EmpireStateBuildingInvestors .com     Toll Free 866-574-1712
  • Home
  • Page List
  • SEC-Malkin Letter
  • Contact
  • ESB Ownership
    • Questions about sales process and 50% split with sublessee. 4
    • Empire State Building and Sublessee 1961-2012: Changing views
    • $2.5 Billion Empire State Building Appraisal 6
    • Sublease >
      • "The supervisor has represented that historically, agreements have been entered into to share capital expenditure and financing costs"
      • Sublessee owners 7
      • Sublessee or Lessee 8
      • Is sublessee in a joint venture with Empire State Building? 9 empire state building ipo prospectus
      • Sublessee declines opportunity to become co-owner 10
      • Owner's relationship with sublessee is contractual 12
    • There is one owner of Empire State Building 11
    • Title to all of the improvements shall be in the Lessor 13
  • News
  • Lawsuits against Malkin Holdings L.L.C. since 3/1/12
    • 3/1/2012 First Class Action Lawsuit
    • 3/7/12 Second Class Action Suit
    • 3/12/12 Third Class Action Suit
  • SEC Rules
    • SEC rules
    • SEC rules 2
  • 3/16/12 SEC filing Empire State Building Associates
  • 4/4/12 SEC Filing EMPIRE STATE BUILDING ASSOCIATES L.L.C.
  • May 31 2012 Empire State Building Associates L.L.C. SEC Filing
  • How much is your ownership worth?
  • WSJ: High-Stakes Feud over Empire State Building
  • FORM OF PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT OF EMPIRE STATE BUILDING ASSOCIATES L.L.C.
  • No independent representative was retained to negotiate on behalf of the participants
  • S-4 Empire State Equity Trust February 13, 2012 14
  • definitions
  • continued from home page 15
  • Empire State Owners Go Ape Over IPO Tax Issues: Wall Street Journal April 8 2012
  • January 9, 2012 Answer to SEC inquiry
  • REITs Spring an Unnerving Surprise
  • Average Rent paid according to Malkin Holdings L.L.C.
  • Duties of Supervisor of Associates
  • Reuters: Empire State Building IPO change may help pay tax
  • Wall Street Journal: Tax Terms Amended in Empire State Building IPO
  • How to Ruin a Safe Bet; Did Rockefeller Center Financiers Reach Too Far?
  • May 31 2012 Helmsley Estate Driving Empire State Building IPO, Malkins Say
  • SEC May 11, 2012 :" "There are material risks and conflicts of interest associated with the consolidation."
  • Empire State Realty Trust, Inc. Lockup Agreement
  • Sublease or Lease
  • Shared Debt Obligation
  • Eliminating Two-Tier Ownership
  • Sublease renewals
  • June 9, 2008 Consent for Loan for Improvement Program
  • December 27, 1961 Lease Empire State Building Prudential Insurance Company and Empire State Building Associates
  • Lease renewals
  • June 8 2008 Loan for Improvements
  • June 9, 2008 Empire State Building Improvements Budget
  • $10 million REIT fees paid out 2011 Empire State Building IPO
  • 2011 Empire State Building Company LLC financials
  • SEC filing July 2, 2012 Empire State Building Associates L.L.C
  • ESBA number of participants
  • On August 6, 2012, Malkin Holdings L.L.C., the supervisor of Empire State Building Associates L.L.C. (the “Registrant”), provided the following to persons calling participants in the Registrant, to be used as a script for such calls:
  • SEC August 6, 2012 Empire State Realty Trust, Inc
  • Poll of ESBA participants
  • August 9, 2012 Legal Proceedings Empire State Building Associates 10Q
  • Columbia University Sublesse interest
  • August 9, 2012 SEC filing of New Risk Factor of More Lawsuits against Management
  • 2012: Observatory increased admission prices over 15%
  • Wells Notice
  • SEC Filing 8/24/12 "legally distinct from a joint venture"‏ malkin empire state sec filings
  • Empire State Realty Trust Empire State Realty Trust, Inc. Empire State Building IPO
  • Top ten reasons to Vote NO to sale of Empire State Building to REIT
  • Empire State Building Income
  • Page 1
  • Economic Joint Venture
  • 50/50 split
  • Empire State Building privately owned by Empire State Building Company?
  • S-4
  • 11/5/12 Settlement reached in Empire State Realty Trust suit
  • S-4 Red-lined version 11/2/12
  • Class Action Suit
  • Empire State Building Company Partnership Agreement
  • January 28, 2013 $800 Class Action Lawsuit Filed
  • REIT fees to ESBA investors
  • 1971 Sublessee Operating Agreement and Amendments
  • 1971 Empire State Building Company Participation Agreement
  • SEC 2/5/13 1971 Sublessee Empire State Building Company Participation Agreement
  • Top Ten Vote No
  • Sublease and improvements
  • Ex-Wien partner: Vote No to REIT
  • NYC's Towering TV Choice: 1 WTC Or Empire
  • Observatory
  • 1961 Empire State Building Associates Prospectus
  • A Yen for Yield Could Rock U.S. REIT
  • Law360
  • REfin Blog
  • Crain's New York: Bidders up ante at Empire State Bldg.
  • Crains New York: Another bidder moves to upset Empire St. Bldg. plan.
  • ESBA purchase of fee title 2001-2
  • Damage and Destruction:
  • ESBA land building cost percentages
  • Revman headed for Empire State Building
  • SL Green says private market will value ESB higher
  • Private market values exceed public market values
  • Thor makes second offer for Empire State Building
  • Empire State Building Investors Again Sue Owners Over IPO
  • Empire State Building Topless Model Lawsuit
  • Empire State Building $500 Million Lawsuit against Malkin Holdings
  • Investors Launch $600M Suit Over Empire State Building Deal
  • Law360: Report Details Malkin's Rebuff Of Empire State Bldg. Bids‏
  • Empire State Building Investor Appeals $55M Settlement
  • Empire State Building Investors Rip Owners Over Discovery
  • SEC Freedom of Information Act Exemptions
  • ESRT SEC filings comments and Malkin Holdings uploaded answers
  • ESRT SEC Indexed files
  • FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2013 (October 1, 2012 through September 30, 2013)
  • Freedom of Information Appeal (FOIA) Resources
  • “MALKIN FAMILY CONTRIBUTORS” to REIT
  • FOIA Vaughn Index
  • sec-glomar-response-to-foia-request-for-copies-of-interviews-with-empire-state-building-investors
  • “[WE] CAN NEITHER CONFIRM NOR DENY THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OF RECORDS RESPONSIVE TO YOUR REQUEST”1 : REFORMING THE GLOMAR RESPONSE UNDER FOIA
  • SEC issues Glomar Response for ESRT-first since 2010
  • Glomar Response-Office of Government Information Services
  • Empire State Building $600 Million lawsuit against Peter Malkin and Tony Malkin
  • SEC FOIA Lawsuit for Empire State Building REIT records
  • Case 1:14-cv-01140 EDELMAN v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Complaint
  • AGREEMENT BETWEEN MALKIN HOLDINGS LLC AND HELMSLEY ENTERPRISES, INC.
  • PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS and FORM OF PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT For Lincoln and Fish Buildings
  • Helmsley Management to self manage
  • SEC Division of Corporation Finance Staff Legal Bulletin No. 1 (with Addendum) "Confidential Treatment Requests"
  • Untitled
  • EDELMAN v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION-Case Assigned to Judge Rosemary M. Collyer. (md, )
  • About 20% of the people who were warned over a two-year period that they might be sued by U.S. regulators for allegedly violating securities law ended up not facing charges
  • justice.gov guide-freedom-information-act
  • September 19, 2013
  • September 5, 2013
  • August 12, 2013
  • December 21, 2012
  • December 17, 2012
  • October 19, 2012
  • October 10, 2012
  • October 5, 2012
  • September 24, 2012
  • September 13, 2012 file 1
  • September 13, 2012 file 2
  • September 10, 2012 file 1
  • September 10, 2012 file 2
  • September 5, 2012
  • August 27, 2012
  • May 8 , 2012
  • July 3, 2012
  • The OGIS Library Vaughn Index
  • FOIA Facts: Inside the Process of Preparing a Vaughn Index
  • Sample Vaughn Indexes
  • ESRT Equity Interests
  • SEC Vaughn Index Lawsuits
  • Gavin vs. SEC
  • GAVIN v. UNITED STATES SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMM., Civil No. 04-4522 (PAM/JSM). , at 4 (D. Minn. Oct. 13, 2006)
  • Empire State Realty Trust Ownership
  • Improvements ownership
  • Therefore, each of Associates and Lessee will ultimately bear one-half of the cost of the improvement program
  • CF Memo
  • SEC Is Steering More Trials to Judges It Appoints
  • 10/20/14 Activity in Case 1:14-cv-01140-RMC EDELMAN v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Order
  • NYC Rooftop RF Options Widen
  • H.R.1211 - FOIA Act
  • Exemption 5
  • Exemption 6
  • 11/10/14 ESRT Update on Lawsuits
  • SEC: How Investigations Work
  • SEC FOIA Exclusions
  • SEC FOIA Requests November 2014
  • FOIA Glomar response conversion to The (c)(1) Exclusion
  • Law360: Empire State Building Investors Launch Another Suit Over IPO
  • 2/17/15: PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
  • ESB SEC FOIA Requests Updated List
  • ESB SEC FOIA Requests Updated List March 2015
  • 04/17/15 RICHARD EDELMAN, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 1:14-CV-1140 (RDM) ) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ) COMMISSION, ) Defendant.
  • Malkin attorneys FOIA requests for ESB investigation files rebuffed by SEC
  • ESRT SEC Enforcement Investigation File
  • FOIA Lawsuit San Diego
  • Malkin Holdings lawyers Dewey Pegno SEC FOIA requests Empire State Building
  • Federal Court to Rule on release of SEC ESRT-Malkin Holdings Investigation Files
  • Peter Malkin Tony Malkin Lose Empire State Building Case Ruling
  • Malkin Holdings, Peter Malkin and Tony Malkin lose counterclaim ruling in Empire State Building Arbitration case.
  • Federal Court to rule on release of SEC ESRT Malkin Holdings ​Empire State Building investigation files.
  • SEC FOIA Lawsuit Empire State Realty Trust Malkin Holdings Consumer Complaints
  • Empire State Realty Trust Income Tax Treatment according to Malkin Holdings LLC
  • February 20, 2013 Re: In re Empire State Realty Trust, MNY-08894
  • SEC 662
  • SEC lawyers Empire State Building sale notes from calls and meetings with Malkin Holdings managers ordered released by Federal Judge
  • Malkin answer to SEC about unauthorized renewal of Empire State Building Master Lease
  • "SEC Ordered To Turn Over Empire State REIT Docs Index"
  • Empire State Building Department of Justice FOIA ruling Malkin Holdings


http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1541401/000119312512387784/filename2.htm

CORRESP 2 filename2.htm

September 10, 2012

VIA FACSIMILE AND OVERNIGHT COURIER

Ms. Louise Dorsey

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Division of Corporation Finance

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549-7010

Re:Empire State Realty Trust, Inc.Empire State Realty OP, L.P.

Amendment No. 3 to Registration Statement on Form S-4

Filed August 13, 2012

File Nos. 333-179486; 333-179486-01

Dear Ms. Dorsey:

On behalf of Empire State Realty Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”) and Empire State Realty OP, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”), we are resubmitting our letter dated August 27, 2012 to reflect the requested clarifications based on our discussions with the staff of the Division of Corporation Finance of the Commission (the “Staff”) on August 30, 2012 and September 5, 2012. These clarifications are as follows:

 (1)Whether Malkin Holdings LLC would consolidate entities other than Empire State Building Associates L.L.C., (2)Whether Malkin Holdings LLC can be kicked-out as the supervisor for the non-controlled entities, and (3)Our variable entity interest analysis related to the non-controlled entities.On behalf of the Company and the Operating Partnership, we are responding to the August 21, 2012 oral request by the Staff for supplemental information, as follows:

 (1)Provide additional analysis related to common control and the determination of non-controlled entities, (2)Provide additional analysis surrounding our identification of Malkin Holdings LLC as the accounting acquirer,all relating to the Company’s Registration Statements on Form S-4 (Registration No. 333-179486) and S-11 (Registration Statement No. 333-179485).

In addition, in accordance with the Staff’s request, we are providing supplementally, an analysis as Exhibit A showing how the $1.65 million referenced in our response # 26 in the August 13, 2012 S-4 amendment was calculated.

Page 1 of 9



Following is an expanded discussion on the Company’s control rights for both the Controlled and Non-Controlled Entities:

Common Control Related to the Combined Entities:

We determined that Peter L. Malkin (father) and Anthony E. Malkin (son) (collectively, the “Sponsors”) constitute the Control Group of the combined entities. For purposes of this analysis we applied the concepts in EITF 02-05 (not codified), Definition of “Common Control,” which states that common control exists in situations where immediate family members hold a controlling interest in an entity. We evaluated each entity being contributed to the formation transactions and the initial public offering to determine whether the entities are under the common control of the Sponsors.

Pre-1988 entities

  Position

  Control Through

One Grand Central Place, New York, New York

    60 East 42nd St. Associates L.L.C.

  Fee owner  SupervisorLincoln Building Associates L.L.C.

  Operating lessee  Supervisor250 West 57th Street, New York, New York

    250 West 57th St. Associates L.L.C.

  Fee owner  SupervisorFisk Building Associates L.L.C.

  Operating lessee  Supervisor1359 Broadway, New York, New York

    Marlboro Building Associates L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  SupervisorFirst Stamford Place, Stamford, Connecticut
62.36% co-tenant position


    Fairfax First Stamford L.L.C.

  Fee owner  SupervisorMerrifield First Stamford L.L.C.

  Operating lessee  Supervisor350 Fifth Avenue (Empire State Building),
New York, New York


    Empire State Building Associates L.L.C.

  Fee owner  Supervisor501 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York

    Seventh & 37th Building Associates L.L.C.

  Fee owner  SupervisorThe entities listed above have governing documents that pre-date the advent of the typical modern limited partnership or limited liability company agreement. Accordingly, the organizational documents do not provide for a general partner; rather they stipulate that Malkin Holdings LLC will “supervise the operations of the partnership agreement.” In its position as supervisor, Malkin Holdings LLC’s role in the management of these entities is essentially the same as that of a general partner or managing member, except Malkin Holdings LLC is not a holder of common equity interests in these older entities. All of the investors in these entities, including the Sponsors with respect to their interests outside the supervisor, have only protective rights that are similar to that of a limited partner or non-managing member. Excluding parties related to the supervisor, no single investor or group of affiliated investors owns 50% or more of these entities. Furthermore, the agreements do not provide any organized procedure for the investors to easily unite to exercise any consent rights that they have to block any action by the supervisor.

The Sponsors, through Malkin Holdings LLC as the supervisor, direct the activities of the limited liability companies listed above with no substantive participation from the other investors. Further, such investors do not have substantive kick-out rights with respect to Malkin Holdings LLC, as the supervisor. As a result, we concluded that the entities listed above are controlled entities within the combined predecessor financial statements in accordance with ASC 810.

Page 2 of 9



Post-1988 entities

  Position  Control ThroughFirst Stamford Place, Stamford, Connecticut
62.36% co-tenant position


    First Stamford Place L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing MemberMetro Center, Stamford, Connecticut

    One Station Place Limited Partnership.

  Owner / Operator  General Partner383 Main Avenue, Norwalk, Connecticut

    Fairfield Merrifield Associates L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing Member500 Mamaroneck Avenue, Harrison, New York

    500 Mamaroneck Avenue L.P. and
Viviane Paris LLC

  Co-tenant Owner
/ Operators  General Partner10 Bank Street, White Plains, New York

    1185 Bank Street L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing Member10 Union Square, New York, New York

    New York Union Square Retail L.P.

  Owner / Operator  General Partner1010 Third Avenue, New York, New York

    East West Manhattan Retail L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing Member77 West 55th Street, New York, New York

    East West Manhattan Retail L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing Member1542 Third Avenue, New York, New York

    1185 Gotham L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing Member69-97 Main Street, Westport, Connecticut

    Westport Retail Co-Investors L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing Member103-107 Main Street, Westport, Connecticut

    Westport Main Street Retail L.L.C.

  Owner / Operator  Managing MemberCertain land parcels in Stamford, Connecticut

    BBSF LLC

  Owner / Operator  Managing MemberThe above entities are governed by a typical centralized-management limited partnership / limited liability company agreement whereby the general partner or managing member has complete and exclusive discretion to manage and control the business of the partnership or limited liability company and cannot be kicked out. The only substantive rights afforded to the other investors are protective rights. For these entities, the Sponsors own and control such general partner or managing member and directly or indirectly hold common equity interests. The Sponsors have equity at risk and exercise power through such general partner or managing member rights. Since the above entities are therefore voting interest entities, we considered the control framework in ASC 810-20-25. We concluded that the entities listed above are controlled entities within the combined predecessor financial statements in accordance with EITF 04-05 and ASC 810-20-25.

Page 3 of 9



Evaluation of Non-Controlled Entities:

Non-controlled entities:

  Position  Control split between350 Fifth Avenue (Empire State Building),
New York, New York


    Empire State Building Company L.L.C.

  Operating lessee  Supervisor / Helmsley estate  11333 Broadway, New York, New York

    1333 Broadway Associates L.L.C.

  Owner / operator  Supervisor / Helmsley estate  21350 Broadway, New York, New York

    1350 Broadway Associates L.L.C.

  Operating lessee  Supervisor / David M. Baldwin  3501 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York

    501 Seventh Avenue Associates L.L.C.

  Operating lessee  Supervisor / Helmsley estate 41Helmsley estate owns a 63.75% interest in the company.

2Helmsley estate owns a 50% interest in the company.

3David M. Baldwin, who is unrelated to the Sponsors, holds a 50% interest in the company as agent for a participating group of investors unrelated to the Sponsors.

4Helmsley estate owns a 59.375% interest in the company.

The non-controlled entities listed above each have a similar legal structure to the pre-1988 entities discussed above, since they too are governed by older agreements that pre-date the advent of the typical modern limited partnership or limited liability company agreement and do not designate a managing general partner or managing member. Rather, the partnership agreements convey to Malkin Holdings LLC the authority to “supervise the operations of the partnership agreement”, which allows Malkin Holdings LLC to direct the activities that most significantly impact the non-controlled entities’ economic performance. Malkin Holdings LLC has this ability despite having no equity at risk in any of the non-controlled entities. Malkin Holdings LLC is contractually entitled to receive a specified percentage of the additional amounts distributed directly from the entities or certain of the participating groups within the entities after they have received a specified rate of return on their cash investment without specifying the source of the distributions.

Interpretive Guidance:

ASC 810-10-05-8

ASC 810-10-05-8 indicates that an entity is a variable interest entity if “as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack…the power, through voting rights or similar rights, to direct the activities of a legal entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance”.

Analysis:

For an entity not to be a VIE, the Variable Interest Model requires that, as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk must have the power, through voting rights or similar rights held through their equity interests, to direct the activities of an entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance.

The non-controlled entities are VIEs because the equity holders of the non-controlled entities (i.e., the Sponsors, the Helmsley Estate and other minority investors) do not have the power, through voting rights or similar rights held through their equity interests, to direct the activities of an entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance.

Page 4 of 9



ASC 810-10-25-38A

ASC 810-10-25-38A indicates that “a reporting entity with a variable interest in a VIE shall assess whether the reporting entity has a controlling financial interest in the VIE and, thus, is the VIE’s primary beneficiary. This shall include an assessment of the characteristics of the reporting entity’s variable interest(s) and other involvements (including involvement of related parties and de facto agents), if any, in the VIE, as well as the involvement of other variable interest holders. A reporting entity shall be deemed to have a controlling financial interest in a VIE if it has both of the following characteristics:

 a.The power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance b.The obligation to absorb losses of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The quantitative approach described in the definitions of the terms expected losses, expected residual returns, and expected variability is not required and shall not be the sole determinant as to whether a reporting entity has these obligations or rights.ASC 810-10-25-38D

ASC 810-10-25-38D indicates that “if a reporting entity determines that power is, in fact, shared among multiple unrelated parties such that no one party has the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance, then no party is the primary beneficiary. Power is shared if two or more unrelated parties together have the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and if decisions about those activities require the consent of each of the parties sharing power”.

Analysis:

We note that the partnership agreements are not specific as to the types of day-to-day decisions afforded to Malkin Holdings LLC. In a typical real estate limited partnership/liability corporation, such rights are typically held by the general partner/managing member and explicitly stated in the agreement. However, this is not the case for these older vintage partnership agreements. Accordingly, as part of our evaluation under ASC 810-10, in order to determine which party has power over the partnerships – i.e., the Sponsors or Malkin Holdings LLC, both of which are combined within the reporting entity, or an unrelated third party (the Helmsley Estate or David Baldwin) – it was necessary for us to look to New York State general partnership law to determine which party, if any has the power to make decisions that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance given the lack of specificity within the partnership agreements.

Malkin Holdings LLC’s ability to direct the activities that most significantly impact the non-controlled entities’ economic performance is limited by the unilateral approval right of the unrelated third parties holding a 50% or greater interest in the entities. In the event of a

Page 5 of 9



disagreement, there is no governing mechanism to resolve the disagreement and there are no substantive kick-out rights in the governing documents. Under New York general partnership law (which is applicable to these entities, because they were originally formed as partnerships, and their limited liability company conversion provided that partnership law would continue to govern the relations of the members among themselves), any unrelated party holding a 50% or greater equity interest has the rights to participate in the control of the entities. Therefore, a party holding 50% or more of the equity can prevent the Supervisor from having unilateral control over the partnership but itself cannot take control over the respective partnership. The key distinction between the non-controlled entities and the pre-1988 controlled entities is that no single investor within the controlled entities controls a 50% or greater interest. Additionally, it has been reaffirmed in writing (the “Reaffirmations”) with the Helmsley Estate and David Baldwin, an unrelated third party, that as the holders of the member interests in the respective non-controlled entities, they have had, and for so long as they continue to hold member interests in the entities, they will continue to have, all of the rights under New York State law of a holder of at least 50% of the interests in a partnership, including but not limited to rights to participate in the control of respective entities, all subject to the right of Malkin Holdings, LLC to exercise joint control.

Based on (1) our understanding of New York State partnership law and (2) the Reaffirmations, we have concluded that no one party has power over these partnerships and that power is shared by Malkin Holdings LLC and the unrelated parties. Accordingly, the non-controlled entities are not included as part of the historical combined group.

Following is an expanded discussion of or identification of Malkin Holdings LLC as the accounting acquirer:

For our identification of the accounting acquirer we considered the guidance in ASC 805 which requires the identification of an acquiring entity in all business combinations that are required to be accounted for using the acquisition method of accounting.

As discussed in our response dated July 3, 2012, ASC 805 provides that if a business combination has occurred but applying that guidance does not clearly indicate which of the combining entities is the accounting acquirer, then paragraph 805-10-25-5 requires the factors in paragraphs 805-10-55-11 through 55-15 to be considered in making that determination. Included within these sub-paragraphs are multiple considerations including: which entity transferred consideration, the relative voting rights in the entity after the business combination, the composition of the governing body of the combined entity, the composition of senior management of the combined entity, the terms of exchange of the equity interests and the relative size of a combining entity.

For each entity included within the Predecessor, Malkin Holdings LLC organized such entity at inception, was appointed and has served as supervisor of its operation, and is now initiating and organizing the formation transactions for the business combination and initial public offering, including coordination and oversight of the process by which consideration is allocated to all the contributing entities. The Sponsors both serve as principals of Malkin Holdings LLC, and the management team of Malkin Holdings LLC will be the Company’s management team upon completion of the formation transactions and IPO.

Page 6 of 9



The formation of Malkin Holdings LLC, the Company’s identified accounting acquirer, preceded the formation of all of the other entities in our Predecessor. The selection of Malkin Holdings LLC is consistent with Leslie Overton’s remarks at the 2006 AICPA National Conference on Current SEC and PCAOB Developments, stating that the predecessor entity in a common control transaction is generally the entity that was first controlled by the parent, which in our case is Malkin Holdings LLC.

In determining the entity that should be the accounting acquirer, we examined all of the entities in the Predecessor. The largest, Empire State Building Associates L.L.C. (“ESBA”), is a limited liability company which owns through a wholly owned subsidiary the fee title to the Empire State Building and the land thereunder. ESBA does not operate the building but subleases it to Empire State Building Company L.L.C. (“ESBC”) pursuant to a net operating sublease. ESBA’s members include the Sponsors as well as Thomas N. Keltner, Jr., an employee of Malkin Holdings LLC, which is controlled by Messrs. Malkin. Each of the Sponsors and Mr. Keltner acts as agent for participants in his respective participating group in ESBA. As discussed in the above section, ESBA is a pre-1988 entity controlled by Malkin Holdings LLC as its supervisor. Since Malkin Holdings LLC controls ESBA and was established prior to ESBA, we concluded that Malkin Holdings LLC was the most appropriate and logical entity to be the identified accounting acquirer, rather than ESBA.

Malkin Holdings LLC, as the supervisor for ESBA and the other entities in the Predecessor, directs the activities of their respective properties without participation from their other investors. If Malkin Holdings LLC were to prepare consolidated US GAAP financial statements, then ESBA and the other pre-1988 entities in the Predecessor would be a consolidated entity. ESBA and the other pre-1988 entities meet the criteria to be variable interest entities under ASC 810; and Malkin Holdings LLC, which directs the activities most significant to ESBA’s and the other pre-1988 entities’ economic performance, is the primary beneficiary. The post-1988 entities in the Predecessor would not be included in US GAAP consolidated financial statements for Malkin Holdings LLC. Malkin Holdings LLC is neither the general partner nor the managing member nor the primary beneficiary. The Sponsors, not Malkin Holdings LLC, are the general partner or the managing member of the entities and are presumed to control in accordance with ASC 810-20-25.

Finally, we believe the selection of either Malkin Holdings LLC or ESBA would result in the same accounting treatment for our subsequent accounting post-IPO, since both Malkin Holdings and ESBA are under common control of the Sponsors. We view each of the steps relating to the formation transactions and IPO as a reorganization of entities that are (and have always been during all periods presented in the combined financial statements) under the common control of the Sponsors. Pursuant to ASC 805-50-30-5, when accounting for the transfer of assets between entities under common control, the entity that receives the net assets and liabilities transferred shall initially recognize the assets and liabilities transferred at their carrying amounts or carry-over basis. Because the Predecessor consists of the accounting acquirer and other entities, all of which are under the common control of the Sponsors, any interests contributed in the formation transactions by Messrs. Malkin or by entities which they control will be recorded at historical carrying amounts.

Page 7 of 9



We thank you for your prompt attention and look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience. Please direct any questions concerning this response to our counsel Larry Medvinsky, Esq. at (212) 878-8149 or Steven Fishman, Esq. at (212) 969-3025.

Yours truly,/s/ Andrew Prentice

Andrew PrenticeChief Accounting OfficerMalkin Holdings LLC
cc:Jessica BarberichEric McPhee

Angela McHale

David L. Orlic

Tom Kluck

Anthony E. Malkin

David A. Karp

Larry Medvinsky

Steven Fishman

Page 8 of 9



Exhibit A

In our letter of August 13, 2012, we advised the Staff that in connection with reimbursements of other expenses and fees totaling $5.0 million received from the Helmsley Estate during 2011, approximately $1.65 million related to Controlled Entities and Non-Controlled Entities in which the Predecessor has an interest. The $1.65 million is comprised as follows:

    Amount
received from
Helmsley
Estate   Predecessor
interest %  Predecessor
interest Controlled entities

     60 East 42nd St. Associates L.L.C.

  $6,707     100%  $6,707  Lincoln Building Associates L.L.C.

   469,479     100%   469,479  250 West 57th St. Associates L.L.C.

   1,929     100%   1,929  Fisk Building Associates L.L.C.

   243,071     100%   243,071  Marlboro Building Associates L.L.C.

   13,663     100%   13,663  Empire State Building Associates L.L.C.

   2,894     100%   2,894              737,743        Non-Controlled entities

     Empire State Building Company L.L.C.

   2,008,696     23.750%   477,065  1333 Broadway Associates L.L.C.

   401,632     50.000%   200,816  1350 Broadway Associates L.L.C.

   319,220     50.000%   159,610  501 Seventh Avenue Associates L.L.C.

   383,589     20.469%   78,517              916,008        Total controlled and non-controlled

     $1,653,751        Page 9 of 9



EXHIBIT A

Incremental accounting costs related to the Company’s S-4 and S-11 filings for the period January 1, 2010 through March 31, 2012:

Service provider

  Total
consolidation
expenses
   Accounting
services -
expensed
   S-4 and S-11
services -
deferred
   Description of services

Anchin Block Anchin  $2,457,921    $1,720,545    $737,376    3-14 financial statements, assistance with MD&A and pro forma, financial statement compilationMargolin Winer Evens   4,953,380     3,467,366     1,486,014    3-14 financial statements, assistance with MD&A and pro forma, financial statement compilationMark Paneth & Shron   2,953,000     2,362,400     590,600    Combined financial statements and assistance with MD&AErnst & Young   8,612,800     1,750,000     6,862,800    Audit, S-4/S-11 assistance, and tax advisory services in connection with IPOBerdon   425,626     —       425,626    Preparation of initial MD&A and analyses to include in the S-4 and S-11Lewis Braff & Co.   73,995     73,995     —      Accounting preparation workRogoff & Company   57,624     57,624     —      Accounting preparation workDeloitte   50,000     50,000     —      Financial systems consultingOther   33,670     33,670     —                   $19,618,016    $9,515,600    $10,102,416               Note: The above amounts do not include $6.9 million of accounting and auditing costs that have been expensed in Marketing, General, and Administrative. Included in the $6.9 million is $1.2 million of audit fees paid to Ernst & Young.