Tag: market

• Pre-leasing, pre-selling, and building on spec

  When you build a new office building, the typical strategy is to pre-lease a certain portion of it. That is, you sign leases with a tenant or a few tenants so that you know for sure that X% of the building will be occupied upon completion. It’s a way to manage risk. If you don’t do this, then you are said to be building the office building “on spec.” 

  When you build a new condo building, the typical strategy is to pre-sell a certain portion of it. That is, you sell suites to purchasers based on plan drawings, certain finishes, and a model suite intended to illustrate what that future suite will more or less look like. And the reason this is typical is because most construction lenders will require you to do that.

  So when you see office buildings and condo buildings going up, there are usually already tenants and residents who plan to move in or investors who plan to rent out their suite and have generally transferred that risk away from the developer. 

  Because really the only time that a purchaser or investor wouldn’t close on a condo suite (and walk away from their deposit) is when the market corrects so badly that it actually makes financial sense to do that. That happened in the U.S. in 2008-2009 in a number of markets.

  But by contrast, when you’re building a rental apartment building you don’t have anything to pre-sell and your tenants (unlike office tenants) aren’t going to sign leases with you for some space that will be ready in 3 years. If you’re lucky, they might sign a lease with you for an apartment that will be ready in 3 months. This means that by default you are also building “on spec”.

  Now rental apartments are often considered to be the safest real estate asset class and the least correlated with the macroeconomy. But as a developer and city builder, this dynamic is still something to keep in mind.

  2015.06.29

• What will the condo market look like in 10-20 years?

  Over the past week I’ve had 2 separate people ask me my thoughts on the future of the condo market in Toronto. One of them was working on a University study and one of them was trying to figure out what (condo) property managers would look like in the future. 

  To be clear, the questions weren’t motivated by the typical “bubble” debate that the media loves to headline, rather these were questions about the long term future of condos in this city.

  I haven’t written about this topic explicitly, so today I thought I would summarize my responses for the Architect This City community. There’s probably a touch of aspiration in the responses I gave, but it’s more or less what I’m thinking and what I believe has a good chance of happening over the next 10-20 years.

  Here are some of my thoughts (not an exhaustive list):

  Intensification is going to continue in Toronto and that is going to mean more condominiums and other types of multi-family dwellings. Rental apartments is the product type du jour right now within the real estate community.

  As intensification continues, I think we’re going to see a tipping point in the near term with more families opting to have and raise children in condos in the city. Part of this will be driven by a desire to stay in the city (walkable communities), but part of it will also be driven by the economics (i.e. high price) of low-rise housing in the city.

  As families begin to fill in condos (not just young single professionals and empty nesters), we’ll see developers and cities respond with more family friendly buildings, amenities, and program choices. This could mean anything from children’s play spaces within buildings to redesigned public spaces and parks.

  In line with this shift, I think we’ll also see more sophisticated executions of “mixed-use.” Rather than just stacked uses (retail at the bottom, a few levels of office, and a residential condo tower above), developers and operators are going to start thinking about the ecosystem they are creating. (Related discussion in the comment section of this post.)

  It’s probably a bit safe to predict that sustainability will become more important going forward. But I think that as more families and long-term end users opt for condos, that consumers will become more interested in building and energy performance. Technological advancement (both hardware and software) will also give this a boost.

  Finally, and this applies somewhat to real estate in general, I believe that we’ll see a lot more openness and transparency all across the industry. There will be much better access to data and information. Similar to above, this will be aided by advances in technology and networks.

  Now it’s your turn. What do you think of the above list? And what will the condo market — either in Toronto or in your city — look like in 10-20 years?

  2015.02.27

• Our economy doesn’t suck

  

  On Friday my friend Paul Crowe (of BNOTIONS) wrote the following Facebook post (rant) about the retail landscape here in Canada. It was a direct response to the claims that the recent loss of Target, Mexx, and Sony is “a warning sign for our economy.” If the text is too small below, you can also click here to read it on my wall.

  

  I would say that competition did impact these retailers, but the key message remains the same: there’s nothing wrong with failure and companies going out of business (although success is obviously a more ideal outcome).

  And it shouldn’t necessarily be interpreted as a bad thing for our economy. In fact, a lot of the time it’s something quite healthy. When companies stop being competitive, the market is supposed to punish them. That’s how this game works.

  2015.01.18

• How wise are crowds?

  Earlier this week I wrote a post about a new build home under construction at 37 Canerouth Drive in the west end of Toronto. As part of that post, I asked people what they thought the home would be valued at when it was completed. There were just under 10 responses (many thanks!) and I thought it was really fascinating to see the ranges.

  A lot of you responded in the comment section of the post, but a bunch of the other estimates came in via Facebook, Twitter, and email. It isn’t a huge data set, but I’ve nonetheless consolidated the ones I could remember I received:

  $2,375,000
  $2,750,000
  $1,800,000
  $3,000,000
  $8,500,000
  $2,600,000
  $3,500,000
  $1,750,000

  If you average these estimates, you come to a value of $3.3M. However, the clear outlier is the $8.5M. So let’s take that one out and see how the number changes. If you do that, you then get an average estimate of $2.5M. A pretty big swing.

  Now, I don’t know offhand how accurate that number really is, but I’m fascinated by this idea of “the crowd” determining value. Particularly for markets such as housing where supply can be completely heterogeneous and there isn’t a lot of transaction volume to refer back to (compared to other types of markets).

  Because my strong belief is that under the right circumstances and with enough data points, this number could end up being hugely accurate. And, it could also be more forward looking since it’s capturing current market sentiment as opposed to being based on historical transaction prices.

  If you have any thoughts on this, I’d love to hear from you 🙂

  2014.10.24

• True Condos Podcast: Transparency in the Real Estate Industry

  A few weeks ago I was invited by Toronto realtor Andrew la Fleur to participate in his True Condos podcast series. I had actually never met Andrew before in person, but I knew of him because of Twitter, his blog, and because he was an early user of my past startup, Dirt.

  I was initially a bit apprehensive about being on a realtor podcast, because I thought it might end up as some sort of cheesy marketing piece. But I’ve come to learn that Andrew is not that kind of guy. He’s also interviewed some really great people in his podcast series (here’s the full list), so I feel honored to have been invited. 

  I’ve embedded the podcast below, but if for whatever reason you can’t see it, click here to be redirected to Andrew’s site. We talk for about 30 minutes, with a big focus on openness and transparency in the real estate industry. Thanks again for the invite Andrew. It was great to meet you in person.

  http://www.podbean.com/media/player/audio/postId/5289048?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftruecondos.podbean.com%2Fe%2Fbrandon%2F

  2014.09.23

• Stuck in condoland?

  Toronto Life recently published an interesting article called Stuck in Condoland. A lot of people have mentioned it to me, so there seems to be a lot of interest in the topic. It basically profiles the lives of a few young families who live downtown and are trying to raise young children in relatively small condos (think 700 square feet).

  I thought it was interesting because I like the idea of small and efficient living. The average post-war bungalow in Toronto was probably less than 1,000 square feet. And so this modern notion that you need a big house in order to properly raise a family is a relatively recent phenomenon. Although we’re a richer city today and that’s what happens when people become wealthier: they consume more.

  But the article also makes it seem that developers only want to build small condos and that larger condos and single-family homes just aren’t profitable enough. Thus the reason all these families are being forced to into tiny shoeboxes in the sky. But that’s not really true.

  Look, just like every other for-profit business on the planet, developers are concerned with making money. And so they will always look for ways to increase efficiency, drive down costs, and so on. But there are certain realities of the market that developers don’t have control over.

  First, developers aren’t building new single family homes in the city (at any sort of meaningful scale) because there’s no land to do so. And because the land use policies in place and the current thinking around how we can more sustainably build our cities for the future dictate that we should be building more intensely. In other words, building up. So it’s not a question of developers not wanting to build single family homes; it’s a question of not being able to.

  Second, trust me when I say that if the market wanted large 3 bedroom family units, developers would build them. Mandating them is a useless exercise if people don’t want them or are unable to afford them.

  The challenge we face is that a reinforced concrete condo tower is more expensive to build than a wood-framed single family house. So until land values get to a point where single family homes become the more expensive option (compared to condos), I don’t think we’ll see a huge rush towards 3+ bedroom suites.

  This is my hypothesis at least. Because when you buy house, you’re really buying two things: the house itself and the land. If the house itself (wood) is cheaper to build on a per square foot basis than a condo (concrete), then the variable that will make a difference is the land. And as people like to say: “buy land, they ain’t making any more of it.”

  So what I’m saying is that I just don’t think the situation is as simple as: “developers are bad, all they want to do is build tiny condos and make lots of money.” It’s more complicated than that. But I do believe the question of how families are going to live in the city is an important one.

  2014.06.21

• Who is worried about Canada’s housing market?

  Atlantic Cities just posted an article on the world’s 5 largest housing bubbles. In descending order of real growth, they are:

  1. Israel
  2. Norway
  3. Switzerland
  4. Canada
  5. Germany

  Not surprisingly, Canada is on the list. There is, of course, lots of talk both locally and abroad about the stability and sustainability of our housing market. Here’s what the article had to say about Canada:

  “With real home price appreciation near 20 percent, Canada’s home price growth has been raising eyebrows. Bank of Canada governor Stephen Poloz doesn’t see a bubble, but others aren’t so sure. Climbing alongside housing prices have been levels of household debt, which surmounted 165 percent of income in the second quarter of 2013. (That’s not too far from where they were in the U.S. before it suffered its housing crisis.) And the Bank of Canada itself has even warned about risks posed by frothy condo sectors in big cities like Toronto. A few hedge funds, such as San Francisco-based Hyphen Partners, have even made high-profile bets on a Canadian housing bust. They haven’t paid off, yet.”

  And here’s the full list of countries:

  

  Overall, it’s not surprising to see that Canadian home prices have risen so dramatically since Q1-2009. As the US sank into deep recession (2008-2009), Canadian credit became cheap in order to stave off a recession of our own. This fuelled the housing market, which is an asset class that’s inextricably linked to financing costs.

  The same thing happened in Ireland, which today sits at the bottom of the above list. It has seen real prices drop roughly 40% since Q1-2009. By adopting the euro currency, Ireland no longer had control over its own monetary policy (this is one of the downfalls of a centralized currency). So when the economies of the larger continental countries stuttered, interest rates were dropped. For the strong Irish economy, it ended up creating a housing bubble.

  I worked in Ireland in the summer of 2007 and I remember people telling me about this. Already at this point there was concern that the market had become overheated. There are obvious parallels to what has happened in Canada, even though we don’t share a common currency. The Canadian and US economies are inextricably linked.

  So will the same thing that happened to Ireland happen here in Canada? Nobody knows for sure, but I think we can take comfort in the actions taken by the feds to tighten up lending. They’re acutely aware of what easy credit has done to the housing market and they’re trying to temper it. And it’s certainly had an impact.

  Early this week when I was on the panel about investing in condominiums, I asked a lot of the realtors about what they were seeing in the residential marketplace. A great number of them told me that their clients were struggling to obtain financing. A lot of deals were falling through because of it.

  If you’re worried about our housing market, this should be taken as great news. Choke off credit and you choke off real estate.

  2013.10.26