CPT Camden Property Trust Oct 2010 Presentation Slides Deck

8/8/2019 CPT Camden Property Trust Oct 2010 Presentation Slides Deck

1/100


2/100

WittenMarket Advisory Services

Market insights for apartment owners,

developers, investors and lenders

Market-Smart Investment Decisions

Advisors

Camden Investor MeetingOctober 4, 2010

1Copyright 2010, Witten Advisors LLC

Dallas, Texas


Dallas, Texas

U.S. Apartment Markets:

Trends and OutlookTrends and Outlook


3/100


Market insights for apartment owners,developers, investors and lenders


Advisors



Dallas, Texas

Like Q1, leasing in 2Q10 was best in 15+ years

Net Absorption in 2nd Quarter of Each Year116,430

103,646

-100,000

-50,000

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Source: Witten Advisors

Market Update


4/100




Advisors



Dallas, Texas

Disconnect between apartment demand and jobs?

JuneApartment

Absorption

Rate*Aug

Job Growth Rate

-6%

-5%

-4%

-3%

-2%

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

Year-Year%Change

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Witten Advisors*net change in occupied apartments

Market Update


5/100




Advisors



Dallas, Texas

Why then? 1) Ownership still losing market share

HomeownershipRate, SA

2Q04

69.4%

2Q10

66.9%

Predicted

63%

64%

65%

66%

67%

68%

69%

70%

1Q90

1Q91

1Q92

1Q93

1Q94

1Q95

1Q96

1Q97

1Q98

1Q99

1Q00

1Q01

1Q02

1Q03

1Q04

1Q05

1Q06

1Q07

1Q08

1Q09

1Q10

1Q11

1Q12

1Q13

Sh

areofU.S.Hous

eholdsWhoOwnHome

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce

Market Update


6/100




Advisors



Dallas, Texas

Population 20-29

(left scale)

Households


7/100




Advisors



Dallas, Texas

2009: 1.1 million more young adults at home than normal

% 18-24 at Home(left scale)

52.8%

% 25-34 at Home

(right scale)

12.8%

45%

50%

55%

60%

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

Sha

reofU.S.Young

Adults18-24Liv

ingat

H

ome

0%

5%

10%

15%

Sha

reofU.S.Young

Adults25-34Liv

ingat

H

ome

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce

Market Update


8/100




Advisors



Dallas, Texas

Young adult hiring in 2010 the best since 1984

973

-2,500

-2,000

-1,500

-1,000

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

20

10*YTDAug

000

JobsGained/LostbyYear(Dec-Dec)

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Market Update


9/100




Advisors



Dallas, Texas

Hiring is uneven in recoveries; 2010 better than most

Early 1980s

Early 1990s

Early

2000s

Late 2000s(excl Census temps)

-0.6%

-0.4%

-0.2%

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

DeepestL

oss

Month1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2

122 23 24

M

onth-Month%EmploymentChange

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Economy


10/100




Advisors



Dallas, Texas

Job Growth Forecast: 2010 gradual; 2011-2013 solid

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; Consensus forecast

Actual YE13

2.9m

YE12

3.1m

YE112.5mYE10

1.2m

-7,000

-6,000

-5,000

-4,000

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Year-YearChangein

Employment(00

0)

Economy


11/100




Advisors


10

Copyright 2010, Witten Advisors LLC

Dallas, Texas

0

20

40

6080

100

120

140

160

180

1Q00

1Q01

1Q02

1Q03

1Q04

1Q05

1Q06

1Q07

1Q08

1Q09

1Q10

ApartmentVa

lueIndex(2000=100)

basedonIn-P

laceNOI/CapRate

Cap rates fall faster than NOIs = 1) higher values


Investment Markets


12/100




Advisors


11


Dallas, Texas

and 2) improved development margins spread should widen gradually, starts follow

Development Return

Spread over Cap Rate

(right scale)

0.26%

Predicted

Spread

Actual Starts

181k

Predicted

Starts

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

1Q94

1Q95

1Q96

1Q97

1Q98

1Q99

1Q00

1Q01

1Q02

1Q03

1Q04

1Q05

1Q06

1Q07

1Q08

1Q09

1Q10

1Q11

1Q12

1Q13

Units,trailin

g12months

-2.0%

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

Development

ReturnSpread

overCurre

ntCapRate


Apartment Starts


13/100




Advisors


12


Dallas, Texas

Demand surge continues, while stock shrinks

-300,000

-200,000

-100,000

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

Jan-96

Jan-97

Jan-98

Jan-99

Jan-00

Jan-01

Jan-02

Jan-03

Jan-04

Jan-05

Jan-06

Jan-07

Jan-08

Jan-09

Jan-10

Jan-11

Jan-12

Jan-13

Units,trailing12months

Absorption New Completions

Net Completions


Market Outlook


14/100




Advisors


13


Dallas, Texas

Recovery began in 2010; 2011-2013 above trend

85%

90%

95%

100%

1Q1995

1Q1996

1Q1997

1Q1998

1Q1999

1Q2000

1Q2001

1Q2002

1Q2003

1Q2004

1Q2005

1Q2006

1Q2007

1Q2008

1Q2009

1Q2010

1Q2

011

1Q2012

1Q2013

O

ccupancy

-5%

0%

5%

10%

AnnualEffectiveRentGro

wth

Occupancy Occupancy Forecast Rent Growth Rent Growth Forecast


Market Outlook


15/100




Advisors


14


Dallas, Texas

4Q13

9.5%

4Q10

-2.8%

4Q11

5.1%

4Q12

10.2%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

1Q96

1Q97

1Q98

1Q99

1Q00

1Q01

1Q02

1Q03

1Q04

1Q05

1Q06

1Q07

1Q08

1Q09

1Q10

1Q11

1Q12

1Q13

Year-YearChan

geinAverageN

et

OperatingIncome

2010 NOI erodes slightly; strong rebound 2011-2013


Market Outlook


16/100




Advisors


15


Dallas, Texas

Employment growth scenarios

Sources for Base Case: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; Consensus includes Economy.com, National Association for

Business Economics, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Standard & Poors

*Best Case reflects highest forecast from above sources **Double-Dip replicates early 1990s downturn and recovery

Actual

Base Case

Best Case*

Double-Dip**

-7,000

-6,000-5,000

-4,000

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

2011

20

12

20

13

Ye

ar-YearChangeinEmployment(000)

Forecast Scenarios


17/100




Advisors


16


Dallas, Texas

Demand surge continues due todemographics, flight from ownership

Base Case

Best Case

Double-Dip

-300,000

-200,000

-100,000

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

Jan-96

Jan-97

Jan-98

Jan-99

Jan-00

Jan-01

Jan-02

Jan-03

Jan-04

Jan-05

Jan-06

Jan-07

Jan-08

Jan-09

Jan-10

Jan-11

Jan-12

Jan-13

Units,trailing12months

Absorption


Forecast Scenarios


18/100




Advisors


17


Dallas, Texas

MF rental starts bottom in 2010, rebound modestly

Actual Starts

Base Case

Best Case

Double-Dip

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

1Q91

1Q92

1Q93

1Q94

1Q95

1Q96

1Q97

1Q98

1Q99

1Q00

1Q01

1Q02

1Q03

1Q04

1Q05

1Q06

1Q07

1Q08

1Q09

1Q10

1Q11

1Q12

1Q13

Units,tra

iling12months

Predicted starts based on return on new development relative to U.S.

Treasuries and inflation, availability of debt and equity financingSource: Witten Advisors

Forecast Scenarios


19/100




Advisors


18


Dallas, Texas

Starts slump in 2008-2010 = few completions ahead

Base Case

Best Case

Double-Dip

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

Jan-96

Jan-97

Jan-98

Jan-99

Jan-00

Jan-01

Jan-02

Jan-03

Jan-04

Jan-05

Jan-06

Jan-07

Jan-08

Jan-09

Jan-10

Jan-11

Jan-12

Jan-13

Units,tra

iling12month

sNew Com letions


Forecast Scenarios


20/100




Advisors


19


Dallas, Texas

Apartment stock shrinks after obsolescence

Base Case

Best Case

Double-Dip

-300,000

-200,000

-100,000

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

Jan-96

Jan-97

Jan-98

Jan-99

Jan-00

Jan-01

Jan-02

Jan-03

Jan-04

Jan-05

Jan-06

Jan-07

Jan-08

Jan-09

Jan-10

Jan-11

Jan-12

Jan-13

Units,trailin

g12months

Net Completions


Forecast Scenarios


21/100




Advisors


20


Dallas, Texas

Solid demand + shrinking supply = high occupancy

Base Case

Best Case

Double-Dip

85%

90%

95%

100%

1Q1995

1Q1996

1Q1997

1Q1998

1Q1999

1Q2000

1Q2

001

1Q2002

1Q2003

1Q2004

1Q2005

1Q2006

1Q2007

1Q2008

1Q2009

1Q2

010

1Q2

011

1Q2

012

1Q2

013

O

ccupancy

Occupancy Base Case Best Case Double-Dip


Forecast Scenarios


22/100




Advisors


21


Dallas, Texas

High occupancy brings rent growth

Base Case

Best Case

Double-Dip

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

1Q1995

1Q1996

1Q1997

1Q1998

1Q1999

1Q2000

1Q2001

1Q2002

1Q2003

1Q2004

1Q2005

1Q2006

1Q2007

1Q2008

1Q2009

1Q2010

1Q2011

1Q2012

1Q2013

EffectiveRent

Growth,year-year

Rent Growth Base Case Best Case Double-Dip


Forecast Scenarios


23/100




Advisors


22


Dallas, Texas

Base Case

Best Case

Double-

Dip

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

1Q96

1Q97

1Q98

1Q99

1Q00

1Q01

1Q02

1Q03

1Q04

1Q05

1Q06

1Q07

1Q08

1Q09

1Q10

1Q11

1Q12

1Q13

Year-YearChan

geinAverageN

et

OperatingIncome

Rent growth drives strong NOI growth


Forecast Scenarios


24/100




Advisors


23


Dallas, Texas

Forecast Summary

Base Case Best Case Double-Dip

Occupancy

Rent

Growth Occupancy

Rent

Growth Occupancy

Rent

Growth2011 95.3% 4.8% 95.6% 5.3% 95.3% 4.3%

2012 96.6% 6.4% 96.8% 6.7% 96.2% 5.0%

2013 96.6% 5.5% 96.8% 6.1% 95.9% 4.9%

2011-2013 96.2% 5.5% 96.4% 6.0% 95.8% 4.8%

Forecast Scenarios


25/100




Advisors


24

Copyright 2010, Witten Advisors LLCDallas, Texas

24


Metro Market Focus

Metro Market Focus


26/100




Advisors


25


Strong demand recovery in many CPT markets


Aus

CharlDen

Miami

Orl

Ral

Riv

Tam

-2%

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

1Q

08

2Q

08

3Q

08

4Q

08

1Q

09

2Q

09

3Q

09

4Q

09

1Q10

2Q10

Year-Y

ear%ChangeinO

ccupiedApartmen

ts

Aus Charl Den Miami Orl Ral Riv Tam

Metro Market Focus


27/100




Advisors


26


solidly positive demand in all others


Atl

DalFtL

FW

HouLVLA

OC

Phx

SDDC

-3%

-2%

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

1Q08

2Q08

3Q08

4Q08

1Q09

2Q09

3Q09

4Q09

1Q10

2Q10

Year-Y

ear%ChangeinO

ccupiedApartmen

ts

Atl Dal FtL FW Hou LV LA OC Phx SD DC

Metro Market Focus


28/100




Advisors


27


2Q 2010 Actuals: Apartment Demand HighlightsAbsorption Rate*: Leaders

12 Months ending 2Q 2010

1. Raleigh 5.5%2. Austin 5.2%

3. Orlando 4.6%

4. Charlotte 3.7%

5. Salt Lake City 3.6%

6. Nashville 3.5%

7. Denver 3.5%

8. West Palm Beach 3.1%9. Jacksonville 2.9%

10. Miami 2.9%


Absorption Rate*: Laggards

12 Months ending 2Q 2010

33. Washington DC 1.1%34. Houston 1.1%

35. San Francisco 1.0%

36. Orange County 0.9%

37. St. Louis 0.9%

38. Detroit 0.3%

39. Kansas City 0.2%

40. Columbus 0.2%41. Cincinnati 0.4%

42. Minneapolis 0.4%

Metro Stories

*year-year % change in occupied apartments

Metro Market Focus


29/100

Wi Ad i


30/100




Advisors


29


Early job growth leaders in recent recoveries


1993-1994 Average 2004-2005 Average

1 Las Vegas 10.2% Las Vegas 7.3%

2 Austin 7.1% Phoenix 5.6%

3 Phoenix 7.0% Riverside 5.6%

4 Salt Lake City 6.3% Orlando 5.4%

5 Atlanta 5.4% Fort Lauderdale 4.7%

6 Orlando 5.2% Jacksonville 4.0%

7 Nashville 4.9% West Palm Beach 3.6%

8 Tampa 4.9% Tampa 3.6%

9 Denver 4.8% Austin 3.6%10 Portland 4.8% Salt Lake City 3.6%

Metro Market Focus

Wi Ad i


31/100




Advisors


30


similar names expected in this recovery


2011 Employment Growth 2012 Employment Growth

1 Austin* 4.3% Austin* 4.7%

2 Riverside* 3.5% Las Vegas* 4.2%

3 Fort Worth 3.5% Fort Worth 4.0%

4 Phoenix * 3.5% Riverside* 3.9%

5 Dallas 3.0% Salt Lake City* 3.8%

6 Denver* 3.0% Phoenix* 3.8%

7 Charlotte 3.0% Jacksonville* 3.5%

8 Jacksonville* 2.9% Dallas 3.5%

9 Orlando* 2.9% Denver* 3.5%10 Washington DC 2.8% Charlotte 3.4%

Metro Market Focus

*among top 10 early job growth leaders in 1993-1994

or 2004-2005 recoveries, or both

Wittk Ad i S i Ad i

k


32/100




Advisors


31


supporting a sharp rebound in rental income


2011 Revenue Growth 2012 Revenue Growth

1 Orlando 6.4% Denver 8.3%

2 West Palm Beach 6.3% Boston 8.0%

3 Washington DC 5.9% Austin 7.8%

4 Denver 5.6% Orange County 7.8%

5 Fort Lauderdale 5.4% San Jose 7.6%

6 Austin 4.9% Phoenix 7.5%

7 Phoenix 4.7% Oakland 7.2%

8 San Antonio 4.6% Atlanta 7.2%

9 San Jose 4.5% Chicago 6.4%10 Atlanta 4.2% Charlotte 6.3%

Metro Market Focus

WittenM k Ad i S i Ad isors

M k O l k


33/100




Advisors


32


Summary 2010: Early recovery well underway

Job gains return (+1.2m); house payments stabilize (-1%)

Effective rents up 1% year-year; NOI -3% as rents finish rolling down

2011-2012: Strong rebound Employment gains 2.5m in 2011, 3.1m in 2012; P&I +10%, +10%

Negative net completions

Rents up 4% in 2011, 6% in 2012; NOI +5%, +10%

2013: Recovery complete Hiring continues (+2.9m); lost jobs replaced

House payments climb +5% Net completions only 30k; starts back to 180k

Rents up 6%+; NOI +10%

Values back to 2007 levels

Market Outlook

WittenM k Ad i S i Advisors


34/100




Advisors


33


33


Questions/Discussion


35/100

1

Camden Property Trust2010 Investor / Analyst Meeting

Houston, TX

October 4 - 5, 2010


36/100

2

Forward-Looking Statements

In addition to historical information, this presentation contains forward-looking statements under the federal securities law. These statements

are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about theindustry and markets in which Camden operates, management'sbeliefs, and assumptions made by management. Forward-lookingstatements are not guarantees of future performance and involve

certain risks and uncertainties which are difficult to predict. Factorswhich may cause the Companys actual results or performance to differmaterially from those contemplated by forward-looking statements aredescribed under the heading Risk Factors in Camdens Annual Reporton Form 10-K and in other filings with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (SEC). Forward-looking statements made in thispresentation represent managements opinions as of the date of thispresentation, and the Company assumes no obligation to update orsupplement these statements because of subsequent events.


37/100

3

Significant Opportunities for Multifamily Industry

Limited new supply of housing expected for next severalyears

Favorable demographics from growing Echo Boompopulation and positive immigration inflows

Homeownership rate declining steadily Negative sentiment toward home ownership

Fewer apartment renters moving out to purchase homes


38/100

4

Housing Supply

Multifamily supply remains well below long-termaverage level

The Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studiesestimates that we already have a shortage of 3 millionunits of affordable rental housing

All markets are now Barrier due to limited availabilityof construction financing


39/100

5

Rising Demand for Apartments

Natural demand of 1.5 million to 2.0 million housingunits annually

78 million Echo Boomers now entering housing market

Baby Boomers downsizing and many choosing to rent

Less than 22% of current American households areMarried Couples with Children

Between 2008-2015, nearly two-thirds of all new

households formed will be renters, creating 6 millionnew renter households


40/100

6

Political Winds Impacting Industry

Focus on more balanced housing policy

Future of GSEs $5 trillion total portfolio

Multifamily portfolio produced over $2 billion in

profits since GSEs placed in conservatorship January 30, 2011 deadline for Treasury to propose a

new plan for the GSEs


41/100

7

Camdens Game Plan

Maximize portfolio cash flow growth

Complete Camden Multifamily Value Add Fundthrough acquisitions and development

Expand development pipeline

Complete selective dispositions

Continue to reduce leverage


42/100

8

Portfolio Trends


43/100

9

Camdens Portfolio

187 operating communities containing 64,074apartment homes in 15 major U.S. markets

High-quality properties with average age of 11 years one of the youngest in sector

3Q10 average same property occupancy 94.3% Turnover rates and moveouts for home purchases

near all-time lows


44/100

10

Geographic Diversity & Market Balance

Percentage of NOI by Market 2Q10 Actual(Including pro-rata share of NOI from JV communities)

Note: Other markets represent 3.6% of NOI

Austin2.7%

Houston8.7%

Dallas6.8%

Phoenix2.4%

Tampa

7.6%

Orlando5.4%

Las Vegas7.5%

Denver4.0%

San Diego/Inland Empire3.4%

Charlotte5.9%

SoutheastFlorida6.9%

Atlanta5.2%

Raleigh4.5%

Washington, DC19.1%

LA/Orange County6.3%


45/100

11

Rank Metro area Gain

1 New York-Wayne NY-NJ 411.0

2 Houston-Baytown TX 328.7

3 Atlanta-Sandy Springs GA 303.84 Los Angeles-Long Beach CA 299.3

5 Chicago-Naperville IL 295.3

6 Dallas-Plano TX 280.5

7 Washington-Arlington DC-VA-MD-WV 190.9

8 Minneapolis-St. Paul MN-WI 155.8

9 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale AZ 153.8

10 Seattle-Bellevue WA 135.5

11 Tampa-St. Petersburg FL 132.612 Philadelphia PA 132.1

13 Fort Worth-Arlington TX 124.2

14 Orlando FL 123.6

15 Austin-Round Rock TX 119.8

16 San Antonio TX 118.9

17 Santa Ana-Anaheim CA 117.1

18 Nassau-Suffolk NY 110.6

19 St. Louis MO-IL 108.520 Miami-Miami Beach FL 100.4

21 Charlotte-Gastonia NC-SC 98.1

22 Denver-Aurora CO 95.8

23 San Diego-Carlsbad CA 93.6

24 Las Vegas-Paradise NV 89.4

25 Portland-Vancouver OR-WA 87.9

Rank Metro area Gain

1 Houston-Baytown TX 626.2

2 Atlanta-Sandy Springs GA 602.8

3 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale AZ 591.94 Los Angeles-Long Beach CA 510.5

5 Dallas-Plano TX 472.5

6 Washington-Arlington DC-VA-MD-WV 270.4

7 Austin-Round Rock TX 250.9

8 Fort Worth-Arlington TX 238.9

9 Chicago-Naperville IL 238.0

10 San Antonio TX 227.0

11 New York-Wayne NY-NJ 224.612 San Diego-Carlsbad CA 220.5

13 Orlando FL 212.9

14 Portland-Vancouver OR-WA 210.9

15 Riverside-San Bernardino CA 210.2

16 Las Vegas-Paradise NV 209.4

17 Raleigh-Cary NC 197.1

18 Charlotte-Gastonia NC-SC 190.9

19 Minneapolis-St. Paul MN-WI 179.9

20 Seattle-Bellevue WA 175.3

21 Santa Ana-Anaheim CA 173.6

22 Denver-Aurora CO 168.6

23 Sacramento-Arden CA 165.6

24 Tampa-St. Petersburg FL 142.9

25 West Palm Beach-Boynton Beach FL 131.9

Growth Drives ResultsTop 25 Metro Areas For Estimated Gains: 2009 - 2014

Source: Prcis METRO 2005 Economy.com, Inc. - September 2010. Highlighted entries represent Camden markets.Over 97% of Camdens NOI is derived from these markets

Population GrowthEmployment Growth


46/100

12

Alphabet Soup

WISOFISL

WISL

FISTWINO


47/100

13

When Will Then Be Now?


48/100

14

HigherEmploymentLifts

Performance

How About?


49/100

15

Peak to Trough Rents

Peak to Current

Trough Rent Amount

Market Decline vs. Peak RecoveredPhoenix (17.8%) (17.2%) 0.6%Las Vegas (16.4%) (16.4%) 0.0%Charlotte (14.8%) (13.5%) 1.3%Orlando (12.7%) (12.1%) 0.6%Atlanta (10.8%) (8.6%) 2.2%

Los Angeles/Orange County (10.5%) (10.3%) 0.1%Tampa (9.9%) (8.7%) 1.2%Southeast Florida (9.9%) (7.7%) 2.2%Austin (8.4%) (6.3%) 2.1%Raleigh (7.9%) (5.0%) 3.0%San Diego/Inland Empire (7.6%) (5.5%) 2.1%

Dallas (7.5%) (6.8%) 0.7%Denver (5.7%) (2.4%) 3.3%Houston (4.2%) (4.0%) 0.2%Washington, DC (3.1%) (0.1%) 3.1%Total (8.5%) (7.3%) 1.3%

Average change in rent per apartment home


50/100

16

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10

New Lease Renewal Overall

Pricing Power Beginning to ReturnAverage change in new lease and renewal rates vs. expiring lease rates when signed


51/100

17

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

W

ashington,

DC

So

utheastFlorida

Atlanta

Austin

Raleigh

Charlotte

CPTAverage

Tampa

Dallas

Orlando

Denver

Phoenix

Sou

thernCalifornia

Houston

LasVegas

Renewal Increases by Market Sept 2010Average change in renewal rates vs. expiring lease rates when signed


52/100

18

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

Austin

Denver

SoutheastFlorida

Phoenix

Orlando

Washington,

DC

Tampa

CPTAverage

Dallas

Raleigh

Charlotte

Sou

thernCalifornia

Atlanta

Houston

LasVegas

New Lease Increases by Market Sept 2010Average change in new lease rates vs. expiring lease rates when signed


53/100

19

$920

$930

$940

$950

$960

$970

$980

$990

Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10

Market Rents In-Place Rents

Rental Rates Improving


54/100

20

94.3%94.2%

93.4%

93.1%

93.9%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

3Q09 4Q09 1Q10 2Q10 3Q10

Same Property Average Occupancy

Occupancy Rising


55/100

21

91.0%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

Washigton,

DC

Denver

Raleigh

Charlotte

SoutheastFlorida

Austin

Dallas

CPTAverage

Atlanta

Orlando

Tampa

Houston

Sou

thernCalifornia

LasVegas

Phoenix

Occupancy by Market3Q10 same property average occupancy


56/100

22

2010 Guidance Increased

Revised Guidance (2)Original Guidance (1)

$0.06 - $0.18$(0.24) - $0.06EPS per share

(3.0)% - (5.0)%(5.5)% - (8.5)%NOI growth0.75% - 1.25%2.0% - 3.5%Expense growth

(1.5)% - (2.5)%(2.25)% - (4.25)%Revenue growth

Same Property Performance

$2.58 - $2.70$2.35 - $2.65FFO per shareEarnings

(1) Issued February 2010.(2) Issued July 2010 and re-affirmed October 2010.


57/100

Thanks for theInternet Al Gore!

2010 50KVisitorsEachWeek


58/100

Top Internet

Referring Sites

1. CraigsList.com2. ApartmentGuide.com

3. Facebook

4. ForRent.com5. Apartments.com


59/100

What are our customers saying about us?


60/100

August 2010 Focus Group Results

Seriously Mobile


61/100

Seriously Mobile

Five Cant-Miss Mobile Marketing Trends For 2010, Paul Rosenfeld, December 30, 2009 - smallbiztrends.comKeep an Eye on Mobile Usage Trends, Erin Wilson, May 12, 2010 - blog.90octane.com

Mobile Access 2010, Aaron Smith, Jul 7, 2010 - Pew Research Center


62/100

Nothing but Net Campaign


63/100

Nothing but Net CampaignInternet Marketing at its finest

Campaign Netted 5,603 leases (July 5 Sept 19)


64/100


65/100


66/100

Guest Card Volume ChangeFor July and August

Nothing but Net Group - 14.35%

Non-Nothing but Net Group - 3.27%

Camden Contact Center


67/100

Steve ZissouOfficial mascot


68/100


69/100

35


70/100


71/100

37

Acquisitions & Dispositions


72/100

38

Create value by maximizing return on invested capital(ROIC)

Ensure appropriate leverage

Accomplish by making investments that are accretive toweighted average cost of capital (WACC)

Camdens Investment Thesis


73/100

39

Acquisition Environment Transaction volumes beginning to increase

Most financing still provided by Fannie Mae & FreddieMac, but life companies competitive

Limited seller distress so far

Well-capitalized buyers competing heavily for coreproduct

Cap rates range from 4.5% to 5.25% for core assets in

infill locations


74/100

40

Camden Multifamily Value Add Fund $120M assets currently owned within Fund

$375M total equity commitment $300M institutionalcapital, $75M Camden

$1.0B total investment capacity (based on 60% leverage)

Investment vehicle for select acquisitions anddevelopment

Camden fee income includes asset management,

property management, construction, development andcapital improvements

20% carried interest and fees enhance equity returns


75/100

41

Camden Yorktown

Location Houston, TX

Date acquired July 2010

Purchase price $25 million

Year built 2008Number of units 306

CPT ownership 20%

% occupied 96% (10/1/10)


76/100

42

Camden Ivy Hall

Location Atlanta, GADate acquired July 2010

Purchase price $15 million

Cost to complete $2 million

Year built 2010

Number of units 110

CPT ownership 20%

% occupied 44% (10/1/10)


77/100

43

Dispositions Expect to complete $105M dispositions by year-end

25-year old asset in Dallas/Ft. Worth 5-year old asset in Suburban Virginia

Midwest Joint Venture currently being marketed for sale

9 communities with 3,237 apartment homes locatedin St. Louis, Kansas City and Louisville

Camden ownership 15%

Expect sale to occur in late 2010 or early 2011


78/100

44

Development & Re-Development


79/100

45

Core competency for Camden throughout 17-yearhistory as public company

Completed over 50 communities with 20,000 apartmenthomes for total cost of $2.3B

Expected development starts

$100M in 2010

$250M-$400M annually thereafter

Resuming Development Activity


80/100

46

2010 Development Starts($ in millions)

Total

Projected EstimatedProject Location Homes Cost

Camden Lake Nona Orlando, FL 420 $61

Camden Summerfield II Landover, MD 187 32

Camden Royal Oaks II Houston, TX 105 13Total 712 $106


81/100

47

Camden Lake Nona

Location Orlando, FL

Number of units 420

Total budget $61 million

Start date 4Q10

Initial occupancy 4Q11

Construction completion 3Q12

Stabilized operations 4Q14


82/100

48

Camden Summerfield II

Location Landover, MD

Number of units 187


Start date 4Q10





83/100

49

Camden Royal Oaks II

Location Houston, TX

Number of units 105


Start date 4Q10





84/100

50

Potential 2011 Development Starts($ in millions)

Total

Projected EstimatedProject Location Homes Cost

Camden Noma Washington, DC 317 $117

Camden South Capital Washington, DC 276 83

Camden Celebration Orlando, FL 438 65

Camden Countryway Tampa, FL 348 51

Camden Montague Tampa, FL 192 23

Camden City Centre II Houston, TX 260 36

Camden Amber Oaks II Austin, TX 244 25

Total 2,075 $400


85/100

51

Additional Land Holdings($ in millions)

* Cost as of 6/30/10

Potential Projected Cost to

Location Projects Homes Date*

Washington, DC 1 400 $17.3

Houston, TX 3 750 9.9

Austin, TX 1 300 4.3

Denver, CO 2 675 11.6Hollywood, CA 1 300 17.3

Dallas, TX 1 300 8.6

Southeast FL 1 200 4.6

Las Vegas, NV 1 425 4.2Total 11 3,350 $77.8


86/100

52

Re-Development Program Completed $45M during 2007-2010 for 10% return on

investment

Interior and exterior improvements included upgradedkitchens, baths and common areas

Recently commenced on-demand kitchen and bath

redevelopment program 15 communities

3,800 apartment homes

Total cost of $30M

Expected returns of 10%-15%


87/100

53

Capital Structure & Liquidity

St C it l St t


88/100

54

Strong Capital Structure

Total Market Capitalization = $6.1 Billion

($ in millions as of 9/30/10)

41.7% debt-to-total market

capitalization 5.1% weighted average

interest rate on all debt

90.9% fixed-rate debt

59.3% unsecured debt

Manageable debt maturitiesover next several years

Unsecured Line

of Credit

$0

Mortgages

$1,034

Senior UnsecuredNotes

$1,508 Equity *

$3,547

* Based on closing share price of $47.97 on 9/30/10.

Li idit


89/100

55

Liquidity Approximately $84M cash on hand at 9/30/10

$0 drawn on credit facility

Sufficient liquidity to meet capital needs

Minimal debt maturities over next 24 months

Large unencumbered asset pool Low payout ratio

Dividend increase likely in 2011

M bl D bt M t iti


90/100

56

$1.1

$158.5

$762.7

$228.0

$11.0

$1,380.8

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Thereafter

Future scheduled maturities (as of 9/30/10)Manageable Debt Maturities

($ in millions)

D t il 2011 & 2012 M t iti


91/100

57

Details on 2011 & 2012 Maturities

$89.1

$36.1 $32.3$1.0 $1.0 $1.0

$70.4

$690.3

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 2Q12 3Q12 4Q12

Future scheduled maturities (as of 9/30/10)

($ in millions)

Camdens Leverage Relative to Peers


92/100

58

Camdens Leverage Relative to Peers

Source: KeyBanc Capital Markets 9/24/10

Company EBITDA/Interest Expense

MAA 3.22x

ESS 3.03x

AVB 2.91x

BRE 2.53x

CPT 2.51x

UDR 2.34x

EQR 2.30xPPS 2.19x

HME 2.18x

CLP 1.87x

AIV 1.72xAEC 1.67x

Average 2.37x

New Revolving Credit Facility


93/100

59

New Revolving Credit FacilityNumber of Banks 17

Joint Bookrunners: Banc of America Securities, LLC and JP Morgan Securities, Inc

$500 million Senior Unsecured Revolving Credit Facility

$100 million letter of credit sublimit Accordion up to $600 million

Maturity: August 2012, with 1 year extension option

Pricing: Pricing grid based on credit rating

Current pricing: LIBOR margin 210 bps

Annual facility fee 40 bps All-in drawn 250 bps

Maximum Leverage Ratio:


94/100

60

Indicative Senior Unsecured Pricing

Maturity (years) 5 7 10Size ($ millions) $250 - $500 $250 - $500 $250 - $500

Benchmark Treasury UST 1.250% 8/15 UST 1.875% 8/17 UST 2.625% 8/20

Benchmark Treasury yield (%) 1.29% 1.91% 2.53%

Reoffer spread (bps) T+200 - 212.5 T+212.5 - 225 T+212.5 - 225

Reoffer yield 3.286% - 3.410% 4.031% - 4.160% 4.653% - 4.780%Swap spread (bps) +23 +15 +3

Reoffer versus LIBOR (bps) +177 - 190 +198 - 120 +209 - 222

Fees upfront (%) 0.600% 0.625% 0.650%

All-in yield 3.42% - 3.54% 4.13% - 4.26% 4.73% - 4.86%

All-in spread versus LIBOR (bps) +190 - 203 +208 - 220 +218 - 230

Pricing as of 9/27/10

Secured Financing Alternatives


95/100

61

Secured Financing Alternatives

80% LTV / 1.25 DSC

InvestorSpread

Term Investor YM Treasury plus G&S Total Rate5 years 4.5 years 1.28% 1.99% 3.27%7 years 6.5 years 1.89% 1.99% 3.88%10 years 9.5 years 2.51% 1.99% 4.50%

65% LTV / 1.35 DSC

Investor

SpreadTerm Investor YM Treasury plus G&S Total Rate5 years 4.5 years 1.28% 1.79% 3.07%7 years 6.5 years 1.89% 1.79% 3.68%10 years 9.5 years 2.51% 1.79% 4.30%

55% LTV / 1.55 DSC

InvestorSpread

Term Investor YM Treasury plus G&S Total Rate5 years 4.5 years 1.28% 1.55% 2.83%7 years 6.5 years 1.89% 1.55% 3.44%10 years 9.5 years 2.51% 1.55% 4.06%

Fannie Mae rates as of 9/27/10


96/100

62

Summary

Why Camden?


97/100

63

Why Camden? Experienced management team with proven history of

performance and sound business plan

Consistent long-term focus and commitment to high-growth markets

Strong balance sheet with ample liquidity

Well-positioned to capitalize on future opportunities

Ranked #10 by FORTUNE Magazine on list of100 Best Companies to Work For in America

Definitions & Disclosures


98/100

65

Funds from Operations (FFO) The National Association of Real Estate InvestmentTrusts (NAREIT) currently defines FFO as net income attributable to commonshareholders computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles(GAAP), excluding gains or losses from depreciable operating property sales, plus real

estate depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidatedpartnerships and joint ventures. Camdens definition of diluted FFO also assumesconversion of all dilutive convertible securities, including minority interests, which areconvertible into common equity. The Company considers FFO to be an appropriatesupplemental measure of operating performance because, by excluding gains or losseson dispositions of operating properties and excluding depreciation, FFO can help one

compare the operating performance of a company's real estate between periods or ascompared to different companies.

Net Operating Income (NOI) NOI is defined by the Company as total propertyincome less property operating and maintenance expenses less real estate taxes. The

Company considers NOI to be an appropriate supplemental measure of operatingperformance to net income attributable to common shareholders because it reflects theoperating performance of our communities without allocation of corporate level propertymanagement overhead or general and administrative costs.

Non-GAAP Reconciliations


99/100

66

Expected FFO Expected FFO is calculated in a method consistent with historical FFO,and is considered an appropriate supplemental measure of expected operatingperformance when compared to expected net income attributable to commonshareholders (EPS). A reconciliation of the ranges provided for expected net income

attributable to common shareholders per diluted share to expected FFO per dilutedshare is provided below:2010 Range

Low High

Expected net income attributable to common shareholders per share - diluted $0.06 $0.18Expected real estate depreciation 2.37 2.37Expected adjustments for unconsolidated joint ventures 0.13 0.13Expected income allocated to noncontrolling interests 0.02 0.02

Expected FFO per share - diluted $2.58 $2.70


100/100

67

Date post:	10-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ala-baster
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

CPT Camden Property Trust Oct 2010 Presentation Slides Deck

Documents