The growth of private property vehicles in the UK: causes and conditions

The UK private indirect real estate market has seen a rapid growth in the last seven years. The gross asset value (GAV) of the private property vehicle (PPV) market has about tripled from a GAV of £22.6bn in 1998 to a GAV of £67.1 billion at the end of 2005 (OPC, 2006). Although this trend of growing syndication of real estate is not only a UK phenomenon, the rate of growth has been significantly faster in the UK. For example the German open-ended funds have grown over the same period from €50.4bn to €85.1bn (BVI, 2006). In the US the market capitalization of equity real estate investment trusts (REIT) has grown 155% since 1999 to US$ 301bn (NAREIT, 2006). Each jurisdiction is offering different formats to invest indirectly into real estate but at the core all these vehicles are the same in that they provide a different route for investors to access real estate. In the UK, although the range of ‘products’ is now quite diverse, all structures have in common the ‘wrapping’ of property assets into a multi-investor vehicle. This paper examines the nature, pattern and process of market growth in PPVs and constructs a series of associations between causes and effects to explain this market shift.

Private property vehicles: the valuation of interests in limited partnerships

This paper examines the extent to which the valuation of partial interests in private property vehicles should be closely aligned to the valuation of the underlying assets. A sample of vehicle managers and investors replied to a questionnaire on the qualities of private property vehicles relative to direct property investment. Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique the relative importance of the various advantages and disadvantages of investment in private property vehicles relative to acquisition of the underlying assets are assessed. The results suggest that the main drivers of the growth of the this sector have been the ability for certain categories of investor to acquire interests in assets that are normally inaccessible due to the amount of specific risk. Additionally, investors have been attracted by the ability to ‘outsource’ asset management in a manner that minimises perceived agency problems. It is concluded that deviations from NAV should be expected given that investment in private property vehicles differs from investment in the underlying assets in terms of liquidity, management structures, lot size, financial structure inter alia. However, reliably appraising the pricing implications of these variations is likely to be extremely difficult due to the lack of secondary market trading and vehicle heterogeneity.