Archive for February, 2006

Florida’s Housing Market Shows Strong Price Gains in January

Tuesday, February 28th, 2006

Coming off several years of blistering home sales at a record pace, Florida’s housing sector followed the
national trend in January and showed signs of some market adjustments,
according to the Florida Association of Realtors® (FAR). Still, the
statewide median sales price for existing single-family homes last month rose
21 percent to $248,600; a year ago, it was $205,100.

Housing industry analysts nationwide noted it may take a while for home
price growth to cool, following a long period of short supply and sellers
accustomed to exceptional price gains. In January 2001, the statewide median
sales price for single-family homes was $115,800, which means a gain of about
114.6 percent over the five-year-period, according to FAR records.

Realtors from across the state report that more homes are available for
sale, improving what had been tight inventories in many markets. Statewide,
sales of single-family existing homes totaled 12,815 in January compared to
15,745 homes sold a year ago for a 19 percent decrease.

2006 FAR President Mike Dooley notes that the market is coming into better
balance between buyers and sellers. “For years, many areas in Florida reported
tight inventories of homes available for sale,” he says. “Now that buyers are
seeing more choices, it’s even more important for both buyers and sellers to
seek advice from real estate professionals. With the expertise and services
that Realtors bring to the table, they help to bridge any differences between
buyers and sellers that may arise during the sales process and work to keep
the transaction going smoothly for everyone involved.”

In December 2005, the national median sales price for existing single-
family homes was $209,300, up 10.8 percent from the previous year, according
to the National Association of Realtors® (NAR). In California, the statewide
median resales price was $548,430 in December; in Maryland, it was $311,914;
in New York, it was $279,900; and in North Carolina, the statewide average
resales price was $209,810.

Sales of existing condominiums in Florida also decreased last month, with
a total of 4,456 condos sold statewide compared to 5,461 in January 2005 for
an 18 percent decline, according to FAR. The statewide median sales price for
condos rose 12 percent to $221,300 last month; a year ago, it was $197,300.
NAR reported the national median existing condo price was $228,100 in December
2005.

This release marks the first time that FAR has reported monthly condo
sales in the state’s metropolitan statistical areas. In conjunction with the
University of Florida Real Estate Research Center, FAR began compiling data on
closed condo sales for comparison purposes in 2005.

Last month, interest rates for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged
6.15 percent, up from the average rate of 5.71 percent in January 2005. FAR’s
sales figures reflect closings, which typically occur 30 to 90 days after
sales contracts are written.

Among the state’s larger markets, the Orlando Metropolitan Statistical
Area (MSA) reported higher existing condo sales last month but slower sales of
single-family homes. A total of 439 condos changed hands in January compared
to 185 condos a year ago—a dramatic increase of about 137 percent. The
market’s median sales price for condos rose 42 percent to $185,100; a year
ago, it was $130,400.

Beverly Pindling, president of the Orlando Regional Realtor Association
and broker-partner/sales training manager with Orlando Real Estate
Professionals, says condos offer an affordable housing choice for many buyers,
as well as a more maintenance-free lifestyle.

“The Orlando area offers exciting options for residents,” she says. “There
are job opportunities here, a new medical school is coming and, compared to
many places in the north, the cost of living here is lower. Orlando is a
convenient, comfortable place to work, shop, live and obtain an education.”

Among the state’s smaller markets, Ocala reported higher sales of existing
single-family homes in January, with a total of 428 homes sold compared to
378 homes a year ago for a 13 percent boost. The median sales price rose
39 percent to $166,200; a year ago, it was $119,600.

Wilbur Van Wyck, president of the Ocala/Marion County Association of
Realtors and broker-owner of Coldwell Banker Riverland Realty in Dunnellon,
says people are drawn to the area’s scenic beauty, relaxed lifestyle and
friendly community. “People are coming up from South Florida where traffic and
living conditions are much more congested,” he says. “This area is gorgeous
and it’s a great place for retirees to live.”

Two charts showing statistics for Florida and its 20 MSAs follow. One
chart compares the volume of existing, single-family home sales and median
sales prices; the other compares the volume of existing, condominium sales and
median sales price in January 2006 to January 2005 based on Realtor
transactions.

The Florida Association of Realtors®, the voice for real estate in
Florida, provides programs, services, continuing education, research and
legislative representation to its nearly 155,000 members in 68
boards/associations.

Home sales, median price on the rise

Monday, February 20th, 2006

The Orlando area’s existing home inventory continued to build in January, but sales and the median price continued to rise as the market settles into “a very comfortable stride,” the Orlando Regional Realtor Association reported today.

Sales of existing homes in metro Orlando rose to 2,318 in January, up 6.2 percent from the same month a year ago, the Realtor association said.

Reflecting the cooling market is the rising inventory, though, as the 12,015 existing homes for sale in January in the core Orlando area was nearly four times greater than in January 2005.

The median price rose to $242,050, a 25.4 percent increase from a year earlier, but less than 1 percent higher than in December, a flattening of prices that began in late 2005.

Association President Beverly Pindling said in a statement that the surge in homes for sale is partly the result of sellers looking to take advantage of the recent rise in prices, and the fact that more sellers are turning to Realtors to list their homes.

Housing surge could be a lot of hot air

Friday, February 17th, 2006

Warm weather inflates reported number of housing starts in January, but economists still expect the market to cool.

By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
February 16, 2006: 1:00 PM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) – Unusually warm weather led to a spike in home building in January, but most experts still believe the real estate market will cool off later this year.

Housing starts jumped 14.5 percent to an annual rate of 2.28 million last month, the highest since March 1973, the Census Bureau reported. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com forecast that housing starts would come in at an annual rate of 2.02 million in the month.

But part of the jump came from seasonal adjustments, since government number crunchers usually assume cold weather in January. Instead, the month was the warmest January on record in the United States, which prompted many builders to start work unexpectedly early.

“The weather basically gave the builders an opportunity to move things forward. No one changed their plans,” said David Seiders, chief economist for the National Association of Home Builders. “But I’ll probably change my forecasts for the next two months lower, even if I keep the first quarter forecast at pretty much the same level.”

Taking out seasonal adjustments, the raw number of housing starts rose 11 percent last month, making it the best January for housing starts on record since the bureau started keeping records in 1959.

Still, there have been numerous signs recently that the real estate market is cooling, and most housing economists expect both home sales and residential construction to slip from the record levels reached in 2005.

“When one looks at the Mortgage Bankers Association data that reveal that applications for the purchases of new homes are down 7.5 percent on a year-over-year basis, it is not hard to see that the gain reported this month is not a sustainable trend,” said Anthony Chan, chief economist for JPMorgan Private Client Services.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in Congressional testimony Wednesday that a slowing housing market was one of the risks to economic growth, although he expected a gradual slowdown, and for the market to remain robust even as it slows.

Good … for January
Despite the strong “headline” number, economists said Thursday’s did little to change their outlook for the full year.

“It’s a very good number for January,” said Phillip Neuhart, economist for Wachovia. “But should we get carried away with the seasonally adjusted number? No. We still expect a slowdown in 2006, no question about it.”

Still, the report also shows some strength that can’t be explained away by the weather.

Statistics from the South, which accounts for nearly half of new home construction in the country, and where weather and seasonal adjustments are less of an issue, showed a roughly 9 percent gain in housing starts.

Building permits seen as a sign of builders’ confidence in the market, came in at an annual pace of 2.22 million in January, up 6.8 percent from December. Permits are much less affected by weather and seasonal adjustments than housing starts.

Much of the gain in the permits issued came from a 24 percent jump in multi-family home permits; single family home permits gained only 2.4 percent.

“There is some reassurance in that (single-family) permit number that the market is not exploding on the high side, and not collapsing,” said the home builders’ Seiders. “I still think we’ll see them move down, but I expect it will be an orderly slowing from the unsustainable growth last year.”

The January boom probably also got some help as mortgage rates edged lower. The average 30-year fixed rate mortgage rate was 6.15 percent last month, according to mortgage financing firm Freddie Mac, down from 6.27 percent in December and 6.33 percent in November.

But rates have started climbing again, and reaching 6.28 percent—the highest in nearly two months—in the most recent reading.

BET Founder to buy 100 hotels for $1.7 billion

Tuesday, February 14th, 2006

The development firm controlled by Robert L. Johnson has signed a deal to buy 100 hotels for $1.7 billion, a significant expansion of the real estate holdings of the founder of the Black Entertainment Television network.
Johnson’s RLJ Development LLC said Monday that it will purchase the properties, most of them operating under Hilton and Marriott brand names, from the hotel company White Lodging Services, based in Merrillville, Ind. The hotels are in 12 states including Illinois, Texas, Colorado, Florida and Indiana.

One of the holding companies Johnson formed after he sold BET to Viacom Inc. in 2001 for $3 billion, RLJ Development currently holds 30 properties. The company will acquire 87 of the White Lodging properties in the second quarter of 2006. The other 13 are under construction, and closing is expected within two years. White Lodging will continue to manage the hotels.

“We are thrilled to add these hotel properties to the RLJ Development portfolio,” Johnson said.

RLJ Development invests in upscale urban hotels, most of them under Hilton and Marriott brand names. In December, it closed its first private equity fund, the RLJ Urban Lodging Fund, that held a purchasing power of $900 million from investments by public and private pension funds, along with other investors.

Johnson, who formed BET in 1979 and owns the NBA’s Charlotte Bobcats, is also on the board of directors of Hilton Hotels Corp.

White Lodging, founded in 1985 by billionaire Dean White of Crown Point, Ind., had said in October it was seeking to sell the hotels in order to generate cash and concentrate on hotel management.

White Lodging does not expect any layoffs and plans to use proceeds from the sale to expand into other markets, said Judy Bronowski, the company’s vice president of strategic planning and communications.

“We’re muscle-building our organization and adding resources,” she said. “It’s part of our strategy to generate the liquidity so we can continue growing.”

As real estate market cools, ‘buys’ return

Thursday, February 9th, 2006

By HOLDEN LEWIS
bankrate.com
February 09, 2006

  • After five years of sizzling growth, U.S. home price appreciation is showing signs of cooling.

For prospective homebuyers, the market shift provides a chance to remaster an old negotiating tactic: the art of the lowball offer. Strategies for securing a below-market price vary by locality. In any region, however, experts say bargain-hunting buyers can close favorable deals by applying a few basic principles.

Here are seven bargain-hunting tips for homebuyers.

First tip: Buy in the offseason. The best time to buy a house is the week between Christmas and New Year’s Day, says Robert Irwin, a real estate author and investor. Why? No one is looking.

“The only ones out there are people who desperately need a home or investors looking for a bargain,” says Irwin.

By the same logic, early spring ranks among the worst times to make a deeply discounted offer. It’s a popular time for sellers to put homes on the market, taking advantage of pleasant weather, longer daylight hours and heightened interest among buyers.

That seasonal pattern applies to most of the country. But warm climates might be the exception. Florida, Arizona and other locales popular with sun-seekers are likely to see high levels of home-buying activity in winter.

Second tip: Accept imperfections. Lots of buyers are looking for spacious, well-maintained homes in upscale neighborhoods. Few will find bargains meeting that description.

To secure a low price on a home, buyers ought to accept a few shortcomings, says Ilyce Glink, a real estate writer and talk show host. This might mean a property that needs repairs or faces a busy street. It could also be a home in a more run-down neighborhood that appears to be improving.

Third tip: Accept rejection. Unless it’s truly the house of your dreams, don’t be disappointed if a seller turns down your initial offers. Rejection is a normal part of the negotiating process. Some would even call it essential.

“Never make an offer you think they will accept,” says Thomas Early, president of the National Association of Exclusive Buyer Agents, who lists rejection as his first rule of savvy home buying.

His second rule? More rejection.

“Make the seller say ‘no’ at least twice. It’s too easy to say no the first time.”

Granted, that strategy doesn’t work everywhere. Early wouldn’t recommend it for competitive real estate markets, where it’s been common in recent years for sellers to get multiple offers above the asking price.

Fourth tip: Find a guide. When you see a great-looking house in a real estate circular, you might be tempted to call the agent listed by the photo. That could be a mistake.

“A lot of buyers think that ‘If I call the listing agent, I’ll get a better deal.’ That’s not true,” said Bob Wilson, an agent with the Guiltinan Group in San Diego County. Because listing agents have a duty to get the best possible price for the seller, they’re not suitable advisers for crafting a lowball offer.

Buyers need someone to represent their interests. Typically, that person is a buyer’s agent, who researches listings exclusively for a home seeker. When a purchase closes, the buyer’s agent normally splits the sales commission with the seller’s Realtor. In most states the buyer’s agent is required to deal with the seller honestly, but unlike the listing agent is under no obligation to get the highest possible price for the seller.

Fifth tip: Look for motivated sellers. The more desperate homeowners are to sell, the more likely they are to accept discounted offers. Therefore, bargain hunters should be on the lookout for homeowners anxious to unload their properties.

One strategy that broker Chris Edwards of Raleigh, N.C., recommends is to look for listings that have been on the market longer than normal. In Edwards’ market, a well-kept home in a good neighborhood typically sells within a month. Sellers with homes on the market two months or more are probably more receptive to lower offers.

Sixth tip: Don’t fixate on list price. The true value of a home might not be reflected in its listed price. A property’s listed price simply reflects what a seller hopes to get, usually based at least in part on selling prices of similar homes.

Glink cautions buyers against taking too much glee in getting a property substantially below list. In some cases, initial list prices are so inflated that even a buyer who negotiates a substantial discount still overpays.

X X X

The benchmark 30-year fixed-rate mortgage rose 4 basis points to 6.32 percent, according to the Bankrate.com weekly national survey of large lenders. A basis point is one-hundredth of 1 percentage point. The mortgages in this week’s survey had an average total of 0.35 discount and origination points. One year ago, the mortgage index was 5.59 percent; four weeks ago, it was 6.22 percent. And on June 30, 2004, it was 6.3 percent.

The 15-year fixed-rate mortgage rose 8 basis points to 5.95 percent. The 5/1 adjustable-rate mortgage rose 10 basis points to 5.99 percent.

www.PropertyandInvesting.com

Wednesday, February 8th, 2006

If you are in the real estate business for a limited time only you can add your site to this new directory for free

www.PropertyandInvesting.com

Getting A Slice Of The Commercial Market

Friday, February 3rd, 2006

The boom in commercial real estate has stirred interest in some unconventional plays. Two of them are untraded real estate investment trusts and tenant-in-common deals. Together last year they scooped up around $14 billion worth of assets. The pitches are enticing: Untraded REITs promise stable valuation, while TIC sponsors offer a tax shelter for capital gains. But is either right for you? Fees are high, and it’s easier to get in than out. Here’s a look at both:

Private REITs’ Dividend DrawUntraded REITs are a lot like the real estate investment trusts that trade on the stock market. Both pool cash to buy commercial properties, pay out at least 90% of their income in dividends, and register with the Securities & Exchange Commission.

Their differences, though, are striking. The price of a share of an untraded REIT —also called a private REIT, non-traded REIT, public unlisted REIT, and non-publicly traded REIT —is set by the sponsor, and it doesn’t fluctuate. An unlisted REIT that sells for $10 a share in February will be worth $10 a share a year from now. Unlisted REITs last for a set time period, typically 10 to 12 years. Investors then cash out through an initial public offering, a merger, or a liquidation. Dividends are now in the 6% to 7% range, vs. an average 4.7% for public REITs.

Although investor buying has slowed recently, sales of unlisted REITs have gone up elevenfold since the stock market peaked in 2000. And of course, real estate has surged in that period. “The lack of market volatility appeals to older investors,” says Robert Lee, a certified financial planner in Fairfax, Va. “They like to see their principal stable and get a 6% to 7% dividend.”

Critics charge that the stable principal and steady income have a steep price. Sponsors such as Wells Real Estate Funds, W.P. Carey (WPC), the Inland Group of Real Estate Cos., and CNL Financial Group levy lots of fees. Typically, only 84 cents to 90 cents of every $1 gets invested. The fees go to the sponsor and to the broker-dealers and personal financial planners selling the REITs. [Commissions are in the 8% to 9% range. In contrast, you can buy public REITs for as little as a $10.99 commission at an online broker.] Says Christopher Meyer, director of the Milstein Center for Real Estate at Columbia Business School: “It’s hard to imagine these are a good deal relative to paying for a public REIT with very little transaction costs.”

Another drawback is the illiquidity. While getting in for as little as $1,000 is easy, getting out is tough. Redemptions are typically limited to no more than 3% a year of the entire fund. Sponsors can suspend redemptions at any time. In general, the shorter the holding period the higher the surrender charge. For instance, in the Wells REIT 11 offering of 2003, an investor can redeem a limited number of shares after a year of ownership at $9.10 for every $10 invested. Three years later, the formula changes to 95% of the estimated value of shares.

Untraded REITs are successors to the real estate limited partnerships that were popular as tax shelters during the real estate boom of the 1970s and early 1980s. These limited partnerships collapsed in disrepute in the late 1980s and early ‘90s, thanks to a combination of changing tax laws and a real estate downturn. A major complaint among investors in those partnerships was their inability to get out once losses started mounting. Phillip Cook, a CFP in Torrance, Calif., sold limited partnerships 20 years ago, an experience he recalls with deep regret. One reason he avoids unlisted REITs “like the plague” is their lack of liquidity.

EXIT STRATEGY

What about overall returns? They’re no more certain than those on a publicly traded stock. For one thing, dividend yields are attractive, but they’re not guaranteed. More than 117,000 investors, for instance, eventually pooled their cash in the Wells REIT created in 1998. But its dividend was cut to 7% from 7.75% in September, 2003. The overall return of a private REIT depends on the success of the exit strategy, such as an IPO. So far, the track record is good. For instance, W.P. Carey has taken 11 of its funds public, providing investors with an average annual total return of 12%. Inland took Inland Real Estate (IRC) public in June, 2004, at 10 a share. The fund started in 1994, but most shareholders invested in 1998. They earned an average dividend yield of 9% a year from 1998 through the IPO. Now the shares trade at $15.40, with a 6.2% dividend. Still, a concern in many quarters of the commercial real estate market is that unlisted REIT companies currently are paying top dollar for properties, and those high prices cut into gains when it’s time to return money to shareholders.

Diversifying into commercial real estate is a smart strategy for many investors. But a better alternative to untraded REITs exists: public ones. Over the past five years [ended Dec. 31], they had an average annual total return of 19.1%, vs. 2.7% for the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index. Of course, there’s no assurance that the sector will remain hot, but if the public market tanks, so will the private. At least with public REITs, investors can cash out with a click of the mouse.

By Christopher Farrell

A Capital-Gains GambitYou’re in a panic. You sold some commercial property for a few million bucks, and you’re facing a big capital-gains tax bill. You can avoid the bite—or defer it, to be exact—if you roll over the money into another property. But the law requires you to pick out the replacement asset within 45 days and close on it within 180 days. The clock is ticking.

In this time crunch, a solution for many investors may be a form of ownership derived from English common law called a tenancy in common, or TIC. A TIC allows up to 35 investors to jointly own real estate such as an office building, shopping center, or apartment complex. Unlike a real estate investment trust or a limited partnership, a TIC is structured so that participants are direct owners of real estate, allowing them to qualify for a tax-free “like-kind” exchange under Internal Revenue Service section 1031. If you stick with like-kind properties until your death, your heirs will avoid much if not all of the capital-gains tax.

TICs let investors get a piece of expensive, high-quality properties with creditworthy tenants that would otherwise be out of their reach. Most properties that are TIC-ified cost $30 million or more. Last year Santa Ana [Calif.]-based Triple Net Properties, the biggest TIC sponsor, bought a 30-story office building in downtown Chicago for $174 million. TICs have grown from almost nothing since a 2002 statement by the IRS clarified their status. Last year TIC sponsors sold $7.3 billion worth of properties to investors, according to Omni Brokerage of Salt Lake City.

Look out, though. Property prices can be high because some buyers, in their rush to beat the IRS deadline and preserve their capital gains, don’t shop around. And TIC sponsors, eager to acquire properties to resell, can spend too much for assets. “There are certainly some TIC sponsors out there who are very good and very responsible, but there’s also some massive amounts of overpaying,” says Brian Ward, chief executive of Orion Residential, a multifamily housing buyer in Seattle, who says he has been outbid by TIC sponsors on several deals.

The risk, of course, is that the building eventually will be sold for less than the mortgage, wiping out your equity. Some established players are concerned: “The number of sponsors who have popped up because they have dollar signs in their eyes, but they don’t have a lot of experience…that scares me,” says Patricia DelRosso, president of Inland Real Estate Exchange in Oakbrook, Ill., and president-elect of the Tenant-in-Common Assn., a trade organization.

PREMIUM PRICE

Fees aren’t cheap. In a typical deal, sponsors charge a property-acquisition fee of 2% to 6% of the equity they put into the deal. Sales commissions are 5% to 8% of equity collected, and there can be a 2% to 3% fee for organization and marketing expenses, not to mention the ordinary annual property management fees, which run from 2% to 6% of net rental income.

The governance of these investment vehicles is clumsy. Decisions on such matters as selecting major tenants require unanimous votes. The only solution to an impasse is for one side to buy out the other. And it can be hard to find a qualified buyer if you need to sell your interest.

Most TICs are open only to “accredited” investors, which generally means those who have $1 million or more in net wealth or annual income of $200,000 or more for the past two years. Investors who aren’t doing a 1031 exchange should think doubly hard about whether a TIC is right for them, because they’re paying a premium for a 1031-qualifying property but won’t be able to use the tax break.

The best advice is to plan so you’re not rushed into a TIC to beat the IRS deadline. A TIC can be a good choice. Just be sure you know what makes it tick.

By Peter Coy

Copyright © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.