ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Material factors that may adversely affect our business, operations and financial condition are summarized below.

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS' VALUE AND INCOME FLUCTUATE DUE TO VARIOUS FACTORS.

The value of real estate fluctuates depending on conditions in the general economy and the real estate business. These conditions may also limit our revenues and available cash.

The factors that affect the value of our real estate investments include, among other things:

The rents we receive and the occupancy levels at our properties may decline as a result of adverse changes in any of these factors. If rental revenues and/or occupancy levels decline, we generally would expect to have less cash available to pay indebtedness and for distribution to shareholders. In addition, some of our major expenses, including mortgage payments, real estate taxes and maintenance costs, generally do not decline when the related rents decline.

Capital markets and economic conditions can materially affect our financial condition and results of operations and the value of our debt and equity securities.

There are many factors that can affect the value of our debt and equity securities, including the state of the capital markets and economy. In the second half of 2007 the residential mortgage and capital markets began showing signs of stress, primarily in the form of escalating default rates on sub-prime mortgages, declining home values and increasing inventory nationwide. In 2008, the “credit crisis” spread to the broader commercial credit and financial markets resulting in illiquidity and volatility in the bond and equity markets. We are currently in an economic recession which has negatively affected all businesses including ours. These conditions have contributed to volatility of unprecedented levels. As a result, the cost and availability of credit has been and may continue to be adversely affected by illiquid credit markets and wider credit spreads. Concern about the stability of the markets generally and the strength of counterparties specifically has led many lenders and institutional investors to reduce, and in some cases, cease to provide funding to borrowers, and may adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition, and the liquidity and financial condition of our tenants. If these market conditions continue, they may limit our ability and the ability of our tenants, to timely refinance maturing liabilities and access the capital markets to meet liquidity needs, resulting in materially adverse effects on our financial condition and results of operations and the value of our debt and equity securities.

Real estate is a competitive business.

Our business segments – Office, Retail, Merchandise Mart, Toys and Other – operate in highly competitive environments. We have a large concentration of properties in the New York City metropolitan area and in the Washington, DC / Northern Virginia areas. We compete with a large number of real estate property owners and developers, some of which may be willing to accept lower returns on their investments. Principal factors of competition are rents charged, attractiveness of location, the quality of the property and the breadth and quality of services provided. Our success depends upon, among other factors, trends of the national, regional and local economies, financial condition and operating results of current and prospective tenants and customers, availability and cost of capital, construction and renovation costs, taxes, governmental regulations, legislation and population trends.

We depend on leasing space to tenants on economically favorable terms and collecting rent from tenants who may not be able to pay.

Our financial results depend significantly on leasing space in our properties to tenants on economically favorable terms. In addition, because a substantial majority of our income comes from renting of real property, our income, funds available to pay indebtedness and funds available for distribution to shareholders will decrease if a significant number of our tenants cannot pay their rent or if we are not able to maintain occupancy levels on favorable terms. If a tenant does not pay its rent, we may not be able to enforce our rights as landlord without delays and may incur substantial legal costs. During periods of economic adversity such as we are currently experiencing, there may be an increase in the number of tenants that cannot pay their rent and an increase in vacancy rates.

Bankruptcy or insolvency of tenants may decrease our revenues and available cash.

From time to time, some of our tenants have declared bankruptcy, and other tenants may declare bankruptcy or become insolvent in the future. In the case of our shopping centers, the bankruptcy or insolvency of a major tenant could cause us to suffer lower revenues and operational difficulties, including leasing the remainder of the property. As a result, the bankruptcy or insolvency of a major tenant could result in a lower level of net income and funds available for the payment of indebtedness or for distribution to shareholders. Circuit City, which leases 12 locations in our Retail Properties segment aggregating 380,000 square feet, approximately $8,100,000 of annual property rental income, recently announced that it is liquidating, pursuant to Bankruptcy Court approval. As a result, we wrote-off approximately $10,383,000 of unamortized costs at December 31, 2008, including tenant improvements, leasing commissions and receivables arising from the straight-lining of rent. The current economic environment may result in additional tenant bankruptcies and write-offs, which could, in the aggregate, be material to our results of operations in a particular period.

We may incur costs to comply with environmental laws.

Our operations and properties are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations concerning the protection of the environment, including air and water quality, hazardous or toxic substances and health and safety. Under some environmental laws, a current or previous owner or operator of real estate may be required to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances released at a property. The owner or operator may also be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage or personal injuries and for investigation and clean-up costs incurred by those parties because of the contamination. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of the release of the substances or caused the release. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination may impair our ability to sell or lease real estate or to borrow using the real estate as collateral. Other laws and regulations govern indoor and outdoor air quality including those that can require the abatement or removal of asbestos-containing materials in the event of damage, demolition, renovation or remodeling and also govern emissions of and exposure to asbestos fibers in the air. The maintenance and removal of lead paint and certain electrical equipment containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and underground storage tanks are also regulated by federal and state laws. We are also subject to risks associated with human exposure to chemical or biological contaminants such as molds, pollens, viruses and bacteria which, above certain levels, can be alleged to be connected to allergic or other health effects and symptoms in susceptible individuals. We could incur fines for environmental compliance and be held liable for the costs of remedial action with respect to the foregoing regulated substances or tanks or related claims arising out of environmental contamination or human exposure to contamination at or from our properties.

Each of our properties has been subject to varying degrees of environmental assessment. The environmental assessments did not, as of this date, reveal any environmental condition material to our business. However, identification of new compliance concerns or undiscovered areas of contamination, changes in the extent or known scope of contamination, discovery of additional sites, human exposure to the contamination or changes in cleanup or compliance requirements could result in significant costs to us.

Inflation or deflation may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Although neither inflation nor deflation has materially impacted our operations in the recent past, increased inflation could have a pronounced negative impact on our mortgages and interest rates and general and administrative expenses, as these costs could increase at a rate higher than our rents. Inflation could also have an adverse effect on consumer spending which could impact our tenants’ sales and, in turn, our percentage rents, where applicable. Conversely, deflation could lead to downward pressure on rents and other sources of income.

Some of our potential losses may not be covered by insurance.

We carry commercial liability and all risk property insurance ((i) fire, (ii) flood, (iii) extended coverage, (iv) “acts of terrorism” as defined in the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (“TRIPRA”) , which expires in December 2014, and (v) rental loss insurance) with respect to our assets. Our New York Office, Washington, DC Office, Retail and Merchandise Mart divisions have $2.0 billion of per occurrence all risk property insurance coverage, including terrorism coverage in effect through September 15, 2009. Our California properties have earthquake insurance with coverage of $150,000,000 per occurrence, subject to a deductible in the amount of 5% of the value of the affected property, and a $150,000,000 annual aggregate.

In June 2007 we formed Penn Plaza Insurance Company, LLC (“PPIC”), a wholly owned consolidated subsidiary, to act as a re-insurer with respect to a portion of our earthquake insurance coverage and as a direct insurer for coverage for “certified” acts of terrorism and for nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological (“NBCR”) acts, as defined by TRIPRA. Coverage for “certified” acts of terrorism is fully reinsured by third party insurance companies and the Federal government with no exposure to PPIC. Prior to the formation of PPIC, we were uninsured for NBCR losses. Subsequently, we have $2.0 billion of NBCR coverage under TRIPRA, for which PPIC is responsible for 15% of each NBCR loss and the insurance company deductible of $1,000,000. We are ultimately responsible for any loss borne by PPIC.

We continue to monitor the state of the insurance market and the scope and costs of coverage for acts of terrorism. However, we cannot anticipate what coverage will be available on commercially reasonable terms in future policy years.

Our debt instruments, consisting of mortgage loans secured by our properties (which are generally non-recourse to us), senior unsecured notes, exchangeable senior debentures, convertible senior debentures and revolving credit agreements contain customary covenants requiring us to maintain insurance. Although we believe that we have adequate insurance coverage for purposes of these agreements, we may not be able to obtain an equivalent amount of coverage at reasonable costs in the future. Further, if lenders insist on greater coverage than we are able to obtain it could adversely affect our ability to finance and/or refinance our properties and expand our portfolio.

Because we operate one hotel property, we face the risks associated with the hospitality industry.

We own the Hotel Pennsylvania in New York City. If the hotel does not generate sufficient receipts, our cash flow would decrease, which could reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to shareholders. The following factors, among others, are common to the hotel industry, and may reduce the revenues generated by our hotel property:

Because of the ownership structure of our hotel, we face potential adverse effects from changes to the applicable tax laws.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, REITs like us are not allowed to operate hotels directly or indirectly. Accordingly, we lease The Hotel Pennsylvania to our taxable REIT subsidiary, or TRS. While the TRS structure allows the economic benefits of ownership to flow to us, the TRS is subject to tax on its income from the operations of the hotel at the federal and state level. In addition, the TRS is subject to detailed tax regulations that affect how it may be capitalized and operated. If the tax laws applicable to a TRS are modified, we may be forced to modify the structure for owning the hotel, and such changes may adversely affect the cash flows from the hotel. In addition, the Internal Revenue Service, the United States Treasury Department and Congress frequently review federal income tax legislation, and we cannot predict whether, when or to what extent new federal tax laws, regulations, interpretations or rulings will be adopted. Any of such actions may prospectively or retroactively modify the tax treatment of the TRS and, therefore, may adversely affect our after-tax returns from the hotel.

Compliance or failure to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act or other safety regulations and requirements could result in substantial costs.  

The Americans with Disabilities Act generally requires that public buildings, including our properties, be made accessible to disabled persons. Noncompliance could result in the imposition of fines by the federal government or the award of damages to private litigants. From time to time persons have asserted claims against us with respect to some of our properties under this Act, but to date such claims have not resulted in any material expense or liability. If, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, we are required to make substantial alterations and capital expenditures in one or more of our properties, including the removal of access barriers, it could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations, as well as the amount of cash available for distribution to shareholders.

Our properties are subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local fire and life safety requirements. If we fail to comply with these requirements, we could incur fines or private damage awards. We do not know whether existing requirements will change or whether compliance with future requirements will require significant unanticipated expenditures that will affect our cash flow and results of operations.

OUR INVESTMENTS ARE CONCENTRATED IN THE NEW YORK CITY METROPOLITAN AREA AND WASHINGTON, DC / NORTHERN VIRGINIA AREAS. CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING THESE AREAS GENERALLY COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR BUSINESS.

A significant portion of our properties are in the New York City / New Jersey metropolitan areas and Washington, DC / Northern Virginia areas are affected by the economic cycles and risks inherent to those areas.

During 2008, approximately 71% of our EBITDA, excluding items that affect comparability, came from properties located in the New York City / New Jersey metropolitan areas and the Washington, DC / Northern Virginia areas. We may continue to concentrate a significant portion of our future acquisitions in these areas or in other geographic real estate markets in the United States or abroad. Real estate markets are subject to economic downturns, as they have been in the past, and we cannot predict how economic conditions will impact these markets in both the short and long term. Declines in the economy or a decline in the real estate markets in these areas could hurt our financial performance and the value of our properties. The factors affecting economic conditions in these regions include:

It is impossible for us to assess with certainty the future effects of the current adverse trends in the economic and investment climates of the geographic areas in which we concentrate, and more generally of the United States, or the real estate markets in these areas. If these conditions persist or if there is any further local, national or global economic downturn, our businesses and future profitability will be adversely affected.

Terrorist attacks, such as those of September   11, 2001 in New York City and the Washington, DC area, may adversely affect the value of our properties and our ability to generate cash flow.

We have significant investments in large metropolitan areas, including the New York, Washington, DC, Chicago, Boston and San Francisco metropolitan areas. In the aftermath of a terrorist attack, tenants in these areas may choose to relocate their businesses to less populated, lower-profile areas of the United States that may be perceived to be less likely targets of future terrorist activity and fewer customers may choose to patronize businesses in these areas. This in turn would trigger a decrease in the demand for space in these areas, which could increase vacancies in our properties and force us to lease space on less favorable terms. As a result, the value of our properties and the level of our revenues and cash flows could decline materially.

WE MAY   ACQUIRE OR SELL ADDITIONAL ASSETS OR ENTITIES OR DEVELOP ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES. OUR FAILURE OR INABILITY TO CONSUMMATE THESE TRANSACTIONS OR MANAGE THE RESULTS OF THESE TRANSACTIONS COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL RESULTS.

We have grown rapidly through acquisitions. We may not be able to maintain this rapid growth and our failure to do so could adversely affect our stock price.

We have experienced rapid growth in recent years, increasing our total assets from approximately $565 million at December 31, 1997 to approximately $21.4 billion at December 31, 2008. We may not be able to maintain a similar rate of growth in the future or manage growth effectively. Our failure to do so may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and ability to pay dividends to shareholders.

We may acquire or develop properties or acquire other real estate related companies and this may create risks.

We may acquire or develop properties or acquire other real estate related companies when we believe that an acquisition or development is consistent with our business strategies. We may not, however, succeed in consummating desired acquisitions or in completing developments on time or within budget. In addition, we may face competition in pursuing acquisition or development opportunities that could increase our costs. When we do pursue a project or acquisition, we may not succeed in leasing newly developed or acquired properties at rents sufficient to cover our costs of acquisition and development or in operating the businesses we acquired. Difficulties in integrating acquisitions may prove costly or time-consuming and could divert management’s attention. Acquisitions or developments in new markets or industries where we do not have the same level of market knowledge may result in poorer than anticipated performance. We may also abandon acquisition or development opportunities that we have begun pursuing and consequently fail to recover expenses already incurred and have devoted management time to a matter not consummated. Furthermore, acquisitions of new properties or companies will expose us to the liabilities of those properties or companies, some of which we may not be aware at the time of acquisition. In addition, development of our existing properties presents similar risks.

From time to time we have made, and in the future we may seek to make, one or more material acquisitions. The announcement of such a material acquisition may result in a rapid and significant decline in the price of our common shares.

We are continuously looking at material transactions that we will believe will maximize shareholder value. However, an announcement by us of one or more significant acquisitions could result in a quick and significant decline in the price of our common shares and convertible and exchangeable securities.

It may be difficult to buy and sell real estate quickly.

Real estate investments are relatively difficult to buy and sell quickly. Consequently, we may have limited ability to vary our portfolio promptly in response to changes in economic or other conditions.

We may not be permitted to dispose of certain properties or pay down the debt associated with those properties when we might otherwise desire to do so without incurring additional costs.

As part of an acquisition of a property, including our January 1, 2002 acquisition of Charles E. Smith Commercial Realty L.P.’s 13.0 million square foot portfolio, we may agree, and in the case of Charles E. Smith Commercial Realty L.P. did agree, with the seller that we will not dispose of the acquired properties or reduce the mortgage indebtedness on them for a period of 12 years, unless we pay certain of the resulting tax costs of the seller. These agreements could result in us holding on to properties that we would otherwise sell and not pay down or refinance indebtedness that we would otherwise pay down or refinance.

On January   1, 2002, we completed the acquisition of the 66% interest in Charles E. Smith Commercial Realty L.P. that we did not previously own. The terms of the merger restrict our ability to sell or otherwise dispose of, or to finance or refinance, the properties formerly owned by Charles E. Smith Commercial Realty L.P., which could result in our inability to sell these properties at an opportune time and increased costs to us.

As indicated above, subject to limited exceptions, we are restricted from selling or otherwise transferring or disposing of certain properties located in the Crystal City area of Arlington, Virginia for a period of 12 years. These restrictions, which currently cover approximately 13.0 million square feet of space, could result in our inability to sell these properties at an opportune time and increase costs to us.

From time to time we make investments in companies over which we do not have sole control. Some of these companies operate in industries that differ from our current operations, with different risks than investing in real estate.

From time to time we make debt or equity investments in other companies that we may not control or over which we may not have sole control. These investments include but are not limited to,  Alexander’s, Inc., Toys “R” Us, Lexington Realty Trust, and equity and mezzanine investments in other entities that have significant real estate assets. Although these businesses generally have a significant real estate component, some of them operate in businesses that are different from our primary lines of business including, without limitation, operating or managing toy stores and department stores. Consequently, investments in these businesses, among other risks, subjects us to the operating and financial risks of industries other than real estate and to the risk that we do not have sole control over the operations of these businesses. From time to time we may make additional investments in or acquire other entities that may subject us to additional similar risks. Investments in entities over which we do not have sole control, including joint ventures, present additional risks such as having differing objectives than our partners or the entities in which we invest, or becoming involved in disputes, or competing with those persons. In addition, we rely on the internal controls and financial reporting controls of these entities and their failure to comply with applicable standards may adversely affect us.

We are subject to risks that affect the general retail environment.

A substantial portion of our properties are in the retail shopping center real estate market and we have a significant investment in retailers such as Toys “R” Us. See “ Our investment in Toys “R” Us, Inc. subjects us to risks different from our other lines of business and may result in increased seasonality and volatility in our reported earnings ” below. This means that we are subject to factors that affect the retail environment generally, including the level of consumer spending and consumer confidence, the threat of terrorism and increasing competition from discount retailers, outlet malls, retail websites and catalog companies. These factors could adversely affect the financial condition of our retail tenants and the retailers in which we hold an investment and the willingness of retailers to lease space in our shopping centers, and in turn, adversely affect us.

We depend upon our anchor tenants to attract shoppers.

We own several regional malls and other shopping centers that are typically anchored by well-known department stores and other tenants who generate shopping traffic at the mall or shopping center. The value of our properties would be adversely affected if tenants or anchors failed to meet their contractual obligations, sought concessions in order to continue operations or ceased their operations. If the sales of stores operating in our properties were to decline significantly due to economic conditions, closing of anchors or for other reasons, tenants may be unable to pay their minimum rents or expense recovery charges. In the event of a default by a tenant or anchor, we may experience delays and costs in enforcing our rights as landlord.

Our investment in Toys “R” Us, Inc. subjects us to risks different from our other lines of business and may result in increased seasonality and volatility in our reported earnings.

On July 21, 2005, a joint venture that we own equally with Bain Capital and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. acquired Toys “R” Us, Inc. (“Toys”). Because Toys is a retailer, its operations subject us to the risks of a retail company that are different than those presented by our other lines of business. The business of Toys is highly seasonal. Historically, Toys fourth quarter net income accounts for more than 80% of its fiscal year net income. In addition, our fiscal year ends on December 31 whereas, as is common for retailers, Toys’ fiscal year ends on the Saturday nearest to January 31. Therefore, we record our pro-rata share of Toys’ net earnings on a one-quarter lag basis. For example, our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2008 include Toys’ financial results for its first, second and third quarters ended November 1, 2008, as well as Toys’ fourth quarter results of 2007. Because of the seasonality of Toys, our reported net income shows increased volatility. We may also, in the future and from time to time, invest in other businesses that may report financial results that are more volatile than our historical financial results.

We invest in subordinated or mezzanine debt of certain entities that have significant real estate assets. These investments involve greater risk of loss than investments in senior mortgage loans.

We invest, and may in the future invest, in subordinated or mezzanine debt of certain entities that have significant real estate assets. As of December 31, 2008, our mezzanine debt securities have an aggregate carrying amount of $472,539,000. These investments, which are subordinate to the mortgage loans secured by the real property, are generally secured by pledges of the equity interests of the entities owning the underlying real estate. These investments involve greater risk of loss than investments in senior mortgage loans which are secured by real property. If a borrower defaults on debt to us or on debt senior to us, or declares bankruptcy, we may not be able to recover some or all of our investment. The value of the assets securing or supporting our investments could deteriorate over time due to factors beyond our control, including acts or omissions by owners, changes in business, economic or market conditions, or foreclosure. Such deteriorations in value may result in the recognition of impairment losses on our statement of operations. In addition, there may be significant delays and costs associated with the process of foreclosing on collateral securing or supporting these investments.

We evaluate the collectibility of both interest and principal of each of our loans, if circumstances warrant, in determining whether they are impaired. A loan is impaired when based on current information and events, it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the existing contractual terms. When a loan is impaired, the amount of the loss accrual is calculated by comparing the carrying amount of the investment to the value determined by discounting the expected future cash flows at the loan’s effective interest rate or, as a practical expedient, to the value of the collateral if repayment of the loan is collateral dependent. There can be no assurance that our estimates of collectible amounts will not change over time or that they will be representative of the amounts we actually collect, including amounts we would collect if we chose to sell these investments before their maturity. If we collect less than our estimates, we will record impairment losses which could be material.

We invest in marketable equity securities of companies that have significant real estate assets. The value of these investments may decline as a result of operating performance or economic or market conditions.

We invest, and may in the future invest, in marketable equity securities of publicly-traded real estate companies or companies that have significant real estate assets. During 2008, we recognized $76,352,000 of impairment losses on our investments in marketable securities, based on the severity and duration of the declines in the market value of these securities. As of December 31, 2008, our marketable securities have an aggregate carrying amount of $334,322,000. Significant declines in the value of these investments due to operating performance or economic or market conditions may result in the recognition of additional impairment losses which could be material.

OUR ORGANIZATIONAL AND FINANCIAL STRUCTURE GIVES RISE TO OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL RISKS.

We May   Not Be Able to Obtain Capital to Make Investments.

We depend primarily on external financing to fund the growth of our business. This is because one of the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, for a REIT is that it distributes 90% of its net taxable income, excluding net capital gains, to its shareholders. There is a separate requirement to distribute net capital gains or pay a corporate level tax in lieu thereof. Our access to debt or equity financing depends on the willingness of third parties to lend or make equity investments and on conditions in the capital markets generally. As a result of the current capital markets and environmental conditions referred to above, we and other companies in the real estate industry are currently experiencing limited availability of financing and there can be no assurances as to when more financing will be available. Although we believe that we will be able to finance any investments we may wish to make in the foreseeable future, new financing may not be available on acceptable terms.

For information about our available sources of funds, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources” and the notes to the consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Vornado Realty Trust depends on dividends and distributions from its direct and indirect subsidiaries. The creditors and preferred security holders of these subsidiaries are entitled to amounts payable to them by the subsidiaries before the subsidiaries may pay any dividends or distributions to Vornado Realty Trust.

Substantially all of Vornado Realty Trust’s assets are held through its Operating Partnership that holds substantially all of its properties and assets through subsidiaries. The Operating Partnership’s cash flow is dependent on cash distributions to it by its subsidiaries, and in turn, substantially all of Vornado Realty Trust’s cash flow is dependent on cash distributions to it by the Operating Partnership. The creditors of each of Vornado Realty Trust’s direct and indirect subsidiaries are entitled to payment of that subsidiary’s obligations to them, when due and payable, before distributions may be made by that subsidiary to its equity holders. Thus, the Operating Partnership’s ability to make distributions to holders of its units depends on its subsidiaries’ ability first to satisfy their obligations to their creditors and then to make distributions to the Operating Partnership. Likewise, Vornado Realty Trust’s ability to pay dividends to holders of common and preferred shares depends on the Operating Partnership’s ability first to satisfy its obligations to its creditors and make distributions payable to holders of preferred units and then to make distributions to Vornado Realty Trust.

Furthermore, the holders of preferred units of the Operating Partnership are entitled to receive preferred distributions before payment of distributions to holders of common units of the Operating Partnership, including Vornado Realty Trust. Thus, Vornado Realty Trust’s ability to pay cash dividends to holders of its shares and satisfy its debt obligations depends on the Operating Partnership’s ability first to satisfy its obligations to its creditors and make distributions payable to holders of preferred units and then to make distributions to Vornado Realty Trust. As of December 31, 2008, there were eight series of preferred units of the Operating Partnership not held by Vornado Realty Trust that have preference over Vornado Realty Trust common shares with a total liquidation value of $372,094,000.

In addition, Vornado Realty Trust’s participation in any distribution of the assets of any of its direct or indirect subsidiaries upon the liquidation, reorganization or insolvency, is only after the claims of the creditors, including trade creditors and preferred security holders, are satisfied.

We have indebtedness, and this indebtedness, and its cost, may increase and debt refinancing may not be available on acceptable terms.

As of December 31, 2008, we had approximately $15.846 billion of total debt outstanding, including our pro rata share of debt of partially owned entities. Our ratio of total debt to total enterprise value was approximately 59%. When we say “enterprise value” in the preceding sentence, we mean market equity value of Vornado Realty Trust’s common and preferred shares plus total debt outstanding, including our pro rata share of debt of partially owned entities. In the future, we may incur additional debt to finance acquisitions or property developments and thus increase our ratio of total debt to total enterprise value. If our level of indebtedness increases, there may be an increased risk of a credit rating downgrade or a default on our obligations that could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, in a rising interest rate environment, the cost of existing variable rate debt and any new debt or other market rate security or instrument may increase. Furthermore, in the current “credit crisis” environment, we may not be able to refinance existing indebtedness in sufficient amounts or on acceptable terms.

Covenants in our debt instruments could adversely affect our financial condition and our acquisitions and development activities.

The mortgages on our properties contain customary covenants such as those that limit our ability, without the prior consent of the lender, to further mortgage the applicable property or to discontinue insurance coverage. Our unsecured credit facilities, unsecured debt securities and other loans that we may obtain in the future contain customary restrictions, requirements and other limitations on our ability to incur indebtedness, including covenants that limit our ability to incur debt based upon the level of our ratio of total debt to total assets, our ratio of secured debt to total assets, our ratio of EBITDA to interest expense, and fixed charges, and that require us to maintain a certain level of unencumbered assets to unsecured debt. Our ability to borrow under these facilities is subject to compliance with certain financial and other covenants. In addition, failure to comply with our covenants could cause a default under the applicable debt instrument, and we may then be required to repay such debt with capital from other sources. Under those circumstances, other sources of capital may not be available to us, or be available only on unattractive terms. Additionally, our ability to satisfy current or prospective lenders’ insurance requirements may be adversely affected if lenders generally insist upon greater insurance coverage against acts of terrorism than is available to us in the marketplace or on commercially reasonable terms.

We rely on debt financing, including borrowings under our unsecured credit facilities, issuances of unsecured debt securities and debt secured by individual properties, to finance acquisitions and development activities and for working capital. If we are unable to obtain debt financing from these or other sources, or refinance existing indebtedness upon maturity, our financial condition and results of operations would likely be adversely affected. If we breach covenants in our debt agreements, the lenders can declare a default and, if the debt is secured, can take possession of the property securing the defaulted loan.

Vornado Realty Trust may fail to qualify or remain qualified as a REIT and may be required to pay income taxes at corporate rates.

Although we believe that we will remain organized and will continue to operate so as to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we may fail to remain qualified in this way. Qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes is governed by highly technical and complex provisions of the Internal Revenue Code for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. Our qualification as a REIT also depends on various facts and circumstances that are not entirely within our control. In addition, legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions may significantly change the tax laws with respect to the requirements for qualification as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of qualifying as a REIT.

If, with respect to any taxable year, we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT and do not qualify under statutory relief provisions, we could not deduct distributions to shareholders in computing our taxable income and would have to pay federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates. The federal income tax payable would include any applicable alternative minimum tax. If we had to pay federal income tax, the amount of money available to distribute to shareholders and pay our indebtedness would be reduced for the year or years involved, and we would no longer be required to make distributions to shareholders. In addition, we would also be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which qualification was lost, unless we were entitled to relief under the relevant statutory provisions. Although we currently intend to operate in a manner designed to allow us to qualify as a REIT, future economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations may cause us to revoke the REIT election or fail to qualify as a REIT.

We face possible adverse changes in tax laws, which may result in an increase in our tax liability.

From time to time changes in state and local tax laws or regulations are enacted, which may result in an increase in our tax liability. The shortfall in tax revenues for states and municipalities in recent years may lead to an increase in the frequency and size of such changes. If such changes occur, we may be required to pay additional taxes on our assets or income. These increased tax costs could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations and the amount of cash available for payment of dividends.

Loss of our key personnel could harm our operations and adversely affect the value of our common shares.

We are dependent on the efforts of Steven Roth, the Chairman of the Board of Trustees and Chief Executive Officer of Vornado Realty Trust, and Michael D. Fascitelli, the President of Vornado Realty Trust. While we believe that we could find replacements for these key personnel, the loss of their services could harm our operations and adversely affect the value of our common shares.

VORNADO REALTY TRUST'S CHARTER DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE LAW MAY HINDER ANY ATTEMPT TO ACQUIRE US.

Our Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust sets limits on the ownership of our shares.

Generally, for Vornado Realty Trust to maintain its qualification as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code, not more than 50% in value of the outstanding shares of beneficial interest of Vornado Realty Trust may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals at any time during the last half of Vornado Realty Trust’s taxable year. The Internal Revenue Code defines “individuals” for purposes of the requirement described in the preceding sentence to include some types of entities. Under Vornado Realty Trust’s Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust, as amended, no person may own more than 6.7% of the outstanding common shares of any class, or 9.9% of the outstanding preferred shares of any class, with some exceptions for persons who held common shares in excess of the 6.7% limit before Vornado Realty Trust adopted the limit and other persons approved by Vornado Realty Trust’s Board of Trustees. These restrictions on transferability and ownership may delay, deter or prevent a change in control of Vornado Realty Trust or other transaction that might involve a premium price or otherwise be in the best interest of the shareholders. We refer to Vornado Realty Trust’s Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust, as amended, as the “declaration of trust.”

We have a classified Board of Trustees and that may reduce the likelihood of certain takeover transactions.

Vornado Realty Trust’s Board of Trustees is divided into three classes of trustees. Trustees of each class are chosen for three-year staggered terms. Staggered terms of trustees may reduce the possibility of a tender offer or an attempt to change control of Vornado Realty Trust, even though a tender offer or change in control might be in the best interest of Vornado Realty Trust’s shareholders.

We may issue additional shares in a manner that could adversely affect the likelihood of certain takeover transactions.

Vornado Realty Trust’s declaration of trust authorizes the Board of Trustees to:

The Board of Trustees could establish a series of preferred shares whose terms could delay, deter or prevent a change in control of Vornado Realty Trust or other transaction that might involve a premium price or otherwise be in the best interest of Vornado Realty Trust’s shareholders, although the Board of Trustees does not now intend to establish a series of preferred shares of this kind. Vornado Realty Trust’s declaration of trust and bylaws contain other provisions that may delay, deter or prevent a change in control of Vornado Realty Trust or other transaction that might involve a premium price or otherwise be in the best interest of our shareholders.

The Maryland General Corporation Law contains provisions that may reduce the likelihood of certain takeover transactions.

Under the Maryland General Corporation Law, as amended, which we refer to as the “MGCL,” as applicable to REITs, certain “business combinations,” including certain mergers, consolidations, share exchanges and asset transfers and certain issuances and reclassifications of equity securities, between a Maryland REIT and any person who beneficially owns ten percent or more of the voting power of the trust’s shares or an affiliate or an associate, as defined in the MGCL, of the trust who, at any time within the two-year period before the date in question, was the beneficial owner of ten percent or more of the voting power of the then outstanding voting shares of beneficial interest of the trust, which we refer to as an “interested shareholder,” or an affiliate of the interested shareholder, are prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the interested shareholder becomes an interested shareholder. After that five-year period, any business combination of these kinds must be recommended by the board of trustees of the trust and approved by the affirmative vote of at least (a) 80% of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of outstanding shares of beneficial interest of the trust and (b) two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of voting shares of the trust other than shares held by the interested shareholder with whom, or with whose affiliate, the business combination is to be effected, unless, among other conditions, the trust’s common shareholders receive a minimum price, as defined in the MGCL, for their shares and the consideration is received in cash or in the same form as previously paid by the interested shareholder for its common shares.

The provisions of the MGCL do not apply, however, to business combinations that are approved or exempted by the board of trustees of the applicable trust before the interested shareholder becomes an interested shareholder, and a person is not an interested shareholder if the board of trustees approved in advance the transaction by which the person otherwise would have become an interested shareholder.

In approving a transaction, the Board may provide that its approval is subject to compliance, at or after the time of approval, with any terms and conditions determined by the Board. Vornado Realty Trust’s Board has adopted a resolution exempting any business combination between any trustee or officer of Vornado Realty Trust, or their affiliates, and Vornado Realty Trust. As a result, the trustees and officers of Vornado Realty Trust and their affiliates may be able to enter into business combinations with Vornado Realty Trust that may not be in the best interest of shareholders. With respect to business combinations with other persons, the business combination provisions of the MGCL may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of Vornado Realty Trust or other transaction that might involve a premium price or otherwise be in the best interest of the shareholders. The business combination statute may discourage others from trying to acquire control of Vornado Realty Trust and increase the difficulty of consummating any offer.

We may change our policies without obtaining the approval of our shareholders.

Our operating and financial policies, including our policies with respect to acquisitions of real estate or other companies, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and dividends, are exclusively determined by our Board of Trustees. Accordingly, our shareholders do not control these policies.

OUR OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE AND RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS MAY   GIVE RISE TO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

Steven Roth and Interstate Properties may exercise substantial influence over us. They and some of our other trustees and officers have interests or positions in other entities that may compete with us.

As of December 31, 2008, Interstate Properties, a New Jersey general partnership, and its partners owned approximately 8.8% of the common shares of Vornado Realty Trust and approximately 27.0% of the common stock of Alexander’s. Steven Roth, David Mandelbaum and Russell B. Wight, Jr. are the three partners of Interstate Properties. Mr. Roth is the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Vornado Realty Trust, the managing general partner of Interstate Properties and the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Alexander’s. Messrs. Wight and Mandelbaum are trustees of Vornado Realty Trust and also directors of Alexander’s.

As of December 31, 2008, the Operating Partnership owned 32.5% of the outstanding common stock of Alexander’s. Alexander’s is a REIT engaged in leasing, managing, developing and redeveloping properties, focusing primarily on the locations where its department stores operated before they ceased operations in 1992. Alexander’s has seven properties, which are located in the greater New York metropolitan area. Mr. Roth and Mr. Fascitelli, the President and a trustee of Vornado Realty Trust, are directors of Alexander’s. Messrs. Mandelbaum, West and Wight are trustees of Vornado Realty Trust and are directors of Alexander’s.

Because of these overlapping interests, Mr. Roth and Interstate Properties and its partners may have substantial influence over Vornado Realty Trust and on the outcome of any matters submitted to Vornado Realty Trust shareholders for approval. In addition, certain decisions concerning our operations or financial structure may present conflicts of interest among Messrs. Roth, Mandelbaum and Wight and Interstate Properties and our other equity or debt holders. In addition, Mr. Roth, Interstate Properties and its partners, and Alexander’s currently and may in the future engage in a wide variety of activities in the real estate business which may result in conflicts of interest with respect to matters affecting us, such as which of these entities or persons, if any, may take advantage of potential business opportunities, the business focus of these entities, the types of properties and geographic locations in which these entities make investments, potential competition between business activities conducted, or sought to be conducted, competition for properties and tenants, possible corporate transactions such as acquisitions and other strategic decisions affecting the future of these entities.

Vornado Realty Trust currently manages and leases the real estate assets of Interstate Properties under a management agreement for which it receives an annual fee equal to 4% of base rent and percentage rent and certain other commissions. The management agreement has a term of one year and is automatically renewable unless terminated by either of the parties on 60 days’ notice at the end of the term. Vornado Realty Trust earned $803,000, $800,000, and $798,000 of management fees under the management agreement for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006. Because of the relationship among Vornado Realty Trust, Interstate Properties and Messrs. Roth, Mandelbaum and Wight, as described above, the terms of the management agreement and any future agreements between Vornado Realty Trust and Interstate Properties may not be comparable to those Vornado Realty Trust could have negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.

There may be conflicts of interest between Alexander’s and us.

As of December 31, 2008, the Operating Partnership owned 32.5% of the outstanding common stock of Alexander’s. Alexander’s is a REIT engaged in leasing, managing, developing and redeveloping properties, focusing primarily on the locations where its department stores operated before they ceased operations in 1992. Alexander’s has seven properties. Interstate Properties, which is described above, and its partners owned an additional 27.0% of the outstanding common stock of Alexander’s as of December 31, 2008. Mr. Roth, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Vornado Realty Trust, is Chief Executive Officer, a director of Alexander’s and managing general partner of Interstate, and Mr. Fascitelli, President and a trustee of Vornado Realty Trust, is President and a director of Alexander’s. Messrs. Mandelbaum, West and Wight, trustees of us, are also directors of Alexander’s and general partners of Interstate. In addition, Joseph Macnow, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, holds the same position with Alexander’s. Alexander’s common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “ALX.”

The Operating Partnership manages, develops and leases the Alexander’s properties under management and development agreements and leasing agreements under which the Operating Partnership receives annual fees from Alexander’s. These agreements have a one-year term expiring in March of each year and are all automatically renewable. Because Vornado Realty Trust and Alexander’s share common senior management and because a majority of the trustees of Vornado Realty Trust also constitute a majority of the directors of Alexander’s, the terms of the foregoing agreements and any future agreements between us and Alexander’s may not be comparable to those we could have negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.

19

For a description of Interstate Properties’ ownership of Vornado Realty Trust and Alexander’s, see “Steven Roth and Interstate Properties may exercise substantial influence over us. They and some of our other trustees and officers have interests or positions in other entities that may compete with us” above.

THE NUMBER OF SHARES OF VORNADO REALTY TRUST AND THE MARKET FOR THOSE SHARES GIVE RISE TO VARIOUS RISKS.

The trading price of our common shares has recently been volatile and may fluctuate.

The trading price of our common shares has recently been volatile and may continue to fluctuate widely as a result of a number of factors, many of which are outside our control. In addition, the stock market is subject to fluctuations in the share prices and trading volumes that affect the market prices of the shares of many companies. These broad market fluctuations have adversely affected and may continue to adversely affect the market price of our common shares. Among the factors that could affect the price of our common shares are:

A significant decline in our stock price could result in substantial losses for shareholders.

Vornado Realty Trust has many shares available for future sale, which could hurt the market price of its shares.

As of December 31, 2008, we had authorized but unissued, 94,714,097 common shares of beneficial interest, $.04 par value, and 76,045,876 preferred shares of beneficial interest, no par value, of which 68,045,876 preferred shares have not been reserved and remain available for issuance as a newly-designated class of preferred. We may issue these authorized but unissued shares from time to time in public or private offerings or in connection with acquisitions.

In addition, as of December 31, 2008, 13,543,949 common shares were reserved for issuance upon redemption of Operating Partnership common units. Some of these shares may be sold in the public market after registration under the Securities Act under registration rights agreements between Vornado Realty Trust and some holders of common units of the Operating Partnership. These shares may also be sold in the public market under Rule 144 under the Securities Act or other available exemptions from registration. In addition, we have reserved a number of common shares for issuance under employee benefit plans, and these common shares will be available for sale from time to time. We have awarded shares of restricted stock and granted options to purchase additional common shares to some of our executive officers and employees. Of the authorized but unissued common and preferred shares above, 47,085,164 common and 8,000,000 preferred shares, in the aggregate, were reserved for issuance upon the redemption of Operating Partnership units, conversion of outstanding convertible securities, under benefit plans or for other activity not directly under our control.

We cannot predict the effect that future sales of Vornado Realty Trust common and preferred shares or Operating Partnership common and preferred units will have on the market prices of Vornado Realty Trust’s outstanding shares.

Increased market interest rates may hurt the value of Vornado Realty Trust’s common and preferred shares.

We believe that investors consider the distribution rate on REIT shares, expressed as a percentage of the price of the shares, relative to market interest rates as an important factor in deciding whether to buy or sell the shares. If market interest rates go up, prospective purchasers of REIT shares may expect a higher distribution rate. Higher interest rates would likely increase our borrowing costs and might decrease funds available for distribution. Thus, higher market interest rates could cause the market price of Vornado Realty Trust’s common and preferred shares to decline.