Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
0
August 2010
Investor Presentation September 2011
NAREIT Investor Presentation November 2011
1
This presentation contains certain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties.
These forward-looking statements are based on certain assumptions, discuss future expectations,
describe future plans and strategies, contain financial and operating projections or state other forward-
looking information. The Company’s ability to predict results or the actual effect of future events, actions,
plans or strategies is inherently uncertain. Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected
in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, the Company’s actual results
and performance could differ materially from those set forth in, or implied by, the forward-looking
statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any of these forward-looking statements,
which reflect the Company’s views on this date. Furthermore, except as required by law, the Company is
under no duty to, and does not intend to, update any of our forward-looking statements after this date,
whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
This presentation does not constitute, and may not be used in connection with, an offer or solicitation by
anyone in any jurisdiction in which such offer or solicitation is not permitted by law or in which the person
making the offer or solicitation is not qualified to do so or to any person to whom it is unlawful to make
such offer or solicitation.
Forward Looking Statements
2
Investment Highlights
The Grove ®
at Troy, AL
The Grove ®
at Mobile—Phase I, AL
Strengthening Operations
Standardized Brand and Building Design
Vertically Integrated Enterprise
Conservative Capital Structure
Attractive Valuation
Experienced Management Team
3
National Footprint of High-Quality Assets
(1) As of September 30, 2011. Includes 21 wholly-owned, 6 joint venture and 6 new development properties that opened in August 2011
(2) As of September 30, 2011. Includes 21 wholly-owned and 6 joint venture properties, but excludes 6 new developments delivered in
August 2011
Operating Portfolio Highlights
33
6,324 / 17,064
2.7 years
0.7 miles
91.2%
Properties (1)
Total Units / Beds (1)
Weighted Average Age (1)
Average Distance to Campus (1)
Occupancy for 2011/12 (2)
4
Accomplishments Since IPO
Completed 6 new developments on time and on budget for 2011/2012 AY
Expect average initial development yield of greater than 7.25%
Launched 6 new projects for delivery in August 2012
Expect average initial development yield of 7.50% - 8.00%
Development Pipeline
Added new senior management and instituted central purchasing and other cost controls,
which drive margin expansion
Established a roving management team to ensure continuity at the property-level
Operational Initiatives
Accessed multiple capital sources to preserve financial flexibility and liquidity
Expanded and converted revolver to an unsecured facility
Secured $48.5 million 7-year Freddie Mac financing
Maintained conservative leverage
Financing &
Capital Structure
Achieved 91.2% occupancy(1) for 2011/2012 AY, a 260bp improvement from 2010/2011
Reported 3.2% rental rate growth(1) for 2011/2012 leasing
Developed an updated comprehensive leasing incentive and tracking program
Focus on Leasing
(1) As of September 30, 2011. Includes 21 wholly-owned and 6 joint venture properties, but excludes 6 new developments delivered in
August 2011
5
Apartment Features:
Private bedrooms with keyed locks
En suite bathrooms
Full furnishings and full kitchens
Modern appliances and washers/dryers
State-of-the-art technology
Ample parking
Gated entrances
On-Site Amenities:
Resort-style swimming pools
Basketball and volleyball courts
Game rooms and coffee bars
Fitness centers
Community clubhouses
All of our apartment communities offer bed-bath parity, attractively furnished units
and a variety of on-site amenities designed to appeal to the college lifestyle
All Properties are Attractive and Amenity-Rich
6
Property Management – Refining and Improving the Process
Standardized product allows for:
Systematic management
Strength in centralized purchasing
that improves margins
Area management with formulaic
allocation of responsibilities based on
property scoring
Proprietary standardized operating
programs and procedures combined with
local market adaptations
Maximizes leasing & operational
efficiencies
HQ
Area Manager
General Manager
Sales Manager
MITs
Maintenance Manager
Community Assistants (9)
Area Sales Manager
Roving General
Managers
Roving Sales Managers
Management “career ladder" approach
to talent development creates
framework for organic internal sourcing
of talent
7
At The Grove ®, we offer a ―fully-loaded college living‖ experience through our
consistent branding and operating philosophy
Consistent and Efficient Branding & Marketing
Our properties are universally branded The Grove®
8
Number of 2011-2012 Leases 2010-2011 Leases Rental Rate
Property Properties Units Beds Signed(1)
% Signed(1)
% % Increase(2)
Wholly-Owned 21 3,920 10,528 9,605 91.2% 9,317 88.5% 2.8%
Joint Venture Properties 6 1,128 3,052 2,781 91.1% 2,719 89.1% 4.9%
Sub Total All Operating Properties 27 5,048 13,580 12,386 91.2% 12,036 88.6% 3.2%
New Developments (2011 Deliveries) 6 1,276 3,484 2,770 79.5% n/a n/a n/a
Total Portfolio 33 6,324 17,064 15,156 88.8% 12,036 88.6% 3.2%
Leasing and Rate Improvement for Academic Year 2011/2012
(1) As of September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, respectively
(2) Average effective rate for 2011/2012 compared to average rate achieved in 2010/2011
Portfolio Leasing and Rate Status for 2011/2012 Academic Year
Increased operating portfolio occupancy by 260 basis points and rental rate
by 3.2% year-over-year
9
September 30, 2011 September 30, 2010 % Change
Total RevPOB (rental and service) $480 $480 0.0%
Average Occupancy 88.8% 88.2% 0.6%
NOI ($000s) $19,917 $18,425 8.1%
NOI Margin 51.8% 48.2% 3.6%
Strengthening Fundamentals at the Company Portfolio
9-Months Results of Same-Store Wholly-Owned Operations(1)
Continued focus on rate, expense management and occupancy
growth will drive NOI growth
(1) Represents 20 properties, as detailed in the Third Quarter 2011 Supplemental Information package
10
Further Operational Opportunities
Tiered pricing within projects based
upon desirability of rooms/ units
Cross branding
Strategic alliance
Increased wallet share
Convenience
Leading Resident Life program
The Grove ®
at San Angelo, TX
The Grove ®
at Jacksonville, AL
11
• Budgets constrain on-campus housing investment
• 38 states cut their educational budgets
during the recession
• Existing on-campus housing stock becoming
increasingly obsolete
• Lack of construction financing is restricting new
entrants
Compelling Market Dynamics
• Echo Boom drives enrollment growth
• Increasing percentage of high-school graduates
attending college
• Increasing foreign enrollments
• Increasing percentage of full-time vs. part-time
students
• Students taking longer to graduate
College Enrollments (1957-2012)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
1950 1963 1973 1983 1993 2003 2013
Demand
Drivers
Supply
Factors
Echo Boom
Enrolling in College
Baby Boom
Enrolling in College
Source: Dept. of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics
(millions)
Enrollment expected to increase by ~1.5 million students over the next 8 years
12
Why Our Markets
• Well-established university markets with protective community councils
• Superior land acquisition and entitlement capabilities
• Lack of available financing for local operators
Higher Barriers to Entry
• On-campus atmosphere with advantages of off-campus economics
• Benefits from symbiotic relationships with universities
• Greater impact from marketing dollars
Unique Relationships
with Universities
• We are able to build a superior product at a lower cost because of our captive
general contractor and wholesale purchaser
Construction Cost
Advantage
• Our markets benefit from higher enrollment growth than primary markets
• 9.5% enrollment growth in our markets over four academic years
Stronger Enrollment
Growth
13
Traditional on-campus, ―dormitory-style‖ housing alternatives have generally
consisted of shared rooms, communal bathroom facilities and extremely limited (if
any) amenities and parking
The Evolution of Student Housing – The Dormitory Era
14
The Evolution of Student Housing – Our Student Housing
Purpose-built student housing is specifically designed to appeal to modern-day
college students with broad on-site amenities, enhanced privacy and a focus on the
overall lifestyle experience
15
Disciplined Development Process
Site acquisition based upon on-the-
ground diligence and solid research
Majority not actually for sale
Development site selection criteria:
High enrollment growth colleges/
universities
Limited competing product
Proximity to campus
Track record of 33 projects,
equating to over $620 million of
investment
Solid pipeline for growth
We utilize a proprietary underwriting model with over 60 inputs to evaluate the relative
attractiveness of each market, which we then use to prioritize development opportunities
16
2012/2013 Academic Year Development Projects
($ in thousands)
In addition to those listed above, we have identified 200+ potential
markets and are conducting due diligence on 80 sites
(1) All data is as of fall 2011 except for Northern Arizona University, which is as of fall 2010; from school websites
(2) Total Enrollment and Distance to Campus are averages
(3) Acquisition of existing community with 138 units and 384 beds. New development adds 68 units and 228 beds
2012/2013 Academic Year Developments
Project University Served
Total
Enrollment(1)
Distance to
Campus
(miles) Units Beds
Est. Cost
($mm)
Wholly-Owned
The Grove at Auburn Auburn University 25,469 0.1 216 600 $26.3
The Grove at Flagstaff Northern Arizona Univ. 17,529 0.3 216 584 33.1
The Grove at Orono University of Maine 11,168 0.5 188 620 25.3
Average/Sub Total(2)
18,055 0.3 620 1,804 $84.7
Joint Venture
The Grove at Fayetteville University of Arkansas 23,199 0.5 232 632 $26.5
The Grove at Laramie University of Wyoming 10,568 0.3 224 612 24.8
The Grove at Stillwater(3)
Oklahoma State Univ. 22,411 0.8 206 612 20.7
Average/Sub Total(2)
18,726 0.5 662 1,856 $72.1
Average/ Total(2) 18,391 0.4 1,282 3,660 $156.8
17
Integrated Construction & Supply Structure
We have built the same prototypical building over 500 times
Continually refining design
Captive general contractor
Control cost, quality, timing
Captive wholesale supply
Volume purchasing
Cost is ~$43 per sq. ft.
We benefit from the experience and efficiencies of our standardized
building design
18
-
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
9/30/2011
Capital Structure (Including Pro Rata Share of Joint
Venture Debt)
($ in millions)
Equity Pro Rata Share of JV Debt Debt
$579.5
(1) From December 31, 2010 to September 30, 2011; excludes construction loans
41.5%
Enhanced Capital Structure
Extended average term to maturity of debt from 4.6 to
5.4 years while decreasing the average cost of debt from
4.8% to 4.5%(1)
Refinanced credit facility in 3Q 2011
Converted to unsecured facility
Increased size to $150mm
Decreased spread over LIBOR by 100 bps
Lengthened term by approximately a year
More attractive covenant package
Demonstrated access to agency financing with inaugural
Freddie Mac $48.5mm financing
Obtained construction loans for all new development
projects
Refinanced three joint venture construction loans with a
term loan and received an additional commitment on
three others
Prudent Capital Structure
19
$46.0
$14.8 $48.5
$26.4
$2.6
$5.1
$109.0
$0.0
$41.5
$31.5
$13.4
$41.0
$150.0
0.0%
17.3%
30.5%
36.1%
53.2%
72.5%
78.7%
100.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
$0.0
$20.0
$40.0
$60.0
$80.0
$100.0
$120.0
$140.0
$160.0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Thereafter
Mortgage Debt Construction Loans ProRata Share of JV Debt Senior Unsecured Revolver
$51.1
Well-Managed Debt Maturities
($ in millions, except per share data)
(1)
Note: $2.6mm of debt classified as construction debt above represents other debt that matures in 2031
(1) Assumes extension option is exercised
(2) Pro forma for a $38.5 million term loan that closed in October 2011; proceeds were used to pay down three construction loans
due in 2011 and 2012. The Company has a commitment for an additional term loan to take out three other construction loans
due in 2012
(2)
20
Attractive Valuation
(1) SNL consensus estimates
(2) Green Street Research nominal cap rate estimates
(3) CCG includes pro rata share of Joint Venture beds – 14,601 beds; ACC excludes beds from On-Campus Participating Properties – 57,968 beds; EDR excludes
announced acquisitions of GrandMarc at Westberry Place and Irish Row as these have not closed – 19,774 beds
24.5x
20.8x
13.4x
0.0x
5.0x
10.0x
15.0x
20.0x
25.0x
30.0x
EDR ACC CCG
6.6%
3.3%3.1%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
CCG EDR ACC
Implied Cap Rate(2) Price/2011E FFO(1)
Dividend Yield Enterprise Value/Bed(3)
Source: Public filings and research reports
Note: Closing price as of 11/10/2011
$66.4
$50.0
$36.6
$25.0
$35.0
$45.0
$55.0
$65.0
$75.0
ACC EDR CCG
7.8%
6.0%
5.3%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
CCG EDR ACC
($ in thousands)
21
Experienced Leadership Team
*Ted W. Rollins Co-Founder, Co-Chairman of
the Board & Chief Executive
Officer
• 25 years of real estate experience developing and operating service-enriched housing properties
• Founded Campus Crest in 2004
*Michael S. Hartnett Co-Founder, Co-Chairman of
the Board & Chief Investment
Officer
• 25 years of real estate experience developing and operating service-enriched housing properties
• Founded Campus Crest in 2004
• Over 33 years of experience in service driven businesses; Colonel in U.S. Army Special Forces
• Joined Campus Crest as a consultant in 2009
Earl C. Howell President & Chief Operating
Officer
• Over 20 years in corporate accounting and senior financial positions at both private and public
companies and Deloitte & Touche LLP
• Joined Campus Crest in 2008
*Donnie L. Bobbitt Executive Vice President &
Chief Financial Officer
Robert M. Dann Executive Vice President &
President of CCREM & CCD
• 25-year industry veteran with significant experience in strategic planning, portfolio and asset management and
operational execution
• Joined Campus Crest in 2011
Brian L. Sharpe Executive Vice President &
President of CCC
• Over 30 years of construction experience including acting as the driving force behind company’s product
development and development of the General Contractor unit that delivers one of the lowest costs in the industry,
combined with high quality
• Joined Campus Crest in 2005
* Denotes present at NAREIT
22
Investment Highlights
The Grove ®
at Troy, AL
Strengthening Operations
Standardized Brand and Building Design
Vertically Integrated Enterprise
Conservative Capital Structure
Attractive Valuation
Experienced Management Team
