many brand name manufacturers, some retail formats are
more successful than others. As typical in the retail industry,
certain tenants have closed, or will close, certain stores by terminating their
lease prior to its natural expiration or as a result of filing for protection
under bankruptcy laws.
During
2009, we have approximately 1.5 million square feet, or 16%, of our wholly-owned
portfolio coming up for renewal. If we were unable to successfully
renew or release a significant amount of this space on favorable economic terms,
the loss in rent could have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations.
25
Existing
tenants’ sales have remained stable and renewals by existing tenants have
remained strong. We have renewed 54% of the 1.5 million square feet
that are coming up for renewal in 2009 with the existing tenants at a 15%
increase in the average base rental rate compared to the expiring
rate. We also re-tenanted 188,000 square feet during the first
quarter of 2009 at a 42% increase in the average base rental rate. In addition,
we continue to attract and retain additional tenants. Our factory
outlet centers typically include well-known, national, brand name
companies. By maintaining a broad base of creditworthy tenants and a
geographically diverse portfolio of properties located across the United States,
we reduce our operating and leasing risks. No one tenant (including affiliates)
accounts for more than 6% of our combined base and percentage rental
revenues. Accordingly, we do not expect any material adverse impact
on our results of operations and financial condition as a result of leases to be
renewed or stores to be released.
As
disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008, we had several tenants vacate space in 2008. As of March 31,
2009, approximately 40% of this space had been released at base rental rates
averaging 55% higher than the average rent being paid by the previous
tenants. During the first quarter of 2009, we had non-temporary
tenants vacate prior to their natural lease expirations representing an
additional 29,000 square feet. None of this space has yet been
released.
Given
current economic conditions it may take longer to re-lease the remaining space
and more difficult to achieve similar increases in base rental
rates. Also, there may be additional tenants that have not informed
us of their intentions and which may close stores in the coming year. There can
be no assurances that we will be able to re-lease such space. While
the timing of an economic recovery is unclear and these conditions may not
improve quickly, we believe in our business and our long-term
strategy.
As of
March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, occupancy at our wholly-owned centers was
94% and 95%. Consistent with our long-term strategy of
re-merchandising centers, we will continue to hold space off the market until an
appropriate tenant is identified. While we believe this strategy will
add value to our centers in the long-term, it may reduce our average occupancy
rates in the near term.
Item
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk
Market
Risk
We are
exposed to various market risks, including changes in interest
rates. Market risk is the potential loss arising from adverse changes
in market rates and prices, such as interest rates. We may
periodically enter into certain interest rate protection and interest rate swap
agreements to effectively convert floating rate debt to a fixed rate
basis. We do not enter into derivatives or other financial
instruments for trading or speculative purposes.
In July
2008 and September 2008, we entered into LIBOR based interest rate swap
agreements with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and BB&T for notional amounts of
$118.0 million and $117.0 million, respectively. The purpose of these
swaps was to fix the interest rate on the $235.0 million outstanding under the
term loan facility completed in June 2008. The swaps fixed the one
month LIBOR rate at 3.605% and 3.70%, respectively. When combined
with the current spread of 160 basis points which can vary based on changes in
our debt ratings, these swap agreements fix our interest rate on the $235.0
million of variable rate debt at 5.25% until April 1, 2011. At March
31, 2009, the fair value of these contracts was a liability of $11.8
million. If the one month LIBOR rate decreased 1%, the fair value
would be approximately $16.2 million. The valuation of our financial
instruments is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques including
discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each derivative.
This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the derivatives, including the
period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest
rate curves. The valuation also includes a discount for counterparty
risk. We have determined that our derivative valuations are
classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
As of
March 31, 2009, 22% of our outstanding debt had variable interest rates that
were not covered by an interest rate derivative agreement and was therefore
subject to market fluctuations. A change in the LIBOR rate of
100 basis points would result in an increase or decrease of approximately
$1.9 million in interest expense on an annual basis. The
information presented herein is merely an estimate and has limited predictive
value. As a result, the ultimate effect upon our operating results of
interest rate fluctuations will depend on the interest rate exposures that arise
during the period, our hedging strategies at that time and future changes in the
level of interest rates.
The
estimated fair value of our debt, consisting of senior unsecured notes,
Exchangeable Notes, unsecured term credit facilities and unsecured lines of
credit, at March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 was $765.0 million and $711.8
million, respectively, and its recorded value was $849.2 million and $795.3
million, respectively. A 1% increase from prevailing interest rates
at March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 would result in a decrease in fair value
of total debt of approximately $35.7 million and $37.4 million,
respectively. Fair values were determined, based on level 2 inputs as
defined by FAS 157, using discounted cash flow analyses with an interest rate or
credit spread similar to that of current market borrowing
arrangements.
26
Item
4. Controls and Procedures
Based on
the most recent evaluation, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, have concluded the Company’s disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) were
effective as of March 31, 2009. There were no changes to the
Company’s internal controls over financial reporting during the quarter ended
March 31, 2009, that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
Neither
the Company nor the Operating Partnership is presently involved in any material
litigation nor, to their knowledge, is any material litigation threatened
against the Company or the Operating Partnership or its properties, other than
routine litigation arising in the ordinary course of business and which is
expected to be covered by liability insurance.
Item
1A. Risk Factors
There
have been no material changes from the risk factors disclosed in the “Risk
Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2008.
Item
6. Exhibits
Exhibits
31.1
|
Principal
Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,
as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
31.2
|
Principal
Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,
as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
32.1
|
Principal
Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,
as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
32.2
|
Principal
Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,
as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant
has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
thereunto duly authorized.
TANGER
FACTORY OUTLET CENTERS, INC.
By: /s/ Frank C. Marchisello, Jr.
Frank C.
Marchisello, Jr.
Executive
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer & Secretary
DATE: May
11, 2009
27
Exhibit
Index
Exhibit
No. Description
__________________________________________________________________________________
31.1
|
Principal
Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
31.2
|
Principal
Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
32.1
|
Principal
Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
32.2
|
Principal
Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of
2002.
|
28