Toggle SGML Header (+)


Section 1: 10-K (10-K)

srg-10k_20161231.htm

 

 

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016

Commission file number 001-37420

 

SERITAGE GROWTH PROPERTIES

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

Maryland

38-3976287

(State or Other Jurisdiction of

Incorporation or Organization)

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

 

489 Fifth Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, New York

10017

(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)

 

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (212) 355-7800

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

Title of each class

 

Name of each exchange on which registered

Class A common shares of beneficial interest, par value

$0.01 per share

 

New York Stock Exchange

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes      No  

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      No  

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      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 if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§232.405 of this chapter) 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.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (Check one):

 

Large accelerated filer

 

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes      No  

On June 30, 2016, the last business day of the most recently completed second quarter of the registrant, the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $1,526,300,000 based upon the closing price of $49.84 of the common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange on such date. 

As of February 24, 2017, the registrant had the following common shares outstanding:

 

Class

 

Shares Outstanding

Class A common shares of beneficial interest, par value $0.01 per share

 

27,942,572

Class B common shares of beneficial interest, par value $0.01 per share

 

1,451,336

Class C common shares of beneficial interest, par value $0.01 per share

 

5,750,185

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of Seritage Growth Properties’ Proxy Statement for its 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be held April 25, 2017, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

 

 


 

SERITAGE GROWTH PROPERTIES

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

DECEMBER 31, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

PART I

 

 

 

Page

Item 1.

 

Business

 

1

Item 1A.

 

Risk Factors

 

5

Item 1B.

 

Unresolved Staff Comments

 

23

Item 2.

 

Properties

 

24

Item 3.

 

Legal Proceedings

 

34

Item 4.

 

Mine Safety Disclosures

 

34

PART II

 

 

 

 

Item 5.

 

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

35

Item 6.

 

Selected Financial Data

 

37

Item 7.

 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

38

Item 7A.

 

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

 

53

Item 8.

 

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

 

53

Item 9.

 

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

 

54

Item 9A.

 

Controls and Procedures

 

54

Item 9B.

 

Other Information

 

54

PART III

 

 

 

 

Item 10.

 

Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance

 

55

Item 11.

 

Executive Compensation

 

55

Item 12.

 

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

 

55

Item 13.

 

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

 

55

Item 14.

 

Principal Accounting Fees and Services

 

55

PART IV

 

 

 

 

Item 15.

 

Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedule

 

56

 

 

Signatures

 

59

 

i


 

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Annual Report”) of Seritage Growth Properties contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws.  Any statements that do not relate to historical or current facts or matters are forward-looking statements.  You can identify forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “believes,” “expects,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “seeks,” “approximately,” “intends,” “plans,” “pro forma,” “estimates” or “anticipates” or the opposite of these words and phrases or similar words or phrases which are predictions of or indicate future events or trends and which do not relate solely to historical matters.  Statements concerning current conditions may also be forward-looking if they imply a continuation of current conditions.  You can also identify forward-looking statements by discussions of strategy, plans or intentions.

Forward-looking statements involve numerous risks and uncertainties and you should not rely on them as predictions of future events.  Forward-looking statements depend on assumptions, data or methods which may be incorrect or imprecise and we may not be able to realize them.  The following factors, among others, could cause actual results and future events to differ materially from those set forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements:

 

Declines in retail, real estate and general economic conditions;

 

Our current dependence on Sears Holdings Corporation for a majority of our revenue;

 

Sears Holdings Corporation’s termination and other rights under its master lease with us;

 

Risks relating to our recapture and redevelopment activities and potential acquisition or disposition of properties;

 

Our relatively limited operating history as an independent public company;

 

The terms of our indebtedness;

 

Tax, environmental, health, safety and land use laws and regulations; and

 

Restrictions with which we are required to comply in order to maintain REIT status.

While forward-looking statements reflect our good faith beliefs, they are not guarantees of future performance.  Except as required by law, we disclaim any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect changes in underlying assumptions or factors of new information, data or methods, future events or other changes.  For a further discussion of these and other factors that could impact our future results, performance or transactions, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors.”

 

 

 

ii


 

PART I

ITEM 1.

BUSINESS

Seritage Growth Properties (“Seritage”) (NYSE: SRG), a Maryland real estate investment trust formed on June 3, 2015, is a fully integrated, self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”) as defined under Section 856(c) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”).  Seritage’s assets are held by and its operations are primarily conducted through, directly or indirectly, Seritage Growth Properties, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership”).  Under the partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership, Seritage, as the sole general partner, has exclusive responsibility and discretion in the management and control of the Operating Partnership.  Unless otherwise expressly stated or the context otherwise requires, the “Company”, “we,” “us,” and “our” as used herein refer to Seritage, the Operating Partnership and its owned and controlled subsidiaries.

Seritage is principally engaged in the acquisition, ownership, development, redevelopment, management and leasing of diversified retail real estate throughout the United States.  As of December 31, 2016, our portfolio included approximately 42.2 million square feet of gross leasable area (“GLA”), consisting of 235 wholly owned properties totaling over 36.8 million square feet of GLA across 49 states and Puerto Rico, and interests in 31 joint venture properties totaling over 5.4 million square feet of GLA across 17 states.

On June 11, 2015 Sears Holdings Corporation (“Sears Holdings”) effected a rights offering (the “Rights Offering”) to Sears Holdings stockholders to purchase common shares of Seritage in order to fund, in part, the $2.7 billion acquisition of 234 of Sears Holdings’ owned properties and one of its ground leased properties (the “Wholly Owned Properties”), and its 50% interests in three joint ventures (the “JV Interests”) that collectively own 28 properties, ground lease one property and lease two properties (collectively, the “JV Properties”) (collectively, the “Transaction”).  The Rights Offering ended on July 2, 2015, and the Company’s Class A common shares were listed on the New York Stock Exchange on July 6, 2015.

On July 7, 2015, the Company completed the Transaction with Sears Holdings and commenced operations.  The Company’s only operations prior to the completion of the Rights Offering and Transaction were those incidental to the completion of such activities.

As of December 31, 2016, we leased a substantial majority of the space in our portfolio at all but 15 of the Wholly Owned Properties (such 15 properties, the “Third-Party Properties”) to Sears Holdings under a master lease agreement (the “Master Lease”), with the remainder of such space leased to third-party tenants.  The Third-Party Properties, which do not contain a Sears Holdings store or have any space leased to Sears Holdings, are leased solely to third-party tenants.  A substantial majority of the space at the JV Properties is also leased to Sears Holdings by, as applicable, GS Portfolio Holdings LLC (the “GGP JV”), a joint venture between a subsidiary of the Operating Partnership and a subsidiary of GGP Inc. (together with its other subsidiaries, “GGP”), SPS Portfolio Holdings LLC (the “Simon JV”), a joint venture between a subsidiary of the Operating Partnership and a subsidiary of Simon Property Group, Inc. (together with its other subsidiaries, “Simon”), or MS Portfolio LLC (the “Macerich JV” and, together with the GGP JV and the Simon JV, each, a “JV” and collectively, the “JVs”), a joint venture between a subsidiary of the Operating Partnership and a subsidiary of The Macerich Company (together with its subsidiaries, “Macerich”), in each case under a separate master lease with each JV (the “JV Master Leases”).

The Master Lease and the JV Master Leases provide the Company and the JVs with certain recapture rights, including the right to recapture up to 50% of the space occupied by Sears Holdings at substantially all of the properties subject to the Master Leases and JV Master Leases.  The Company and the JVs will generally exercise these rights to facilitate the redevelopment and retenanting of the subject properties.  See “Item 2. Properties” for a description of our current portfolio.

- 1 -


 

Business Strategies

Our primary objective is to create value for our shareholders through the re-leasing and redevelopment of the majority of our Wholly Owned Properties and JV Properties.  In doing so, we expect to meaningfully grow net operating income (“NOI”) by re-leasing space to third-party retailers at materially higher rents while also substantially diversifying our tenant base. In order to achieve our objective, we intend to execute the following strategies:

 

Convert single-tenant buildings into multi-tenant properties at meaningfully higher rents.  We intend to increase NOI and diversify our portfolio by actively recapturing space at our properties and re-leasing such space to third-party retailers for higher rents than are payable under the Master Lease by Sears Holdings.

We seek to optimize the mix of tenants at, and maximize the value of, our properties by focusing on growing national retailers and taking into account customer demographics and the competitive environment of each property's market area.  We believe that the superior real estate locations, diversity of property types and national footprint that characterize our portfolio, combined with the recapture features of the Master Lease, make us well-positioned to meet the store growth needs of retailers across a variety of sectors and concepts.  As we lease space to such retailers, we aim to create multi-tenant shopping centers that command superior rents and valuations due to their prime locations, synergies with adjoining retailers and proximity to productive malls and shopping centers.

 

Maximize value of vast land holdings through retail and mixed-use densification.  Our portfolio includes over 3,000 acres of land, or approximately 13 acres per site for our Wholly Owned Properties, and our most significant geographic concentrations are in higher growth markets in California, Florida, Texas and the Northeast.  We believe these land holdings will provide meaningful opportunities for additional retail and mixed-use development.

In addition to the right to recapture up to approximately 50% of the space occupied by Sears Holdings at substantially all of our Wholly Owned Properties, the Master Lease provides us with the right to recapture (i) 100% of the stores located at 21 identified properties; (ii) all of any automotive care centers which are free-standing or attached as “appendages” to the stores; and (iii) outparcels or outlots, as well as certain portions of parking areas and common areas.

The 21 identified properties for which we have 100% recapture rights include over 3.9 million square feet of entitled commercial space on over 350 acres of land and our portfolio of automotive care centers encompasses approximately 3.5 million square feet of scarce real estate typically located on the most visible and highly-trafficked site at a property.  Given our fee ownership of these properties and control over parking lots and outparcels, we believe that many of these sites, as well as others throughout the portfolio, will provide attractive and value-enhancing development, redevelopment and densification opportunities.

 

Leverage existing and future joint venture relationships with leading real estate and financial partners.  We currently own 50% interests in 31 JV Properties with leading regional mall REITs each of which, we believe, is focused on driving value creation at the JV Properties through recapturing and re-leasing space pursuant to the JV Master Leases.

We participate in 50% of all net value created at the JV Properties and expect to benefit from the leasing and redevelopment platforms of our JV partners, as well as stores that are, generally, located at high-productivity malls within their respective portfolios.

We may participate in future joint ventures to leverage our human and capital resources and pursue additional value-creating projects.  We will generally seek partners that provide incremental expertise and/or capital, or, as a result of circumstances, allow us to create more value together than we believe we could create on our own.

 

Maintain a flexible capital structure to support value creation activities.  We expect to maintain a capital structure that provides us with the financial flexibility and capacity to fund our redevelopment opportunities.  We believe that the capital structure resulting from the Transaction positioned us with sufficient liquidity and flexibility to commence the execution of our redevelopment business strategy, and that we have access to multiple forms of capital to continue investing in value-creating projects, including internally generated cash from operations.  We may also raise capital through the public or private issuance of equity and debt securities, as well as through asset sales and additional joint ventures.

Significant Tenants

A substantial majority of the Company’s real estate properties are leased to Sears Holdings, and the majority of our rental revenues are derived from the Master Lease.  See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Operations.”

The Master Lease provides Seritage the right to recapture up to approximately 50% of the space occupied by Sears Holdings at each of the Wholly Owned Properties included in the Master Lease (subject to certain exceptions).  In addition, Seritage has the right to

- 2 -


 

recapture any automotive care centers which are freestanding or attached as “appendages” to the stores, and all outparcels or outlots, as well as certain portions of parking areas and common areas.  We also have the right to recapture 100% of the space occupied by Sears Holdings at each of 21 identified Wholly Owned Properties by making a specified lease termination payment to Sears Holdings.  While we will be permitted to exercise our recapture rights all at once or in stages as to any particular property, we will not be permitted to recapture all or substantially all of the space subject to the recapture right at more than 50 Wholly Owned Properties during any lease year.

The Master Lease also provides for certain rights to Sears Holdings to terminate the Master Lease with respect to Wholly Owned Properties that cease to be profitable for operation by Sears Holdings.  In order to terminate the Master Lease with respect to a certain property, Sears Holdings must make a payment to us of an amount equal to one year of rent (together with taxes and other expenses) with respect to such property.  Such termination right, however, will be limited so that it will not have the effect of reducing the fixed rent under the Master Lease by more than 20% per annum.

A substantial majority of the space at the JV Properties is leased to Sears Holdings under the JV Master Leases which include recapture rights and termination rights with similar terms as the Master Lease.

Sears Holdings is a publicly traded company and is subject to the informational filing requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and is required to file periodic reports on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”); refer to www.sec.gov for Sears Holdings’ publicly available financial information.  We make no representation as to the accuracy or completeness of the information regarding Sears Holdings that is available through the SEC’s website or otherwise made available by Sears Holdings or any third party, and none of such information is incorporated by reference herein.

Competition

We compete for investment opportunities and prospective tenants with other REITs, real estate partnerships and other real estate companies, private individuals, investment companies, private equity and hedge fund investors, sovereign funds, pension funds, insurance companies, lenders and other investors, including retailer operators that may close stores and pursue similar real estate strategies.  In addition, revenues from our properties are dependent on the ability of our tenants and operators to compete with other retail operators.

Some of our competitors are significantly larger and have greater financial resources and lower costs of capital than we have.  Increased competition will make it more challenging to identify and successfully capitalize on investment opportunities that meet our objectives.  Our ability to compete is also impacted by national and local economic trends, availability of investment alternatives, availability and cost of capital, construction and renovation costs, existing laws and regulations, new legislation and population trends.

As a landlord, we compete in the real estate market with numerous developers and owners of properties, including the shopping centers in which our properties are located.  Some of our competitors have greater economies of scale, relationships with national tenants at multiple properties which are owned or operated by such competitors, access to more resources and greater name recognition than we do.  If our competitors offer space at rental rates below the current market rates or below the rentals we currently charge, or on terms and conditions which include locations at multiple properties, we may lose our existing and/or potential tenants and we may be pressured to reduce our rental rates or to offer substantial rent abatements, tenant improvement allowances, early termination rights or below-market renewal options in order to win new tenants and retain tenants when our leases expire.

Environmental Matters

Our properties are subject to environmental laws regulating, among other things, air emissions, wastewater discharges and the handling and disposal of wastes.  Certain of the properties were built during the time that asbestos-containing building materials were routinely installed in residential and commercial structures.  In addition, a substantial portion of the properties we acquired from Sears Holdings currently include, or previously included, automotive care center facilities and retail fueling facilities, and are or were subject to laws and regulations governing the handling, storage and disposal of hazardous substances contained in some of the products or materials used or sold in the automotive care center facilities (such as motor oil, fluid in hydraulic lifts, antifreeze and solvents and lubricants), the recycling/disposal of batteries and tires, air emissions, wastewater discharges and waste management.  In addition to these products or materials, the equipment in use or previously used at such properties, such as service equipment, car lifts, oil/water separators, and storage tanks, has been subject to increasing environmental regulation relating to, among other things, the storage, handling, use, disposal, and transportation of hazardous materials.  The Master Lease obligates Sears Holdings to comply with applicable environmental laws and to indemnify us if their noncompliance results in losses or claims against us, and to remove all automotive care center equipment and facilities upon the expiration or sooner termination of the Master Lease. We expect other leases to include similar provisions for other operators of their respective spaces with respect to environmental matters first arising during their occupancy.  An operator’s failure to comply could result in fines and penalties or the requirement to undertake corrective actions which may result in significant costs to the operator and thus adversely affect their ability to meet their obligations to us.

- 3 -


 

Pursuant to U.S. federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be required to investigate, remove and/or remediate a release of hazardous substances or other regulated materials at, or emanating from, such property.  Further, under certain circumstances, such owners or operators of real property may be held liable for property damage, personal injury and/or natural resource damage resulting from or arising in connection with such releases.  Certain of these laws have been interpreted to be joint and several unless the harm is divisible and there is a reasonable basis for allocation of responsibility.  We also may be liable under certain of these laws for damage that occurred prior to our ownership of a property or at a site where we sent wastes for disposal.  The failure to properly remediate a property may also adversely affect our ability to lease, sell or rent the property or to borrow funds using the property as collateral.

Under the Master Lease, Sears Holdings is required to indemnify us from certain environmental liabilities at the Wholly Owned Properties before or during the period in which each Wholly Owned Property is leased to Sears Holdings, including removal and remediation of all affected facilities and equipment constituting the automotive care center facilities (and each JV Master Lease includes a similar requirement of Sears Holdings).  In addition, pursuant to the terms our debt financing agreements, an escrow account for environment remediation was funded at the closing of the Transaction in the amount of approximately $12.0 million.  As of December 31, 2016, the balance of the escrow account was approximately $11.8 million.

In connection with the ownership of our current or past properties and any properties that we may acquire in the future, we could be legally responsible for environmental liabilities or costs relating to a release of hazardous substances or other regulated materials at or emanating from such property.  We are not aware of any environmental issues that are expected to have a material impact on the operations of our properties.

Insurance

We have comprehensive liability, property and rental loss insurance with respect to our portfolio of properties. We believe that such insurance provides adequate coverage.

REIT Qualification

We elected to be treated as a REIT commencing with the taxable year ended December 31, 2015 and expect to continue to operate so as to qualify as a REIT.  So long as we qualify as a REIT, we generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on net taxable income that we distribute annually to our shareholders.  In order to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, including, but not limited to, the real estate qualification of sources of our income, the composition and values of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our shareholders and the diversity of ownership of our stock.  In order to comply with REIT requirements, we may need to forego otherwise attractive opportunities and limit our expansion opportunities and the manner in which we conduct our operations.  See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Status as a REIT.”

Financial Information about Industry Segments

We currently operate in a single reportable segment, which includes the acquisition, ownership, development, redevelopment, management and leasing of retail properties.  We review operating and financial results for each property on an individual basis and do not distinguish or group our properties based on geography, size, or type.  We, therefore, aggregate all of our properties into one reportable segment due to their similarities with regard to the nature and economics of the properties, tenants and operational process.

Employees

As of February 24, 2017, we had 38 full-time employees.  Our employees are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, and we consider our employee relations to be satisfactory.

Available Information

Our principal offices are located at 489 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10017 and our telephone number is (212) 355-7800. Our website address is www.seritage.com. Our reports electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act can be accessed through this site, free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file or furnish such reports. These filings are also available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Our website also contains copies of our corporate governance guidelines and code of business conduct and ethics as well as the charters of our audit, compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees. The information on our website is not part of this or any other report we file with or furnish to the SEC.

- 4 -


 

ITEM 1A.

RISK FACTORS

Certain factors may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. You should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described below, in addition to other information contained in this Annual Report, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face.  Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently believe are not material, may also become important factors that adversely affect our business.  If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and future prospects could be materially and adversely affected.  In that event, the trading price of our common shares of beneficial interest could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment.

Risks Related to Our Business and Operations

We will be substantially dependent on Sears Holdings, as a tenant, until we further diversify the tenancy of our portfolio, and an event that has a material adverse effect on Sears Holdings’ business, financial condition or results of operations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Sears Holdings is the lessee of a substantial majority of our properties and accounts for a substantial majority of our revenues.  Under the Master Lease, Sears Holdings is required to pay all insurance, taxes, utilities and maintenance and repair expenses in connection with these leased properties and to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless from and against various claims, litigation and liabilities arising in connection with its business, subject to proportionate sharing of certain of these expenses with occupants of the remainder of the space not leased to Sears Holdings.  Sears Holdings may not in the future have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable it to satisfy its payment obligations under the Master Lease.  In addition, Sears Holdings has disclosed that its domestic pension and postretirement benefit plan obligations are currently underfunded.  Sears Holdings may have to make significant cash payments to some or all of its pension and postretirement benefit plans, which would reduce the cash available for its businesses, potentially including its rent obligations under the Master Lease.  The inability or unwillingness of Sears Holdings to meet its rent obligations and other obligations under the Master Lease could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations, including our ability to pay the interest, principal and other costs and expenses under our financings, or to pay cash dividends to Seritage shareholders.  For these reasons, if Sears Holdings were to experience a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of operations, our business, financial condition or results of operations could also be materially adversely affected.

Our dependence on rental payments from Sears Holdings as our main source of revenues may limit our ability to enforce our rights under the Master Lease.  In addition, we may be limited in our ability to enforce our rights under the Master Lease because it is a unitary lease and does not provide for termination with respect to individual properties by reason of the default of the tenant.  Failure by Sears Holdings to comply with the terms of the Master Lease or to comply with the regulations to which the leased properties are subject could require us to find another master lessee for all such leased property and there could be a decrease or cessation of rental payments by Sears Holdings.  In such event, we may be unable to locate a suitable master lessee or a lessee for individual properties at similar rental rates and other obligations and in a timely manner or at all, which would have the effect of reducing our rental revenues.  In addition, each JV is subject to similar limitations on enforcements of remedies and risks under its respective JV Master Lease, which could reduce the value of our investment in, or distributions to us by, one or more of the JVs.

The bankruptcy or insolvency of any of our tenants, particularly Sears Holdings, could result in the termination of such tenant’s lease and material losses to us.

A tenant bankruptcy or insolvency could diminish the rental revenue we receive from that property or could force us to “take back” tenant space as a result of a default or a rejection of the lease by a tenant in bankruptcy.  In particular, a bankruptcy or insolvency of Sears Holdings, which is our primary tenant, could result in a loss of a substantial portion of our rental revenue and materially and adversely affect us.  Any claims against bankrupt tenants for unpaid future rent would be subject to statutory limitations that would likely result in our receipt of rental revenues that are substantially less than the contractually specified rent we are owed under their leases or no payments at all.  In addition, any claim we have for unpaid past rent will likely not be paid in full.  If a tenant becomes bankrupt or insolvent, federal law may prohibit us from evicting such tenant based solely upon such bankruptcy or insolvency.  We may also be unable to re-lease a terminated or rejected space or re-lease it on comparable or more favorable terms. If we do re-lease rejected space, we may incur costs for brokerage, marketing and tenant expenses.

Sears Holdings leases a substantial majority of our properties. Bankruptcy laws afford certain protections to tenants that may also affect the Master Lease or JV Master Leases.  Subject to certain restrictions, a tenant under a master lease generally is required to assume or reject the master lease as a whole, rather than making the decision on a property-by-property basis.  This prevents the tenant from assuming only the better performing properties and terminating the master lease with respect to the poorer performing properties.  While we believe that our Master Lease and JV Master Lease are unitary leases that would need to be assumed or rejected as a whole in any bankruptcy proceeding, whether or not a bankruptcy court would require that a master lease be assumed or rejected as a whole depends upon a “facts and circumstances” analysis considering a number of factors, including the parties’ intent, the nature and

- 5 -


 

purpose of the relevant documents, whether there was separate and distinct consideration for each property included in the master lease, the provisions contained in the relevant documents and applicable state law.  If a bankruptcy court in a Sears Holdings bankruptcy were to allow the Master Lease or a JV Master Lease to be rejected in part, certain underperforming leases related to properties we or the applicable JV as landlord under a JV Master Lease, respectively, own could be rejected by the tenant in bankruptcy while tenant-favorable leases are allowed to remain in place, thereby adversely affecting payments to us derived from the properties.  For this and other reasons, a Sears Holdings bankruptcy could materially and adversely affect us.

In addition, although we believe that the Master Lease is a “true lease” for purposes of bankruptcy law, it is possible that a bankruptcy court could re-characterize the lease transaction set forth in the Master Lease as a secured lending transaction.  If the Master Lease were judicially recharacterized as a secured lending transaction, we would not be treated as the owner of the property and could lose certain rights as the owner in the bankruptcy proceeding.  In addition, each JV is subject to this risk with respect to its JV Master Lease, which could reduce the value of our investment in, or distribution to us by, one or more of the JVs.

Sears Holdings’ right to terminate the Master Lease with respect to a portion of our properties could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Under the terms of the Master Lease, in each year after the first lease year, Sears Holdings will have the right to terminate the Master Lease with respect to properties representing up to 20% of the aggregate annual rent payment under the Master Lease with respect to all properties, if, with respect to a property leased under the Master Lease, the EBITDAR for the 12-month period ending as of the most recent fiscal quarter end produced by the Sears Holdings store operated there is less than the rent allocated to such property payable during that year. While Sears Holdings must pay a termination fee equal to one year of rent (together with taxes and other expenses) with respect to such property, the value of some of the properties could be materially adversely affected if we are not able to re-lease such properties at the same rates which Sears Holdings was paying in a timely manner or at all, and this may negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, Sears Holdings will have the right to terminate a portion of the JV Master Lease with the GGP JV with respect to up to four JV Properties in any lease year, the JV Master Lease with the Simon JV with respect to up to three JV Properties in any lease year and the JV Master Lease with the Macerich JV with respect to up to three JV Properties in any lease year, in each case if, with respect to a JV Property owned by the applicable JV, the same EBITDAR condition is satisfied, which could reduce the value of our investment in, or distributions to us by, one or more of the JVs.

During the year ended December 31, 2016, Sears Holdings terminated the Master Lease with respect to 17 stores totaling 1.7 million square feet of gross leasable area and, in January 2017, provided notice that it intended to exercise its right to terminate the Master Lease with respect to an additional 19 stores totaling 1.9 million square feet of gross leasable area. The aggregate base rent at these 36 stores was approximately $11.9 million as of December 31, 2016.

We may not be able to renew leases or re-lease space at our properties, or lease space in newly recaptured properties, and property vacancies could result in significant capital expenditures.

When leases for our properties expire, the premises may not be re-released in a timely manner or at all, or the terms of re-releasing, including the cost of allowances and concessions to tenants, may be less favorable than the current lease terms.  The loss of a tenant through lease expiration or other circumstances may require us to spend (in addition to other re-letting expenses) significant amounts of capital to renovate the property before it is suitable for a new tenant and cause us to incur significant costs in the form of ongoing expenses for property maintenance, taxes, insurance and other expenses.  Many of the leases we will enter into or acquire may be for properties that are especially suited to the particular business of the tenants operating on those properties.  Because these properties have been designed or physically modified for a particular tenant, if the current lease is terminated or not renewed, we may be required to renovate the property at substantial costs, decrease the rent we charge or provide other concessions to re-lease the property. In addition, if we are required or otherwise determine to sell the property, we may have difficulty selling it to a party other than the tenant due to the special purpose for which the property may have been designed or modified.  This potential illiquidity may limit our ability to quickly modify our portfolio in response to changes in economic or other conditions, including tenant demand. Also, we may not be able to lease new properties to an appropriate mix of tenants or for rents that are consistent with our expectations. To the extent that our leasing plans are not achieved or we incur significant capital expenditures as a result of property vacancies, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

Real estate investments are relatively illiquid.

Our properties represent a substantial portion of our total consolidated assets, and these investments are relatively illiquid. Significant expenditures associated with each equity investment, such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes, insurance, and repair and maintenance costs, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a reduction in income from the investment. If income from a

- 6 -


 

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 or other costs and expenses. As a result, our ability to sell one or more of our properties or investments in real estate in response to any changes in economic or other conditions may be limited. If we want to sell a property, we may not be able to dispose of it in the desired time period or at a sale price that would exceed the cost of our investment in that property.

The number of potential buyers for certain properties that we may seek to sell may be limited by the presence of such properties in retail or mall complexes owned or managed by other property owners. In addition, our ability to sell or dispose of certain properties may be hindered by the fact that such properties are subject to the Master Lease or a JV Master Lease, as the terms of the Master Lease and the JV Master Leases or the fact that Sears Holdings is the lessee may make such properties less attractive to a potential buyer than alternative properties that may be for sale. Furthermore, if we decide to sell any of our properties, we may provide financing to purchasers and bear the risk that the purchasers may default, which may delay or prevent our use of the proceeds of the sales for other purposes or the distribution of such proceeds to our shareholders.

Both we and our tenants face a wide range of competition that could affect our ability to operate profitably.

The presence of competitive alternatives, both to our properties and the businesses that lease our properties, affects our ability to lease space and the level of rents we can obtain. Our properties operate in locations that compete with other retail properties and also compete with other forms of retailing, such as catalogs and e-commerce websites. Competition may also come from strip centers, outlet centers, lifestyle centers and malls, and both existing and future development projects. New construction, renovations and expansions at competing sites could also negatively affect our properties. In addition, we compete with other retail property companies for tenants and qualified management. These other retail property companies may have relationships with tenants that we do not have since we have a limited operating history, including with respect to national chains that may be desirable tenants. If we are unable to successfully compete, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.  See also “Item 1. Business – Competition.”

In addition, the retail business is highly competitive and if our tenants fail to differentiate their shopping experiences, create an attractive value proposition or execute their business strategies, they may terminate, default on, or fail to renew their leases with us, and our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected. Furthermore, we believe that the increase in digital and mobile technology usage has increased the speed of the transition from shopping at physical locations to web-based purchases and that our tenants, including Sears Holdings, may be negatively affected by these changing consumer spending habits. If our tenants are unsuccessful in adapting their businesses, and, as a result terminate, default on, or fail to renew their leases with us, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

Our pursuit of investments in and redevelopment of properties, and investments in and acquisitions or development of additional properties, may be unsuccessful or fail to meet our expectations.

We intend to grow our business through investments in, and acquisitions or development of, properties, including through the recapture and redevelopment of space at many of our properties. However, our industry is highly competitive, and we face competition from other REITs, investment companies, private equity and hedge fund investors, sovereign funds, lenders, and other investors, some of whom are significantly larger and have greater resources and lower costs of capital. This competition will make it more challenging to identify and successfully capitalize on acquisition and development opportunities that meet our investment objectives. If we are unable to finance acquisitions or other development opportunities on commercially favorable terms, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected. Additionally, the fact that we must distribute 90% of our net taxable income in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT may limit our ability to rely upon rental payments from leased properties or subsequently acquired properties in order to finance acquisitions. As a result, if debt or equity financing is not available on acceptable terms, further acquisitions or other development opportunities might be limited or curtailed.

Investments in, and acquisitions of, properties we might seek to acquire entail risks associated with real estate investments generally, including (but not limited to) the following risks and as noted elsewhere in this section:

 

we may be unable to acquire a desired property because of competition;

 

even if we are able to acquire a desired property, competition from other potential acquirers may significantly increase the purchase price;

 

even if we enter into agreements for the acquisition of properties, these agreements are subject to customary conditions to closing, including completion of due diligence investigations to our satisfaction;

- 7 -


 

 

we may incur significant costs and divert management attention in connection with evaluation and negotiation of potential acquisitions, including ones that we are subsequently unable to complete;

 

we may acquire properties that are not initially accretive to our results upon acquisition, and we may not successfully manage and lease those properties to meet our expectations;

 

we may be unable to finance the acquisition on favorable terms in the time period we desire, or at all;

 

even if we are able to finance the acquisition, our cash flow may be insufficient to meet our required principal and interest payments;

 

we may spend more than budgeted to make necessary improvements or renovations to acquired properties;

 

we may be unable to quickly and efficiently integrate new acquisitions, particularly the acquisition of portfolios of properties, into our existing operations;

 

market conditions may result in higher than expected vacancy rates and lower than expected rental rates; and

 

we may acquire properties subject to liabilities and without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, with respect to unknown liabilities.

In addition, we intend to redevelop a significant portion of the properties purchased from Sears Holdings in order to make space available for lease to additional retail tenants and potentially other third-party lessees for other uses. The redevelopment of these properties involves the risks associated with real estate development activities generally. Our redevelopment strategies also involve additional risks, including that Sears Holdings may terminate or fail to renew leases with us for the applicable portion of the redeveloped space as a result of our redevelopment activities. If we are unable to successfully redevelop properties or to lease the redeveloped properties to third parties on acceptable terms, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

Current and future redevelopment may not yield expected returns.

We expect to undertake redevelopment, expansion and reinvestment projects involving our properties as part of our long-term strategy. Likewise, each JV expects to undertake redevelopment, expansion and reinvestment projects involving its JV Properties, with respect to which we may be required to make additional capital contributions to the applicable JV under certain circumstances. These projects are subject to a number of risks, including (but not limited to):

 

abandonment of redevelopment activities after expending resources to determine feasibility;

 

loss of rental income, as well as payments of maintenance, repair, real estate taxes and other charges, from Sears Holdings related to space that is recaptured pursuant to the Master Lease (or the JV Master Leases) and which may not be re-leased to third parties;

 

restrictions or obligations imposed pursuant to other agreements;

 

construction and/or lease-up costs (including tenant improvements or allowances) and delays and cost overruns, including construction costs that exceed original estimates;

 

failure to achieve expected occupancy and/or rent levels within the projected time frame or at all;

 

inability to operate successfully in new markets where new properties are located;

 

inability to successfully integrate new or redeveloped properties into existing operations;

 

difficulty obtaining financing on acceptable terms or paying operating expenses and debt service costs associated with redevelopment properties prior to sufficient occupancy and commencement of rental obligations under new leases;

 

changes in zoning, building and land use laws, and conditions, restrictions or limitations of, and delays or failures to obtain, necessary zoning, building, occupancy, land use and other governmental permits;

 

changes in local real estate market conditions, including an oversupply of, or a reduction in demand for, retail space or retail goods, and the availability and creditworthiness of current and prospective tenants;

 

negative perceptions by retailers or shoppers of the safety, convenience and attractiveness of the property;

- 8 -


 

 

exposure to fluctuations in the general economy due to the significant time lag between commencement and completion of redevelopment projects; and

 

vacancies or ability to rent space on favorable terms, including possible market pressures to offer tenants rent abatements, tenant improvements, early termination rights or below-market renewal options.

If any of these events occur at any time during the process with respect to any project, overall project costs may significantly exceed initial cost estimates, which could result in reduced returns or losses from such investments. In addition, we may not have sufficient liquidity to fund such projects, and delays in the completion of a redevelopment project may provide various tenants the right to withdraw from a property.

Rising expenses could reduce cash flow and funds available for future development.

If any property is not fully occupied or becomes vacant in whole or in part, or if rents are being paid in an amount that is insufficient to cover operating costs and expenses, we could be required to expend funds with respect to that property for operating expenses. Our properties are subject to increases in tax rates and tax assessments, utility costs, insurance costs, repairs, maintenance and administrative expenses, and other operating expenses. We may also incur significant expenditures as a result of deferred maintenance for the properties we have already acquired (subject to reserved funds to cover certain of these costs) and other properties we may acquire in the future. While properties under the Master Lease and the JV Master Leases are generally leased on a triple-net basis (subject to proportionate sharing of operating expenses with respect to space not leased by Sears Holdings), renewals of leases or future leases may not be negotiated on that basis, in which event we may have to pay those costs. If we are unable to lease properties on a triple-net-lease basis or on a basis requiring the tenants to pay all or some of such expenses, or if tenants fail to pay required tax, utility and other impositions and other operating expenses, we could be required to pay those costs which could adversely affect funds available for future development or cash available for distributions.

Real estate related taxes may increase, and if these increases are not passed on to tenants, our income will be reduced.

Some local real property tax assessors may seek to reassess some of our properties as a result of our acquisitions of properties. Generally, from time to time, our property taxes increase as property values or assessment rates change or for other reasons deemed relevant by the assessors. An increase in the assessed valuation of a property for real estate tax purposes will result in an increase in the related real estate taxes on that property. Although the Master Lease and some third-party tenant leases may permit us to pass through such tax increases to the tenants for payment, there is no assurance that renewal leases or future leases will be negotiated on the same basis. Increases not passed through to tenants will reduce our income and the cash available for distributions to our shareholders.

Changes in building and/or zoning laws may require us to update a property in the event of recapture or prevent us from fully restoring a property in the event of a substantial casualty loss and/or require us to meet additional or more stringent construction requirements.

Due to changes, among other things, in applicable building and zoning laws, ordinances and codes that may affect certain of our properties that have come into effect after the initial construction of the properties, certain properties may not comply fully with current building and/or zoning laws, including electrical, fire, health and safety codes and regulations, use, lot coverage, parking and setback requirements, but may qualify as permitted non-conforming uses. Such changes in building and zoning laws may require updating various existing physical conditions of buildings in connection with our recapture, renovation, and/or redevelopment of properties. In addition, such changes in building and zoning laws may limit our or our tenants’ ability to restore the premises of a property to its previous condition in the event of a substantial casualty loss with respect to the property or the ability to refurbish, expand or renovate such property to remain compliant, or increase the cost of construction in order to comply with changes in building or zoning codes and regulations. If we are unable to restore a property to its prior use after a substantial casualty loss or are required to comply with more stringent building or zoning codes and regulations, we may be unable to re-lease the space at a comparable effective rent or sell the property at an acceptable price, which may materially and adversely affect us.

Our real estate assets may be subject to impairment charges.

On a periodic basis, we must assess whether there are any indicators that the value of our real estate assets and other investments may be impaired.  If an impairment indicator is identified, a property’s value is considered to be impaired only if management’s estimate of current and projected operating cash flows (undiscounted and unlevered), taking into account the anticipated and probability weighted holdings periods, are less than the carrying value of the property. In our estimate of cash flows model, we consider factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, the effects of demand, competition and other factors. If we are evaluating the potential sale of an asset or development alternatives, the undiscounted future cash flows considers the most likely course of action at

- 9 -


 

the balance sheet date based on current plans, intended holding periods and available market information. We are required to make subjective assessments as to whether there are impairments in the value of our real estate assets and other investments. These assessments may have a direct impact on our earnings because recording an impairment charge results in an immediate negative adjustment to earnings. We may take impairment charges in the future related to the impairment of our assets, and any future impairment could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the impairment charge is taken.

Properties in our portfolio may be subject to ground leases; if we are found to be in breach of these ground leases or are unable to renew them, we could be materially and adversely affected.

We currently have one property in our wholly-owned portfolio that is on land subject to a ground lease. Accordingly, we only own a long-term leasehold in the land underlying this property, and we own the improvements thereon only during the term of the ground lease. In the future, our portfolio may include additional properties subject to ground leases or similar interests. If we are found to be in breach of a ground lease, we could lose the right to use the property and could also be liable to the ground lessor for damages. In addition, unless we can purchase a fee interest in the underlying land or extend the terms of these leases before their expiration, which we may be unable to do, we will lose our right to operate these properties and our interest in the improvements upon expiration of the leases. Our ability to exercise options to extend the term of our ground lease is subject to the condition that we are not in default under the terms of the ground lease at the time that we exercise such options, and we may not be able to exercise our options at such time. In addition, three JV Properties are currently ground leased or leased and, therefore, subject to similar risks. Furthermore, we may not be able to renew our ground lease or future ground leases upon their expiration (after the exercise of all renewal options). If we were to lose the right to use a property due to a breach or non-renewal or final expiration of the ground lease, we would be unable to derive income from such property, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial conditions or results of operations.

Certain properties within our portfolio are subject to restrictions pursuant to reciprocal easement agreements, operating agreements, or similar agreements, some of which contain a purchase option or right of first refusal or right of first offer in favor of a third party.

Many of the properties in our portfolio are, and properties that we acquire in the future may be, subject to use restrictions and/or operational requirements imposed pursuant to ground leases, restrictive covenants or conditions, reciprocal easement agreements or operating agreements (collectively, “Property Restrictions”) that could adversely affect our ability to redevelop the properties or lease space to third parties. Such Property Restrictions could include, for example, limitations on alterations, changes, expansions, or reconfiguration of properties; limitations on use of properties, including for retail uses only; limitations affecting parking requirements; restrictions on exterior or interior signage or facades; or access to an adjoining mall, among other things. In certain cases, consent of the other party or parties to such agreements may be required when altering, reconfiguring, expanding, redeveloping or re-leasing properties. Failure to secure such consents when necessary may harm our ability to execute leasing, redevelopment or expansion strategies, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. In certain cases, a third party may have a purchase option or right of first refusal or right of first offer that is activated by a sale or transfer of the property, or a change in use or operations, including a closing of the Sears Holdings operation or cessation of business operations, on the encumbered property.

Economic conditions may affect the cost of borrowing, which could materially adversely affect our business.

Our business is affected by a number of factors that are largely beyond our control but may nevertheless have a significant negative impact on us. These factors include, but are not limited to:

 

interest rates and credit spreads;

 

the availability of credit, including the price, terms and conditions under which it can be obtained;

 

a decrease in consumer spending or sentiment, including as a result of increases in savings rates and tax increases, and any effect that this may have on retail activity;

 

the actual and perceived state of the real estate and retail markets, market for dividend-paying stocks and public capital markets in general; and

 

unemployment rates, both nationwide and within the primary markets in which we operate.

In addition, economic conditions such as inflation or deflation could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Deflation may have an impact on our ability to repay our debt. Deflation may delay consumption and thus weaken tenant sales, which may reduce our tenants’ ability to pay rents. Deflationary pressure on retailers may diminish their ability to rent our space and decrease our ability to re-lease the space on favorable terms to us. In an inflationary economic environment, increased inflation may have a pronounced negative impact on the interest expense we pay in connection with our indebtedness and

- 10 -


 

our general and administrative expenses, as these costs could increase at a rate higher than rents we collect. Also, inflation may adversely affect tenant leases with stated rent increases, which could be lower than the increase in inflation at any given time. Inflation could also have an adverse effect on consumer spending, which could impact our tenants’ sales and, in turn, our own results of operations. Restricted lending practices may impact our ability to obtain financing for our properties and may also negatively impact our tenants’ ability to obtain credit. Decreases in consumer demand can have a direct impact on our tenants and the rents we receive.

Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act may require us to make expenditures that adversely affect our cash flows.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (the “ADA”) has separate compliance requirements for “public accommodations” and “commercial facilities,” but generally requires that buildings be made accessible to people with disabilities. Compliance with the ADA requirements could require removal of access barriers, and non-compliance could result in imposition of fines by the United States government or an award of damages to private litigants, or both. While the tenants to whom our properties are leased are generally obligated by law or lease to comply with the ADA provisions applicable to the property being leased to them, if required changes involve other property not being leased to such tenants, if the required changes include greater expenditures than anticipated, or if the changes must be made on a more accelerated basis than anticipated, the ability of these tenants to cover costs could be adversely affected. Moreover, certain third-party leases may require the landlord to comply with the ADA with respect to the building as a whole and/or the tenant’s space. As a result of any of the foregoing circumstances, we could be required to expend funds to comply with the provisions of the ADA, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Environmental, health, safety and land use laws and regulations may limit or restrict some of our operations.

As the owner or operator of various real properties and facilities, we must comply with various federal, state and local environmental, health, safety and land use laws and regulations. We and our properties are subject to such laws and regulations relating to the use, storage, disposal, emission and release of hazardous and non-hazardous substances and employee health and safety, as well as zoning restrictions. Historically, Sears Holdings has not incurred significant expenditures to comply with these laws with respect to the substantial majority of the space at the properties. However, a substantial portion of our properties that have resulted in certain remediation activities currently include, or previously included, automotive care center facilities and retail fueling facilities, and/or above-ground or underground storage tanks, and are or were subject to laws and regulations governing the handling, storage and disposal of hazardous substances contained in some of the products or materials used or sold in the automotive care center facilities (such as gasoline, motor oil, fluid in hydraulic lifts, antifreeze, solvents and lubricants), the recycling/disposal of batteries and tires, air emissions, wastewater discharges and waste management. In addition to these products, the equipment in use or previously used at such properties, such as service equipment, car lifts, oil/water separators, and storage tanks, has been subject to increasing environmental regulation relating to, among other things, the storage, handling, use, disposal and transportation of hazardous materials. There are also federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances that govern the use, removal and/or replacement of underground storage tanks in the event of a release on, or an upgrade or redevelopment of, certain properties. Such laws, as well as common-law standards, may impose liability for any releases of hazardous substances associated with the underground storage tanks and may provide for third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators of such properties for damages associated with such releases. If hazardous substances are released from any underground storage tanks on any of our properties, we may be materially and adversely affected. In a few states, transfers of some types of sites are conditioned upon clean-up of contamination prior to transfer. If any of our properties are subject to such contamination, we may be subject to substantial clean-up costs before we are able to sell or otherwise transfer the property.

Under the Master Lease, Sears Holdings is required to indemnify us from certain environmental liabilities at the properties purchased from Sears Holdings before or during the period in which each property is leased to Sears Holdings, including removal and remediation of all affected facilities and equipment constituting the automotive care center facilities (and each JV Master Lease includes a similar requirement of Sears Holdings). Although existing and future third-party leases are expected to require tenants generally to indemnify us for such tenants’ non-compliance with environmental laws as a result of their occupancy, such tenants typically will not be required to indemnify us for environmental non-compliance arising prior to their occupancy. In such cases, we may incur costs and expenses under such leases or as a matter of law. The amount of any environmental liabilities could exceed the amounts for which Sears Holdings or other third parties are required to indemnify us (or the applicable JV) or their financial ability to do so. In addition, under the terms of the agreements governing our indebtedness, we have deposited funds in a reserve account that will be used to fund costs incurred in correcting certain environmental and other conditions. The amount of such funds may not be sufficient to correct the environmental and other conditions to which they are expected to be applied.

In addition, additional laws which may be passed in the future, or a finding of a violation of or liability under existing laws, could require us and/or one or more of the JVs to make significant expenditures and otherwise limit or restrict some of our or its or their operations, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

- 11 -


 

Environmental compliance costs and liabilities associated with real estate properties owned by us may materially and adversely affect us.

Our properties may be subject to known and unknown environmental liabilities under various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to human health and the environment. Certain of these laws and regulations may impose joint and several liability on certain statutory classes of persons, including owners or operators, for the costs of investigation or remediation of contaminated properties. These laws and regulations apply to past and present business operations on the properties, and the use, storage, handling and recycling or disposal of hazardous substances or wastes. We may face liability regardless of our knowledge of the contamination, the timing of the contamination, the cause of the contamination or the party responsible for the contamination of the property.

We may be held primarily or jointly and severally liable for costs relating to the investigation and clean-up of any of our properties from which there has been a release or threatened release of a regulated material as well as other affected properties, regardless of whether we knew of or caused the release.

As the owner or operator of real property, we may also incur liability based on various building conditions. For example, buildings and other structures on properties that we currently own or operate or those we acquire or operate in the future contain, may contain, or may have contained, asbestos-containing material (or “ACM”). Environmental, health and safety laws require that ACM be properly managed and maintained and may impose fines or penalties on owners, operators or employers for non-compliance with those requirements. These requirements include special precautions, such as removal, abatement or air monitoring, if ACM would be disturbed during maintenance, renovation or demolition of a building, potentially resulting in substantial costs. In addition, we may be subject to liability for personal injury or property damage sustained as a result of exposure to ACM or releases of ACM into the environment. In addition, the presence of significant mold or other airborne contaminants at any of our properties could require us to undertake a costly remediation program to contain or remove the mold or other airborne contaminants or increase ventilation and/or expose us to liability from our tenants, employees of our tenants, or others if property damage or personal injury occurs.

In addition to these costs, which are typically not limited by law or regulation and could exceed a property’s value, we could be liable for certain other costs, including governmental fines, and injuries to persons, property or natural resources. Further, some environmental laws create a lien on the contaminated site in favor of the government for damages and the costs the government incurs in connection with such contamination. Any such costs or liens could have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition.

Although we intend to require our tenants to undertake to indemnify us for certain environmental liabilities, including environmental liabilities they cause, the amount of such liabilities could exceed the financial ability of the tenant to indemnify us. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination may adversely affect our ability to sell or lease the real estate or to borrow using the real estate as collateral.

Each JV is subject to similar risks relating to environmental compliance costs and liabilities associated with its JV Properties, which may reduce the value of our investment in, or distributions to us by, one or more JVs, or require that we make additional capital contributions to one or more JVs.

Possible terrorist activity or other acts of violence could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Terrorist attacks 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 have future capital needs and may not be able to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms.

As of December 31, 2016, we had aggregate outstanding indebtedness of approximately $1.2 billion. We may incur additional indebtedness in the future to refinance our existing indebtedness, to finance newly acquired properties or capital contributions to joint ventures, or to fund retenanting and redevelopment projects. Our existing debt and any significant additional indebtedness could

- 12 -


 

require a substantial portion of our cash flow to make interest and principal payments. Demands on our cash resources from debt service will reduce funds available to us to pay dividends, make capital expenditures and acquisitions or carry out other aspects of our business strategy. Our indebtedness may also limit our ability to adjust rapidly to changing market conditions, make us more vulnerable to general adverse economic and industry conditions and create competitive disadvantages for us compared to other companies with relatively lower debt levels. Increased future debt service obligations may limit our operational flexibility, including our ability to acquire properties, finance or refinance our properties, contribute properties to joint ventures or sell properties as needed.

Moreover, our ability to obtain additional financing and satisfy our financial obligations under indebtedness outstanding from time to time will depend upon our future operating performance, which is subject to then-prevailing general economic, real estate and credit market conditions, including interest rate levels and the availability of credit generally, and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. A prolonged worsening of credit market conditions would have a material adverse effect on our ability to obtain financing on favorable terms, if at all.

We may be unable to obtain additional financing or financing on favorable terms or our operating cash flow may be insufficient to satisfy our financial obligations under any indebtedness outstanding from time to time. Among other things, the absence of an investment grade credit rating or any credit rating downgrade could increase our financing costs and could limit our access to financing sources. If financing is not available when needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to enhance our properties or develop new properties, complete acquisitions or otherwise take advantage of business opportunities or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If additional funds are raised through the issuance of equity securities, our shareholders may experience significant dilution. Additionally, sales of substantial amounts of Class A common shares in the public market, or the perception that such sales could occur, could adversely affect the market price of Class A common shares, may make it more difficult for our shareholders to sell their common shares at a time and price that they deem appropriate, and could impair our future ability to raise capital through an offering of our equity securities.

We expect to incur mortgage indebtedness and other borrowings, which may increase our business risks.

We may incur mortgage debt and pledge all or some of our real properties as security for that debt to obtain funds to acquire additional real properties. The Company may also borrow if it needs funds or deems it necessary or advisable to assure that it maintains its qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. If there is a shortfall between the cash flow from a property and the cash flow needed to service mortgage debt on a property, then the amount available for distributions to shareholders may be reduced. In addition, incurring mortgage debt increases the risk of loss since defaults on indebtedness secured by a property may result in lenders initiating foreclosure actions. In that case, we could lose the property securing the loan that is in default. For tax purposes, a foreclosure of any of our properties would be treated as a sale of the property for a purchase price equal to the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage. If the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage exceeds our tax basis in the property, we would recognize taxable income on foreclosure, but would not receive any cash proceeds. In such event, the Company may be unable to pay the amount of distributions required in order to maintain its REIT status. If any mortgages contain cross-collateralization or cross-default provisions, a default on a single property could affect multiple properties. If any properties are foreclosed upon due to a default, our ability to pay cash distributions to our shareholders may be adversely affected, which could result in our being required to pay taxable stock dividends in order to maintain our REIT status.

Covenants in our debt agreements may limit our operational flexibility, and a covenant breach or default could materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

The agreements governing our indebtedness contain customary covenants for a real estate financing, including restrictions on the ability of the borrowers under the agreements governing our existing indebtedness to grant liens on their assets (including the Wholly Owned Properties and JV Interests, which comprise substantially all of our assets), incur additional indebtedness, or transfer or sell assets. Such restrictions also include cash flow sweep provisions based upon certain measures of the Company’s and Sears Holdings’ financial and operating performance, including (a) where the “Debt Yield” (the ratio of net operating income for the mortgage borrowers to their debt) is less than 11.0%, (b) if the performance of Sears Holdings at the stores subject to the Master Lease with Sears Holdings fails to meet specified rent ratio thresholds, (c) if the Company fails to meet specified tenant diversification tests and (d) upon the occurrence of a bankruptcy or insolvency action with respect to Sears Holdings or if there is a payment default under the Master Lease with Sears Holdings, in each case, subject to cure rights, including providing specified amounts of cash collateral or satisfying tenant diversification thresholds.  

In November 2016, the Company and the servicer for our Mortgage Loans (as defined below) entered into amendments to our Loan Agreements to resolve a disagreement regarding one of the cash flow sweep provisions in our Loan Agreements. The principal terms of these amendments are that the Company has (i) posted $30 million, and will post $3.3 million on a monthly basis, to a

- 13 -


 

redevelopment reserve account, which amounts may be used by the Company to fund redevelopment projects and (ii) extended the spread maintenance provision for prepayment of the loan by two months through March 9, 2018 (with the spread maintenance premium for the second month at a reduced amount).  As a result of this amendment and the resolution of the related disagreement, no cash flow sweep was imposed.

Were a cash flow sweep to be imposed (and for so long as a cash flow sweep period is imposed), we potentially could be constrained in our ability to use cash generated by the Wholly Owned Properties.  In addition, during the pendency of the cash flow sweep, the lender would have certain consent rights over, among other things, our annual budget and variances thereto, redevelopment budgets and variances thereto, and capital improvements requiring capital expenditures that are not consistent with the approved annual budget or an approved redevelopment plan and budget.   These enhanced consent rights potentially could limit our operational flexibility.

The covenants in our Loan Agreements also require Seritage to maintain a minimum consolidated liquidity and minimum consolidated net worth. Covenants that limit our operational flexibility as well as defaults under our debt instruments could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

We have limited operating history as a REIT and an independent public company, and our inexperience may impede our ability to successfully manage our business or implement effective internal controls.

We have limited operating history owning, leasing or developing properties independent from Sears Holdings or operating as a REIT. Similarly, we have limited operating history as an independent public company. We cannot assure you that our past experience will be sufficient to successfully operate our company as a REIT and an independent public company. The Company is required to implement substantial control systems and procedures in order to maintain its qualification as a REIT, satisfy its periodic and current reporting requirements under applicable SEC regulations and comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 and the NYSE listing standards. As a result, our management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time to comply with these rules and regulations and establish the corporate infrastructure and controls demanded of a publicly traded REIT. These costs and time commitments could be substantially more than we currently expect. If our finance and accounting organization is unable for any reason to respond adequately to the increased demands, the quality and timeliness of our financial reporting may suffer, and we could experience significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal control over financial reporting.

An inability to establish effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting or remediate existing deficiencies could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations under the Exchange Act, or result in material weaknesses, material misstatements or omissions in our Exchange Act reports, any of which could cause investors to lose confidence in our company, which could have an adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations or the market price of Class A common shares, par value $0.01 per share, Class B non-economic common shares of beneficial interest, par value $0.01 per share (“Class B non-economic common shares”), and Class C non-voting common shares of beneficial interest, par value $0.01 per share (“Class C non-voting common shares”).

Our rights and the rights of our shareholders to take action against our trustees and officers are limited.

As permitted by the Maryland REIT Law, the Company’s Declaration of Trust limits the liability of its trustees and officers to Seritage and its shareholders for money damages, except for liability resulting from:

 

actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services; or

 

a final judgment based upon a finding of active and deliberate dishonesty by the trustee or officer that was material to the cause of action adjudicated.

In addition, the Company’s Declaration of Trust authorizes it and Seritage’s bylaws obligate it to indemnify its present and former trustees and officers for actions taken by them in those capacities and to pay or reimburse their reasonable expenses in advance of final disposition of a proceeding to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, and we have entered into indemnification agreements with our trustees and executive officers. As a result, the Company and our shareholders may have more limited rights against our trustees and officers than might otherwise exist absent the provisions in our Declaration of Trust and bylaws or that might exist with other companies. Accordingly, in the event that actions taken by any of our trustees or officers are immune or exculpated from, or indemnified against, liability but which impede our performance, the Company and our shareholders’ ability to recover damages from that trustee or officer will be limited.

- 14 -


 

Seritage’s Declaration of Trust and bylaws, Maryland law, and the partnership agreement of Operating Partnership contain provisions that may delay, defer or prevent an acquisition of Class A common shares or a change in control.

The Company’s Declaration of Trust and bylaws, Maryland law and the partnership agreement of Operating Partnership contain a number of provisions, the exercise or existence of which could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for our shareholders or otherwise be in their best interests, including the following:

 

The Company’s Declaration of Trust Contains Restrictions on the Ownership and Transfer of Seritage Shares of Beneficial Interest. In order for us to qualify as a REIT, no more than 50% of the value of all outstanding common shares may be owned, beneficially or constructively, by five or fewer individuals at any time during the last half of each taxable year other than 2015, the first taxable year for which we elected to be taxed as a REIT. Additionally, at least 100 persons must beneficially own Class A common shares during at least 335 days of a taxable year (other than the first taxable year for which we elect to be taxed as a REIT). The Company’s Declaration of Trust, with certain exceptions, authorizes the Board of Trustees to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to preserve its qualification as a REIT. For this and other purposes, subject to certain exceptions, our Declaration of Trust provides that no person may beneficially or constructively own more than 9.6%, in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of all outstanding shares, or all outstanding common shares (including our Class A common shares, our Class B non-economic common shares and our Class C non-voting common shares), of beneficial interest of the Company. We refer to these restrictions collectively as the “ownership limits.” The constructive ownership rules under the Code are complex and may cause shares owned directly or constructively by a group of related individuals or entities to be deemed to be constructively owned by one individual or entity. As a result, the acquisition of less than 9.6% of the outstanding shares of beneficial interest of our shares by an individual or entity could cause that individual or entity or another individual or entity to own, beneficially or constructively, the Company’s shares of beneficial interest in violation of the ownership limits.  In addition, because we have multiple classes of common shares, the acquisition of Class A common shares may result in a shareholder inadvertently owning, beneficially or constructively, the Company’s shares of beneficial interest in violation of the ownership limits.  Our Declaration of Trust also prohibits any person from owning Class A common shares that would result in our being “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Code or otherwise cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT. Any attempt to own or transfer Class A common shares or any of our other shares of beneficial interest in violation of these restrictions or other restrictions on ownership or transfer in our Declaration of Trust may result in the transfer being automatically void. The Company’s Declaration of Trust also provides that Class A common shares in excess of the ownership limits will be transferred to a trust for the exclusive benefit of a designated charitable beneficiary, and that any person who acquires Class A common shares in violation of the ownership limits will not be entitled to any dividends on the shares or be entitled to vote the shares or receive any proceeds from the subsequent sale of the shares in excess of the lesser of the price paid by such person for the shares (or, if such person did not give value for such shares, the market price on the day the shares were transferred to the trust) or the amount realized from the sale. We or our designee will have the right to purchase the shares from the trustee at this calculated price as well. The ownership limits and other restrictions on ownership and transfer in our Declaration of Trust may have the effect of preventing, or may be relied upon to prevent, a third party from acquiring control of us if the Board of Trustees does not grant an exemption from the ownership limits, even if our shareholders believe the change in control is in their best interests.

 

The Company’s Board of Trustees Has the Power to Cause Us to Issue Additional Shares of Beneficial Interest and Classify and Reclassify Any Unissued Class A Common Shares without Shareholder Approval. The Company has issued and outstanding, in addition to the Class A common shares, Class B non-economic common shares having, in the aggregate, approximately 4.9% of the voting power of the Company, all of which are held by ESL Partners, L.P. and Edward S. Lampert (“ESL”), and Class C non-voting common shares entitled to, in the aggregate, 17.1% of the dividends or other distributions issued to holders of shares of beneficial interest of the Company, all of which are held by clients (“Fairholme Clients”) of Fairholme Capital Management L.L.C. (“FCM”).  Our Declaration of Trust authorizes us to issue additional authorized but unissued common shares or preferred shares of beneficial interest. In addition, the Board of Trustees may, without shareholder approval, (i) amend the Declaration of Trust to increase or decrease the aggregate number of shares of beneficial interest or the number of shares of beneficial interest of any class or series that we have authority to issue and (ii) classify or reclassify any unissued common shares or preferred shares of beneficial interest and set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. As a result, the Board of Trustees may establish a class or series of common shares or preferred shares of beneficial interest that could delay or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for Class A common shares or otherwise be in the best interests of our shareholders.

 

The Board of Trustees Is Divided into Three Classes and Trustee Elections Require a Vote of 75% of the Class A Common Shares and Class B Non-Economic Common Shares Entitled to Vote. The Board of Trustees is divided into three classes of trustees, with each class to be as nearly equal in number as possible. As a result, approximately one-third of the Board of Trustees will be elected at each annual meeting of shareholders, with, in both contested and uncontested elections, trustees elected by the vote of 75% of the votes of the Class A common shares and Class B non-economic

- 15 -


 

 

common shares (voting together as a single class) entitled to be cast in the election of trustees. In the event that an incumbent trustee does not receive a sufficient percentage of votes cast for election, he or she will continue to serve on the Board of Trustees until a successor is duly elected and qualifies. The classification of trustees and requirement that trustee nominees receive a vote of 75% of the votes of the Class A common shares and Class B non-economic common shares (voting together as a single class) entitled to be cast in the election of trustees may have the effect of making it more difficult for shareholders to change the composition of the Board of Trustees. The requirement that trustee nominees receive a vote of 75% of the votes of the Class A common shares and Class B non-economic common shares (voting together as a single class) entitled to be cast in the election of trustees may also have the effect of making it more difficult for shareholders to elect trustee nominees that do not receive the votes of shares of beneficial interest held by ESL and/or Fairholme Clients, which control approximately 8.2% and approximately 9.0%, respectively, of the voting power of the Company.

 

The Partnership Agreement of Operating Partnership Provides Holders of Operating Partnership Units Approval Rights over Certain Change in Control Transactions Involving the Company or Operating Partnership. Pursuant to the partnership agreement of Operating Partnership, certain transactions, including mergers, consolidations, conversions or other combinations or extraordinary transactions or transactions that constitute a “change of control” of the Company or Operating Partnership, as defined in the partnership agreement, will require the approval of the partners (other than the Company and entities controlled by it) holding a majority of all the outstanding Operating Partnership units held by all partners (other than the Company and entities controlled by it). These provisions could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control. ESL holds all of the Operating Partnership units not held by the Company and entities controlled by it.

 

Certain Provisions of Maryland Law May Limit the Ability of a Third Party to Acquire Control of Us. Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law (the “MGCL”) applicable to Maryland REITs may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from acquiring us or of impeding a change of control of the Company under circumstances that otherwise could provide Class A common shareholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of such shares or otherwise be in the best interest of shareholders, including:

 

“business combination” provisions that, subject to certain exceptions and limitations, prohibit certain business combinations between a Maryland REIT and an “interested shareholder” (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting power of the Company’s outstanding voting shares or an affiliate or associate of the Maryland REIT who, at any time within the two-year period immediately prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of the then-outstanding shares of the Company) or an affiliate of any interested shareholder and the Maryland REIT for five years after the most recent date on which the shareholder becomes an interested shareholder, and thereafter imposes two supermajority shareholder voting requirements on these combinations;

 

“control share” provisions that provide that, subject to certain exceptions, holders of “control shares” of our company (defined as voting shares that, if aggregated with all other shares owned or controlled by the acquirer, would entitle the acquirer to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in electing trustees) acquired in a “control share acquisition” (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition of issued and outstanding “control shares”) have no voting rights with respect to the control shares except to the extent approved by our shareholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all interested shares; and

 

Additionally, Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL permits the Board of Trustees, without shareholder approval and regardless of what is currently provided in our Declaration of Trust or bylaws, to implement certain takeover defenses.

The Board of Trustees has, by resolution, exempted from the provisions of the Maryland Business Combination Act all business combinations (a) between us and (i) Sears Holdings or its affiliates or (ii) ESL or FCM and/or Fairholme Clients and their respective affiliates and (b) between us and any other person, provided that such business combination is first approved by the Board of Trustees (including a majority of our trustees who are not affiliates or associates of such person). In addition, our bylaws contain a provision opting out of the Maryland control share acquisition act.

We may experience uninsured or underinsured losses, or insurance proceeds may not otherwise be available to us which could result in a significant loss of the capital we have invested in a property, decrease anticipated future revenues or cause us to incur unanticipated expense.

While the Master Lease and other existing third-party leases require, and new lease agreements are expected to require, that comprehensive general insurance and hazard insurance be maintained by the tenants with respect to their premises, and we have

- 16 -


 

obtained casualty insurance with respect to our properties, there are certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and floods, that may be uninsurable or not economically insurable. Insurance coverage (net of deductibles) may not be effective or be sufficient to pay the full current market value or current replacement cost of a loss. Inflation, changes in building and zoning codes and ordinances, environmental considerations, and other factors also might make it infeasible to use insurance proceeds to restore or replace the property after such property has been damaged or destroyed. Under such circumstances, the insurance proceeds received might not be adequate to restore the economic position with respect to such property or to comply with the requirements of our mortgages and Property Restrictions. Moreover, the holders of any mortgage indebtedness may require some or all property insurance proceeds to be applied to reduce such indebtedness, rather than being made available for property restoration.

If we experience a loss that is uninsured or that exceeds our policy coverage limits, we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those properties. In addition, if the damaged properties were subject to recourse indebtedness, Property Restrictions or ground leases, we could continue to be liable for the indebtedness or subject to claims for damages even if these properties were irreparably damaged.

In addition, even if damage to our properties is covered by insurance, a disruption of our business or that of our tenants caused by a casualty event may result in the loss of business and/or tenants. The business interruption insurance we or our tenants carry may not fully compensate us for the loss of business or tenants due to an interruption caused by a casualty event. Further, if one of our tenants has insurance but is underinsured, that tenant may be unable to satisfy its payment obligations under its lease with us or its other payment or other obligations.

A disruption in the financial markets may make it more difficult to evaluate the stability, net assets and capitalization of insurance companies and any insurer’s ability to meet its claim payment obligations. A failure of an insurance company to make payments to us upon an event of loss covered by an insurance policy, losses in excess of our policy coverage limits or disruptions to our business or the business of our tenants caused by a casualty event could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Each JV may also experience uninsured or underinsured losses, and also faces other risks related to insurance that are similar to those we face, which could reduce the value of our investment in, or distributions to us by, one or more JVs, or require that we make additional capital contributions to one or more JVs.

Conflicts of interest may exist or could arise in the future between the interests of Seritage shareholders and the interests of holders of Operating Partnership units, and the partnership agreement of Operating Partnership grants holders of Operating Partnership units certain rights, which may harm the interests of Seritage shareholders.

Conflicts of interest may exist or could arise in the future as a result of the relationships between Seritage and its affiliates, on the one hand, and Operating Partnership or any of its partners, on the other. Seritage’s trustees and officers have duties to Seritage under Maryland law in connection with their oversight and management of the company. At the same time, Seritage, as general partner of Operating Partnership, will have duties and obligations to Operating Partnership and its limited partners under Delaware law, as modified by the partnership agreement of Operating Partnership in connection with the management of Operating Partnership.

For example, without the approval of the majority of the Operating Partnership units not held by Seritage and entities controlled by it, Seritage will be prohibited from taking certain extraordinary actions, including change of control transactions of Seritage or Operating Partnership.

ESL owns a substantial percentage of the Operating Partnership Units, which may be exchanged for cash or, at the election of Seritage, Class A common shares, and which will result in certain transactions involving Seritage or Operating Partnership requiring the approval of ESL.

ESL owns approximately 39.6% of the Operating Partnership units, with the remainder of the units held by the Company. In addition, ESL will have the right to acquire additional Operating Partnership units in order to allow it to maintain its relative ownership interest in Operating Partnership if Operating Partnership issues additional units to the Company under certain circumstances, including if we issue additional equity and contribute the funds to Operating Partnership to fund acquisitions or redevelopment of properties, among other uses. In addition, ESL will have the right to require the Operating Partnership to redeem its Operating Partnership units in whole or in part in exchange for cash or, at the election of the Company, Class A common shares, except as described below. Due to the ownership limits set forth in our Declaration of Trust, ESL may dispose of some or all of the Class A common shares it beneficially owns prior to exercising its right to require Operating Partnership to redeem Operating Partnership units, and the partnership agreement of Operating Partnership will permit ESL (and only ESL) to transfer its Operating Partnership units to one or more underwriters to be exchanged for Class A common shares in connection with certain dispositions in order to achieve the same effect as

- 17 -


 

would occur if ESL were to exchange a larger portion of its Operating Partnership units for Class A common shares and then dispose of those shares in an underwritten offering. Sales of a substantial number of Class A common shares in connection with or to raise cash proceeds to facilitate, such a redemption, or the perception that such sales may occur, could adversely affect the market price of the Class A common shares.

In addition, the partnership agreement of Operating Partnership requires the approval of a majority of the Operating Partnership units not held by the Company and entities controlled by it for certain transactions and other actions, including certain change of control transactions involving Seritage or Operating Partnership, sales of all or substantially all of the assets of Operating Partnership, waivers to the excess share provision in the Declaration of Trust of the Company, certain modifications to the partnership agreement, withdrawal or succession of the Company as general partner of Operating Partnership, limits on the right of holders of Operating Partnership units to redeem their units, tax elections and certain other matters. As long as ESL owns a majority of the outstanding Operating Partnership units not held by the Company and entities controlled by it (and, for certain actions, as long as ESL holds at least 40% of the economic interests of Seritage and Operating Partnership on a combined basis), ESL’s approval will be required in order for the general partner to undertake such actions. If ESL refuses to approve a transaction, our business could be materially adversely affected. Furthermore, ESL owns approximately 3.5% of the outstanding Class A common shares, as well as Class B non-economic common shares having, in the aggregate, 4.9% of the voting power of the Company. In any of these matters, the interests of ESL may differ from or conflict with the interests of our other shareholders.

ESL exerts substantial influence over us and Sears Holdings, and its interests may differ from or conflict with the interests of our other shareholders.

ESL beneficially owns approximately 39.6% of the Operating Partnership units, and approximately 3.5% of the outstanding Class A common shares and Class B non-economic common shares having, in the aggregate, 4.9% of the voting power of Seritage. ESL also beneficially owns approximately 50.1% of the outstanding common stock of Sears Holdings.  In addition, Mr. Lampert, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Sears Holdings and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of ESL, serves as the Chairman of the Seritage Board of Trustees. As a result, ESL and its affiliates have substantial influence over us and Sears Holdings. In any matter affecting us, including our relationship with Sears Holdings, the interests of ESL may differ from or conflict with the interests of our other shareholders.

The businesses of each of the GGP JV, the Simon JV, and the Macerich JV are similar to our business and the occurrence of risks that adversely affect us could also adversely affect our investment in the GGP JV, the Simon JV and/or the Macerich JV.

The GGP JV is a joint venture that owns and operates certain JV Properties, which consist of 12 properties formerly owned or leased by Sears Holdings, the Simon JV is a joint venture that owns and operates certain other JV Properties, which consist of ten other properties formerly owned by Sears Holdings and the Macerich JV is a joint venture that owns and operates the remaining JV Properties, which consist of nine other properties formerly owned by Sears Holdings. A substantial majority of the space at the JV Properties is leased by the applicable JV to Sears Holdings under the applicable JV Master Lease. Except with respect to the rent amounts and the properties covered, the general formats of the JV Master Leases are similar to one another and to the Master Lease, including with respect to the lessor’s right to recapture space leased to Sears Holdings (other than at one property owned by the Macerich JV) and Sears Holdings’ right to terminate a portion of the lease as to certain properties. As a result, each JV’s business is similar to our business, and each JV is subject to many of the same risks that we face. The occurrence of risks that adversely affect us could also adversely affect one or more JVs and reduce the value of our investment in, or distributions to us from, one or more JVs, or require that we make additional capital contributions to one or more JVs.

In addition, our influence over each JV may be limited by the fact that day-to-day operation of the GGP JV, the Simon JV and the Macerich JV, and responsibility for leasing and redevelopment activities related to the JV Properties owned by the GGP JV, the Simon JV and the Macerich JV, as applicable, are generally delegated to GGP, Simon and Macerich, respectively, subject to certain exceptions. The JV Properties owned by the GGP JV are located at malls owned and operated by GGP, the JV Properties owned by the Simon JV are located at malls owned and operated by the Simon JV and the JV Properties owned by the Macerich JV are located at malls owned and operated by the Macerich JV. As a result, conflicts of interest may exist or could arise in the future between the interests of GGP, Simon or Macerich and our interests as a holder of 50% interests in the GGP JV, the Simon JV and the Macerich JV, respectively, including, for example, with respect to decisions as to whether to lease to third parties space at a JV Property or other space at the mall at which such JV Property is located.

- 18 -


 

We depend on Sears Holdings to provide certain services at properties where Sears Holdings is the sole or primary tenant and may have difficulty finding replacement services or be required to pay increased costs to replace these services after our agreements with Sears Holdings expire.

We entered into various agreements that effected the purchase and sale of the acquired properties and the lease or sublease of a substantial majority of the acquired properties to Sears Holdings, including, among others, the Subscription, Distribution and Purchase and Sale Agreement and the Master Lease. The Master Lease governs the terms of the use and operation of the properties leased by us to Sears Holdings, including our redevelopment and recapture rights and Sears Holdings’ lease termination rights, and the repair, maintenance and redevelopment-related services Sears Holdings may provide to us. In addition, the Subscription, Distribution and Purchase and Sale Agreement provides for, among other things, our responsibility for liabilities relating to our business and the responsibility of Sears Holdings for liabilities unrelated to our business. The agreements between us and Sears Holdings also govern our various interim and ongoing relationships. The Subscription, Distribution and Purchase and Sale Agreement also contains indemnification obligations and ongoing commitments of us and Sears Holdings.

After the Master Lease expires, or if Sears Holdings is unable to meet its obligations under the Master Lease, we may be forced to seek replacement services from alternate providers. These replacement services may be more costly to us or of lower quality, and the transition process to a new service provider may result in interruptions to our business or operations, which could harm our financial condition or results of operations.

Sears Holdings has agreed to indemnify us for certain liabilities. However, these indemnities may be insufficient to insure us against the full amount of such liabilities, and Sears Holdings’ ability to satisfy its indemnification obligations may be impaired in the future.

Pursuant to the Subscription, Distribution and Purchase and Sale Agreement and the Master Lease, Sears Holdings has agreed to indemnify us for certain liabilities. However, third parties could seek to hold us responsible for any of the liabilities that Sears Holdings has agreed to retain, and Sears Holdings may be unable to fully satisfy its indemnification obligations. Moreover, even if we ultimately succeed in recovering from Sears Holdings any amounts for which we are held liable, we may be temporarily required to bear these losses while seeking recovery from Sears Holdings. Any liabilities in excess of amounts for which we receive timely indemnification from Sears Holdings could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Risks Related to Status as a REIT

If we do not qualify to be taxed as a REIT, or fail to remain qualified as a REIT, we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax as a regular corporation and could face a substantial tax liability, which would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our shareholders.

We elected to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes commencing with our initial taxable year ended December 31, 2015 and have operated, and expect to continue to operate, to qualify as a REIT.  References throughout this document to the “first taxable year” for which we have elected to be taxed as a REIT refer to the taxable year ended December 31, 2015. In connection with the Transaction, the Company received an opinion of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz (“Wachtell Lipton”) with respect to its qualification as a REIT. Investors should be aware, however, that opinions of counsel are not binding on the IRS or any court. The opinion of Wachtell Lipton represented only the view of Wachtell Lipton based on its review and analysis of existing law and on certain representations as to factual matters and covenants made by us, including representations relating to the values of our assets and the sources of our income. The opinion was expressed as of the date it was issued and has not been updated. Wachtell Lipton has no obligation to advise us or the holders of Class A common shares of any subsequent change in the matters stated, represented or assumed or of any subsequent change in applicable law. Furthermore, both the validity of the opinion of Wachtell Lipton and our qualification as a REIT will depend on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, shareholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis, the results of which will not be monitored by Wachtell Lipton. Our ability to satisfy the asset tests depends upon our analysis of the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for some of which we will not obtain independent appraisals.

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be subject to U.S. federal income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, on our taxable income at regular corporate rates, and dividends paid to our shareholders would not be deductible by the Company in computing our taxable income. Any resulting corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our shareholders, which in turn could have an adverse impact on the value of Class A common shares. Unless we were entitled to relief under certain Code provisions, the Company also would be disqualified from re-electing to be taxed as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year in which we failed to qualify as a REIT.

- 19 -


 

Qualifying as a REIT involves highly technical and complex provisions of the Code.

Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Code provisions for which only limited judicial and administrative authorities exist. Even a technical or inadvertent violation could jeopardize our REIT qualification. The Company’s qualification as a REIT depends on the satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, shareholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis. In addition, our ability to satisfy the requirements to qualify as a REIT may depend in part on the actions of third parties over which we have no control or only limited influence, including in cases where we own an equity interest in an entity that is classified as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

We could fail to qualify to be taxed as a REIT if income we receive from Sears Holdings is not treated as qualifying income.

Under applicable provisions of the Code, we will not be treated as a REIT unless we satisfy various requirements, including requirements relating to the sources of our gross income. Rents we receive or accrue from Sears Holdings will not be treated as qualifying rent for purposes of these requirements if the Master Lease is not respected as a true lease for U.S. federal income tax purposes and is instead treated as a service contract, joint venture, financing, or some other type of arrangement. If the Master Lease is not respected as a true lease for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we may fail to qualify to be taxed as a REIT. Furthermore, our qualification as a REIT depends on the satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, shareholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis. Our ability to satisfy the asset tests depends upon our analysis of the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for some of which we will not obtain independent appraisals.

In addition, subject to certain exceptions, rents we receive or accrue from Sears Holdings (or other tenants) will not be treated as qualifying rent for purposes of these requirements if we or an actual or constructive owner of 10% or more of the Class A common shares actually or constructively owns 10% or more of the total combined voting power of all classes of Sears Holdings stock (or the stock of such other tenant) entitled to vote or 10% or more of the total value of all classes of Sears Holdings stock (or the stock of such other tenant). The Company’s Declaration of Trust provides for restrictions on ownership and transfer of Class A common shares, including restrictions on such ownership or transfer that would cause the rents we receive or accrue from Sears Holdings (or other tenants) to be treated as non-qualifying rent for purposes of the REIT gross income requirements. Nevertheless, such restrictions may not be effective in ensuring that rents we receive or accrue from Sears Holdings (or other tenants) will be treated as qualifying rent for purposes of REIT qualification requirements.

Dividends payable by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for some dividends.

The maximum U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to income from “qualified dividends” payable by U.S. corporations to U.S. shareholders that are individuals, trusts and estates is currently 20%. Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the reduced rates. Although these rules do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs, the more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate qualified dividends could cause investors who are individuals, trusts and estates to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the shares of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including the Class A common shares.

REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.

We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding any net capital gains, in order for us to qualify to be taxed as a REIT (assuming that certain other requirements are also satisfied) so that U.S. federal corporate income tax does not apply to earnings that we distribute. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement and qualify for taxation as a REIT but distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and including any net capital gains, we will be subject to U.S. federal corporate income tax on our undistributed net taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we distribute to our shareholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under U.S. federal tax laws. We intend to, at a minimum, make distributions to our shareholders to comply with the REIT requirements of the Code.

From time to time, we may generate taxable income greater than our cash flow as a result of differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash or the effect of nondeductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. If we do not have other funds available in these situations, we could be required to borrow funds on unfavorable terms, sell assets at disadvantageous prices or distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year; alternatively, we may distribute taxable stock dividends to our shareholders in the form of additional shares of stock – see “Seritage may from time to time make

- 20 -


 

distributions to our shareholders in the form of taxable stock dividends, which could result in shareholders incurring a tax liability without receiving sufficient cash to pay such tax”. These alternatives could increase our costs or reduce our equity. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of Class A common shares.

Restrictions in our indebtedness, including restrictions on our ability to incur additional indebtedness or make certain distributions, could preclude us from meeting the 90% distribution requirement. Decreases in funds from operations due to unfinanced expenditures for acquisitions of properties or increases in the number of Class A common shares outstanding without commensurate increases in funds from operations each would adversely affect our ability to maintain distributions to our shareholders. Moreover, the failure of Sears Holdings to make rental payments under the Master Lease would materially impair our ability to make distributions. Consequently, we may be unable to make distributions at the anticipated distribution rate or any other rate.

We may from time to time make distributions to our shareholders in the form of taxable stock dividends, which could result in shareholders incurring tax liability without receiving sufficient cash to pay such tax.

Although it has no current intention to do so, Seritage may in the future distribute taxable stock dividends to its shareholders in the form of additional shares of its stock. Taxable shareholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of the dividend as ordinary income to the extent of Seritage’s current and accumulated earnings and profits for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a result, shareholders may be required to pay income taxes with respect to such dividends in excess of the cash distributions received. If a U.S. shareholder sells Seritage shares that it receives as a dividend in order to pay this tax, the sales proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the dividend, depending on the market price of our shares at the time of the sale. Furthermore, with respect to certain non-U.S. shareholders, Seritage may be required to withhold U.S. federal income tax with respect to such dividends, including in respect of all or a portion of such dividend that is payable in its common stock.

Even if we remain qualified as a REIT, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow.

Even if we remain qualified for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain U.S. federal, state, local and foreign taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income and state, local or foreign income, property and transfer taxes. For example, in order to meet the REIT qualification requirements, Seritage may hold some of our assets or conduct certain of our activities through one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRSs”) or other subsidiary corporations that will be subject to federal, state and local corporate-level income taxes as regular C corporations. In addition, we may incur a 100% excise tax on transactions with a TRS if they are not conducted on an arm’s-length basis. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our shareholders.

Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive opportunities.

To qualify to be taxed as a REIT, we must ensure that, at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and “real estate assets” (as defined in the Code), including certain mortgage loans and securities. The remainder of our investments (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a TRS) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our total assets (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a TRS) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 20% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more TRSs. If the Company fails to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive investments. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our shareholders.

In addition to the asset tests set forth above, to qualify to be taxed as a REIT, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the amounts we distribute to our shareholders and the ownership of our shares of beneficial interest. We may be unable to pursue investments that would be otherwise advantageous to us in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for qualifying as a REIT. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to make certain attractive investments.

Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.

The REIT provisions of the Code substantially limit our ability to hedge our assets and liabilities. Any income from a hedging transaction that we enter into to manage risk of interest rate changes with respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets (or that we enter into to manage risk with respect to a prior hedge entered into in connection with property that has been disposed of or liabilities that have been extinguished) does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the 75% or 95% gross

- 21 -


 

income tests that apply to REITs, provided that certain identification requirements are met. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging transactions or fail to properly identify such transaction as a hedge, the income is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of both of the gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may be required to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through a TRS. This could increase the cost of our hedging activities because our TRS may be subject to tax on gains or expose us to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than we would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in our TRS will generally not provide any tax benefit, except that such losses could theoretically be carried back or forward against past or future taxable income in the TRS.

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs or other entities could have a negative effect on us.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury (the “Treasury”). Changes to the tax laws or interpretations thereof, with or without retroactive application, could materially and adversely affect our investors or us. We cannot predict how changes in the tax laws might affect our investors or us. New legislation, Treasury regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect our ability to qualify as a REIT or the U.S. federal income tax consequences to our investors and the Company of such qualification. In particular, the tax reform proposals being proposed by the new U.S. presidential administration and being considered in the U.S. Congress create uncertainty with respect to the future tax treatment of the Company and its investors.  For example, certain of the proposals may result in changes to the tax treatment of REITs and/or corporate entities. Other proposals could limit or eliminate the deduction for interest expense.  It is unclear whether, when, how and to what extent any of these (or other) proposals will be adopted.

Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Shares

The market price and trading volume of our common shares may be volatile.

The market price of our common shares may be volatile, and the trading volume in our common shares may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. Some of the factors that could negatively affect the market price of our common shares or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our common shares include:

 

actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly results of operations or distributions;

 

changes in our funds from operations or earnings estimates;

 

publication of research reports about us or the real estate or retail industries;

 

increases in market interest rates that may cause purchasers of our common shares to demand a higher yield;

 

changes in market valuations of similar companies;

 

adverse market reaction to any additional debt we may incur in the future;

 

actions by ESL or FCM and/or Fairholme Clients, or by institutional shareholders;

 

speculation in the press or investment community about our company or industry or the economy in general;

 

adverse performance by Sears Holdings, our primary tenant;

 

the occurrence of any of the other risk factors presented in this filing;

 

specific real estate market and real estate economic conditions; and

 

general market and economic conditions.

Future offerings of debt, which would be senior to our common shares upon liquidation, and/or preferred equity securities, which may be senior to our common shares for purposes of distributions or upon liquidation, may adversely affect the market price of our common shares.

In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources by making additional offerings of debt or preferred equity securities, including medium-term notes, trust preferred securities, senior or subordinated notes and preferred shares. Upon liquidation, holders of our debt securities and preferred shares and lenders with respect to other borrowings may receive distributions of our available assets prior to the holders of our common shares. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of our existing shareholders or reduce the market price of our common shares, or both. Holders of our common shares are not entitled to preemptive rights or other protections against dilution, and will have no voting rights in connection with the issuance of these securities. Our preferred shares of beneficial interest, if issued, could have a preference on liquidating distributions or a preference on distribution payments that could

- 22 -


 

limit our ability to make a distribution to the holders of our common shares. Since our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend in part on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Thus, our shareholders bear the risk of our future offerings reducing the market price of our common shares and diluting their holdings in us.

The transactions with Sears Holdings could give rise to disputes or other unfavorable effects, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Disputes with third parties could arise out of our transactions with Sears Holdings, and we could experience unfavorable reactions from employees, ratings agencies, regulators or other interested parties. These disputes and reactions of third parties could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, disputes between us and Sears Holdings (and our subsidiaries) could arise in connection with any of the Subscription, Distribution and Purchase and Sale Agreement, the Master Lease or other agreements.

A court could deem aspects of the transactions with Sears Holdings to be a fraudulent conveyance and void the transaction or impose substantial liabilities upon us.

A court could deem aspects of the transactions with Sears Holdings (such as the acquisition of properties from Sears Holdings) to be a fraudulent conveyance upon a subsequent legal challenge by unpaid creditors or a bankruptcy trustee of the debtor that made the conveyance. Fraudulent conveyances include transfers made or obligations incurred with the actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud current or future creditors, or transfers made or obligations incurred in exchange for less than reasonably equivalent value when the debtor was, or was rendered, insolvent, inadequately capitalized or unable to pay its debts as they become due. To remedy a fraudulent conveyance, a court could void the challenged transfer or obligation, requiring us to return consideration that we received, or impose substantial liabilities upon us for the benefit of unpaid creditors of the debtor that made the fraudulent conveyance, which could adversely affect our financial condition and our results of operations. Among other things, the court could require our shareholders to return to Sears Holdings some or all of the Class A common shares issued in the distribution. Whether a transaction is a fraudulent conveyance may vary depending upon, among other things, the jurisdiction whose law is being applied.

The number of shares available for future sale could adversely affect the market price of Class A common shares.

We cannot predict whether future issuances of Class A common shares, the availability of Class A common shares for resale in the open market or the conversion of Class C non-voting common shares into Class A common shares will decrease the market price per share of Class A common shares. Sales of a substantial number of Class A common shares in the public market, or the perception that such sales might occur, could adversely affect the market price of the Class A common shares.

Our earnings and cash distributions will affect the market price of Class A common shares.

We believe that the market value of a REIT’s equity securities is based primarily upon market perception of the REIT’s growth potential and its current and potential future cash distributions, whether from operations, sales, acquisitions, development or refinancing, and is secondarily based upon the value of the underlying assets. For these reasons, Class A common shares and Class C non-voting common shares may trade at prices that are higher or lower than the net asset value per share. To the extent we retain operating cash flow for investment purposes, working capital reserves or other purposes rather than distributing the cash flow to shareholders, these retained funds, while increasing the value of our underlying assets, may negatively impact the market price of Class A common shares. Our failure to meet market expectations with regard to future earnings and cash distributions would likely adversely affect the market price of Class A common shares and Class C non-voting common shares.

ITEM 1B.

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

There are no unresolved comments from the staff of the SEC as of the date of this Annual Report.

 

 

 

- 23 -


 

ITEM 2.

PROPERTIES

As of December 31, 2016, our portfolio included 235 Wholly Owned Properties totaling over 36.8 million square feet of GLA across 49 states and Puerto Rico, and 50% interests in 31 JV Properties totaling over 5.4 million square feet of GLA across 17 states.  The following tables set forth certain information regarding our Wholly Owned Properties and JV Properties based on signed leases as of December 31, 2016, including signed but not yet open leases (“SNO leases”):

 

Wholly-Owned Properties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recapture

 

 

 

 

GLA (3)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City

 

State

 

Rights

(1)(2)

 

 

Sears or

Kmart

 

Total

 

 

Sears

Holdings

 

 

Third

Parties

 

 

Vacant

 

 

Significant Third Party Tenants (3)

 

Leased (3)

 

1

 

Anchorage

 

AK

 

 

100%

 

 

Sears

 

 

257,700

 

 

 

204,100

 

 

 

42,700

 

 

 

10,900

 

 

Lands' End, Nordstrom Rack

 

 

95.8

%

2

 

Cullman (5)

 

AL

 

n/a

 

 

Kmart

 

 

98,500

 

 

 

98,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

3

 

North Little Rock

 

AR

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

185,700

 

 

 

185,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

4

 

Russellville

 

AR

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

88,000

 

 

 

88,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

5

 

Flagstaff

 

AZ

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

66,200

 

 

 

66,200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

6

 

Mesa

 

AZ

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

121,900

 

 

 

121,900

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

7

 

Peoria

 

AZ

 

n/a

 

 

n/a

 

 

104,400

 

 

 

 

 

 

104,400

 

 

 

 

 

At Home

 

 

100.0

%

8

 

Phoenix

 

AZ

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

144,200

 

 

 

144,200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

9

 

Phoenix

 

AZ

 

n/a

 

 

n/a

 

 

151,200

 

 

 

 

 

 

151,200

 

 

 

 

 

At Home

 

 

100.0

%

10

 

Prescott

 

AZ

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

102,300

 

 

 

102,300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

11

 

Sierra Vista

 

AZ

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

94,700

 

 

 

94,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

12

 

Sierra Vista (5)

 

AZ

 

n/a

 

 

Kmart

 

 

86,100

 

 

 

86,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

13

 

Tucson

 

AZ

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

250,100

 

 

 

250,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

14

 

Yuma

 

AZ

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

90,400

 

 

 

90,400

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

15

 

Antioch

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

95,200

 

 

 

95,200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

16

 

Big Bear Lake

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

80,400

 

 

 

69,300

 

 

 

7,400

 

 

 

3,700

 

 

Radio Shack, Subway, Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

95.4

%

17

 

Carson (4)

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

181,200

 

 

 

115,100

 

 

 

66,100

 

 

 

 

 

Applebee’s, Burlington Stores, Chick-Fil-A, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Jersey Mike’s, Smash Burger

 

 

100.0

%

18

 

Chula Vista

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

250,100

 

 

 

250,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

19

 

Citrus Heights

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

289,500

 

 

 

280,700

 

 

 

8,800

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End

 

 

100.0

%

20

 

Delano

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

86,100

 

 

 

86,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

21

 

El Cajon

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

286,500

 

 

 

275,700

 

 

 

10,800

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End

 

 

100.0

%

22

 

El Centro

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

139,700

 

 

 

139,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

23

 

Fairfield

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

164,100

 

 

 

159,300

 

 

 

4,800

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End

 

 

100.0

%

24

 

Florin

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

272,700

 

 

 

272,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

25

 

Fresno

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

217,600

 

 

 

217,600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

26

 

McKinleyville

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

94,800

 

 

 

94,800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

27

 

Merced

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

92,600

 

 

 

92,600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

28

 

Montclair

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

174,700

 

 

 

174,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

29

 

Moreno Valley

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

169,400

 

 

 

169,400

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

30

 

Newark

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

145,800

 

 

 

145,800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

31

 

North Hollywood (4)

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

151,000

 

 

 

108,300

 

 

 

42,700

 

 

 

 

 

Burlington Stores

 

 

100.0

%

32

 

Northridge

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

291,800

 

 

 

256,900

 

 

 

34,900

 

 

 

 

 

Ashley Furniture

 

 

100.0

%

33

 

Palm Desert

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

151,500

 

 

 

151,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

34

 

Ramona

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

107,600

 

 

 

87,000

 

 

 

14,700

 

 

 

5,900

 

 

Dollar Tree

 

 

94.5

%

35

 

Riverside

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

214,200

 

 

 

202,000

 

 

 

12,200

 

 

 

 

 

Bank of America

 

 

100.0

%

36

 

Riverside (6)

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

132,600

 

 

 

94,500

 

 

 

38,100

 

 

 

 

 

Jack in the Box, Stater Brothers

 

 

100.0

%

37

 

Roseville

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

139,000

 

 

 

131,400

 

 

 

7,600

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End

 

 

100.0

%

38

 

Salinas

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

133,000

 

 

 

133,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

39

 

San Bernardino

 

CA

 

 

100%

 

 

Sears

 

 

264,700

 

 

 

264,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

40

 

San Bruno

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

276,600

 

 

 

267,900

 

 

 

8,700

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End

 

 

100.0

%

 

- 24 -


 

 

Wholly-Owned Properties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recapture

 

 

 

 

GLA (3)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City

 

State

 

Rights

(1)(2)

 

 

Sears or

Kmart

 

Total

 

 

Sears

Holdings

 

 

Third

Parties

 

 

Vacant

 

 

Significant Third Party Tenants (3)

 

Leased (3)

 

41

 

San Diego

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

194,800

 

 

 

164,800

 

 

 

30,000

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End, Williams-Sonoma

 

 

100.0

%

42

 

San Jose

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

262,500

 

 

 

262,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

43

 

Santa Cruz (4)

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

119,600

 

 

 

53,400

 

 

 

66,200

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End, Petco, TJ Maxx

 

 

100.0

%

44

 

Santa Maria

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

108,600

 

 

 

108,600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

45

 

Santa Monica (4)

 

CA

 

n/a

 

 

n/a

 

 

117,800

 

 

 

112,000

 

 

 

5,800

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End

 

 

100.0

%

46

 

Santa Paula

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Kmart

 

 

71,300

 

 

 

71,300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

47

 

Temecula

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

115,600

 

 

 

115,600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

48

 

Thousand Oaks

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

164,000

 

 

 

50,300

 

 

 

113,700

 

 

 

 

 

Dave & Busters, DSW, Nordstrom Rack

 

 

100.0

%

49

 

Ventura

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

178,600

 

 

 

171,900

 

 

 

6,700

 

 

 

 

 

Lands' End

 

 

100.0

%

50

 

Visalia

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

75,600

 

 

 

75,600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

51

 

West Covina

 

CA

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

142,000

 

 

 

142,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

52

 

Westminster

 

CA

 

 

100%

 

 

Sears

 

 

197,900

 

 

 

197,900

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

53

 

Lakewood

 

CO

 

 

50%

 

 

Sears

 

 

153,000

 

 

 

153,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

100.0

%

54

 

Thornton (5)

 

CO

 

n/a

 

 

Kmart