ITEM 1A.     RISK FACTORS

Material factors that may adversely affect our business, operations and financial condition are summarized below.  The risks and uncertainties described herein may not be the only ones we face.  Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial may also adversely affect our business.  See “Forward-Looking Statements” contained herein on page 3.

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 adversely impact our revenues and cash flows.

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

·      national, regional and local economic conditions;

·      competition from other available space;

·      local conditions such as an oversupply of space or a reduction in demand for real estate in the area;

·      how well we manage our properties;

·          the development and/or redevelopment of our properties;

·      changes in market rental rates;

·      the timing and costs associated with property improvements and rentals;

·      whether we are able to pass all or portions of any increases in operating costs through to tenants;

·      changes in real estate taxes and other expenses;  

·      whether tenants and users such as customers and shoppers consider a property attractive;

·      the financial condition of our tenants, including the extent of tenant bankruptcies or defaults;

·      availability of financing on acceptable terms or at all;

·      fluctuations in interest rates;

·      our ability to obtain adequate insurance;

·      changes in zoning laws and taxation;

·      government regulation;

·      consequences of any armed conflict involving, or terrorist attacks against, the United States;

·      potential liability under environmental or other laws or regulations;

·          natural disasters;

·      general competitive factors; and

·          climate changes.

The rents or sales proceeds 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, sales proceeds 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 the economy, which over the past few years have negatively affected substantially all businesses, including ours.  Demand for office and retail space may decline nationwide as it did in 2008 and 2009, due to bankruptcies, downsizing, layoffs and cost cutting.  Government action or inaction may adversely affect the state of the capital markets.  The cost and availability of credit may be adversely affected by illiquid credit markets and wider credit spreads, which may adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition, and the liquidity and financial condition of our tenants.  Our inability or the inability of our tenants to timely refinance maturing liabilities and access the capital markets to meet liquidity needs may materially affect 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 – New York, Washington, DC, Retail Properties, Merchandise Mart and Toys – operate in a highly competitive environment. We have a large concentration of properties in the New York City metropolitan area and in the Washington, DC / Northern Virginia area. We compete with a large number of property owners and developers, some of which may be willing to accept lower returns on their investments than we are. Principal factors of competition include rents charged, sales prices, 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 regulation, 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 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, 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 revenue, net income 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 decreased revenue, net income and funds available for the payment of indebtedness or for distribution to shareholders. 

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. Our predecessor companies may be subject to similar liabilities for activities of those companies in the past.  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 clean-up 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.  In addition, we own residential properties which are leased to tenants with one-year lease terms.  Because these are short-term leases, declines in market rents will impact our residential properties faster than if the leases were for longer terms.

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

We maintain general liability insurance with limits of $300,000,000 per occurrence and all risk property and rental value insurance with limits of $2.0 billion per occurrence, including coverage for terrorist acts, with sub-limits for certain perils such as floods.  Our California properties have earthquake insurance with coverage of $180,000,000 per occurrence, subject to a deductible in the amount of 5% of the value of the affected property, up to a $180,000,000 annual aggregate.

Penn Plaza Insurance Company, LLC (“PPIC”), our wholly owned consolidated subsidiary, acts as a re-insurer with respect to all risk property and rental value insurance and a portion of our earthquake insurance coverage, and as a direct insurer for coverage for acts of terrorism, including nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological (“NBCR”) acts, as defined by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act. Coverage for acts of terrorism (excluding NBCR acts) is fully reinsured by third party insurance companies and the Federal government with no exposure to PPIC.  Coverage for NBCR losses is up to $2.0 billion per occurrence, for which PPIC is responsible for a deductible of $3,200,000 and 15% of the balance of a covered loss and the Federal government is responsible for the remaining 85% of a covered loss.  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 non-recourse to us, senior unsecured notes 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 our properties and expand our portfolio.

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

We own and operate the Hotel Pennsylvania in New York City. The following factors, among others, are common to the hotel industry and may reduce the revenues generated by the hotel, which would reduce cash available for distribution to our shareholders:

·      our hotel competes for guests with other hotels, a number of which have greater marketing and financial resources;

·      if there is an increase in operating costs resulting from inflation and other factors, we may not be able to offset such increase by increasing room rates;

·      our hotel is subject to the fluctuating and seasonal demands of business travelers and tourism;

·      our hotel is subject to general and local economic and social conditions that may affect demand for travel in general, including war and terrorism; and

·      physical condition, which may require substantial additional capital.

Because of the ownership structure of the Hotel Pennsylvania, 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 (“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 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 (“ADA”) generally requires that public buildings, including our properties, meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons.  Noncompliance could result in the imposition of fines by the federal government or the award of damages to private litigants and/or legal fees to their counsel.  From time to time persons have asserted claims against us with respect to some of our properties under the ADA, but to date such claims have not resulted in any material expense or liability.  If, under the ADA, 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.

We face risks associated with our tenants being designated “Prohibited Persons” by the Office of Foreign Assets Control.    

Pursuant to Executive Order 13224 and other laws, the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the United States Department of the Treasury (“OFAC”) maintains a list of persons designated as terrorists or who are otherwise blocked or banned (“Prohibited Persons”) from conducting business or engaging in transactions in the United States.  Our leases, loans and other agreements may require us to comply with OFAC requirements.  If a tenant or other party with whom we conduct business is placed on the OFAC list we may be required to terminate the lease or other agreement.  Any such termination could result in a loss of revenue or otherwise negatively affect our financial results and cash flows.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of system failures.    

Despite system redundancy, the implementation of security measures and the existence of a disaster recovery plan for our internal information technology systems, our systems are vulnerable to damages from any number of sources, including computer viruses, unauthorized access, energy blackouts, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication failures.  Any system failure or accident that causes interruptions in our operations could result in a material disruption to our business.  We may also incur additional costs to remedy damages caused by such disruptions.

The occurrence of cyber incidents, or a deficiency in our cybersecurity, could negatively impact our business by causing a disruption to our operations, a compromise or corruption of our confidential information, and/or damage to our business relationships, all of which could negatively impact our financial results.

A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of our information resources. More specifically, a cyber incident is an intentional attack or an unintentional event that can include gaining unauthorized access to systems to disrupt operations, corrupt data, or steal confidential information. As our reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our systems, both internal and those we have outsourced. Our three primary risks that could directly result from the occurrence of a cyber incident include operational interruption, damage to our relationship with our tenants, and private data exposure.  We have implemented processes, procedures and controls to help mitigate these risks, but these measures, as well as our increased awareness of a risk of a cyber incident, do not guarantee that our financial results will not be negatively impacted by such an incident.

Our Investments Are Concentrated in the New York CITY METROPOLITAN AREA and Washington, DC / NORTHERN VIRGINIA Area. Circumstances Affecting These Areas Generally Could Adversely Affect Our Business.

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

In 2012, approximately 74% of our EBITDA, excluding items that affect comparability, came from properties located in the New York City metropolitan areas and the Washington, DC / Northern Virginia area.  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 and we cannot predict how economic conditions will impact these markets in either the short or long term. Declines in the economy or declines in real estate markets in these areas could hurt our financial performance and the value of our properties.  In addition to the factors affecting the national economic condition generally, the factors affecting economic conditions in these regions include:

·      financial performance and productivity of the publishing, advertising, financial, technology, retail, insurance and real estate industries;

·      space needs of, and budgetary constraints affecting, the United States Government, including the effect of a deficit reduction plan and/or base closures and repositioning under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 2005, as amended;

·      business layoffs or downsizing;

·      industry slowdowns;

·      relocations of businesses;

·      changing demographics;

·      increased telecommuting and use of alternative work places;

·      infrastructure quality; and

·      any oversupply of, or reduced demand for, real estate.

It is impossible for us to assess the future effects of 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.  Local, national or global economic downturns, would negatively affect our businesses and profitability.

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 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.

Natural Disasters could have a concentrated impact on the areas where we operate and could adversely impact our results.

We have significant investments in large metropolitan areas, including the New York, Washington, DC and San Francisco metropolitan areas.  As much of our investments are concentrated along the Eastern Seaboard, natural disasters, such as those resulting from Superstorm Sandy, could impact several of our properties.  Additionally, natural disasters, including earthquakes, could impact several of our properties in other areas in which we operate.  Potentially adverse consequences of “global warming” could similarly have an impact on our properties.  As a result, we could become subject to significant losses and/or repair costs that may or may not be fully covered by insurance and to the risk of business interruption.  The incurrence of these losses, costs or business interruptions may adversely affect our operating and financial results.

We May Acquire or Sell Assets or Entities or Develop 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 substantially since 2002 through acquisitions. We may not be able to maintain this growth and our failure to do so could adversely affect our stock price.

We have grown substantially since 2002, increasing our total assets from approximately $9.0 billion at December 31, 2002 to approximately $22.0 billion at December 31, 2012. 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 as well as the amount of cash available for distributions 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 strategy. 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 or selling newly-developed or acquired properties at rents or sales prices sufficient to cover costs of acquisition or development and operations.  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 weaker 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 of at the time of acquisition. 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 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. 

It may be difficult to buy and sell real estate quickly, which may limit our flexibility.

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.  In addition, when we dispose of or sell assets, we may not be able to reinvest the sales proceeds and earn similar returns.

As part of an acquisition of a property, or a portfolio of properties, we may agree, and in the past have agreed, not to dispose of the acquired properties or reduce the mortgage indebtedness for a long-term period, 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.  In addition, when we dispose of or sell assets, we may not be able to reinvest the sales proceeds and earn returns similar to those generated by the assets that were sold.

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. (“Alexander’s”), Toys “R” Us (“Toys”), Lexington Realty Trust (“Lexington”), J.C. Penney Company, Inc. (“J.C. Penney”), and other equity and mezzanine investments. 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 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 maintain effectiveness or 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 and J.C. Penney. 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.

Our investment in Toys subjects us to risks that are different from our other lines of business and may result in increased seasonality and volatility in our reported earnings.

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, 2012 include Toys’ financial results for its first, second and third quarters ended October 29, 2012, as well as Toys’ fourth quarter results of 2011. Because of the seasonality of Toys, our reported quarterly 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 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, including as a result of bankruptcy. 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 decision to dispose of real estate assets would change the holding period assumption in our valuation analyses, which could result in material impairment losses and adversely affect our financial results.

 We evaluate real estate assets for impairment based on the projected cash flow of the asset over our anticipated holding period.  If we change our intended holding period, due to our intention to sell or otherwise dispose of an asset, then under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, we must reevaluate whether that asset is impaired.  Depending on the carrying value of the property at the time we change our intention and the amount that we estimate we would receive on disposal, we may record an impairment loss that would adversely affect our financial results. This loss could be material to our results of operations in the period that it is recognized.

We invest in mortgage loans and subordinated or mezzanine debt of certain entities that have significant real estate assets. 

We invest, and may in the future invest, in mortgage loans and subordinated or mezzanine debt of certain entities that have significant real estate assets.  These investments are either secured by the real property or by pledges of the equity interests of the entities owning the underlying real estate.  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.  In addition, there may be significant delays and costs associated with the process of foreclosing on collateral securing or supporting these investments.  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 and/or valuation allowances on our statements of income.  As of December 31, 2012, our investments in mortgage and mezzanine debt securities have an aggregate carrying amount of $225,359,000. 

We evaluate the collectibility of both interest and principal of each of our loans whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate such amounts may not be recoverable.  A loan is impaired when 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 present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, or as a practical expedient, to the value of the collateral if 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 will 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.  The value of these investments may decline as a result of operating performance or economic or market conditions. 

We invest in marketable equity securities of publicly-traded companies, such as J.C. Penney.  As of December 31, 2012, our marketable securities have an aggregate carrying amount of $398,188,000, at market.  Significant declines in the value of these investments due to, among other reasons, operating performance or economic or market conditions, may result in the recognition of 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 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. Although we believe that we will be able to finance any investments we may wish to make in the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that new financing will be available or 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 (“Vornado”) 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.

Substantially all of Vornado’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’s cash flow is dependent on cash distributions to it by the Operating Partnership. The creditors of each of Vornado’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’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.

Furthermore, the holders of preferred units of the Operating Partnership are entitled to receive preferred distributions before payment of distributions to holders of Class A units of the Operating Partnership, including Vornado. Thus, Vornado’s ability to pay cash dividends to its shareholders and satisfy its debt obligations depends on the Operating Partnership’s ability first to satisfy its obligations to its creditors and make distributions to holders of its preferred units and then to holders of its Class A units, including Vornado.  As of December 31, 2012, there were four series of preferred units of the Operating Partnership not held by Vornado with a total liquidation value of $101,095,000.

In addition, Vornado’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 outstanding debt, and the amount of debt and its cost may increase and refinancing may not be available on acceptable terms.

As of December 31, 2012, we had approximately $14.7 billion of total debt outstanding, including our pro rata share of debt of partially owned entities, and excluding $25.4 billion for our pro rata share of LNR’s liabilities related to its consolidated CMBS and CDO trusts, which are non-recourse to LNR and its equity holders, including us.  Our ratio of total debt to total enterprise value was approximately 46%. When we say “enterprise value” in the preceding sentence, we mean market equity value of our common and preferred securities plus total debt outstanding, including our pro rata share of debt of partially owned entities, and excluding LNR’s liabilities related to its consolidated CMBS and CDO trusts.  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, 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, or may 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 is subject to compliance with these 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 may be available only on unattractive 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 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 of Vornado, and Michael D. Fascitelli, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Vornado. While we believe that we could find replacements for these and other key personnel, the loss of their services could harm our operations and adversely affect the value of our common shares.

Vornado’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 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 may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals at any time during the last half of Vornado’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’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 adopted the limit and other persons approved by Vornado’s Board of Trustees. These restrictions on transferability and ownership may delay, deter or prevent a change in control of Vornado or other transaction that might involve a premium price or otherwise be in the best interest of the shareholders. We refer to Vornado’s Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust, as amended, as the “declaration of trust.”

Vornado has a classified Board of Trustees and that may reduce the likelihood of certain takeover transactions.

Vornado’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, even though a tender offer or change in control might be in the best interest of Vornado’s shareholders.

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

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

·      cause Vornado to issue additional authorized but unissued common shares or preferred shares;

·      classify or reclassify, in one or more series, any unissued preferred shares;

·      set the preferences, rights and other terms of any classified or reclassified shares that Vornado issues; and

·      increase, without shareholder approval, the number of shares of beneficial interest that Vornado may issue.

The Board of Trustees could establish a series of preferred shares whose terms could delay, deter or prevent a change in control of Vornado or other transaction that might involve a premium price or otherwise be in the best interest of Vornado’s shareholders, although the Board of Trustees does not now intend to establish a series of preferred shares of this kind. Vornado’s declaration of trust and bylaws contain other provisions that may delay, deter or prevent a change in control of Vornado 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 voting shares of beneficial interest of the trust and (b) two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of voting shares of beneficial interest of the trust other than shares held by the interested shareholder with whom, or with whose affiliate, the business combination is to be effected or held by an affiliate or associate of the interested shareholder.  These supermajority voting requirements do not apply if 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’s Board has adopted a resolution exempting any business combination between Vornado and any trustee or officer of Vornado or its affiliates.  As a result, any trustee or officer of Vornado or its affiliates may be able to enter into business combinations with Vornado that may not be in the best interest of Vornado’s 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 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 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, 2012, Interstate Properties, a New Jersey general partnership, and its partners owned an aggregate of approximately 6.5% of the common shares of Vornado and 26.3% of the common stock of Alexander’s, which is described below.  Steven Roth, David Mandelbaum and Russell B. Wight, Jr. are the three partners of Interstate Properties. Mr. Roth is the Chairman of the Board of Vornado, 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 and also directors of Alexander’s.

Because of these overlapping interests, Mr. Roth and Interstate Properties and its partners may have substantial influence over Vornado and on the outcome of any matters submitted to Vornado’s 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.

We currently manage and lease the real estate assets of Interstate Properties under a management agreement for which we receive an annual fee equal to 4% of base rent and percentage rent. The management agreement has a one-year term and is automatically renewable unless terminated by either of the parties on 60 days’ notice at the end of the term. Because of the relationship among Vornado, Interstate Properties and Messrs. Roth, Mandelbaum and Wight, as described above, the terms of the management agreement and any future agreements between us and Interstate Properties may not be comparable to those we could have negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.

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

As of December 31, 2012, we owned 32.4% of the outstanding common stock of Alexander’s. Alexander’s is a REIT that has six properties, which are located in the greater New York metropolitan area.  In addition to the 2.1% that they indirectly own through Vornado, Interstate Properties, which is described above, and its partners owned 26.3% of the outstanding common stock of Alexander’s as of December 31, 2012. Mr. Roth is the Chairman of the Board of Vornado, 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 and also directors of Alexander’s and general partners of Interstate Properties.  Michael D. Fascitelli is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Vornado and the President of Alexander’s and Dr. Richard West is a trustee of Vornado and a director of Alexander’s.  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.”

We manage, develop and lease Alexander’s properties under management and development agreements and leasing agreements under which we receive 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 and Alexander’s share common senior management and because certain of the trustees of Vornado 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.

For a description of Interstate Properties’ ownership of Vornado 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 been volatile and may fluctuate. 

The trading price of our common shares has 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 in the past and may in the future adversely affect the market price of our common shares.  Among the factors that could affect the price of our common shares are:

·          our financial condition and performance;

·          the financial condition of our tenants, including the extent of tenant bankruptcies or defaults;

·          actual or anticipated quarterly fluctuations in our operating results and financial condition;

·          our dividend policy;

·          the reputation of REITs and real estate investments generally and the attractiveness of REIT equity securities in comparison to other equity securities, including securities issued by other real estate companies, and fixed income securities;

·          uncertainty and volatility in the equity and credit markets;

·          changes in revenue or earnings estimates or publication of research reports and recommendations by financial analysts or actions taken by rating agencies with respect to our securities or those of other REITs;

·          failure to meet analysts’ revenue or earnings estimates;

·          speculation in the press or investment community;

·          strategic actions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions or restructurings;

·          the extent of institutional investor interest in us;

·          the extent of short-selling of our common shares and the shares of our competitors;

·          fluctuations in the stock price and operating results of our competitors;

·          general financial and economic market conditions and, in particular, developments related to market conditions for REITs and other real estate related companies;

·          domestic and international economic factors unrelated to our performance; and

·          all other risk factors addressed elsewhere in this Annual Report on the Form 10-K. 

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

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

The interests of our current shareholders could be diluted if we issue additional equity securities. As of December 31, 2012, we had authorized but unissued, 63,265,289 common shares of beneficial interest, $.04 par value and 58,766,023 preferred shares of beneficial interest, no par value; of which 20,705,537 common shares are reserved for issuance upon redemption of Class A Operating Partnership units, convertible securities and employee stock options and 11,200,000 preferred shares are reserved for issuance upon redemption of preferred Operating Partnership units.  Any shares not reserved may be issued from time to time in public or private offerings or in connection with acquisitions.  In addition, common and preferred shares reserved may be sold upon issuance in the public market after registration under the Securities Act or under Rule 144 under the Securities Act or other available exemptions from registration.  We cannot predict the effect that future sales of our common and preferred shares or Operating Partnership Class A and preferred units will have on the market prices of our outstanding shares.

Increased interest rates may hurt the value of our 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 interest rates as an important factor in deciding whether to buy or sell the shares. If 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 interest rates could cause the market price of our common and preferred shares to decline.