Showing posts with label property valuations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label property valuations. Show all posts

Friday, May 29, 2009

A Quick Run-Through Of Global Real Estate Hotspots


Real estate is a cumbersome slow moving asset. Its not like stock prices which can move up and down a few percent on the same day. Real estate is however a reflection of liquidity, a wealth indicator, a confidence indicator, a leading indicator, and a lagging indicator as well, depending on how you argue and look at things. Hence it opportune to have a peek at some real estate hotspots to see if the surprising bull run ties in with the investing situation in real estate.

Australia

The Australian housing market downturn is likely to be milder than in the U.S., UK and EU in 2009. Australia's house price correction had a head start going back to 2003. Furthermore, housing demand from migrants to the commodities-rich west and the chronic housing shortage in eastern Australia will keep prices from stabilizing back at pre-boom levels unless Australia fails to avoid a deep recession. Indeed, building approvals and housing loans to owner-occupiers began to recover since October 2008 after the government doubled grants for first-time purchases of homes until December 2009. Mortgage interest rates fell to their lowest level in four decades after the Reserve Bank of Australia cut the overnight cash rate 425bp within a year to 3% in April 2009, the lowest since 1960. Tax cuts, government handouts and lower petrol prices will also raise the affordability of housing. Affordability may not mean higher house prices, though. Despite increased sales (new home sales in Q1 2009 rose 20% since end-2008), house prices fell 6.7% y/y in Q1 2009. Rising unemployment and lower household wealth will keep buying sentiment mild this year but, short of a deep recession, improved affordability and ongoing housing shortages will help Australia avoid a housing crash as bad as in the U.S. and Europe.


New Zealand

New Zealand housing market is in worse shape than Australia's but is also likely to avoid as deep a correction as in the U.S. and Europe. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand has cut 575bp since July 2008 to 2.5% in April 2009 but longer-term, fixed mortgage rates have recently begun to rise again due to expectations of a quick recovery and higher interest rates. Fiscal policy has been laissez-faire towards the recession, opting merely for tax cuts as the government would rather not stand in the way of the economy's structural adjustment. With housing assets 5.7 times the household disposable income, New Zealand property markets are even more leveraged than their U.S. counterparts. House prices fell 8% in 2008 and are down 9.2% y/y as of April 2009. Some analysts believe the housing market will bottom on an annual basis in 2009. The housing market has already bottomed on a month-over-month basis, with the median price rising from $325,000 in January 2009 to $340,000 in April. Immigration has revived housing demand and sales have been strongest in the low-end segment thanks to increased affordability. However, new building starts and new home sales remain below the boom levels of 2004 and will likely remain so due to credit constraints, rising unemployment and sluggish economic growth in the year ahead.


United Kingdom

The housing sector is one the most important factors affecting the economic slump in the UK, which is similar in many ways to the difficulties facing the U.S. economy. The latest data on the UK housing sector continues to be mixed but some analysts are tentative to call the bottom in Q2 2009. The latest Halifax price index fell 1.7% m/m in April with price levels back to 2004 readings. Nationwide data brought a 0.4% decline in April but the y/y contraction fell from 15.7% in March to 15% in April. Mortgage lending showed some signs of recovery in April according to the data from CML with a 9% m/m drop. Despite hopes of a recovery, lending is still 60% lower than a year. The monthly data could be quite volatile in the coming months, drawing a slow bottom-like pattern. A real recovery of the housing sector will depend on improvement in the personal income and employment situation in the economy, which are not yet foreseen.


Asia

Asia has witnessed sharp real estate correction led by the Asian Tigers, plus China, India and Vietnam. All these markets saw declining home and office prices and rentals, lower sales and rising vacancies. Prices are approaching fundamental values and slowing construction activity might somewhat close the estimated excess supply. But further price and rental correction are imminent. This because household and corporate demand will remain subdued in 2009 despite policy measures such as interest rate cuts and fiscal incentives as well as attractive discounts offered by realtors. Slowing or contracting consumer spending and rising job losses in most economies are hitting residential and retail markets. Slowing corporate earnings and capex, declining exports and liquidity crunch are weighing down on commercial real estate. Though banks are reducing exposure to the real estate sector, lower earnings among realtors and income pressures among consumers are raising the risk of delinquencies. Nonetheless, as the global liquidity crunch abates overtime, high growth potential and attractive returns, given rising incomes and urbanization in developing Asia, will revive domestic and foreign investor interests in Asia's real estate.

China

Unlike many global markets, the residential property market in China is showing some signs of stabilization. Significant price discounting, lower mortgage rates, incentives and overly ample credit extension are contributing to an increase in transactions and helping to reduce the existing inventory. Chinese property prices began falling in mid-2008 as anti-speculation measures and slower economic growth reduced investment. However, transactions could slow if authorities rein in lending growth in mid-2009. Commercial property has yet to show signs of recovery. The global capex retrenchment is also putting pressure on commercial property as it delays some expansion plans especially by foreign companies. Although domestic companies are somewhat less affected, a slower pace of consumption growth may weigh on both office and retail property markets.

HK

The HK real estate seems to be bubbling up again at least in terms of sales to investors as increased credit availability, and a weakening US and Hong Kong dollar, encourage investment. However, new tenants remain scarce and vacancies are on the rise, suggesting further downward pressure on prices, especially as Hong Kong’s economy, including the financial sector, continues to contract and consumption weakens.

India

Home prices in India have corrected 15% to as much as 40% in some prime areas since September 2008. The recent pick-up in demand due to discounts by realtors and mortgage rate cuts by banks will be largely outweighed by the excess supply of homes in the market. So another 15-20% price correction is underway in residential and office markets over the next 6-to-8 quarters. This is especially because bank lending standards have tightened, households face wealth erosion and slowing job market, affordability remains low and corporate sector faces liquidity pressures. Mall construction and rentals have taken a hit and so have activity and employment in the construction sector. Drying funding from foreign investors and domestic equity market is forcing the indebted real estate firms to divest shares to raise capital, hold back expansion plans, and refinance bank loans which has been helped by recent central bank measures.

Singapore

Singapore's real estate sector started moderating in Q2 2008 and home and office prices witnessed record decline of over 10% in Q1 2009 with rents also falling sharply. Another 15% to as much as 25% correction is expected in the residential sector and may be even higher in the luxury section. Woes in the financial and service sectors, negative wealth effects among households and shrinking population due to outflow of laid-off immigrants – all will weigh down on residential and retail real estate. This will be exacerbated by falling speculative investment due to tight domestic and foreign liquidity.

Vietnam

Vietnam's property prices are down over 30% in some markets with luxury section taking the biggest hit and office rentals showing steep decline. Though realtors have been cutting prices and banks are resuming lending, demand has been slow to pick up. Investors also remain reluctant to enter the market since they largely depend on foreign liquidity. The sector is unlikely to improve in 2009 and this will be exacerbated by lower investment via remittances and FDI.

Japan
Economic downside risk in Japan was highlighted when exports plummeted by 49% year-over-year in February. The steep decline in exports, a key driver of economic growth, stemmed from faltering global demand and the strong Japanese yen. Amid the dramatic drop in external trade, domestic consumption slowed in the quarter as well. The government reports that, on a year-over-year basis in February, household spending shrank 3.5% and retail sales contracted by 5.8%, the steepest decline in seven years. Imports declined 43%. Bank of Japan’s latest tankan survey in March shows that large manufacturers turned more pessimistic about business prospects, which does not bode well for industrial production or the labor market. Indeed, the unemployment rate rose to 4.4% in February, a three-year high. The excess capacity resulting from the collapse in demand and consumption has increased the risk of deflation. Headline inflation contracted by 0.1% in February. In one of the few bright spots in the Japanese economy, bank lending in Japan grew by nearly 4% year-over-year in January and February, much higher than the growth during the same months last year.
Commercial land values are falling. Land prices in the three major urban areas (Greater Tokyo, Nagoya and Osaka) in January declined by 5.4% year-over-year, the first drop in four years, according to the government. The decline was more pronounced in Greater Tokyo, where the government said that prices dropped 6.1% in January. Meanwhile, the tightened lending policies adopted by banks, coupled with the difficult business environment, have pushed up the number of companies filing for bankruptcy. In the first two months of 2009, corporate bankruptcies rose 25.5% over the previous year. That helped prompt a rise in office vacancy in Tokyo’s five wards to 6.1% in March, from 4.7% at year-end 2008. Vacancies are likely to rise further as companies consolidate their space requirements. Newly constructed buildings will be hard to fill as demand dwindles. We believe that weak demand will persist this year and competition for tenants will lead to more concessions from landlords – rental discounts, longer rent-free periods and other incentives. With demand for class-A office space likely to remain soft and rents under pressure, cap rates for class-A offices will likely rise in the quarters ahead, possibly by 10-30 bps. Commercial land prices will see further downside as well. Residential land prices are also falling. Land prices in the three major urban areas declined by 3.5% in January from a year ago, according to the government, which said that the decline was a bit steeper, 4.4%, in Greater Tokyo. The volume and velocity of transactions has slowed sharply. In Tokyo, only 621 new condominium units were marketed in January with a contract ratio of 67%. The number of unsold units stood at about 4,200 units at the end of January, almost double from a year ago. As part of the national budget for fiscal year 2009, the government has included steps to rejuvenate housing demand that include tax breaks of up to 6 million yen for home buyers who move into their property in 2009 or 2010. The amount of the tax break will be lowered gradually after 2010.

REIT Markets
REIT markets in Asia posted mixed results in the first quarter. REITs gained in Hong Kong (14%) and Malaysia (5.3%), but J-REITs and S-REITs posted negative returns, as investors raised concerns about refinancing issues. Still, REITs mostly outperformed the broader equity markets, possibly because investors were attracted by the deep discounts to net asset values (NAV) and higher dividend yields.


Total Returns, REITs vs. All Equities

1Q09 / 2008 / 2007 / 2006 / 2005

REITs

Hong Kong 14.0% / -28.9% / 10.4% / 9.8% / 2.0%
Japan -4.7% / -49.0% / -2.3% / 29.7% / 13.5%

Malaysia 5.3% / -14.8% / 17.8% / N.A. / N.A.

Singapore -1.1% / -56.1% / 2.8% / 57.9% / 22.2%

All Equities

Hong Kong 0.2% / -52.4% / 40.3% / 32.6% / 11.3%

Japan -8.9% / -41.4% / -11.3% / 2.9% / 47.4%

Malaysia 1.0% / -39.7% / 43.0% / 31.4% / 1.1%

Singapore -3.7% / -50.9% / 22.1% / 33.9% / 16.1%


Indeed REIT yield premiums ranged from 569 to 940 bps above long-term government bond yields. As of the end of March, the region had 83 REITs with a total market capitalization of US$44.4 billion, which is moderately down from US$45.2 billion at end of last year. The weighted average dividend yield fell by 30 bps in the first quarter, to 8.2%.


Market Cap and Dividend Yields of Asian REITs

No. of REITs / Market Cap (US$ bil.) / Average Dividend Yield / Risk-free Rate /* Risk Premium (bps)
Japan 41 / 26.28 / 7.03% / 1.34% / 569

Singapore 21 / 9.93 / 11.40% / 2.00% / 940

Hong Kong 7 / 6.92 / 7.80% / 1.93% / 587
Malaysia 11 /1.10 / 10.80% / 1.89% / 891

Korea 3 / 0.17 / 10.60% / 4.68% / 592


Total 83 / $44.4 / 8.20% (weighted average based on market cap)


p/s photos: Zhou Weitong



Saturday, February 21, 2009

Credit Crisis 101 - Leverage


Pick up any business magazine or paper, or watch the business channels, you will find a plethora of information on the credit crisis. Sometimes, too much information overload will distract from the real issues and when we talk about the crisis, we have too many angles on the problem. Unless we zero in on the root cause (not not ascribing blame), we won't be able to get a handle on the crisis and its effects.

Let's get the blame out of the way. I have blogged about the blame game: mainly its the ratings agency, followed by Greenspan and then the Wall Street firms. If you have to describe the root of the current crisis in one word, that word has to be "leverage". If you take leverage out of the equation, if we didn't have the many new fangled acronyms, which were basically packaged loans supported by derivatives like capital platform, we would have a very mild recession. This recession is the severest we have seen since the Depression because of the leverage i.e. derivatives. Leverage implies very little capital outlay for a certain contract of service or product. If we have derivatives and leverage during the 1920s, the whole world might have collapse even more brutally.

Yes, we have more knowledge since then, we have a better understanding of fiscal and monetary policy, and some say better laws and regulation (well, there are regulators but they did not do a good job at all). Its the leverage which brought about such a recession that is much worse than any we have seen in modern times.
If you want to take an account of the mess, the more reliant you were on that leverage, the more you fell as the values were nothing but book entries. The investment banks would not have been in so much trouble if they did not get greedy themselves and bought most of the instruments.

Naturally, the front line got hit the worst, the investment banks that parlayed capital up to 20x-30x leverage to issue these papers, and when they collapsed it very easy to see capital totally vanishing with just a minor drop in values. Now we are talking of properties (which these papers were based on) losing 30%-50%, hence the negative equity.
Those who bought properties using these kind of easy and unchecked loans were the first to be foreclosed. Even if you did not participate in those loans, you might have benefited via rising housing values, and refinanced, you would have got hit as well. Generally the affected banks lost about 90% or more in share price while most of the broader equities lost about 50% and counting.

The rest of the world got hit because they got a corresponding inflow of liquidity emanating from these gains. Liquidity was ample.
Related areas which practiced excessive leverage were hedge funds. If these funds bought emerging market shares and commodity, those prices got inflated as well, hence when it came time to de-leverage, the outflow was very severe. In particular commodity prices. Its not just a bull cycle, it was the leveraged funding which went looking for "liquid assets" to move into. Hence the very sharp rise in commodity prices in 2004-2008, and they came down just as fast. Related to commodities were the commodity ETFs which were coming out like fresh donuts. Every commodity ETF basically just fueled the rise and trend even further, causing many pension funds to specifically target a substantial weighting in commodity as a critical portfolio composition.

Unfortunately, the US consumers represents a significant engine for global demand. They are key to the US economy, and they need to buy crap from the rest of the world, so that the rest of the world have the funds to buy crap from other countries. The wealth destruction from falling share prices and more importantly, the losses from property, have caused the US consumers to tighten their consumption patterns. That has severe ramifications for the flow on effects to the rest of the world relying on exports for growth. Yes, it may not be the rest of the world that is at fault, but you still get swept up in the tsunami.

The curtailment of credit and loss in wealth from the deleveraging is what is bringing global demand to its knees. Every country has attempted to reflate, whether the sums are big enough is still debatable, I think it is, but more than just reflating you need to address the root problem. Has the deleveraging stopped? Well, banks are still holding the toxic assets, refusing to write down to a fairer market value, say twenty cents to the dollar, as that would wipe out the bank's equity. Hence NATIONALISATION is the best solution going forward. You are not going to do it, let the government do it. Nationalisation of banks = forced sale of these assets = investors have a good idea of the losses = shareholders will be wiped out but its necessary.


As big as the TARP is, it is insufficient to replace the writedowns. You want a bad bank, you need $2 trillion minimum. Already the lawmakers are balking over the TARP's $780bn, the amount for bad bank is humongous. By nationalising, you basically close a few big banks that shouldn't be allowed to continue. By propping them up, you will eventually have to pump close to $2 trillion anyway to get them on even keel.

The other major contention is that property has to stop falling in price because as it keeps down trending, investors have no idea how to put a fair value on those toxic asset losses. A better plan Obama should have included is to put a stop to the slide - put up an incentive for new home owners to buy, e.g. $25,000 for new homeowners that qualify. Its pointless to renegotiate mortgages if prices keep falling. You need genuine long term buying.

As for auto sector in the US, the crisis basically hasten their demise. Their business model does not work and is inflated. They must be bankrupted so that they can negotiate a reasonable business model with a very much reduced pension/healthcare liability overhanging the car makers. But the US auto sector is the least of global concerns.

Things are coming to a head, falling share prices will force the government's hand. Keep an eye on developments on these two front:

a) how they deal with the toxic assets properly

b) how to stop property prices from sliding further


To that end, the markets looks oversold as a lot of liquidity is on the sidelines. To activate the flow back, we need to see catalysts that would trigger (a) and (b) in the right way. Bank nationalisation would be one. Bad bank is still OK but the hurdles on raising $2 trillion will not be easy.

Things are so bleak now that it gives me room to be optimistic that certain things will happen when you are forced into a corner. These are very difficult decisions, do you have the political will to nationalise banks.


Another potential positive catalyst will be Geithner roping in private equity and hedge funds to start buying up the toxic assets. Pricing will be an issue but the government is keen to get these funds to take off some of these assets via special funding, which may be hard to come by for hedge funds and private equity funds now. Geithner has a strong hand now, by forcing banks to sell the toxic assets to these funds or else face nationalisation. Geithner has seen his credibility being eroded quickly with his conceptual plan that lacked details and a pricing mechanism for the toxic assets. He can restore much of it by moving fast to move the toxic assets. Yes, banks will have to do massive writedowns, and many may be barely solvent, but that's part and parcel of what needs to be done.

Despite all the bad news, I am more hopeful than most as things are coming to a head - and tough decisions are forthcoming, which will be good for the markets.


p/s photos: Natasha Hudson


Friday, March 10, 2006

Asian Real Estate


Or Why Malaysian Real Estate Is So Cheap

Did you know that KL real estate is one of the cheapest in Asia - another reason why 5 star hotels in Malaysia are also among the cheapest in the world. One can understand if Malaysian real estate values lag those of more developed nations such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Seoul or Tokyo... but KL even lags Indian cities, Bangkok and certain places in Jakarta. We can understand why Shanghai or Beijing would be more expensive too compared to KL - population, out-sourcing and investment.

Is this a correlation to our GDP per capita (roughly translated is how much money a citizen earns in a specific country a year). The figures were obtained from CIA files, yes the American Central Intelligence Agency for 2005: www.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html

1) Luxembourg US$62,700
2) Equatorial Guinea US$50,200 (where is that, I want to move there ... but a cafe latte will probably cost US$15)
3) Norway US$42,400
4) USA US$41,800
8) HK US$36,800
16) Canada US$32,800
18) Australia US$32,000
20) UK US$30,900
22) Japan US$30,400
26) Singapore US$29,700
36) Taiwan US$26,700
41) New Zealand US$24,100
42) Brunei US$23,600
51) South Korea US$20,300
82) Russia US$10,700
83) Malaysia US$10,400
86) Mexico US$10,000
88) WORLD AVERAGE US$9,300
97) Thailand US$8,300
118) China US$6,200
132) Philippines US$5,100
150) Indonesia US$3,700
155) India US$3,400
229) Somalia US$600
231) Gaza Strip US$600
232) East Timor US$400

If you look at the table above, it bears little correlation. A poor country can have high city real estate values - hence a big factor is city population. You need to cram a lot of people into a tiny space, then real estate values will soar - take New York, Tokyo, HK, Singapore, Bangkok, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Karachi, Mumbai ... many are in the region of 10-30 million city population. KL has about 5 million but it is also quite spread out. So, another factor is it has to be CRAMPED - or rather business activity CBD has to be cramped.

Another factor for high real estate values is whether you are a financial center. Is your city a crucial outpost to doing business in the region - HK, Shanghai, Singapore, Tokyo, Mumbai, New York, etc... KL is neither here nor there. What about Bangkok? Well, it has a super duper population (have you seen the weekend exodus from Bangkok every Friday). Even though it is not a financial center, it the the center for a country with a decent population size. If your capital city is the center of a country with a decent population, you can be assured of good commercial real estate values - e.g. Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea. We need Malaysia to move quickly from 26 million to at least 60 million. Then you can have some good ripple on effect on real estate values.

If you are not a financial center, you can still command high rates if high-value services businesses are aplenty. Hence Singapore's commercial real estate will have a very strong long term uptrend as it does not depend on its reputation as a financial center/port/MICE biz like HK but moves higher up the value-added curve by encouraging designers/inventors in animation, biotech, education, etc. Does KL look like a city with good high value added industries?

Good amenities and public infrastructure would not be a bad thing, look at Tokyo, HK, Singapore or even New York - but infra is not crucial in giving higher real estate values. If you look at the capital cities of the high GDP per capita countries such as Oslo, Amsterdam, Stockholm, etc.. you will find that good infra is a good thing but not necessarily stratospheric real estate prices.

Lack of good quality commercial space will also spruce up real estate values. Just look at Indian cities, cities in Vietnam or even Jakarta. We in KL, unfortunately builds okay buildings cheaply as land is cheap and plentiful. I mean, KL commercial just keeps getting drawn wider and wider. First the CBD, then the city kind of move wider to include PJ, then it moves out to Shah Alam, now Klang. Too much cheap flat land.

So, commercial real estate value in Malaysia will lag the rest of Asia, even some cities in Vietnam (my gawd), and it will not change until the fundamentals change. The only exciting part for Malaysian real estate is residential, and you know how people get crazy with houses, every now and then, good houses in good locations will have its own bull run. The rental yields never match the house prices - but hey, who the heck cares. Commercial and retail, fergedaboudit!