UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
FORM 10-Q
QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 1999
For Quarter Ended Commission File Number
June 30, 1999 0-15532
MLH INCOME REALTY PARTNERSHIP VI
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its governing instrument)
New York 13-3272339
(State of Organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
World Financial Center, South Tower
225 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10080-6112
(Address of principal executive office) (Zip Code)
Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (800) 288-3694.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X No __.
<PAGE>
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements:
Consolidated Balance Sheets
June 30, 1999 and December 31, 1998.
Consolidated Statements of Operations
for the three and six months Ended June 30, 1999 and June 30, 1998
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
for the six months Ended June 30, 1999 and June 30, 1998
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MLH INCOME REALTY PARTNERSHIP VI
AND CONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Dollars in Thousands)
(Unaudited)
June 30, December 31,
1999 1998
------------ -------------
<S> <C> <C>
ASSETS:
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS HELD FOR SALE (Note 1):
Land $ 26,716 $ 26,716
Other real estate assets 9,068 8,617
------------ -------------
Total real estate investments 35,784 35,333
------------ -------------
OTHER ASSETS:
Cash and equivalents (Note 1) 4,321 4,749
Interest and other receivables, net 75 122
Prepaid expenses and other 15 4
------------ -------------
Total other assets 4,411 4,875
------------ -------------
TOTAL $ 40,195 $ 40,208
============ =============
LIABILITIES:
Accounts payable and accrued expenses $ 237 $ 161
Other liabilities 514 514
------------ -------------
Total liabilities 751 675
------------ -------------
PARTNERS' CAPITAL:
General Partners:
Capital contributions 25 25
Cumulative income 20,405 20,405
Cumulative distributions (20,430) (20,430)
------------- -------------
- -
------------- -------------
Limited Partners (322,275 Units):
Capital contributions, net of offering expenses 294,968 294,968
Cumulative income 103,757 103,846
Cumulative distributions (359,281) (359,281)
------------- --------------
39,444 39,533
------------- --------------
Total Partners' capital 39,444 39,533
------------- --------------
TOTAL $ 40,195 $ 40,208
============= ==============
</TABLE>
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MLH INCOME REALTY PARTNERSHIP VI
AND CONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Dollars in Thousands, Except Per Unit Data)
(Unaudited)
For the Three Months Ended For the Six Months Ended
----------------------------- -------------------------------
June 30, June 30, June 30, June 30,
1999 1998 1999 1998
------------ ----------- ----------- -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
OPERATING REVENUES:
Rental and management fees $ 174 $ 110 $ 351 $ 159
Interest 50 78 107 161
------------ ----------- ----------- -----------
Total operating revenues 224 188 458 320
------------ ----------- ----------- -----------
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Property operating 188 359 388 639
General and administrative 90 67 159 135
------------ ----------- ----------- -----------
Total operating expenses 278 426 547 774
------------ ----------- ----------- -----------
NET LOSS $ 54 $ 238 $ 89 $ 454
============ =========== =========== ===========
NET LOSS ALLOCATED TO
GENERAL PARTNERS $ - $ - $ - $ -
============ =========== =========== ===========
NET LOSS ALLOCATED TO
LIMITED PARTNERS $ 54 $ 238 $ 89 $ 454
============ =========== =========== ===========
NET LOSS PER UNIT OF LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP INTEREST $ 0.17 $ 0.74 $ 0.28 $ 1.41
============ =========== =========== ===========
UNITS OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST 322,275 322,275 322,275 322,275
============ =========== =========== ===========
</TABLE>
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MLH INCOME REALTY PARTNERSHIP VI
AND CONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Dollars in Thousands)
(Unaudited)
For the Six Months Ended
-----------------------------------------
June 30, June 30,
1999 1998
------------- ---------------
<S> <C> <C>
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net loss $ (89) $ (454)
Items reconciling net loss to net cash
used in operating activities:
Bad debt expense - (15)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Interest and other receivables 47 (57)
Accounts payable and accrued expenses 76 (37)
Other assets and other liabilities, net (11) (8)
------------- ---------------
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities 23 (571)
------------- ---------------
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Property improvements (451) (791)
------------- ---------------
Net cash used in investing activities (451) (791)
------------- ---------------
NET DECREASE IN CASH AND EQUIVALENTS (428) (1,362)
CASH AND EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD 4,749 6,434
------------- ---------------
CASH AND EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD $ 4,321 $ 5,072
============= ===============
</TABLE>
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
<PAGE>
MLH INCOME REALTY PARTNERSHIP VI
AND CONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
1. ORGANIZATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
MLH Income Realty Partnership VI (the "Partnership") was formed under the
New York Uniform Limited Partnership Act on December 4, 1984. The Partnership
made equity investments in nineteen income-producing properties located
throughout the United States.
The Partnership's remaining real estate investment is the land formerly
known as Treasure Island (the "property"), a scenic, oceanfront property
situated on approximately 27 acres, including 3,000 feet of coastline along the
Pacific Ocean, in Laguna Beach, California. As previously reported, the property
was officially closed as a mobile home park on March 15, 1996 and all former
tenants have vacated the property. Also as previously reported, Treasure Island
Associates ("TIA"), the joint venture between the Partnership and an
unaffiliated entity through which the Partnership owns an interest in the
property, was involved in lawsuits concerning certain tenants. See Note 2,
Litigation, for a discussion of local legislation, administrative requirements
and litigation affecting this property.
Future Developments of the Property
As previously reported, TIA has entered into a contract and an amendment
thereto ("Contract") with Vestar-Athens Resorts, L.L.C., a Phoenix, Arizona
based real estate developer ("Athens"), for the sale of the property. Athens
plans to purchase the property and develop it as an oceanfront resort community.
A Second Amendment to the Contract, dated as of July 27, 1999, provides for
(i) an additional down payment of $800,000 in the form of a promissory note that
must be replaced with cash in that amount by no later than August 10, 1999, and
(ii) the closing date to be extended from July 27, 1999 to August 31, 1999.
Athens satisfied the terms of the promissory note by depositing the additional
down payment with the escrow agent.
The purchase price under the Contract, as amended, is $37,000,000 and will
be increased by an amount equal to an annualized 10% of this stated purchase
price beginning June 1, 1999 until the closing date. There can be no assurance
that a sale will be consummated.
The Partnership wishes to ensure that statements made regarding expected
future developments regarding the property are accompanied by meaningful
cautionary statements pursuant to the safe harbor established in the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are
based upon current available data and reflect the Partnership's expectations
that the property will be sold to Athens in accordance with the terms set forth
in the Contract, as amended. There can be no assurance that a sale will be
consummated. Actual closing of the sale is subject to future events and
uncertainties, which could materially affect the ability of the Partnership to
consummate the sale to Athens.
Since this is the last property investment of the Partnership, pursuant to
Section 8.1 (ii) of the Partnership's Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited
Partnership, the sale of this property will cause the dissolution of the
Partnership. The Partnership will not be liquidated, however, until payment of a
final liquidating distribution to the Partnership's partners of the
Partnership's remaining assets.
The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by
the Partnership in the preparation of its consolidated financial statements:
Basis of Presentation
The financial statements reflect all adjustments which are, in the opinion
of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the financial condition and
results of operations for the periods presented. Such adjustments were of a
normal, recurring nature. Footnote disclosure which substantially duplicates the
disclosure contained in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 1998, which is hereby incorporated by reference, has
been omitted.
Cash Equivalents
The Partnership classifies its investments in debt securities, including
those considered to be cash equivalents, as securities held-to-maturity and
carries them at amortized cost on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
The purchase cost of such securities is included in "cash and equivalents". All
such securities mature within one year, and any unrealized gains or losses on
these securities for the six months ended June 30, 1999 are immaterial.
Income Taxes
No provision for income taxes has been made since all income and losses are
allocated to the partners for inclusion in their tax returns.
<PAGE>
Allocations Among Partners
Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, Distributable Cash from operations
if any, will be allocated 90.16% to the Limited Partners and 9.84% to the
Managing General Partners. In addition to the distribution of cash from
operations, the Partnership Agreement provides for the General Partners, as a
class, to receive 2% of Sale or Financing Proceeds to be distributed,
representing their residual carried interest.
Net income or loss is allocated to the Partners in accordance with the
Partnership Agreeement.
Under the terms of the Partnership Agreement, the General Partner will not
retain any of the sale proceeds resulting from the anticipated sale of the
property to Athens under the pending contract between Athens and TIA.
2. LITIGATION
TREASURE ISLAND ASSOCIATES LITIGATION
The Partnership owns a joint venture Partnership interest in the property
formerly known as Treasure Island (the "property"), which was a mobile home
community located in Laguna Beach, California. The property was purchased by
Treasure Island Associates ("TIA"), a joint venture Partnership between the
Partnership and an unaffiliated entity, on August 1, 1989.
In 1992, in compliance with an ordinance requiring mobile home park owners
to apply for a conditional use permit ("CUP") prior to a park closure, TIA
applied to the City of Laguna Beach (the "City") for a CUP. In 1994, the City
adopted a resolution that approved the CUP but imposed conditions on TIA to
mitigate the alleged adverse impact of the closure on tenants. Litigation
between TIA, the City, various tenants and former tenants of the property, and
the tenant association Treasure Island Residents and Owners Association
("TIROA") ensued concerning the mitigation conditions imposed by the City,
possession of the property and related damages. This litigation was resolved
through separate settlements among the parties.
On May 2, 1996, George Posey, a nonresident tenant, filed an action with
the Court against TIA for trespass, constructive eviction, breach of covenant of
quiet enjoyment, declaratory relief, and unfair business practices. TIA
successfully demurred to the complaint and a first amended complaint was filed
July 19, 1996, seeking to set aside warehouseman's lien sale, cancellation of
instrument, declaratory relief, malicious prosecution, constructive eviction,
breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment, trespass, and unfair business practices.
Mr. Posey claims that TIA wrongfully sold his mobilehome at a warehouseman's
lien sale and thereafter denied him entry to the mobilehome. He seeks special
damages of $50,000, general damages of $250,000, and punitive damages of
$500,000. A jury trial is set for October 25, 1999.
In February 1996, the Partnership submitted a development proposal to the
City for the redevelopment of the property. The initial application included a
combination of detached single-family residences, multi-family housing and a
resort hotel complex including meeting rooms and restaurants. The application
consisted of a local coastal program ("LCP") and a specific plan reflecting such
uses. An LCP is required by California law because the City has not obtained
approval from the California Coastal Commission for a Local Coastal Program for
the property as required by the California Coastal Act.
The Planning Commission approved a development proposal for the property
consisting of up to 275 hotel rooms and 37 residences on April 15, 1998. The
City Council approved the master plan (the "Plan") on June 2, 1998. Because the
property is on the oceanfront, the Plan was also subject to approval by the
Coastal Commission. On August 13, 1998 and November 6, 1998, the Coastal
Commission approved the Plan subject to certain modifications and conditions. On
November 17, 1998, the City Council approved such modifications and conditions.
The Executive Director of the Coastal Commission reported the acceptance of such
modifications and conditions to the Coastal Commission and, as a result of such
report, the Plan became final on January 13, 1999.
The Planning Commission and City Council may now consider further permits
and approvals to implement the Plan, such as a subdivision map, site development
plan and design review.
On July 6, 1998, Eugene R. Atherton, M.D. filed a Petition for Writ of
Mandate (the "Petition") in the Orange County Superior Court against the City
Council Members and others (Atherton v. City of Laguna Beach, et al., Action No.
796478). The Petition challenged the City's compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act in its consideration of the Plan and sought a Writ of
Mandate vacating the City Council's approval of the Plan. TIA, Merrill Lynch,
Hubbard Inc. (an affiliate of the Managing General Partner) and The Athens Group
(an affiliate of the party that executed the Contract for the sale of the
property) are named in the Petition as real parties in interest. The Court held
a hearing on the merits of the Petition on April 28, 1999, and announced its
decision upholding the City Council's approval of the Plan. Atherton has
appealed the decision.
<PAGE>
Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Because the land formerly known as Treasure Island ("the property") is the
last remaining property investment of the Partnership, pursuant to Section 8.1
(ii) of the Partnership's Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership,
the sale of this last property will cause the dissolution of the Partnership.
The Partnership will not be liquidated, however, until payment of a final
liquidating distribution to the Partnership's partners of all of the
Partnership's remaining assets. See Part II, Item 1, Legal Proceedings, for a
discussion of local legislation, administrative requirements and litigation
affecting the potential disposition and value of this property.
At June 30, 1999, the Partnership and its consolidated joint venture had
cash and equivalents of approximately $4.3 million. Such funds are expected to
be utilized for reserve requirements, redevelopment of the property, working
capital requirements and, to the extent available, cash distributions to the
Partners. In total, cash and equivalents decreased $428,000 from December 31,
1998 to June 30, 1999 primarily due to disbursements for certain costs related
to the redevelopment of the property, net of interest income earned on the
Partnership's portfolio of cash equivalents.
Cash flows are affected by disbursements for the redevelopment of the
property.
Cumulative Limited Partners' distributions paid through November 30, 1996
have been allocated to the Limited Partners based upon the dates they became
Unit Holders and are summarized as follows:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Percentage
Return of
Cumulative Original
Date Became Cumulative Distributions Capital
Unit Holder Units Distributions Per Unit Contribution
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 6, 1986 204,786 $229,684,000 $1,121.58 112%
August 7, 1986 64,730 72,050,000 1,113.08 111%
November 25, 1986 25,200 27,670,000 1,098.01 110%
January 20, 1987 7,477 8,153,000 1,090.41 109%
March 11, 1987 15,500 16,795,000 1,083.56 108%
April 23, 1987 253 272,000 1,075.10 108%
May 7, 1987 4,329 4,657,000 1,075.75 108%
</TABLE>
Such cumulative Limited Partners' distributions included sales proceeds and
related interest totalling $211,670,000, or $656.80 per Unit. For income tax
purposes all cash distributions are a tax-free return of capital until the cash
received exceeds the tax basis of his/her Partnership investment. Taxable income
or losses of the Partnership are passed through to the Partners for inclusion in
their respective tax returns, as reflected on the Federal Schedules K-1
distributed to the Partners each year.
Considering reserve requirements for the costs associated with the
redevelopment and eventual sale of the property, the Partnership's last
property, the Partnership does not expect to make future cash distributions to
Limited Partners until the sale of this last property. Distributions of future
sales proceeds will be made in accordance with the Partnership's Amended and
Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership. Buyers and sellers of Units will
receive such distributions in accordance with the terms of the Partnership's
transfer documents. The level and timing of distributions of sales proceeds will
be dependent on the timing of the future sale of the remaining property and the
ultimate sale price achieved, as well as on reserve requirements.
Results of Operations
Fluctuations in the Partnership's operating results for the six months
ended June 30, 1999, as compared to the six months ended June 30, 1998, are
primarily attributable to a decrease in total operating expenses as a result of
declined activities at the Partnership's last remaining property.
<PAGE>
Year 2000 Compliance Initiative
The year 2000 ("Y2K") problem is the result of a widespread programming
technique that causes computer systems to identify a date based on the last two
numbers of a year, with the assumption that the first two numbers of the year
are "19". As a result, the year 2000 would be stored as "00", causing computers
to incorrectly interpret the year as 1900. Left uncorrected, the Y2K problem may
cause information technology systems (e.g., computer databases) and
non-information technology systems (e.g., elevators) to produce incorrect data
or cease operating completely.
The Managing General Partner is responsible for providing administrative
and accounting services necessary to support the Partnership's operations,
including maintenance of the books and records, maintenance of the partner
database, issuance of financial reports and tax information to partners and
processing distribution payments to partners. In 1995, Merrill Lynch established
the Year 2000 Compliance Initiative, which is an enterprisewide effort to
address the risks associated with the Y2K problem, both internal and external.
The Partnership utilizes systems provided by Merrill Lynch and these systems
have completed Y2K renovation and testing. Merrill Lynch continues to survey and
communicate with third parties whose Year 2000 readiness is important to the
company. Based on the nature of the response and the importance of the product
or service involved, Merrill Lynch determines if additional testing is needed.
Merrill Lynch is also refining its contingency plans and expects to complete the
testing of these plans at the end of the third quarter of 1999.
Although the Partnership has not finally determined the cost associated
with its Year 2000 readiness efforts, the Partnership does not anticipate the
cost of the Y2K problem to be material to its business, financial condition or
results of operations in any given year. However, there can be no guarantee that
the systems of other companies on which the Partnership's systems rely will be
timely converted, or that a failure to convert by another company or a
conversion that is incompatible with the Partnership's systems would not have a
material adverse effect on the Partnership's business, financial condition or
results of operations.
<PAGE>
PART II
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
TREASURE ISLAND ASSOCIATES LITIGATION
The Partnership owns a joint venture Partnership interest in the property
formerly known as Treasure Island (the "property"), which was a mobile home
community located in Laguna Beach, California. The property was purchased by
Treasure Island Associates ("TIA"), a joint venture Partnership between the
Partnership and an unaffiliated entity, on August 1, 1989.
In 1992, in compliance with an ordinance requiring mobile home park owners
to apply for a conditional use permit ("CUP") prior to a park closure, TIA
applied to the City of Laguna Beach (the "City") for a CUP. In 1994, the City
adopted a resolution that approved the CUP but imposed conditions on TIA to
mitigate the alleged adverse impact of the closure on tenants. Litigation
between TIA, the City, various tenants and former tenants of the property, and
the tenant association Treasure Island Residents and Owners Association (TIROA)
ensued concerning the mitigation conditions imposed by the City, possession of
the property and related damages. This litigation was resolved through separate
settlements among the parties.
On May 2, 1996, George Posey, a nonresident tenant, filed an action with
the Court against TIA for trespass, constructive eviction, breach of covenant of
quiet enjoyment, declaratory relief, and unfair business practices. TIA
successfully demurred to the complaint and a first amended complaint was filed
July 19, 1996, seeking to set aside warehouseman's lien sale, cancellation of
instrument, declaratory relief, malicious prosecution, constructive eviction,
breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment, trespass, and unfair business practices.
Mr. Posey claims that TIA wrongfully sold his mobilehome at a warehouseman's
lien sale and thereafter denied him entry to the mobilehome. He seeks special
damages of $50,000, general damages of $250,000, and punitive damages of
$500,000. A trial is set for October 25, 1999.
In February 1996, the Partnership submitted a development proposal to the
City for the redevelopment of the property. The initial application included a
combination of detached single-family residences, multi-family housing and a
resort hotel complex including meeting rooms and restaurants. The application
consisted of a local coastal program ("LCP") and a specific plan reflecting such
uses. An LCP is required by California law because the City has not obtained
approval from the California Coastal Commission for a Local Coastal Program for
the property as required by the California Coastal Act.
The Planning Commission approved a development proposal for the property
consisting of up to 275 hotel rooms and 37 residences on April 15, 1998. The
City Council approved the master plan (the "Plan") on June 2, 1998. Because the
property is on the oceanfront, the Plan was also subject to approval by the
Coastal Commission. On August 13, 1998 and November 6, 1998, the Coastal
Commission approved the Plan subject to certain modifications and conditions. On
November 17, 1998, the City Council approved such modifications and conditions.
The Executive Director of the Coastal Commission reported the acceptance of such
Modifications and conditions to the Coastal Commission and, as a result of such
report, the Plan became final on January 13, 1999.
The Planning Commission and City Council may now consider further permits
and approvals to implement the Plan, such as a subdivision map, site development
plan and design review.
On July 6, 1998, Eugene R. Atherton, M.D. filed a Petition for Writ of
Mandate (the "Petition") in the Orange County Superior Court against the City
Council Members and others (Atherton v. City of Laguna Beach, et al., Action No.
796478). The Petition challenged the City's compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act in its consideration of the Plan and sought a Writ of
Mandate vacating the City Council's approval of the Plan. TIA, Merrill Lynch,
Hubbard Inc. (an affiliate of the Managing General Partner) and The Athens Group
(an affiliate of the party that executed the June 2, 1998 contract for the sale
of the property) are named in the Petition as real parties in interest. The
Court held a hearing on the merits of the Petition on April 28, 1999, and
announced its decision upholding the City Council's approval of the Plan.
Atherton has appealed the decision.
Items 2-5 are herewith omitted as the response to all items is either none
or not applicable.
Item 6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K
Responses:
a) Exhibits: Exhibit 27 Financial Data Schedule
For the period ending June 30, 1999.
b) Reports on Form 8-K:
Report filed on April 30, 1999 disclosing under Item 5, Other Events, the
execution of an amendment to the contract of sale of the land formerly known as
Treasure Island.
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, the Partnership has duly caused this report to be signed
on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
MLH INCOME REALTY PARTNERSHIP VI
By: MLH Property Managers Inc.
Managing General Partner
By: /s/ Sharon McKenzie
Sharon McKenzie
Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
August 13, 1999
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
<ARTICLE> 6
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary information extracted from the second
quarter of 1999 Form 10-Q Balance Sheets and Statements of Operations and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<S> <C>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<PERIOD-TYPE> 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END> DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START> JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END> JUN-30-1999
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST> 44,171,963
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE> 26,715,816
<RECEIVABLES> 75,147
<ASSETS-OTHER> 15,324
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS> 9,067,860
<TOTAL-ASSETS> 40,195,001
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES> 0
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT> 0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES> 750,975
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES> 750,975
<SENIOR-EQUITY> 0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON> 0
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK> 0
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR> 0
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT> 0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII> 0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS> 0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS> 0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC> (1,012,878)
<NET-ASSETS> 39,444,026
<DIVIDEND-INCOME> 106,934
<INTEREST-INCOME> 0
<OTHER-INCOME> 0
<EXPENSES-NET> 547,093
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME> (89,457)
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT> 0
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT> 0
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS> (89,457)
<EQUALIZATION> 0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME> 0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS> 0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER> 0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD> 0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED> 0
<SHARES-REINVESTED> 0
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS> (89,457)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR> 0
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR> 0
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR> 0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR> 0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES> 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE> 0
<GROSS-EXPENSE> 0
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS> 39,488,757
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN> 122.67
<PER-SHARE-NII> (.28)
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC> 0
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND> 0
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS> 0
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL> 122.39
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END> 0
<EXPENSE-RATIO> 0
[AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING] 0
[AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE] 0
</TABLE>
