If we do not successfully operate our investment management business to achieve the investment returns that we or the market anticipates, our results of operations may be adversely impacted.
We may expand our investment management business to involve other investment classes where we do not have prior investment experience. We may find it difficult to attract third party investors without a performance track record involving such investments. Even if we attract third party capital, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in deploying the capital to achieve targeted returns on the investments.
We face substantial competition from established participants in the private equity market as we offer investment management vehicles to third party investors.
We face significant competition from large financial and other institutions that have proven track records in marketing and managing vehicles and otherwise have a competitive advantage over us because they have access to pre-existing third party investor networks into which they can channel competing investment opportunities. If our competitors offer investment products that are competitive with products offered by us, we will find it more difficult to attract investors and to capitalize our investment management vehicles.
Our investment management vehicles are subject to the risk of defaults by third party investors on their capital commitments.
The capital commitments made by third party investors to our investment management vehicles represent unsecured promises by those investors to contribute cash to the investment management vehicles from time to time as investments are made by the investment management vehicles. Accordingly, we are subject to general credit risks that the investors may default on their capital commitments. If defaults occur, we may not be able to close loans and investments we have identified and negotiated which could materially and adversely affect the investment management vehicles’ investment program or make us liable for breach of contract, in either case to the detriment of our franchise in the private equity market.
CTIMCO’s role as collateral manager for our CDOs and investment manager for our funds may expose us to liabilities to investors.
We are subject to potential liabilities to investors as a result of CTIMCO’s role as collateral manager for our CDOs and our investment management business generally. In serving in such roles, we could be subject to claims by CDO investors and investors in our funds that we did not act in accordance with our duties under our CDO and investment fund documentation or that we were negligent in taking or refraining from taking actions with respect to the underlying collateral in our CDOs or in making investments. In particular, the discretion that we exercise in managing the collateral for our CDOs and the investments in our investment management business could result in liability due to the current negative conditions in the commercial real estate market and the inherent uncertainties surrounding the course of action that will result in the best long term results with respect to such collateral and investments. This risk could be increased due to the affiliated nature of our roles. If we were found liable for our actions as collateral manager or investment manager and we were required to pay significant damages to our CDO and investment advisory investors, our financial condition could be materially adversely effected.
Risks Related to Our Company
We are dependent upon our senior management team to develop and operate our business.
Our ability to develop and operate our business depends to a substantial extent upon the experience, relationships and expertise of our senior management and key employees. We cannot assure you that these individuals will remain in our employ. Our chief executive officer, Stephen D. Plavin, and our chief credit officer, Thomas C. Ruffing, are currently not employed pursuant to employment agreements and the employment agreement with our chief financial officer, Geoffrey G. Jervis, expires on December 31, 2010. There can be no assurance that Messrs. Plavin and Ruffing, and upon expiration of his agreement, Mr. Jervis, will enter into new employment agreements pursuant to which they agree to long-term employment with us. In addition, the departure of Mr. Plavin from his employment with us constitutes an event of default under our restructured debt obligations unless a suitable replacement acceptable to the lenders is hired by us.
Our ability to compensate our employees is limited by our restructured debt obligations.
Our restructured debt obligations limit the aggregate cash compensation we are able to pay our employees (excluding our chief executive officer and chief financial officer) to 2008 aggregate compensation levels. In the case of our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, cash compensation must be approved by our lenders. This may impact our ability to retain our employees or attract new employees.
There may be conflicts between the interests of our investment management vehicles and us.
We are subject to a number of potential conflicts between our interests and the interests of our investment management vehicles. We are subject to potential conflicts of interest in the allocation of investment opportunities between our balance sheet once our balance sheet investment activity resumes and our investment management vehicles. In addition, we may make investments that are senior or junior to, participations in, or have rights and interests different from or adverse to, the investments made by our investment management vehicles. Our interests in such investments may conflict with the interests of our investment management vehicles in related investments at the time of origination or in the event of a default or restructuring of the investment. Finally, our officers and employees may have conflicts in allocating their time and services among us and our investment management vehicles.
We must manage our portfolio in a manner that allows us to rely on an exclusion from registration under the Investment Company Act of 1940 in order to avoid the consequences of regulation under that Act.
We rely on an exclusion from registration as an investment company afforded by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under this exclusion, we are required to maintain, on the basis of positions taken by the SEC staff in interpretive and no-action letters, a minimum of 55% of the value of the total assets of our portfolio in “mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate,” which we refer to as “Qualifying Interests,” and a minimum of 80% in Qualifying Interests and real estate related assets. Because registration as an investment company would significantly affect our ability to engage in certain transactions or to organize ourselves in the manner we are currently organized, we intend to maintain our qualification for this exclusion from registration. In the past, based on SEC staff positions, when required due to the mix of assets in our balance sheet portfolio, we have purchased all of the outstanding interests in pools of whole residential mortgage loans, which we treat as Qualifying Interests. Investments in such pools of whole residential mortgage loans may not represent an optimum use of our investable capital when compared to the available investments we target pursuant to our investment strategy. These investments present additional risks to us, and these risks are compounded by our inexperience with such investments. We continue to analyze our investments and may acquire other pools of whole loan residential mortgage backed securities when and if required for compliance purposes.
We treat certain of our investments in CMBS, B Notes and mezzanine loans as Qualifying Interests for purposes of determining our eligibility for the exclusion provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) to the extent such treatment is consistent with guidance provided by the SEC or its staff. In the absence of such guidance that otherwise supports the treatment of these investments as Qualifying Interests, we will treat them, for purposes of determining our eligibility for the exclusion provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C), as real estate related assets or miscellaneous assets, as appropriate.
We understand the SEC staff is currently reconsidering its interpretive policy under Section 3(c)(5)(C) and whether to advance rulemaking to define the basis for the exclusion. We cannot predict the outcome of this reconsideration or potential rulemaking initiative and its impact on our ability to rely on the exclusion.
If our portfolio does not comply with the requirements of the exclusion we rely upon, we could be forced to alter our portfolio by selling or otherwise disposing of a substantial portion of the assets that are not Qualifying Interests or by acquiring a significant position in assets that are Qualifying Interests. Altering our portfolio in this manner may have an adverse effect on our investments if we are forced to dispose of or acquire assets in an unfavorable market and may adversely affect our stock price.
If it were established that we were an unregistered investment company, there would be a risk that we would be subject to monetary penalties and injunctive relief in an action brought by the SEC, that we would be unable to enforce contracts with third parties and that third parties could seek to obtain rescission of transactions undertaken during the period it was established that we were an unregistered investment company and limitations on corporate leverage that would have an adverse impact on our investment returns.
Changes in accounting pronouncements have materially changed the presentation and content of our financial statements.
Beginning January 1, 2010 we adopted new accounting guidance which required us to consolidate certain securitization trust entities in which we have subordinate investments. This consolidation resulted in a significant increase to our GAAP-basis assets and liabilities, which may be misleading to readers of our financial statements. In addition, we are required to record losses under GAAP on consolidated assets which may be in excess of our economic interest in the respective consolidated entities.
We may not have sufficient cash flow to satisfy our tax liability arising from the use of CDO financing.
Due to the redirection provisions of our CDOs, which reallocate principal and interest otherwise distributable to us to repay senior note holders, assets financed through our CDOs may generate current taxable income without a corresponding cash distribution to us. In order to raise the cash necessary to meet our tax and/or distribution requirements, we may be required to borrow funds, sell a portion of our assets at disadvantageous prices or find other alternatives. In any case, there can be no assurances that we will be able to generate sufficient cash from these endeavors to meet our tax and/or distribution requirements.
In the event we experience an “ownership change” for purposes of Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code, our ability to utilize our net operating losses and net capital losses against future taxable income will be limited, increasing our dividend distribution requirement for which we may not have sufficient cash flow.
We have substantial net operating and net capital loss carry forwards which we use to offset our tax and/or distribution requirements. In the event that we experience an “ownership change” for purposes of Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code, our ability to use these losses will be effectively eliminated. An “ownership change” is determined based upon the changes in ownership that occur in our common stock for a trailing three year period. Such change provisions may be triggered by regular trading activity in our common stock, and are generally beyond our control.
Risks Relating to Our Class A Common Stock
Sales or other dilution of our equity may adversely affect the market price of our class A common stock.
In connection with restructuring our debt obligations, we issued warrants to purchase 3,479,691 shares of our class A common stock, which represents approximately 15.5% of our outstanding common stock and stock units as of October 22, 2010. The market price of our class A common stock could decline as a result of sales of a large number of shares of class A common stock acquired upon exercise of the warrants in the market. If the warrants are exercised, the issuance of additional shares of class A common stock would dilute the ownership interest of our existing shareholders.
Because a limited number of shareholders, including members of our management team, own a substantial number of our shares, they may make decisions or take actions that may be detrimental to your interests.
Our executive officers and directors, along with vehicles for the benefit of their families, collectively own and control 1,550,283 shares of our common stock representing approximately 6.9% of our outstanding common stock and stock units as of October 22, 2010. W. R. Berkley Corporation, or WRBC, which employs one of our directors, owns 3,843,413 shares of our common stock, which represents approximately 17.0% of our outstanding common stock and stock units as of October 22, 2010. By virtue of their voting power, these shareholders have the power to significantly influence our affairs and are able to influence the outcome of matters required to be submitted to shareholders for approval, including the election of our directors, amendments to our charter, mergers, sales of assets and other acquisitions or sales. The influence exerted by these shareholders over our affairs might not be consistent with the interests of some or all of our other shareholders. In addition, the concentration of ownership in our officers or directors or shareholders associated with them may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of our company, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your class A common stock, and might negatively affect the market price of our class A common stock.
Some provisions of our charter and bylaws and Maryland law may deter takeover attempts, which may limit the opportunity of our shareholders to sell their shares at a favorable price.
Some of the provisions of our charter and bylaws and Maryland law discussed below could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so might be beneficial to our shareholders by providing them with the opportunity to sell their shares at a premium to the then current market price.
Issuance of Preferred Stock Without Shareholder Approval. Our charter authorizes our board of directors to authorize the issuance of up to 100,000,000 shares of preferred stock and up to 100,000,000 shares of class A common stock. Our charter also authorizes our board of directors, without shareholder approval, to classify or reclassify any unissued shares of our class A common stock and preferred stock into other classes or series of stock and to amend our charter to increase or decrease the aggregate number of shares of stock of any class or series that may be issued. Our board of directors, therefore, can exercise its power to reclassify our stock to increase the number of shares of preferred stock we may issue without shareholder approval. Preferred stock may be issued in one or more series, the terms of which may be determined without further action by shareholders. These terms may include preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends or other distributions, qualifications or terms or conditions of redemption. The issuance of any preferred stock, however, could materially adversely affect the rights of holders of our class A common stock and, therefore, could reduce the value of the class A common stock. In addition, specific rights granted to future holders of our preferred stock could be used to restrict our ability to merge with, or sell assets to, a third party. The power of our board of directors to issue preferred stock could make it more difficult, delay, discourage, prevent or make it more costly to acquire or effect a change in control, thereby preserving the current shareholders’ control.
Advance Notice Bylaw. Our bylaws contain advance notice procedures for the introduction of business and the nomination of directors. These provisions could discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for you and other shareholders to elect shareholder-nominated directors and to propose and approve shareholder proposals opposed by management.
Maryland Takeover Statutes. We are subject to the Maryland Business Combination Act which could delay or prevent an unsolicited takeover of us. The statute substantially restricts the ability of third parties who acquire, or seek to acquire, control of us to complete mergers and other business combinations without the approval of our board of directors even if such transaction would be beneficial to shareholders. “Business combinations” between such a third party acquirer or its affiliate and us are prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the acquirer or its affiliate becomes an “interested shareholder.” An “interested shareholder” is defined as any person who beneficially owns 10 percent or more of our shareholder voting power or an affiliate or associate of ours who, at any time within the two-year period prior to the date interested shareholder status is determined, was the beneficial owner of 10 percent or more of our shareholder voting power. If our board of directors approved in advance the transaction that would otherwise give rise to the acquirer or its affiliate attaining such status, such as the issuance of shares of our class A common stock to WRBC, the acquirer or its affiliate would not become an interested shareholder and, as a result, it could enter into a business combination with us. Our board of directors could choose not to negotiate with an acquirer if the board determined in its business judgment that considering such an acquisition was not in our strategic interests. Even after the lapse of the five-year prohibition period, any business combination with an interested shareholder must be recommended by our board of directors and approved by the affirmative vote of at least:
