Choppy CMBS Market Hoping For Resurgence

By Charley Babb

CMBS issuance for the first quarter of 2016 was roughly half of the production for the same period in 2015. This has been counter-intuitive for most of us in the commercial real estate lending community as reasonably positive US economic performance combined with significant CMBS legacy maturities should have resulted in 2016 outpacing last year’s production. Many experienced CMBS borrowers are asking “what is going on here?”

In contrast to the previous cycle when aggressive underwriting led to a “bubble”, this time around there are other factors contributing to the instability and uncertainty in the market that perplexes many of our clients. In December, we saw the culmination of fourth quarter spread widening to the point where various participants were unprofitable on their originations. This has led to a reduction in the number of CMBS lenders to under 30 at this point from over 45 at the peak in 2015. Mid-sized origination shops are being squeezed out by larger institutions that are securitizing more frequently.

CMBS bond buyers continue to impact pricing as they weigh the relative values of widened spreads on corporate bonds vis-à-vis CMBS issues. While senior tranches are pricing close to levels that were seen last August, bonds lower in the capital stack continue to lag and the credit curve remains steeper than last summer.

Further uncertainty on the part of issuers lies ahead as the environment becomes more regulated. Regulation AB, Basel III, Dodd-Frank and risk sharing rules will definitely impact the market. You say you don’t know what all of those are; simply read them as “more government regulations intended to ‘safeguard’ the consumer, but resulting in making it more expensive to borrow money.”

cmbs markets

As a result, borrowers who have traditionally looked to CMBS lenders to finance or refinance their properties have elected to look to other capital sources in the past six months. Re-trades on pricing and terms have led to a preference for certainty of execution over leverage. Life insurance companies, banks, and private lenders have provided debt in the Q1 2016 that would have been financed in the CMBS market during the same period last year. There is a catch, however. Some market observers have noted that these alternative sources to CMBS may reach their respective capacity for debt issuance by the end of the third quarter. This may set in motion a potential liquidity crunch late in the year.

Borrowers facing Q4 maturities may be forced to settle for a CMBS execution should lack of liquidity from other sources turn out to be a reality. This is likely good news for a lagging CMBS market as pricing should be higher leading to a return to profitability and hopefully more certainty of execution. That said, fewer options for borrowers will likely provide less favorable terms for them at that juncture.

In conclusion, if a borrower has flexibility in their timing, now might be a better time to access the capital markets rather than later in the year.

Metropolitan Capital Advisors seeks to assist their clients with their commercial real estate financing needs. We welcome the prospect to evaluate your new acquisitions and development opportunities.

The author, Charley Babb, is a Senior Director and Principal in the Denver office of Metropolitan Capital Advisors. Contact Charley Babb at

Posted on by admin in CMBS, Commercial Real Estate Finance Comments Off on Choppy CMBS Market Hoping For Resurgence

Predevelopment Risk, What Is It?

MCA was recently retained by a sophisticated client to arrange a construction loan and secure a joint-venture equity partner for a very large project in North Texas.  The project cost exceeded $100,000,000 and the capital structure was complex, with multiple providers, including a public bond component.  The timing of the project required that the committed capital fund a portion of its investment before the majority of the predevelopment work was completed, with a ground breaking estimated to be 6 to 8 months after the committed capital “closed” on the project.

Predevelopment Risk

The Pre-Development Stage, or the early stage of a project, centers around due diligence, research, confirming entitlements and permitting.  As such, investing at this stage carries the greatest and most varied risks, because there are many unknowns.  Market analysis and feasibility studies can assist with potential project viability.  Other risks include site plans, development plans, and building plans, permitting, project costs and in rare cases, arranging construction financing.  It is not typical for a joint venture equity partner to close in advance of a construction loan commitment so that is why I slot construction financing as a rare instance.

Since the pre-development stage is the riskiest, pre-development costs are usually financed by the project sponsor or if the project is large enough, the joint-venture equity partner that might get taken out by the construction loan.  Investments made during this stage, therefore, provide for higher returns than those made during the later stages.   One important note for equity investors is that obtaining construction financing from a bank or other lender is a very rigorous process, and if a developer already has a construction loan arranged, it usually means that a number of major hurdles have been cleared.

Perhaps the greatest impediments to capital formation during pre-development are zoning/permitting and project cost verification.  Zoning and permitting can be a cause for delays in ground breaking.  The building permit application process is relatively speedy compared to the land use process because it is supposed to be based on objective criteria.  For this reason, it is less likely to delay fundraising.

The last milestone in the pre-development stage is the confirmation from a reputable General Contractor of the project hard costs.  This concept can cause for a real show stopper during a joint-venture equity agreement negotiation.  The joint-venture equity does not want to take risk that the project cost is higher than what the developer proforma suggests.  The project cost directly affects the project profit.  Joint-venture equity does not want to be surprised during pre-development, when the project they thought they had committed to might actually cost significantly more.  In most cases, the General Contractor cannot accurately cost a project until a full set of Schematic Design plans are completed.  This endeavor can be costly depending on the project size.  Therein lies the conundrum: how does the joint venture equity recoup its investment into the predevelopment stage if the project cost exceeds a level of viability?

That question is usually followed by a swift answer….the equity doesn’t jump into the deal until the sponsor is able to provide assurances that the project cost is as outlined in the investment brochure/business plan.

Based on the feedback from institutional equity investors in the marketplace, MCA was able to determine which investors were willing to accept pre-development risk and who was not.  Setting aside the pre-development aspect, the project had extremely favorable above-market returns and economic metrics.  After sourcing approximately 75 sources of capital, the majority of the capital prospects would not consider investing in a deal prior to the issuance of a Guaranteed Maximum Price Contract (“GMAX” or “GMP”) from a reputable general contractor.  Simply stated, the majority of the joint venture equity available in the market was willing to bet on the deal outcome as well as market conditions; however, they were not willing to bet that the sponsor’s costs were accurate absent of the GMAX contract.  When a reputable contractor with a strong balance sheet guaranties construction costs not to exceed a pre-agreed upon amount, it is essentially a credit enhancement to the project and can, in most cases, mitigate the potential for cost-overruns (save for change orders).

MCA was successful in identifying several candidates that, via various different forms of “structure” on the joint venture, were able to stomach the pre-development risks.  However, those equity providers generally priced in the pre-development risks in the equity waterfall returns and required a higher IRR or Equity Multiple threshold before the sponsor could earn their promoted interest.

Developers should know that in order to negotiate the most favorable terms from the joint venture equity market, the pre-development risks need to be eliminated and/or covered by the sponsor.  Putting the joint venture equity in a position to fund at the construction loan closing and ground breaking of the construction, will yield the best economic deal toward the sponsor as well as increase the appeal to prospective joint venture equity providers to the project.

The author, Todd McNeill, is a Director and Principal in the Dallas office of Metropolitan Capital Advisors. Todd can be easily reached at

Posted on by admin in Commercial Real Estate Finance Comments Off on Predevelopment Risk, What Is It?

Metropolitan Capital Advisors Arranges a $14,440,000 Fixed-Rate Permanent Loan

Metropolitan Capital Advisors has arranged a $14,440,000 fixed-rate permanent loan on a Portfolio of two office properties located in the Dallas Metroplex. The Portfolio is controlled by Rainier Asset Management Company—a subsidiary of Dallas-based Rainer Companies. The ownership is struc-tured as a Tenant-In-Common (“TIC”). The refinance was sized to 65% LTV by a Fort Worth based bank at 4.95% fixed for 5 years.


Left: Lakeview Center; RIght: Soujourn Medical & Office Center

Lakeview Center (Coppell, TX), is a 101, 426 SF single-story office building built in 1999. Lakeview is currently 100% leased by six (6) tenants, with major tenants including Beacon Health Options, Circle K Stores, and Caliber Home Loans.

Sojourn Medical and Office Center (Addison, TX), built in 2000, is currently 87% leased by three (3) tenants, with The U.S. Oncology Center as the major tenant. Rainier anticipates the remainder of the space to be leased within the next few months.

Since 1992, Metropolitan Capital Advisors has closed in excess of $12 billion of debt and equity transactions. National Real Estate Investor Magazine has consistently ranked MCA as one of the top CRE Financial Intermediaries in the US. MCA completed over $600,000,000 of commercial real estate financing during 2015.

For More Information Contact:

Sunny Sajnani


Posted on by admin in Commercial Real Estate Finance, Commercial Real Estate Funding, News Comments Off on Metropolitan Capital Advisors Arranges a $14,440,000 Fixed-Rate Permanent Loan