Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.

Subscribe

Category: Business

  • From hours billed to value created

    Large law firms typically operate on a structure known as a pyramid or leverage model. The basic idea is that at the top there is a small group of equity partners who are expected to make it rain and bring in big clients, but who don’t actually do most of the work.

    Beneath them is a middle layer of senior people who manage the day-to-day, and at the very bottom is an army of juniors who do most of the actual grunt work.

    Because the base is wide and the juniors are getting billed at hourly rates that far exceed their fixed salaries, the partners at the top get the benefit of the excess funds flowing upward. It is a model that relies on juniors working long hours, most people burning out and leaving, and a relative few becoming partners.

    But as we know, AI disrupts everything. Interestingly enough, Wall Street firms are reportedly going to their big law firms and saying, “Hey, now that AI is empowering you to work fewer hours and be way more efficient, we’d like you to tell us exactly how many hours you’re saving and reduce your fees accordingly.”

    According to this recent FT article, the broad expectation is that the cost per transaction is going to come down significantly and that legal firms will need to adopt different business models in the short term.

    I don’t think this necessarily means that legal firms will become less profitable, but it certainly encourages people to move away from “this is how many hours I worked” to “this is all the value that I created for you.”

  • Cynics sound smart but optimists build the future

    There’s an old saying that “cynics sound smart, but optimists move the world.” And indeed, studies show that we typically perceive pessimism as a sign of intelligence. On some levels, this makes sense because it requires intellect to understand something, and then expose its vulnerabilities.

    But at the same time, pure cynicism can be inherently passive. It’s an easy armour to wear, one that protects the user from (1) taking risk, (2) being proven wrong, and (3) doing the hard work to determine whether something might actually work. Importantly, cynicism generally creates zero new value. It may protect you from a bad decision, but it also blocks you from the really great ones. Value creation demands action.

    Now, blind optimism is not the answer. Risk management is essential. In fact, some of my real estate developer colleagues describe the business purely in these terms: “I manage risk for a living.”

    The right answer is a kind of rational optimism. Because the greatest value creation comes when you believe something is true or possible, even if it has never been done before. If someone has already proven the thesis, it doesn’t require the same degree of optimism; it only requires research.

    If you’re looking for evidence of this in practice, consider that the most entrepreneurial cities in the world have robust capital markets that are inherently tolerant of risk. Venture capital, for example, is rational optimism scaled across an asset class. It operates on a power-law distribution. The assumption is that most investments will be a failure, but a select few will more than make up for it.

    This is an important feature because it rewards bold ideas that can change the world. But for all of this to work, you need a healthy dose of institutional optimism. Without it, these bets go unmade and the future gets created by someone else. Let’s not ignore this key ingredient as we build our cities.

  • Out-of-office messages are for the unserious — or are they?

    There is a school of thought that out-of-office messages are only for the unserious. If you’re a top-performing executive, owner, or whatever, you need to be available and reachable at all times, and so an OOO message sends completely the wrong signal. It says that you’re just not that committed to what you do. Yeah, I always use an OOO message when I’m away.

    While I appreciate that school of thought and I know firsthand that when you have your own business you’re on 24/7 (because of some unhealthy combination of drive and obsession), I also believe that the following two things are true.

    One, we could all die tomorrow and it’s important to take some time when you can. In fact, I’d say greater freedom is the objective. As Charlie Munger famously stated: “I did not intend to get rich. I wanted to get independent, I just overshot.”

    Two, as connected as we all are today, there’s no way that when I’m crushing back bowls at high elevations I’m going to be able to respond as quickly as I do when I’m sitting at my desk for 15 hours a day. So I think it’s important to let people know, “Hey, if I don’t respond to you in 38 seconds, I have not died; you just need to wait a bit longer.”

    The signal is a recalibration of expectations, not of my level of commitment.

    Cover photo by Luca Bravo

  • Customer-centricity reduces risk

    Real estate can be an abstract concept. If you’re a capital allocator, it might be a line item in one of your spreadsheets. Or, if you’re a developer primarily focused on zoning and entitlements, you might think in terms of gross floor area. How much density do I have, and what is it going to be worth?

    This is not to disparage any one component or participant within the development supply chain; it is simply to say that development is long and complicated, participants will naturally specialize, and everyone will have a lens through which they see things.

    But at the end of the day, these activities ultimately come back to fundamentals: the real estate needs to house people and things, and do something. Gross floor area has value on a spreadsheet because it can be turned into something. And it is ultimately that something that determines how much it is worth.

    If you’re a developer selling entitled land, your direct customer is the next developer, the one who will ultimately build out the site. Then, that developer’s customers are the people who will ultimately buy, rent, and occupy the space. And in some cases, those customers will also have their own customers, if, for instance, they choose to buy a space and then rent it out to somebody else.

    So there are layers to this. But regardless of where you might sit within the chain, I think it’s always helpful to focus on the customer, or customers. It’s harder to be wrong with your assumptions if you drill all the way down and consider the end use cases.

    Cover photo by Israel Andrade

  • Boom: Bubbles and the End of Stagnation

    So Stripe, the payment-processing company, also has a book publishing division. It’s called Stripe Press, and its objective is to publish ideas that support overall business progress. Their latest book is called Boom: Bubbles and the End of Stagnation, and I must say that the website is pretty neat.

    Here’s what the actual book is about though:

    From the Moon landing to the dawning of the atomic age, the decades prior to the 1970s were characterized by the routine invention of transformative technologies at breakneck speed. By comparison, ours is an age of stagnation; of slowing median wage growth, rising inequality, and decelerated scientific discovery. In Boom, Byrne Hobart and Tobias Huber take an inductive approach to this problem. They track some of the most significant breakthroughs of the past 100 years—from the Manhattan Project and the Apollo program to Moore’s law and Bitcoin—and reverse-engineer how transformative progress arises from the same dynamics that govern financial bubbles, bringing together small groups with a unified vision, vast funding, and surprisingly poor accountability. Bubbles, they conclude, aren’t all bad—in fact, they create the ideal conditions for transformative innovation. Integrating insights from economics, philosophy, and history, Boom provides a blueprint for accelerating innovation and a path to unleash a new era of global prosperity.

    If you’re interested, it comes out on November 19, 2024.

  • Developers are optimists

    I started a new French class his week. Most of my classmates are regulars, but since we have a new teacher, we were all asked to introduce ourselves. And to spice things up, we were asked to talk about whether we’re glass half full or half empty kind of people.

    When it came to my turn, and before I could answer, one of my classmates jumped in and said “Brandon est un optimiste.” And you know what, this made me happy. I took it as a great compliment.

    Because to be a real estate developer, I think you need to be an optimist. I have argued this before on the blog.

    This is not to say that you don’t need to carefully manage risk, and think about all of the things that can and probably will go wrong. It is say that the inertia working against you is so great, that you really need to believe in the future you are trying to create. If not, you’re liable to not make it.

    So this morning, when my partner Lucas showed me the below quote from Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman, I immediately thought, “yeah, this is going on the blog.”

    “If you are allowed one wish for your child, seriously consider wishing him or her optimism. Optimists are normally cheerful and happy, and therefore popular; they are resilient in adapting to failures and hardships, their chances of clinical depression are reduced, their immune system is stronger, they take better care of their health, they feel healthier than others and are in fact likely to live longer.
    ​
    Optimistic individuals play a disproportionate role in shaping our lives. Their decisions make a difference; they are the inventors, the entrepreneurs, the political and military leaders – not average people. They got to where they are by seeking challenges and taking risks. They are talented and they have been lucky, almost certainly luckier than they acknowledge… the people who have the greatest influence on the lives of others are likely to be optimistic and overconfident, and to take more risks than they realize.”

    This excerpt is from Kahneman’s book, Thinking, Fast and Slow. I haven’t read it. But now I want to.

  • Stubborn flexibility

    I’ve been having more coffee meetings over the last few weeks. And one of the things they are doing — besides making me jittery — is reminding me that at least two things happen during bear markets:

    1. Conviction gets tested.
    2. People get really creative.

    Let’s start with number one. It’s easy to have conviction in something when it’s obviously working and lots of other people are doing it. But what about when that is no longer the case?

    Take the example of Amazon. In this 2018 post by Fred Wilson, he reminds us that at the peak of the internet bubble in 1999, Amazing was trading at around $90 per share. Two years later it was somewhere around $6 per share. And it was not until 2007 that Amazon would start trading above its peak again.

    In hindsight, holding on was very obviously the right thing to do. But to do that from 1999 to 2007, you would have needed patience. And to have patience, you would have needed a high degree of conviction in Amazon as a company and in the internet as the harbinger of an important societal shift. That wouldn’t have been easy — just like many things today are not easy.

    At the same time, bear markets force people to get really creative — we’re now onto thing number two. In this case, it’s not a question of patience. It’s, “the thing I was doing before no longer works and I don’t know if/when it will work again, so I’m going to get creative and try something new.” Bear markets give you this wonderful opportunity because the opportunity cost of not doing the status quo disappears (or greatly reduces).

    On some level, though, these are two contradictory things: are we sticking to our guns or are we trying something new? But in my mind, you want both. This is not about saying, “lots of people used to want to buy cryptocurrencies and condominiums, but now a lot of people don’t, so I’m going to move onto the next hot thing.” It’s something more calculated than this.

    To return to Amazon, I think it’s akin to Jeff Bezos’ old mantra that you want to be stubborn on vision, but flexible on the details. Right now, lots of people are being forced to be flexible. But the vision part is what you still need conviction around. Otherwise, how will you get to where you want to go?

  • My last day at Slate

    As some of you may have gleaned from this recent RENX article, I have moved on from my development position at Slate Asset Management to focus exclusively on Globizen. After 8 very productive and exciting years at the company, it was time.

    I joined Slate in 2016 to help start the development group. Here is the post that I wrote back then. And it all came about because of a coffee meeting at Starbucks at the corner of Yonge & King.

    At the time, Lucas Manuel was looking to hire someone, and so our mutual friend, Kieran Boyd, connected us with the expectation that I would make some industry introductions. But at the end of our meeting, Lucas was quick to say, “actually, I think you should come join Slate.”

    And obviously, that’s what I did.

    Fast forward to today, and Slate has grown into a global investment and asset management company with $13 billion of assets under management across Canada, the US, and Europe. And within this platform is a supremely talented development group with an awesome portfolio of sites and projects.

    Thankfully though, this is not a goodbye. Myself and the Globizen team will still be working very closely with Slate on a handful of development projects, including One Delisle and Corktown. And the intent is that we will continue to work on new projects together in the future.

    I learned a lot during my time at Slate, and I have so much respect for Blair and Brady Welch and the rest of the partners. They have built an incredible global company and assembled some of the most creative, entrepreneurial, and smartest people I have ever worked with.

    Thank you for everything over the last 8 years.

    So what’s the plan for Globizen? This will be the topic of a follow-up post.

  • Eating by algorithm

    Grocery shopping is one of those things that — despite a lot of people really trying — has remained a stubbornly in-person activity. However, the pandemic did give online grocery shopping a significant boost, and lot of that has stuck, even if it has been trending slightly downward from its peak. Here are a few slides from Dan Frommer’s Consumer Trends: 2024 Food & Wellness Special report:

    Part of the challenge may be that the majority of people say they actually like grocery shopping, and doing so in a physical store:

    So it is very possible that, for the foreseeable future, there will always be a large segment of buyers who prefer to shop in-store. But then again, if you asked me these same questions, I would also tell you that I like grocery shopping and that I prefer buying in-store. However, that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be open to alternatives. I just haven’t explored and found a suitable online option.

    At the same time, and according to the same Consumer Trends Survey, about 10% of Americans say they currently dislike grocery shopping. Maybe this is the same 10% who are right now shopping online. Either way, this is already a large segment of people who would rather not go into a grocery store.

    Intuitively, as the online offerings get better, one would expect this number to grow. Here, for example, is an interesting overview of the service Hungryroot. One part “meal kit” delivery and one part online grocery shopping, the company uses machine learning and algorithms to determine what its customers might want to buy. Already, about 70% of what it sells is picked automatically.

    On the back end, McKean explains, among other actions, Hungryroot is “clustering” its new customer with other users who have answered its onboarding survey similarly and have already been with the service for multiple years. “And so we can say, ‘okay, people who filled out that signup flow like you… they loved these top recipes with high probability, so we think you’re going to love these recipes with high probability’.”

    What I like about this is that it requires fewer decisions; it has the potential to feel like you have a private chef (one that learns what you like and adjusts accordingly); and it promotes dietary variety. For the typical American, 75% of what they buy in a grocery store is the exact same as what they bought the last time. There’s very little variety, because it’s always easier not to have to think.

    Given this stat, it is maybe surprising that this 75% hasn’t become more automated for more people. Perhaps it’s the 25% that keeps most of us going into stores. I’m not sure, but I think I’m ready to try a service like Hungryroot.

  • Unlearning our biases

    I had coffee this morning with an engineer who is going back to business school in order to segue into real estate development. This is a fairly typical journey. Lots of people come into development from a related discipline. In my case, it was architecture (even though I never practiced architecture). It was also the case when I went to Rotman that something like a third of the class had a background in some sort of science or engineering field.

    However, one thing I did mention this morning was that he will likely find that he will need to unlearn certain things as he moves forward. Every discipline tends to indoctrinate us with a certain way of thinking about the world. Lawyers tend to be a certain way. Engineers tend to be a certain way. And architects tend to be a certain way.

    In my case, I found that architecture school taught me to be, among other things, an intense perfectionist. The modus operandi in design studios is that your project is never ever complete. The more you work on it, the better it will become. And as a result, you should feel a deep onus to work on it as much as humanly possible. But in business, this isn’t practical. In the vast majority of cases, speed over perfection will serve you better.

    I believe wholeheartedly in multi-disciplinary backgrounds, and maybe this is one of the reasons why. It shows you what you should unlearn. What would you say your biases are?