Asymmetric response of demand-supply mismatch to investor's sentiment

We look through both the demand and supply side information to understand dynamics of price determination in the real estate market and examine how accurately investors’ attitudes predict the market returns and thereby flagging off extent of any demand-supply mismatch. Our hypothesis is based on the possibility that investors’ call for action in terms of their buy/sell decision and adjustment in reservation/offer prices may indicate impending demand-supply imbalances in the market. In the process, we study several real estate sectors to inform our analysis. The timeframe of our analysis (1995-2010) allows us to observe market dynamics over several economic cycles and in various stages of those cycles. Additionally, we also seek to understand how investors’ attitude or the sentiment affects the market activity over the cycles through asymmetric responses. We test our hypothesis variously using a number of measures of market activity and attitude indicators within several model specifications. The empirical models are estimated using Vector Error Correction framework. Our analysis suggests that investors’ attitude exert strong and statistically significant feedback effects in price determination. Moreover, these effects do reveal heterogeneous responses across the real estate sectors. Interestingly, our results indicate the asymmetric responses during boom, normal and recessionary periods. These results are consistent with the theoretical underpinnings.

Timing and the holding periods of institutional real estate

Literature on investors' holding periods for securities suggests that high transaction costs are associated with longer holding periods. Return volatility, by contrast, is associated with shorter holding periods. In real estate, high transaction costs and illiquidity imply longer holding periods. Research on depreciation and obsolescence suggests that there might be an optimal holding period. Sales rates and holding periods for U.K. institutional real estate are analyzed, using a proportional hazards model, over an 18-year period. The results show longer holding periods than those claimed by investors, with marked differences by type of property and over time. The results shed light on investor behavior.

Using bargaining-game theory for negotiating concession period for BOT-type contract

This paper extends the build-operate-transfer (BOT) concession model (BOTCcM) to a new method for identifying a concession period by using bargaining-game theory. Concession period is one of the most important decision variables in arranging a BOT-type contract, and there are few methodologies available for helping to determine the value of this variable. The BOTCcM presents an alternative method by which a group of concession period solutions are produced. Nevertheless, a typical weakness in using BOTCcM is that the model cannot recommend a specific time span for concessionary. This paper introduces a new method called BOT bargaining concession model (BOTBaC) to enable the identification of a specific concession period, which takes into account the bargaining behavior of the two parties concerned in engaging a BOT contract, namely, the investor and the government concerned. The application of BOTBaC is demonstrated through using an example case.

Direct investment in real estate

Momentum strategies have the potential to generate extra profits in private real estate markets. Tests of a variety of frequencies of portfolio reweighting identify periods of winner and loser performance. There are strong potential gains from momentum strategies that are based on prior returns over a 6- to 12-month period. Whether these gains are attainable for real-world investors depends on transaction costs, but some momentum strategies do produce net excess returns. The findings hold even if returns are unsmoothed to reflect underlying market prices.

Depreciation, income distribution and the UK REIT

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to consider prospects for UK REITs, which were introduced on 1 January 2007. It specifically focuses on the potential influence of depreciation and expenditure on income and distributions. Design/methodology/approach – First, the ways in which depreciation can affect vehicle earnings and value are discussed. This is then set in the context of the specific rules and features of REITs. An analysis using property income and expenditure data from the Investment Property Databank (IPD) then assesses what gross and net income for a UK REIT might have been like for the period 1984-2003. Findings – A UK REIT must distribute at least 90 per cent of net income from its property rental business. Expenditure therefore plays a significant part in determining what funds remain for distribution. Over 1984-2003, expenditure has absorbed 20 per cent of gross income and been a source of earnings volatility, which would have been exacerbated by gearing. Practical implications – Expenditure must take place to help UK REITs maintain and renew their real estate portfolios. In view of this, investors should moderate expectations of a high and stable income return, although it may well still be so relative to alternative investments. Originality/value – Previous literature on depreciation has not quantified amounts spent on portfolios to keep depreciation at those rates. Nor, to our knowledge, has its ideas been placed in the indirect investor context.