GIC faces US$575 Million Losses On Manhattan Apartment Complex
By Lingling Wei from Wall Street Journal
One of the biggest, most high-profile deals of the commercial real-estate boom is in danger of imminent default, say people familiar with the matter, signaling the beginning of what is expected to be a wave of commercial-property failures.
The sprawling Manhattan apartment complex known as Peter Cooper Village and Stuyvesant Town — acquired for $5.4 billion in 2006 by a venture of Tishman Speyer Properties and a unit of BlackRock Inc. — is running out of cash. As of the end of September, it had $33.7 million left of the $400 million in interest reserves set up to service its debt, according to the people familiar with the matter. At its current burn rate of about $16 million per month, the reserve could be depleted before the end of the year, the people said. Others have said the venture could avoid default until February.
The spokesman for Tishman Speyer declined to comment on behalf of the partnership.
The ownership, which includes a roster of high-profile investors from the Church of England to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, has no current plans to inject more capital into the venture, according to the people. Lenders who financed the deal first projected the complex’s net operating income would triple to $336 million in 2011 from $112 million in 2006, according to Deutsche Bank AG. But net income is projected to be $139 million this year, according to Realpoint LLC, a credit-rating agency.
Investors who bought into the deal were confident that real-estate manager Tishman Speyer would be able to greatly boost profits by raising rents in Manhattan’s sizzling apartment market. But today, the 56-building, 11,000-apartment property is suffering from a slowing New York economy, a lawsuit that has hindered the owner’s ability to convert rent-controlled units to market rentals, and the debt load.
Realpoint estimates that the property is worth only $2.1 billion now, less than half of the purchase price. By that measure, all the equity investors and many of the lenders, including Government of Singapore Investment Corp., or GIC; Gramercy Capital Corp.; and SL Green Realty Corp., are in danger of seeing most, if not all, of their investments wiped out. Hartford Financial Services Group, which bought $100 million of the debt tied to the property, said it has “sufficiently reserved for ths asset in the first half of this year.”
Some of the nation’s largest institutional investors already consider their investment a failure. The $133 billion Florida State Board of Administration committed $250 million to the equity partnership in 2007. It now counts the value as zero. A spokesman for the pension fund declined further comment.
The failure of the high-profile investment also would further rattle the market for apartments, offices, hotels and other commercial property. The market this year has seen increases in loan delinquencies and property foreclosures, stoking worries that it will drag down the nascent economic recovery.
Commercial mortgage-backed securities — the kind that financed a chunk of the Peter Cooper-Stuyvesant deal — are high on the list of concerns. Some $700 billion worth of CMBS were issued during the boom years but they have never been tested by a protracted downturn.
The apartment complex was developed by MetLife for returning World War II veterans and remained a middle-class bastion even as rents in other parts of Manhattan skyrocketed. New York’s strict regulations prevented the owners from raising rents.
But New York rent rules were eased over the years. When the Tishman/BlackRock venture purchased the property from MetLife in late 2006, the new owners predicted they would be able to convert thousands of protected apartments to higher market rents.
These projections convinced Calpers and the pension funds of several other states to make large equity investments in the deal. Meantime, the Tishman/BlackRock venture put a $3 billion first mortgage on the property and another $1.4 billion of so-called mezzanine debt.
The new owners ran into a slowing economy and resistance from tenants that battled to block rent increases. In one of their most successful challenges, tenants groups filed a lawsuit charging MetLife and the new owners with improperly converting rent-regulated units while receiving tax benefits from the city. The appellate division of the State Supreme Court in March ruled in the tenants’ favor. The state’s highest court is expected to rule on an appeal this month.
But even a victory by the Tishman/BlackRock partnership likely won’t save the deal from a default. One indication: a “special servicer” is in the process of taking over the deal’s CMBS debt, say people familiar with the matter. Special servicers are experts in dealing with troubled loans. The transfer to the special servicer, CW Capital, could occur as soon as this month, the people said.
Once that happens, the special servicer likely will try to negotiate with the partnership to restructure the debt.
Major players in these talks will likely be Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which together own more than $1.5 billion of the most highly rated, triple-A slices of the CMBS debt, according to people familiar with the matter. They would likely benefit from a fast foreclosure because, as senior lenders, they would be paid back first.
A Fannie representative declined to comment. A spokesman at Freddie confirmed its holding of the debt. “We don’t expect to incur any losses on these securities,” he said.
Another big player in the restructuring talks could be Singapore’s GIC. The fund owns a $575 million mezzanine loan backed by the property, according to people familiar with the matter. Also, GIC owns about $100 million to $200 million in equity, the people said.
Both investments might be wiped out unless GIC maneuvers to have more influence in the loan workout process, possibly by buying more senior debt. GIC declined to comment.
Source: Wall Street Journal





















no surprise, there are more skeletons in the closet that the financial world has not come to grips with.
GIC boasting of its steady performance during 2008 crisis has been proven wrong by this article
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sigh
When will GIC (like all govmin agencies) learn that it cannot hide failures and triumph successes.
To do so undermines cred.
Anyway gain on Citi will cover this loss.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
i can see more bad news soon from our glc.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
500 million is not something the famiLEE would worry about. This is only petty cash comparing the famiLEE’s wealth or even Sinkapore’s reserved\s, which stood at 500 BILLION (if it is not lost yet).
500 Million, move the CPF withdrawal age back by a few years or raise the minimum easilly can cover, no worries, :*(
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I as a Monk only corrupt $50,000. I got deep shit, Those lost multi-Billion $, NKF corrupt more than me got no shit.
This world has no justics.Amitahab
Like or Dislike:
0
0
what is US$575 million to GIC – small change lah.
In Singapore -
Rule 1: Government is always right
Rule 2: Government is never wrong
Rule 3: If in doubt, refer to rule #1 and 2
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Correction:
Rule #1: The Lee Family Empire can do no wrong;
Rule #2: If the Lee Family Empire is wrong, refer to Rule #1.
Failure to abide by these 2 rules will earn you a court case in which will declare you guilty of defamation & then a further declaration that you are now a bankrupt because you cannot afford to compensate the Lee family for damaging their ego.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Have you people not heard.
If you buy Low and sell High you are Ching Ho
If you buy High and sell Low you are Ho Ching.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
It’s only US$575m.
They will just leech more money from Singaporeans. Fees, fares, fines, taxes. Problem solved.
Then it’s business as usual for Singapore Inc.
Onward to the next bad business decision by GIC!
Like or Dislike:
0
0
GIC and Temasek have become experts in losing money. Wonder if their staff will get 6 month bonus.
Suzhou Industrial Park, Temasek lose money.
Is it true that Batam Industrial Park is also losing money for Singapore? Anyone?
Like or Dislike:
0
0
@Political Monk on Wed, 14th Oct 2009 8:12 pm – LOL. Hilarious!
Like or Dislike:
0
0
We were invited to invest USD 5.4 Billion in the Manhatten Apartment Project but decided to put in an investment of USD 575 million only.
As such, we will likely lose USD 575 million maximum in a worst case scenario.
We had the foresight not to invest USD 5.4 billion when invited to do so, and therefore saved taxpayers from additional loses of USD 4.9 billion.
We saw it coming… and did quite well, in this case.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“We had the foresight not to invest USD 5.4 billion when invited to do so, and therefore saved taxpayers from additional loses of USD 4.9 billion.
We saw it coming… and did quite well, in this case.”
And since our team has done so well, saving Singapore so many billions, it’s only fair that all team members get a hefty pay rise!
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Weird….this statement “We had the foresight not to invest USD 5.4 billion when invited to do so, and therefore saved taxpayers from additional loses of USD 4.9 billion.”
If GIC had the foresight they shouldn’t even lose the 575 million by not going in at all : )
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Imagine what those losses could have done for each of us,per capita basis…plenty.
If those monies were not generously poured into the stomachs of those american “conboys”-not the heroic cowboys we saw at cinemas-our unemployment rate could have been controlled more
substancially.Look again,even China may not be spared with their usd 800 bio parked in the USA.Hey,those “conboys” even
managed to “wallop” their own kind at home,what more canw say.
i realy feel sorry for the folks at MAIN STREET.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
btw..it is time to write off NIB investment in Pakistan by our beloved Temasek Holdings…Pakistan is now a major conflict zone getting aid from other nations. another $150 million disappears.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Is anyone really surprised? And, yes, Batam Industrial Park is 1. losing money and 2. would be sold for less than was paid so there is a forthcoming capital loss as well. In the Australian investment community, Singaporeans are considered the best investors because they are the dumbest. It doesn’t matter how many smart Singaporeans are sent to do due diligence, the yes men with access to Ho Ching and Great Leader will pay far too much for any asset they want to acquire. It’s easy for a civil servant to do this because their working life is built around using other people’s money without any accountability other than pleasing the Great Leader and his idiot son.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
no point talking and talking about the losses. We get what we deserve
Like or Dislike:
0
0
spore government would rather gamble away our money than help needy and elderly sporeans .. let the casinos come in some more
this country is going to hell where it will rot and burn .. fallen fallen fallen, woe is babylon
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Just so everyone knows what these properties really are to really understand just how ridiculous these ‘investment’ decisions were. These properties where previously low income housing – i.e. ‘housing projects’ – the lowest form of housing in the US. When they converted Stuyvesent town into condos, they soon realized that it was going to be hard to turn turd into diamonds. I’ve seen these apartments – they are seriously bad looking flats that are not only old, but that, with a simple glance, could be recognized as bad investment decisions. Look up “housing projects, NYC” and you’ll understand depth of incompetence in the initial assessment of this investment decision….Preposterous.
Like or Dislike:
0
0