首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

美国商业地产市场迎来末日

Alena Botros
2023-07-23

凯投宏观的副首席房地产经济学家指出,本轮美国商业地产价格的复苏周期将长于上轮金融危机之后。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

商业地产特别容易受到高利率的影响,尤其是在经历了一段时间的低息时期之后。就像无数人曾经指出的那样,商业地产之所以是目前风险最高的板块,主要原因在于需求。

随着远程办公的持续流行,美国的商业地产市场受到了沉重打击。据位于英国伦敦的独立宏观经济分析、预测和咨询服务公司凯投宏观(Capital Economics)预测,商业地产的价格很快将从峰值跌向谷底,跌幅或将达到35%,而且这种颓势直到2040年也不太可能逆转。

为了更深入地了解凯投宏观公司对商业地产前景的看法,《财富》杂志专访了凯投宏观的副首席房地产经济学家基兰·赖奇拉。凑巧的是,赖奇拉刚刚参加了一场在美国芝加哥举办的会议,会上他刚好谈到了同一话题。他表示,由于上述两个原因,商业地产市场正在经历一场崩盘。但受市场的结构性转型力量影响,商业地产的本轮走低和之前的几次崩盘还是有一些不同之处的。

《财富》杂志对基兰·赖奇拉进行了专访,以下是专访的文字稿,为简明起见,以下采访有删减。

《财富》:首先,你们预测到2025年年底,美国的商业地产价值将暴跌35%,你能多说一说这方面的事情吗?

基兰·赖奇拉:首先,我们是从正反两方面看待房地产行业的前景的——也就是说,我们既要看入住率的市场前景,也要看房地产的收入定价。因此,影响房地产市场的首要因素是近两年的加息。一般来说,我们是参照某个无风险利率为商业地产定价的。比如我们能够参照10年期的美国国债利率,这个利率在2021年年底是1.5%,但是现在已经涨到了4%。无风险利率的上升意味着我们必须看到商业地产资本化率的上升,而这对所有行业都产生了类似的影响。

商业地产的特殊之处在于,如今有充分证据表明,美国企业对实体办公室的使用率正在下降。目前,美国商业地产的入住率大约只有新冠疫情前的一半,而且很多企业在租约到期后也没有选择续租。因此,我们发现美国商用地产的入住率在持续下滑,这导致了商业地产空置率的上升,而空置率越高,租金的增长就越弱。

目前,美国商业地产的空置率已经大幅上升至5%左右,我们认为,未来美国商业地产的空置率还会进一步上升,因为未来几年,可能还会有更多租房放弃续租,这使我们的租赁预期显得非常负面。因此,上文所述的35%的跌幅既考虑了加息因素,也考虑了人们对商业地产本身的风险预期,以及运营收入下降等因素(后者是由于空置率的上升和远程办公导致的租金下降等因素造成的)。

与你们最初的预测相比,商业地产价格的动向有什么变化吗?

它肯定并非一直是35%,在过去几个月里,这个预测值已经大幅下调了。在今年3月的美国银行业危机期间,我们大幅下调了对美国所有商业地产价格的预期,因为银行业危机对美国的所有房地产债务融资都产生了影响,因此也影响了投资者对房地产前景的信心。所以我认为,当时大家就应该已经预料到商业地产价格会有所下降了。

而现在,很多投资者要么觉得投资商业地产不赚钱,要么由于一些商业地产已经过于老旧,根本租不出去,所以他们干脆把这些商业地产交还银行进行法拍,因此商业地产价格的走向也变得愈发明朗。市场已经认识到需要对它们进行重新定价,这也促使我们大幅下调了我们的预测。

为什么你们认为即使到2040年,美国的商业地产价值也不太可能恢复到新冠疫情前?

我们认为商业地产价格不会复苏是有几个原因的。首先,我们认为市场对办公空间的需求已经出现了结构性变化。在正常的经济衰退中,企业一旦破产,工人一旦失业,企业就会腾出办公空间。等到调整期一到,经济回到增长周期,一切又会恢复原样。但这次市场出现了结构性下跌,所以不管企业有多少员工,他们都希望减少办公空间的面积。这会给市场造成一个向下的冲击,而且很难向以往那样反弹。

在利率方面,我们认为美国也已经出现了结构性的转变。美国的利率以前也曾经到达过像今天这样的低点(4%左右),不过我们的预测表明,未来五年,美国的利率大致会保持在3%至3.5%之间,显著高于前几年的水平。这意味着房地产的上限利率水平需要定得更高,而房价则倾向于变得更低。我们也认为,在降息环境下,美国商业地产价格是不太可能反弹的。

在2007年年底的全球金融危机(Great Financial Crisis)爆发后,美国的商业地产价格出现大跌,直到2019年年底才再次达到峰值。这个过程整整花了12年,但即便如此,这也不是一次结构性的转变,而只是一轮周期性的下跌。所以我们认为,这次美国商业市场很可能需要更长的时间才能恢复元气。

商业地产行业已经崩盘?如果真是如此,是否还会有进一步的低迷?

我们确实认为美国的商业地产行业正在崩盘,我们从数据中看到了证据,也从客户处听到了证据。对于商业地产的业主来说,目前是一个尤为艰难的时期,我们知道银行也正在从商业地产领域回收债务。另一方面,加息的影响又是全方位的,它对企业的办公空间需求产生了巨大影响。这也让很多业主不得不权衡出租商业地产的收益流。因此这也造成了很多的不确定性因素,很多投资者都试图影响定价,但反而很多时候都会对定价产生不利影响。

我们预计美国的商业地产价格跌幅将达到35%。但到目前为止,估值指数显示它只下跌了15%,所以我们的预测甚至尚未在估值中反映出一半。但是在实际交易中,一些商业地产已经大幅折价了。例如在旧金山等美国西海岸城市,商业地产几乎是在以新冠疫情前的60%至70%的价格进行交易,甚至还要比前几年的价格更低。

你是否认为商业地产的价值会完全恢复?

我认为会的。你可以把它们看作资产本身。在某些情况下,你还能够改变它的用途。这未必意味着商业地产数量的改变,但对于业主或投资者而言,他们还是可以从中获得一些可观的价值的。另一方面,一些受影响最严重的城市可能无法恢复到原来的房价水平,有的商业地产甚至可能被废弃、拆除或转作其他用途,但是最优质的商业地产肯定还是会回归的,甚至有可能发展得更好。

我们谈了很多关于全美的情况,你能谈谈各大城市的情况吗?

我刚才讲了推动房价下跌的两个因素:一是加息的影响,二是商业地产市场的结构性变化。加息的影响是全方位的,市场结构性变化的影响虽然也是全方位的,但是程度却有所不同。有些因素在影响着商业地产的利用率,比如通勤时间和通勤成本——通勤时间的变长,意味着人们必然不愿意在办公室里上班。另外住房成本也是一个影响因素,因为它会影响到人们对住所的选择,这对居住成本过高的旧金山等城市显然是不利的。

我们认为有些城市受到的影响会更大,特别是那些美国西海岸或者靠近西海岸的城市。还有一些城市受到的影响相对较轻,例如位于美国南部和东南部地区的得克萨斯和佛罗里达等州。最近几年,这些城市吸引了不少新的劳动者和企业,这与他们吸引移民的能力不无关系。因此,这对美国南部和东南部各州是一个利好因素,我们认为美国南部各州的空置率变化程度会相对较低,因此对租金和净营业收入的影响也要小得多。(财富中文网)

译者:朴成奎

商业地产特别容易受到高利率的影响,尤其是在经历了一段时间的低息时期之后。就像无数人曾经指出的那样,商业地产之所以是目前风险最高的板块,主要原因在于需求。

随着远程办公的持续流行,美国的商业地产市场受到了沉重打击。据位于英国伦敦的独立宏观经济分析、预测和咨询服务公司凯投宏观(Capital Economics)预测,商业地产的价格很快将从峰值跌向谷底,跌幅或将达到35%,而且这种颓势直到2040年也不太可能逆转。

为了更深入地了解凯投宏观公司对商业地产前景的看法,《财富》杂志专访了凯投宏观的副首席房地产经济学家基兰·赖奇拉。凑巧的是,赖奇拉刚刚参加了一场在美国芝加哥举办的会议,会上他刚好谈到了同一话题。他表示,由于上述两个原因,商业地产市场正在经历一场崩盘。但受市场的结构性转型力量影响,商业地产的本轮走低和之前的几次崩盘还是有一些不同之处的。

《财富》杂志对基兰·赖奇拉进行了专访,以下是专访的文字稿,为简明起见,以下采访有删减。

《财富》:首先,你们预测到2025年年底,美国的商业地产价值将暴跌35%,你能多说一说这方面的事情吗?

基兰·赖奇拉:首先,我们是从正反两方面看待房地产行业的前景的——也就是说,我们既要看入住率的市场前景,也要看房地产的收入定价。因此,影响房地产市场的首要因素是近两年的加息。一般来说,我们是参照某个无风险利率为商业地产定价的。比如我们能够参照10年期的美国国债利率,这个利率在2021年年底是1.5%,但是现在已经涨到了4%。无风险利率的上升意味着我们必须看到商业地产资本化率的上升,而这对所有行业都产生了类似的影响。

商业地产的特殊之处在于,如今有充分证据表明,美国企业对实体办公室的使用率正在下降。目前,美国商业地产的入住率大约只有新冠疫情前的一半,而且很多企业在租约到期后也没有选择续租。因此,我们发现美国商用地产的入住率在持续下滑,这导致了商业地产空置率的上升,而空置率越高,租金的增长就越弱。

目前,美国商业地产的空置率已经大幅上升至5%左右,我们认为,未来美国商业地产的空置率还会进一步上升,因为未来几年,可能还会有更多租房放弃续租,这使我们的租赁预期显得非常负面。因此,上文所述的35%的跌幅既考虑了加息因素,也考虑了人们对商业地产本身的风险预期,以及运营收入下降等因素(后者是由于空置率的上升和远程办公导致的租金下降等因素造成的)。

与你们最初的预测相比,商业地产价格的动向有什么变化吗?

它肯定并非一直是35%,在过去几个月里,这个预测值已经大幅下调了。在今年3月的美国银行业危机期间,我们大幅下调了对美国所有商业地产价格的预期,因为银行业危机对美国的所有房地产债务融资都产生了影响,因此也影响了投资者对房地产前景的信心。所以我认为,当时大家就应该已经预料到商业地产价格会有所下降了。

而现在,很多投资者要么觉得投资商业地产不赚钱,要么由于一些商业地产已经过于老旧,根本租不出去,所以他们干脆把这些商业地产交还银行进行法拍,因此商业地产价格的走向也变得愈发明朗。市场已经认识到需要对它们进行重新定价,这也促使我们大幅下调了我们的预测。

为什么你们认为即使到2040年,美国的商业地产价值也不太可能恢复到新冠疫情前?

我们认为商业地产价格不会复苏是有几个原因的。首先,我们认为市场对办公空间的需求已经出现了结构性变化。在正常的经济衰退中,企业一旦破产,工人一旦失业,企业就会腾出办公空间。等到调整期一到,经济回到增长周期,一切又会恢复原样。但这次市场出现了结构性下跌,所以不管企业有多少员工,他们都希望减少办公空间的面积。这会给市场造成一个向下的冲击,而且很难向以往那样反弹。

在利率方面,我们认为美国也已经出现了结构性的转变。美国的利率以前也曾经到达过像今天这样的低点(4%左右),不过我们的预测表明,未来五年,美国的利率大致会保持在3%至3.5%之间,显著高于前几年的水平。这意味着房地产的上限利率水平需要定得更高,而房价则倾向于变得更低。我们也认为,在降息环境下,美国商业地产价格是不太可能反弹的。

在2007年年底的全球金融危机(Great Financial Crisis)爆发后,美国的商业地产价格出现大跌,直到2019年年底才再次达到峰值。这个过程整整花了12年,但即便如此,这也不是一次结构性的转变,而只是一轮周期性的下跌。所以我们认为,这次美国商业市场很可能需要更长的时间才能恢复元气。

商业地产行业已经崩盘?如果真是如此,是否还会有进一步的低迷?

我们确实认为美国的商业地产行业正在崩盘,我们从数据中看到了证据,也从客户处听到了证据。对于商业地产的业主来说,目前是一个尤为艰难的时期,我们知道银行也正在从商业地产领域回收债务。另一方面,加息的影响又是全方位的,它对企业的办公空间需求产生了巨大影响。这也让很多业主不得不权衡出租商业地产的收益流。因此这也造成了很多的不确定性因素,很多投资者都试图影响定价,但反而很多时候都会对定价产生不利影响。

我们预计美国的商业地产价格跌幅将达到35%。但到目前为止,估值指数显示它只下跌了15%,所以我们的预测甚至尚未在估值中反映出一半。但是在实际交易中,一些商业地产已经大幅折价了。例如在旧金山等美国西海岸城市,商业地产几乎是在以新冠疫情前的60%至70%的价格进行交易,甚至还要比前几年的价格更低。

你是否认为商业地产的价值会完全恢复?

我认为会的。你可以把它们看作资产本身。在某些情况下,你还能够改变它的用途。这未必意味着商业地产数量的改变,但对于业主或投资者而言,他们还是可以从中获得一些可观的价值的。另一方面,一些受影响最严重的城市可能无法恢复到原来的房价水平,有的商业地产甚至可能被废弃、拆除或转作其他用途,但是最优质的商业地产肯定还是会回归的,甚至有可能发展得更好。

我们谈了很多关于全美的情况,你能谈谈各大城市的情况吗?

我刚才讲了推动房价下跌的两个因素:一是加息的影响,二是商业地产市场的结构性变化。加息的影响是全方位的,市场结构性变化的影响虽然也是全方位的,但是程度却有所不同。有些因素在影响着商业地产的利用率,比如通勤时间和通勤成本——通勤时间的变长,意味着人们必然不愿意在办公室里上班。另外住房成本也是一个影响因素,因为它会影响到人们对住所的选择,这对居住成本过高的旧金山等城市显然是不利的。

我们认为有些城市受到的影响会更大,特别是那些美国西海岸或者靠近西海岸的城市。还有一些城市受到的影响相对较轻,例如位于美国南部和东南部地区的得克萨斯和佛罗里达等州。最近几年,这些城市吸引了不少新的劳动者和企业,这与他们吸引移民的能力不无关系。因此,这对美国南部和东南部各州是一个利好因素,我们认为美国南部各州的空置率变化程度会相对较低,因此对租金和净营业收入的影响也要小得多。(财富中文网)

译者:朴成奎

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.

0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开