日韩中文字幕在线一区二区三区,亚洲热视频在线观看,久久精品午夜一区二区福利,精品一区二区三区在线观看l,麻花传媒剧电影,亚洲香蕉伊综合在人在线,免费av一区二区三区在线,亚洲成在线人视频观看
          首頁 500強 活動 榜單 商業 科技 商潮 專題 品牌中心
          雜志訂閱

          美國商業地產市場迎來末日

          Alena Botros
          2023-07-23

          凱投宏觀的副首席房地產經濟學家指出,本輪美國商業地產價格的復蘇周期將長于上輪金融危機之后。

          文本設置
          小號
          默認
          大號
          Plus(0條)

          商業地產特別容易受到高利率的影響,尤其是在經歷了一段時間的低息時期之后。就像無數人曾經指出的那樣,商業地產之所以是目前風險最高的板塊,主要原因在于需求。

          隨著遠程辦公的持續流行,美國的商業地產市場受到了沉重打擊。據位于英國倫敦的獨立宏觀經濟分析、預測和咨詢服務公司凱投宏觀(Capital Economics)預測,商業地產的價格很快將從峰值跌向谷底,跌幅或將達到35%,而且這種頹勢直到2040年也不太可能逆轉。

          為了更深入地了解凱投宏觀公司對商業地產前景的看法,《財富》雜志專訪了凱投宏觀的副首席房地產經濟學家基蘭·賴奇拉。湊巧的是,賴奇拉剛剛參加了一場在美國芝加哥舉辦的會議,會上他剛好談到了同一話題。他表示,由于上述兩個原因,商業地產市場正在經歷一場崩盤。但受市場的結構性轉型力量影響,商業地產的本輪走低和之前的幾次崩盤還是有一些不同之處的。

          《財富》雜志對基蘭·賴奇拉進行了專訪,以下是專訪的文字稿,為簡明起見,以下采訪有刪減。

          《財富》:首先,你們預測到2025年年底,美國的商業地產價值將暴跌35%,你能多說一說這方面的事情嗎?

          基蘭·賴奇拉:首先,我們是從正反兩方面看待房地產行業的前景的——也就是說,我們既要看入住率的市場前景,也要看房地產的收入定價。因此,影響房地產市場的首要因素是近兩年的加息。一般來說,我們是參照某個無風險利率為商業地產定價的。比如我們能夠參照10年期的美國國債利率,這個利率在2021年年底是1.5%,但是現在已經漲到了4%。無風險利率的上升意味著我們必須看到商業地產資本化率的上升,而這對所有行業都產生了類似的影響。

          商業地產的特殊之處在于,如今有充分證據表明,美國企業對實體辦公室的使用率正在下降。目前,美國商業地產的入住率大約只有新冠疫情前的一半,而且很多企業在租約到期后也沒有選擇續租。因此,我們發現美國商用地產的入住率在持續下滑,這導致了商業地產空置率的上升,而空置率越高,租金的增長就越弱。

          目前,美國商業地產的空置率已經大幅上升至5%左右,我們認為,未來美國商業地產的空置率還會進一步上升,因為未來幾年,可能還會有更多租房放棄續租,這使我們的租賃預期顯得非常負面。因此,上文所述的35%的跌幅既考慮了加息因素,也考慮了人們對商業地產本身的風險預期,以及運營收入下降等因素(后者是由于空置率的上升和遠程辦公導致的租金下降等因素造成的)。

          與你們最初的預測相比,商業地產價格的動向有什么變化嗎?

          它肯定并非一直是35%,在過去幾個月里,這個預測值已經大幅下調了。在今年3月的美國銀行業危機期間,我們大幅下調了對美國所有商業地產價格的預期,因為銀行業危機對美國的所有房地產債務融資都產生了影響,因此也影響了投資者對房地產前景的信心。所以我認為,當時大家就應該已經預料到商業地產價格會有所下降了。

          而現在,很多投資者要么覺得投資商業地產不賺錢,要么由于一些商業地產已經過于老舊,根本租不出去,所以他們干脆把這些商業地產交還銀行進行法拍,因此商業地產價格的走向也變得愈發明朗。市場已經認識到需要對它們進行重新定價,這也促使我們大幅下調了我們的預測。

          為什么你們認為即使到2040年,美國的商業地產價值也不太可能恢復到新冠疫情前?

          我們認為商業地產價格不會復蘇是有幾個原因的。首先,我們認為市場對辦公空間的需求已經出現了結構性變化。在正常的經濟衰退中,企業一旦破產,工人一旦失業,企業就會騰出辦公空間。等到調整期一到,經濟回到增長周期,一切又會恢復原樣。但這次市場出現了結構性下跌,所以不管企業有多少員工,他們都希望減少辦公空間的面積。這會給市場造成一個向下的沖擊,而且很難向以往那樣反彈。

          在利率方面,我們認為美國也已經出現了結構性的轉變。美國的利率以前也曾經到達過像今天這樣的低點(4%左右),不過我們的預測表明,未來五年,美國的利率大致會保持在3%至3.5%之間,顯著高于前幾年的水平。這意味著房地產的上限利率水平需要定得更高,而房價則傾向于變得更低。我們也認為,在降息環境下,美國商業地產價格是不太可能反彈的。

          在2007年年底的全球金融危機(Great Financial Crisis)爆發后,美國的商業地產價格出現大跌,直到2019年年底才再次達到峰值。這個過程整整花了12年,但即便如此,這也不是一次結構性的轉變,而只是一輪周期性的下跌。所以我們認為,這次美國商業市場很可能需要更長的時間才能恢復元氣。

          商業地產行業已經崩盤?如果真是如此,是否還會有進一步的低迷?

          我們確實認為美國的商業地產行業正在崩盤,我們從數據中看到了證據,也從客戶處聽到了證據。對于商業地產的業主來說,目前是一個尤為艱難的時期,我們知道銀行也正在從商業地產領域回收債務。另一方面,加息的影響又是全方位的,它對企業的辦公空間需求產生了巨大影響。這也讓很多業主不得不權衡出租商業地產的收益流。因此這也造成了很多的不確定性因素,很多投資者都試圖影響定價,但反而很多時候都會對定價產生不利影響。

          我們預計美國的商業地產價格跌幅將達到35%。但到目前為止,估值指數顯示它只下跌了15%,所以我們的預測甚至尚未在估值中反映出一半。但是在實際交易中,一些商業地產已經大幅折價了。例如在舊金山等美國西海岸城市,商業地產幾乎是在以新冠疫情前的60%至70%的價格進行交易,甚至還要比前幾年的價格更低。

          你是否認為商業地產的價值會完全恢復?

          我認為會的。你可以把它們看作資產本身。在某些情況下,你還能夠改變它的用途。這未必意味著商業地產數量的改變,但對于業主或投資者而言,他們還是可以從中獲得一些可觀的價值的。另一方面,一些受影響最嚴重的城市可能無法恢復到原來的房價水平,有的商業地產甚至可能被廢棄、拆除或轉作其他用途,但是最優質的商業地產肯定還是會回歸的,甚至有可能發展得更好。

          我們談了很多關于全美的情況,你能談談各大城市的情況嗎?

          我剛才講了推動房價下跌的兩個因素:一是加息的影響,二是商業地產市場的結構性變化。加息的影響是全方位的,市場結構性變化的影響雖然也是全方位的,但是程度卻有所不同。有些因素在影響著商業地產的利用率,比如通勤時間和通勤成本——通勤時間的變長,意味著人們必然不愿意在辦公室里上班。另外住房成本也是一個影響因素,因為它會影響到人們對住所的選擇,這對居住成本過高的舊金山等城市顯然是不利的。

          我們認為有些城市受到的影響會更大,特別是那些美國西海岸或者靠近西海岸的城市。還有一些城市受到的影響相對較輕,例如位于美國南部和東南部地區的得克薩斯和佛羅里達等州。最近幾年,這些城市吸引了不少新的勞動者和企業,這與他們吸引移民的能力不無關系。因此,這對美國南部和東南部各州是一個利好因素,我們認為美國南部各州的空置率變化程度會相對較低,因此對租金和凈營業收入的影響也要小得多。(財富中文網)

          譯者:樸成奎

          商業地產特別容易受到高利率的影響,尤其是在經歷了一段時間的低息時期之后。就像無數人曾經指出的那樣,商業地產之所以是目前風險最高的板塊,主要原因在于需求。

          隨著遠程辦公的持續流行,美國的商業地產市場受到了沉重打擊。據位于英國倫敦的獨立宏觀經濟分析、預測和咨詢服務公司凱投宏觀(Capital Economics)預測,商業地產的價格很快將從峰值跌向谷底,跌幅或將達到35%,而且這種頹勢直到2040年也不太可能逆轉。

          為了更深入地了解凱投宏觀公司對商業地產前景的看法,《財富》雜志專訪了凱投宏觀的副首席房地產經濟學家基蘭·賴奇拉。湊巧的是,賴奇拉剛剛參加了一場在美國芝加哥舉辦的會議,會上他剛好談到了同一話題。他表示,由于上述兩個原因,商業地產市場正在經歷一場崩盤。但受市場的結構性轉型力量影響,商業地產的本輪走低和之前的幾次崩盤還是有一些不同之處的。

          《財富》雜志對基蘭·賴奇拉進行了專訪,以下是專訪的文字稿,為簡明起見,以下采訪有刪減。

          《財富》:首先,你們預測到2025年年底,美國的商業地產價值將暴跌35%,你能多說一說這方面的事情嗎?

          基蘭·賴奇拉:首先,我們是從正反兩方面看待房地產行業的前景的——也就是說,我們既要看入住率的市場前景,也要看房地產的收入定價。因此,影響房地產市場的首要因素是近兩年的加息。一般來說,我們是參照某個無風險利率為商業地產定價的。比如我們能夠參照10年期的美國國債利率,這個利率在2021年年底是1.5%,但是現在已經漲到了4%。無風險利率的上升意味著我們必須看到商業地產資本化率的上升,而這對所有行業都產生了類似的影響。

          商業地產的特殊之處在于,如今有充分證據表明,美國企業對實體辦公室的使用率正在下降。目前,美國商業地產的入住率大約只有新冠疫情前的一半,而且很多企業在租約到期后也沒有選擇續租。因此,我們發現美國商用地產的入住率在持續下滑,這導致了商業地產空置率的上升,而空置率越高,租金的增長就越弱。

          目前,美國商業地產的空置率已經大幅上升至5%左右,我們認為,未來美國商業地產的空置率還會進一步上升,因為未來幾年,可能還會有更多租房放棄續租,這使我們的租賃預期顯得非常負面。因此,上文所述的35%的跌幅既考慮了加息因素,也考慮了人們對商業地產本身的風險預期,以及運營收入下降等因素(后者是由于空置率的上升和遠程辦公導致的租金下降等因素造成的)。

          與你們最初的預測相比,商業地產價格的動向有什么變化嗎?

          它肯定并非一直是35%,在過去幾個月里,這個預測值已經大幅下調了。在今年3月的美國銀行業危機期間,我們大幅下調了對美國所有商業地產價格的預期,因為銀行業危機對美國的所有房地產債務融資都產生了影響,因此也影響了投資者對房地產前景的信心。所以我認為,當時大家就應該已經預料到商業地產價格會有所下降了。

          而現在,很多投資者要么覺得投資商業地產不賺錢,要么由于一些商業地產已經過于老舊,根本租不出去,所以他們干脆把這些商業地產交還銀行進行法拍,因此商業地產價格的走向也變得愈發明朗。市場已經認識到需要對它們進行重新定價,這也促使我們大幅下調了我們的預測。

          為什么你們認為即使到2040年,美國的商業地產價值也不太可能恢復到新冠疫情前?

          我們認為商業地產價格不會復蘇是有幾個原因的。首先,我們認為市場對辦公空間的需求已經出現了結構性變化。在正常的經濟衰退中,企業一旦破產,工人一旦失業,企業就會騰出辦公空間。等到調整期一到,經濟回到增長周期,一切又會恢復原樣。但這次市場出現了結構性下跌,所以不管企業有多少員工,他們都希望減少辦公空間的面積。這會給市場造成一個向下的沖擊,而且很難向以往那樣反彈。

          在利率方面,我們認為美國也已經出現了結構性的轉變。美國的利率以前也曾經到達過像今天這樣的低點(4%左右),不過我們的預測表明,未來五年,美國的利率大致會保持在3%至3.5%之間,顯著高于前幾年的水平。這意味著房地產的上限利率水平需要定得更高,而房價則傾向于變得更低。我們也認為,在降息環境下,美國商業地產價格是不太可能反彈的。

          在2007年年底的全球金融危機(Great Financial Crisis)爆發后,美國的商業地產價格出現大跌,直到2019年年底才再次達到峰值。這個過程整整花了12年,但即便如此,這也不是一次結構性的轉變,而只是一輪周期性的下跌。所以我們認為,這次美國商業市場很可能需要更長的時間才能恢復元氣。

          商業地產行業已經崩盤?如果真是如此,是否還會有進一步的低迷?

          我們確實認為美國的商業地產行業正在崩盤,我們從數據中看到了證據,也從客戶處聽到了證據。對于商業地產的業主來說,目前是一個尤為艱難的時期,我們知道銀行也正在從商業地產領域回收債務。另一方面,加息的影響又是全方位的,它對企業的辦公空間需求產生了巨大影響。這也讓很多業主不得不權衡出租商業地產的收益流。因此這也造成了很多的不確定性因素,很多投資者都試圖影響定價,但反而很多時候都會對定價產生不利影響。

          我們預計美國的商業地產價格跌幅將達到35%。但到目前為止,估值指數顯示它只下跌了15%,所以我們的預測甚至尚未在估值中反映出一半。但是在實際交易中,一些商業地產已經大幅折價了。例如在舊金山等美國西海岸城市,商業地產幾乎是在以新冠疫情前的60%至70%的價格進行交易,甚至還要比前幾年的價格更低。

          你是否認為商業地產的價值會完全恢復?

          我認為會的。你可以把它們看作資產本身。在某些情況下,你還能夠改變它的用途。這未必意味著商業地產數量的改變,但對于業主或投資者而言,他們還是可以從中獲得一些可觀的價值的。另一方面,一些受影響最嚴重的城市可能無法恢復到原來的房價水平,有的商業地產甚至可能被廢棄、拆除或轉作其他用途,但是最優質的商業地產肯定還是會回歸的,甚至有可能發展得更好。

          我們談了很多關于全美的情況,你能談談各大城市的情況嗎?

          我剛才講了推動房價下跌的兩個因素:一是加息的影響,二是商業地產市場的結構性變化。加息的影響是全方位的,市場結構性變化的影響雖然也是全方位的,但是程度卻有所不同。有些因素在影響著商業地產的利用率,比如通勤時間和通勤成本——通勤時間的變長,意味著人們必然不愿意在辦公室里上班。另外住房成本也是一個影響因素,因為它會影響到人們對住所的選擇,這對居住成本過高的舊金山等城市顯然是不利的。

          我們認為有些城市受到的影響會更大,特別是那些美國西海岸或者靠近西海岸的城市。還有一些城市受到的影響相對較輕,例如位于美國南部和東南部地區的得克薩斯和佛羅里達等州。最近幾年,這些城市吸引了不少新的勞動者和企業,這與他們吸引移民的能力不無關系。因此,這對美國南部和東南部各州是一個利好因素,我們認為美國南部各州的空置率變化程度會相對較低,因此對租金和凈營業收入的影響也要小得多。(財富中文網)

          譯者:樸成奎

          Commercial real estate is vulnerable to high interest rates, particularly after an era of cheap money. And like countless others have said before, the one thing that’s separating the office sector, making it the most at risk, is demand.

          Amid the continued prevalence of remote work, the office sector is currently undergoing an economic reckoning. Capital Economics, a London-based provider of independent macroeconomic analysis, forecasts, and consultancy, predicts a substantial decline in office values from peak to trough, amounting to 35%. Furthermore, this decline is unlikely to recover even by 2040, in the firm’s view.

          To gain deeper insights into Capital Economics’ perspective on the office sector outlook, Fortune reached out to Kiran Raichura, the organization’s deputy chief property economist. Coincidentally, Raichura had just concluded a conference in Chicago, where he discussed the very same topic. According to Raichura, the office sector is experiencing a crash due to the two aforementioned reasons. However, he emphasized that the downturn in the office space is distinct from previous ones due to the presence of structural shifts.

          Fortune held a conversation with Kiran Raichura, and the following transcript reflects key aspects of their exchange. Portions of the Q&A have been edited and condensed for the sake of clarity and brevity.

          Fortune: I want to start by asking you about your methodology behind that 35% plunge in office values that you’re forecasting by the end of 2025, can you tell me more about that?

          Kiran Raichura: The way we think about the outlook for real estate, generally, is that we look at both sides—meaning that we look at the occupancy market outlook and the pricing of the income stream from property. So the first thing that’s affecting all the real estate sectors across the board is the increase in interest rates that we’ve seen in the last couple of years. Generally speaking, we price commercial real estate against a risk free rate. For that, we can think about the 10-year Treasury Yield, from the end of 2021, that was 1.5%, it’s now nearly 4%. And so that increase in the risk free rate means we need to see an increase in commercial real estate capitalization rates. That’s affecting all the sectors across the board to a similar extent.

          What is different for offices is that there’s been this very well documented reduction in the use of physical office space. The average physical occupancy in the U.S. is running at about 50% of its pre-pandemic levels, and that essentially has fed through to firms reducing the amount of office space they are choosing to have when their lease expires. So we’re generally seeing a reduction of space across the board, and that’s fed through at the market level to an increase in vacant space. The higher the vacancy rate, the weaker the rental growth.

          Vacancy has already risen pretty sharply to around five percentage points, and we think there’s a lot more to come still, as other tenants leave their space in the next few years. And so that drives our rental forecasts to look pretty negative. Essentially, the 35% drop is a combination of the rise in rates and the increased risk premium for people’s concerns about the office sector itself—and the drop in net operating incomes, which is a combination of rising vacancy and falling rents because of remote and hybrid work.

          How has the office forecast changed from your original outlook?

          It definitely wasn’t always 35%. It’s been downgraded quite substantially in the last few months. On the back of the banking crisis in March, we took a big red pen to all of our commercial real estate forecasts in the U.S. because it had a really substantial impact on both the availability and the cost of debt finance for real estate investment. And it’s also had an impact in terms of investors’ confidence in the outlook for real estate. So I think arguably, maybe we should have already been expecting some of those price reductions that we are now forecasting.

          Now, actually, there seems to be a lot more clarity in terms of what’s happening in the office sector with investors giving back assets to their banks, where they don’t make economic sense to put more money into or because they’re old and don’t have any tenants. So yes, essentially the realization that the market needs to reprice substantially has driven us to make a big downgrade in our forecast as well.

          Why do you think office values are unlikely to recover, or regain their pre-pandemic peaks, even by 2040?

          There’s a couple of reasons why we don’t think they’re going to recover. In terms of the demand for office space, we think it’s a structural change in that demand. In a normal recession, you get job losses, firms go bust, and they vacate office space. There’s an adjustment and then you get this growth back in the economy and things come back again. This time around there is a structural drop, so that firms, even if they maintain their same size, they’re reducing the amount of space they want for any given amount of employment. It’s going to have a downward impact, and it’s not going to bounce back in the same way it would normally

          In terms of interest rates, there’s a fairly structural shift in our view. They reached such lows before and are now at nearly 4%. But our forecast is that they stay roughly between 3% and 3.5% over the next five years, so the level of interest rates will be much higher than it was in the last few years. And that means that the level of real estate cap rates need to be higher, which means prices will tend to be lower. We also don’t think they’ll bounce back with any support from a reduction in the interest rate environment either.

          One way you could think about it is following the onset of the GFC [Great Financial Crisis], essentially from the end of 2007, you had again a really large drop in office values, and it wasn’t until the end of 2019 that they reached that peak again. That was a 12 year period, but it wasn’t a structural shift, it was very much a cyclical drop. So we think this time, it’s very easy to see it taking much longer to recover.

          Is the office sector crashing? And if so, is there still more downturn to play out?

          We definitely think the office sector is crashing. We’re seeing that evidence in the data, and also hearing it from our clients. It’s a very tough time to be an office landlord, and we know that banks are withdrawing debt from the sector as well. And the big drivers of this being the increase in interest rates that’s affecting all sectors, and the widespread adoption of remote and hybrid working that’s having a major impact on the demand for office space. And so that’s going to weigh on land landlords’ income streams from that sector. And it also creates a lot of uncertainty, which investors are trying to price in, and generally has a detrimental impact on prices.

          We’re forecasting a 35% peak-to-trough fall. The valuation indices so far show around a 15% fall in values, so we’re not actually even halfway yet in terms of that being reflected in valuations. In terms of the deals that are happening, some of those bigger discounts are already taking place. In west coast cities, like San Francisco, which is the market that we think is going to be the worst in terms of values, assets that were valued pre-pandemic at a certain price have now been traded at a 60% to 70% discount, or even more to that previous value.

          Do you think office values will ever fully recover?

          I think they will. You can think about it as just the asset itself, and in some cases, it will be a case of changing its use. That wouldn’t necessarily reflect office numbers, but for that landlord or investor, they could certainly extract some decent value out of it and then see that go reasonably well in the future. On the downside, the risk is in some of the hardest hit cities where they might not come back to the same extent. Essentially the worst hit assets, some of those will become fairly obsolete and will be either knocked down or converted to other uses. But certainly the best quality office space will come back and will probably end up doing very well.

          We’ve largely spoken about your national office outlook, what can you tell me about markets on a metro-level?

          I spoke earlier about the two factors driving prices down: the impact of higher interest rates and the impact of the structural change on the office sector. With interest rates, again, the effect is across the board, and the structural change in demand is also across the board but to varying degrees. There’s a handful of different factors that are driving different levels of office utilization. So think about things like commute times and costs. Longer commutes mean that people are less inclined to work in the office. Housing costs also make a difference because they’re impacting where people actually end up wanting to live, which is obviously a negative for somewhere like San Francisco where it’s very expensive.

          Those cities that we think are going to be the losers, essentially are those that are in the west coast or near the west coast. Then the relative winners are a lot of those places in the south and southeast in Texas and Florida, where there’s less of a downward impact from those specific factors. But also there’s some pretty strong cyclical growth in office-type employment in those cities. They’ve been attracting new workers, they’ve been attracting new firms in the last few years, partly because of migration patterns. And so that stands as a positive factor for some of the southern and southeastern markets, so that kind of drives a difference in our forecasts. Essentially, we think that the change in vacancy is going to be smaller in the southern markets, and therefore the impact on rents and net operating incomes much smaller.

          財富中文網所刊載內容之知識產權為財富媒體知識產權有限公司及/或相關權利人專屬所有或持有。未經許可,禁止進行轉載、摘編、復制及建立鏡像等任何使用。
          0條Plus
          精彩評論
          評論

          撰寫或查看更多評論

          請打開財富Plus APP

          前往打開