XML 49 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.1.9
FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Fair Value Disclosures [Abstract]  
FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
6. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
 
GAAP emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement. Therefore, a fair value measurement should be determined based on the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. GAAP requires the use of observable market data, when available, in making fair value measurements. Observable inputs are inputs that the market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of ours. When market data inputs are unobservable, we utilize inputs that we believe reflect our best estimate of the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. When inputs used to measure fair value fall within different levels of the hierarchy, the level within which the fair value measurement is categorized is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs that are classified within Levels 1 and 2 of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified that are within Level 3 of the hierarchy). The three levels of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:
 
 
•
Level 1 Inputs – Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Partnership has the ability to access.
 
•
Level 2 Inputs – Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly.
 
•
Level 3 Inputs – Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which are typically based on the Partnership’s own assumptions, as there is little, if any, related market activity.

 

 
Our consolidated financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, tenant and accounts receivable, accounts receivable – related party, notes receivable, notes payable, notes payable – related party, accounts payable – related party, and accounts payable and other liabilities. The carrying values of all of these financial instruments, except for our notes payable, are representative of their fair values due to the short-term nature of the instruments. In determining the fair value of our debt, we determine the appropriate treasury bill rate based on the remaining time to maturity for each of the debt instruments. We then add the appropriate yield spread to the treasury bill rate. The yield spread is a risk premium estimated by investors to account for credit risk involved in debt financing. The spread is typically estimated based on the property type and loan-to-value ratio of the debt instrument. The result is an estimate of the market interest rate a typical investor would expect to receive given the underlying subject asset (property type) and remaining time to maturity.
 
The fair value of Note A was approximately $8.5 million and classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 2014. As described in Note 5, Note B does not accrue interest and its payment is dependent upon the occurrence and amount of a capital event. Accordingly, we determined the fair value of Note B to be approximately $590,000, using internal estimates of potential proceeds in the event we were to sell the underlying property in the current market. Because the estimates used to determine fair value are not readily observable, we have classified the fair value of Note B in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2013, we estimated the fair value of our notes payable was $25.0 million and classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.