The last couple of years have represented a time in which markets stagnated, not solely due to the lack of available capital, but also due to the gap in expectations between buyers and sellers.  Sellers clung to memories of historically low capitalization rates and aggressive rent projections, while buyers assumed the worst in their cash flow analysis and disregarded cap rates altogether.  The chasm between buyer and seller over the last couple of years has been wide, to the point of stunting almost all activity in the market.  The result of the stagnation is that market values are relatively vague across most property types.

Most industry experts concur – the commercial real estate market trails residential and is affected by all the additional market conditions in play. When combined with the still-compounding effects of stock market fluctuations, increasing unemployment, decreased consumer spending (related impacts to retail sales and more), and ongoing corporate restructuring and downsizing to adjust to the greater cycle, conditions are likely to worsen in the short- to medium-term. Key markets such as New York are just beginning to feel the impacts of financial sector lay-offs with commercial space inventories dramatically increasing and residential foreclosures accelerating. These key markets set trends across other areas of the nation.

In addition, as financial institutions continue to flounder or be seized by the FDIC, related asset workouts are the growing trends. In the past, the FDIC would typically take over one bank in a time span covering years. In 2009, as reported on CBS’s 60 Minutes, the FDIC has seized over 50 banks to date and the number is growing. Sitting on the books of these failed financial institutions are portfolios of properties that must be immediately appraised for true, current value and factored against the market conditions in order to get them sold. A related increase of property sales to liquidate these assets, both previously foreclosed properties and those in active loan management, will have direct, negative impacts on the market through further increases in inventories and the liquidation of assets at drastically reduced prices to facilitate rapid disposition and cash flow.

With all of these factors in play, expect market participants in the future to be more realistic in their internal underwriting, but to place emphasis on initial cash-on-cash returns and a flight to quality.  Well-located and tenanted product will slowly begin to move again as the expectations between buyers and sellers move toward each other. However, the flight to quality will benefit the some markets sooner than other areas of the U.S.

Finding The Bottom Vs. Finding Value
by Jackson Cooper, SIOR, CCIM – Managing Director
Sperry Van Ness – Boise, ID

Arriving at a decision on the best strategy for how to successfully navigate the commercial real estate market during these challenging economic times is vexing to many an investor. Do I, or don’t I??? That is the conundrum facing most commercial real estate investors in today’s market. Do I, or don’t I liquidate my portfolio (or at least my non-performing assets)? Do I, or don’t I stand on the sidelines and wait-out these turbulent times? Do I, or don’t’ I get aggressive and take advantage of the decline in property values and the spike in acquisition cap rates? In the text that follows I’ll put forth counsel based not upon the emotions of the times, but rather the forthcoming advice is based upon my years of experience in successfully advising clients in both advancing and declining commercial real estate markets.

It is often said that you can only count on two things in life: death and taxes. There is a third thing that is often overlooked…market volatility. Whether markets are moving up or down isn’t really the issue. The issue is whether or not value can be added or created in the investment being considered. What tends to happen to the non-sophisticated commercial real estate investor is that they rely on upward moving markets to create value for them. If the market happens to move in your favor that is a plus, but it should not be the sole basis upon which your investment decision is made. You need to be able to add value to an asset through operational improvements, repositioning, restructuring, recapitalizing, re-tenanting, or other proactive strategic or tactical value enhancements. This is the mark of a savvy investor.

It doesn’t really matter whether you’re looking at the equity market, commodities market, bond market, the commercial real estate market, or any other investment market, as all investment markets have certain similarities…It is my hope that the following five points will be useful in refining your investment philosophy moving forward:

1.Market Timing: Let me be very blunt right from the outset…not only is it an exercise in frivolity to try and time a market bottom, but many significant investment opportunities will simply pass you by as you stand on the sidelines waiting for that almighty market bottom to occur. I know…smart investors buy low and sell high right? Sure, but there is a difference between recognizing value and opportunity that lead to superior investment returns, and trying to wait for that ethereal moment in time that represents the exact bottom of a market. Put simply, one in a million will correctly time a market bottom, while many investors will generate significant returns by exploiting the opportunities that a declining market provides.

2.Professional vs. Amateur Investors: Tough times tend to separate the wheat from the chaff. The challenge facing most commercial real estate investors today is to become honest with themselves in determining whether they are in fact astute commercial real estate professionals, or whether they were among the masses just riding a wave while it lasted. You see professional investors are always in the market…during good times and bad. They understand that more “lasting wealth” is created in declining markets than in overheated advancing markets. You see it’s the non-professional investor (stupid money) that is both late to the market, and then overstays their welcome by holding on too long. In point number 1 above I mentioned top of the market…Whenever you reach a point in the market where everyone (even your cab driver) is a “real estate investor” you know you’ve found the top of the market.

3.Invest in Opportunities not Asset Classes: The most successful investors are fluid in their approach…they see changes in the market as being synonymous with the creation of new opportunities. While I certainly understand the synergies that come from developing a niche focus, I don’t believe they can make-up for the increase in diversification and scale that comes by exploiting opportunities across asset classes. Are you a retail investor, or a commercial real estate investor? Are you a multifamily investor or a commercial real estate investor? You see it is my belief that the core of sound commercial real estate investing is present across asset classes. The same characteristics that make an investment attractive in one asset class are ostensibly the same in others. Location, current market dynamics, tenant mix and quality, entitlement and construction risk, absorption and vacancy (supply and demand), age and construction quality, micro and macro economics, NOI and valuation drivers, etc. are relevant regardless of whether you’re investing in industrial or office assets. Furthermore, it’s important to be flexible in the structuring of your investment opportunities. As an example as long as the risk/reward ration falls within your investment guidelines it shouldn’t matter whether you are a principal in entirety, have a limited ownership interest, where you investment falls in the capital structure or any number of other considerations. You either like the opportunity or you don’t…the rest of the issues are just details to be worked out at the negotiating table.

4.Understanding Opportunity: Rarely will you come across a static opportunity in the sense that it will stand idle and wait for you to act…Significant opportunities are not only scarce, but they typically operate on the principal of diminishing returns. The longer you wait to seize the opportunity the smaller the return typically is. In fact, more likely is the case that the opportunity will completely evaporate if you wait too long to seize it. Keep this thought in mind; when opportunity knocks…answer the door. I can’t even begin to count the number of times I watched people miss great opportunities due to a poor sense of timing. Not too surprisingly, people who possess a poor sense of timing usually don’t even understand timing is an issue. How many times have you witnessed someone holding-out for a higher price, better valuation, evolving markets, technology advances, or any number of other circumstances that either never transpires, or by the time they do, the opportunistic advantage had disappeared? I’ve observed the risk adverse take due diligence one step too far, the greedy negotiate too long, the impulsive jump the gun, and the plodders move to slow. As the saying goes “timing is everything.” The proverbial window closes on every opportunity at some point in time. As you approach each day I would challenge you to consistently evaluate the landscape and seize the opportunities that come your way. Better to be the one who catches the fish than the one who tells the story of the big one who got away…

5.Seeking Sound Counsel: The smartest commercial real estate investors surround themselves with professional advisors who extend their strengths, shore up their weakness, improve their access to market knowledge, and provide more visibility and broader access to investment opportunities. What really separates the successful investor from the average investor is that the successful investor has a broader sphere of influence and a larger network helping them to be successful than the novice investor. If you ever wonder why certain investors seem to get access to the best deals, it is usually because the professional investor simply enlists more resources working on their behalf.

My advice is this…don’t let the current market conditions intimidate you. Rather create an opportunistic approach to commercial real estate investment that will simply adapt your investment guidelines to the current market dynamics. There is every reason to get into the market and take advantage of once in a generation opportunities that exist now.

About the Author

Jackson Cooper, SIOR, CCIM is the Managing Director for Sperry Van Ness in Boise. He has served as a Senior Advisor for Sperry Van Ness for 5 years specializing in office, industrial, multifamily, hospitality, retail and land for development property transactions. With over 30 years of commercial real estate experience, his knowledge is leveraged through the innovative concepts of Sperry Van Ness. Prior to relocating to Boise, Idaho Jackson was the first Sperry Van Ness affiliate in Oregon and was honored in the Wall Street Journal as one of Sperry Van Ness’ top Advisors in 2004 & 2005.

To date Jackson has closed over 1 Billion dollars in sales transactions. Jackson is extremely active in the commercial real estate industry, holding the designations of Certified Commercial Investment Member and Society of Industrial and Office Realtors. He is a member of the National Association of REALTORS, Ada County Associations of REALTORS, Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce and Boise Chapter of BOMA. Jackson Graduated from Washington State University with a Bachelor of Arts Degree in 1970. Jackson is currently licensed in Idaho and Oregon. Through Jackson’s experience over the last 30 years he has gained local, regional and national expertise of market knowledge & trends. Along with the national platform of resources that Sperry Van Ness provides, Jackson can present each client with up-to-date analysis and state-of-the-art marketing concepts to maximize their investments.

For more information you can reach Jackson at any of the contact points listed below:
Email: cooperj@svn.com
Phone: 203.363.7000
Web: www.jacksoncooper.com
Copyright © 2009–Jackson Cooper
This Office Independently Owned and Operated
All information presented by Sperry Van Ness (SVN) has been obtained from sources deemed reliable.
SVN makes no representation with regard to the accuracy of the information contained herein.

The dislocation in the commercial real estate capital markets that exists today in the second quarter of 2009 has frustrated users of capital and left them feeling hopeless. The small universe of debt and equity providers that are willing and able to provide capital today want to advance less loan dollars on your deal while also taking on less risk. Most of the time that means that it’s a deal you cannot make.  Thankfully, after successive quarters of bad news, most of us are past the denial stage and are making attempts to exist in a broken market.  The leverage being offered by capital providers today would make sense if cap rates were closer to double digits, but unless and until that market correction happens, there will be further frustrations as both borrowers and lenders are fighting to preserve their equity and maintain returns seen earlier in the decade.  The following are some survival tips that could help your deal:

1.    Focus on the borrower/sponsor.  If you haven’t already, organize all personal financial information into a well presented document that clearly lists all assets & liabilities as well as a schedule of real estate owned that includes mortgage data. Also include a resume with past projects that demonstrate you have the appropriate experience necessary to perform on the subject business plan. Borrower’s are being scrutinized much more today than during the last boom. Give the lender every reason to promote your deal up the food chain.

2.    Focus on operations. If vacancy is up in your submarket, make sure you have a documented plan for tenant retention & expense management. Include your managers and leasing brokers on every aspect of the plan that is appropriate.  A solid business plan will illustrate to a potential lender that you have your head in the game and make you someone they want to lend to.

3.    Reduce risk wherever possible. A development deal may need to move forward because of a pending land loan maturity.  Attracting a development loan will be difficult, but may be possible if you reduce risk by attempting to presale your development, in whole or in part, to a serious buyer who is willing to make a sizeable earnest money deposit. This could add a credit enhancement to your deal by showing the lender they have an exit with some teeth in it.

4.    Consider smaller investments (loans < $5 Million). The majority of debt providers who are in the market right now are making loans under this amount, thus increasing your chances.

5.    Partner up. A new equity partner, whether a local operator, a high net worth individual, or an institution, can provide additional loan guarantees on a new loan and could infuse cash into a lagging project that is facing a loan maturity. You dilute your ownership position, but you could save your investment and you may find a partner who will complement your weaknesses in areas such as cash, operations, local expertise, etc. 

6.    Adjust expectations for returns. The 55-60% loan to values we live with now vs. the 80%+ values we saw often during the last boom are requiring investors to use more of their cash to get into investments which puts downward pressure on leveraged returns. 

7.    Hire reputable CRE finance professionals. Ask around and commit to hiring a mortgage broker who you trust or comes recommended by someone you trust. It’s essential to exclusively engage a mortgage broker early in the process that will be accountable to you and the transaction. A mortgage banker plays a dual role by uncovering investments for the lender while sourcing the appropriate solution for the borrower. Look for brokers who receive their compensation from the borrower and not the lender.  It’s important to the deals success to have one professional as the single point of contact who is your advocate in the capital markets, much like you would have one listing agent. 

8.    Explore underlying loan assumptions & seller financing.  According to Real Capital Analytics April Issue of Capital Trends, more than 50% of deals being done right are being capitalized with assumable debt and/or seller financing.  This can be a good source of capital for someone who must transact because of a 1031 exchange deadline.

The significant turmoil in the real estate capital markets has resulted in a considerable vacuum in financing opportunities for Manufactured Home Communities. Once a favorite of the now inactive CMBS/Conduit loan industry, the MHC asset class has become increasingly reliant on Fannie Mae, life insurance company, and commercial bank loan executions. Many MHC and RV Resort operators, in addition to borrowers across every asset class, had found favor in recent years with aggressive Conduit lending programs and their high loan-to-value and low debt service coverage thresholds. With the disappearance of this segment of the capital marketplace, the availability of competitively priced, non-recourse first lien financing for MHC’s outside of Fannie Mae does exist, however with comparatively less attractive terms.

Portfolio life insurance companies are still in the market and are providing non-recourse financing, however their fixed rates range from 7% to 8%, which is 1.5% to 2.0% higher than Fannie Mae fixed rates today. Commercial banks will loan up to 75% loan-to-value on MHC’s, subject to debt coverage requirements of 1.25x typically. The best bank pricing today is in the low to mid 6% range, and the borrower must sign a personal guarantee. The bright spot for MHC financing continues to be Fannie Mae, but they too are getting tighter in their underwriting and pricing. The highlight of Fannie Mae’s offerings today includes a variable rate loan program with fully indexed rates in the high 4% range and a lifetime cap between 6.75% and 7.25%.

Zachary E. Koucos

Associate Director HFF

858.812.2351 Office

858.552.7695 Fax

Securitized lending for individual properties (CMBS or conduit loans) emerged in the mid-1990s as a very popular lending option for commercial real estate including MHCs. Conduit lending was embraced by lenders as a way to generate lending profits while shifting the risk of defaults to bondholders who purchased the bonds that were collateralized by the individual loans. In some years conduit lending accounted for up to 60 percent of annual commercial lending volume. Borrowers benefited by having very attractive (interest rates and leverage) non-recourse financing available for most properties including MHCs, which had previously been viewed by many lenders as a special purpose asset. The existence of conduits also resulted in better terms being available from non-conduit or traditional balance sheet lenders as they had to compete with conduits to obtain business. However, the recent capital market turmoil brought the origination of conduit loans to a halt as the buyers of these bonds, or CMBS, exited the market. With conduit lenders gone from the market, many MHC borrowers with existing conduit loans are facing challenges in refinancing their properties.

Tony Petosa

Senior Vice President

Wells Fargo Multifamily Capital

760.438.2153 Office

760.505.9001 Cell

760.438.8710 Fax

tpetosa@wellsfargo.com

To use a Vegas analogy, we went from a “hot” craps table where everybody is winning, to the desperation of placing your last dollar into the slot machine on the way out, hoping you’ll get lucky. OK, maybe not that extreme, but close. Over the past several years, there were many options to finance your MHC; you had the CMBS/conduit lenders, the life companies, GE, commercial banks and the Fannie Mae DUS lenders, to name a few, and they all wanted a piece of the action.

Due to MHCs being a proven asset class within the finance world (high performing loans and low delinquencies), they were viewed as favorably as a Class A apartment complex in a strong Southern California market. At the peak, it was common to see 10 years interest only, 80%+ leverage and a sub-100 spread on any given community. Then, much like the economy as a whole, the bottom fell out and we went from an extremely liquid and aggressive market to a cautious, selective, downright tough market.

The good news is that we are still closing loans under the Fannie Mae DUS program. Although the terms are not quite as attractive, it is still possible, and realistic, to get a non-recourse, less than 6% fixed rate loan with a 10 year term and a 25 to 30 year amortization schedule at 75% leverage on high quality communities. Other than that, you may be able to find a local bank or a life company to consider something on a recourse basis and/or a more conservative structure.

Todd Elkins

Vice President

Grandbridge Real Estate Capital LLC

205.978.1920 Office

205.978.1852 Fax

telkins@gbrecap.com

www.gbrecap.com

With the capital market providers still on the sidelines , owners of manufactured home communities basically have two choices when it comes to financing – Fannie Mae and everything else. I divide it into two choices since Fannie Mae is the best option in the market today and Capmark is actively closing loans through its Fannie Mae platform. The main issue is having the community qualify for a Fannie Mae loan from the quality standpoint. The community generally has to be 3.5 star quality and higher, 50% of the spaces have to accommodate multi-sectional homes, very little park owned homes, 5% or less RV sites, good amenity package and has to show well. Current underwriting guidelines are 80% LTV with a 1.25x debt coverage ratio with terms ranging from 5 to 30 years. Amortization schedule of 25 to 30 years. Keep in mind that Fannie Mae has been tightening their underwriting requirements, so a deal that fit the program a year ago may not qualify today.

If the community doesn’t qualify for Fannie Mae, then it falls into what I call “everything else”, meaning Capmark works with the borrower to try and find a loan. There are several smaller banks that will lend on manufactured home communities throughout the country. The underwriting is going to be more conservative than Fannie Mae, generally LTV of 60 – 70% with 1.30 + debt coverage ratio. The terms are going to be shorter as is the amortization. Capmark also works with life insurance companies to fund loans for manufactured home communities. Some insurance companies will lend on communities that don’t qualify for Fannie Mae program ; it really comes down to deal specifics.

As a community owner who needs financing in this challenging environment, it is important to allow more time to get your loan closed and it is very important to work with lenders that know what they are doing.

Damon B. Reed

Vice President Capmark Finance Inc

205.991.6700, Ext 8191

205.991.9101 Fax

205.601.2855 Cell

Damon.Reed@capmark.com

Underwriting parameters continue to become more conservative. Fannie Mae recently announced that all-age communities (non-age restricted) will need to utilize a 25 year amortization, as opposed to the standard 30-year amortization. Fannie is taking a harder look at asset quality and only wants to lend on the highest quality communities. That being said, Fannie Mae closed on over $1 billion in manufactured housing business in 2008, which was a huge jump from the previous year. Rates are still very attractive for communities that do qualify, with 10-year loans currently pricing in the 5.75-6.25% range. With limited other financing options, we expect to continue to see a large volume of manufactured housing owners seeking Fannie Mae financing in 2009 for their communities.

Andrew Tapley

Senior Vice President Multifamily Finance

301.215.5578 Office

301.634.2151 Fax

atapley@walkerdunlop.com

www.walkerdunlop.com

In the next 12 to 24 months do you foresee any new financing sources or options that are not currently available for MHC owners?

I have been lending on manufactured home communities since 1995 and it’s hard for me to imagine that the capital market providers will stay on the sidelines forever. I think we are several months away before any of the Wall Street firms dip their toe in the securitization market. I do think by 2010, we will see some “conduit’ lending for manufactured home communities, albeit on much more conservative terms that what was done in 2007. Manufactured home communities as an asset class are holding up well compared to other commercial property types. If that trend continues, you may have more life insurance companies and even pension funds start to lend on communities. Overall, I am optimistic that the worse days are behind us and that we may start to see “normal” lending emerge in the near future.

Damon B. Reed

Vice President Capmark Finance Inc.

205.991.6700, Ext 8191

205.991.9101 Fax

205.601.2855 Cell

Damon.Reed@capmark.com

Yes, we are seeing the marketplace gradually deepen for MHC financing as more lenders have taken note that Manufactured Home Communities as an asset class provide a reliable, low-risk investment. Life insurance companies as well as commercial and regional banks that historically have not transacted in the MHC sector are beginning to realize the inherent value of including this product type in their investment portfolios. The word is out – low loan delinquency ratios, high occupancy rates, and consistent cash flow make MHC’s one of the most attractive options for the deployment of capital in these uncertain times.

We are also seeing many public and private capital sources raising debt and equity funds for the origination of first lien, mezzanine, bridge, and structured finance transactions. More and more of these capital sources have MHC’s on their list of preferred product types. The ability to navigate the capital landscape left standing after the implosion of the MBS/Conduit marketplace is crucial today for MHC operators who are finding that their go-to lenders are no longer active or existent. The good news is that there will be capital available and looking for opportunities, albeit with a tighter strike zone on underwriting, pricing, and terms.

Zachary E. Koucos

Associate Director HFF

858.812.2351 Office

858.552.7695 Fax

zkoucos@hfflp.com

For the near future, we see Fannie Mae as the best financing source for MHCs. Fannie Mae offers long-term fixed rate, non-recourse financing to qualified MHC’s (10-year fixed rates are currently under 6%), and this has helped fill the some of the void left by the conduit market. For properties that do not qualify for Fannie Mae financing, portfolio lending programs would be the next option. Borrowers will find, however, that portfolio lending programs often require full recourse (personal guarantees) and the terms and rates are not as attractive as what can be found with Fannie Mae currently. Beyond that, seller financing may be an option if a borrower is acquiring a property. In that instance, the financing terms will be the result of what the buyer is able to negotiate with the seller. Will conduit lending return? Ultimately we believe it will, but not for the foreseeable future and likely in a more regulated environment with tighter credit standards.

Nick Bertino

Vice President Wells Fargo Multifamily Capital

760.438.2629 Office

858.336.0782 Cell

760.438.8710 Fax

nick.bertino@wellsfargo.com

With the single-family market struggling, how do you think this will affect the manufactured home community industry?

Simply put, the struggling single family market presents terrific challenges and great potential. The potential is to design creative and sustaining programs that enable companies like ours to provide quality, affordable shelter to families who have challenging balance sheets and credit histories because they are moving from housing they can’t afford to factory-built homes in community neighborhoods that present a lifestyle and a value proposition that they can embrace. The real challenge for our company is developing programs to take advantage of the baby-boomer population wanting to downsize, but not being able to sell and capture their perceived equity in the current home they have occupied for decades.

James A. Reitzner

President & Director Asset Development Group, Inc

414.507.8057

jim.reitzner@assetdevelopment.com

In the near term, on the 55+ side, the inability of our prospects to sell their homes has been affecting us for a while now. New home sales in age restricted communities have dramatically slowed given the difficulties these prospective residents face in selling their permanent homes. When houses do start to sell, and there is evidence the inventory of foreclosures and short sales is starting to move in the Sunbelt states, we’re going to be competing with some relatively cheap stick-built product. I think this will force us to revisit the floor plans and models we’re spec’ing. For a while, when the market was hot, the homes we were selling kept getting bigger and more expensive (triples, two-car garages, granite and stainless steel, etc.). This worked because the cost of alternative housing was increasing so rapidly and our customers were pulling out large amounts of equity from their homes in the north. That is obviously not the case at this point and we are going to be selling in a much more “normal” market when the ship turns.

The good news is, I think the housing correction has readjusted the market for the different types of housing. Many of those folks, and there are millions of them, that could previously have qualified for a high leverage mortgage to buy a stick built-house, are renters now. This has translated to fantastic sales results within our all-age portfolio in all regions of the country. As long as we remain focused on the overall value proposition this industry is based on, we expect this success to continue.

William Glascott

CFA Vice President Hometown America, LLC

312.604.7503 Office

312.604.3103 Fax

312.523.7584 Cell

bglascott@hometownamerica.net

www.hometownamerica.com

The manufactured home industry is able to offer individuals and families an alternative affordable housing option during an economic transition.

Manufactured home communities offer an atmosphere and amenities that a typical apartment complex does not have. These include homes with a larger living area than a typical 2 bedroom apartment unit, individual yards in which pets and children can play safely, and a similar neighborhood atmosphere to that of a single-family subdivision.

The RHP Properties portfolio (70 communities, 15 states) continues to experience an increase in occupancy due to our strong hands -on management approach during these tough economic times.

Joshua Mermell

Director of Acquisitions RHP Properties, Inc

248.626.0737

jmermell@rhp-properties.com

Many owners have indicated that one of the biggest challenges of owning MHCs is having to carry notes of community-owned homes on the balance sheet. With the lack of chattel/manufactured home financing, how are you dealing with home financing issues?

As a company, we recognized years ago that we could not “get around” the necessity of financing homes in our communities. Our business model necessitates the three critical components of our asset class: retail sales of homes, retail financing of homes and quality communities in which to place those homes all for the purpose of creating the value proposition for the customer. We purchased a finance company with an on-going book of business and solid income stream, and expanded that company’s ability to grow and service our buyers. This approach keeps our balance sheet on the properties side focused on the traditional method of valuing properties which is the Net Operating Income tied to the real estate and not blurred by the necessity to evaluate the “home inventory”, however it is represented on the balance sheet.

James A. Reitzner

President & Director Asset Development Group, Inc

414.507.8057

jim.reitzner@assetdevelopment.com

We’re doing it ourselves. You are correct though that this is a big challenge as the capital requirement associated with home sales has increased. It has worked out for us as we’ve been able to manage delinquencies and turnover because we’re in the communities every day. From a capital preservation standpoint, it has worked out as we’re well capitalized, long term investors with the critical mass that supplies geographic and demographic diversity in our loan portfolio.

We do have good relationships with the national lenders that are still out there lending and work to establish partnerships with regional and local banks when possible. We are also always looking at creative ways to add liquidity to this market through industry initiatives and working with national organizations like the MHI. I think as investors come back to the market for asset backed securities (with help from Uncle Sam) and we as an industry can demonstrate transparent and stable loan performance, more chattel financing sources will surface. However, that means that we need to be very disciplined in our lending practices and underwriting so that we ensure these notes are marketable assets when that time does come.

William Glascott

CFA Vice President Hometown America, LLC

312.604.7503 Office

312.604.3103 Fax

312.523.7584 Cell

bglascott@hometownamerica.net

www.hometownamerica.com

A lot of investors steered clear of this passive investment due to the lack of rent growth, the above market rents associated with these built-to-suit projects and the low going in cap rates. Additionally, the values for this asset class are directly impacted by cap rate trends; there is no opportunity to offset increasing cap rates with rent growth because the contract rent is typically flat anywhere from 60 to 75 years. An investor that purchased a Walgreens at a 5.75% cap rate should know that there is a good chance the property has declined in value in excess of 20% (assuming 7% & up cap rates).

The following analysis is a basic overview of how our company recently estimated the applicable cap rate for a Walgreens property in eastern Oregon.

Analysis

As will be discussed shortly in the National Investor Survey, capitalization rate have jumped recently. This is notably true for asking rates of Walgreens. The Seattle-based senior vice president of CB Richard Ellis’ net-leased group, Jeffery Thomas, was recently reported in February 2009 as saying that because debt markets have become increasingly unstable since the fall of 2007, there has been a significant increase in the number of Walgreens marketed at above 7%. He feels that the ones currently marketed below 7% are stagnating and will soon be re-priced at more realistic levels. This is noted in the following Current Listings Cap Rate Summation Table, where Comparable 6 was just recently re-marketed at a 7% capitalization rate, up from 6.75 in March, 2009. Finally, Jeffery Thomas was quoted as saying that “We fully expect to see the Walgreens’ average asking cap rate reach 8% at some point in 2009.”

The following table summarizes six current listings of Walgreens along the West Coast, with the majority of them located in the Pacific Northwest.

All three of the listings in Oregon have listing capitalization rates ranging from 7.2% to 7.5%. The one Idaho listing is being offered at a capitalization rate of 7.3%. The lowest capitalization rate (7%) is for the California listing, and it is noted that it was being offered at a 6.75% capitalization rate as recently as the end of March 2009. Noting that these are listings in a buyers market, they are likely slightly low to good indicators for the subject.

The following table presents the capitalization rate conclusion by the market extraction method.

Band of Investments Technique – Because most properties are purchased with debt and equity capital, the overall capitalization rate must satisfy the market return requirements of both investment positions. Lenders must anticipate receiving a competitive interest rate commensurate with the perceived risk of the investment or they will not make funds available. Lenders also require that the principal amount of the loan be repaid through period amortization payments. Similarly, equity investors must anticipate receiving a competitive equity cash return commensurate with the perceived risk or they will invest their funds elsewhere.

 To analyze the capitalization rate from a financial position, the Band of Investments Technique is used. Available financing information from lenders and the sales comparables indicates the following terms:

Equity dividend rates vary depending upon motivations of buyers and financing terms. Although investors have been accepting meager equity dividends in recent years as low as 4% for this property type, moving forward opportunistic buyers will be most active and will require higher cash-on-cash returns. This factor is somewhat tempered by the low returns being provided by alternative investment vehicles (stock market, bonds, etc). The previous terms and an appropriate equity dividend rate are used in the Band of Investments calculations, which are presented in the following chart.

National Survey – The investor pool for the subject property includes national, regional and local investors. While all three groups place emphasis on local cap rates, regional and national investors would also strongly consider national cap rate trends due to the potential to invest in other regions that are offering higher rates of return. The following table summarizes national cap rate trends for net-leased properties.  

The preceding table clearly shows that cap rates slowly trended upwards through the end of 2007 and the first three quarters of 2008. The rate of increase sharply escalated in the fourth quarter of 2008 when it increased by 20 basis points. The increase in the most recent quarter was even more pronounced when it jumped by 73 basis points. The year to year increase was nearly a full percentage point at 95 basis points.

Retail properties in the Oregon marketplace have consistently been trading at slightly lower effective cap rates compared to the national averages. The region’s resilience to the changing national real estate market is commendable; however, the sweeping change in the mindset of investors has caught up here as well. Due to the substantially reduced transaction volume (down as much as 75% in 2008), it is rather unclear when the inflection point occurred; nonetheless, local cap rates have bottomed out and are on the rise. Pinpointing the applicable cap rate for the subject using national survey data is somewhat subjective. The most reasonable cap rate that can be derived from this analysis is presented in the following table. 

Capitalization Rate Conclusion – For investments of the subject’s general size and price, and when sales activity is brisk with relative market stability, the Market Extraction Method is most often relied upon by buyers and sellers to develop cap rate decisions. However, recent events indicate rapid and profound shifts in the financial environment and the economy on local, national and global levels. The other two approaches developed have varying limitations, but generally support the upward shift in capitalization rates. Taking all these factors into consideration, the following table summarizes the various capitalization rate indicators and provides the final capitalization rate conclusion.

Beginning in 2008, and carrying over into 2009, market conditions have led to a noticeable increase in capitalization rates.  These trends are a function of increased risk perceived by investors and more stringent lending conditions implemented by financial institutions.

As will be shown on the following pages, based various sources, capitalization rates have increase from about 50 to 150 basis points during the past 12 to 15 months. The result is that property values have declined commensurately. 

The upward trends in capitalization rates are evident from several different perspectives:

1. The most common method for analyzing capitalization rate from a financial position is the Band of Investment Analysis.

Also known as the mortgage equity analysis, this technique divides the net income between debt and equity positions. Available financing and required investor equity dividend rates are the components of this analysis. Current loan terms would be in a range of:

Mortgage Ratio:                                                     65%

Amortization Period:                                         25 years

Mortgage Interest Rate:                                         6.5%

Mortgage Constant:                                            0.0810

Equity Dividend:                                                 0.0800

These terms are used in the mortgage equity calculation, which is presented below:

BAND OF INVESTMENT TECHNIQUE
Component	%	X	Rate	=	Weighted Average
Debt	65%	X	0.0810	=	.0527
Equity	35%	X	0.0800	=	.0280
					.0807
Indicated Rate					8.1%

Mortgage Ratio:                                                     75%

Amortization Period:                                         25 years

Mortgage Interest Rate:                                         6.0%

Mortgage Constant:                                            0.0773

Equity Dividend:                                                 0.0700

Using these terms in the mortgage equity calculation, the indicated capitalization rate is 50 basis points higher:

BAND OF INVESTMENT TECHNIQUE
Component	%	X	Rate	=	Weighted Average
Debt	75%	X	0.0773	=	.0580
Equity	25%	X	0.0700	=	.0175
					.0755
Indicated Rate					7.6%

This analysis shows that even a slight change in the interest rate, or loan to value ratio, places upward pressure on the capitalization rate.

2. Comments from brokers in late 2008 and early 2009 indicate rates have increased about 100 basis points in the past 12 months, meaning a property that once traded at a 7.0% cap rate would now sell for 8.0%. 

One broker with Capital Pacific commented in March 2009 that rates for triple net leased real estate would likely be in a range of about 7.5 to 8.5%.

Another retail broker, Kevin Hemstreet, sold two triple net properties in August and September 2008 at cap rates of 6.6% and 6.9%, felt that cap rates would be between 7.75 and 8.0% today.

3. Korpacz Investor Survey, is a national survey of real estate investors and portfolio managers which shows a similar trend. The survey results pertaining to the National Net Lease market from the 1st Quarter 2009 are summarized below:

Source: Korpacz, 1st Quarter 2009  Investor Survey

This data reveals that average capitalization rates for the National Net Lease market have increased about 95 basis points over the past year. 

4. Regional net lease sales also provide strong evidence of upward trends.  Investor purchases of fast food restaurant buildings with triple net leases are charted below. 

TRIPLE NET LEASE SALES (1/08 TO 1/09)
Sale					Year			Cap
Date	Tenant	City	State	NRA	Built	Sale Price	PPSF	Rate
1/22/08	Carl’s Jr	McMinnville	OR	2,657	2007	$1,820,000	$685	6.0%
2/15/08	Izzy’s	Salem	OR	5,154	1982	$1,750,000	$340	5.0%
3/3/08	Starbucks	Syracuse	UT	1,750	2007	$1,300,000	$743	6.2%
4/4/08	Applebee’s	Pasco	WA	5,415	2005	$2,625,000	$485	6.9%
4/24/08	Jack in the Box	Grants Pass	OR	2,662	2006	$2,120,000	$796	6.2%
5/22/08	KFC/Taco Bell	Port Angeles	WA	3,200	1990	$1,335,000	$417	6.0%
6/3/08	Jack in the Box	Vancouver	WA	2,654	2007	$1,215,000	$458	5.6%
7/23/08	El Pollo Loco	Vancouver	WA	2,844	2008	$2,600,000	$914	6.7%
8/22/08	Jack in the Box	Klamath Falls	OR	3,000	2007	$2,400,000	$800	6.5%
9/23/08	Arby’s	Grants Pass	OR	2,700	2008	$2,100,000	$778	7.1%
12/1/08	Shari’s	The Dalles	OR	4,950	2008	$1,800,000	$364	7.7%
1/29/09	Taco Johns	Kennewick	WA	1,768	1981	$857,000	$485	7.3%
	Source:  PGP Valuation/Capital Pacific

On the following chart, the above data is plotted into a regression analysis, which clearly shows the upward trend in cap rates.

Based on this data, as of about one year ago, capitalization rates were about 5.75% and today would be about 7.5%. 

5. Impact on Value The relationship between capitalization rates and value is inverse and can be significant because capitalization rates are a highly sensitive input into the calculation of value.  Therefore, a slight increase in capitalization rates can have a dramatic downward effect on value. 

For example, if a property generating $100,000/year in NOI was purchased early 2008 at a 6.5% capitalization rate, the sale price would have been about $1,540,000 ($100,000 / 0.065).  Today, at a capitalization rate of 7.5%, the value would be about $1,330,000 ($100,000 / 0.075).  That suggests an erosion in value of $200,000, or about 13% ($210,000 / $1,540,000).

6. Looking ahead investors surveyed in the 1st Quarter 2009 Korpacz Investor Survey said they expect rates to increase another 50 basis points over the next 6 months. Again, these upward increases in cap rates are tied to economic conditions and more stringent lending requirements.

Getting Your Property Financed
Being Capital Markets Savvy in a Down Economy
by Jackson Cooper, SIOR, CCIM – Managing Director
Sperry Van Ness – Boise, ID

I rarely have a conversation these days where the topic of financing doesn’t arise as a serious concern for my clients. When the economy is robust, and the capital markets are frothy, financing a commercial real estate transaction is a relatively simple matter. However during today’s recessionary times, the commercial capital markets are severely constrained. Not only is the supply of capital tight, but the demand may be near all time highs as well. Depending on which industry source you quote there is between $150 and $200 billion dollars of CMBS debt maturing in 2009 alone. This figure doesn’t include maturing loans from insurance companies, banks and other lenders, which means that many borrowers will be forced to secure financing in a market that presently offers little liquidity.

Given the current lack of liquidity and financing options described above, only the savviest of sponsors with solid projects will be receiving attention from lenders and investors. In the text that follows I’ll provide you with an overview of the information you need to possess in order to speak fluent finance and to increase the odds of getting your project financed.

The first thing to keep in mind is that financing serves multiple purposes beyond rate and term considerations. The proper financing strategy can allow you to increase project velocity, improve operating efficiency, conserve internal capital, increase leverage, and lower the overall cost of capital. Good sponsors focus on developing an integrated capital formation strategy surrounding acquisition, development, construction, refinancing and recapitalization initiatives. The following items are just a few of the things commercial borrowers need to address when seeking capital:

•The selection of the appropriate capital provider;
•Level(s) of the capital structure to be addressed;
•Operating considerations;
•Control provisions;
•Rate, term, pricing and structure;
•Closing time frame;
•Third party requirements;
•Certainty of execution;
•Recourse provisions;
•Exit and pre-payment options;
•Inter-creditor or other multi-party agreements;
•Post closing servicing issues;
•The effect of the capital acquired on tax, balance sheet, future projects or portfolio considerations, and;
•A whole host of other value-added considerations.

Possessing knowledge and understanding of the commercial capital markets is a critical factor in not only determining the eventual success of a single transaction, but also an entire portfolio or operating business. The first thing that borrowers must understand is that all capital providers are not created equal. There is a definite hierarchy within the world of capital providers, and understanding the value-ads offered by different capital providers is important in choosing a relationship. Understanding how to use different types of capital providers for different types of solutions/needs will be important to structuring the proper outcome. Approaching a lender for high leverage loan in today’s market without having your ducks in a row will prove to be next to impossible.

With debt service coverage ratios (DCR) nearing or even eclipsing 1.3 for many asset classes, advance rates on senior debt have certainly constricted requiring more mezz and equity investments for most sponsors to put a deal together. Making matters even more complicated is that there is no longer a clear division between debt and equity in the commercial capital markets. Given the ever increasing complexity of financially engineered structured finance solutions, it is essential for borrowers to develop a detailed understanding of the capital markets, and the structured finance options available to them. With the conservative advance noted above, it is critically important that you understand how to fill the increasing equity gap with the most affordable and effective capital markets solutions available.

The optimized use of structured finance solutions is one of the few arenas that allow commercial real estate owners to dramatically impact leverage, efficiencies and economies of scale across all business lines including acquisitions, financing ventures and operating activities. Structured finance is best defined as financially engineering the proper blend of debt, equity, synthetic, derivative, and hybrid capital in order to resolve particular transactional needs that cannot readily be met by conventional senior financing alone.

Structured financing allows for an engineered design and pricing of situation-specific financing instruments. Representative examples of typical situations that call for structured finance solutions include the following:

•Working around balance sheet or capital constraints;
•Shifting a higher percentage of the capital structure up or down in the leverage curve based upon current needs or market conditions;
•Attaining greater amounts of leverage at a lower blended cost of capital;
•Adding value and increased leverage to buyouts, yield-plays, recapitalizations, repositionings, and stress-   induced financial restructuring;
•Shifting risk and better managing control at both the project and entity levels;
•Releasing trapped equity in single assets or portfolios;
•Conversion of illiquid assets into tradable securities;

While many would choose to define structured finance in narrow terms, it is rather the limitless ability to engineer hybrid, synthetic or derivative instruments. This level of flexibility makes the engineered solution provided by structured finance so valuable. While current capital markets conditions have restricted the use and/or availability of some products, typical structured finance instruments include the following:

•Senior and Junior Mezzanine Debt;
•Straight, Convertible and Participating Second Mortgages;
•Preferred Equity Structures;
•Bond Placements, Tax Credits and other Municipal Finance Alternatives;
•Index or Currency Linked Strips;
•Swaps, Options, Caps, Collars, Swaptions, Captions, etc;
•Credit Enhancement, Financial Guaranties, Standby Commitments; Forward Commitments;

Understanding how to maximize all levels of the capital structure through the use of structured finance techniques when developing the capital formation plan on your next transaction will help you create a much more effective and efficient execution. The following items are just a few of the benefits of understanding how to engineer the right capital structure:

1. Use all levels of the capital structure to move up the leverage curve: By using the proper combination of senior debt, subordinated debt and third party equity, even in this market it is still possible to aggressively climb the leverage curve and still maintain control of the project.

2. Use different levels of the capital structure to prevent project ownership dilution: By using subordinated debt (seller financing or mezzanine financing) to fill as much of the equity gap as possible you will lower your overall cost of capital while not being forced to give up as much ownership in the project as you would by closing the entire equity gap with a joint venture equity partner.

3. Work the Lenders: In today’s market, lenders will often negotiate with borrowers where there is a benefit for doing so. It is quite possible to get a lender to write down or restructure the current financing on a property or portfolio to keep from taking back non-performing assets.

4. Negotiating the proper type of equity joint venture can be critical to the financial success of a project: If you move up the leverage curve with the proper combination of senior and subordinate debt the amount of equity needed from outside investors is minimized. Using the right preferred equity investment structure can leverage the sponsor co-invest to a smaller percentage of the project equity requirement while still leaving the sponsor with the majority of project ownership.

5. Individual Investors vs. Institutional Investors: Decide early where you choose to seek your capital partners and investors and be willing to live with your decision. With rare exception if a sponsor can meet institutional suitability tests they will be better served by accessing commercial capital markets rather than dealing with individual investors. Institutional investors have more knowledge and flexibility when structuring transactions giving owners more operating flexibility. Institutional investors have deep pockets and can provide the appropriate level of financing to allow sponsors to engage on multiple projects at one time thereby creating the ability to grow their business with greater velocity when contrasted to the leverage provided by individual investors. Additionally most institutional investors prefer passive investments and will only exercise dilution or control provisions in the rarest of circumstances. Lastly, institutional investors often times can provide tremendous non-financial value adds in the form of knowledge base, intellectual capital, market contacts and the like.

6.Resist the temptation to do “one-off” project level financings: Disparate financings at the project level can at a minimum restrict a borrowers future ability to cost effectively monetize on value creation by subjecting the property to pre-payment issues in the case of refinancing or disposition prior to the expiration of lock-out periods. Worse than trapping equity at the project level may be the fact that one-off financings restrict the ability to pool the asset with the balance of the portfolio creating a lack of optimized leverage and timely access to credit which in turn can create capital constraints by slowing acquisitions activities or operating initiatives. Lastly, large portfolios or even smaller sub-portfolios created by a multitude of one-off financings can create a management nightmare. This is due to constantly maturing debt rollover which will subject individual assets to credit, interest rate and market risk. This type of risk is not present when financing at the portfolio level due to the ability to trade in and out of collateralized pools where pricing, sizing and structural aspects are known constants.

The year ahead will definitely be challenging with regard to capital markets issues. Understanding how to access and maneuver within the commercial capital markets, and effectively leveraging the many benefits of understanding how to work the capital stack to your advantage may be the defining difference in optimizing the scalability and efficiency of your commercial real estate venture. Please take a moment to review my bio on the following page and feel free to reach me at any of the contact points listed below if I can offer any assistance to you. Thank you for your consideration.

About the Author

Jackson Cooper, SIOR, CCIM is the Managing Director for Sperry Van Ness in Boise. He has served as a Senior Advisor for Sperry Van Ness for 5 years specializing in office, industrial, multifamily, hospitality, retail and land for development property transactions. With over 30 years of commercial real estate experience, his knowledge is leveraged through the innovative concepts of Sperry Van Ness. Prior to relocating to Boise, Idaho Jackson was the first Sperry Van Ness affiliate in Oregon and was honored in the Wall Street Journal as one of Sperry Van Ness’ top Advisors in 2004 & 2005.

To date Jackson has closed over 1 Billion dollars in sales transactions. Jackson is extremely active in the commercial real estate industry, holding the designations of Certified Commercial Investment Member and Society of Industrial and Office Realtors. He is a member of the National Association of REALTORS, Ada County Associations of REALTORS, Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce and Boise Chapter of BOMA. Jackson Graduated from Washington State University with a Bachelor of Arts Degree in 1970. Jackson is currently licensed in Idaho and Oregon. Through Jackson’s experience over the last 30 years he has gained local, regional and national expertise of market knowledge & trends. Along with the national platform of resources that Sperry Van Ness provides, Jackson can present each client with up-to-date analysis and state-of-the-art marketing concepts to maximize their investments.

For more information you can reach Jackson at any of the contact points listed below:
Email: cooperj@svn.com
Phone: 203.363.7000
Web: www.jacksoncooper.com
Copyright © 2009–Jackson Cooper
This Office Independently Owned and Operated
All information presented by Sperry Van Ness (SVN) has been obtained from sources deemed reliable.
SVN makes no representation with regard to the accuracy of the information contained herein.

Did you like this article? Click the following link to download a PDF copy of this article.

Introduction

There is broad sweeping change in the mindset of the World economy caused by the credit crisis, economic downturn and long-term uncertainty, which is having a profound impact on the real estate market. Our job as appraisers is to interpret what is occurring in the economy including supply/demand conditions, unavailability of financing, rising unemployment and alternative investment vehicles in order to credibly estimate the value of real property. The following information provides an introduction to the commercial real estate appraisal process, and summary statements with regard to how we are adapting our analysis to the changing economic conditions.

Appraisal: (noun) the act or process of developing an opinion of value; an opinion of value.  (adjective) of or pertaining to appraising and related functions such as an appraisal practice or appraisal service.

Appraiser: one who is expected to perform valuation services competently and in a manner that is independent, impartial, and objective.

Appraisal Process

1) Define the problem

• Identify the real estate
• Identify the rights to be valued
• Establish the intended user of the appraisal
• Determine the definition of value
• Determine the effective date of the appraisal
• Identify the scope of the appraisal
• Establish any assumptions and limiting conditions

2) Preliminary Analysis and Data Collection

3) Highest and Best Use Analysis

4) Land Value Estimate

5) Apply the Appropriate Valuation Techniques (Cost, Income, and Sales)

6) Reconciliation of Value and Final Value Conclusion

7) Report the Defined Value

Scope of Work: the type and extent of research and analysis in an assignment.

The scope of work is defined by the appraiser and the client.  However, the appraiser can not limit the scope of work to such a degree that is jeopardizes the reliability of the value conclusion.

The most common value scenario requested is the As Is Market Value.  Market Value is defined below:

The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and assuming that the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:

1.     Buyer and seller are typically motivated;

2.     Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interests;

3.     A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;

4.     Payment is made in terms of cash in United States dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and

5.     The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.

Office of Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulation, Part 34, Subpart C – Appraisals, 34.42 (g); Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), 12 CFR 564.2 (g); This is also compatible with the RTC, FDIC, FRS and NCUA definitions of market value.

The scope of work may be defined by the appraiser, however, the scope of work must meet or exceed 1) the expectations of parties who are regularly intended users for similar assignments; and 2) what an appraiser’s peers’ actions would be in performing the same or similar assignment.

Appraisal Reporting Options

An appraiser has 3 options for written reports:

Self Contained

Summary

Restricted Use

Three Approaches to Value

• Cost Approach
• Income Approach
• Sales Comparison Approach

Cost Approach

The cost approach is based upon the principle that the value of the property is significantly related to its physical characteristics, and that no one would pay more for a facility than it would cost to build a like facility in today’s market on a comparable site. In this approach, the market value of the site is estimated and added to the estimated depreciated value of the improvements.

Or

Replace Cost of Improvements w/ profit – Depreciation + site value = Cost Approach Value

Replacement Cost New

All costs to construct

• -Direct Cost (materials, labor, contractor overhead)
• -Indirect Cost (perm. financing, marketing, professional reports)

Sources for Data: Developer’s Budget, Cost Comparables, Marshal Valuation, Bids

(+) Profit

Sufficient entrepreneurial incentive to compensate risk

• -Varies based on market sector

Developers (10-20%)

Users (5%)

Sources: Market survey, alternative investments

(-) Depreciation

Three Types

• -Physical (typical wear & tear)
• -Functional (obsolescence due to design)
• -Economical (surrounding influences)

(+) Land Value

Cost of equivalent substitute site

• -Valuation techniques

Sales comparison (most typical)

Residual analysis

= Cost Approach Value

Most Applicable for:

• New or proposed construction
• Owner/user properties
• Special purpose properties

Limited Application for:

• Investment properties

-mostly to test financial feasibility

• Older construction

-difficult to measure accrued depreciation

Cost Approach in a Declining Market

Many new projects are not financially feasible.  The lease-up or absorption/sell-out of a project becomes extended.  Many projects appraised 18 months ago that are nearing completion are no longer profitable due to extended marketing periods.

Replacement cost becomes a less reliable indicator of market value.

Land value assumptions change. In an active construction market, land is purchased for immediate development. If a development parcel is purchased now, the buyer’s assumption would be to hold until development is feasible.  Additional holding costs may require a downward adjustment to the land sales that sold in 2007.

Income Approach

In the Income Approach a property’s capacity to generate income is analyzed, which is in turn capitalized into an indication of present value. Two fundamental methods are used in this approach, Direct Capitalization and Yield Capitalization, which are described below:

• Direct Capitalization Method – The advantages of direct capitalization are that it is simple to use, easy to explain, often expresses market thinking, and provides strong market evidence of value when adequate sales are available. Direct capitalization is most commonly applied by applying an overall capitalization rate to relate value to the entire property income (i.e., net operating income).
• Yield Capitalization Method – This method is typically referred to as a Discounted Cash Flow Analysis. Market supported assumptions and projections are made for future changes in occupancy, rents, income, and expenses to arrive at periodic cash flow. The property’s eventual reversion is also estimated, incorporating anticipated changes in the property and market conditions. The resulting cash flows are discounted to a present value indication using an appropriate market supported yield rate.

Direct Capitalization – Most Commonly Used

The following steps create a basic outline of the income approach:

• Estimate income
• Estimate Vacancy and Expenses
• Derive an estimate of Net Operating Income (NOI)
• Derive a capitalization rate from a) market sales, b) band of investment analysis
• Divide the NOI by the Capitalization rate to estimate the value

The fundamental principle in this approach if anticipation.  The anticipated risk associated with the income stream is implicit in the cap rate.

A basic Income Approach is:

Potential Income – Vacancy = Effective Gross Income

Effective Gross Income – Expenses = NOI

NOI /Capitalization Rate = Value

Limitations - The limitations of this approach include:

• Lack of recent, directly comparable rental rates
• Lack of market transactions from which to derive a reliable capitalization rate

Common Mistakes - Common mistakes made by market participants include:

• Understanding the difference between current income and potential income and between fee simple and leased fee value
• Estimating appropriate expenses
• Understanding the structure of the leases in order to measure appropriate expense reimbursements when applicable
• Deriving an appropriate capitalization rate based upon the risk factors of the property

Income Approach in a Declining Market

The Income Capitalization Approach is the best measure of value for income-producing investment properties. One challenging task in the current economy is accurately estimating market rents, which requires the appraiser to measure the impacts that softer market conditions are having on rents.

Without a doubt, the most difficult and important modifications to our appraisals are occurring in the capitalization and discount rate analysis. Due to the drastic decline in investment sales over the past year, it takes a lot of creative analysis to reasonably estimate current capitalization rates. We look in the rearview mirror on past transactions, consider current listing and review national trends in order to provide the most reasonable estimate.

Sales Comparison Approach

The Sales Comparison (Market) Approach is based on the principle of substitution, which asserts that no one would pay more for a property than the value of similar property in the market. In this approach, the subject property is compared directly with other recent sales of similar properties in the marketplace. This comparison is typically accomplished by extracting “units of comparison,” for example, price per square foot, and then adjusting these units of comparison for the comparable sales for differences between the subject and each comparable.

The reliability of an indication found by this method depends on the quality and quantity of the comparable data found and the ability of the appraiser to make reasonable and supportable adjustments. In active markets with a large number of sales that are physically similar comparables, this approach is generally a good indicator of value.

Sources of Comparable Data

• Buyer
• Seller
• Brokers
• Public records
• Professional data companies
• Multiple listing services
• Other appraisers

Typical Units of Comparison

• Price/SF of gross building area
• Price/SF of net building area
• Price per unit (apartments, self storage, hotels, health care)
• Price per seat (restaurants and theaters)
• Price per door (truck terminals and distribution centers)
• Price per boat slip (marinas)
• Price per parking space (parking decks)
• Price per hole (golf courses)
• Price per lane (bowling alleys)
• Price per lot or pad (subdivisions, mobile home parks, RV parks)

Most Applicable for:

• Owner/user properties
• Special purpose properties
• Any property (retail, office, etc.) where sufficient data is available

Sales Comparison Approach in a Declining Market

Limited sales activity is making the sales approach more difficult. Investment sales are off 60% to 80%.  As much as 50% of those sales now include assumed debt.

The factors affecting value and pricing have changed. This includes buyer’s assumption on the future. For example, capitalization rates at 6% and investors IRR of 15% imply substantial increases in income over a holding period. With flat rents, higher vacancy costs to ownership, difficulty financing, the conditions in which sales took place in 2007 are much different that they are today.

Appraiser now need to do a better job interviewing brokers, analyzing active listings, and drawing a conclusion from possibly older sales prior to 2007.

W. Grant Norling & Jeff Grose, MAI presented the previous discussion with Perkins Coie LLP on Thursday March 19th of 2009. If you would like to meet with them to discuss anything further feel free to get in contact with W. Grant Norling at grant.norling@pgpinc.com

You can view and/or download a PDF version of the above presentation in the iPaper document displayed below.

In this article, a capitalization rate for a strip center is analyzed based on (1) market extraction; (2) national survey; and (3) debt coverage/equity dividend analysis. This is an in-depth analysis that shows how a capitalization rate can be derived when little data is available in a market area. This presentation is an example of the in-depth analysis that is done in many appraisals.

Market Extraction – The following table is a qualitative capitalization rate analysis of the five sales utilized ahead in the Sales Comparison Approach section.

The preceding grid analyzes the cap rate comparables for eight elements of comparison. The comparables are not adjusted to the subject; rather they demonstrate the variances that make them different than the subject. Each element of comparison can put upward, downward or no pressure on the capitalization rate as it relates to the subject’s characteristics. Particular attention should be paid to Date of Sale, Condition, Tenant Mix and Upside Rent Potential.

• Date of Sale - Regionally, cap rates bottomed out in early to mid 2007, remained relatively flat through early 2008, and have climbed slightly in 2008. Therefore, as the sale dates get older, the analysis recognizes further downward pressure placed on the cap rates.

• Condition - Although the subject is in good condition for its age, its overall condition, design and appeal are inferior to the comparables that were recently constructed with contemporary construction appeal. New construction places downward pressure on cap rates compared to older centers.

• Tenant Mix - Tenant mix takes into account both the quality and the durability of the tenants (length of typical lease terms, good track record for retention, etc.), which are important factors when taking into account the leased fee interest of a retail center.

• Upside Rent Potential - As demonstrated in the Gross Rent Analysis, the market rents of the subject are somewhat above (5-10%) contract rents; however, the contract rents were utilized because they appear to be durable and are most indicative of the leased fee interest of the subject. That said and all other things being equal, investors pay more for income streams that have perceived upside in rents compared to those that don’t.

The cap rate comparables indicate a relatively narrow range from 6.38% to 6.82%, and average 6.6%. Through qualitative analysis, two comparables (3 & 4) command primary consideration. Comparable 3 (6.82%) had the second fewest variances, the majority of which placed upward pressure on the cap rate. This comparable is a high indicator and reasonable sets the upper limit indicator for the subject. Comparable 4 (6.48%) had the fewest variances, the majority of which place downward pressure on the cap rate. This comparable defines the lowest cap rate that the subject could command.

Based on the preceding analysis, the capitalization rate conclusion by market extraction is presented in the table below.

Please note the preceding cap rate analysis by the Market Sales Method purposely takes a rearview mirror approach. Although the analysis did take into consideration the slight upward trend that cap rates have taken over the past few quarters, it does not adequately reflect a more refined perspective of the trends moving forward. The Cap Rate Trends section ahead will further develop the subject’s applicable capitalization rate in the current economic environment. An attempt to further adjust the cap rate at this time would be very subjective.

Debt Coverage/Equity Dividend Analysis – Most investment properties are purchased with debt and equity capital; therefore, the cap rate must satisfy the market return requirements of both investment positions. Lenders must anticipate receiving a competitive interest rate commensurate with the perceived risk of the investment or they will not make funds available. Lenders also require that the principal amount of the loan be repaid through period amortization payments. Similarly, equity investors must anticipate receiving a competitive equity cash return commensurate with the perceived risk or they will invest their funds elsewhere.

Over the preceding several years, permanent financing was available at loan-to-value (LTV) ratios up to 75% and debt coverage ratio (DCR) requirements were as low as 1.15 for well located retail centers. However, loan terms have changed substantially in the current credit crunch economy. Typical loan terms today include decreased LTV ratios of 65% and DCR requirements in the 1.25 to 1.3 range. Additionally, market interest rates have increased to a point where negative leverage is occurring. That is mortgage constants exceed market CAP rates; therefore, as the LTV increases, the equity dividend (cash-on-cash return) decreases.

The following table summarizes the debt coverage/equity dividend analysis.

The preceding analysis is somewhat of a hybrid of Band of Investments Analysis and the Underwriter’s Method to derive cap rates; however, it is intended to be focused on how buyers can meet investment goals while re-adapting to old school lending practices. The loan term assumptions are fixed with the exception of the LTV ratio, which floats between 60 to 70%. The exercise is intended to provide sensitivity analysis for both DCR requirements to satisfy underwriting criteria and equity dividends to provide the investor an adequate rate of return at various cap rates. The ideal and most applicable cap rate satisfies a minimum DCR of 1.25 and a first year equity dividend of 5%. The cap conclusion derived from this analysis is presented in the following table.

National Survey – As discussed in the Market Analysis section, the investor pool for the subject property includes national, regional and local investors. While all three groups place emphasis on local cap rates, regional and national investors would also strongly consider national cap rate trends due to the potential to invest in other regions that are offering higher rates of return. The following table summarizes national cap rate trends for strip centers.

The preceding table clearly shows that cap rates bottomed out in the third quarter of 2007. As depicted in the Retail Cap Rates – OR table ahead in the Cap Rate Trends section, strip centers in the Oregon marketplace have consistently been trading at lower effective cap rates compared to the national averages. This region’s resilience to the changing national real estate market is commendable; however, the sweeping change in the mindset of investors has caught up here as well. Due to the substantially reduced transaction volume (down as much as 75% in 2008), it is rather unclear when the inflection point occurred; nonetheless, local cap rates have bottomed out and are on the rise. Pinpointing the applicable cap rate for the subject using national survey data is very subjective. The most reasonable cap rate that can be derived from this analysis is presented in the following table.

Cap Rate Trends - The following table summarizes cap rate trends for investment grade retail centers in the Oregon marketplace over the past several years.

Capitalization rates had trended downward for several years; however, they appear to have stabilized or even trended upward slightly over the past several months due to the tightening of credit and increased underwriting standards. Interviews with real estate sales brokers that are familiar with both local and national real estate investment properties indicate that capitalization rates and corresponding values within the Pacific NW region are holding strong relative to other regions. Several factors contribute to the strong commercial real estate fundamentals in the Pacific Northwest region: (1) stringent zoning and scarcity of developable commercial sites create a barrier to entry for new development; (2) relatively favorable supply/demand conditions (stable vacancy levels) insolate existing development and ensure that market rent levels at minimum match inflation; (3) very few prime investment properties are available for sale, while demand from local, regional and national investors is still relatively strong in this marketplace; and (4) the relationship between NOI and value (capitalization rates) have remained relatively in balance relative to other regions.

In addition to the general downward trend in cap rates since 2002, the spread between traditionally lower risk (anchored neighborhood) and higher risk (non-anchored strips) investments narrowed to the point that investors were not making a distinction between the two. It is apparent that this trend is quickly being reversed as demonstrated in the following table.

The preceding table summarizes the most recent investment retail sales that have closed or are pending in the region. The emerging trend appears a reclassification of cap rates that is   consistent with actual risk characteristics. For example, the low end of the range at 6.3% is a highly marketable investment occupied by Walgreens (AAA rating) subject to a long-term lease. Cap rates for this asset class have increased as much as 25 bps over the past year. In comparison, the high end of the range at 7.6% is a well positioned property adjacent to a regional shopping center. However, the tenant mix is comprised of primarily mid box retailers that are particularly vulnerable in times of recession. Additionally, the largest tenant had a contract rent that was measurably above market, adding risk to the durability of the income stream. During confirmation of the sale, the buyer acknowledged that these issues were taken into consideration when developing his purchase offer. In all likelihood, this property would have traded at a cap rate in excess of 100 bps lower at the height of the market. This issue will be taken into consideration when reconciling the subject’s cap rate.

Capitalization Rate Conclusion – For investments of the subject’s general size and price, and when sales activity is brisk with relative market stability, the Market Extraction Method is most often relied upon by buyers and sellers to develop cap rate decisions. However, recent events indicate rapid and profound shifts in the financial environment and the economy on local, national and global levels. The other two approaches developed have varying limitations, but generally support the upward shift in cap rates. The subject has a strong track record for retaining tenants, and it is very well positioned noting prime exposure and its pad location within a regional shopping center. Taking all these factors into consideration, the following table summarizes the various cap rate indicators and provides the final cap rate conclusion.

The creators are commercial real estate appraisers based out of Portland, OR that serve the entire OR market. By default, the articles will be somewhat skewed toward the Pacific NW, and how our local and regional issues relate to the overall national and global real estate markets. If that does nothing for you, feel free to build your own blog.

Enjoy the journey!!!

Way back in November 1996, Oregon voters passed Measure 47. This was a constitutional amendment popularly referred to as the “cut and cap” tax reform act. The “cut” aspect of the legislation referred to a reduction in taxes for the 1997-98 tax year calculated as the lesser of the 1994-95 taxes or 90 percent of the 1995-96 taxes. Bonded debt would be exempt from the calculations. The “cap” aspect of the measure restricted growth in taxes to no greater than 3 percent annually after the 1997-98 tax year.
Exempt from the calculation were circumstances of new construction, significant renovations/rehabilitation, loss of exemption status, change in zoning, subdivision of the property, and omitted property.

When the legislative assembly convened in January 1997, it became evident that, as written, Measure 47 was impractical to implement on an equitable and feasible basis. Measure 50 was the revision of Measure 47 and is the product of a cooperative effort between industry, the petitioner for Measure 47, the Oregon Assessors, the Department of Revenue and the House Revenue Committee. Measure 50 limited the 1997-98 assessed value of each property to the lesser of real market value or the 1995-96 real market value, less 10 percent. Growth in assessed value was limited to 3 percent annually, thereafter. Thus, the 1998-99 maximum assessed value was the 1995-96 real market value, less 10 percent, plus 3 percent. The 1999-2000 maximum assessed value was the 1998-99 maximum assessed value plus 3%, and so on.

In addition to the cap on assessed value growth, tax growth was also effectively limited to a 3 percent annual growth rate, although exceptions are permitted under specially approved levies. Similar to Measure 47, assessed values can be increased due to new construction, subdivision, rezoning, omitted property and loss of exemption. When these events occur, the assessor will place the added value on the assessment roll at the maximum assessed value.

The maximum assessed value of added value will be determined by estimating the real market value of the change and multiplying it by the ratio of the maximum assessed values of like properties to the real market value of like properties.

For example, on December 31, 2007, a new fast serve restaurant was completed. Its real market value is $800,000. The average maximum assessed value for like properties in this class is $600,000 and the average real market value for like properties is $800,000. Therefore, the subject’s 2008-09 assessment (maximum assessed value) will be [($600,000/$800,000) x $800,000] $600,000.

The process is charted below:

The 2009-10 assessed value will be ($600,000 x 1.03) $618,000.

Measure 50 also provided for establishment of new levies outside the tax rate limits. One interesting aspect of the new levies clause was that the levy request required a 50 percent “turnout” of registered voters for approval. Voters overturned this supermajority requirement in 2008.

One significant implication of Measure 50 is the “disconnect” between assessed value and market value. Reliance on assessed value for market-based decision making and matters related to income tax is clearly a phenomenon of the past. There is reason to believe that there will be some level of predictability of future tax obligations based on the growth rate limits. Properties subject to exceptions, particularly new or significantly changed properties, should be monitored closely for their first year values on the tax roll, as these values will dictate the taxable values into the future.

Todd S. Liebow, MAI, is a Principal of PGP Valuation Inc, a National Real Estate Appraisal and Consulting Firm providing Property Tax Appeals/Consultations; Commercial, Industrial, and Special Use Property Appraisals; and Feasibility studies.

A Scrib iPaper version of the document is presented below. Additionally, you can view other publications including recent newsletters and tax information in the Publications section of the website.

If you enjoyed this article and would like to download a PDF copy, you can do so from the link below.

Note: There is a file embedded within this post, please visit this post to download the file.