10-year-treasury-yields 800x315

To understand where interest rates might go, watching the actions of the Federal Reserve is important, of course, but so is monitoring yields of Treasury instruments. Whether bonds, notes, or bills, depending on the term, they have great sway.

Treasurys are considered safe investments, and so are one of those practical baselines for calculating risk adjusted returns. As the yields rise, so do interest rates.

But as is true with anything, trying to track every movement can become confusing.

For example, CBRE noted on Thursday, November 3 that the “recent bond market sell off has lifted the 10-year Treasury yield to nearly 5% and further dampened investor sentiment for commercial real estate.”

 

“Rather than inflation, a mix of short- and medium-term economic and political pressures is driving up bond yields,” they continued. “These include a stronger-than-expected economy with robust consumer spending, increasing term premiums, the surging government deficit and reductions in the Fed’s balance sheet (quantitative tightening).”

Based on such data and their analysis, CBRE said that it lowered growth expectations for CRE investment rate volumes in 2024. The projection had been +15%; now they are -5%.

“Our econometric models indicate that the rise in the 10-year Treasury yield to 5% or more, if sustained, will raise cap rates and lower capital values for commercial real estate,” they wrote.

And if they were correct that the 10-year would continue a strong upward pace, maybe the impact of higher interest rates would have such an impact. They might even be correct.

But this is where following short-term data flows can drive people to potentially make mistakes.

On Wednesday November 1, the 10-year dropped from the previous day’s 4.88% yield to 4.77%. Then on Thursday, it hit to 4.67%, and Friday closed out at 4.57%. Similarly, the 2-year yield went from 5.07% on Tuesday to 4.83% on Friday.

Econometric models can be wrong. Then again, they could be correct, look further out, and maybe yields will rebound in the long run.

But then, CBRE wrote that other than office, the “relative health” of CRE property types “makes forward internal rates of return (IRRs) increasingly attractive.”

“If the economy manages a soft landing and long-term bond rates ease, investment activity may surprise on the upside,” they wrote.

This is why solid hedging strategies make a great deal of sense.

 

Source:  GlobeSt.

odds stacked against you_checkmate_shutterstock_2002341425 800x315

Almost any problem can be solved if there’s a realistic plan and the necessary materials are at hand. But miss what you need for the repair and there’s only so far that you can go. That’s a problem facing commercial real estate right now.

There is an “historic volume of mortgage maturities,” as a recent Trepp analysis of Federal Reserve Flow of Funds data showed: $2.78 trillion in commercial loans coming due by 2027.

But will there be enough money to keep the bulk out of trouble? Up until Wednesday, the 10-year yields were moving tentatively toward 5% and have been at levels not seen since 2007. The higher Treasury yields go, the harder it is to argue for riskier investments without a lot of extra return. Shorter-term Treasury yields are even higher.

Even with a slight retreat of the 10-year yield with the Fed’s hold on interest rates and Treasury slowing expansion of planned new bond issuance, there is still abundant safety at respectable returns that becomes difficult to compete with. CRE property valuations have plummeted, with the Fed saying that after the reductions they were still elevated beyond where they should be.

Too many of the maturing loans were granted under easy money conditions and bigger amounts of leverage than are typically available at the present. Deals that need refinancing often make no financial sense because of the amount of capital needed to get new financing is prohibitive.

That is why the news on reduced funding for CRE is worrisome. Third quarter private real estate fundraising of $18.2 billion plummeted by 71% compared to the $63.4 billion of Q2, according to Preqin dataquoted by Bloomberg. Global property transactions fell from $31.9 billion in the second quarter to $26.9 billion in the third.

As the Wall Street Journal noted, CRE lending is at “historically low levels.”

“There is liquidity available,” James Muhlfeld, managing director at Eastdil Secured, told the Journal. “But it’s likely going to be more expensive, with lower leverage and with a different lender.”

All this raises the question of which projects will be able to afford refinancing — and if they can’t, who will be left holding the bag for the mortgages on those properties.

 

Source:  GlobeSt.

rising expenses_money with upward trending graph_canstockphoto6222096 800x315

The Federal Reserve’s October 2023 Financial Stability Report was not the sort of reading for CRE professionals to quell their fevered concerns about the industry’s immediate future.

As the Fed wrote, “Valuation pressures arise when asset prices are high relative to economic fundamentals or historical norms.” An apt description for commercial real estate. And elevated valuation pressures can “increase the possibility of outsized drops in asset prices.”

The implications might apply to any CRE property, but on reflection, sale-leaseback transactions seem like they might be particularly prone to adverse effects under the current conditions. The problem that appears for both buyer and seller is the potential longevity of the arrangement. Getting caught by an erroneous valuation is bad enough in the short term. Over a longer period, the effect can be magnified, with more to regret over an arrangement that will run years and possibly decades.

Under a sale-leaseback, the initial owner of a property is also the occupant. That owner decides to sell the property to an investor that will become the new owner and landlord.

The initial owner wants to use the property, often over a long period of time because that party prefers to keep control for years at least or perhaps decades. So, as part of the deal, that party agrees to remain a tenant, often on a net lease basis.

It’s a common type of arrangement. The first owner wants the sale to free capital locked in the building that might be put to better use, like R&D, acquiring another business, or expanding into a new sales territory.

In normal times, understanding the true value of the property is fairly straightforward. But currently, that isn’t possible because there is a lack of price discovery. If, as the Fed suggests, properties are overvalued, then the seller might seem to get a premium, assuming that an experienced buyer won’t recognize the danger, which a bit of a stretch.

However, say the transaction happens on that valuation. The buyer will need rents going forward that justified the price it paid, and they would need to be higher than true market rents. Overly high valuation likely means higher taxes that are paid by the seller. It could be that taxes would eventually come down, but it would require the local government to reassess the property.

This doesn’t mean that a sale-leaseback with net lease can’t make sense, but it might require more thought and negotiation for changing conditions.

 

Source:  GlobeSt.

charts and graphs_canstockphoto5373165 800x315

The Federal Reserve’s October 2023 Financial Stability Report reads like a slightly early major Halloween trick for commercial real estate — no treat in the pages. Overly high asset valuations, even after all that’s happened so far, and ongoing high interest rates are flashing warning signs for the central bank.

One aspect is of particular concern to CRE professionals.

First, the overall view, based on a periodic survey the Federal Reserve Bank of New York conducts, the most recent having taken place from August 10 to October 4. Here is the top line:

“The two most frequently cited topics in this survey — the risk of persistent inflationary pressures leading to a more restrictive monetary policy stance and the potential for large losses on commercial real estate and residential real estate — were mentioned by three-fourths of all survey participants, up from one-half of all participants in the previous survey.”

The grim views are all focused on real estate, whether commercial or residential. For a bit of moderation, the survey was of 25 people, “including professionals at broker-dealers, investment funds, research and advisory fi rms, and academics,” the Fed wrote.

Far from a representative sample, but given the expertise, concerning. About 70% of the experts pointed to commercial and residential real estate as among the biggest risks over the next 12 to 18 months. The only other factors gaining that type of attention were a pairing of persistent inflation and monetary tightening. Auspicious company.

The big problem for CRE is valuation. As the Fed wrote, “Valuation pressures arise when asset prices are high relative to economic fundamentals or historical norms.” An apt description for commercial real estate. And elevated valuation pressures can “increase the possibility of outsized drops in asset prices.”

What is an apparent puzzlement in the Fed’s report is that even as prices have continued to decline, real estate valuations have remained elevated.

“Aggregate CRE prices measured in inflation-adjusted terms continued declining through August,” the report said. “Capitalization rates at the time of property purchase, which measure the annual income of commercial properties relative to their prices, have increased modestly from recent historically low levels but have not increased as much as real Treasury yields, suggesting that prices remain high relative to rental income.”

Office sector prices are particularly elevated, “where fundamentals are especially weak for offices in central business districts, with vacancy rates increasing further and rent growth declining since the May report.” But that doesn’t leave other sectors free and clear.

Some part, maybe significant, of this may be the ongoing lack of price discovery. With transactions down and many sellers holding off, waiting for improved pricing, while a lot of buyers look for bargains in distress, it’s hard to tell how much properties should be worth. CRE has the possibility of seeing significant additional drops in valuation, which would then cause even more problems with refinancing.

 

Source:  GlobeSt.

yellow default button on keyboard_canstockphoto110189794 800x315

Delinquency rates for mortgages backed by commercial and multifamily properties increased during the third quarter of 2023, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) latest commercial real estate finance (CREF) Loan Performance Survey. The delinquency rate for loans backed by commercial properties has now increased for four consecutive quarters.

At. 5.1%, “the delinquency rate for loans backed by office properties now exceeds those of loans backed by retail and hotel properties, while the delinquency rates for multifamily and industrial property loans remain below 1%,” said Jamie Woodwell, MBA’s head of commercial real estate research. 

He continued, “Commercial property markets are working through challenges stemming from uncertainty about some properties’ fundamentals, a lack of transparency into where current property values are, and higher and volatile interest rates. The result has been a slow and steady uptick in delinquency rates, concentrated among loans facing more of those challenges.” 

 

Source:  Connect CRE

hourglass_shutterstock_2102178886 800x315

By Ron Osborne, Managing Director

Sperry Commercial Global Affilates | RJ Realty

 

The decision of whether or not to sell a commercial property before a low-interest rate loan matures and needs to be refinanced at a higher interest rate is a complex financial decision that depends on various factors.

Here are some considerations to keep in mind:

  • Current Market Conditions: Assess the current real estate market conditions in your area. If property values are high, it might be a good time to sell and take advantage of the equity you’ve built.

 

  • Equity and Profitability: Consider how much equity you have in the property and whether selling would result in a profit or capital gain. If you can make a significant profit, it might be a good time to sell.

 

  • Loan Terms: Review the terms of your existing loan, especially any prepayment penalties or fees associated with paying off the loan early. Factor these costs into your decision.

 

  • Future Interest Rates: While you expect to refinance at a higher interest rate in the future, it’s essential to consider the potential interest rate increase and its impact on your cash flow. Consult with a financial advisor or mortgage expert to understand the implications.

 

  • Cash Flow and Expenses: Evaluate your current cash flow and property expenses (Property Insurance is at an all time High and increasing). A higher interest rate will increase your mortgage payments, potentially affecting your property’s profitability.

 

  • Tax Implications: Consult with a tax advisor to understand the tax implications of selling the property, especially regarding capital gains taxes.

 

  • Alternative Investments: Explore other investment opportunities that might provide a better return on your investment compared to the potential future interest rate increase on your property loan. Consider a 1031 exchange with a high-quality single tenant that can afford the expenses.

 

  • Risk Tolerance: Assess your risk tolerance and financial stability. If you are risk-averse or concerned about potential cash flow issues with a higher interest rate, selling might be a safer option.

 

  • Market Predictions: Consider economic and market forecasts. If there is a strong consensus that interest rates will continue to rise significantly in the near future, it may influence your decision.

Ultimately, the decision to sell a commercial property or refinance before a low-interest rate loan matures depends on your specific financial situation (can you add equity that will be required to lower the loan amount to the lenders requirements), investment goals, and market conditions. It’s advisable to consult with financial advisors, real estate professionals, and mortgage experts to make an informed decision based on your unique circumstances.

 

number 15_15-shutterstock_1179095095 800x315

The CRE industry is different than all other industries in that it is a transaction-based model. The lifeblood of the industry is dependent on sale, financing, and lease transactions. The more transactions there are, the more money the industry and everyone in it makes and the more successful the business. 2021 was a record year for transaction volumes and a phenomenal boom year for CRE.

The most successful companies and individuals in the industry are usually adept at selling, financing and/or leasing CRE property. However, in pursuing these transactions the same key mistakes are made over and over again which usually results in poor performance, the loss of equity in a property or the loss of the property in foreclosure. Below are the 15 biggest investing mistakes in CRE that are the root cause of bad deals, according to Joseph J. Ori, Executive Managing Director at Paramount Capital Corporation, a CRE Advisory Firm.

  1. Acquiring properties at low cap rates. Cap rates below 5.0% are not justified even if the investor believes that future rent increases, which may not happen, will make up for the low initial return. Buying CRE at sub-5.0% cap rates is like buying a tech stock at a 100-price-to-earnings ratio.
  1. Not diversifying a national portfolio by property type, location, and industry. Many national firms diversify a large fund by type and location but forget about industry diversification. If an investor buys only apartments and offices in Silicon Valley, 70% of the apartment tenants work in the tech industry and 70% of the office tenants are technology or related companies. If the tech industry retracts in a downturn, many of the apartment tenants may be laid off and unable to pay their rent or may move home or double up with roommates. This will negatively affect the apartment market. Many of the office tech firms may default on their leases or shrink their space requirements, which will negatively affect the office market.
  1. Not performing property level and financial due diligence on all properties in a portfolio acquisition. Many institutional investors that acquire large portfolios consisting of dozens or hundreds of properties do not do sufficient property-level due diligence. They only look at the larger and more valuable properties in the pool or hire inexperienced third-party firms to do the property-level due diligence.
  1. Acquiring properties with negative leverage. Negative leverage occurs when the cap rate is less than the mortgage constant, which means the cash-on-cash return will be lower than the cap rate, which is a “no-no” in CRE. Many firms acquire properties with negative leverage believing that future rent increases will more than make up for the low initial return.
  1. Using short-term floating rate debt without the protection of a swap or collar to finance a long-term real estate asset or portfolio. This is what has occurred during the last two years as the Fed abruptly raised the federal funds rate from 0.0% to 5.25%. Many CRE investors were caught flat-footed by the quick increase in interest rates from floating rate debt and no interest rate protection and are now scrambling to lower their financing costs and risk.
  1. In underwriting an acquisition, using a terminal cap rate that is less than the going-in cap rate. This is often done by the acquisition or other internal group within a large CRE firm to “juice up” the internal rate of return on the equity in a deal underwriting.
  1. Institutional investors who commit capital to sponsors who have inexperienced senior management teams. The senior management team should have gray hair and have been through at least the last two secular CRE downturns of 1987-1992 and 2007-2012. One of the most important drivers of success in CRE investment is having individuals on the team with significant and long-term experience and knowledge in all property types, markets, and economic recessions.
  1. Using overly optimistic rent projections in underwriting a deal. This often occurs when  the acquisition or other internal group wants to make the deal look better and the deal to be developed or acquired.
  1. Not analyzing the sales volumes per square foot of retail tenants, a key metric when buying shopping centers. One of the most important metrics when buying shopping centers after the cap rate, is the sales per square foot of the anchor tenants. High sales per square foot means the center is in an A location, will remain fully leased and in high demand from tenants and shoppers.
  1. Using high leverage of more than 75%. One of the highest risks in CRE investment is using high leverage and this was one of the causes of the Great Recession from 2007 to 2012.
  1. Not giving senior-level employees an equity interest in the company, portfolio, or fund. This is what is known as the “golden handcuffs” in CRE. If you don’t take care of your key people, they will leave and become your competitors.
  1. Not incorporating the 15 risks of CRE in a real estate firm. The risks include cash flow, value, tenant, market, economic, interest rate, inflation, leasing, management, ownership, legal and title, construction, entitlement, liquidity, and refinancing into the firm’s investment strategy.
  1. Investing in property sectors like hotels and senior housing, which are more operating businesses than real estate deals, in which the investment firm has no experience. Hotels are typically 70% operating business, and 30% real estate deal and senior housing is 80% to 100% operating business and 0% to 20% real estate.
  1. Not obtaining the Kmart discount when acquiring a large portfolio of CRE assets. Whenever a large CRE portfolio trades it is typically made up of Class A queens, Class B pigs and average Class B deals, and the buyer needs a discount of at least a 1.0% higher cap rate for the risk of the Class C properties.
  1. Not checking the formulas in an XL underwriting workbook, as there is at least one formula error in every CRE underwriting worksheet. This is a common occurrence when preparing a complicated Excel underwriting workbook and firms should make sure that  all formulas are rechecked by an independent party.

 

Source:  GlobeSt.

calculator and pen_investment

By Ron Osborne, Managing Director

Sperry Commercial Global Affilates | RJ Realty

 

Interest rates, debt coverage ratios (DCR), and loan-to-value (LTV) ratios are important factors that can significantly impact the value of commercial property. These factors are closely related to the financing and income potential of a commercial property, and they are often considered by investors and lenders when assessing the value and risk associated with a property. Here’s how each of these factors can affect the value of commercial property:

Interest Rates

  • Interest rates set by central banks and financial institutions have a direct impact on the cost of financing for commercial property buyers. When interest rates are low, borrowing costs are reduced, making it more attractive for investors to purchase and finance commercial properties. This can drive up property values as demand increases.
  • Conversely, when interest rates are high, borrowing becomes more expensive, which can reduce the affordability of commercial properties. This can lead to a decrease in property values as demand weakens.

Debt Coverage Ratios (DCR)

  • DCR is a measure of a property’s ability to generate enough income to cover its debt service (i.e., mortgage payments). It is calculated as the property’s net operating income (NOI) divided by the annual debt service.
  • A higher DCR indicates a property’s ability to comfortably service its debt, which can increase the property’s value. Lenders typically prefer to see a DCR of 1.2 or higher, as it provides a margin of safety.
  • A lower DCR can be a red flag for lenders and investors, as it suggests that the property may struggle to meet its financial obligations. This can result in a lower property valuation or difficulties in securing financing.

Loan-to-Value (LTV) Ratios

  • LTV is a measure of the loan amount compared to the property’s appraised value. For example, an LTV of 80% means that the loan covers 80% of the property’s value, and the buyer must provide a 20% down payment.
  • Lower LTV ratios, such as 60% or 70%, can reduce the risk for lenders and investors, as there is more equity in the property. This can lead to more favorable financing terms and possibly a higher property value.

In summary, interest rates, debt coverage ratios, and loan-to-value ratios are interrelated and play critical roles in determining the value of commercial properties. Lower interest rates, higher DCRs, and lower LTV ratios typically support higher property values, while the opposite conditions may have the opposite effect. It’s essential for investors and lenders to carefully consider these factors when assessing the attractiveness and risk associated with a commercial property investment.

 

jumper cables_jump start_shutterstock_2281508457 800x315

It’s one of the toughest questions plaguing commercial real estate today: What is to be done with a pileup of maturing — or past-due — loans worth hundreds of billions of dollars when refinancing is all but impossible?

For most of this year, and seemingly since the pandemic began, the most common solution has been to extend loans until financial conditions improve. But any relief on interest rates remains off in the distance, and the most prolific class of commercial real estate lender, regional banks, is under pressure to get CRE off its books.

Barring a shocking economic reversal, some regional banks will be forced to make a deal or foreclose on delinquent loans, which continue to rise in number. One form of deal that could rise to prevalence is the discounted payoff, or DPO, debt negotiators told Bisnow.

“The discussions about [DPOs] are increasing,” said Amy Hatch, vice chair of law firm Polsinelli’s financial services litigation practice. “I can’t say I’ve seen a bunch closing or a bunch happening, but I think it’s on people’s radar as a tool, probably more than a year ago when we were talking about extending to see what happens or finding options for borrowers.”

A discounted payoff is when a lender agrees to be repaid at a lower price than the outstanding balance on a loan. A borrower typically offers a DPO if it has financing lined up, either in the form of a buyer who agrees to pay the DPO price for the building or by obtaining a new loan to retain possession.

When a lender accepts a DPO, it realizes the loss of a loan’s value on its books. For banks, there is no functional difference between a DPO and selling the loan for the discounted price, Newmark Loan Sale Advisory Group Executive Managing Director Brock Cannon said.

But Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse in March came after it sold $1.8B worth of assets at a loss and announced the need to raise more capital, prompting a run on deposits that spiraled out of control. And even though many surviving regional banks want to decrease their exposure to commercial property loans, they have been unwilling to take the losses that doing so would require, whether through outright loan sales or DPOs, Cannon said.

“If you were hearing about DPOs, then it would mean a lot of lenders are taking a lot of losses right now, and it’s just not happening,” he said. “They don’t have the pressure on them to sell loans at a big discount.”

Darkening Skies

The Federal Reserve is poised to raise interest rates again in the next few months and keep them higher for longer than the market expected even six months ago, based on comments Fed Chair Jerome Powell made at the Federal Open Market Committee’s September meeting.

Interest rate hikes put downward pressure on property values, but the uncertainty of where they will end up and how long they will stay there has paralyzed the acquisition market since the second half of last year.

Green Street’s Commercial Property Price Index was down 16% in August from its March 2022 peak, but a lack of sales and appraisal-triggering refinancing deals makes high-level data less useful than it is in most years, Newmark found in its second-quarter U.S. capital markets report.

The collapse in transaction volume this year is making it difficult for anyone to agree on how much properties are worth as maturity dates approach and, in many cases, pass by, MSCI Chief Economist for Real Assets Jim Costello said. Borrowers and lenders are finding themselves at odds in negotiations over extensions and/or workouts.

“I put a low probability on the notion we go back to 2021 and early 2022,” Costello said. “The only other way this could change is if current owners give up the ghost and come to the realization that holding out for market-high prices might not be viable given how much things have changed.”

Second-quarter U.S. debt research reports from Newmark and credit analytics firms Trepp and MSCI all found that much more debt is still on track to mature this year and next than further in the future. The numbers of new loans and willing lenders have plummeted. And delinquency rates continued to rise for CMBS loans across most property types.

“It feels like we’ve been talking about this for a long time, but we’re still early,” CohnReznick Debt Restructuring and Dispute Resolution Managing Director Debra Morgan said. “There’s probably another rate hike or two coming, so the market hasn’t settled into loss, it hasn’t settled into recovery, it hasn’t settled into anything yet.”

Still Extending, Still Pretending

Plenty of borrowers are seeking creative solutions like DPOs and injections of rescue capital like bridge loans or preferred equity as they search for any way to avoid lump-sum payments and the consequences of being unable to come up with the cash, Hatch said. A similar sentiment has been echoed at multiple Bisnow events in the past month, including the 2023 National Finance Summit in New York.

In an environment of falling values and scarce, expensive new debt, discounted payoffs can be beneficial to both borrowers and lenders if extension negotiations and refinancing searches are going nowhere, Related Cos. Fund Management Senior Vice President Sam Friedland said at the National Finance Summit.

Hatch advised on a DPO deal that closed on Thursday, she told Bisnow.

Owners of maturing loans are doing whatever they can to get borrowers to put up enough cash to justify an extension or otherwise keep loans on their books as performing assets, all while facing intense scrutiny over the health of their balance sheets.

“There’s just a bad gap between what borrowers are willing to pay and what lenders are expecting,” Cannon said. “Borrowers aren’t motivated to sell their property to pay down loans right now. And that’s a big mistake lenders are making, letting borrowers drive the bus.”

In Q2, banks “charged off” $459M of office-backed debt, meaning they accepted that much in future losses for loans on their balance sheets, according to Trepp data. That was more than triple what banks charged off in Q1, which at $149M was also over triple the $49M banks charged off in Q4 2022.

Net charge-offs also rose sharply for hotels in Q2, while multifamily net charge-offs rose modestly, Trepp found. Even though short-term loans backed by apartment buildings should be especially damaged by the changes to the economy in the past year and a half, government-sponsored entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are performing their function of keeping liquidity alive in multifamily, the Mortgage Bankers Association found in its Q2 omnibus report released Friday.

Lenders are still more apt to write down, or charge off, the value of a loan as it sits on their books than accept a DPO, Cannon said.

“I don’t understand the marks they’re writing down to. No one really does,” Cannon said of banks. “But it helps them change the performance of the loan on the books. If you do DPO with a borrower, you’ve got to report that as a loss. It’s like if you do a loan sale at 50% of par, you have to tell your investors that, especially if you’re a public bank.”

 

Something’s Gotta Give

What helped restart debt markets in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis was the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. selling the loan books and foreclosed properties of hundreds of banks that had failed, Cannon said. Only three banks failed this spring, but the resulting crisis of confidence accelerated banks’ retreat from commercial lending, according to Newmark’s Q2 report.

The FDIC is marketing Signature Bank’s $33B commercial loan portfolio for sale in what could be a watershed moment for pricing comparisons. For now, lenders are using extension negotiations to clean up their paper, like getting borrowers to waive liability clauses, CohnReznick’s Morgan said.

“Forbearances until the first quarter of next year I’m seeing a lot,” she said. “We’re either going to see a bunch more forbearance agreements in the Q1, or we’ll see paper being sold.”

One public company has made a DPO deal in the past two months: Retail REIT Urban Edge Properties paid $72.5M on what had been a $117M CMBS loan for a mall in Puerto Rico by exercising an option added in a 2020 modification, it announced Aug. 30. Urban Edge obtained a new $82M loan from Banco Popular de Puerto Rico to pay for the DPO. The company declined to comment through a spokesperson.

Lenders will be more likely to accept DPOs on office buildings if and when they accept the reality that those properties have lost a large chunk of value, Cannon said. For all sectors, acknowledging that the environment is unlikely to improve until 2025 at the earliest is only a matter of time for many lenders, Hatch said.

“It makes more sense right now for a lender to say the borrower put it out to the market, this is the highest value they can get, and this borrower is otherwise going to default,” she said.

Avoiding the expensive and drawn-out foreclosure process would be among the most likely reasons for a lender to agree to a DPO, Hatch and Morgan said. Rising delinquencies indicate that more and more borrowers are losing the patience or the ability to keep up with payments on the property, which all but forces a lender’s hand.

“The more recent discussions I’ve had on [DPOs] is just lenders making the decision in the current market that they’re not seeing a lot of upside to going through the enforcement process,” Hatch said. “That would involve becoming the owner of those properties and trying to sell them at a better price.”

In addition to acknowledging a property’s loss of value, a lender could be convinced to agree to a DPO because doing so would free up some capital to make new loans, Morgan and Hatch said.

Even so, extensions and short-term forbearance agreements are still the most common resolutions being reached this autumn, as the holidays rapidly approach and complex deals seem less likely to get done before the end of the year, sources told Bisnow. But the longer lenders delay their final decisions, the more appealing DPOs could become.

“We’re starting to see more banks calling us, saying, ‘Uh-oh, we should have sold that loan a year ago,’” Cannon said.

 

Source:  Bisnow

drop in crystal clear water - dark_water-ripple_27847879_s-800x315-1.jpg

Commercial property owners in Florida are no strangers to the unique challenges posed by the state’s unpredictable weather patterns and natural disasters. To safeguard their investments, property owners often rely on insurance coverage. However, what many may not realize is that insurance premiums for commercial properties in Florida can be significantly influenced by another factor – interest rates. In this article, we will explore how interest rates affect insurance premiums for commercial properties in the Sunshine State.

The Link between Interest Rates and Insurance Premiums

Interest rates play a crucial role in shaping insurance premiums. These rates, set by central banks, impact the overall financial climate. When interest rates rise, insurance companies will incur higher costs for re-insurance and investment returns and maintaining reserves. Consequently, they may adjust their premium rates to compensate for these increased expenses.

In Florida, where hurricanes, floods, and other natural disasters (World Wide) are a constant threat, insurance premiums can already be substantial. When interest rates rise, insurance companies may increase premiums further to mitigate financial risks, as they may need to pay out larger claims due to more frequent and severe weather events.

Mitigating the Impact

While property owners may not have control over interest rate fluctuations, they can take steps to mitigate the impact of rising interest rates on insurance premiums:

  1. Risk Mitigation: Implementing risk management strategies such as building upgrades, hurricane-resistant materials, and flood mitigation measures can help reduce insurance costs.
  2. Insurance Shopping: Periodically reviewing insurance policies and shopping around for competitive rates can help property owners find the best deals, even in a changing interest rate environment.

Conclusion

Interest rates are a hidden variable that can significantly influence insurance premiums for commercial properties in Florida. As property owners brace themselves for the unpredictable weather patterns of the region, they should also keep an eye on interest rate trends and consider strategies to manage the impact on their insurance costs. By staying informed and taking proactive measures, property owners can better protect their investments and ensure their businesses thrive, come rain or shine.