Slides
Page 1
HOWARD HUGHES 2025 HHH Shareholder Meeting
Page 2
HOWARD HUGHES 2 Forward-Looking Statements Statements made in this presentation that are not historical facts, including statements accompanied by words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “intend,” “likely,” “may,” “plan,” “project,” “realize,” “should,” “transform,” “would,” and other statements of similar expression and other words of similar expression, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These statements are based on management’s expectations, estimates, assumptions and projections as of the date of this presentation and are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially are set forth as risk factors in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In this presentation, forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, those relating to our intentions to launch an insurance business, the operating and strategic characteristics and performance of any insurance business that we do commence, expectations about the performance of our Master Planned Communities segment and other current income-producing properties and future liquidity, development opportunities, development spending and management plans. We caution you not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation and do not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect future events, information or circumstances that arise after the date of this presentation except as required by law. Non-GAAP Financial Measures The non-GAAP financial performance measures used in this presentation are net operating income (NOI), Cash G&A, Adjusted Condo Gross Profit, and Adjusted Operating Cash Flow Performance Measure. Non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered independently, or as a substitute, for financial information presented in accordance with GAAP. Refer to the Appendix included in this presentation for reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures. We define In-Place NOI as forecasted current-year NOI for all properties included in the Operating Assets segment as of the end of the current period. Estimated Stabilized NOI is initially projected prior to the development of the asset based on market assumptions and is revised over the life of the asset as market conditions evolve. On a quarterly basis, each asset’s In-Place NOI is compared to its Estimated Stabilized NOI in conjunction with forecast data to determine if an adjustment is needed. Adjustments to Estimated Stabilized NOI are made when changes to the asset's long-term performance are thought to be more than likely and permanent. The Company defines Cash G&A as General and administrative expense less non-cash stock compensation expense. Cash G&A is a non-GAAP financial measure that we believe is useful to our investors and other users of our financial statements as an indicator of overhead efficiency without regard to non-cash expenses associated with stock compensation. However, it should not be used as an alternative to general and administrative expenses in accordance with GAAP. Adjusted condo gross profit is a non-GAAP financial measure that we believe is useful to our investors and other users of our financial statements as an indicator of gross profit related to condominium sales closed in each period. This measure excludes costs in Condominium rights and unit cost of sales related to the remediation of construction defects at Waiea tower and costs related to a settlement agreement reached for the reimbursement of Waiea remediation costs. We define Adjusted Operating Cash Flow as the sum of the following non-GAAP performance measures: MPC EBT, Operating Asset NOI, condo gross profit, and cash G&A expense—all of which we have been using to measure our performance and providing guidance on for several years—as well as net interest expense (adjusted for interest income already included in MPC EBT). We believe Adjusted Operating Cash Flow provides investors a straightforward measure to model the Company’s overall financial performance against guidance. Also, by focusing on the core business metrics of each segment, Adjusted Operating Cash Flow offers a straightforward reflection of our operational and cash generation capabilities while highlighting the key drivers of future growth. No reconciliation of forward-looking measures including In-Place NOI, Estimated Stabilized NOI, and Adjusted Operating Cash Flow is included in this presentation as we are unable to quantify certain forecasted amounts included in the most directly comparable GAAP measure without unreasonable efforts, and we believe such reconciliations would imply a degree of precision that would be confusing or misleading to investors. For reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures, please see the Reconciliation to Non-GAAP Measures on the Company’s Investor Relations website in the Quarterly Results section under Financial Performance.
Page 3
HOWARD HUGHES Agenda Proposals and Voting Results Howard Hughes Holdings Overview and Strategy (Ackman) Discussion of Potential Insurance Company (Israel / Ackman) Howard Hughes Communities Strategic Review (O’Reilly) Conclusion (Ackman) Q&A 01 02 03 04 05 06 9:00 – 9:15 a.m. 9:15 – 9:25 a.m. 9:25 – 9:40 a.m. 9:40 – 9:50 a.m. 9:50 – 10:00 a.m. 10:00 – 11:00 a.m.
Page 4
HOWARD HUGHES Overview and Strategy
Page 5
HOWARD HUGHES Strategic Transaction With Pershing Square 5 Ownership Investment enables HHH to transform into a diversified holding company seeking controlling stakes in high-quality, durable growth companies while continuing to invest and grow the core real estate development businessStrategy Bill Ackman rejoins the Board as Executive Chairman Ryan Israel— Pershing Square’s Chief Investment Officer—joins the Board and HHH executive teamLeadership Pershing Square purchased 9 million newly issued HHH shares for $100 per share, a 48% premium(1)Share Purchase Pershing Square will support HHH’s strategic expansion with its investment, advisory, and other services, including corporate development, transaction execution, capital markets, and hedging Support HHH to pay Pershing Square a quarterly fee of $3.75M plus an incentive fee equal to 0.375% of the growth in HHH’s equity market capitalization(2) Pershing Square beneficial ownership increased to ~46.9% with voting power capped at 40% and beneficial ownership limited to 47% Fee Structure Source: Company filings and data as announced on May 5, 2025. (1) Premium relative to HHH’s closing stock price on May 2, 2025. (2) Above the reference market capitalization of the Company of 59.4M shares and a reference market price of $66.1453, adjusted annually for inflation. Investment of $900 Million to Transform HHH into a Diversified Holding Company
Page 6
HOWARD HUGHES Board of Directors and Senior Leadership 6Source: Company filings and data. Board Structure • Current HHH leadership team—led by CEO, David O’Reilly, is unchanged • Ryan Israel named Chief Investment Officer, a new senior role at the Company Senior Leadership • Independent directors remain the majority • Pershing Square holds three Board seats with Bill Ackman serving as Executive Chairman • New Members join Board: Jean-Baptiste Wautier • Previously serviced as Chairman of the Investment Committee and CIO in the United Kingdom of BC Partners, a private equity investment manager • Previously worked at Arthur Anderson and Morgan Stanley Susan Panuccio • Previously served as CFO of News Corp • Previously served as CFO of News International UK Thom Lachman • Chairman and CEO of Duracell, A Berkshire Hathaway Company • Previously served as President of Procter and Gamble Canada
Page 7
HOWARD HUGHES HHH Diversified Holding Company Structure 7Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of May 5, 2025. Platform will build a faster growing, high-returning diversified holding company that will seek to acquire controlling interests in high-quality, durable growth operating businesses Primary Real Estate Subsidiary Master Planned Communities Operating Assets Strategic Developments Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. Howard Hughes Communities Future Business Investment Future Business Investment Future Business Investment
Page 8
HOWARD HUGHES HHH Insurance Opportunity
Page 9
HOWARD HUGHES Insurance Opportunity Strategic Rationale 9 Leverages Pershing Square public market’s investment expertise via ability to invest in marketable securities1. Insurance is an ideal business platform for HHH’s transition to a diversified holding company Cash generative nature and industry structure of insurance allow for rapid growth and provide significant source of investment funds 2. HHH’s holding company structure provides significant advantages for an insurance company 3. Pershing Square’s 47% ownership of HHH and long-term track record of providing capital support enhances insurance subsidiary’s credit profile4.
Page 10
HOWARD HUGHES HHH’s Insurance Opportunity 10 HHH is well-positioned to acquire an insurance subsidiary that leverages and builds upon core tenets of Berkshire Hathaway’s highly successful model: Holding Company Structure Balance Sheet Overcapitalization Investment Approach
Page 11
HOWARD HUGHES Key Drivers of Return on Equity 11 A property and casualty (“P&C”) insurer’s total return on equity can be analyzed as the sum of its underwriting return on equity and its investment return on equity Total P&C Insurer Return on Equity Underwriting Return on Equity Underwriting Profitability (1 – Combined Ratio) Premium Leverage (Premiums Earned / Equity) Investment Return on Equity Investment Performance (Return on Invested Assets) Balance Sheet Leverage (Invested Assets / Equity)
Page 12
HOWARD HUGHES Typical P&C Insurer Operating Framework 12 Write net premiums in roughly equal proportion to equity capital1. A typical P&C insurer operates with the following high-level principles Target modest underwriting profitability (<100% combined ratio)2. Deploy investment portfolio in principally fixed income securities3. Invested-assets-to-equity ratio equals ~2x to 3x4.
Page 13
HOWARD HUGHES Premiums-to-Equity Ratio 13 P&C insurers tend to write annual net premiums in roughly equal proportion to their equity capital Net Premiums Earned / BoP Equity Capital Percentage | 2015 – 2024 Average Carriers specializing in shorter-tail lines of business (personal home and auto), like Progressive and Allstate, tend to write a higher volume of premiums relative to their capital 60% 70% 95% 98% 110% 123% 132% 190% 306% RenaissanceRe Chubb Cincinnati Financial Everest Group P&C Peer Group Median Travelers W.R. Berkley Allstate Progressive Source: Public Filings.
Page 14
HOWARD HUGHES Underwriting Profitability 14 P&C insurers target modest underwriting profitability (1 – Combined Ratio) through the insurance cycle GAAP Combined Ratio | 2015 – 2024 Average 89.8% 91.9% 92.5% 92.8% 93.7% 94.6% 94.6% 95.8% 97.0% Chubb RenaissanceRe Progressive W.R. Berkley P&C Peer Group Median Travelers Cincinnati Financial Allstate Everest Group Source: Public Filings.
Page 15
HOWARD HUGHES 15 Traditional P&C insurers are not well-equipped to pursue high-return equity strategies Insurance companies find it difficult to compete with institutional investors and asset management firms in recruiting best-in-class investment professionals Significant public company pressure to limit volatility of investment portfolio As a result, investment portfolios are primarily invested in lower-return fixed income assets Despite their perceived stability, fixed-income assets still carry inherent duration and credit risk These risks are magnified by the elevated invested-assets-to-equity ratio of a typical P&C insurer Small subset of insurance entities backed by hedge funds and other financial sponsors lack underwriting expertise and suffer from misaligned incentives Structured principally as financing vehicles to generate fee-paying capital for sponsors Sponsors are compensated for growth in the asset portfolio rather than underwriting profitability A typical P&C insurer focuses on underwriting profitability but does not prioritize optimal asset allocation and investment performance Typical P&C Insurers Suboptimize Investment Returns
Page 16
HOWARD HUGHES Investment Portfolio Asset Allocation 16 The investment portfolio of a typical P&C insurer is principally invested in fixed income securities (government and corporate bonds) Asset Class as % of Total Invested Assets | 12/31/2024 Balance Sheet Source: Public Filings. 58% 69% 71% 75% 76% 78% 88% 89% 95% 18% 15% 3% 7% 7% 6% 5% 1% 3% 13% 13% 16% 11% 7% 5% 38% 6% 6% 8% 6% 4% Cincinnati Financial RenaissanceRe Everest Group Chubb W.R. Berkley P&C Peer Group Average Allstate Travelers Progressive Fixed Income (incl. preferred stock) Short-Term Investments Other Investments / Alternatives Equities 1% 1%
Page 17
HOWARD HUGHES Invested-Assets-to-Equity Leverage Ratio 17 A typical P&C insurer’s invested-assets-to-equity ratio generally ranges between ~2x to 3x, which is used to generate higher returns on equity from their investment portfolio Invested Assets / Equity Capital Leverage Ratio | 2015 – 2024 Average Source: Public Filings. 2.1x 2.4x 2.6x 2.9x 2.9x 2.9x 3.2x 3.4x 3.6x Chubb RenaissanceRe Everest Group Cincinnati Financial P&C Peer Group Median Progressive Travelers W.R. Berkley Allstate
Page 18
HOWARD HUGHES 18 Typical P&C Insurer(1) Combined Ratio 95.0% Pre-Tax Underwriting Margin (1-CR) 5.0% Less: Taxes (21% Tax Rate) (1.1%) After-Tax Underwriting Margin 4.0% Earned Premiums / Equity 100% Underwriting Return on Equity 4.0% % of Assets Inv. Return Cash and ST Investments 10% 3.0% Fixed Income 85% 4.0% Common Stocks 5% 10.0% Pre-Tax Investment Return on Assets 4.2% Less: Taxes (21% Tax Rate) (0.9%) After-Tax Investment Return on Assets 3.3% Invested Assets / Equity 2.5x Investment Return on Equity 8.3% Total Return on Equity 12.2% (1) Reflects illustrative operating assumptions based on historical performance (2015 - 2024) of selected P&C insurer peer group (Progressive, Travelers, Chubb, W.R. Berkley, Cincinnati Financial, Allstate, Everest and RenaissanceRe) Balance sheet leverage amplifies modest investment returns from a low-yielding, principally fixed income portfolio into a higher return on equity Illustrative Typical P&C Insurer Return on Equity (“ROE”)
Page 19
HOWARD HUGHES Balance sheet is substantially overcapitalized relative to broader P&C industry Annual net premiums earned equal ~20% to 40% of equity capital Invested-assets-to-equity ratio of approximately ~1.5x to 2.0x Investment portfolio is principally invested in cash and common stocks Float (loss reserves) is invested in cash and short-term Treasurys to earn a positive spread relative to the cost/profit of generating float while avoiding duration or credit risk Excess equity capital is invested in common stocks, where Berkshire Hathaway has a decades-long track record of generating superior investment returns Holding company structure provides significant competitive advantages Additional implied credit support Diversified earnings stream reduces pressure to write premiums when pricing is unattractive Ability to seamlessly provide capital when opportunity to grow premiums is attractive 19 Berkshire Hathaway is able to earn higher returns on equity with materially lower leverage than a typical insurer by optimizing its asset allocation Berkshire Hathaway’s Differentiated Approach
Page 20
HOWARD HUGHES (2) Reflects though-cycle (2015 – 2024 average) combined ratios. For Berkshire Hathaway, reflects combined ratios for key lines of business including GEICO, BH Primary and BH Property & Casualty Reinsurance. ~ 100% of Equity Capital Premiums-to- Equity Capital Typical P&C Insurer(1) ~ 20% - 40% of Equity Capital Berkshire Hathaway(2) ~ 95% Combined RatioUnderwriting Profitability(2) < 95% Combined Ratio ~ 2.0x to 3.0x Invested Assets to Equity Balance Sheet Leverage ~ 1.5x to 2.0x Invested Assets to Equity 10% Cash and Short-term Inv. 85% Fixed Income and Other 5% Common Stocks Investment Portfolio Asset Allocation (% of Portfolio by Asset class) 25% Cash and Short-term Inv. 5% Fixed Income and Other 70% Common Stocks Berkshire Hathaway vs. Typical P&C Insurer (1) Typical P&C insurer metrics reflect comparable figures of selected P&C insurer peer group (Progressive, Travelers, Chubb, W.R. Berkley, Cincinnati Financial, Allstate, Everest Group and RenaissanceRe) 20
Page 21
HOWARD HUGHES 21 Ability to rapidly scale up premium-writing capacity to pursue attractive business opportunities without having to raise external capital No pressure to demonstrate growth at the expense of underwriting profitability Investing float (loss reserves) principally in cash and Treasury bills minimizes investment and liquidity risks Greater allocation to common stocks generates higher return on assets Overcapitalization mitigates impact of adverse reserve developments and mark-to-market volatility in asset portfolio Favorable ratings agency and regulatory treatment Berkshire Hathaway’s Model is Highly Advantaged Berkshire’s overcapitalized balance sheet, optimized asset allocation and holding company structure unlock powerful structural advantages
Page 22
HOWARD HUGHES 22 Annualized Total Shareholder Return (including dividends) 10-Year Annualized Returns (12/31/2014 - 12/31/2024) Source: Bloomberg, public filings (1) Reflects an estimate of the market value appreciation of Berkshire Hathaway’s equity portfolio (adjusted for purchases and sales of securities) and includes the impact of dividend income. 13.1% ~12% S&P 500 Berkshire Hathaway Estimated Equity Portfolio Return 14.5% ~8% S&P 500 Berkshire Hathaway Estimated Equity Portfolio Return 5-Year Annualized Returns (12/31/2019 - 12/31/2024) Over the last decade, Berkshire Hathaway has delivered investment returns on its equity portfolio broadly in line with the S&P 500 (1) (1) Berkshire Hathaway Equity Investment Track Record
Page 23
HOWARD HUGHES 23 Typical P&C Insurer(1) Berkshire Hathaway(2) Combined Ratio 95.0% 93.0% Pre-Tax Underwriting Margin (1-CR) 5.0% 7.0% Less: Taxes (21% Tax Rate) (1.1%) (1.5%) After-Tax Underwriting Margin 4.0% 5.5% Earned Premiums / Equity 100% 33% Underwriting Return on Equity 4.0% 1.8% % of Assets Inv. Return % of Assets Inv. Return Cash and ST Investments 10% 3.0% 25% 3.0% Fixed Income 85% 4.0% 5% 4.0% Common Stocks 5% 10.0% 70% 12.5% Pre-Tax Investment Return on Assets 4.2% 9.7% Less: Taxes (21% Tax Rate) (0.9%) (2.0%) After-Tax Investment Return on Assets 3.3% 7.7% Invested Assets / Equity 2.5x 1.7x Investment Return on Equity 8.3% 13.0% Total Return on Equity 12.2% 14.9% (1) Reflects illustrative operating assumptions based on historical performance (2015 - 2024) of selected P&C insurer peer group (Progressive, Travelers, Chubb, W.R. Berkley, Cincinnati Financial, Allstate, Everest and RenaissanceRe) (2)Reflects Berkshire Hathaway’s historical performance (2015 – 2024) Overcapitalization provides significant underwriting flexibility to scale up and down premium-writing capacity depending on the insurance cycle Berkshire Hathaway has optimized its asset allocation mix towards common stocks -> generating a materially higher investment ROE with substantially less risk due to its lower leverage profile Illustrative Berkshire Hathaway ROE
Page 24
HOWARD HUGHES 24 HHH’s insurance subsidiary (the Howard Hughes Insurance Company, “HHIC”) provides an opportunity to build a uniquely differentiated insurance company that can achieve industry-leading returns with a lower risk profile The Howard Hughes Insurance Opportunity A number of industry-leading companies and management teams have demonstrated long- term track records of strong underwriting profitability Investment expertise provided by Pershing Square, which has a 21-year, industry-leading investment track record Structural advantages of being part of a holding company (HHH) HHIC has the key ingredients in place to become an early-stage Berkshire Hathaway, with a significantly longer growth runway and the potential to earn superior returns on equity
Page 25
HOWARD HUGHES 10.4% 16.4% S&P 500 PSLP / PSH Net Return Pershing Square’s Investment Track Record | Net Returns 25 Annualized Net Return Since Inception (January 2004 – Current) Pershing Square’s high-return investment strategy has delivered strong performance since inception Since Permanent Capital Era (January 2018 – Current) Last Five Calendar Years (December 2019 – December 2024) Note: All market and return data as of June 30, 2025 (unless otherwise stated). Past performance is not necessarily indicativ e of future results. All investments involve the possibility of profit and the risk of loss, including the loss of principal. Please see the additional disclaimers, index descriptions and notes to performance results at the end of this presentation. Performance information or any illustrative performance information based on the performance of PSLP/PSH is not the performance record of the company and should not be considered a substitute for the Company’s own performance. Please see the additional disclaimers and notes to performance results at the end of this presentation. (1) PSLP/PSH Net Return represents hypothetical NAV net returns an inves tor would have earned if she/he invested in PSLP at its January 1, 2004 inception and converted to PSH at its launch on December 31, 2012. (2) PSH Net Return represents hypothetical NAV net returns an investor would have earned if she/he invested in PSH on January 1, 2018. (3) PSH Net Return represents hypothetical NAV net r eturns an investor would have earned if she/he invested in PSH on December 31, 2019 through December 31, 2024. 13.8% 23.5% S&P 500 PSH Net Return 14.5% 22.2% S&P 500 PSH Net Return 600 bp Outperformance Per Annum vs. S&P 500 970 bp Outperformance Per Annum vs. S&P 500 770 bp Outperformance Per Annum vs. S&P 500 (1) (2) (3)
Page 26
HOWARD HUGHES 10.4% 21.5% S&P 500 PSLP / PSH Gross Return Pershing Square’s Investment Track Record | Gross Returns 26 Annualized Gross Return (excluding fees) Since Inception (January 2004 – Current) Pershing Square’s high-return investment strategy has delivered strong performance since inception Since Permanent Capital Era (January 2018 – Current) Last Five Calendar Years (December 2019 – December 2024) Note: All market and return data as of June 30, 2025 (unless otherwise stated). Past performance is not necessarily indicativ e of future results. All investments involve the possibility of profit and the risk of loss, including the loss of principal. Please see the additional disclaimers, index descriptions and notes to performance results at the end of this presentation. Performance information or any illustrative performance information based on the performance of PSLP/PSH is not the performance record of the company and should not be considered a substitute for the Company’s own performance. Please see the additional disclaimers and notes to performance results at the end of this presentation. (1) PSLP/PSH Gross Return represents hypothetical NAV gross returns an i nvestor would have earned if she/he invested in PSLP at its January 1, 2004 inception and converted to PSH at its launch on December 31, 2012. (2) PSH Gross Return represents hypothetical NAV gross returns an investor would have earned if she/he invested in PSH on January 1, 2018. (3) PSH Gross Return represents hypotheti cal NAV gross returns an investor would have earned if she/he invested in PSH on December 31, 2019 through December 31, 2024. 13.8% 28.4% S&P 500 PSH Gross Return 14.5% 27.9% S&P 500 PSH Gross Return 1,110 bp Outperformance Per Annum vs. S&P 500 1,460 bp Outperformance Per Annum vs. S&P 500 1,340 bp Outperformance Per Annum vs. S&P 500 (1) (2) (3)
Page 27
HOWARD HUGHES (500%) 0% 500% 1,000% 1,500% 2,000% 2,500% 3,000% 3,500% 4,000% 4,500% 5,000% 5,500% 6,000% 6,500% 7,000% '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25 Pershing Square Cumulative Returns vs. S&P 500 27 Pershing Square 21-Year Cumulative Returns Note: All market and return data as of June 30, 2025 (unless otherwise stated). Past performance is not necessarily indicativ e of future results. All investments involve the possibility of profit and the risk of loss, including the loss of principal. Please see the additional disclaimers, index descriptions and notes to performance results at the end of this presentation. Performance information or any illustrative performance information based on the performance of PSLP/PSH is not the performance record of the company and should not be considered a substitute for the Company’s own performance. Please see the additional disclaimers and notes to performance results at the end of this presentation. (1) PSLP/PSH Gross Return represents hypothetical NAV gross returns an i nvestor would have earned if she/he invested in PSLP at its January 1, 2004 inception and converted to PSH at its launch on December 31, 2012. (2) PSLP/PSH Net Return represents hypothetical NAV net returns an investor would have earned if she/he invested in PSLP at its January 1, 2004 inception and converted to PSH at its launch on December 31, 2012. First 11.5 Years Since Firm Inception (Jan 2004 – Jul 2015) Permanent Capital Era (Jan 2018 – Now) Challenging Period (Aug 2015 – Dec 2017) S&P 500 744% 8.4x PSLP / PSH Net Return(2) (1.5% Mgmt. & 20%/16% Perf. Fee) 2,525% 26.2x PSLP / PSH Gross Return(1) 6,516% 66.2x
Page 28
HOWARD HUGHES 28 HHIC will not incur any of the substantial fixed costs required to build out its own investment operations or hire an external manager A typical market-rate fee structure for an external investment manager would be a 1% - 2% management fee and a 10% - 20% performance fee on profits Vastly superior incentive structure relative to typical insurance entities backed by financial sponsors or hedge funds Since Pershing Square will not earn any fees tied to HHIC’s asset value, there are no misaligned incentives to prioritize asset or premium growth at the expense of underwriting profitability HHIC will have a highly liquid and transparent investment portfolio Unlike typical “alternative” investments, HHIC’s equity portfolio will be principally invested in highly liquid, large-capitalization common stocks, rather than opaque fund structures Pershing Square will manage HHIC’s investment portfolio as part of its HHH broader Services Agreement with no additional fees charged Fee-Free Investment Expertise from Pershing Square Will be a Material Competitive Advantage for HHIC
Page 29
HOWARD HUGHES HHIC’s Investment and Underwriting Approach 29 Write annual net premiums equal to ~50% of equity capital, with flexibility to scale ratio up or down depending on the insurance cycle Target strong through-cycle underwriting profitability Invested-assets-to-equity ratio to equal ~1.5x to 2.0x Float (loss reserves) to be invested in cash and Treasury bills Excess equity capital will be invested by Pershing Square in a portfolio of common stocks which are consistent with its core investment principles
Page 30
HOWARD HUGHES Typical P&C Insurer(1) Berkshire Hathaway(2) Illustrative HHIC(3) Combined Ratio 95.0% 93.0% 94.0% Pre-Tax Underwriting Margin (1-CR) 5.0% 7.0% 6.0% Less: Taxes (21% Tax Rate) (1.1%) (1.5%) (1.3%) After-Tax Underwriting Margin 4.0% 5.5% 4.7% Earned Premiums / Equity 100% 33% 50% Underwriting Return on Equity 4.0% 1.8% 2.4% % of Assets Inv. Return % of Assets Inv. Return % of Assets Inv. Return Cash and ST Investments 10% 3.0% 25% 3.0% 40% 3.0% Fixed Income 85% 4.0% 5% 4.0% -% 4.0% Common Stocks 5% 10.0% 70% 12.5% 60% 20.0% Pre-Tax Investment Return on Assets 4.2% 9.7% 13.2% Less: Taxes (21% Tax Rate) (0.9%) (2.0%) (2.8%) After-Tax Investment Return on Assets 3.3% 7.7% 10.4% Invested Assets / Equity 2.5x 1.7x 1.7x Investment Return on Equity 8.3% 13.0% 17.7% Total Return on Equity 12.2% 14.9% 20.1% 30(1) Reflects illustrative operating assumptions based on historical performance (2015 - 2024) of selected P&C insurer peer group (Progressive, Travelers, Chubb, W.R. Berkley, Cincinnati Financial, Allstate, Everest and RenaissanceRe) (2) Reflects Berkshire Hathaway’s historical performance (2015 – 2024) (3) Balance sheet leverage and asset allocation mix reflect illustrative operating framework for HHIC. Assumes equity investment returns in-line with Pershing Square’s 21-year investment track record since inception. Illustrative HHIC ROE Best-in-class 20%+ ROEs Superior investment performance enabled by Pershing Square Superior underwriting profitability Holding company structure, equity- focused asset allocation and balance sheet overcapitalization
Page 31
HOWARD HUGHES Illustrative HHIC ROE Sensitivity 31 With reasonable expectations of underwriting profitability and annual investment returns approaching Pershing Square’s historical track record, HHIC’s long-term ROE could well exceed 20% Illustrative HHIC(1) ROE Sensitivity (1) Assumes following base case operating assumptions: 50% premiums-to-equity ratio, 1.7x invested assets / equity leverage ratio and a 60% asset allocation to common stocks. Investment Return on Common Stocks 12.5% 15.0% 17.5% 20.0% 22.5% 25.0% Blended Investment Return on Assets 8.7% 10.2% 11.7% 13.2% 14.7% 16.2% Combined Ratio 90.0% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24% 26% 92.0% 15% 17% 19% 21% 23% 25% 94.0% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24% 96.0% 13% 15% 17% 19% 21% 23% 98.0% 12% 14% 17% 19% 21% 23% 100.0% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% The ultimate success of HHIC will be driven more by investment performance than underwriting profitability
Page 32
HOWARD HUGHES Emphasis will be on underwriting profitability rather than growth Insurance executives can focus on running the business rather than dealing with shareholders HHH provides a permanent ownership structure for HHIC vs. merry-go-round of private equity ownership 32 HHIC will not have any top-down production goals for underwriting team Holding company provides capacity to absorb significant volatility in premiums written Lack of public company or financial sponsor pressures shield HHIC from needing to demonstrate consistent premium growth Strong investment returns provide significant contribution to overall return on equity, which reduces the incentive to grow premiums to achieve a strong return on equity Holding Company Creates Ideal Incentive Structure As a subsidiary of a larger holding company, HHIC can create the optimal incentive structure to effectively navigate the insurance cycle
Page 33
HOWARD HUGHES Favorable regulatory treatment Favorable ratings agency treatment Enhanced customer perception of counterparty credit risk Greater asset allocation flexibility in investment portfolio Diverse cash flow streams from HHH provide immediate funding source to scale HHIC’s capital to pursue attractive opportunities in a hard market 33 Holding Company Credit and Capital Support Credit and capital support from HHH (HHIC’s holding company) will materially strengthen HHIC’s credit profile and underwriting flexibility
Page 34
HOWARD HUGHES 34 HHIC will also benefit from its holding company, HHH, having a well-capitalized 47% owner in Pershing Square Pershing Square Enhances Credit Support $20 billion in total assets and $17 billion in equity(1) PSH was upgraded to an A- rating by S&P on May 20, 2025 Well-capitalized, highly free-cash-flow-generative business with no net leverage A group of strategic investors acquired a 10% stake in PS HoldCo in June 2024 at a $10.5 billion post-money valuation The Pershing Square funds and PS HoldCo represent a combined ~$30 billion of additional equity capital backing HHH and HHIC PSH and Pershing Square private funds (32% HHH ownership) PS HoldCo (15% HHH ownership) (1) As of June 30, 2025
Page 35
HOWARD HUGHES Pershing Square HoldCo made a $900 million primary investment in HHH Pershing Square backstopped and invested $73 million in a $175 million rights offering by Seaport Entertainment Group, completed shortly after its spin-off from HHH During the COVID-19 pandemic, Pershing Square backstopped and invested $500 million in a $600 million rights offering Pershing Square, along with other investors, initially capitalized the company with a $250 million rights offering 35 (1) (1) November 2010 March 2020 October 2024 May 2025 Pershing Square has a long-term track record of providing capital support to HHH, which we believe will be viewed favorably by ratings agencies Long-Term Track Record of Providing Capital to HHH
Page 36
HOWARD HUGHES HHH Holding Company Structure 36 HHIC Benefits from Two Layers of Capital Support Public Shareholders 1 2 Layer Pershing Square (Funds and PS HoldCo) Premier collection of large-scale master planned communities in Texas, Nevada, Hawaii, Maryland, and Arizona 53% Ownership Layer 47% Ownership Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. (NYSE: HHH) Future Operating Business Subsidiaries Illustrative HHIC Insurance Subsidiary Howard Hughes Communities (“HHC”)
Page 37
HOWARD HUGHES Key Status Update
Page 38
HOWARD HUGHES Deepened our understanding of emerging trends and best practices by studying the insurance landscape and industry leaders 38 Key Status Update Actively evaluating several small-to-mid-capitalization P&C (re)insurance targets Engaged an investment bank to help identify and source potential acquisition opportunities Our goal is to bring one or more executives on as a director, advisor, and/or to work directly with us on our insurance initiative We look forward to sharing key updates as the company makes further progress Exploring potential acquisition opportunities to accelerate launch of HHIC Engaged in discussions with several top insurance operating executives Expanding Knowledge Base and Strategic Insights for HHIC
Page 39
HOWARD HUGHES 39 Additional Disclaimers and Notes to Performance Results of Pershing Square All performance information herein is presented as of June 30, 2025, unless otherwise noted. This presentation includes unaudited information regarding the track record and performance data of PSCM (the “Track Record” or “Pershing Square Return” presented on a “PSLP/PSH (as converted)” basis, which assumes that an investor invested in PSLP (the Pershing Square fund with the longest track record) at its inception on January 1, 2004 and converted to shares of PSH at its inception on December 31, 2012. (Accordingly, unless otherwise specified: for periods prior to January 1, 2013, the Track Record as presented represents the performance of PSLP alone; for periods from or following January 1, 2013, the Track Record as presented represents the performance of PSH alone; and for periods that extend before and after January 1, 2013, including information on the “cumulative” or “annualized” performance of the strategy pursued by PSH, the Track Record as presented represents the performance of PSLP for the portions of such periods prior to January 1, 2013 and of PSH for the portions of such periods from or following January 1, 2013.) Such “as converted” performance information does not reflect either the performance of PSLP since its inception or PSH since its inception and no individual fund has actually achieved these results. The information is presented to illustrate how Pershing Square's core strategy has performed over a longer time horizon beyond the inception of PSH and is not necessarily, and does not purport to be, indicative, or a guarantee, of future results. This performance provided is calculated based on certain inputs and underlying assumptions, but not all considerations may be reflected therein and such performance is subject to various risks and inherent limitations that are not applicable to the presentation of the performance of either PSH or PSLP alone. Although Pershing Square believes the performance calculations described herein are based on reasonable assumptions, the use of different assumptions would produce different results. The performance set forth in these materials is provided to you on the understanding that you will understand and accept the inherent limitations of such results. The information that comprises the Track Record is not necessarily comprehensive and should not be considered to be indicative of PSH’s possible future performance. The past performance of PSCM is not a reliable indicator of, and cannot be relied upon as a guide to, PSH’s future performance or the future performance of PSCM. For a variety of reasons, the comparability of the Track Record information to PSH’s future performance is by its nature very limited. Among other factors, results can be positively or negatively affected by market conditions beyond PSH’s control or the control of PSCM. Future market conditions may be different in many respects from those that prevailed in the past or prevail at present, with the result that the performance of PSH’s investment portfolio in the future may be significantly different from PSH’s performance and the performance of the other Funds in the past. No representation is being made by the inclusion of the Track Record presented herein that PSH will achieve performance similar to the Track Record or avoid losses. There can be no assurance that PSH will meet its investment objective generally or avoid losses. When “net returns” are presented in this presentation, they include the reinvestment in the investment strategy of all dividends, interest and capital gains from underlying portfolio companies; they assume that an investor has been invested in the applicable fund since inception and participated in any “new issues,” as such term is defined under Rules 5130 and 5131 of FINRA (which only had a de minimis impact historically). “Net returns” are also presented on a net-of-fees basis and reflect the deduction of, among other things: management fees, brokerage commissions, administrative expenses and accrued and/or crystallized performance fees/allocation (if any). PSH’s “net returns” are based on the dollar return for the specific period, including any and all dividends paid by PSH, but not the reinvestment in PSH of these dividends, calculated from the beginning of such period to the end of such period. Since May 2, 2017, PSH has repurchased shares of its listed class of shares subject to certain limitations. Any positive impact on performance due to share buybacks (as a result of the positive NAV per share impact of shares that are repurchased) is reflected in the returns data. Unless otherwise specified, information on the Track Record in this presentation has been presented on a net returns basis and, as discussed above, on a PSLP/PSH (as converted) basis.
Page 40
HOWARD HUGHES 40 Additional Disclaimers and Notes to Performance Results of Pershing Square The inception date for PSLP is January 1, 2004. In 2004, PSCM earned a $1.5 million (approximately 3.9%) annual management fee and PSLP’s general partner earned a performance allocation equal to 20% above a 6% hurdle from PSLP, in accordance with the terms of the limited partnership agreement of PSLP then in effect. That limited partnership agreement was later amended to provide for a 1.5% annual management fee and 20% performance allocation effective January 1, 2005. The net returns for PSLP presented herein reflect the different fee arrangements in 2004, and subsequently. In addition, pursuant to a separate agreement, in 2004 the sole unaffiliated limited partner of PSLP paid PSCM an additional $840,000 for overhead expenses in connection with services provided unrelated to PSLP, which have not been taken into account in determining PSLP’s net returns. To the extent that such overhead expenses had been included as fund expenses, net returns of PSLP would have been lower. The market indices shown in this presentation have been selected for purposes of comparing PSH's performance or the Track Record with certain broad-based benchmarks. The statistical data regarding these indices has been obtained from Bloomberg and the returns are calculated assuming all dividends are reinvested. The S&P 500 Index, FTSE 100 Index, and MSCI World Index are not subject to any of the fees or expenses to which the Pershing Square Funds are subject. The Pershing Square Funds are not restricted to investing in those securities which comprise any of these indices, their performance may or may not correlate to any of these indices and the portfolio of the Pershing Square Funds should not be considered a proxy for any of these indices (or vice versa). The volatility of an index may materially differ from the volatility of the Pershing Square Funds’ portfolios. The S&P 500 is comprised of a representative sample of 500 U.S. large-cap companies. The index is an unmanaged, float-weighted index with each stock's weight in the index in proportion to its float, as determined by Standard & Poors. The S&P 500 index is proprietary to and is calculated, distributed and marketed by S&P Opco, LLC (a subsidiary of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC), its affiliates and/or its licensors and has been licensed for use. S&P® and S&P 500® are registered trademarks of Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC. © 2025 S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC, its affiliates and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. PSH gained entry to the FTSE 100 Index (“FTSE 100”) in December 2020. The FTSE 100 is a capitalization-weighted index of the 100 most highly capitalized companies traded on the London Stock Exchange. The equities use an investibility weighting in the index calculation. The MSCI World Index is a broad global equity index that represents large and mid-cap equity performance across 23 developed markets countries, covering approximately 85% of the free float-adjusted market capitalization in each country. This presentation also contains forward-looking statements, which reflect Pershing Square’s views. These forward-looking statements can be identified the use of words such as “believe”, “expect”, potential”, “continue”, “may”, “will”, “should”, “seek”, “approximately”, “predict”, “intend”, “plan”, “estimate”, “anticipate” or other comparable words. These forward-looking statements are subject to various risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Accordingly, there are or will be important factors that could cause actual outcomes or results to differ materially from those indicated in these statements. Should any assumptions underlying the forward- looking statements contained herein prove to be incorrect, the actual outcome or results may differ materially from outcomes or results projected in these statements. None of PSH, Pershing Square or any of their respective affiliates undertakes any obligation to update or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as required by applicable law or regulation.
Page 41
HOWARD HUGHES
Page 42
HOWARD HUGHES 4242 Howard Hughes Communities
Page 43
HOWARD HUGHES New residents spark demand for more commercial amenities Commercial amenities increase the value of HHC’s residential land Perpetual Cycle of Value Creation HHC Competitive Advantages Drive Value Creation 43 Little-to-No Competition in Our MPCs Self-Funding Business Model MPC EBT Condo Profit …Funds Future Growth Operating Assets NOI Covers… G&A Interest Exp. HHC is the dominant owner of commercial assets in our MPCs A disciplined, demand-driven approach to development generates superior risk-adjusted returns Office Multifamily Undeveloped LandRetail
Page 44
HOWARD HUGHES New residents spark demand for more commercial amenities Commercial amenities increase the value of HHC’s residential land Perpetual Cycle of Value Creation HHC Competitive Advantages Drive Value Creation 44 Little-to-No Competition in Our MPCs Self-Funding Business Model MPC EBT Condo Profit …Funds Future Growth Operating Assets NOI Covers… G&A Interest Exp. Office Multifamily Undeveloped LandRetail HHC is the dominant owner of commercial assets in our MPCs A disciplined, demand-driven approach to development generates superior risk-adjusted returns
Page 45
HOWARD HUGHES HHC is the dominant owner of commercial assets in our MPCs A disciplined, demand-driven approach to development generates superior risk-adjusted returns New residents spark demand for more commercial amenities Commercial amenities increase the value of HHC’s residential land Perpetual Cycle of Value Creation HHC Competitive Advantages Drive Value Creation 45 Little-to-No Competition in Our MPCs Self-Funding Business Model MPC EBT Condo Profit …Funds Future Growth Operating Assets NOI Covers… G&A Interest Exp. Office Multifamily Undeveloped LandRetail
Page 46
HOWARD HUGHES New residents spark demand for more commercial amenities Commercial amenities increase the value of HHC’s residential land Perpetual Cycle of Value Creation HHC Competitive Advantages Drive Value Creation 46 Little-to-No Competition in Our MPCs Self-Funding Business Model MPC EBT Condo Profit …Funds Future Growth Operating Assets NOI Covers… G&A Interest Exp. Office Multifamily Undeveloped LandRetail HHC is the dominant owner of commercial assets in our MPCs A disciplined, demand-driven approach to development generates superior risk-adjusted returns
Page 47
HOWARD HUGHES Source: Company filings and data. Note: GAV in $ millions. Price per acre in $ thousands. As of June 30, 2025. Land Appreciation Offsets Shrinking Land Bank 47 MPC Gross Asset Value 2017 GAV $3.7B 2025 GAV $4.8B (2)
Page 48
HOWARD HUGHES Source: Company filings and data. Note: GAV in $ millions. Price per acre in $ thousands. As of June 30, 2025. (1) Land sales revenue excludes deferred revenue and SID bond revenue. Land Appreciation Offsets Shrinking Land Bank 48 MPC Gross Asset Value 2017 GAV $3.7B Since 2017 4,052 Total Acres Sold $670k Weighted- Avg. Price Per Acre $2.7B Total Land Sales Revenue X = (1)
Page 49
HOWARD HUGHES Source: Company filings and data. Note: GAV in $ millions. Price per acre in $ thousands. As of June 30, 2025. (1) Land sales revenue excludes deferred revenue and SID bond revenue. (2) TTM calculation as of June 30, 2025 Land Appreciation Offsets Shrinking Land Bank 49 MPC Gross Asset Value 2017 GAV $3.7B Residential Price Per Acre +164% +61% +49% Since 2017 4,052 Total Acres Sold $670k Weighted- Avg. Price Per Acre $2.7B Total Land Sales Revenue X = (1) Summerlin Bridgeland The Woodlands Hills (2)
Page 50
HOWARD HUGHES Source: Company filings and data. Note: GAV in $ millions. Price per acre in $ thousands. As of June 30, 2025. (1) Land sales revenue excludes deferred revenue and SID bond revenue. (2) TTM calculation as of June 30, 2025 (3) Excludes value of Teravalis for an apples-to-apples comparison. Land Appreciation Offsets Shrinking Land Bank 50 MPC Gross Asset Value 2017 GAV $3.7B 2025 GAV $4.8B Residential Price Per Acre +164% +61% +49% Since 2017 4,052 Total Acres Sold $670k Weighted- Avg. Price Per Acre $2.7B Total Land Sales Revenue X = (1) (3) Summerlin Bridgeland The Woodlands Hills (2)
Page 51
HOWARD HUGHES $267M $430M ($206 M) ($81 M) $697M ($287 M) Recurring Income Recurring Expenses Anticipated Stabilized Cash Flows Significantly Higher than Current Levels Operating Asset NOI > MPC EBT > Condo Profit > 2025 Adjusted Operating Cash Flow $410M > > (1) Interest Expense Cash G&A $0M Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) Based on mid-point of 2025 guidance range. Ulana is the only condominium tower closing in 2025 and is expected to break even.
Page 52
HOWARD HUGHES $267M $430M ($206 M) ($81 M) $697M ($287 M) Recurring Income Recurring Expenses Meaningful NOI Runway Remains Within HHC’s Portfolio 52 Operating Asset NOI > MPC EBT > Condo Profit > 2025 Adjusted Operating Cash Flow(1) $0M Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) Based on mid-point of 2025 guidance range. Roadmap to Stabilized NOI by Existing & Under Construction Developments Asset Type Incremental NOI Office $ 45.6 Retail $ 16.7 Multifamily $ 8.6 Other $ 1.9 Total NOI $ 72.8 Property Incremental NOI Multifamily $ 9.9 1 Riva Row $ 9.9 Office $ 1.8 One Bridgeland Green $ 1.8 Retail $ 3.5 The Park Retail $ 1.9 Ulana Ward Village $ 0.7 Kalae Retail $ 0.1 The Ritz-Carlton Retail $ 0.8 Total NOI $15.2 $267M $73M $15M $355M 2Q '25 In-Place NOI Existing Assets Under Const. Dev. Stabilized NOI
Page 53
HOWARD HUGHES $166M $264M $209M $317M $283M $341M $349M $430M 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Guidance Actuals Guidance $267M $430M $697M Recurring Income Recurring Expenses Record MPC Results Continue to Exceed Expectations 53 Operating Asset NOI > MPC EBT > Condo Profit > (1) $0M Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) Based on mid-point of 2025 guidance range. (2) 2020-2024 Residential Price Per Acre MPC Earnings Before Taxes (EBT) ~$300M Historical MPC EBT Avg.(2) Summerlin Bridgeland $772k $1540k 2020 2Q '25 +99% $439k $608k 2020 2Q '25 +38% $310k $467k 2020 2Q '25 +51% The Woodlands Hills Double-Digit Land Price AppreciationAcross All MPCs Above Trend MPC Earnings at All-Time Highs2025 Adjusted Operating Cash Flow(1)
Page 54
HOWARD HUGHES $267M $430M $697M Recurring Income Recurring Expenses Condos Continue to Generate High Demand 54 (1) Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) Based on mid-point of 2025 guidance range. 54 Pre-SalesUnder Construction 696 Units 545 Units 329 Units 111Units 485 Units 220 Units 148 Units 100% Pre-Sold 97% Pre-Sold 93% Pre-Sold 70% Pre-Sold 67% Pre-Sold 52% Pre-Sold 41% Pre-Sold Est. 2025 Est. 2026 Est. 2027 Est. 2027 Est. 2028 Est. 2030 Est. 2030 Ulana Kalae Melia ‘IlimaThe LauniuThe Park Ritz-Carlton 2025 Adjusted Operating Cash Flow(1) Robust Pipeline of Condominium Sales over the next 5 Years Operating Asset NOI > MPC EBT > Condo Profit > $0M 4.0B (3)(2) (4) 1.8B (5) Contracted condominium sales of $4.0B with total expected margin ranging from 25 - 30%. (2) (3) (2) Estimated gross revenue based on under contract units as of June 30, 2025 including contracts closed for Melia and ‘Ilima as of September 4, 2025 (3) Excludes Ulana as the work force condominium tower is expected to break even.
Page 55
HOWARD HUGHES $267M $430M ($206 M) ($81 M) $697M ($287 M) Recurring Income Recurring Expenses Anticipated Stabilized Cash Flows Significantly Higher than Current Levels 55 Operating Asset NOI > MPC EBT > Condo Profit > ($206M) ($81M) ($287M) Recurring Income Recurring Expenses ~$355M $425M $450M $175M $200M $955M – $1.0B 2025 Adjusted Operating Cash Flow Est. Stabilized Adjusted Operating Cash Flow $410M $690M > > Interest Expense > Cash G&A >Operating Asset NOI > MPC EBT > Condo Profit > (1) Interest Expense Cash G&A $0M Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) Based on mid-point of 2025 guidance range. Ulana is the only condominium tower closing in 2025 and is expected to break even.
Page 56
HOWARD HUGHES
Page 57
HOWARD HUGHES Thank You
Page 58
HOWARD HUGHES Appendix
Page 59
HOWARD HUGHES Debt Maturities by Segment Over the Next 5 Years 4.1 Yrs. Weighted-Average Debt Maturity 5.39% Weighted-Average Interest Rate 92% of Debt is Fixed or Capped HHC’s Fortress Balance Sheet 59 <1 5% <2 15% <3 9% <4 16% <5 20% 6+ 35% Years Until Maturity (1) Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) Excludes $36 million in deferred financing costs. (2) Includes the impact of interest rate derivatives. Does not include extension options, some of which have performance requirements. (3) Represents consolidated unrestricted cash and undrawn capacity on a line of credit for Howard Hughes Holdings, Inc. (“HHH”) and Howard Hughes Communities (“HHC”). (2)(2) (3) Total liquidity balance provides coverage of maturities through 2027 and a portion of 2028 Undrawn Line of Credit Capacity Unrestricted Cash $265M $359M $316M $93M $337M $1.0B $85M $78M $17M $68M $427M $143M $750M $650M $650M $1.4B $515M $2.0B $282M $786M $459M $843M $1.1B $1.8B Total Liquidity 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Thereafter Operating Assets MPC Strategic Development Condominium Development Corporate $17M
Page 60
HOWARD HUGHES 2025 Guidance HHC Significantly Reduced and Stabilized Cash G&A 60 Significantly Reduced and Stabilized Cash G&A Stabilization of G&A $76M - $86M Guidance Range $81M 2025 Mid-Point Cash G&A guidance remains unchanged, despite inclusion of ~$10M in Pershing Square’s base advisory fee due in 2025. Cost Discipline Sustains G&A Stability Efficient Operations The Pershing Square fee impact is expected to be substantially offset by future savings from a reduction in force and other cost reduction initiatives. Future Growth These actions enable us to maintain stable overhead while preserving the flexibility to fund strategic growth priorities. Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) 2025 reflects actual results for 1H25 and company guidance for 2H25. $47M $34M $137M $104M $72M $76M $83M $83M $81M 1.71% 1.30% 0.86% 0.85% 0.95% 0.90% 0.79% 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Cash G&A Actuals Cash G&A Guidance G&A Percent of Total Assets (1)
Page 61
HOWARD HUGHES $267 $355 2025 Guidance 2025 Stabilized Self-Funding Business Model That Strengthens Over Time 61 Operating Assets Condos Under Construction Operating Assets NOI Trajectory 33% Projected Growth Master Planned Communities Earnings Before Taxes $114 $430 2015 2025 Guidance 14% CAGR Ulana The Park Kalae Ritz-Carlton The Launiu Melia ‘Ilima Q4 2025 696 623 SF $900/SF $372M Condo Gross Profit Margin ~25-30% In Pre-Sales Completion Date Units Avg. Unit Square Feet Est. Price/SF Est. Gross Rev 2026 545 847 SF $1,550/SF $704M 2027 329 1,207 SF $2,050/SF $776M 2027 111 2,524 SF $1,750/SF $343M 2028 485 950 SF $1,900/SF $555M 2030 220 1,612 SF TBD(1) TBD(1) 2030 148 2,279 SF TBD(1) TBD(1) Source: Company filings and data. Note: As of June 30, 2025. (1) Demand has been strong with all pre-sold units within their contractual 30-day recission periods as of June 30, 2025. (2) Estimated gross revenue based on under contract units as of June 30, 2025. (2)
Page 62
HOWARD HUGHES Source: Company filings and data. 62 Reconciliation of Operating Assets Segment EBT to NOI thousands Q2 2025 Q2 2024 YTD Q2 2025 YTD Q2 2024 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 Total revenues $ 116,446 $ 110,760 $ 230,448 $ 217,760 $ 444,300 $ 410,254 $ 401,304 $ 415,104 $ 365,174 Total operating expenses (49,467) (47,610) (98,284) (93,764) (194,591) (179,865) (170,114) (187,820) (174,870) Segment operating income (loss) 66,979 63,150 132,164 123,996 249,709 230,389 231,190 227,284 190,304 Depreciation and amortization (42,305) (41,811) (85,428) (83,651) (169,040) (161,138) (145,208) (153,893) (155,381) Interest income (expense), net (34,173) (34,165) (68,391) (67,107) (138,207) (125,197) (87,664) (73,017) (88,886) Other income (loss), net 634 542 438 950 822 2,092 (1,383) (10,306) 456 Equity in earnings (losses) from unconsolidated ventures (325) 336 4,318 6,153 5,819 2,968 22,262 (67,042) (7,366) Gain (loss) on sale or disposal of real estate and other assets, net (1) — 9,978 4,794 22,907 23,926 29,588 39,168 38,232 Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt (307) (198) (307) (198) (465) (97) (2,230) (1,926) (1,521) Provision for impairment — — — — — — — — (48,738) Operating Assets segment EBT (9,498) (12,146) (7,228) (15,063) (28,455) (27,057) 46,555 (39,732) (72,900) Add back: Depreciation and amortization 42,305 41,811 85,428 83,651 169,040 161,138 145,208 153,893 155,381 Interest (income) expense, net 34,173 34,165 68,391 67,107 138,207 125,197 87,664 73,017 88,886 Equity in (earnings) losses from unconsolidated ventures 325 (336) (4,318) (6,153) (5,819) (2,968) (22,262) 67,042 7,366 (Gain) loss on sale or disposal of real estate and other assets, net 1 — (9,978) (4,794) (22,907) (23,926) (29,588) (39,168) (38,232) (Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt 307 198 307 198 465 97 2,230 1,926 1,521 Provision for impairment — — — — — — — — 48,738 Impact of straight-line rent (373) 24 (1,533) (823) (4,770) (2,256) (11,241) (14,715) (7,630) Other (384) (373) (195) (427) (306) 337 1,528 10,275 (114) Operating Assets NOI 66,856 63,343 130,874 123,696 245,455 230,562 220,094 212,538 183,016 Company's share of NOI from equity investments 2,004 2,088 3,947 4,068 8,310 7,745 9,061 4,081 7,750 Distributions from Summerlin Hospital investment — — 5,605 3,242 3,242 3,033 4,638 3,755 3,724 Company's share of NOI from unconsolidated ventures 2,004 2,088 9,552 7,310 11,552 10,778 13,699 7,836 11,474 Total Operating Assets NOI $ 68,860 $ 65,431 $ 140,426 $ 131,006 $ 257,007 $ 241,340 $ 233,793 $ 220,374 $ 194,490
Page 63
HOWARD HUGHES Source: Company filings and data. 63 Reconciliation of Adjusted Operating Cash Flow Performance Measure Three Months Ended June 30, 2025 Six Months Ended June 30, 2025 Year Ended December 31, 2024 thousands except per share amounts (per diluted share) (per diluted share) (per diluted share) Net income (loss) from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders $ (12,144) $ (0.22) $ (1,611) $ (0.03) $ 285,926 $ 5.73 Adjustments to reconcile to Adjusted Operating Cash Flow Performance Measure: Corporate Adjustments Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests 68 373 (711) Income tax expense (benefit) (3,821) (385) 80,184 Non-cash stock compensation expense 6,167 8,918 9,104 (Gain) loss on sale of MUD receivables 48,197 48,197 48,651 Other Corporate Items 5,093 10,528 17,236 Total 55,704 1.01 67,631 1.29 154,464 3.09 Operating Assets Adjustments Depreciation and amortization 42,305 85,428 169,040 Equity in (earnings) losses from unconsolidated ventures 325 (4,318) (5,819) (Gain) loss on sale or disposal of real estate and other assets, net 1 (9,978) (22,907) (Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt 307 307 465 Impact of straight-line rent (373) (1,533) (4,770) Other (384) (195) (306) Company's share of NOI from unconsolidated ventures 2,004 9,552 11,552 Total 44,185 0.80 79,263 1.51 147,255 2.95 Strategic Developments Adjustments Rental revenue 26 (33) (459) Other land, rental, and property revenues (547) (1,000) (4,321) Operating costs 3,760 7,336 17,670 Rental property real estate taxes 615 1,163 2,480 Depreciation and amortization 1,076 2,234 7,255 Other (income) loss, net (132) 1,130 (90,534) Equity in (earnings) losses from unconsolidated ventures (87) (174) (251) (Gain) loss on sale or disposal of real estate and other assets, net (1,657) (1,657) — Waiea settlement and remediation costs — — 15,091 Total 3,054 0.05 8,999 0.17 (53,069) (1.06) Adjusted Operating Cash Flow Performance Measure $ 90,799 $ 1.64 $ 154,282 $ 2.94 $ 534,576 $ 10.71 Three Months Ended June 30, 2025 Six Months Ended June 30, 2025 Year Ended December 31, 2024thousands General and administrative (G&A) $ 34,552 $ 56,988 $ 91,752 Less: Non-cash stock compensation (6,167) (8,918) (9,104) Cash G&A $ 28,385 $ 48,070 $ 82,648 Condominium rights and unit sales $ 193 $ 535 $ 778,616 Condominium rights and unit cost of sales (811) (1,053) (582,574) Less: Waiea settlement and remediation cost — — 15,091 Adjusted condo gross profit $ (618) $ (518) $ 211,133 Three Months Ended June 30, 2025 Six Months Ended June 30, 2025 Year Ended December 31, 2024thousands Total Operating Assets NOI $ 68,860 $ 140,426 $ 257,007 MPC EBT 102,412 165,676 349,134 Adjusted condo gross profit (618) (518) 211,133 Interest income (expense), net (33,363) (68,339) (139,577) Less MPC Interest (income) expense, net (a) (18,107) (34,893) (60,473) Cash G&A (28,385) (48,070) (82,648) Adjusted Operating Cash Flow Performance Measure $ 90,799 $ 154,282 $ 534,576 (a) Represents interest income for the MPC segment, which is included in MPC EBT.