XML 65 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.2.0.727
Fair Value Disclosure of Financial Instruments
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2015
Notes To Financial Statements [Abstract]  
Fair Value Disclosure of Financial Instruments
 Fair Value Disclosure of Financial Instruments

Cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities and security deposits are carried at amounts that reasonably approximate their fair value due to their short term nature.

We apply Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, 820 Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, or ASC 820.  ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. ASC 820 applies to reported balances that are required or permitted to be measured at fair value under existing accounting pronouncements; accordingly, the standard does not require any new fair value measurements of reported balances.

ASC 820 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.  As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, ASC 820 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 within Level 3 of the hierarchy).

Level 1 inputs utilize quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that we have the ability to access. Level 2 inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, as well as inputs that are observable for the asset or liability (other than quoted prices), such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and yield curves that are observable at commonly quoted intervals. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which are typically based on an entity’s own assumptions, as there is little, if any, related market activity. In instances where the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the fair value hierarchy, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the entire fair value measurement falls is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.

Fixed rate notes payable at June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, totaled $2.45 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively, and had estimated fair values of $2.48 billion and $2.54 billion (excluding prepayment penalties), respectively, as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014. The carrying value of variable rate notes payable (excluding the effect of interest rate swap and cap agreements) at June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, totaled $0.99 billion and $1.02 billion, respectively, and had estimated fair values of $0.97 billion and $0.97 billion (excluding prepayment penalties), respectively, as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014. The valuation of our debt is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each debt instrument. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the debt, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate curves and credit spreads. The fair values of fixed debt are determined by using the present value of future cash outflows discounted with the applicable current market rate plus a credit spread. The fair values of variable debt are determined using the stated variable rate plus the current market credit spread. Our variable rates reset every 30 to 90 days and we conclude that these rates reasonably estimate current market rates. We have determined that inputs used to value our debt fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy and therefore our fair market valuation of debt is considered Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.

Currently, we use interest rate swaps and interest rate caps (options) to manage our interest rate risk.  The valuation of these instruments is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each derivative. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the derivatives, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate curves and implied volatilities. The fair values of interest rate swaps are determined using the market standard methodology of netting the discounted future fixed cash receipts (or payments) and the discounted expected variable cash payments (or receipts). The variable cash payments (or receipts) are based on an expectation of future interest rates (forward curves) derived from observable market interest rate curves.

The fair values of interest rate options are determined using the market standard methodology of discounting the future expected cash receipts that would occur if variable interest rates rise above the strike rate of the caps. The variable interest rates used in the calculation of projected receipts on the cap are based on an expectation of future interest rates derived from observable market interest rate curves and volatilities.

To comply with the provisions of ASC 820, we incorporate credit valuation adjustments to appropriately reflect both our own nonperformance risk and the respective counterparty’s nonperformance risk in the fair value measurements. In adjusting the fair value of our derivative contracts for the effect of nonperformance risk, we have considered the impact of netting and any applicable credit enhancements, such as collateral postings, thresholds, mutual puts and guarantees. In conjunction with the FASB's fair value measurement guidance, we made an accounting policy election to measure the credit risk of our derivative financial instruments that are subject to master netting agreements on a net basis by counterparty portfolio.

We have determined that the majority of the inputs used to value our derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, and as a result, all of our derivatives held as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 were classified as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

The table below presents our assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, aggregated by the level in the fair value hierarchy within which those measurements fall.

Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis at June 30, 2015
(dollars in thousands)
 
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
and Liabilities
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs (Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs (Level 3)
 
Balance at
 
 
 
 
June 30, 2015
Assets
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Derivative financial instruments
$

 
$
2,241

 
$

 
$
2,241

Liabilities
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Derivative financial instruments
$

 
$
13,071

 
$

 
$
13,071










Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis at December 31, 2014
(dollars in thousands)
 
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
and Liabilities
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs (Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs (Level 3)
 
Balance at
 
 
 
 
December 31, 2014
Assets
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Derivative financial instruments
$

 
$
78

 
$

 
$
78

Liabilities
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Derivative financial instruments
$

 
$
13,392

 
$

 
$
13,392



The fair value estimates presented herein are based on information available to management as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014.  These estimates are not necessarily indicative of the amounts we could ultimately realize.  See also discussions in Note 7 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.