First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. (FR) Q1 2015 Earnings Report, Transcript and Summary

Good afternoon. My name is Felicia and I will be your conference operator today. [Operator Instructions]. Thank you. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Art Harmon, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Thanks a lot, Felicia. Hello and welcome to our call. Before we discuss our first quarter 2015 results, let me remind everyone that our call may include forward-looking statements as defined by Federal Securities Laws. These are based on management's expectations, plans and estimation of our prospects. Today's statements may be time sensitive and accurate only as of today's date, April 24, 2015. We assume no obligation to update our statements or the other information we provide. Actual results may differ materially from our forward-looking statements and factors which could cause this are described in our 10-K and other SEC filings. You can find a reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures discussed in today's call in our supplemental report and our earnings release. The supplemental report, earnings release and our SEC filings are available at www.firstindustrial.com, under our Investor Relations tab. Our call will begin today with remarks by Bruce Duncan, our President and CEO; as well as Scott Musil, our CFO, after which we will open it up for your questions. Also on the call today are Jojo Yap, our Chief Investment Officer; Peter Schultz, Executive Vice President for our east region; Chris Schneider, Senior Vice President of Operations; and Bob Walter, Senior Vice President of Capital Markets and Asset Management. Let me turn the call over to Bruce.

Thanks, Art. Thanks to everyone for joining us on our call today. We're off to a good start in 2015 due to the great efforts of our team and the strength of the industrial market. Our occupancy at quarter end was 94.3% which was flat compared to our year-end number, helped by a 10 basis point impact from sales. As you know, we typically see a dip in occupancy in the first quarter, so we're very pleased with this outcome. Our same store results were once again strong as we delivered growth of 6.2% on a cash basis. Cash rental rates on new and renewal leasing were up 2.6%, our fifth consecutive positive quarter. On a GAAP basis, rental rates were up 9.3%, marking our thirteenth consecutive positive quarter for that metric. Fundamentals are healthy as growth in the economy is driving demand for industrial space. Investment interest in our sector for portfolios and individual properties continues to be elevated, supported by the capital market environment and investors' quest for yield and growth. On the capital markets side, we strengthened and enhanced our financial flexibility by closing on a new $625 million senior unsecured revolving credit facility, replacing our prior one. The new facility extends our borrowing runway as it matures in March of 2019. The facility has a one year extension option and can also be expanded to $900 million, subject to certain conditions. Scott will discuss the economics of the new facility later. On another capital related note, I would like to address our interest rate protection agreement we put in place in the third quarter of last year. Per our press release last night, we will cash settle this agreement before its expiration on June 1, but do not currently anticipate any public or private unsecured debt issuance this year. This is based on the current interest rate environment and the additional tenor and liquidity we have gained through our new credit facility. As a result, we're required to include the mark-to-market of the hedge in reported earnings, resulting in $0.11 per share one-time impact on our first quarter EPS and NAREIT FFO. Scott will walk you through the impact to our guidance. Moving on to investments, as discussed on our last call, we broke ground on First Park at Ocean Ranch in Southern California. Ocean Ranch will be a three building park totaling approximately 237,000 square feet which we expect to be complete by year-end. Total investment is estimated to be $27.5 million, with a projected GAAP yield of 6.7%. Please keep in mind that when we discuss our initial GAAP yield it is calculated by dividing the estimated first year's cash NOI by the GAAP investment basis. We're also scheduled to complete construction of our two Dallas developments in the second quarter. The first is our two building, 598,000 square foot, First Pinnacle Industrial Center which is 87% pre-leased. The second is First Arlington commerce center, our 153,000 square foot development that is 41% pre-leased. Lastly, our two building 585,000 square foot First 33 Commerce Center in the Lehigh Valley remains on track for a fourth quarter completion. Our expected total investment in these three developments in process is $79 million, with a combined projected initial GAAP yield of 6.7%. We have no new leasing to report at this time for our completed developments in Southern California, Houston, or the remaining half of our Minneapolis development. We will keep you posted. In total, we were at roughly 25% leased for our completed and developments in process as of the end of the first quarter. Regarding the acquisition market, pricing remains very challenging as demand from a wide range of investors dramatically exceeds supply. We continue to be very selective and did not make any new acquisitions during the first quarter. Thus far in the second quarter, we closed on a 21-acre site in Phoenix where we expect to begin developing a 386,000 square foot multi-tenant building in the second quarter. This development will allow us to serve an existing customer's expansion needs, from the current 80,000 square foot space to 170,000 square feet, or 44% of the new building. We expect to complete this facility by the end of the first quarter of 2016. Total investment is expected to be $21.1 million and our targeted stabilized GAAP yield is 7.8%. Moving on to our ongoing portfolio management efforts, in the first quarter we sold 525,000 square feet for a total of $26.6 million. Our first quarter sales were consistent with our efforts to reduce our holdings of flex and other high finished buildings. The largest sale was a six building flex and light industrial portfolio in the Atlanta market, comprised of 299,000 square feet for $12.8 million which we discussed on our last call. We also sold an 88,000 square foot flex building that was 75% vacant in Southern California to a user for $9.4 million. So far in the second quarter, we have completed the sale of one building, comprised of 160,000 square feet in the Detroit market for $5.9 million. I would also note that in the first quarter we sold the final assets in our net lease JV, completing the wind down of that venture. We remain focused on driving cash flow and value throughout our organization. Reflecting that focus and our positive outlook, we just paid our first quarter dividend of $12.75 per share which is an increase of 24.4% compared to the prior rate. We expect to be within our target AFFO payout ratio of 50% to 60%, giving us capital to redeploy in developments from our existing land bank, or as we uncover additional investment opportunities using our platform. So to wrap it up, before I turn it over to Scott, let me point out that we're well on our way to our year-end occupancy goal of 95%. We're continuing our portfolio management focus through both investments, new investments, primarily by way of development and targeted sales. There is always work to be done and our team is focused on continuing to deliver for shareholders. With that, Scott?

Thanks, Bruce. Starting with the overall results for the quarter, funds from operations were $0.20 per fully diluted share, compared to $0.24 per share in Q1 2014. First quarter results reflect an $0.11 per share charge from the anticipated settlement of the interest rate hedge that Bruce discussed. This $0.11 charge is based on the swap rate as of the end of the first quarter. I would also remind you that as we telegraphed last call, first quarter's G&A reflected $1.3 million of accelerated expensing of incentive compensation which explains the higher figure in the first quarter relative to the implied run rate from our G&A guidance. Before onetime items, such as the Q1 2015 charge related to the anticipated settlement of the previously discussed interest rate hedge as well as losses related to our preferred redemptions and a portion of a onetime restoration fee in the year-ago quarter, funds from operations were $0.31 per fully diluted share versus $0.25 in the year-ago quarter. EPS for the quarter was $0.02 as it was for the year-ago quarter. As Bruce noted, we finished the quarter with occupancy at 94.3% which was flat versus year-end and up 190 basis points from the year-ago quarter. Sales helped occupancy by about 10 basis points, versus the fourth quarter. Regarding leasing volume, we commenced approximately 3.6 million square feet of long-term leases in the first quarter. Of these, 1.8 million square feet were new, 1.7 million were renewals and 100,000 square feet were development leases. Tenant retention by square footage was 60.5%, with the largest impact due to an anticipated move out in Indianapolis. Same store NOI on a cash basis, excluding termination fees and the one-time restoration fee we recognized in Q1 2014, was 6.2%. Same store growth was primarily the result of lower free rent versus the comparative period, contractual rent escalations and lower landlord expenses. Lease termination fees totaled $51,000 in the quarter. Same store cash NOI growth, including termination fees but excluding the onetime restoration fee in the year-ago quarter, was 6%. Cash rental rates in the quarter were up 2.6% overall. Breaking it down, renewals rate positive 2.2% and new leases were up 3.2%. On a GAAP basis, the overall rental rate change was a positive 9.3%. On the capital markets front as Bruce discussed, we renewed our $625 million line of credit for a new four year term with an option for an additional year that would extend the maturity date to March of 2020. Economics were improved as the credit spread is now 115 basis points over LIBOR, a reduction of 35 basis points. The facility fee is now 20 basis points. In the future, the rate and fees are subject to a onetime adjustment to an investment grade rating pricing grid at the Company's election and there is an accordion feature, by which we could increase the capacity to $900 million, subject to certain conditions. Regarding our balance sheet, let me update you now on some of our metrics. At the end of Q1, our net debt plus preferred stock to EBITDA is 6.1 times, normalizing G&A and excluding the onetime impact of the anticipated hedge settlement. This is at the low end of our target range of 6 to 7 times. At March 31, the weighted average maturity of our unsecured notes, term loan and secured financings is 4.4 years, with a weighted average interest rate of 5.7%. These figures exclude our credit facility. Credit line balance today is $198 million and our cash position is approximately $19 million. Now reviewing our updated 2015 guidance, per our press release last evening, our NAREIT FFO guidance range is $1.16 to $1.26 per share, with a midpoint of $1.21, this is a $0.06 per share decrease in the midpoint compared to our 2015 NAREIT FFO guidance we discussed in our fourth quarter call. The change is comprised of the $0.11 per share charge in Q1 related to the anticipated settlement of the interest rate hedge discussed earlier, offset by $0.04 per share of interest expense savings related to our decision to defer any unsecured debt offering and $0.01 per share of other items. Excluding the anticipated settlement of the interest rate hedge, our FFO guidance is $1.27 to $1.37 per share. The key assumptions are as follows, average in service occupancy of 93.5% to 94.5%, based on quarter end results with our year-end target of 95%; average quarterly same store NOI on a cash basis before termination fees, of 3% to 5%, note that this excludes the one-time restoration fee in the comparative period of 2014. Please note that our full-year guidance reflects our expectation that second quarter same store growth will be below the lower end of the full-year range due to one-time income items recognized in Q1 2014 as well as the expectation for higher bad debt expense in Q2 2015, compared to the low levels experienced in the year-ago quarter. Our G&A range remains the same at $24 million to $25 million. Guidance no longer assumes the issuance of approximately $250 million of unsecured debt in the second quarter which negates the $0.03 to $0.05 per share dilution we expected from such a transaction in our prior guidance. Guidance reflects the anticipated fourth quarter 2015 no cost prepayment of approximately $23 million of secured debt, at 5.58%. This loan was originally scheduled to come due in the first quarter of 2016. Guidance includes the costs related to our developments in process in Dallas and Pennsylvania, our first quarter start in Southern California and our planned second-quarter start on the land in Phoenix we just closed in the second quarter. We expect to capitalize about $0.02 per share of interest related to these developments in 2015. Other than what I've noted, our guidance does not reflect the impact of any future debt issuances; the impact of any future debt repurchases or repayments; any additional property sales, acquisitions or further developments; any additional changes in the final termination value of the interest rate hedge we anticipate settling; any future NAREIT compliant gains or losses or the impact of impairments; nor the potential issuance of equity. With that, let me turn it back over to Bruce.

Thanks, Scott. Before I open it up for questions, let me say that we're off to a good start in 2015, toward our 95% year end occupancy goal. And that we're encouraged by the continuing health in the leasing environment as we're seeing demand for space from a wide range of prospects which is exceeding new supplies. We're delighted with the impact of our new developments on our portfolio and our long-term cash flow growth profile. They're also additive to our efforts to further close the valuation gap to our public peers and private comps. Finally, the significant recent portfolio transactions in our sector have provided the marketplace with some clear data points on the value of industrial portfolios and platforms. In that light, I am excited about our opportunity to continue to deliver good returns for our shareholders. And I know that my team in this room and our entire FR team across the country shares that excitement. We will now open it up for your questions. As a courtesy to other callers we ask that you limit your questions to one, plus a follow-up, in order to give the other participants a chance to get their questions answered. You're welcome to get back in the queue. Operator, may we now open it up for questions?

[Operator Instructions]. Your first question comes from the line of Craig Melman with KeyBanc.

Just wanted to ask on guidance, in light of the better first quarter occupancy here. I heard the comments about 2Q same store falling below that 3% level. But I would have thought with the good start to the year, maybe some of the operating metrics would tick a little bit higher here, rather than just let interest expense come above guidance. Additional thoughts on why that kind of the better occupancy didn't flow through to the operating stats?

Sure. Craig, this is Scott. When you cut through the hedge and the offset with the debt deal that we're not doing, we actually did raise guidance by a penny. That net was due to lower -- our interest expense savings due to our new line of credit and lower bad debt of roughly $250,000 in the first quarter. We're seeing some impact from that. But on the same store front, when you look at occupancy, if you read the supplemental, our same store occupancy was the same on a daily weighted average basis in 1Q 2015 compared to 1Q 2014. And that was due to the fact that the move-outs in 2015 were earlier and the lease-up happened later in the quarter. So I would say as we stand now, we're comfortable with the guidance range. We got a little bit of benefit in NOI due to bad debt.

And I did he see that in the supp. I thought maybe relative to your internal projections, when you talked about the 50 basis points down last quarter, I know 10 basis points was due to the dispositions. I just thought it may have come in a little bit better. But then just my second question here, can you just talk about the decision not to do the $250 million debt deal. I know you got the line done, but you had the swap in place and terming out debt in this environment, not a bad idea, just curious there.

Sure. Let me go back with the hedge. We put a hedge in place in August of last year and that was to lock rates on a prospective debt offering which would have happened in the second quarter of this year. And again, we put the hedge hunt back during that time period because there was an anticipation that rates were going to rise and we wanted to protect ourselves from that. As we stand here today, we think a couple things. One, is the interest rate is different than what it was back in the third quarter when we put the hedge on. And then secondly, the new line of credit definitely does help us out from a liquidity point of view. So we basically have a new five year term with it, we've got plenty of capacity on that line of credit. So for those two reasons, we decided to push the offering off until 2016.

Your next question comes from the line of Dave Rodgers with Baird.

I wanted to ask about the developments and a quick update. Bruce, in your comments you did say you had no more leasing to update us on, but wanted to dive a little bit deeper into the completed and in process projects in terms of the activity that you're seeing, with a particular focus on that question on Houston.

Okay. I'll have Jojo talk a little about it. I would say, big picture, we feel better about Houston today than we did two months ago. We're having good activity on our existing portfolio and -- but why don't you give numbers.

Sure. On the existing portfolio, like Bruce mentioned, we feel very good about that. We ended the quarter over 99%. Also, we have very little rollover left. On the year-to-date new leasing and if you combine the early renewals, we did roughly 400,000 square feet and rental rate growth there exceeded 20%. So again, like Bruce said, we feel very good about our portfolio, our portfolio in Houston. In terms of First Park northwest we still have nothing to report today. Where we continue to he see prospect activity, across different industries on that asset. You also asked, Dave, about the rest of our completed portfolio, completed development. So first 36, like Bruce said, we have nothing to announce right now. We do continue to see prospectivity also across a broad range of industries there.

Okay. And then maybe more broadly as you go throughout the year and as you're starting to put leases in place today for the next six or nine months, the outlook for leasing spreads, should we continue to expect that they'll continue to be pretty strong in that high single digit? Could we see low double digits in terms of the GAAP spreads that you could report throughout the course of the year?

We continue to be pretty bullish on where we see in terms of rental rates. So I think you anticipate that trends will continue.

As far as the GAAP spreads, typically we're 600 to 700 basis points higher than the cash spread. So we continue to see that happening throughout the year.

Your next question comes from the line of Eric Frankel with Green Street Advisors.

Just two quick questions, one, I noticed, 95% occupancy. Looks like the markets where you're going to do the most lease-up is Dallas, Minneapolis, Indianapolis. Was hoping you could talk about some of the vacancies in those markets. And then second, I read a couple weeks ago that you are working on titling a site in Wisconsin. Looks like a sizable development. Was hoping you could touch upon that. Thank you very much.

Let me take the first question. The second question first which is you heard we were working on something in Wisconsin. We don't comment on anything; that's not closed. We have nothing to say on that. As relates to your first question, Eric, what's going on with Minneapolis, Indianapolis and Dallas, Peter do you want to handle that?

Sure. Good morning, Eric. It's Peter. Indianapolis, we have one large vacancy of 311,000 square feet. The tenant moved out at year end and that's part of a larger multi-tenant building. And this space would accommodate one or two tenants, happens to also be rail served and we're seeing good interest, particularly from logistics companies and we'll keep you updated on our progress. But we're encouraged about that. That space represents just under 10 percentage points of occupancy in our Indy market. So it's significant relative to the occupancy percentage. And then in Minneapolis, we also had as we talked about on our last call, a fourth quarter move-out of a tenant in two different spaces, also about 310,000 square feet. We did re-lease a portion of that in the first quarter of 40,000 square feet and are continuing to see pretty good activity, particularly in tenants or prospects in the 30,000 to 70,000 square foot range. Jojo, do you want to comment on Dallas?

Sure. Our Dallas performance, we're over 93% leased today. In terms of just activity, again we're out there, we're pre-leased on our 150,000 square foot development there, Eric and we're getting prospectivity for the rest and we're not even done with the building. So we're pleased about that. And we're looking for additional development opportunities in Dallas.

[Operator Instructions]. Your next question comes from the line of John Guinee with Stifel.

Very nice quarter, you guys are very, very methodical, dispose, develop, dispose, develop, repeat, very little in the way of acquisitions. But you're clearly doing this in baby steps. What do you think the Company looks like, what do you think your portfolio looks like in three years, Bruce?

I think if you look at where we're, we're going to continue to be developing a couple hundred million dollars a year, you know, we're going to be substantially more in the larger properties. And I think in terms of we'll be doing a little bit less in the Midwest and I think there's a great opportunity for us. We just keep doing what we're doing and executing on the plan. I think to me, I think the real opportunity here is when you look at where we're and where we trade and you look at the comps that are in the marketplace, I think if we keep executing on what we're doing, we're going to drive the delta, if you will, between our cap rate of today it's like 6.6% or 6.7% and if you look at the cap rate of the KKRs or the INCORE, at 5. 2% I think was KKR, 5.5% was INCORE. There's a lot of value there that we can create for shareholders. We just got to keep executing on the plan and keep doing what we're doing.

Your next question comes from the line of Ki Bin Kim with SunTrust Robinson Humphrey.

Turning to your same store occupancy, I think it was first time it's been flat year-over-year in a while. And I know you mentioned something about timing. At 92.6%, is that -- are we hitting a plateau, or is it much higher at 94% where your in-service portfolio is. Just trying to gauge where the additional upside could be with your Company and stock.

This is Chris. I think that, obviously as you compare what we're doing same store throughout 2014, you were seeing more increases in the occupancy. But obviously as we get closer to stabilized occupancy, you get closer to 95%, you are going to see less increase from the occupancy. But where you're going to see more increase is, obviously, positive cash rents are going to start help same store more and then we continue pushing on the bumps as far as that's concerned. You're going to definitely see more of the same store increases coming from bumps in rents as opposed to occupancy.

But I guess where do you see that 92%? When you look at it from asset, market by market, I'm sure you have come up with your own internal opinions on where you think same store occupancy can plateau out at. Is that close to--

I'll be disappointed if we don't get it up to the 94%, 95% range fairly quickly.

I think that's what we were looking for. You said you didn't want to comment on some deals that you didn't close. Not your first time going into Northern Chicago or Southern Wisconsin, whatever you want to call it. But what about, maybe not the deal specifically, but about that market in Kenosha is appealing?

We think it's very appealing, given what's going on there. We talked about some of the tenants up there, the e-commerce.

There is a multiple really depth of industries out there and it's primarily driven by a couple things. One as you know, Chicago is a big consumption zone. So Southern Wisconsin is really a Chicago market. We all know that. They're serving the large consumption zone. The other thing too is that overall property tax rates are lower in southern Wisconsin than Lake County which is for everybody's benefit, the immediate industrial market south of the border. And lastly, of course this filters across the whole business climate. The state of Wisconsin has a very business friendly environment and probably a little bit more fiscally -- more fiscally sound state. I told that to you as a driver of industries to southern Wisconsin. Does that answer your question?

I would just add. You have leaders like Amazon picking that market. We've obviously had some success there with some acquisitions and development we did for Rust-Oleum in the past and it really is just feeding into the Chicago market and driving a consumption zone that crosses between Milwaukee and Chicago into the Midwest.

Got it. And in the market like that, because it's not exactly -- are yields inherently, generically speaking higher?

Overall, Southern Wisconsin yields are Chicago yields. Chicago yields is higher than LA yields. Does that answer your question?

Are these potentially like if you can develop at 6% in LA or more like 8%, 9%? I was trying to just triangulate where potentially secondary developments, where yields would come in at, secondary market developments.

LA we've seen cap rates as low as 4% and in highly leased quality product in Chicago they trade in low 5%s. Let me give you that.

And again, your developments would be -- your term would be 150 basis points higher than that or so.

Correct.

Your next question is a follow-up from the line of Dave Rodgers with Baird.

Bruce, just given the demand from developers out there to put new buildings up and your appetite to perhaps build in areas where you don't have land given a couple recent acquisitions of land parcels, are you thinking about selling more land? Do you have more appetite and how much of that land do you think is buildable for you guys in the future, consistent with your strategy?

The land we have, we're pretty excited about. Jojo, you want to walk through? We've got a good land bank that we can do probably 7 million square feet of space.

Just under 7 million square feet of space, actually our land bank, our key land bank is concentrated into large sites that we believe are ultimately developable and buildable. Maybe just highlight the large ones. First Logistics Center, Inland Empire, that's about 1.4 million square feet.

That's imminently buildable. Hopefully we'll be starting very soon on that.

Correct. And then you have land in Nashville, that could accommodate about1.5 million. You heard about our land acquisition with reconfiguration with our existing tenant in Southeast Atlanta, that's about 924,000 square foot buildable.

Again, a great site, ready to go.

You also know about our site at the third beltway in Houston, just about a mile and-a-half from I-10 and Grand Parkway, called The First Grand Parkway Commerce Center in Katy. That can accommodate about 830,000 square feet. And then finally, just a small building, but it's 190,000 square feet at Inland Empire, the corner of the Harbor Freight Building that we own. If you look at that, that's about 6 million square feet and that's actually the bulk of our land.

We have a big piece in Stockton we could do but it's not ready to go.

That's 1 million, plus.

1.2 million.

We continue as you know, Dave, continue to replenish our land portfolio, again witness what we just bought a piece in Phoenix to do this expansion for one of our tenants.

Using our platform.

[Operator Instructions]. Your next question comes from the line of Craig Melman from KeyBanc.

Just wanted to ask about Phoenix, the relocation of the 80,000 square foot tenant. When does that tenant actually leave the building that they're in now? I know you said first quarter commencement. Just curious if you have the month that, that's coming out. And then also just curious what type of mark-to-market you're able to get on their space at the new building versus the 80,000 that they're moving out of?

The tenant will move into the new 170,000 square feet at the substantial completion of that building which is expected at first quarter of next year. The lease, existing lease of 80,000 square feet, will terminate when the new building's essentially complete. And just want to highlight, Craig, that the reason that's going on as well, is because there's a lack of quality space available in Phoenix under 200,000 square feet. So that's one of the reasons that we're very excited about this project of 380,000, 386,000, because that will leave us slightly over 200,000 square foot to lease which is a tight market right now. We believe that sector, that size is undersupplied, vis-a-vis the rent is basically the same because the space that they're occupying is a very high quality space as well, the 80,000 square foot space. It's a cross-dock, 80,000 square footer.

For new product it's a flat rent? Wouldn't there be a premium on new product, relative to where they're coming out of?

Well, yes, typically you would get that higher rent, but 80,000 square foot cross-dock space that they're occupying with extra storage outside and extra -- and low coverage is trading at a premium.

Okay. Where in the first quarter does this development -- is it sort of mid-quarter or is it closer to beginning of the year?

It's basically, I would say midpoint. Of course, we're going to try to beat our schedule. I would say you could factor in the middle of the quarter.

There are no further questions at this time. I would like to hand the conference back over to Mr. Bruce Duncan for any closing remarks.

Great. Thank you. We appreciate your interest. If you have any questions, please feel free to call Scott or Art or myself and we look forward to talking to you at NAREIT in June. So thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Thank you. And this concludes today's First Industrial First Quarter Results Conference Call. You may now disconnect.