Note 4 – Investment in 111 West 57^th Partners LLC

In June 2013, the Company purchased an equity interest in a real estate development property through a joint venture agreement to purchase and develop real property located at 105 through 111 West 57^th Street in New York (the “111 West 57^th Property”). The Company is engaged in material disputes and litigation with the sponsor of the joint venture and a mezzanine lender to the joint venture. In August 2017, the junior mezzanine lender (“Spruce”) issued a Notice of Retention of Pledged Collateral in Full Satisfaction of Indebtedness, in which Spruce claims to have retained the collateral securing the junior mezzanine loan (the “Strict Foreclosure”).

Despite ongoing litigation challenging the legitimacy of the actions taken by the Sponsors and Spruce in connection with the Company’s investment in the 111 West 57^th Property as further discussed herein, in accordance with GAAP, the Company recorded an impairment of its equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Property of $63,745,000 in the third quarter ended September 30, 2017. The carrying value of the Company’s equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Property represented substantially all of the Company’s assets and net equity value.

The Company has an appeal pending on its challenge to the Strict Foreclosure which has not yet been resolved. The Company is and will continue to vigorously pursue the recovery of its asset value from all sources of recovery. See Note 9 for further information.

See below for additional information with regard to background information regarding the Company’s 111 West 57^th Property equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Property and events leading up to the Strict Foreclosure, as follows:

In June 2013, 111 West 57^th Investment LLC, (“Investment LLC”), a then newly formed subsidiary of the Company, entered into a joint venture agreement (as amended, the “JV Agreement”) with 111 West 57^th Sponsor LLC, (the “Sponsors”), pursuant to which Investment LLC invested (the “Investment”) in a real estate development property to purchase and develop the 111 West 57^th Street Property (the “111 West 57^th Property”). In consideration for making the Investment, Investment LLC was granted a membership interest in 111 West 57^th Partners LLC (“111 West 57^th Partners”), which indirectly acquired the 111 West 57^th Property on June 28, 2013 (the “Joint Venture,” and such date, the “Closing Date”). The Company also indirectly contributed an additional amount to the Joint Venture in exchange for an additional indirect interest in the Joint Venture. Other members and the Sponsor contributed additional cash and/or property to the Joint Venture. The Joint Venture plans to redevelop the 111 West 57^th Property into a luxury residential tower and retail project.

Amounts relating to the Company’s initial June 2013 investment and other information relating to the 111 West 57^th Property are as follows:

($ in thousands)
Company’s aggregate initial investment	$	57,250
Company’s aggregate initial membership interest %		60.3	%
Other members and Sponsor initial investment	$	37,750
Approximate gross square feet of project		346,000

The JV Agreement and related operating agreements generally provide that all distributable cash shall be distributed as follows: (i) first, 100% to the members in proportion to their percentage interests until Investment LLC has received distributions yielding a 20% internal rate of return as calculated; (ii) second, 100% to the Sponsor as a return of (but not a return on) any additional capital contributions made by the Sponsor on account of manager overruns; and (iii) thereafter, (a) 50% to the members in proportion to their respective percentage interests at the time of such distribution, and (b) 50% to the Sponsor.

Additionally, the JV Agreement provides that (i) Mr. Richard A. Bianco (the Company’s current Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer) (“Mr. R. A. Bianco”), his immediate family, and/or any limited liability company wholly-owned thereby, and/or a trust in which Mr. R. A. Bianco and/or his immediate family is the beneficiary, shall at all times own, in the aggregate, not less than 20% of the outstanding shares of AmBase; and (ii) Mr. R. A. Bianco shall remain the Chairman of the Board of Directors of AmBase for the duration of the JV Agreement.

In March 2014, the Company entered into an amended and restated operating agreement for Investment LLC (the “Amended and Restated Investment Operating Agreement”) to grant a 10% subordinated participation interest in Investment LLC to Mr. R. A. Bianco as contingent future incentive for Mr. R. A. Bianco’s past, current and anticipated ongoing role to develop and commercialize the Company’s equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Property. Pursuant to the terms of the Amended and Restated Investment Operating Agreement, Mr. R.A. Bianco has no voting rights with respect to his interest in Investment LLC, and his entitlement to receive 10% of the distributions from Investment LLC is subject to the Company first receiving distributions equal to 150% of the Company’s initial aggregate investment in Investment LLC and the Joint Venture, plus any additional investments by the Company, and only with respect to any distributions thereafter. At the current time the Company has not expensed nor accrued any amounts relating to this subordinated participation interest, as no amount or range of amounts can be reasonably estimated or assured.

During 2014, in connection with the funding of additional capital calls under the JV Agreement for required borrowing and development costs for the 111 West 57^th Property, the Company’s management and its Board of Directors concluded that, given the continuing development risks of the 111 West 57^th Property and the Company’s financial position, the Company should not at that time increase its already significant concentration and risk exposure to the 111 West 57th Property. Nonetheless, the Company sought to limit dilution of its interest in the Joint Venture resulting from any failure to fund the capital call requirements, but at the same time wished to avoid the time, expense and financial return requirements (with attendant dilution and possible loss of voting rights) that obtaining a replacement third-party investor would require. The Company therefore entered into a second amended and restated operating agreement for Investment LLC (“Second Amended and Restated Investment Operating Agreement”) pursuant to which Capital LLC was admitted as a member of Investment LLC. In exchange for Capital LLC contributing toward Investment LLC capital calls in respect of the 111 West 57^thProperty, available cash of Investment LLC will be distributed first to Capital LLC until it has received a 20% internal rate of return (calculated as provided for in the JV Agreement as noted above), second to the Company until it has received 150% of its capital, and; thereafter, available cash is split 10/90 with 10% going to Mr. R.A. Bianco as the subordinated participation interest noted above and 90% going to Capital LLC and the Company pari-passu, with Capital LLC receiving one-half of its pro-rata share based on capital contributed and the Company receiving the balance. No other material changes were made to the Amended and Restated Investment Operating Agreement, and neither Mr. R. A. Bianco nor Capital LLC has any voting rights with respect to their interest and investment in Investment LLC.

In accordance with the JV Agreement, Shortfall Capital Contributions may be treated either as a member loan or as a dilutive capital contribution by the funding party valued at one and one-half times the amount actually contributed. The Sponsors deemed the Shortfall Capital Contributions as dilutive capital contributions to the Company. The Company disagrees with the Sponsors’ investment percentage calculations. The Sponsors have taken the position that the Capital Contribution Requests, if taken together, would have caused the Company’s combined ownership percentage to be diluted to approximately 48%. The parties have a dispute with regard to the calculation of the revised investment percentages resulting from the Capital Contribution Requests, along with the treatment and allocation of these Shortfall Capital Contribution amounts.

On June 30, 2015, 111 West 57^th Partners obtained financing for the 111 West 57^thProperty. The financing was obtained in two parts: (i) a first mortgage construction loan with AIG Asset Management (US), LLC (along with its affiliates “AIG”); and (ii) a mezzanine loan with Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance, Inc. (along with its affiliates “Apollo”), as detailed herein below. Both loans have a four-year term with a one-year extension option subject to satisfying certain conditions. The loan agreements (the “Loan Agreements”) also include customary events of default and other customary terms and conditions. Simultaneously with the closing of the AIG and the Apollo financing, 111 West 57^th Partners repaid all outstanding liabilities and obligations to Annaly CRE, LLC under the initial mortgage and acquisition loan agreement, dated June 28, 2013, between joint venture entities and Annaly CRE, LLC. The remaining loan proceeds were to be drawn down and used as necessary for construction and related costs, loan interest escrow and other related project expenses for development of the 111 West 57^th Property.

Information relating to the June 30, 2015 financing for 111 West 57^th Partners is as follows:

(in thousands)
Financing obtained by 111 West 57^th Partners - AIG	$	400,000
Financing obtained by 111 West 57^th Partners - Apollo	$	325,000
Annaly CRE LLC initial mortgage and acquisition loan repaid	$	230,000

In April 2016, AmBase initiated a litigation in the New York State Supreme Court for New York County (the “NY Court”), Index No. 652301/2016, (“AmBase v. 111 West 57^th Sponsor LLC, et al.”) (the “111 West 57^th Action”). The defendants in that litigation are 111 West 57th Sponsor LLC, 111 West 57th JDS LLC, PMG West 57th Street LLC, 111 West 57th Control LLC, 111 West 57th Developer LLC, Elliot Joseph, 111 West 57^th KM Equity LLC, 111 West 57^th KM Group LLC, Kevin Maloney, Matthew Phillips, Michael Stern, Ned White and Franklin R. Kaiman (collectively, “Defendants”) and nominal defendant 111 West 57th Partners LLC. AmBase alleges in that action, among other claims, that the Defendants engaged in an unlawful scheme to dilute AmBase’s equity interest in the joint real estate venture 111 West 57^th Partners, and to keep for themselves certain financing opportunities in breach of Defendants’ contractual and fiduciary duties. The complaint also alleges that defendants have failed to honor the exercise of AmBase's contractual “equity put right” as set forth in the JV Agreement (the “Equity Put Right”). AmBase is seeking compensatory damages, as well as punitive damages, indemnification and equitable relief including a declaration of the parties’ rights, an accounting and a constructive trust over distributions received by the Defendants. The complaint in this action has been filed, a motion to dismiss is pending and discovery is ongoing. The Company has also demanded from the Sponsors access to the books and records for the 111 West 57^th Property which the Sponsors have refused, claiming they have provided all books and records as required. For additional information, see Note 9.

The Sponsors proposed for approval a “proposed budget” (the “Proposed Budget”), which the Sponsors claim represented an increase to the aggregate of hard cost line items of an amount slightly below the Equity Put Right threshold amount and a further increase in other costs thus resulting in the need for additional funding in order to complete the project. The Company disputes, among other items, the calculation of the percentage increase of hard costs shown in the Proposed Budget. The Company believes the aggregate projected hard costs in the Proposed Budget exceed a contractually stipulated limit as a percentage of the hard costs set forth in the prior approved budget, thus allowing Investment LLC the option to exercise its Equity Put Right. Consequently, subsequent to the Sponsors’ presentation of the Proposed Budget, Investment LLC notified the Sponsors that it was exercising its Equity Put Right pursuant to the JV Agreement. The Sponsors have refused to honor the exercise of Investment LLC’s Equity Put Right. The Sponsors claim, among other things, that the conditions precedent were not met in that the increase in aggregate hard costs in the Proposed Budget does not exceed the contractually stipulated limit that would allow exercise of the Equity Put Right.

The Company further contends that a portion of the Proposed Budget increases should be manager overruns (as defined in the JV Agreement) and thus should be paid for by the Sponsors. The Sponsors deny that the Proposed Budget increases were manager overruns. The Company continues to challenge the nature and substance of the Proposed Budget increases and how they should be treated pursuant to the JV Agreement.

In March 2017, the Company and Mr. R. A. Bianco entered into an agreement for Mr. R. A. Bianco to provide to the Company a financial commitment in the form of a line of credit up to ten million dollars ($10,000,000) or additional amount(s) as may be necessary and agreed to enable AmBase to contribute capital to Investment LLC and/or other affiliated subsidiaries of the Company to meet capital calls for the of 111 West 57^th Property if and when the case may be necessary on terms agreeable to/by the Company (as determined by the independent members of the Board of Directors) and Mr. R. A. Bianco at such time. The agreement provides that additional borrowings from Mr. R. A. Bianco pursuant to this line of credit shall be secured by the Company’s commercial office building in Greenwich, Connecticut.

As a result of the projected Proposed Budget increase, the Sponsors claimed that additional borrowings of $60 million to $100 million were needed to complete the project. In addition, the Company had been informed by the Sponsors, that Apollo had indicated that due to budget increases, it believed the current loan had been “out of balance” (meaning, according to Apollo, the projected budget exceeds the original budget approved in connection with the loan); and thus 111 West 57th Partners LLC (“111 West 57th Partners”), or its subsidiaries would need additional funding in order to bring the loan back into balance. The Company considered approving the additional financing, but informed the Sponsors that it had concerns about the Proposed Budget and the implications of the Proposed Budget, as well as other questions which needed to be addressed first. Apollo had previously provided loan forbearances to the borrowers and guarantors in order to allow the Sponsors time (while the building continued to be built) to raise the additional financing that it claimed would be needed in order to complete the 111 West 57th project. This forbearance period ended on June 29, 2017. Around this date, the Company was advised that Apollo sold $25 million of the mezzanine loan—broken off as a junior mezzanine loan—to an affiliate of Spruce Capital Partners LLC, (“Spruce”) (the “Junior Mezzanine Loan”).

On June 30, 2017, Spruce declared an event of default under the Junior Mezzanine Loan and demanded immediate payment of the full outstanding balance of the Junior Mezzanine Loan. Spruce gave notice to the junior mezzanine borrower that it proposed to accept the pledged collateral (including the joint venture members’ collective interest in the property) in full satisfaction of the joint venture’s indebtedness under the Junior Mezzanine Loan (i.e., a “Strict Foreclosure”).

On July 25, 2017, the Company filed a complaint against Spruce and the Sponsors and requested injunctive relief halting the Strict Foreclosure from the New York State Supreme Court for New York County, (the “NY Court”) Index No. 655031/2017, (the “111 West 57^th Spruce Action”). The defendants in the 111 West 57^th Spruce action are 111 W57 Mezz Investor, LLC, Spruce Capital Partners LLC, 111 West 57th Sponsor LLC, Michael Z. Stern, and Kevin P. Maloney (collectively, “Defendants”) and nominal defendants 111 West 57th Partners LLC and 111 West 57^th Mezz 1 LLC.

Pursuant to the Strict Foreclosure process, Spruce claims to have completed the retention of the collateral pledged by the junior mezzanine borrower, and therefore, the Company’s interest in the 111 West 57th Street Property. That investment represents substantially all of the Company’s assets and net equity value. The Company’s motion for a stay or injunctive relief pending appeal has not yet been resolved. 111 W57 Mezz Investor, LLC and Spruce Capital Partners LLC filed an opposition to that motion and the Company filed its reply brief. For additional information see Note 9.

As noted above, despite ongoing litigation challenging the legitimacy of the actions taken by the Sponsors and Spruce in connection with the Company’s investment in the 111 West 57^th Property as further discussed herein, in accordance with GAAP, the Company recorded an impairment of its equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Property in the third quarter ended September 30, 2017. The Company is and will continue to vigorously pursue the recovery of its asset value from all sources of recovery. For additional information with regard to the Company’s legal proceedings related to the 111 West 57^th Property, see Note 9.

For information relating to the Litigation Funding Agreement entered into between the Company and Mr. Richard A. Bianco, the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, see Note 10.

With respect to its disputes and litigation relating to its interest in the 111 West 57th Property, the Company is continuing to pursue various legal courses of action, as well as considering other possible economic strategies, including the possible sale of the Company’s interest in and/or rights with respect to the 111 West 57th Property. The Company is continuing to pursue other options to realize the Company’s investment value and/or protect its legal rights.

The Company can give no assurances regarding the outcome of the matters described herein, including as to the effect of Spruce’s actions described herein, whether the Sponsors will perform their contractual commitments to the Company under the JV Agreement, as to what further action, if any, the lenders may take with respect to the project, as to the ultimate resolution of the ongoing litigation proceedings relating to the Company’s investment interest in the 111 West 57^th Property, as to the ultimate effect of the Sponsors’, the Company’s or the lenders’ actions on the project, or as to the completion or ultimate success of the project, or the value or ultimate realization of any portion of the Company’s equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Street Property.

While the Company’s management is evaluating future courses of action to recover the value of the Company’s equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Property, the adverse developments make it uncertain as to whether any such courses of action will be successful in recovering value for the Company. Any such efforts are likely to require sustained effort over a period of time, and require substantial additional financial resources. Inability to recover all or most of such value would in all likelihood have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and future prospects.

The Company recorded its investment in 111 West 57^th Partners utilizing the equity method of accounting. Despite ongoing litigation challenging the legitimacy of the actions taken by the Sponsors and Spruce in connection with the Company’s investment in the 111 West 57^th Property as further discussed herein, in accordance with GAAP, the Company recorded an impairment of its equity investment in the 111 West 57^th Property in the third quarter ended September 30, 2017. As a result, the operations of 111 West 57^th only through June 30, 2017 are included in the Company’s condensed consolidated operations for the year to date period ended September 30, 2017.

As a result of the matters described herein, the following tables present summarized financial information for 111 West 57^th Partners solely for the periods indicated. The amounts shown represent 100% of the financial position and results of operations of 111 West 57^thPartners for the dates indicated below.

(in thousands)

Assets:	December 31, 2016
Real estate held for development, net	$	563,133
Escrow deposits		9,000
Other assets		6,908
Total assets	$	579,041
Liabilities:
Loans payable	$	441,749
Other liabilities		16,788
Total liabilities		458,537
Equity:
Total members' equity		120,504
Total liabilities and members' equity	$	579,041

	Three Months Ended			Nine Months Ended
(in thousands)	September 30, 2016			September 30, 2016

Rental income	$	-		$	-
Expenses		81			910
Net income (loss)	$	(81	)	$	(910	)