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

Tag: financial times

  • Why construction productivity sucks and how it might be fixed

    We are living through an inflationary hard cost environment. In speaking with one of our cost consultants the other week, he was predicting that overall we could see another 9-10% increase next year here in the Toronto area. Now, who knows what will ultimately happen. But this is top of mind for everyone in the industry and it will continue to impact how and what we build.

    One of the challenges with construction — and this is will documented — is that unlike the manufacturing industry, which has seen sustained productivity improvements over the years, the construction industry has seen relatively little productivity growth over the last half century. In fact, you could argue that it’s been mostly negative in recent history.

    The obvious thought is why not just apply what we’ve been doing in manufacturing to construction. There is, of course, a long standing tradition of trying to do this, with varying degrees of success. But at the end of the day, building a house remains different than building something like a car.

    Probably the key difference is that every construction site has unique constraints and conditions and so the process is constantly changing. Whereas the innovations that Henry Ford pioneered were centered around interchangeable parts and a well-defined process that could be repeated millions of times to generate the exact same output.

    From what I can tell, there seems to be two ways in which we can think about improving productivity. One, we can try to be more Ford-like and drive standardization. This means more off-site factory construction and more standardization. This is the typical “pre-fab” approach and companies like R-Hauz, as well as many others, are already successfully doing this. The trade-off is less design flexibility.

    The second option has to do with better software and hardware. What if we had significantly better “digital twins” for our buildings such that we could see and experience it in 3D before it is physically built? I’m thinking strap on VR goggles and do a walkthrough with the team. This could allow us to pinpoint all of the issues before they actually happen on the job site.

    In parallel to this, what if we had far better on-site automation and robotics to then execute on the above digital twin? Think 3D printing concrete instead of using traditional forms. This is all happening and being worked on, but it doesn’t seem to be at a point where it is changing our industry. But it is exciting to think that it may one day.

    Photo by Di on Unsplash

  • Optimistic and excited

    With seemingly so much happening in the world these days — everything from COVID to climate change — it is perhaps easy to feel a little discouraged about the current state of affairs. But I am an optimist. And as I mentioned on Twitter a few weeks ago, I haven’t been this excited about the future of tech and the internet in a long time.

    We are seeing the auto industry quickly transition to electric vehicles (though, in my opinion, not driving at all is still better for our cities than driving something that is electric). Norway has created the world’s first ever zero emission, autonomous cargo ship. And LIDAR vision systems are looking pretty promising as one of the technologies that will ultimately power fully autonomous vehicles.

    I believe in the resiliency of cities and, as I have been arguing on this blog all throughout COVID, I think the claims about the demise of our cities have been greatly exaggerated. In fact, I think this pandemic has forced us rethink a lot of things about our urban environments, including how we allocate and use our public spaces (think patios). Some of these changes have been for the better and they’re not going to go away.

    I think the benefits of working in close proximity to others are too great to have everyone working remotely. Yes, we have learned that decentralization is possible. But there’s an overwhelming amount of research telling us that we’re all more innovative and productive when we cluster together in cities and in offices.

    I have been back in the office almost 100% of the time since it has been possible to do that. And I am much happier and more productive as a result. There’s also research suggesting that there are psychological benefits to a reasonable commute. It creates a break in our day, allows us to detach from our work, and gives us time to process stuff in our mind.

    I think things like digital fashion and augmented reality are going to have profound impact on the way we consume things. You could also argue that there’s a sustainability angle to more digital and less physical. And of course, I am excited about the transformations that I believe cryptocurrencies and blockchain technologies will continue to bring to many different industries (if not most).

    This morning I was reading a Financial Times article about cryptocurrencies in the developing world. It it perhaps no surprise that many of these countries are providing to be early adopters. People are leapfrogging over to cryptocurrencies because their existing currencies and financial systems aren’t effective enough. That has lead to adoption and penetration that looks something like this according to FT:

    There is, of course, many other things to be optimistic and excited about. But I’ll leave that for the comment section below. What are you excited about these days?

  • The Netherlands is short 330,000 homes

    The price of an existing home in the Netherlands increased 14.6% in the first 6 months of this year alone, according to this recent FT article. This is in comparison to 6.1% for existing homes across the EU on a year-over-year basis. Some economists estimate that the Netherlands is short about 330,000 homes right now and that it needs to build at least 1 million more over the next decade to better align supply and demand. I know that there is a lot of debate about the extent to which supply alone can solve problems of affordability. And indeed there are other factors at play here, such as low interest rates. But 330,000 is a lot of missing housing and numbers like this are not unique to the Netherlands. Most big cities have a supply of housing that is highly inelastic because of how difficult we make it to build. Most of us recognize this. But it remains a problem.

  • A new agricultural frontier in Canada and Russia

    Last year over the holidays, I attended a virtual wine tasting event that was put on by one of our partners. It was with a vineyard / winemaker in Spain and so it was evening for us and some ungodly hour for him.

    At the end of the tasting — which was exceptional, by the way — I asked him what he thought about the Niagara region. Some of you may know that I love to support local Ontario wines. His response was hilarious and something along the lines of: “When we think of Niagara wines, we think of a part of the world that shouldn’t produce wine but somehow does.”

    Ouch.

    This was maybe the case before. But I think the region, vines, and industry have all matured. We also have some exceptional winemakers, some of which have come from the Old World because our startup-y wine region affords them far more creative freedom.

    But you might also argue that things are changing because our climate is changing. The Financial Times recently published an interesting “big read” about how agricultural production and crop types are shifting around the world in the face of climate temperatures.

    It turns out that wine grapes are a pretty good leading indicator. A canary in the coal mine if you will. Because climate matters a great deal if you’re trying to make exceptional wines. And if you’ve been harvesting a particular thing at a certain time for the last 5 decades and you’re now doing it several weeks earlier, it might be a sign that something is changing.

    It also turns out that two countries, in particular, stand to disproportionately benefit from this shifting agricultural landscape: Canada and Russia. As temperatures change, a new agricultural frontier is going to be created. And it is expected that more than 50% of this land will be in these two countries. See image at the top of this post.

    Of course, there’s a flipside to this change. Countries on the other end of the spectrum with marginal growing climates and/or low production yields, could be severely impacted by higher temperatures. So perhaps it is a good idea to stay on top of what’s happening in the world of wine. Might I recommend something from Niagara?

    Image: FT

  • Soho House went public this week

    So Soho House went public this week. It is now trading on the NYSE under the ticker $MCG. It renamed itself the Membership Collective Group Inc. for the IPO given the myriad of brands that the company now operates. The company went public at $14 a share and with a $2.8 billion valuation. It raised $420 million through the offering.

    My first reaction when I heard the news was that going public is maybe at odds with being a cool, urban, and exclusive membership club. We’re all about creatives; also, buy our stock. But maybe I’m wrong. This is just the company maturing. At 26 years old, the company now has some 119,000 members and has 30 Soho Houses around the world in 12 different countries.

    Full disclosure: I am a member and a big fan of Soho House.

    But now that the company is public, we also know that it has never turned a profit. And it hopes to do that by next year, as well as open some five to seven new Soho Houses each year while trying to remain “asset light”. As the company does this and pushes toward profitability, there is, of course, a very natural question about what that does to the experience and the overall brand.

    Does it get diluted at all?

    I don’t think that necessarily needs to be the case. But of course the company will end up evolving. On a related note, if anyone from Soho House / MCG is reading this post (unlikely), I would love to connect about an opportunity here in the Toronto area. I think it has the potential to become something truly remarkable — not to mention, much needed. I can be reached, here.

  • Delivery > mobility

    I was picking up food the other night on Bloor Street (via Uber Eats) and the lineup of delivery drivers outside of the restaurant was at least ten people deep when we arrived. While we were waiting, another handful of drivers pulled over to quickly pickup their deliveries. This is what is happening in our cities right now, especially here in Toronto while we live through another stay-at-home order. And the numbers certainly reflect it.

    Last month in March, Uber’s delivery business (which is separate from the company’s mobility business) recorded a 150% year-over-year increase in annualized gross bookings. The company’s run-rate as of March is now $52 billion. To put this number into perspective, the company’s mobility business also had its best ever month in March with an annualized gross bookings run-rate of $30 billion.

    Delivery > mobility right now. Makes sense.

    To further put this into perspective, total restaurant spending across the entirety of the United States was $670 billion in 2019 (figure from Benedict Evans). So Uber Eats has quickly become a meaningful part of how we eat. I obviously believe that people are dying to get out and eat at restaurants again, but these figures are still interesting nonetheless.

    It’s also interesting to think about the above trendline from a broader logistics perspective. Alongside the rise in Uber Eats, we are seeing a wave of capital move toward “rapid delivery apps.” These are platforms that allow meals, groceries, and other stuff to be delivered, in some cases, almost right away, which aligns with where I think consumers are moving. Rather than making lists and doing weekly shops, it’s now about just-in-time delivery.

    It’s arguably a lazier way of going about things, but water will always find the path of least resistance.

    Many, or perhaps most, of these platforms have adopted an asset light approach. Instacart, which partners with existing grocers, would fall into this category. Their model revolves around gig workers going into existing stores, picking orders directly from the shelves, and then delivering those orders. And it is what Blair Welch was getting at in his recent RENX interview when he reasoned that grocery shopping is still being done, almost exclusively, at local stores.

    This approach is enough for Instacart to be valued at nearly $40 billion, according to the Financial Times. So something seems to be working.

  • London super prime and the City Trifecta Index

    The latest (15th) edition of Knight Frank’s annual The Wealth Report was published last month. I find these interesting because they give you a global view of how and where capital is flowing into real estate (specifically prime real estate). London, for example, did rather well last year despite the pandemic. Buyers from the around the world spent nearly $4 billion on what is commonly referred to as “super-prime properties.” This is real estate with a sale price of US$10 million or more. London saw 201 super-prime properties trade hands last year, with an average price of $18.6 million and with 31 of these transactions being at or above $25 million. This is an increase compared to the year prior (2019), which I suppose is something given that the UK’s housing market was more or less frozen between March and May of last year. These figures put London at the top, ahead of New York and Hong Kong, when it comes to super-prime real estate sales in 2020. (London figures via the Financial Times.)

    Another interesting thing that you’ll find in the report is a city ranking that Knight Frank calls their City Trifecta. What this index does is take Knight Frank’s City Wealth Index (which considers where wealth is currently concentrated) and then adds in two other dimensions: innovation and wellbeing. The idea here is that innovation should drive future economic growth and wealth, and that wellbeing (quality of life) is pretty important when it comes to the future competitiveness of our global cities. When you look at the world’s top cities through this lens, the ranking starts to differ from what you may be used to seeing with cities like London, New York, and Hong Kong at the top (see above chart). Now you have Munich taking the number one spot; Boston and Toronto in 5th and 6th position, respectively; and cities like Zurich jumping up ahead of cities like Hong Kong. These kind of rankings always need to be looked at with a critical eye, but they can be interesting nonetheless.

    Image: Knight Frank

  • Housing supply and house price dynamics in the UK

    In the fourth quarter of last year, the average house price to earnings ratio in the UK was about 8.4x. Apparently this is about as high as it has been in the past 120 years. But interestingly enough, if you go back to the 19th century, this ratio was even higher. It was over 12x back in 1845, but then went on a steady decline until about the 1920s. What changed, according to some researchers, is three things: homes got smaller (making them more affordable), incomes rose, and supply increased.

    So what’s going on today? The obvious answer is perhaps that interest rates are low. But in this recent FT article by Martin Wolf, he argues that that’s not really the primary driver. Part of his logic is that low interest rates are a global phenomenon. And so how is it that real home prices in the UK rose 93% between 2000 and 2020, but only 29% in Germany? There must be some other structural force(s) at work. (Germany has a lower homeownership rate for whatever that’s worth.)

    Wolf argues that it’s a problem of housing supply. Very little housing was built during WW2, for obvious reasons, but housing delivery did really spike in the post-war period in the UK. Local authorities also played a major role. If completions from 2000 to 2019 had averaged the same rate seen between 1950 and 1970, the country would have 2.9 million more homes today, representing a 13% increase to total dwelling count.

    This, Wolf argues, would be having an impact on house price dynamics.

    Chart: Financial Times

  • Venice in numbers

    Here are some interesting figures about Venice take from this recent FT article by Chris Allnutt:

    • Tourist visits to Venice last year were estimated to be about 1/5 of what they usually are
    • Short-term rental bookings as of December 2020 were down about 74% year-over-year
    • It is estimated that short-term rentals normally represent about 12% of homes in Venice (this is significantly higher than the “typical city” which is estimated to be about 1-2%)
    • Even before the pandemic, average property prices had declined from about €4,500 per square meter in 2018 to €4,341 in 2019 (2020 data is still coming)
    • Pre-pandemic, the population of the city was about 50,000, which is less than a third of what it was back in the 1950s
    • A 2018 study by Airbnb reported that for every local Venetian the city had 74 tourists on average (wow)
    • Being a dominant port city, the city has generally been disproportionately impacted by plagues and other health crises throughout its history
    • The Lazzaretto Vecchio, which still stands today, is a small island in the Venetian Lagoon that was founded in the 15th century as a hospital to care for plague victims; apparently it was the first of its kind in the world
    • During the 15th century, Venice saw its population drop by about two-thirds as a result of an epidemic
    • At the height of the Republic of Venice in the 1790s, the city had a population of about 170,000; after falling to Napoleon it halved to about 96,000
    • It’s worth pointing out that the “height of the republic” occurred after many great epidemics; the subsequent population decline was seemingly the result of a conquest and not pestilence

    Photo by @canmandawe on Unsplash

  • Luxury housing surges in San Francisco

    The story of two markets continues. Median rents in San Francisco are down some 27% percent over the last year. Sales of homes priced under $300,000 are down by about a fifth. And yet, according to the Financial Times, sales are up significantly for homes priced above $2 million. For the top 5% of homes, prices ended the year up about 26.5%. Overall, the median home price in San Francisco was up 16.8% last year. It now sits at $718,000. As we’ve talked about before, much of this can be chalked up to the fact that the financial impacts of this current environment are being unequally felt. But I also see it as evidence that, despite all of the media headlines, many/most people aren’t actually betting against cities.

    Chart: FT