Construction Finance

<html><body>
Last week I was assisting a client with her dual occupancy construction finance. We have Development Application (DA) and Construction Certificate (CC) consents and the builder has issued their Building Contract. The bank now has all the documentation required to unconditionally approve her construction finance.
They had conditionally approved her loan a few weeks earlier after verifying income and assessing serviceability and all the other stuff they do after you sign a mountain of loan docs. The next step was for the bank to value the two dwellings and then they could finalise the construction loan.
Her bank did an "As if Complete" valuation. This is also known as a Tentative on Completion valuation. It's when the bank value the project before it's constructed but based on how they think it will be completed.  lf it's more than one dwelling - a dual occupancy or multi unit project - they look for a value of the property '"in one line". This means not subdivided. If the bank had to sell the dwellings all on the original title, what would they get for them?
The number one, massive, biggest, fattest, most frustrating issue with this type of valuation  is that there are generally NO sales references. Who in their right mind would sell in one line if given the choice of making far more profit by subdividing?
When there are no sales references in one line, it is up to the valuer to determine how they discount the end values if the dwellings were on their own title.  Valuers must take legal responsibility for their opinion. The valuer needs to cover themselves in the instance that the bank may need to fire sell the properties together on one title of land.
The process of subdivision after building works are complete, whilst not complicated, can take a number of months to get to the registration stage. Yet the builder's final payment is due on completion of construction.
The Australian Property Institute publish a very interesting document on valuation standards. It's 395 pages long. That's how complicated the valuation process can be.  It covers valuations for different purposes such as market, mortgage and loan security, rating and taxing, for compulsory acquisitions, for assessing rental value, for property plant and material, for insurance purposes and to use in financial reports. 
In this instance due to no direct sales the valuer will possibly use a gross realisation of the dwellings assuming they are subdivided and on separate titles and then deduct a profit and risk factor, holding and selling costs to arrive at their valuation figure. 
They may also take into consideration a capitalisation of the gross income and use an acceptable market capitalisation rate or cap rate. 
In my opinion, without actual sales references of properties sold in one line, the valuer will be super conservative in their calculations and hence, a low On Completion valuation may be received. This is one of the perils of construction finance and so a buffer of cash should be put aside in case the construction loan requires supplementing. 
Applying for and then finally receiving approval of, construction finance can be one of the most lengthy phases of a development project. It can take longer than obtaining the DA consent and in some cases, has taken longer than the construction phase itself!  So be careful to allow, not only enough extra funds, but also time for your construction finance.
Jo Chivers is chief executive officer of property development project managers <a href="https://www.propertybloom.com.au/about" target="_blank">Property Bloom</a>.
</body></html>

jochivers-wq5Bp59R5a

The complicated process of valuation: Jo Chivers

<html><body>
<img src="/images/2016/03/Holdencapital_banner.jpg" alt="" width="655" height="138">
SPONSORED POST
Currently we are seeing a constant barrage of articles from all sectors of the press and social media regarding the onset of an impending financial readjustment or even a collapse, with some arguing it will be worse than the last GFC.
There are many areas being pointed to as the likely root causes or triggers for this financial Armageddon and most are driven by international triggers well beyond our control, however the potential ramifications on our markets are being touted as devastating and even their potential occurrences are impacting our day to day business confidence.
One key area of influence that we have touched on previously is the impact of the post GFC capital requirements on our banks and how that impacts their appetite for construction lending. It is important to understand why this is happening but of more importance is what you need to do to ensure your business is not adversely impacted.
While the changes in bank policies towards construction lending will fluctuate within certain low risk parameters, these overriding regulatory requirements are not temporary responses to a specific event; they represent an ongoing constraint that will impact the pricing and structure of all future loan transactions and represent a new world order in construction finance.
Fundamentally this is because Australians have an expectation that their savings accounts will always be there when things get tough and they expect their politicians to ensure that this is so. No political leader wants to be explaining why they allowed unscrupulous lenders to lose the hard earned savings of their Mum and Dad depositors.
Accordingly, Governments of both persuasions continue to apply pressure on the major banks via the available regulatory levers to ensure that their contingent exposure to underwriting a portion of the banks deposit funds is appropriately controlled and that the banks risks are “well managed”.
History tells us that during booms, lenders can get over-excited and sometimes leads to being careless in the race to secure a share of the profits being generated as markets run hot, and then as it peaks and the signs are there that risks are increasing, the temptation to do “one more deal” often leads to losses.
The regulatory requirements being imposed on the banks are designed to minimise this risk and this is demonstrated by the recent changes seen their attitude towards construction lending that has been substantially pared back to ensure that they maintain appropriate capital reserve exposures.
Putting aside the question of the profitability of these types of loans to the major banks which we have also addressed in a previous paper, all bank loans of this type are now assessed on deal-by-deal basis with all the relevant factors input into a complex risk model in order to monitor the banks risk profile as prescribed by ASIC. As a consequence, there are far fewer “discretionary” decisions available to your bank manager when he deals with your application, which also reflects the lower risk appetite now prevailing amongst the major banks.
As a result of all this, developers can no longer expect their regular bank will provide the necessary funding just because “they have always done it in the past”. 
As many are learning, the fact that you may have had a 30+ year sound relationship with your bank is of no consequence and does not guarantee they will lend you money when you ask them for it, or on the terms they previously have.
With the banks limiting their exposure to the sector and pricing risk far more keenly than in the past, there is now a wide range of alternative providers of debt, equity and all the permutations between entering the market.
The challenge for tody’s developer is identifying which ones best fit both their business and specific project needs. This in turn requires a readjustment of expectations as to what constitutes an appropriate finance cost when assessing project viability.
While all this sounds like the industry has become a lot more complicated, and in some ways it has, it also means there are far more options available to Developers, enabling them to fulfil their project ambitions and maximise their available capital.
As a consequence, knowledge of all these competing options is a critical prerequisite to getting the best outcome. Even more importantly, engaging the right finance consultant who can navigate your transaction through to a successful conclusion, just as you would with any specialised requirement such as town planning or engineering solutions, is the key to securing funding and ensuring a profitable outcome for your next development.
As always, your success is directly related to how well you adapt and deal with change and as the saying goes, there is nothing surer than change. So make sure that you are setting your expectations at the appropriate levels and getting sound advice.
This article was written by Dan Holden of HoldenCAPITAL, who are a bespoke construction finance firm, they arrange construction finance and invest in projects through their equity fund, Queen Street INVEST. To discuss your project finance requirement please call (07) 3171 4200 or visit HoldenCAPITAL <a href="https://www.holdencapital.com.au/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

firstname-zEygzUaHDN

Development finance new world order: Resetting your expectations for success

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
In late 2015, the major banks began to feel the heat from APRA regarding their exposure to residential investor loans and how their appetite for this type of funding was driving new development product and impacting the market. 
Prior to this inevitable crack down by ASIC and APRA in their respective spheres of responsibility, the major banks enjoyed a long and prosperous period where they were largely unchallenged in the construction finance sector. 
However, now we are seeing changes as the capital requirements imposed on the banks start to take effect. Importantly, all political parties support the continued application of pressure via the regulatory levers to ensure that their contingent exposure to underwriting the banks deposit funds is appropriately controlled and “well managed”. This is because Australians have an expectation that their savings accounts will always be there when things get tough and they expect their politicians to ensure this is so. No political leader wants to be explaining why they allowed unscrupulous bankers to lose the hard earned savings of their Mum and Dad constituents. 
These overriding regulatory requirements are not temporary responses to a specific event; they represent an ongoing constraint that will impact the pricing and structure of all future construction loans, resulting in permanent changes to bank lending policies which will now fluctuate within certain lower risk parameters. 
This represents a new world order in construction finance and has been clearly demonstrated with all four banks being either closed for “new to bank” business; or, operating with significantly reduced appetite and lending parameters over the past 10 months. 
These loans are assessed individually via a complex risk model that requires all the relevant factors to be input to ensure the banks satisfy and maintain the accepted risk levels required of them by APRA. As a consequence, there are far fewer “discretionary” decisions available to your bank manager when he deals with an application. 
Developers can no longer expect their house bank to provide the necessary funding because “they have always done it in the past”. As many are learning, the fact that they may have had a long-term relationship with their bank is of no consequence and doesn’t guarantee an ability to borrow funds on the same terms that they have become accustomed to. 
With the banks now limiting their exposure to the sector and pricing risk far more keenly than in the past, a wide range of alternative debt providers and equity players are entering the market or broadening their existing reach. The challenge for today’s developer is identifying which ones best fit both their business and specific project needs. This in turn requires a readjustment of expectations as to what constitutes an appropriate finance cost when assessing project viability as the cost of these funds is generally between 2-3% higher. 
While all this sounds like the industry has become a lot more complicated, and in some ways it has, it also means there are far more options available to developers, enabling them to fulfil their project ambitions and maximise their available capital. Just as the housing mortgage market was completely restructured with the coming of the wholesale funds and brokerage structures, we expect to see the construction finance industry undergo a similar metamorphosis, ultimately with similar positive results for developers. 
With the re-emergence of various second tier lenders, investment funds, managed trusts and private lenders all vying for a share of what will continue to be a growingly sophisticated market, the challenge for the governments and the regulators will be ensuring that Mum and Dad investors in search of better returns get the appropriate levels of protection that their bank funds do. 
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
This article appeared in Holden CAPITAL's Special Edition Market Update - Winter 2016 Insights from the Front Line of Construction Finance .
This article was written by Dan Holden of HoldenCAPITAL, who are a bespoke construction finance firm, they arranged over $300 million of construction finance in 2015 across 52 projects. To discuss your project finance requirement please call (07) 3171 4200 or visit <a href="https://www.holdencapital.com.au/" target="_blank">www.holdencapital.com.au</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
 
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Construction finance industry likely to undergo metamorphosis: Holden Capital

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
To most within the development sector, the world of construction finance beyond the major banks is largely opaque, with no clear signage or yellow pages directory to guide developers in the right direction to find the best fit for their business and project needs. 
There are a multitude of sophisticated providers of private construction or site acquisition money available to be tapped into, however most do not have a front door as such and they certainly don’t have a team of business development executives who pound the pavement looking for deals to invest in. 
They rely on origination businesses like HoldenCAPITAL to source and present the opportunities to them, which is why we commit a lot of our time to engaging with them to gain a clear understanding of what they will and won’t invest in and the terms on which they will do so. 
A point we often make to clients is that you wouldn’t waste your time trying to negotiate an important town planning issue without input from an experience town planner in order to draw on their experience, relationships and understanding of current approval authority expectations. 
Similarly, we see ourselves in the same light, tapping into the knowledge gained from settling over $340 million in new development transactions over the past 12 months and our accreditation with over 100 lenders to ensure we secure the best possible financial outcome for our clients. 
In fact, our list of lenders and equity providers is growing at the rate of about one a week and of these, some 87 are currently active in one form or another with Investor Funds, Mezzanine Lenders and Private Lenders accounting for over 70 percent of them. 
<a href="/images/2016/08/30/Screen%20Shot%202016-08-30%20at%2012.50.54%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/08/30/Screen%20Shot%202016-08-30%20at%2012.50.54%20PM.png" alt="">
In particular, we are seeing a growing level of demand for and supply of, Stretch Senior funding options where lenders are prepared to provide up to 86% of the Total Development Cost, in return for a total interest cost in the order of 11 percent but with more relaxed terms and conditions. This is particularly evident in the area of pre-sale debt cover, where there is scope to reduce this figure to well below the 100 percent+ required by the banks. 
The demand supply equation for construction funds tends to react quickly as evidenced when the major and second tier banks started to withdraw from the market under regulatory pressure and we saw increased demand on those smaller funds and private lenders to fill the gap. After a flurry of activity many were tapped out and we found ourselves looking further afield to meet the demand. 
Following interstate visits and trips to Asia we now have a significant number of new sources and as a result, we are finding that the capital supply is meeting demand and with a steadily growing supply of mandated transactions these new lenders are stepping up to meet the demand. 
This article was written by Dan Holden of HoldenCAPITAL, who are a bespoke construction finance firm, they arranged over $300 million of construction finance in 2015 across 52 projects. To discuss your project finance requirement please call (07) 3171 4200 or visit <a href="https://www.holdencapital.com.au/" target="_blank">www.holdencapital.com.au</a>
</body></html>

The world of construction finance without banks: HoldenCAPITAL

<html><body>
Steve Wiltshire, executive chairman of HoldenCAPITAL, says the recent APRA bank regulatory balance sheet requirements will see the big banks lose interest in construction finance to most property developers.
"They will pick and chose who they deal with," he said.
"It will be less of a volume game," the experienced property investment banker said.
"This is a regulatory change that isn't going to go away.
"It is a bit of a game changer," he said.
"The banks will still continue to do construction finance.
"My own view on this is that they won't come back to dominate construction finance like they did following the gfc, where they were able to very much take the market over and really control where it was going," he said.
He said it was less profitable for the big banks compared to other products.
"The new requirements from a balance sheet prospective means property is no longer as attractive as it once was," he said.
It was suggested during episode one of <a href="https://www.holdencapital.com.au/podcast/" target="_blank">The Constructive Finance Podcast</a> when Dan Holden, at HoldenCAPITAL, spoke with Steve Wiltshire about his market views, opportunities and challenges he has faced and some advice/lessons learned thus far in his career.
The podcast will be released every fortnight on Tuesday and will feature an elite developer discussing these same topics.
The podcast will be available to stream from iTunes and via the HoldenCAPITAL website.
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Big banks will pick and choose property development financing: Steve Wiltshire

<html><body>
 
<img src="/images/2015/12/Holdencapital_banner.jpg" alt="" width="594" height="122">
SPONSORED POST
Perhaps more importantly, the question should be what defines a bankable property developer?
The truth is, there are all types of property developers out there, from the opportunistic once off family affairs to the long-term specialist, the small one-man band operator to the listed behemoths, from the successful partnership to the passive investment fund. But the important thing that defines them all is whether or not they achieve their objectives and how the successful ones go about it? 
Most would respond that having the financial wherewithal and the skills to turn a sound profit represent the benchmarks but they are just a single solution one measure of success. But a big balance sheet is not always available and a lot of factors outside of the control of the developer can influence the ultimate profit, which of itself is not always the key measure of success.
What is critical is an ability to control or positively influence the various processes involved in the process and to cope with unforeseen problems positively in order to reach the desired outcome. As a property developer, your primary role is to “manage risk” and that is the true measure of your ability as a developer and ultimately leads to ‘bankability”.
Hopefully you will get a reward for taking that risk and in most instances that is reflected as profit. You invest $1M to buy a site, borrow another $4M to build some concrete boxes and hopefully you sell them for $7M so that after paying the associated GST and selling fees you realise a profit of $1M.
You have risked $5M and 15 months of your life to make $1M in profit. Sounds simple and sometimes it can be but there are many obstacles that can thwart that outcome. What defines you as both a successful and bankable developer is how prepared and able you are to deal with those potentially unforeseen obstacles.
Many developers serve an apprenticeship working for a major corporate developer, an architectural practice or in real estate, where as a single cog in the big machine they learn one or two key roles, get promoted into another specific area of responsibility and progressively develop many of the skills involved in the total process. After a while they build up enough experience and decide its time to go it alone. But more often than not they have not been exposed to all the processes involved and have relied on others with the requisite skills to deal with the issues in those areas.
So, however it is that you find yourself in the role of developer, the key skill required for success is actually the ability to identify and manage all the risks associated with the process, especially those where you are not the expert. Importantly, the ability to identify where you don’t have the requisite skills and to then secure the right resources required to deal with those issues is what really defines a successful and as a result, bankable developer.
There are many ways to solve the problems such as contracting the right consultants or employing the right people to deal with the process but the skill is actually knowing when you will need help and securing it before it becomes an issue and in the best way to protect your investment in the project. You don’t need to be the expert in every facet of the process, but you do need to be able to identify how, where and when to bring one in to efficiently deal with a problem before it becomes one, not after the fact.
When you are able to demonstrate to a banker that you understand all of the risks involved in the development process, have carefully assessed how they may influence your project outcome and how you can deal with them if they arise, you are well down the road towards getting the kind of funding you want and more importantly, on the terms that you want.
This article was written by Dan Holden of HoldenCAPITAL, who are a bespoke construction finance firm, they arrange construction finance and invest in projects through their equity fund, Queen Street INVEST. To discuss your project finance requirement please call (07) 3171 4200 or visit HoldenCAPITAL <a href="https://www.holdencapital.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Construction Finance

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Construction Finance

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News