Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13

Whitney R. Tilson and Glenn H.

Tongue phone: 212 386 7160


Managing Partners fax: 240 368 0299
www.T2PartnersLLC.com

February 28, 2010

Dear Partner,

Our fund rose 7.0% net in February vs. 3.1% for the S&P 500, 2.9% for the Dow and 4.3% for
the Nasdaq. Year to date, it’s up 5.3% net vs. -0.6% for the S&P 500, -0.5% for the Dow and
-1.2% for the Nasdaq.

The biggest driver of our fund’s performance this month was the 41.0% jump in General Growth
Properties, discussed below. Other winners included Borders Group (up 65.1%), Huntsman
(12.6%), Resource America (11.0%), Sears Canada (10.0%) and Winn-Dixie (8.0%). The
biggest mover in our short book was Palm, which reported terrible sales numbers and tumbled
41.4%.

General Growth Properties


A bidding war has broken out for General Growth, as we expected. On December 16th, in our
first (of three) rebuttals to Hovde Capital’s bearish reports on GGP, we wrote:

Hovde completely ignores GGP’s value as a strategic asset to an acquirer, which is not a
theoretical idea but a concrete reality as both Simon and Brookfield are circling right now. For
Simon, there would be big cost savings and, more importantly, revenue benefits: according to the
WSJ article below, “Buying General Growth would make it by far the dominant player in the
U.S. mall industry with more than 500 properties, giving it enormous clout over retailers in lease
negotiations.” As for Brookfield, it raised a $5 billion fund in the past year to make acquisitions
and GGP represents its last opportunity to break into the U.S. market in a big way. These are two
very motivated potential acquirers. [page 9; all three rebuttals are posted at
www.tilsonfunds.com/GGP.pdf]

We continue to hold a large position in GGP because we think the downside is limited in light of
the offers on the table and the upside could exceed $20 (the stock closed February at $13.11).
Attached in Appendix A are three Wall Street Journal articles about the bidding war (also
attached is our updated Privacy Policy).

K-1s
We are working hard, along with our auditors, Rothstein Kass, to finish the 2009 audit and K-1s.
As soon as yours is ready (likely in late March), we will send it to you at this email address. If
you would like someone (such as your bookkeeper) cc’d on the email, or would like us to fax it
instead, please email or call Kelli at KAlires@T2PartnersLLC.com or (212) 386-7160.

Conclusion
In their latest Kiplinger’s column, Cribbing From the Best, John Heins and Whitney highlight
how we track the 13-F filings of top investors to find good new investment ideas to research.

145 E. 57th Street, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10022


Thank you for your continued confidence in us and the fund. As always, we welcome your
comments or questions, so please don’t hesitate to call us at (212) 386-7160.

Sincerely yours,

Whitney Tilson and Glenn Tongue

The unaudited return for the T2 Accredited Fund versus major benchmarks (including reinvested
dividends) is:

February Year-to-Date Since Inception


T2 Accredited Fund – gross 8.4% 6.7% 240.9%
T2 Accredited Fund – net 7.0% 5.3% 175.4%
S&P 500 3.1% -0.6% 9.3%
Dow 2.9% -0.5% 44.6%
NASDAQ 4.3% -1.2% 4.6%
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Please refer to the disclosure section at the end of this letter. The T2
Accredited Fund was launched on 1/1/99. Gains and losses among private placements are only reflected in the returns since
inception.

T2 Accredited Fund Performance (Net) Since Inception


180

160

140

120

100

80
(%)
60

40

20

0
Jan-99 Sep-99 May-00 Jan-01 Sep-01 May-02 Jan-03 Sep-03 May-04 Jan-05 Sep-05 May-06 Jan-07 Sep-07 May-08 Jan-09 Sep-09
-20

-40

T2 Accredited Fund S&P 500

-2-
Appendix A: Three Articles About General Growth
Properties
• FEBRUARY 16, 2010, WSJ

Simon Bids for General Growth


By KRIS HUDSON

Mall giant Simon Properties Group Inc. on Tuesday announced it has offered $10 billion to
acquire struggling rival General Growth Properties Inc., possibly creating the largest U.S. owner
of high-end malls.

General Growth also has been negotiating with Canadian real-estate concern Brookfield Asset
Management Inc. about Brookfield providing General Growth billions of dollars in capital to
emerge from bankruptcy-court protection. The decision of whether to go with Simon or
Brookfield is for General Growth's board to make, with the company's creditors and the
bankruptcy judge getting a say on the final decision.

Indianapolis-based Simon, which owns more than 300 U.S. malls, has offered to pay off General
Growth's $7 billion in unsecured debt in cash or stock. Simon also would pay $6 a share to
General Growth's shareholders and the equivalent of $3 a share to pay its remaining obligations
to the heirs of billionaire tycoon Howard Hughes for a massive residential development in Las
Vegas. General Growth's stock closed at $9.40 on Friday in trading on the so-called Pink Sheets.

"Simon's offer provides the best possible outcome for all General Growth stakeholders," Simon
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer David Simon said in a statement released Tuesday.
"Simon is in the unique position of being able to offer General Growth creditors and
shareholders full, fair and immediate value."

General Growth representatives didn't immediately comment on the Simon offer. The Chicago-
based company owns more than 200 U.S. malls. It sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in
April 2009 after failing to refinance portions of its $27 billion debt as they came due.

In a letter to General Growth's board sent Tuesday, Mr. Simon noted that he chose to make the
offer public after General Growth didn't respond to a formal offer that Simon made to its
executives and directors "more than a week" ago. Simon said it can finance its entire bid with
cash and borrowing capacity it has on hand as well as with financial partners it didn't name.

The deal, if accepted by General Growth's board and approved by its creditors and U.S.
Bankruptcy Judge Allan Gropper, would combine two of the largest and oldest mall owners in
the U.S. into a colossus with 550 malls—at least a third of the entire U.S. market. Such heft
would give Simon unrivaled clout in lease negotiations with retailers and in financing talks with
its lenders.

-3-
The deal would put half of the highest quality malls in the U.S. under Simon's ownership,
according to Green Street Advisors Inc. Of the 307 U.S. malls rated "A quality"—generally
meaning they generate sales per square foot of $400 or more each year—Simon owns 71 and
General Growth owns 77. Some analysts say it is those high-quality malls that Simon most
covets, and that Mr. Simon might opt to shed General Growth's lower-quality properties if his
bid succeeds.

"Simon is a leader in the mall business," Green Street analyst Jim Sullivan said. "Buying General
Growth in one bite would take them from leader to dominant player. That's the legacy that I
think is attracting [David Simon's] interest."

But Simon Properties likely will have to compete with a rival plan that General Growth is
discussing with Brookfield. Brookfield, which owns and manages $98 billion of assets, bought
nearly $1 billion of General Growth's unsecured debt in the past year, giving it a say in any
restructuring of General Growth's $7 billion of unsecured debt. Brookfield has informally spoken
with General Growth and other creditors about providing the capital General Growth needs to
pay some of its debts in return for an equity stake. Such an arrangement would allow General
Growth to exit bankruptcy next year as an independent company with Brookfield as a major
shareholder.

The decision of which route to take out of bankruptcy will be taken up by General Growth's
board, which has directors with divergent backgrounds that might influence their choices. On
one side is Chairman John Bucksbaum, the founding family scion whose father and uncle built
General Growth into one of the country's largest mall owners after opening their first shopping
center in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, in 1954. Mr. Bucksbaum and his family trust own roughly 23% of
General Growth's shares.

On the other side is activist investor William Ackman, whose hedge fund bought roughly 25% of
General Growth's stock late last year through direct purchases and swap contracts with
investment banks. His Pershing Square Capital Management LP made most those purchases
while General Growth's stock was trading for less than $2. He was added to General Growth's
board last June. "You have a mercenary, a profit-motivated owner of 25% of the company in Bill
Ackman," Green Street's Mr. Sullivan said. "And you have a 25% owner in the Bucksbaum
family that has deep emotional ties to this company and its assets. That's the setting for a very
interesting board discussion."

Also on the board are Adam Metz and Thomas Nolan, two board members who stepped into
executive roles in late 2008 as General Growth was careening toward bankruptcy. Mr. Metz,
now General Growth's CEO, and Mr. Nolan, its president and chief operating officer, have
adroitly steered General Growth's bankruptcy process. They and General Growth's advisers have
reached agreements with creditors holding most of General Growth's $15 billion in mortgages to
restructure those loans and get the malls pledged as collateral out of bankruptcy in recent weeks.

Should General Growth choose to accept Simon's bid, the combination will have ramifications
for mall retailers such as Gap Inc., Footlocker Inc. and Limited Brands Inc. A mall owner with
hundreds of locations can pressure retailers to open stores in struggling malls as a condition of
getting space in its best-quality malls. In addition, a retailer is less likely to fight a giant landlord

-4-
over the terms of a given store's lease if the standoff might influence negotiations on its leases at
other of that landlord's properties.

Still, some say Simon wouldn't be able to apply such wide-ranging influence immediately.
"Clearly, the only potential downside is, if you're a mall-based retailer, you have a little less
leverage in negotiating," said Scott Krugman, a spokesman for the National Retail Federation, a
trade group for retailers. "But a lot of the leases are already locked in long term. So there
wouldn't be an immediate impact on retailers' leases."

-5-
• FEBRUARY 23, 2010, WSJ

Brookfield to Battle Simon for Mall Giant


By JEFFREY MCCRACKEN And KRIS HUDSON

Associated Press

Faneuil Hall, right, shown in 2007. General Growth Properties owns Faneuil Hall Marketplace in
Boston.

Canadian property giant Brookfield Asset Management Inc. is readying a bid to take a large
stake in U.S. mall owner General Growth Properties Inc., according to several people familiar
with the matter, aiming to top an unsolicited bid made last week by mall rival Simon Property
Group Inc.

Brookfield's planned bid, which could be unveiled as soon as this week, would allow General
Growth to exit Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings as a standalone company, with Brookfield as
its largest shareholder, these people said.

The Simon bid values General Growth equity at about $3 billion, or about $9 a share. Simon
would also pay off in cash the company's unsecured creditors, who hold $7 billion in debt,
valuing General Growth at around $10 billion.

Brookfield's plan, while still being worked out, would value General Growth equity at a little
more than $3 billion, the people familiar with the matter said. Unsecured creditors, however,
would have to accept equity in General Growth, along with some cash.

The plan would make Brookfield the largest buyer in a massive stock sale General Growth
intends to make to raise capital for emerging from bankruptcy court. Brookfield would invest at
least $2 billion, these people said, though some of that would likely include forgiving General
Growth debt currently held by Brookfield.

The size of Brookfield's proposed ownership stake and the value it will attach to General Growth
couldn't be learned.

-6-
Brookfield, which has been readying a bid for some time, has lined up a consortium of other
investors, many of whom are already General Growth debt holders, said people familiar with the
matter. They didn't identify those investors. "It is a friendlier, more consensual deal from the
General Growth point of view," one of the people said.

The ultimate amount of stock that General Growth would sell hasn't been determined. Brookfield
wants to be a "substantial investor in the company," said a person familiar with the situation,
with an eye toward operating General Growth and expanding it.

In rejecting Simon's bid last week, General Growth executives said they intended to look into all
options for exiting bankruptcy, including soliciting other buyout bids and selling stock to raise
money for paying debts.

A spokesman for Simon said its bid was the better option for General Growth. "Simon's firm,
fully financed $10 billion offer provides immediate 100% cash recovery of par value plus
accrued interest and dividends to all unsecured creditors, plus more than $9 per share in value to
shareholders. It is the only offer which provides a full cash recovery for unsecured creditors
while reducing risk and providing potential upside," the spokesman said.

Chicago-based General Growth sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy last April after failing to refinance
portions of its $27 billion debt as they came due. The competing efforts of Brookfield and Simon
come ahead of a key March 3 hearing in its bankruptcy case.

At the hearing, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Allan Gropper is to decide whether and by how much to
extend General Growth's exclusivity period. During that period, only the company's board can
propose plans for exiting bankruptcy. Once the period expires, creditors and outside parties can
do so.

Brookfield's plan is likely to get mixed reactions from General Growth's creditors. It is unlikely
that General Growth's stock sale will raise as much as $7 billion and that all of that money would
be used to pay unsecured debt. Thus, General Growth's strategy is likely to call for paying part of
its creditors' claims in cash and the balance in stock, people familiar with the matter said. That
would appeal to creditors who wanted the potential to reap more than what they are owed if the
stock rises.

Simon, based in Indianapolis, has offered to pay the unsecured claims entirely in cash. That
appeals to some creditors who want to immediately settle their claims and prefer not to gamble
on the stock rising.

Further complicating matters: Brookfield last year bought roughly $1 billion of General Growth's
unsecured debt, giving it a voice among General Growth's creditors. Simon, too, has bought
some of the debt, but how much isn't known. Brookfield is being advised on its bid by Goldman
Sachs Group and law firm Willke, Farr & Gallagher, people familiar with the matter said.

The unsecured creditors will be one of many constituencies the judge weighs when he
determines which plan best suits all of General Growth's creditors and shareholders. It remained
unclear whether the judge would allow a Brookfield plan to compete with Simon's offer, since it

-7-
wouldn't pay unsecured creditors in cash. But if enough creditors preferred getting a chunk of
stock instead of cash, Brookfield could attempt to seek enough votes to confirm the plan,
assuming the judge allows creditors to vote on it.

Toronto-based Brookfield manages more than $98 billion in assets, specializing in infrastructure,
power plants and commercial property. It has long coveted retail property in the U.S., having
made a failed bid for discount-mall owner Mills Corp. in 2007. And It bid unsuccessfully to
provide General Growth with emergency financing when the mall owner sought bankruptcy last
year.

In the past year, Brookfield has raised roughly $5 billion, mostly from institutional real estate
investors contributing to its newly created fund for making acquisitions.

-8-
• FEBRUARY 25, 2010, WSJ

Westfield Weighs Bid for General Growth


By KRIS HUDSON And JEFFREY MCCRACKEN

The takeover battle for mall owner General Growth Properties Inc. reached a boiling point
Wednesday as General Growth unveiled a deal with Canadian property investor Brookfield Asset
Management Inc. even as Australian mall owner Westfield Group considered entering the fray.

GGP proposes to allocate properties between two spin-off companies based on performance. Las
Vegas's Fashion Show mall would go to the larger spin-off company for the best performing
malls. New York's South Street Seaport mall will go to the smaller spin-off.

Westfield, which owns 119 malls in the U.S., Australia and Britain, signed a nondisclosure
agreement this week to begin discussions with General Growth about a possible offer, people
familiar with the matter said.

Westfield has $8 billion of borrowing capacity on hand, and is thus far acting alone, these people
said.

As Westfield deliberated, General Growth laid out a plan to exit bankruptcy proceedings this
year by splitting the company in two, with Brookfield pledging $2.63 billion to that effort.

General Growth and Brookfield envision creating one company that owns roughly 180 of
General Growth's higher-quality malls and a smaller one that owns riskier real-estate holdings,
geared to investors willing to gamble on higher returns.

The complex plan, drafted partly by activist investor and General Growth board member William
Ackman, is meant to top a $10 billion buyout bid that rival mall owner Simon Property Group
Inc. made last week. The General Growth-Brookfield plan values General Growth at $15 a share
and the Simon offer at $9 a share.

"We know it is not automatic," Brookfield spokesman Denis Couture said. "But, we look
forward to working with them and through the court process."

The widening of the takeover contest reflects the recognition among the world's biggest mall
landlords that the General Growth bankruptcy represents a once-in-a-life opportunity. Although
U.S. retailers are suffering from one of the worst downturns in decades, General Growth still
owns a much-coveted collection of malls, such as the Ala Moana Center in Honolulu and
Fashion Show mall in Las Vegas.

Under General Growth's plan to split itself in two to exit bankruptcy, the challenge will be for
the company to assemble $7 billion in cash to pay its unsecured creditors. Simon and its partners
have already amassed such a sum.

-9-
General Growth on Wednesday outlined several paths for raising the money: getting the $2.6
billion from Brookfield; selling another $2.8 billion of new stock in the larger company after the
split; issuing $1.5 billion in new debt; and selling $1 billion of stakes in some of its malls. The
latter two efforts are in preliminary stages.

Despite its deal with Brookfield, General Growth intends to continue soliciting buyout or
financing offers. "There's still an opportunity for Simon, if they continue to be interested, to
ultimately provide something that's higher and better than the deal that's on the table today," said
General Growth Chief Executive Adam Metz.

In a statement released late Wednesday, Simon said its all-cash bid was superior to the
Brookfield plan because it provided $10 billion "of real value…as compared to a complex piece
of financial engineering that is so highly conditional as to be illusory."

If General Growth gains approval from its creditors and the bankruptcy judge for the breakup,
the larger of the resulting companies, which would retain the General Growth Properties name,
would hold roughly 180 of the company's more than 200 malls. Brookfield has pledged to buy
30% of that company's shares at a price of $10 a share, for a total of roughly $2.5 billion. The
larger company would carry more than $19 billion of mortgages on its malls.

The smaller company, to be called General Growth Opportunities, would include many of
General Growth's less-valuable malls—including the South Street Seaport mall in New York and
13 malls the company previously intended to forfeit to its lenders—as well as assets like its
residential-development division and development rights.

Brookfield would support the smaller company by providing half of the $250 million that
company would raise by selling stock at $5 a share, people familiar with the matter said.
Brookfield, in turn, would get a 7% stake in that company, which would carry $1.2 billion of
mortgages on its properties.

After an early surge on news of the breakup plan, General Growth's stock ended the day down
eight cents at $12.89 in 4 p.m. trading on the over-the-counter Pink Sheets. Analysts said
investors were unsure of the true value of the smaller company with riskier assets.

The Brookfield plan values General Growth at about $4.5 billion in equity value, compared with
$3 billion under the Simon offer. But Simon has been cutting deals with Blackstone Group LP
and other deep-pocketed partners in case it decides to raise its bid.

General Growth clinched the Brookfield pact just one week prior to a pivotal hearing in its
bankruptcy case. On March 3, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Allan Gropper will decide whether
General Growth's exclusive right to propose a reorganization plan should be extended by as long
as six months.

Simon, which has offered to buy the whole of General Growth for $10 billion, would pay off in
cash holders of General Growth's $7 billion of unsecured debt.

-10-
In addition, Simon would pay roughly $3 billion to General Growth's shareholders, including $6
a share in cash and an estimated $3 a share in value from a proposed spinoff off General
Growth's residential-development division.

In addition to Blackstone, Simon has lined up sovereign wealth funds to help finance its bid. On
its own, Simon has $4 billion of cash and $3.5 billion of borrowing capacity. Yet Simon
ultimately might structure its bid as a joint venture in which it owns half and its partners own
half, especially if it eventually must sweeten the bid, people familiar with the matter said.

Attention now will turn to whether Simon will increase its offer or perhaps risk missing the
opportunity to purchase its next-largest rival at a fraction of the price it would have fetched in
past years. That doesn't mean Simon must match or exceed the Brookfield offer or General
Growth's current share price.

Kevin Starke, an analyst with CRT Capital LLC, estimates that Simon can justify paying as
much as $16 a share for General Growth, based on General Growth's estimated asset value and
cash flow.

One advantage Simon has over Brookfield is that, as the largest U.S. mall owner, Simon can
wring cost savings out of General Growth that Brookfield couldn't. In other words, Simon can
recoup some of its outlay by cutting duplicated corporate jobs and perhaps combining other
staffs.

"If there's another bid, [Simon is] going to be forced to raise their bid," said Jim Sullivan, an
analyst with Green Street Advisors Inc., prior to the Brookfield bid's unveiling. "But they have
the strategic advantage in being in the mall business, which allows them to bid more. They have
a very strong balance sheet. But someone has to prompt them to bid more."

General Growth sought bankruptcy last April after failing to refinance portions of its $27 billion
debt load as they came due. If Simon's bid were to prevail, Simon would pay off General
Growth's $7 billion in unsecured debts and assume the $20 billion in mortgages on its malls,
likely selling some of those assets to recoup some of its outlay for the purchase. Ultimately, the
judge might allow General Growth's creditors to vote on either the Simon or Brookfield plans.

-11-
T2 Partners Management, L.P. PRIVACY POLICY
This privacy policy explains the manner in which the Partnership, the General Partner and the Investment Manager
(collectively, the “Partnership”) collect, utilize and maintain nonpublic personal information about the Partnership’s
investors, as required under Federal legislation. This privacy policy only applies to nonpublic information of investors
who are individuals (not entities).

Collection of Investor Information


The Partnership collects nonpublic personal information about its investors mainly through the following sources:
Subscription forms, investor questionnaires and other information provided by the investor in writing, in person, by
telephone, electronically or by any other means. This information includes name, address, nationality, tax identification
number and financial and investment qualifications; and transactions within the Partnership, including account balances,
investments and withdrawals.

Disclosure of Nonpublic Personal Information


The Partnership does not sell or rent investor information. The Partnership does not disclose nonpublic personal
information about its investors to nonaffiliated third parties or to affiliated entities, except as permitted by law. For
example, the Partnership may share nonpublic personal information in the following situations:

• To service providers in connection with the administration and servicing of the Partnership, which may include
attorneys, accountants, auditors and other professionals. The Partnership may also share information in
connection with the servicing or processing of Partnership transactions;

• To 3rd party marketing firms who have been engaged by T2 to raise assets for the Funds. Any information
provided to a 3rd party marketing firm would be limited to name and basic contact information.

• To affiliated companies in order to provide you with ongoing personal advice and assistance with respect to the
products and services you have purchased through the Partnership and to introduce you to other products and
services that may be of value to you;

• To respond to a subpoena or court order, judicial process or regulatory authorities;

• To protect against fraud, unauthorized transactions (such as money laundering), claims or other liabilities; and

• Upon consent of an investor to release such information, including authorization to disclose such information to
persons acting in a fiduciary or representative capacity on behalf of the investor.

If you elect to “opt-out” and do not want us to share your non-public personal information other than when required
to perform normal services or when required by law, please contact us at: 145 East 57th Street, 10th Floor, New York,
NY 10022, Ph: (212) 386-7160 or by email: kalires@tilsonfunds.com.

Protection of Investor Information


The Partnership’s policy is to require that all employees, financial professionals and companies providing services on its
behalf keep client information confidential.

The Partnership maintains safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect investor information. The Partnership
restricts access to the personal and account information of investors to those employees who need to know that
information in the course of their job responsibilities. Third parties with whom the Partnership shares investor information
must agree to follow appropriate standards of security and confidentiality.

The Partnership’s privacy policy applies to both current and former investors. The Partnership may disclose nonpublic
personal information about a former investor to the same extent as for a current investor.

Changes to Privacy Policy


The Partnership may make changes to its privacy policy in the future. The Partnership will not make any change affecting
you without first sending you a revised privacy policy describing the change.

-12-
T2 Accredited Fund, LP (the “Fund”) commenced operations on January 1, 1999. The Fund’s
investment objective is to achieve long-term after-tax capital appreciation commensurate with
moderate risk, primarily by investing with a long-term perspective in a concentrated portfolio of
U.S. stocks. In carrying out the Partnership’s investment objective, the Investment Manager, T2
Partners Management, LLC, seeks to buy stocks at a steep discount to intrinsic value such that
there is low risk of capital loss and significant upside potential. The primary focus of the
Investment Manager is on the long-term fortunes of the companies in the Partnership’s portfolio
or which are otherwise followed by the Investment Manager, relative to the prices of their stocks.

There is no assurance that any securities discussed herein will remain in Fund’s portfolio at the
time you receive this report or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities
discussed may not represent the Fund’s entire portfolio and in the aggregate may represent only a
small percentage of an account’s portfolio holdings. It should not be assumed that any of the
securities transactions, holdings or sectors discussed were or will prove to be profitable, or that
the investment recommendations or decisions we make in the future will be profitable or will
equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. All recommendations within
the preceding 12 months or applicable period are available upon request.

Performance results shown are for the T2 Accredited Fund, LP and are presented gross and net
of incentive fees. Gross returns reflect the deduction of management fees, brokerage
commissions, administrative expenses, and other operating expenses of the Fund. Gross returns
will be reduced by accrued performance allocation or incentive fees, if any. Gross and net
performance includes the reinvestment of all dividends, interest, and capital gains. Performance
for the most recent month is an estimate.

The fee schedule for the Investment Manager includes a 1.5% annual management fee and a 20%
incentive fee allocation. For periods prior to June 1, 2004, the Investment Manager’s fee
schedule included a 1% annual management fee and a 20% incentive fee allocation, subject to a
10% “hurdle” rate. In practice, the incentive fee is “earned” on an annual, not monthly, basis or
upon a withdrawal from the Fund. Because some investors may have different fee arrangements
and depending on the timing of a specific investment, net performance for an individual investor
may vary from the net performance as stated herein.

The return of the S&P 500 and other indices are included in the presentation. The volatility of
these indices may be materially different from the volatility in the Fund. In addition, the Fund’s
holdings differ significantly from the securities that comprise the indices. The indices have not
been selected to represent appropriate benchmarks to compare an investor’s performance, but
rather are disclosed to allow for comparison of the investor’s performance to that of certain well-
known and widely recognized indices. You cannot invest directly in these indices.

Past results are no guarantee of future results and no representation is made that an investor will
or is likely to achieve results similar to those shown. All investments involve risk including the
loss of principal. This document is confidential and may not be distributed without the consent
of the Investment Manager and does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer
to purchase any security or investment product. Any such offer or solicitation may only be made
by means of delivery of an approved confidential offering memorandum.

-13-