Showing posts with label real estate consulting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label real estate consulting. Show all posts

Thursday, May 6, 2010

All in a day's work


During the final days of their feasibility period to purchase a property, a client requested that I go the Seller’s office to review some documents.

It seems that the Seller had located some additional material that had not previously been disclosed. I was asked to run down and make a quick review of the materials and report back on my findings.

(Note the 21 banker’s boxes of new material)

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Builders Cash in on Tax Refunds

Extension of net operating loss carry-back provision to five years are returning millions of dollars to public builders, some of which are using the money to buy land at bargain prices.


Christmas came a little late, but with a huge satchel of gifts for many of America’s largest home builders: Nearly $2 billion in total tax refunds for the last three months of 2009.

On Tuesday, Pulte, the housing industry’s largest builder, reported that its earnings loss for the three months ended Dec. 31, 2009 had narrowed to $116.9 million. That improvement in no small measure resulted from a whopping $800 million tax refund that Pulte gained from a law change that now allows companies carry back net operating losses up to five years.

The net operating loss (NOL) carryback provision was one of the key lobbying points—the other being the extension of the federal tax credit for home buyers—that NAHB and its largest members pushed Congress hardest for to resuscitate the housing sector. Pulte’s tax benefit, which helped offset $925 million in quarterly land impairments and other writedowns, is the largest among the almost $2 billion in total NOL refunds that 10 of the industry’s publicly traded builders reaped in their latest quarters. (See chart below.)

Two other public companies, Hovnanian Enterprises and Toll Brothers, ended their latest fiscal years before the law went into effect, and therefore reported losses for of $250.8 million and $78.8 million, respectively, in their fourth quarters. Both builders, however, intend to take full advantage of the law change. Larry Sorsby, Hovnanian’s CFO, told investors that his company is “now expecting a $275 million to $295 million tax refund in our second quarter of 2010.” Toll believes it will recover $161.8 million in 2010 from filing its 2009 tax return.

Indeed, the tax refunds that large public builders have received so far could be just the tip of the iceberg. D.R. Horton, for one, has submitted a claim for a $352 million refund for the current quarter.

During their first quarters of 2010, Ryland Group is counting on refunds of $99.4 million, Meritage Homes $93 million, KB Home $190.7 million, and Standard Pacific $103 million.

Lennar is also banking on a $320 million tax refund in early 2010. “Our improved balance sheet enables us to continue to capitalize on distressed land-buying opportunities, which will improve our operating results in 2010 and beyond,” said its CEO Stuart Miller.

M.D.C. Holdings expects to do the same. As it was closing the books on 2009, the Denver-based builder raised new capital by issuing $250 million in new debt. M.D.C. also expects to receive a $143 million tax refund during the first quarter of 2010. “Given these enhancements to our liquidity, we are well-positioned to continue making investments in 2010 as we build our land pipeline to support future home closings,” wrote M.D.C.’s chairman and CEO Larry Mizel.

John Caulfield is senior editor for BUILDER magazine.

Company Quarterly net income for three months ending 12/30/09 Tax refund

_______________________________________________

Pulte $(116.9) million $800 million

Lennar $35.6 million $251.1 million

KB Home $100.7 million $191.7 million

M.D.C. Holdings $127.2 million $142.6 million

D.R. Horton $192 million $113 million

Beazer $50 million $101 million

Ryland Group $39 million $97.6 million

Standard Pacific $82.7 million $94.1 million

Meritage Homes $43 million $90 million

M/I Homes $7 million $31 million

TOTAL $560.3 million $1.9 billion

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Rural zoned condominium lot


A family owned some property in the rural area of King County. The property included the main home as well as a secondary home that was built many years ago. They wished to have the ability to sell one of the homes and keep the other.

The normal way would be to subdivide the property via a short plat. Short platting the property probably would have cost them about $110,000 for applications, engineering, site construction, bonding etc. and taken about 3 years to complete. Unfortunately, they didn’t even have enough area (a large enough lot) to subdivide, so that wasn’t an option.

In talking with their engineer, they learned of a creative solution for their problem. Cramer Northwest Inc. advised them to do a Condo Survey. The Condo survey accomplished their objective utilizing a different code. In the end, they got their two lots (just like in a short plat) but at a fraction of the time and expense of one.



Method..............~Cost............Time

Short Plat.................$110,000...........3 years
Condo Survey..........$9,500...............7 months

===============================
Savings................91%..............80%


Disclaimer: The codes in your jurisdiction may not be the same. The key to this example is that the clients had two existing homes on the same lot. Please consult a professional such as Cramer Northwest http://www.cramernw.com/ to discuss your particular case.

Monday, December 7, 2009

Report Cards are in

Last week the Municipal League released a study titled "Rights, Wrongs and Reforms: Selected Issues on Land Use regulations in King County." Issues from multiple perspectives are discussed and worth considering.

http://www.mbaks.com/library/issues/LandUseReportFinal.pdf

Friday, December 4, 2009

High Appreciation hid a lot of mistakes...for a while

I have a very intelligent friend. Heck, some say his IQ is way up there near the genius level—but that doesn’t make him a smart real estate investor. Here was a lifelong engineer wanting to become a home builder simply because the market was so hot that no one could lose.

One day he called me and asked for a favor. He wanted me to look at a vacant lot he was considering buying to build a spec home on. I quickly did a CMA and a NewHome Trends report to pull up comparables and headed to the site. I spend two hours with him walking the lot and the neighborhood. We went through a due diligence checklist I worked up for him. While most things looked fine, there were still a number of questions he would need to get answered by the local planning department.

When he told me what he was going to pay for the lot I said I thought he was paying full retail price—and maybe even a little more. Off the cuff I told him if he could avoid adding a fire hydrant in the street, sprinkling the home and get a sewer easement from a neighbor (to avoid pumping the sewage up to the main) then he might be alright. If he couldn’t accomplish at least two of these then he was overpaying for the Lot. I recommended he get his questioned answered and then determine how much lower he needed to reduce his offer by to be safe.

He was in such a hurry to buy that he didn’t take the time to check into the feasibility items I warned him about. He believed that even if he was overpaying for the lot, he could make up the difference with the appreciation that was bound to occur on the land during the time he was building the home.

Unfortunately, there were too many instances like this where people were so excited to buy that they ignored market signs and failed to do the proper feasibility before buying land and homes.
A proper due diligence report would have identified many of the problems the Buyer ended up encountering.