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: real estate

  • The re-allocation of capital (and predictions for this decade)

    I have stayed at two hotels over the last month where I did not need to interact with a human as part of the check in process. And in one of those two instances I didn’t even need to interact with a computer at the hotel.

    My room key was issued to me through an app and I used that (and Bluetooth) to open my hotel room door (after the app, of course, notified me that my room was ready).

    This is prediction #2 in Fred Wilson’s annual roundup of what is going to happen next in the world. Automation is reducing the costs associated with operating many businesses. Who is going to be the beneficiary of this consumer surplus?

    The other prediction that should interest most of you — because the impacts would be widespread — is this one here regarding climate change:

    The looming climate crisis will be to this century what the two world wars were to the previous one. It will require countries and institutions to re-allocate capital from other endeavors to fight against a warming planet. This is the decade we will begin to see this re-allocation of capital. We will see carbon taxed like the vice that it is in most countries around the world this decade, including in the US. We will see real estate values collapse in some of the most affected regions and we will see real estate values increase in regions that benefit from the warming climate. We will see massive capital investments made in protecting critical regions and infrastructure. We will see nuclear power make a resurgence around the world, particularly smaller reactors that are easier to build and safer to operate. We will see installed solar power worldwide go from ~650GW currently to over 20,000GW by the end of this decade. All of these things and many more will cause the capital markets to focus on and fund the climate issue to the detriment of many other sectors.

    For the rest of Fred’s predictions, click here. These are always great reads.

  • A non-zero probability of copycats

    Software businesses are generally high margin businesses. But along with this feature comes some risks. Here’s an excerpt from a recent post by Scott Galloway (which is actually about FedEx):

    With any software start-up, there is a non-zero probability that you wake up the next day and find that a better-resourced firm (Microsoft, Oracle, Salesforce, Adobe) has deployed 200 engineers to copy your product, bundle it with their stack for free, or near free, and … welcome to zero. I believe this is happening to Slack, but more slowly than Netscape, as Microsoft’s General Counsel has likely coached Satya to charge a nominal fee for Teams and let Slack bleed out, instead of putting a bullet in its head and stirring the DOJ from a 3-Ambien slumber.

    Real estate, by comparison, doesn’t get disrupted in quite the same way. A location/city can lose its economic purpose (Great Grimsby is just one example), but as long as there are growth tailwinds the real estate should do well.

    Venture capitalist Fred Wilson has on many occasions written about how he (and his firm) made a fortune in the dot-com era, only to lose it all and have to remake it again over the subsequent decades.

    One the lessons learned from that experience (according to his blog), was to take some of that second tech fortune and invest it into hard assets — namely real estate. That feels right to me.

  • Grinding it out over the long-term

    Fred Wilson’s latest blog post about “grinding” tells the story of how Twitter solved the infamous “fail whale” problem that plagued its platform in the early days. I remember that whale, as I’m sure many of you do as well. It was a problem and, according to Fred, it was a real threat to the business. The solution wasn’t all that sexy; though sexy solutions were attempted. The team just rebuilt everything, piece by piece. And eventually the fail whale problem went away.

    The lessons here go well beyond just this Twitter example (or at least, it triggers something for me). Here’s how Fred ends his post:

    If given a choice between a flashy operator or a grinder, I will take a grinder every time. It is a much higher percentage bet. It requires faith and patience and the results are sometimes hard to see. But if you look at the results from grinding it out over a long enough time frame, you can see the power of that approach.

    This kind of long-term patient thinking can be difficult, especially in an increasingly instantaneous world. We are all drawn to magic solutions, hot stock tips, and new condos that are destined to double in value over the next year. I suppose that’s partially why so many people enjoy playing the lottery, even though the odds of winning big can be as low as 1 in a million.

    Being a grinder is largely a higher percentage bet because you’re taking a longer, more disciplined, view. Warren Buffet has, admittedly, no idea how stocks will behave over the next week or year, just as I have no idea how condo prices in Toronto will behave over the next week or year. Instead, Warren chooses to bet on “The American Tailwind” and I choose to bet on the role of Toronto as a global city.

    Warren first invested in an American business in 1942. He was 11. Over the next 77 years, the S&P 500 would go on to return an average of 11.8% annually. Had he invested in a no-fee index fund and reinvested all dividends, his gain would have been 5,288 for 1. In other words, a $1 million investment would have grown to $5.3 billion on a pre-tax basis. (See: The compound effect.)

    77 years is, of course, a long time. But I am sure you get the point: faith. patience, and tenacity — even when, sometimes, the results can be hard to see. Real estate development is very much that kind of business.

  • Who is going to buy the homes vacated by Baby Boomers?

    The Wall Street Journal estimates that, from now until about 2037, roughly 21 million homes in the United States will be vacated by seniors. To put this number into perspective, it’s about 25% of the US for-sale housing stock and more than double the amount of new homes that were sold during the 1998 to 2008 housing boom. That number was about 10 million (see below).

    This is part of the normal cycle of housing, but in this particular instance, there’s concern that the new generation won’t be there to backfill these homes, or least not in the same way. For one, there are more boomers than there are Gen Xers. So right away there’s a potential gap. But on top of this, the next in line don’t appear to necessarily have the same preferences in housing type and location.

    As someone who would fall into the 65.9 million birth bucket highlighted in deep mustard (had I been born in the US), I can tell you that I am far less interested in many of the housing products (real estate speak) / typologies (architect speak) popularized by the generation ahead of me. Whether my opinion is representative is, of course, debatable.

    Anecdotally, I can also say that I know many boomers who have started making real estate decisions based on the assumption that demand for certain types of housing will be tepid going forward. This is not to say that some of these communities won’t be able to reposition themselves if it comes to that. But there is uncertainty.

    Images: WSJ

  • Solving the rubik’s cube

    Developing a building can often feel like you’re trying to solve a rubik’s cube. Among other things, you have to manage a myriad of different stakeholders, all of which — naturally — operate in their own self-interest. There’s the city, community, politicians, various agencies, consultants, tenants, purchasers, lenders, investors, the market at large (of which you really have no control of), and many others. Oftentimes you even have stakeholders whose interests are mutually exclusive. Indeed, the things that they want can sometimes be at odds with each other. Your job is to figure out a solution that satisfies as many of these interests as possible.

    To give you an example, let’s say that you’ve been asked to introduce a stepback into your building in order to break up the elevation. From an urban design standpoint, this may make perfect sense. Hello, datum line. But now your construction costs just went up. You have to transfer your mechanical lines, insulate the roof, introduce new bulkheads, and, for the purposes of this example, let’s say you now need to introduce a structural transfer. This is big cost item that you hadn’t accounted for. And because you just reduced the height of the building to satisfy another stakeholder, you don’t have the excess clear height to accommodate the additional depth required by this new structural element. There is, of course, always a solution. But usually something will need to give.

    At the same time, this raises some interesting philosophical questions. What’s more important in this example? The urban design move or keeping construction costs low so that the building can be delivered more affordably? The cynics will argue that this is a moot point because developers will always profit maximize. But I would encourage you to check out some of my past posts, such as “Cost-plus pricing” and “The impact of inclusionary zoning on development feasibility.” This problem solving dynamic is one of the things that makes development so challenging. But it is also one of the things that makes it incredibly rewarding.

    Photo by Ivan Bandura on Unsplash

  • Prime residential pricing in 10 global cities

    The below graphs are taken from a recent (June 2019) report by Knight Frank on “prime” residential pricing across the world. They define “prime” as generally being the top 5% of each market by value. What these graphs show are the spread between the average price of a prime property and the top price achieved in that market.

    The most expensive market is Hong Kong. The average price of a prime property in 2018 was USD 4,251 per square foot (or USD 45,760 per square meter) and the top price achieved was in 2016 at USD 28,154 per square foot (or USD 303,051 per square meter).

    Using the 2018 average, a 350 square foot studio apartment would run nearly USD 1.5 million (or almost CAD 2 million), assuming there are “prime” studios available in the market. Remember, we are talking about the top end of the market.

    If you’d like to download a copy of the full report, you can do that over here.

  • Risk, uncertainty, and opportunity

    For two reasons, I really like Fred Wilson’s recent blog post on hypothetical value to real value. Firstly, it is structured in the way that I think good blog posts are structured. He starts with a personal story (about this son) and then uses that to take a position and impart some knowledge about the venture capital industry. It makes for a more engaging read. Secondly, I like how he describes the journey and spread between hypothetical value and real value:

    Venture capitalists and seed funds and angel investors make or lose money on the journey from hypothetical value to real value. And when the spread between the two narrows, the money we make is less. When the spread increases, the money we make is more. It is easier to drink your own Kool Aid in the world of hypothetical values. You handicap the odds of winning more aggressively. You trade ownership for capital at work. You accept the new normal. Real value doesn’t move so fast. Because it is right in front of you. You can see it. So it is not prone to flights of fancy. I try to keep this framework front and center in my brain as we meet with founders and work to find transactions that work for everyone. I find it to be a stabilizing force in an unstable market.

    All of this is related to the notion that you make real money when you’re right about something that most people think is wrong. Because that would be hypothetical value. If it were real value, then everyone would simply believe it. It would be “right in front of you.” And this is pretty much true of all competitive marketplaces, including the real estate industry. Risk and uncertainty create opportunity.

    Photo by James Sullivan on Unsplash

  • Slate announces minority investment from Goldman Sachs

    On Monday, Slate Asset Management announced a minority investment from Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s Petershill Program. This is great news, so here’s a copy of the full press release that went out.

    Toronto, August 19, 2019 – Slate Asset Management L.P. (Slate), a leading alternative asset management platform with a focus on real estate and real assets, today announced a passive, non-voting minority equity investment from Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s Petershill program, creating a strategic relationship with one of the world’s leading investment managers and positioning Slate for future success. The transaction will have no impact on the control or decision making of Slate. The day-to-day operations and management of Slate will remain unchanged.

    The investment provides capital that Slate will use to enhance its platform and increase its GP investments in current and future businesses and investment vehicles, further strengthening the firm’s alignment with its clients and investing partners.

    The investment accelerates Slate’s goal to build the leading independent alternative investment platform in real estate and real assets. As part of the transaction, Slate Founders Blair and Brady Welch have made a long-term commitment to the business.

    To date Slate has completed over $11 billion of transactions across Canada, the U.S. and Europe, through multiple vehicles spanning co-investments with global institutional partners, private equity funds and publicly-traded Real Estate Investment Trusts.

    “This investment in our platform is an endorsement of our people, our strategy and our future,” said Brady Welch, co-founder of Slate. “For our investors and our team, this is excellent news; our strategy and model remain the same, and we can now benefit from our new relationship with Goldman.”

    Blair Welch, co-founder of Slate, added that: “Since we started Slate nearly 15 years ago, we have showed that we can build tremendous value by providing our investors with a unique perspective, focusing on the fundamentals of the assets we acquire and delivering hands-on management that is innovative and creative. With our new relationship with Goldman Sachs, Brady and I are enthusiastic about what all of us at Slate can accomplish together over the next decade and beyond.”

    “Slate Asset Management is an incredibly innovative, dynamic real-estate focused alternative asset management platform,” said Robert Hamilton Kelly, Managing Director, Goldman Sachs Asset Management Petershill program. “We are big believers in the strategy, the team and the model. We are excited to partner with Slate as they work to capture the opportunities before them.”

    About Slate Asset Management

    Slate Asset Management L.P. is a leading real-estate focused alternative investment platform with over $6 billion in assets under management. Slate is a value-oriented manager and a significant sponsor of all of its private and publicly-traded investment vehicles, which are tailored to the unique goals and objectives of its investors. The firm’s careful and selective investment approach creates long-term value with an emphasis on capital preservation and outsized returns. Slate is supported by exceptional people, flexible capital and a demonstrated ability to originate and execute on a wide range of compelling investment opportunities. Visit slateam.com to learn more.

    About Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s (GSAM) Petershill Program

    The Petershill program is managed by GSAM’s Alternative Investments & Manager Selection (AIMS) Group, which provides investors with investment and advisory solutions across leading private equity funds, hedge fund managers, real estate managers, public equity strategies and fixed income strategies. With investments in over 20 asset management firms, the Petershill program provides strategic capital to mid-sized asset management firms and has raised over $5 billion of commitments since inception. GSAM is one of the world’s leading investment managers with more than $1 trillion in assets under supervision globally as of June 30, 2019.

    For more information:

    Slate Asset Management
    Katie Fasken
    416-583-1785

    Goldman Sachs
    Patrick Scanlan
    212-902-5400

  • People are camping out in Opendoor’s homes

    Inc. Magazine just did a profile on Opendoor, which is a company that we have, of course, talked a lot about on this blog and that I continue to follow closely.

    It’s interesting to read about some of the challenges that they’ve been having as a result of their frictionless open houses. Since all you need is a smartphone, the company has been having the ongoing problem of people camping out in their listed homes. Sometimes for weeks. They’ve been working to address this by restricting the hours (6AM to 9PM) and by installing motion detectors. I am sure they will figure it out.

    The company is also having to be careful in terms of how it positions itself alongside realtors. There are many livelihoods at stake here. Here’s an excerpt from the article:

    During interviews, Wu has chosen his words carefully when discussing Opendoor’s potential to replace Realtors. “The reality with Realtors today,” he said on stage at the Startup Grind Global Conference in Silicon Valley in February, “is their role is shifting from project management–especially in our ecosystem, where we’re automating a lot of the processes–to advisement.”

    Fred Wilson (venture capitalist) has argued many times before on his blog that business model innovation is far more disruptive than technical innovation. I think it’s valuable to keep that in mind in the context of this discussion.

    Opendoor continues to charge a commission fee (sometimes a higher one than is typical), but it also makes money on the flipping of homes and it has plans to vertically integrate other aspects of the real estate business.

    Will that do it?