TenantSee Weekly: Translating the Lease
Recently, we completed a lease for a client in a small San Francisco building. The transaction was negotiated to provide our client with a tenant improvement allowance, and the right to manage their construction. Because the client is a design firm, this approach suited them well. They understand design and construction and can leverage relationships to mitigate cost. The ownership of this building is not an institution, its management team lacks the sophistication you would otherwise see with professionals working for larger institutional owners. The lease provided the landlord with the right to approve the plans prior to construction, but it notably lacked a specific mechanism for communicating such approval. Our client provided detailed plans. They received a few minor comments/questions to which they responded promptly. Otherwise, the landlord agreed to the project schedule and let them commence their construction – implicit approval. During the construction, the client invited the management team to attend weekly meetings, to walk the space and generally sought to keep them informed (under no obligation to do so). Despite a few bumps along the way (the building had non-compliance in a few areas and a small amount of hazmat was discovered), the project was successfully completed. However, after moving into the space, the landlord sent a letter stating numerous elements of the construction had been completed without its approval, and the space must be restored at the end of the lease term (an undertaking which would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars). Naturally, our client was concerned. Thankfully, they sent us the letter and asked for our guidance.
TenantSee Weekly: Timing the Downturn
Since the pandemic, the cost to lease San Francisco office space, but for the most premium segment of the market, has steadily declined. The pace of decline is beginning to accelerate as more landlords capitulate to unprecedented vacancy and reduced demand, just as more companies are (finally) taking a longer-range approach to workplace. For occupiers, this provides a welcome respite from the relentless effects of a decades-long dynamic in which the office market was both too tight and too expensive.
TenantSee Weekly: The Lingering Fog of a Bull Market
The Lingering Fog of a Bull Market.
Advisors on the right side of a bull market end up looking good, no matter what they do. This was certainly the case for landlord advisors in the San Francisco office market for the ~10 years leading up to the pandemic, a time when you could win for losing, as the deal you failed to make was often (quickly) replaced by a new deal at better rental economics due to rapidly appreciating rents. Today, both landlord advisors and the investors they advise are, in some cases, suffering from the lingering effects of the bull market.
TenantSee Weekly: Meet WALT
WALT, or weighted average lease term, is an essential metric in the valuation of office buildings as it forecasts the stability of future cash flow. WALT was less important back when office markets like San Francisco were seeing aggressive year over year rent growth. Back then vacancy was worth more than leased space, the theory being a buyer could take advantage of vacant space to capture higher rent (necessary to justify inflated pricing which baked in aggressive rent growth assumptions). However, in the broader historical context of valuation, the idea that vacancy is worth more than occupancy is antithetical to defining value. Indeed, the more prevalent (and logical) approach to value hinges on the quality and duration of the net operating income. Of course, this approach is less sexy as it disables a seller’s capacity to “sell the dream”. The buyer is buying stability and yield, both of which are measurable going in.
TenantSee Weekly: How to Protect From Landlord Default?
Office building owners are facing the most challenging environment of the past 50 years due to substantial reductions in demand for space. The shift in demand is not cyclical; it’s a systemic shift caused by changes in how work is done in the information economy. In other words, investors can’t count on a swift reversion to the norm. This dynamic is playing out globally. There are geographic differences, but the fundamental trend is the same. The impact on office investors has been swift and brutal, leaving many in a precarious financial position.
TenantSee Weekly: Sublease, Terminate, or Restructure
Subleasing is the most common approach occupiers take in mitigating the cost of underutilized space. Yet in San Francisco, it has become increasingly difficult to sublease office space. With recoveries ranging from 0 to 25%, companies must consider the full spectrum of options. Remember, too, sublease recoveries can be expensive to execute (fees and concessions); and, in subleasing, the occupier takes on a variety of risks that can prove costly (e.g., subtenant default).
TenantSee Weekly: Q2 2023 The Tenant's Perspective
Occupiers continue to add sublease space to an already saturated market, and to downsize their occupancy requirement at lease expiration. Market participants, including investors, are now accepting as fact the new ways of using office space will result in less demand for their product. During the first couple of years of the pandemic, investors, enjoying record high levels of occupancy and strong cash flow, naturally chose to believe in a future narrative that included a rebound to 2019 demand levels. Their optimistic (if not realistic) outlook had them waking up in 2023 with 7m to 10m square feet of demand and 4% vacancy. But it’s now clear this is not how things are playing out.
TenantSee Weekly: The Price of Innovation
In San Francisco, there’s not much standing between a near-term future in which office vacancies spike to 40% or higher. By not much, we mean demand for office space. What’s interesting is the cause. Many focus on the battle between employer and employee in which employers want the employee back in the office and the employee wants to work remotely. But it’s not that simple. Post-pandemic, employees (especially younger generations) are more inclined to embrace the benefits of technology which enable work to be done from anywhere and make it less compelling, even illogical, to commute to the office. No, this isn’t just about whether you like or don’t like being in an office. It’s about the ways in which tech has advanced to change work and generational differences in the adoption of and comfort with such technologies. Technology changes things. It’s changing the construct of white-collar work, and in the midst of such change there will be winners and losers. The fate of office markets, indeed of the office building as a product, hinges not on resolution of the remote work debate; but, rather, on the pace at which we adopt existing technologies and innovate new ones
TenantSee Weekly: Unusual Times
Want to know how strange things have gotten in the San Francisco office market? An empty office building now costs less on a per square foot basis than it will cost to build new interior space in the same building. Cushman & Wakefield’s Project Development Services team has recently released an Office Fit Out Cost Guide (report is here) which indicates the average cost to build new space from shell in San Francisco stands at $222/SF. Now consider that a building like 350 California Street is rumored to be getting buyer interest at around $200/SF.
TenantSee Weekly: Swimming Naked: The Risk of Non-Performing Vacancy
Over the past decade the San Francisco office market was among the most desirable global markets for institutional office investment. Valuations increased by 100%+, and many assets traded…some multiple times. Even those that didn’t trade were often refinanced at substantially higher values, enabling the equity partners to take out significant amounts of capital. Today values are dropping as demand for office space in San Francisco is at historical lows, causing rental economics to decline rapidly. This presents unique challenges that are (typically) not entirely obvious to occupiers; namely, a full understanding of the debt and equity stack and the landlord’s ability to perform.
TenantSee Weekl: Change is Hard
While change is generally a constant state, big changes in one area can have the effect of spurring many additional changes in related areas. In most cases we’re not very good at forecasting all the add-on changes that may follow the initial change. We’re like low skill chess players, unable to see the full spectrum of opportunity and vulnerability created by our moves. And when big change requires us to take action, we often seek the comfort of doing what everyone else does as opposed to formulating our own approach. In the business world, this is a byproduct of risk aversion, or what can be called CYA at scale. Our corporate structures don’t typically provide incentive for creative, individualized responses to business challenges.
