We see a lot of confusion in the market around when to begin negotiations. It’s not an insignificant consideration. In fact, when you begin can make a huge difference in the outcome. It’s understandable that tenants would not know when to start. Brokers are not always keen to start at the right time, since compensation is derived by transacting and the closer the tenant is to lease expiration, the faster it will need to transact (and the fewer options it will have). Good for the broker, bad for the tenant. This creates a misalignment of interests that discourages thoughtful consultation on the front end – the more time a broker spends on a project, the lower the compensation.
Throughout 2020, the prevailing sentiment among investors in the San Francisco office market was one of relative optimism. After all, despite the fact tenants were prohibited from occupying their buildings, they continued to collect full rent. The buildings were full, with vacancy hovering around 4%. Sure, companies weren’t happy about paying for space they couldn’t use, but business was good. In many cases the tech sector (which makes up most of San Francisco’s office occupancy) was booming due to an even greater reliance on and usage of tech caused by pandemic driven changes in how people were living. Throughout the course of 2020 there was no reason for San Francisco investors to panic, as few (if any) office occupiers were showing signs of developing long-term hybrid or remote-first strategies. Most were simply focused on solving for ongoing operations as a temporary reaction to the pandemic. Yet early indicators did point to a future in which companies would be shedding office space, as some expiring leases were not replaced. This, coupled with the addition of new supply, caused a big increase in vacancy to nearly 12% by year end. Despite this large uptick, the brunt of the sluggish demand dynamic was being felt in the sublease markets, where rental economics more accurately reflected the true state of the market. Despite a total closing of the office market in 2020, average asking rents ended the year off just 6% from the pre-pandemic high.
In the years leading up to the pandemic, most medium and small companies defined their office space need based on headcount (current and projected), space programming, and industry/sector norms. The exercise was mostly formulaic. The primary differences in the offices of a small, regional law firm compared to those of an AM Law 100 firm would be scale, the cost of finishes, and the quality of the building and views. It was planning for the same outcome, just at different levels on the cost spectrum. Companies having a larger portfolio of offices would typically create a “workplace strategy” that included guidelines around programming (e.g., space layout, office size, critical adjacencies, growth factor, finishes, FF&E, etc.). These guidelines could then be used to inform the real estate process across geography.
Negotiations are always about (or should always be about) this or that. There’s always something else, maybe that something else is nothing (as in sometimes the best thing to do is nothing at all). Decisions made without proper consideration of all relevant alternative scenarios are decisions made poorly. As important, in the context of office lease negotiations, the best negotiated outcomes are directly correlated to the extent to which we understand the alternatives of the landlord counterparty. This is a bit counter intuitive, allow us to explain.
A little AI distraction to cheer your day (and relieve us of yet another discussion about workplace). Ever wandered through the streets and felt like you've stepped into the future? With their undeniable presence here in San Francisco, the driverless car is quickly becoming the most prominent representation of AI in our daily lives. If you spend any time in San Francisco neighborhoods, you can’t miss them. The other day, as I chatted with a neighbor, I counted 6 autonomous vehicles casually cruise by our front door within a span of 10 minutes. Intriguing, right? And today, in a twist of irony, I was held up by one. Blocked by a double-parked UPS truck, the driverless car hesitated, unsure about navigating into the lane of oncoming traffic. Of course, all the drivers in the opposing lane weren’t too keen to make space for the driverless car, as one normally would (or at least the more decent among us would) for a human-driven vehicle. Hence, we waited.
Imagine you invested in an office building in San Francisco in 2015. At the time, the building was 95% occupied. You paid $750/sf for the building and secured a loan on 50% of the value at the rate of 3.5%. 50% of the building’s tenant leases rolled in 2023/2024, a fact you underwrote as opportunity, opportunity to increase net operating income by achieving higher rents. Then the pandemic hit.
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.
It’s Not Really About the Office
We’re experiencing a behavioral shift which is changing one of the most pervasive social institutions of our time; namely, how, and where white-collar workers work. Few societal constructs impact individuals, or society, as much as where and how we work. The collective dialogue about this change, especially between employer and employee, has at times been challenging. However, we’re now entering a more hopeful phase of the conversation, one which promises to finally move us to a new place, letting go of the idea that we must revert to pre-pandemic norms.
The San Francisco office market consists of 86M sf. Currently, 18.7M sf is available, 13.7M direct from landlords and 5M for sublease. This means that 72.3M sf is leased and not being marketed for sublease. We can assume there will not be much (if any) new supply added to the market over the next several years. Demand will be the key factor in determining the market’s trajectory.
Mixed messages. Q3 was the best leasing quarter since the pandemic began, with gross leasing activity just under 1.8M SF, above the historical average of 1.6M SF. Vacancy and rental economics were essentially flat. Yet while the overall dynamic implies stability, the fact remains we have 6.8M SF of sublease space available, most of which is scheduled to become the landlord’s problem in the next ~ 2 years. This will do 2 things: 1. it will increase direct vacancy which is currently 12.6%, and 2, it will cause landlords to officially engage in a difficult market where undifferentiated spaces and assets will be forced to compete by lowering rental economics. Where landlords are sitting on assets that lack best in class amenities, they will be underwriting the cost/benefit of investing in such amenities vs. doing nothing; or, where the cost is too high, exiting the investment.
When I began my real estate career in San Francisco in the early 1990s, office buildings were mostly owned by private investors using a relatively small selection of institutional capital partners. The Shorenstein Company, whom I worked for from 1990 – 1995, was a great example. At that time, they were the largest owner of office buildings in San Francisco, holding 11M sf. During those days, most owners, including Shorenstein, employed a simple strategy centered on preserving tenants while minimizing cash requirements (funding of tenant improvements, etc.). In most cases, the first choice was to keep the existing tenant by offering a rental rate which was discounted to market. If that failed and the tenant moved out, the next step was to undercut the market by lowering the rental rate to steal a tenant away from another building. The goal was to buy and manage the asset to generate maximum cash flow, which the investors counted on each quarter. Importantly, the majority of assets were owned by this type of investor. But by the mid-1990s, the nature of office ownership was beginning a period of significant change which would materially impact rental economics for decades to come.
This week we’re writing about an old topic that surfaces every now and again, usually when we come across a tenant who has chosen to negotiate a lease or lease renewal on its own. Why would a tenant do so? I think the most common reason is perceived savings. This scenario seems to play out most often in buildings owned by private investors (e.g., not institutions). Buildings where the landlord calls the tenant directly and proposes to renew the lease at a discount if the tenant negotiates without a broker.
This is a common question for tenants looking to negotiate lease extensions in the current market environment. Intuitively, they expect their occupancy cost to decrease due to the effects of the pandemic (e.g., higher vacancy, less demand, etc.). However, they often fail to realize the point of impact, or the base values on which market softness has its affect, are values that were in place just prior to the pandemic, not values from 5+ years ago when they signed the original lease…
This San Francisco office market report is provided compliments of Samantha S. Low and Greg Fogg, Co-Founders of TenantSee. TenantSee is a tenant real estate product combining a team of subject-matter experts with powerful technology to make tenant real estate smarter, faster, and better. Our report is intended to provide you the tenant, with meaningful insights, not raw data.
There’s always been a large gap between what companies need from an office and what the market offers. Over the past decade, as the coworking market rapidly evolved, landlords were forced to rethink customer experience, resulting in an “amenity war” that has made many office buildings more valuable and attractive to occupiers. But despite new lounge spaces, high quality exercise facilities and other project-based amenities, the nature of the office lease commitment in major US metros has remained unchanged. The product is still designed to lock in tenants for the longest possible term at the highest possible price, while minimizing the amount of capital the landlord must spend to win the tenant. Addressing the gap between occupier and landlord objectives may be what’s next in the evolution of the office.
This San Francisco office market report is provided compliments of Samantha S. Low and Greg Fogg, Co-Founders of TenantSee. TenantSee is a tenant real estate product combining a team of subject-matter experts with powerful technology to make tenant real estate smarter, faster, and better. Our report is intended to provide you the tenant, with meaningful insights, not raw data.
To our clients and loyal followers…In a departure from our normal practice, we’ve chosen to write a letter to close out what has been a most unusual year. With respect to office space, it’s no stretch to describe 2020 as the most impactful year of the past century. What changed? In a word: everything.
The Covid-19 pandemic is not only the most significant public health challenge of our time, it is also massively disrupting the way we live, socialize and work. While corporations navigate a rapidly changing business landscape, they’re also forced to solve for new operational challenges they’ve never seen before. This is a highly complex time. Among the most significant challenges is that of creating optimal workplace solutions that foster employee health and wellness, are sensitive to the differentiated employee needs and maximize employee engagement/productivity.
Over the past decade as demand surged and supply became increasingly limited, office rents rose uniformly across the bay area. But now that demand is waning and supply rising, don’t expect landlords to make downward price adjustments in unison. Landlord behavior varies by type of landlord (private capital, REIT, institutional fund), debt and equity, stability of tenancy and cost basis. While product type may be comparable (e.g., class A office buildings in the San Francisco financial district), individual owner motivations reflect the highly differentiated interplay of these variables.~
Recessionary pressures often result in reduced hiring and/or lay offs, leading to excess office space. The COVID - 19 Pandemic has forced many San Francisco tenants to look to the sublease market to mitigate the expense of excess office space. Over the past decade it has been relatively easy for occupiers to secure subtenants, often at a profit. Yet in times of macro-economic uncertainty, many tenants are surprised to learn their space is worth less (sometimes considerably less) than their cost basis. This is one of those times.
Among the many reasons we created TenantSee is our belief that tenant real estate services should be full-scope, easy for occupiers to access and delivered with total transparency. Most real estate service providers simply don’t have the scale to address the entire spectrum of occupier need. The handful that have such scale require tenant clients to navigate a maze of siloed service lines that are poorly integrated with conflicting agendas. TenantSee, powered by Cushman & Wakefield, offers occupiers industry-leading resources accessible through an award-winning technology platform from which services and outcomes are delivered and measured with transparency. ~
Technology has had a growing impact on how corporations think about labor, facilities and cost. In particular, companies have found that they don’t always need to have a physical presence to be present. And where they are physically present, they seek deeper understanding of how to design their facility to maximize employee engagement. In short, the scale and design of the modern workplace is rapidly changing in response to technology.
