Tarragon doing well in Edgewater
10
July
7/10/2008:
Tarragon’s publicity company sent Hoboken411 this press release yesterday. Figured I’d give them the opportunity to spread the good news about their Edgewater development.
One Hudson Park 90% Sold
Edgewater’s Only High-Rise Condominium Almost Sold Out
EDGEWATER, N. J. (July 9, 2008) – Tarragon Corp.’s new condominium development, One Hudson Park in Edgewater along New Jersey’s desirable Gold Coast, is now more than 90 percent sold.
Nearly all of the one-, two- and three-bedroom homes in the distinct luxury residential tower are sold, and only a handful of penthouses remain. One Hudson Park has been selling steadily since its first residents moved in in May 2007.
“One Hudson Park offers its residents spacious living areas and high-end amenities, including an indoor lap pool and a fully furnished rooftop deck, with incredible views of the Manhattan skyline,” said William Rosato, president of Tarragon Development Corp. “Sales have continued to stay strong because of the building’s convenient location, modern architecture and impeccable finishes.”
Located on River Road, these ultra-spacious condominium homes boast highly sought-after features such as gracious foyers, expansive floor-to-ceiling windows and corner living and dining rooms. Separate gourmet kitchens and sleek stone baths offer a level of contemporary elegance found in only the finest new condominiums. All residences are equipped with washer/dryers and exceptional closet space. Dramatic glass- and steel-trimmed balconies play host to sweeping New York City skyline views.
The increased sales are also attributed to favorable interest rates and a change in attitude among buyers, many of whom have decided to move forward after waiting for months on the sidelines, Rosato added.
One Hudson Park houses an array of amenities including its 50-foot indoor lap pool, a fitness center and yoga studio, a children’s playroom and a board room for private business or quiet study. Other luxury features include a 24-hour attended lobby, deeded parking, and a media lounge with catering kitchen. There also is a Tarragon-built public park adjacent to the building. For more information on One Hudson Park, please visit www.onehudsonpark.com.
About Tarragon Corporation:
Tarragon Corporation [TARR] is a leading developer of multi-family housing for rent and for sale. The company’s operations are concentrated in the Northeast, Florida, Texas and Tennessee. To learn more about Tarragon Corp., visit the Web site at www.tarragoncorp.com.
July 10th 2008 - 13:52:35 |
This is a lot of fluff. Besides Maxwell Place, I can’t think of another development that is continuing to see “strong” buying patterns. This is in Edgewater though, so I could be wrong (which I usually am).
Login or Register to reply
July 10th 2008 - 13:54:59 |
That’s good they finally sold 90% after being completed in May 2007. The letter from their accountant in their most recent annual report questions whether they can avoid bankruptcy:
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors and Stockholders
Tarragon Corporation
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Tarragon Corporation (a Nevada Corporation) and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007. Our audits of the basic financial statements included the financial statement schedules listed in Item 15.2. These financial statements and financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial statement schedules based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Tarragon Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the related financial statement schedules, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1, Liquidity, to the consolidated financial statements, as of December 31, 2007 the Company had $1,111.6 million in consolidated debt and had guaranteed additional debt of its unconsolidated joint ventures totaling $31.6 million. At December 31, 2007, the Company was not in compliance with certain of its debt covenants. Additionally the Company incurred a net loss of $388.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2007, and, as of that date, the Company’s total liabilities exceeded its total assets by $93.6 million. These factors, among others, as discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 1. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
As discussed in Note 12, Income Taxes, to the consolidated financial statements, the Company recorded a cumulative effect adjustment as of January 1, 2007, in connection with adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes — an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.” As discussed in Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, to the consolidated financial statements, the Company recorded a cumulative effect adjustment as of January 1, 2006, in connection with the adoption of Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, “Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements.”
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Tarragon Corporation and subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) and our accompanying report dated March 27, 2008, expressed an adverse opinion thereon.
/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
New York, New York
March 27, 2008
Ps. As of 6/13/08 Grant Thornton is no longer doing their books.
Login or Register to reply
July 10th 2008 - 14:14:13 |
That’s funny. I’ve heard that One Hudson Park is doing horribly and people are trying to back out.
Login or Register to reply
July 10th 2008 - 14:46:11 |
Switching auditors is never a good sign mid-year. I am sure they are switching b/c their auditors told them the truth, that they will be lucky to avoid bankruptcy. And if they file for CH-11, good luck getting them to live up to any of the promises they make the city. At best, Hoboken would be 1 of thousands of unsecured creditors that all will get to share a whole lot of NOTHING!
Login or Register to reply
July 10th 2008 - 15:16:11 |
1. Adverse opinion on financial controls.
2. Going concern issues.
Wow.
This would make me axious if I bought a condo based on blueprints. (If I owned a condo in a completed building, I’d lobby to get another management company.)
However… The going concern issue can be resolved with some outside capital, if they can find a taker.
And the internal controls can’t be too terrible given the clean opinion.
Login or Register to reply
July 10th 2008 - 15:23:36 |
YuppieSteve wrote:
Given the amount of leverage on this pig already, who would put money in? The secured lenders probably have covenants so you can’t put money in pari or senior to their debt. And I believe most of it is project debt and it is secured by each of the respective properties – so it is doubtful they will let you layer on more project related debt. And if you want to put in money as an unsecured lender, would your want to be subordinated by all that secured debt (almost $1bn of it)? And based on the market cap of the equity, that has almost no value (the market cap is under $40mm). So how would they raise capital? If they could raise money, they would have done it loooooooong ago.
As for the internal controls – I believe they use percentage of completion accounting………never a good sign. Most accounting restatements I see have to do with percentage of completion accounting.
Login or Register to reply
July 10th 2008 - 15:58:31 |
matt_72 wrote:
Well they essentially built that apartment building at 9th and Madison and are flipping it to ING. If the real estate market continues to worsen they’ll likely have a hard time pulling off that type of deal again.
Login or Register to reply
July 11th 2008 - 09:36:47 |
Percentage of completion accounting is common in construction… But yes, it is subject to abuse.
As for seeking outside money… It would have to be equity or some sort of convertible issue.
Login or Register to reply
July 11th 2008 - 09:41:34 |
YuppieSteve wrote:
I don’t think that is likely with almost a billion of secured debt ahead of any new money and a market cap of under $40mm. I bet even that secured debt doesn’t all trade at par……
Login or Register to reply
July 16th 2008 - 15:11:37 |
Surprised no one’s talking about this bogus website from Tarragon’s BS ad in the Hoboken Reporter last weekend:
http://www.hobokencommunitycenter.com/
It’s basically trying to use the community center to blackmail the city into giving them what they want (i.e. even more free reign to print money).
It’s funny how they copy/pasted stuff in their “Get the Facts” section directly from hobokenparks.org, and even funnier how they inadvertently put their foot in their mouth:
beamrider9 wrote:
OK, so the rooftops thing isn’t true. But the part about most of the “green” being landscaped building perimeters? Yeah, seems like that’s probably true.
Login or Register to reply
July 16th 2008 - 16:00:19 |
beamrider9 wrote:
I like the “Contact The Mayor and Council” link and it canned message.
Journey wrote:
Login or Register to reply
October 6th 2008 - 09:17:31 |
Tarragon recived a notice of default and had $42.9mm in loans accelerated by one of their lenders. As they will likely be filing for bankrupcty in the near term if this default isn’t cured, anyone want to bet they won’t be living up to any of the empty promises they made the city? We granted all sorts of variances for the buildings Tarragon has ALREADY BUILT and now we will get none of the promisied benefits. At least the mayor got his $1mm in campaign contributions.
Login or Register to reply