the Internal Revenue Code.
Therefore, cash needed to execute our strategy and invest in new properties, as well as to pay our debt at maturity, must come from one or more of the following sources: ?
cash not distributed to shareholders, ?
proceeds of property dispositions, or ?
proceeds derived from the issuance of new debt or equity securities.
It is management’s intention that we continually have access to the capital resources necessary to expand and develop our business.
As a result, we intend to operate with and maintain a conservative capital structure that will allow us to maintain strong debt service coverage and fixed-charge coverage ratios as part of our commitment to investment-grade debt ratings.
We may, from time to time, seek to obtain funds by the following means: ?
additional equity offerings, ?
unsecured debt financing and/or mortgage financings, and ?
other debt and equity alternatives, including formation of joint ventures, in a manner consistent with our intention to operate with a conservative debt structure.
Cash and cash equivalents were $30.5 million and $35.0 million at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003, respectively.
Summary of Cash Flows
## Table 0 ##
The cash provided by operating activities is primarily attributable to the operation of our properties and the change in working capital related to our operations.
We used cash of $154.3 million during the twelve months ended December 31, 2004 in investing activities, including the following: ?
$101.7 million for our acquisition of Westgate Mall, Shaw’s Plaza and several parcels of land, ?
capital expenditures of $59.2 million for development and redevelopment of properties including Santana Row, ?
maintenance capital expenditures of approximately $36.9 million, ?
$9.4 million capital contribution to a real estate partnership, and ?
an additional $3.2 million net advance under an existing mortgage note receivable; offset by ?
$41.8 million in net sale proceeds from the sale of properties, and
Retail and Residential Properties The following table sets forth information concerning all real estate projects in which we owned an equity interest, had a leasehold interest, or otherwise controlled and are consolidated as of December 31, 2012.
Except as otherwise noted, we are the sole owner of our retail real estate projects.
Principal tenants are the largest tenants in the project based on square feet leased or are tenants important to a project’s success due to their ability to attract retail customers.
## Table 1 ##
changes in fair value of the interest rate swaps associated with our cash flow hedges is recognized in earnings in the period affected.
Hedge ineffectiveness has not impacted earnings as of December 31, 2012, and we do not anticipate it will have a significant effect in the future.
The fair values of the interest rate swap agreements are based on the estimated amounts we would receive or pay to terminate the contracts at the reporting date and are determined using interest rate pricing models and interest rate related observable inputs.
The fair value of our swaps at December 31, 2012 and 2011, was a liability of $12.4 million, and $3.9 million, respectively, and are included in "accounts payable and accrued expenses" on our consolidated balance sheet.
The changes in valuation on our interest rate swaps were $8.4 million and $3.9 million (including $4.1 million and $0.3 million, respectively, reclassified from other comprehensive loss to earnings) for 2012 and 2011, and are included in "accumulated other comprehensive loss".
A summary of our financial liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis, by level within the fair value hierarchy is as follows:
## Table 2 ##
NOTE 9—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES We are sometimes involved in lawsuits, warranty claims, and environmental matters arising in the ordinary course of business.
Management makes assumptions and estimates concerning the likelihood and amount of any potential loss relating to these matters.
We are currently a party to various legal proceedings.
We accrue a liability for litigation if an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated.
If an unfavorable outcome is probable and a reasonable estimate of the loss is a range, we accrue the best estimate within the range; however, if no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, the minimum within the range is accrued.
Legal fees related to litigation are expensed as incurred.
Other than as described below, we do not believe that the ultimate outcome of these matters, either individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position or overall trends in results of operations; however, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties.
Also under our leases, tenants are typically obligated to indemnify us from and against all liabilities, costs and expenses imposed upon or asserted against us (1) as owner of the properties due to certain matters relating to the operation of the properties by the tenant, and (2) where appropriate, due to certain matters relating to the ownership of the properties prior to their acquisition by us.
In May 2003, a breach of contract action was filed against us in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, alleging that a one page document entitled “Final Proposal” constituted a ground lease of a parcel of property located adjacent to our Santana Row property and gave the plaintiff the option to require that we acquire the property at a price determined in accordance with a formula included in the “Final Proposal.
” The “Final Proposal” explicitly stated that it was subject to approval of the terms and conditions of a formal agreement.
A trial as to liability only was held in June 2006 and a jury rendered a verdict against us.
A trial on the issue of damages was held in April 2008, the court issued a final judgment awarding damages of $15.9 million plus costs of suit in June 2009, and in July 2009, we and the plaintiff both filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
In December 2009, the plaintiff filed an “appellee’s principal and response brief” providing additional information regarding the issues the plaintiff is appealing; our accrual of $16.4 million at December 31, 2009 reflected our best estimate of the litigation liability.
A final ruling on the appeal was issued in February 2011 rejecting both appeals and consequently, affirmed the final judgment against us.
Therefore, in December 2010, we adjusted our accrual to $16.2 million which reflects the amount we paid in first quarter 2011.
The net change in our accrual in 2010 as well as additional legal and other costs related to the lawsuit and appeal process are included in “litigation provision” in our consolidated statements of comprehensive income.
We reserve for estimated losses, if any, associated with warranties given to a buyer at the time real estate is sold or other potential liabilities relating to that sale, taking any insurance policies into account.
These warranties may extend up to ten years and require significant judgment.
If changes in facts and circumstances indicate that warranty reserves are understated, we will accrue additional reserves at such time a liability has been incurred and the costs can be reasonably estimated.
Warranty reserves are released once the legal liability period has expired or all related work has been substantially completed.
Any increases to our estimated warranty losses would usually result in a decrease in net income.
HCP, Inc.  NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
## Table 3 ##
The above selected quarterly financial data includes the following significant transactions: ?
On January 5, 2007, the Company formed HCP Ventures II with an institutional capital partner.
Upon the sale of a 65% interest, the Company received approximately $280 million in proceeds, including a one-time acquisition fee of $5.4 million.
Effective on the date of formation, the Company accounted for the interest retained in the joint venture as an equity method investment.  ?
On April 30, 2007, the Company formed HCP Ventures IV with an institutional capital partner.
Upon the sale of an 80% interest in the venture, the Company received proceeds of $196 million and recognized a gain on the sale of real estate interest of $10 million.
These proceeds include a one-time acquisition fee of $3 million.
Effective on the date of formation, the Company accounted for the interest retained in the joint venture as an equity method investment.  ?
The results for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, include income of $6 million, or $0.03 per diluted share of common stock, in discontinued operations, resulting from the Company’s change in estimate relating to the collectibility of straight-line rents due from Emeritus.
The results for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, include income of $9 million, or $0.04 per diluted share of common stock, resulting from the Company’s change in estimate relating to the collectibility of straight-line rents due from Emeritus.  ?
On August 1, 2007, the Company acquired SEUSA.
The impact of the Company’s acquisition of SEUSA is included in the results beginning in the quarter ended September 30, 2007.  ?
On August 15, 2007, the Company sold 41 senior housing facilities to Emeritus Corporation for an aggregate price of $501.5 million, resulting in gains of $284 million.  ?
On December 21, 2007, the Company made an investment in mezzanine loans having an aggregate face value of $1.0 billion.
The impact of the Company’s investment in mezzanine loans is included in the results beginning in the quarter ended December 31, 2007.  ?
On July 30, 2008, the Company received and recognized lease termination income of $18 million from a tenant in connection with the early termination of three leases in its life science segment.
Upon termination of the leases, the Company recognized an impairment of $4 million related to intangible assets associated with these leases.  ?
On September 19, 2008, the Company completed the restructuring of its hospital portfolio leased to Tenet and settled various disputes.
The settlement provided for, among other things, the sale of its hospital in Tarzana, California, valued at $89 million, the purchase of Tenet’s minority interest in a joint venture valued at $29 million and the extension of the terms of three other hospitals leased by the Company to Tenet.
As a result of the sale of its hospital in Tarzana, California and the settlement of the legal disputes with Tenet, the Company recognized income of $47 million.
The following table summarizes key operating and leasing statistics for all of our operating leases as of and for the years ended December 31, (square feet in thousands):
## Table 4 ##
(1) Represents occupancy and per rental unit/bed amounts as reported by the respective tenants or operators.
Certain operators in our hospital portfolio are not required under their respective leases to provide operational data.
(2) Senior housing facilities are measured in units (e. g. , studio, one or two bedroom units).
Life science facilities and medical office buildings are measured in square feet.
Hospitals and skilled nursing facilities are measured in licensed bed count.
Development Properties The following table sets forth the properties owned by us in our life science and medical office segments as of December 31, 2008 that are currently under development or redevelopment.
There are no assurances that any of these projects will be completed on schedule or within estimated amounts.
Estimated Estimated Total
## Table 5 ##
(1) For development projects, management’s estimate of the date the core and shell structure improvements are expected to be or have been completed.
For redevelopment projects, management’s estimate of the time in which major construction activity in relation to the scope of the project has been substantially completed.
(2) Represents redevelopments.
Redevelopments are properties that require significant capital expenditures (generally more than 25% of acquired cost or existing basis) to achieve stabilization or to change the use of the properties.
Assets are considered stabilized at the earlier of achieving 90% occupancy or one year from the completion of development or redevelopment activities
increased by $105.6 million, or 3.4%, from 2006 to 2007.
The following table reflects the components of our revenue growth for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006:
## Table 6 ##
(1) Core volume growth for the year ended December 31, 2006 includes .8% associated with hauling waste from the city of Toronto to one of our landfills in Michigan.
This hauling service is provided to the city at a rate that approximates our cost.
(2) Includes the impact of the acquisition of Allied in December 2008.
(3) Represents new taxes levied on landfill volumes in certain states that are passed on to customers.  ?2008: During the year ended December 31, 2008, our core revenue growth continued to benefit from a broad-based pricing initiative.
In addition, 14.7% of our revenue growth is due to our acquisition of Allied in December 2008.
Revenue growth also benefited from higher fuel surcharges and environmental fees.
However, during 2008 we experienced lower prices for commodities.
We also experienced a decrease in core volumes primarily due to lower commercial and industrial collection volumes and lower landfill volumes resulting from the slowdown in the economy.
We expect to continue to experience lower volumes until economic conditions improve.  ?2007: During the year ended December 31, 2007, our revenue growth from core pricing continued to benefit from a broad-based pricing initiative.
Our revenue growth also benefited from higher prices for commodities.
However, we experienced a decrease in core volume growth primarily due to lower industrial collection and landfill volumes resulting from the slowdown in residential construction.  ?2006: During the year ended December 31, 2006, our revenue growth continued to benefit from our broad-based pricing initiative.
We experienced core volume growth in our collection and landfill lines of business.
This core volume growth was partially offset by hurricane clean-up efforts that took place during the fourth quarter of 2005.  ?2009 Outlook: We anticipate internal revenue from core operations to decrease approximately 4.0% during 2009.
This decrease is the expected net of growth in core pricing of approximately 4.0% and an expected decrease in volume of approximately 8.0%.
Our projections assume no deterioration or improvement in the overall economy from that experienced during the fourth quarter of 2008.
However, our internal growth may remain flat or may decline in 2009 depending on economic conditions and our success in implementing pricing initiatives.
Cost of Operations.
Cost of operations was $2.4 billion, $2.0 billion and $1.9 billion, or, as a percentage of revenue, 65.6%, 63.1% and 62.7%, for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
The increase in cost of operations in aggregate dollars for the year ended December 31, 2008 versus the comparable 2007 period is primarily a result of our acquisition of Allied in December 2008.
The remaining increase in cost of operations in aggregate dollars and the increase as a percentage of revenue is primarily due to charges we recorded during 2008 of $98.0 million related to estimated costs to comply with F&Os issued by the OEPA and the AOC issued by the EPA in response to environmental conditions at our Countywide facility in Ohio, $21.9 million related to environmental conditions at our closed disposal facility

<table><tr><td></td><td>For the year ended December 31, 2004 (In thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Cash provided by operating activities</td><td>$161,113</td></tr><tr><td>Cash used in investing activities</td><td>-154,273</td></tr><tr><td>Cash used by financing activities</td><td>-11,333</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease in cash and cash equivalents</td><td>-4,493</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period</td><td>34,968</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and cash equivalents, end of period</td><td>$30,475</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Property, City, State, Zip Code</td><td>YearCompleted</td><td>YearAcquired</td><td>Square Feet-1/ApartmentUnits</td><td>Average RentPer SquareFoot-2</td><td>PercentageLeased-3</td><td>Principal Tenant(s)</td></tr><tr><td>California</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>150 Post StreetSan Francisco, CA 94108</td><td>1908, 1965</td><td>1997</td><td>102,000</td><td>$42.51</td><td>95%</td><td>Brooks BrothersH & M</td></tr><tr><td>Colorado BlvdPasadena, CA 91103-4</td><td>1905-1988</td><td>1996/1998</td><td>69,000</td><td>$38.11</td><td>99%</td><td>Pottery BarnBanana Republic</td></tr><tr><td>Crow Canyon CommonsSan Ramon, CA 94583-11</td><td>1980-2006</td><td>2005/2007</td><td>242,000</td><td>$19.81</td><td>94%</td><td>LuckyLoehmann’s Dress ShopRite Aid</td></tr><tr><td>East Bay BridgeEmeryville & Oakland, CA-11</td><td>1994-1995, 2010, 2012</td><td>2012</td><td>438,000</td><td>$15.37</td><td>100%</td><td>Home Depot Michaels Pak-N-Save Target</td></tr><tr><td>Escondido PromenadeEscondido, CA 92029-5</td><td>1987</td><td>1996/2010</td><td>297,000</td><td>$21.99</td><td>97%</td><td>TJ MaxxToys R UsDick's Sporting GoodsRoss Dress For Less</td></tr><tr><td>Fifth AvenueSan Diego, CA 92101</td><td>1888-1998</td><td>1996</td><td>17,000</td><td>$47.66</td><td>100%</td><td>Urban Outfitters</td></tr><tr><td>Hermosa AvenueHermosa Beach, CA 90254</td><td>1922</td><td>1997</td><td>22,000</td><td>$35.73</td><td>100%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Hollywood BlvdHollywood, CA 90028-6</td><td>1929, 1991</td><td>1999</td><td>140,000</td><td>$30.69</td><td>91%</td><td>DSWL.A. FitnessFresh & Easy</td></tr><tr><td>Kings CourtLos Gatos, CA 95032-4(7)</td><td>1960</td><td>1998</td><td>78,000</td><td>$29.30</td><td>94%</td><td>Lunardi’s SupermarketCVS</td></tr><tr><td>Old Town CenterLos Gatos, CA 95030</td><td>1962, 1998</td><td>1997</td><td>96,000</td><td>$34.56</td><td>89%</td><td>GapBanana Republic Anthropologie</td></tr><tr><td>Plaza El SegundoEl Segundo, CA 90245 -5(11)</td><td>2006-2007</td><td>2011</td><td>381,000</td><td>$37.06</td><td>99%</td><td>H&MAnthropologieBest BuyHomeGoodsWhole FoodsDick's Sporting Goods Container Store</td></tr><tr><td>Santana Row—RetailSan Jose, CA 95128</td><td>2002, 2009</td><td>1997</td><td>647,000</td><td>$47.34</td><td>98%</td><td>H&M Crate & BarrelContainer StoreBest BuyCineArts TheatreHotel Valencia</td></tr><tr><td>Santana Row—ResidentialSan Jose, CA 95128</td><td>1999-2009, 2011</td><td>1997, 2012</td><td>450 units</td><td>N/A</td><td>94%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Third Street PromenadeSanta Monica, CA 90401</td><td>1888-2000</td><td>1996-2000</td><td>210,000</td><td>$64.92</td><td>99%</td><td>Abercrombie & FitchJ. CrewOld NavyBanana Republic</td></tr><tr><td>WestgateSan Jose, CA 95129</td><td>1960-1966</td><td>2004</td><td>639,000</td><td>$12.83</td><td>92%</td><td>Target WalmartBurlington Coat FactoryRoss Dress For LessMichaels Nordstrom Rack</td></tr><tr><td>Connecticut</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>BristolBristol, CT 06010</td><td>1959</td><td>1995</td><td>266,000</td><td>$12.35</td><td>94%</td><td>Stop & ShopTJ Maxx</td></tr><tr><td>Greenwich AvenueGreenwich Avenue, CT 06830</td><td>1968</td><td>1995</td><td>36,000</td><td>$61.00</td><td>100%</td><td>Saks Fifth Avenue</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">December 31, 2012</td><td colspan="4">December 31, 2011</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Level 1</td><td>Level 2</td><td>Level 3</td><td>Total</td><td>Level 1</td><td>Level 2</td><td>Level 3</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="8">(In thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Interest rate swaps</td><td>$—</td><td>$12,388</td><td>$—</td><td>$12,388</td><td>$—</td><td>$3,940</td><td>$—</td><td>$3,940</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4"> Three Months Ended During 2007</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> March 31</td><td> June 30</td><td> September 30</td><td> December 31</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4"> (in thousands, except share data, unaudited) </td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>$206,503</td><td>$204,609</td><td>$241,968</td><td>$254,281</td></tr><tr><td>Income before income taxes, equity income from unconsolidated joint ventures and minority interests' share in earnings</td><td>26,629</td><td>50,418</td><td>24,120</td><td>33,832</td></tr><tr><td>Total discontinued operations</td><td>122,737</td><td>25,141</td><td>302,254</td><td>23,235</td></tr><tr><td>Net income applicable to common shares</td><td>140,005</td><td>66,001</td><td>316,866</td><td>45,013</td></tr><tr><td>Dividends paid per common share</td><td>0.445</td><td>0.445</td><td>0.445</td><td>0.445</td></tr><tr><td>Basic earnings per common share</td><td>0.69</td><td>0.32</td><td>1.54</td><td>0.21</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted earnings per common share</td><td>0.68</td><td>0.32</td><td>1.53</td><td>0.21</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td><td> 2004</td></tr><tr><td><i>Senior housing:</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average occupancy percentage<sup>-1</sup></td><td>89%</td><td>91%</td><td>94%</td><td>91%</td><td>87%</td></tr><tr><td>Average effective annual rental per unit<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$12,333</td><td>$11,305</td><td>$10,498</td><td>$9,676</td><td>$9,690</td></tr><tr><td>Units<sup>-2</sup></td><td>22,458</td><td>22,357</td><td>22,142</td><td>7,528</td><td>6,183</td></tr><tr><td><i>Life science:</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average occupancy percentage</td><td>91%</td><td>83%</td><td>98%</td><td>100%</td><td>100%</td></tr><tr><td>Average effective annual rental per square foot</td><td>$36</td><td>$31</td><td>$21</td><td>$21</td><td>$20</td></tr><tr><td>Square feet<sup>-2</sup></td><td>6,126</td><td>5,896</td><td>897</td><td>738</td><td>514</td></tr><tr><td><i>Medical office:</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average occupancy percentage</td><td>90%</td><td>91%</td><td>91%</td><td>92%</td><td>92%</td></tr><tr><td>Average effective annual rental per square foot</td><td>$25</td><td>$24</td><td>$17</td><td>$13</td><td>$11</td></tr><tr><td>Square feet<sup>-2</sup></td><td>12,952</td><td>12,834</td><td>11,954</td><td>8,908</td><td>7,839</td></tr><tr><td><i>Hospital:</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average occupancy percentage<sup>-1</sup></td><td>43%</td><td>41%</td><td>56%</td><td>57%</td><td>69%</td></tr><tr><td>Average effective annual rental per bed<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$32,741</td><td>$32,893</td><td>$30,063</td><td>$29,420</td><td>$29,402</td></tr><tr><td>Beds<sup>-2</sup></td><td>2,562</td><td>2,562</td><td>1,568</td><td>1,568</td><td>1,568</td></tr><tr><td><i>Skilled nursing:</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average occupancy percentage<sup>-1</sup></td><td>86%</td><td>86%</td><td>87%</td><td>86%</td><td>87%</td></tr><tr><td>Average effective annual rental per bed<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$6,399</td><td>$6,445</td><td>$5,873</td><td>$5,641</td><td>$5,514</td></tr><tr><td>Beds<sup>-2</sup></td><td>5,681</td><td>5,681</td><td>5,681</td><td>5,681</td><td>5,681</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Name of Project</td><td rowspan="8"> Location So. San Francisco, CA So. San Francisco, CA So. San Francisco, CA Redwood City, CA So. San Francisco, CA San Diego, CA Sacramento, CA</td><td rowspan="8"> Estimated Completion Date<sup>-1</sup> 4Q 2008 4Q 2008 4Q 2008 4Q 2009 3Q 2010 3Q 2010 3Q 2010</td><td rowspan="8"> Estimated Total Investment $97,448 103,293 60,660 45,813 43,231 34,272 31,605</td><td rowspan="8"> Total Investment To Date $79,744 84,546 47,761 29,277 7,300 20,272 23,626</td></tr><tr><td>Oyster Point II (Building A)</td></tr><tr><td>Oyster Point II (Building B)</td></tr><tr><td>Oyster Point II (Building C)</td></tr><tr><td>500/600 Saginaw<sup>-2</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Modular Labs IV<sup>-2</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Innovation Drive<sup>-2</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Folsom Blvd<sup>-2</sup></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$416,322</td><td>$292,526</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Core price</td><td>4.0%</td><td>4.2%</td><td>3.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Fuel surcharges</td><td>1.8</td><td>.2</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental fees</td><td>.4</td><td>.2</td><td>.4</td></tr><tr><td>Recycling commodities</td><td>.1</td><td>.9</td><td>-.1</td></tr><tr><td>Total price</td><td>6.3</td><td>5.5</td><td>4.8</td></tr><tr><td>Core volume<sup>-1</sup></td><td>-3.9</td><td>-1.5</td><td>2.4</td></tr><tr><td>Non-core volume</td><td>.1</td><td>-.1</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total volume</td><td>-3.8</td><td>-1.6</td><td>2.4</td></tr><tr><td>Total internal growth</td><td>2.5</td><td>3.9</td><td>7.2</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisitions, net of divestitures<sup>-2</sup></td><td>13.4</td><td>-.5</td><td>-.1</td></tr><tr><td>Taxes<sup>-3</sup></td><td>.1</td><td>—</td><td>.1</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenue growth</td><td>16.0%</td><td>3.4%</td><td>7.2%</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the average cost of operations from 2006 to 2008 in millions
Answer: 2.1