METLIFE, INC.  NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Compensation expense related to awards under the Incentive Plans is recognized based on the number of awards expected to vest, which represents the awards granted less expected forfeitures over the life of the award, as estimated at the date of grant.
Unless a material deviation from the assumed rate is observed during the term in which the awards are expensed, any adjustment necessary to reflect differences in actual experience is recognized in the period the award becomes payable or exercisable.
Compensation expense of $144 million, $120 million and $89 million, and income tax benefits of $50 million, $42 million and $31 million, related to the Incentive Plans was recognized for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Compensation expense is principally related to the issuance of Stock Options, Performance Shares and LTPCP arrangements.
As described in Note 1, the Company changed its policy prospectively for recognizing expense for stock-based awards to retirement eligible employees.
Had the Company continued to recognize expense over the stated requisite service period, compensation expense related to the Incentive Plans would have been $116 million, $120 million and $89 million, rather than $144 million, $120 million and $89 million, for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Had the Company applied the policy of recognizing expense related to stock-based compensation over the shorter of the requisite service period or the period to attainment of retirement eligibility for awards granted prior to January 1, 2006, pro forma compensation expense would have been $120 million, $122 million and $94 million for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Stock Options All Stock Options granted had an exercise price equal to the closing price of the Holding Company’s stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange on the date of grant, and have a maximum term of ten years.
Certain Stock Options granted under the Stock Incentive Plan and the 2005 Stock Plan have or will become exercisable over a three year period commencing with the date of grant, while other Stock Options have or will become exercisable three years after the date of grant.
Stock Options issued under the Directors Stock Plan were exercisable immediately.
The date at which a Stock Option issued under the 2005 Directors Stock Plan becomes exercisable is determined at the time such Stock Option is granted.
A summary of the activity related to Stock Options for the year ended December 31, 2006 is presented below.
The aggregate intrinsic value was computed using the closing share price on December 29, 2006 of $59.01 and December 30, 2005 of $49.00, as applicable.
## Table 0 ##
Prior to January 1, 2005, the Black-Scholes model was used to determine the fair value of Stock Options granted and recognized in the financial statements or as reported in the pro forma disclosure which follows.
The fair value of Stock Options issued on or after January 1, 2005 was estimated on the date of grant using a binomial lattice model.
The Company made this change because lattice models produce more accurate option values due to the ability to incorporate assumptions about grantee exercise behavior resulting from changes in the price of the underlying shares.
In addition, lattice models allow for changes in critical assumptions over the life of the option in comparison to closed-form models like Black-Scholes, which require single-value assumptions at the time of grant.
The Company used daily historical volatility since the inception of trading when calculating Stock Option values using the Black-Scholes model.
In conjunction with the change to the binomial lattice model, the Company began estimating expected future volatility based upon an analysis of historical prices of the Holding Company’s common stock and call options on that common stock traded on the open market.
The Company uses a weighted-average of the implied volatility for publicly traded call options with the longest remaining maturity nearest to the money as of each valuation date and the historical volatility, calculated using monthly closing prices of the Holding Company’s common stock.
The Company chose a monthly measurement interval for historical volatility as it believes this better depicts the nature of employee option exercise decisions being based on longer-term trends in the price of the underlying shares rather than on daily price movements.
The risk-free rate is based on observed interest rates for instruments with maturities similar to the expected term of the Stock Options.
Whereas the Black-Scholes model requires a single spot rate for instruments with a term matching the expected life of the option at the valuation date, the binomial lattice model allows for the use of different rates for each year over the contractual term of the option.
The table below presents the full range of imputed forward rates for U. S.  Treasury Strips that was used in the binomial lattice model over the contractual term of all Stock Options granted in the period.
Dividend yield is determined based on historical dividend distributions compared to the price of the underlying common stock as of the valuation date and held constant over the life of the Stock Option.
Use of the Black-Scholes model requires an input of the expected life of the Stock Options, or the average number of years before Stock Options will be exercised or expired.
The Company estimated expected life using the historical average years to exercise or
In March 2008, the FASB issued guidance which requires entities to provide greater transparency about (a) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, (b) how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted, and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.
This guidance was effective on January 1, 2009.
The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In June 2009, the FASB issued guidance on accounting for transfers of financial assets.
This guidance amends various components of the existing guidance governing sale accounting, including the recognition of assets obtained and liabilities assumed as a result of a transfer, and considerations of effective control by a transferor over transferred assets.
In addition, this guidance removes the exemption for qualifying special purpose entities from the consolidation guidance.
This guidance is effective January 1, 2010, with early adoption prohibited.
While the amended guidance governing sale accounting is applied on a prospective basis, the removal of the qualifying special purpose entity exception will require us to evaluate certain entities for consolidation.
While we are evaluating the effect of adoption of this guidance, we currently believe that its adoption will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statement.
In June 2009, the FASB amended the guidance for determining whether an entity is a variable interest entity, or VIE, and requires the performance of a qualitative rather than a quantitative analysis to determine the primary beneficiary of a VIE.
Under this guidance, an entity would be required to consolidate a VIE if it has (i) the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE that could be significant to the VIE.
This guidance is effective for the first annual reporting period that begins after November 15, 2009, with early adoption prohibited.
While we are currently evaluating the effect of adoption of this guidance, we currently believe that its adoption will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
NOTE 3 / PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS 2009 Acquisitions During 2009, we acquired the sub-leasehold positions at 420 Lexington Avenue for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $15.9 million.2008 Acquisitions In February 2008, we, through our joint venture with Jeff Sutton, acquired the properties located at 182 Broadway and 63 Nassau Street for approximately $30.0 million in the aggregate.
These properties are located adjacent to 180 Broadway which we acquired in August 2007.
As part of the acquisition we also closed on a $31.0 million loan which bears interest at 225 basis points over the 30-day LIBOR.
The loan has a three-year term and two one-year extensions.
We drew down $21.1 million at the closing to pay the balance of the acquisition costs.
During the second quarter of 2008, we, through a joint venture with NYSTERS, acquired various interests in the fee positions at 919 Third Avenue for approximately $32.8 million.
As a result, our joint venture controls the entire fee position.2007 Acquisitions In January 2007, we acquired Reckson for approximately $6.0 billion, inclusive of transaction costs.
Simultaneously, we sold approximately $2.0 billion of the Reckson assets to an asset purchasing venture led by certain of Reckson’s former executive management.
The transaction included the acquisition of 30 properties encompassing approximately 9.2 million square feet, of which five properties encompassing approximately 4.2 million square feet are located in Manhattan.
The following summarizes our allocation of the purchase price to the assets and liabilities acquired from Reckson (in thousands):
## Table 1 ##
The total purchase price of $551.6 million (inclusive of $2.4 million of holdback note payables) for the 2006 acquisitions reflects transaction costs and is net of cash acquired.
Amounts allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed are based on estimates of fair value.
The purchase price allocation of Besco includes 100% of the acquired assets and liabilities, of which $22.1 million is a non-controlling interest that is reflected in Other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Adjustments to reflect the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed are complete for Facom, Automatic Doors, Automatic Entrances, and Allan Brothers.
However, the purchase price allocations for the Besco, GDX and other minor acquisitions are preliminary, mainly with respect to finalization of intangible asset valuations, related deferred taxes, and other minor items.
The following table summarizes the estimated fair values of major assets acquired and liabilities assumed for the 2006 acquisitions in the aggregate:
## Table 2 ##
Other liabilities primarily consist of liabilities for warranty, environmental and employee benefit obligations associated with the Facom acquisition and the previously discussed $22.1 million Besco non-controlling interest.
The weighted average useful lives assigned to the amortizable assets identified above are trade names – 7 years; customer relationships – 13 years; patents and technology – 15 years; and other intangible assets – 9 years.
The amount allocated to the trade names includes $171.6 million associated with the Facom acquisition (Facom?, Virax?, and USAG?)
which have been determined to have indefinite lives.
Goodwill associated with the 2006 acquisitions that is deductible for tax purposes amounts to $0.6 million.
During 2006, the Company completed a consultation process with its European Works Council regarding the reorganization of its Facom and Stanley hand tools activities in Europe (these ‘‘Initiatives’’).
These Initiatives will, among other things, implement growth strategies and reduce costs by rationalizing manufacturing, logistics, sales and support organizations result ing in the severance of approximately 580 employees, the closure of two legacy Facom factories in France, as well as four legacy Facom distribution centers located in the United Kingdom, Belgium, Germany and Switzerland.
The facility rationalization commenced recently with the severance of approximately 440 employees, closure of the two French factories and exit from the United Kingdom distribution center.
The Company expects to complete these Initiatives during 2007.
Cash expenditures to be incurred for these Initiatives are estimated at $75 million, of which $59.4 million has been recorded to the Facom purchase price allocation and $0.7 million was reported as a 2006 restructuring charge.
As of December 30, 2006, $6.6 million has been utilized to date, with $53.5 million accrual remaining.
Also, $1.4 million of asset impairments were recorded to Cost of Sales relating to inventory rationalization associated with the plant shut downs.2005 ACQUISITIONS?The Company completed the acquisition of Security Group, Inc.  (‘‘Security Group’’) on January 4, 2005 and acquired certain assets and liabilities of Rolatape Corporation (‘‘Rolatape’’) as of March 11, 2005 for a combined cost of $57.4 million.
Security Group manufactures and distributes locking devices, lock parts and safes in the United States and Europe.
Rolatape, a small-bolt on to the 2004 CST/Berger acquisition, designs, manufactures and distributes measuring wheels in professional survey, construction and industrial channels.
In January 2005, the Company acquired Eastern Vault & Security Limited (‘‘EVS’’), a small distributor of electronic security products and services primarily to financial institutions in Canada for $1.3 million, which was immediately integrated into the Frisco Bay business.
On May 12, 2005, the Company acquired Sielox Security Systems Pty Ltd.  (‘‘Sielox’’) for $6.3 million.
Sielox is an Australian-based security integrator that provides security systems for new construction environments such as prisons, major apartment and office projects, and provides the Company a footprint in the Australian security markets.
Precision Hardware, Inc.  (‘‘Precision’’) was acquired on May 24, 2005 for a purchase price of $41.5 million.
Precision manufactures and distributes exit devices, door closers and security hardware in the United States and provides a complementary product line to the Company’s existing mechanical access business.
The Company completed the acquisition of ABZ Verwaltungs, Beteiligungs and Handels Gmbh along with a remaining 50% interest in Chicago Steel Tape Gmbh (collectively ‘‘ABZ’’) on September 6, 2005 for $3.3 million.
ABZ, based in Germany, develops and produces surveying technology and equipment.
On September 30, 2005, Pinnacle Electronic Systems, Inc.  (‘‘Pinnacle’’) was acquired for $5.1 million.
Pinnacle is a full-service electronic security integrator specializing in correctional facilities in the Eastern and Midwestern United States.
On November 30, 2005, the Company completed the acquisition of National Manufacturing Co.  (‘‘National’’) for $174.3 million.
National is a leading North American manufacturer and supplier of builders’ hardware that markets the majority of its product range through the two-step cooperative channel to the builder trade and serves over 25,000 outlets with manufacturing operations in the U. S. , Canada and Mexico.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td></td><td> Weighted </td><td rowspan="4"> Weighted   Average   Remaining   Contractual   Term  (Years)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Number of</td><td> Average </td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Shares Under</td><td> Exercise Price </td><td rowspan="2"> Aggregate   Intrinsic Value  (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Option</td><td> Per Share</td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at January 1,</td><td>24,381,783</td><td>$31.83</td><td>6.92</td><td>$419</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>3,758,955</td><td>$50.21</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Exercised</td><td>-2,754,390</td><td>$30.00</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cancelled/Expired</td><td>-153,494</td><td>$32.04</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-341,403</td><td>$37.14</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at December 31,</td><td>24,891,451</td><td>$34.68</td><td>6.58</td><td>$606</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate number of stock options expected to vest at December 31,</td><td>24,390,157</td><td>$34.48</td><td>6.54</td><td>$598</td></tr><tr><td>Exercisable at December 31,</td><td>17,034,788</td><td>$30.66</td><td>5.72</td><td>$483</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Land</td><td>$766,727</td></tr><tr><td>Building</td><td>3,724,962</td></tr><tr><td>Investment in joint venture</td><td>65,500</td></tr><tr><td>Structured finance investments</td><td>136,646</td></tr><tr><td>Acquired above-market leases</td><td>24,661</td></tr><tr><td>Other assets, net of other liabilities</td><td>30,473</td></tr><tr><td>Acquired in-place leases</td><td>175,686</td></tr><tr><td>Assets acquired</td><td>4,924,655</td></tr><tr><td>Acquired below-market leases</td><td>422,177</td></tr><tr><td>Minority interest</td><td>401,108</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities acquired</td><td>823,285</td></tr><tr><td>Net assets acquired</td><td>$4,101,370</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>(MillionsofDollars)</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Currentassets, primarily accounts receivable andinventories</td><td>$267.8</td></tr><tr><td>Property,plant, and equipment</td><td>104.6</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>292.6</td></tr><tr><td>Tradenames</td><td>175.4</td></tr><tr><td>Customerrelationships</td><td>21.5</td></tr><tr><td>Patents andtechnology</td><td>17.0</td></tr><tr><td>Other intangibleassets</td><td>1.8</td></tr><tr><td>Otherassets</td><td>8.3</td></tr><tr><td>Totalassets</td><td>$889.0</td></tr><tr><td>Currentliabilities</td><td>213.5</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred taxliabilities</td><td>27.9</td></tr><tr><td>Otherliabilities</td><td>98.4</td></tr><tr><td>Totalliabilities</td><td>$339.8</td></tr></table>

Question: for the reckson deal , was was the average cost per square foot for the properties acquired?
Answer: 978.261
Reasoning program: multiply(const_9,const_1000), divide(#0,9.2)